RE. Your Thoughts on Cultural Appropriation In Writing?

[Gnosticangel]

A potentially controversial topic; genuinely curious what TLO members think; no offense intended.

As someone who works professionally with many writers - and who also writes privately at home - I've been fascinated and occasionally alarmed by the current climate criticising writers who write POVs of characters from outside of the author's race, gender or religion. If for example, a middle-aged, white, hetero Christian woman can only write about people from her own identity group, and her attempts at doing otherwise - no matter how sensitively written - stir up accusations of cultural appropriation or racism, then I believe that we may all end up much poorer. However I also recognize that we are in a time when many marginalized or dispossessed groups are rightfully taking back their power and this has ramifications in all spheres of public discourse.

What do you feel about the implicit right of a writer - or any artist - to use their inspiration, imagination and empathy to portray a fictional character from any race, culture or gender?

Does any identity group - or individuals of any such group - have the right to silence or edit an author on topics relevant to their own race, culture, gender, sexual preference or religion?

My post was inspired by reading this talk from author Lionel Shriver, from her opening address at last month's Brisbane Writer's Festival. I include the link as she raises several provocative questions that could be relevant to any discussion here on TLO:

Lionel Shriver's full speech: 'I hope the concept of cultural appropriation is a passing fad' | Opinion | The Guardian

It's a nonsense idea used by people who want to use their ideology to excuse acting in a dickish manner to others in as many ways as possible.

People don't own culture.

[Kevin]

More P.C. thought control. Rebel!!

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

A lot of the examples of cultural appropriation are really just racial stereotyping and clumsy misuse of things that are attached to a load of architecture the writer is unaware of (like unknowingly using a religious garb for a character as if they were just regular clothes with no purpose).
I think these things can spread harmful ideas of what they're representing but a lot of the rules people prescribe are overly simplistic and just can't fit the complexity of culture. A case by case basis is better.

Care and respect are all-important but I don't believe it's anyone's place to give permission to who can or can't depict any given thing.

[Frater_Tsalal]

This is something that's been on my mind the last few months: earlier this year I finished writing a Lovecraftian novel that had, as its main character, a gay black guy who happens to also be a big Lovecraft fan (for the record, I'm white). I realize that I might be playing with fire, having a black character hyping up and defending Lovecraft (while at the same time being critical of the man's racial views, though I don't harp on this because I think that writing a Lovecraftian book with a black main character and going on and on about Lovecraft's racism is the most dumbass obvious thing one could possibly write), but what the hell, black Lovecraft fans do exist, I even saw a few on Facebook critiquing the WFA's decision to drop the Lovecraft bust. Anyway, that's my target audience: gay black Lovecraft-lovin' Ligotti quoting antinatalist/atheists.

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

Among social justice people, there are different camps. Some enthusiastically encourage writing about people from very different backgrounds as often as possible and others are more restrictive.

[Druidic]

It's sad this topic is even discussed. I've said before that I admire the Old Time Liberals, men of integrity and good will, not these intolerant neo-'pretenders' who haven't a clue to what liberal tolerance was.
The old guys used to stress the basic sameness of humanity, the things all people, all races have in common. They believed in discussion, not shutting people down by public shaming techniques far more appropriate to fascists. They also believed in equality under the law, the only true and meaningful equality possible unless you descend into the absurdity that Vonnegut describes in Welcome to the Monkey House. When something like racism is a monolithic legal institution only ideas like that allowed men to tear down the laws. Sadly, you don't hear that phrase much today. Its been forgotten in favor of a more dubious--and impossible--'equality'.

They would say things like, "I may disagree with what you say but I'll fight for your right to say it."
They didn't worship diversity; they sought out the common elements in all people.
The future will look back at this time period as one of narrow-minded hypocrisy and meanness.
A writer should allow no external censure, no fear of not "knowing his place", dictate the limits of his imagination. The individuals of different races, genders, are not exotic otherworldly creatures but, simply, human beings. A writer's talent and insight are the only limits in portraying other human beings.
Give me that old time liberalism. It was a lot closer to true conservative thought than some might like to admit. The social contract was still strong and people of good will had much in common.

Quote Originally Posted by Frater_Tsalal

This is something that's been on my mind the last few months: earlier this year I finished writing a Lovecraftian novel that had, as its main character, a gay black guy who happens to also be a big Lovecraft fan (for the record, I'm white). I realize that I might be playing with fire –

You can be as sedulously careful as possible. It doesn't matter. People will just wonder why a white guy of inherent privilege due to their pale skin is writing a black guy being dominated by an alien god and losing the agency civil rights struggles aspired for them to have.

Political correctness with this sort of horror is ridiculous. I deliberately write stories in which nobody has agency, so if I ever become successful (ha!) I will probably be excoriated for not giving my female characters any agency, despite me not giving my male ones either.

Political correctness in literature is too often about making the inner universe a fairer place, which is inimical to the idea of pessimist horror. I would prefer a monstrous mind such as Hanns Heinz Ewers' or Thomas Ligotti's to be my guiding voice rather than somebody who thinks the world will be pretty much OK if another Clinton gets in the white house.

Quote Originally Posted by Druidic

It's sad this topic is even discussed. I've said before that I admire the Old Time Liberals, men of integrity and good will

Apart from when it comes to economics, as the blind faith in the free market means classical liberalism is ultimately a tyrannical system.

Quote

Give me that old time liberalism. It was a lot closer to true conservative thought than some might like to admit

Classical liberalism is as close to American conservatism as it is possible to get, provided constitutionalism/libertarian conservatism is seen as the purer strain. That American conservatives until around 5 seconds ago found classical liberalism uncomfortable is a further damnation proving that the surface sound of words means more than the content or point in this era, which is why political discourse can feel so dumbed down.

[Frater_Tsalal]

Well, when I say Lovecraftian, I mean that it's set in Providence and that there's a lot about Lovecraft and his life... but no actual alien gods or cults or anything like that. Part of the reason why I made him black was simply because the book revolves around the idea of a Lovecraftian hip-hop horrorcore band from the 90's and back then most of the rappers in that sub-genre were black. But I also knew that it would annoy the small faction of Lovecraft's fan base that just reads him because they like his fascist/racist views... though at the same time by making my character a Lovecraft fan it'll probably piss off a lot of SJW types as well. In other words, not many people will be pleased about it!

Alt-righters will call you a virtue signalling cuck for using a black protagonist, whilst SJWs will say your use is problematic. Anybody remotely interesting should be caught between both idiotic factions.

My mind boggles at the confounding lack of intelligence displayed by America choosing Trump as one of its most capable candidates for leadership, but the SJWs are responsible for turning people away from intelligent and compassionate ideas into the safety of a new dark age with their narcissistic nonsense.