The HaraGossip Girls: people of color as accessories
by guest contributor DISGRASIAN, originally published at DISGRASIAN
Diana and I realized this week that we are masochists. What else explains why we subject ourselves to shows like A Shot at Love with Tila Tiqueerla or the CW’s Gossip Girl, which is not unlike gouging away at our eyeballs with thumbtacks?
Truth be told, we’ve been blinding ourselves with Gossip Girl to track the progress of the HARAGOSSIP GIRLS. You know, the Black Chick and the Asian Chick who never talk but always dress identically? Their name, for those of you just checking in with us, pays homage to DISGRASIAN Hall-of-Shamer Gwen Stefani’s Harajuku Girls, the original posse of Asian Chicks who trail their blonde master everywhere, never talk, and always dress identically.
The Haragossip Girls are no different. They have more handbags than they’ve had lines on the show. But boy, have those bitches looked fierce.
Here they are in the pilot, mutely flanking Chuck, the James Spader-as-Steff-in-Pretty in Pink impersonator:
Then we have them in the second episode, “Wild Brunch,” trailing their owner Blair, aka A Poor Man’s Rachel Bilson:
I just love them as accessories! Oops–Freudian slip–what I meant to say was, I love their accessories! Where can I get me an ostrich bag?
And there was my own personal favorite, “Poison Ivy,” where everyone was trying to brown-nose their way into the Ivies:
And the sleepover episode, “Dare Devil,” where the Haragossip Girls dared to give each other matching pearls!
Finally, in the ever-so-aptly titled “Handmaiden’s Tale,” the Haragossip Girls actually had one, two lines maybe–but that was only because they had to do the bidding of their master Blair, by helping Blair’s drippy boyfriend Nate, A Poor Man’s Ian Somerhalder (which is welfare-poor), “find” their owner at the masquerade ball.
“You look hot, betch.”
“No, you look hot, betch.”
“That’s what I said.”
“That’s what I said.”
“Are we the same person?”
“Are we the same person?”
“Stop it!”
“You stop it!”
But not to worry. This week, a new girl of color, Vanessa, was introduced as the old flame of Dan Humphrey, aka The Poor Kid, back suddenly from a year-stint in Vermont… and she talks! Here she is with her ex:
Her outfit suggests “Washington Heights Dominican,” which is wonderful, because now the show has all the colors of the rainbow reprzented. It’s clear after this week’s episode that this saucy Latina really wants Dan back. Does she plan to get between The Poor Kid and his Poor Little Rich Girl Serena Whoser Whatsen?
Hmm. Wait a minute. I’m getting a strong sense of deja vu.
Oh right. The exact same scenario happened in Josh Schwartz’s other pile of caca show The OC, when Ryan’s ex Theresa DIAZ suddenly reappeared in his life, preggers with an abusive boyfriend, whom Ryan saves her from, thus breaking up his improbable but hopelessly romantic Poor Kid/Poor Little Rich Girl relationship with Marissa.
So, to recap. What has DISGRASIAN learned from Gossip Girl thus far in the season? Girls of color are best suited to…shut up and look pretty. And when they don’t–boy, do they fuck things up for everybody.
Source: cwtv.com, aka The Garbage Channel
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
john mccollum wrote:
Thank you. As a white dad with three Asian kids, I’ve had to do a lot of learning about race/ethnicity/identity/privilege. Sites like yours will continue to be a great resource for my family.
Peace to you.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 8:35 am ¶
Kate wrote:
Awesome write-up, hideous show. Thanks for this! It made me laugh and feel somewhat sad at the same time.
Sad part: the part of Kati (the Asian character) is played by Nan Zhang, who was a Neuroscience/Pre-Med major at the John Hopkins University before deciding to move to NYC to try out the acting thing.
I’m trying to weigh the pros and cons here: appear as the mute Oriental token of a brittle, bitchy WASP on a CW show with floundering ratings, or graduate from a highly prestigious university and eventually become a neurologist. Doesn’t seem too tough to me.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 8:46 am ¶
anon wrote:
“Tiqueerla” is offensive.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 9:00 am ¶
Gregory A. Butler wrote:
I KNEW that show was going to be awful!
Maybe because, living in the New York City media market, where the show takes place and is filmedI was BOMBARDED with promos for it (they even had a “Gossip Girl” special on the channel 11 morning news the week it premiered!).
Maybe because it seemed like a low budget series version of “Cruel Intentions” – complete with the pretentious sounding dialog.
Or maybe just because I didn’t think the personal lives of overpriviliged Upper East Side prep school kids were interesting enough to create 13 weeks of interesting television (or even 13 minutes, for that matter)!!
But now you tell me they put race and racism in the mix – mute women of color who serve as human backdrop for the white folks
And, of course, no MEN of color, since we’re so “threatening”!!!
Disgusting…
And I like that Harajuku girls reference – I used to like Gwen Stefani, until she had to add the Asian women as human backdrop (and they’re forbidden to speak – since in real life, they’re Southern California girls, and their real life valley girl accents would totally throw off the attempt to exotify and fetishize them!!!)
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 10:00 am ¶
Daomadan wrote:
I’ve gotta agree. Can we take out the Tiqueerla?
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 10:11 am ¶
Angel H. wrote:
Am I the only one that noticed that the CW only has 2 types of shows?:
Funny Black People &
Pretty White People with Problems
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 10:41 am ¶
Kenny wrote:
2007 and the networks are still doing that type of crap. That’s why I usually watch sports and reality shows.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 11:30 am ¶
Wendi Muse wrote:
cute write-up! i have never seen the show gossip girl, but i’m glad that someone else took a stab at the ridiculous use of WOC as toy poodles.
funny enough, gay men are used in film & tv in the same way…
which helps me seque to the use of “tila tiqueerla,” to which some people have objected, but that i don’t really have a problem with. just a little background info on that…”queer” is used by the lgbtqa (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, and allies) as an umbrella term for all people and subjects that don’t fall into heteronormative categories. i identify as a bisexual and worked at the nyu office of lgbt student services during college, and queer was (and still is) an acceptable word to use to refer to people who are not straight. in fact, the use of the word queer for tila is, funny enough, a bit progressive, especially considering that, at least based on the show as evidence, her sexuality is something she is constantly questioning, bisexual just so happening to be the best term for fit how she feels at present.
for many people, sexuality and gender-based attraction changes over time, so queer is a term that allows for such change without making people check a box.
thought queer once had a negative connotation, it’s widely used by lgbt activists and people who identify as such, and is not demonized in the way that it was, say, in the 1940s.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 12:01 pm ¶
Daomadan wrote:
Well, as a queer (bisexual) woman I don’t really like how it’s been put into another queer woman’s name. I proudly use the term, but in this case I thought it was distasteful considering the way people have been responding to Tila.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 12:16 pm ¶
Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:
Hey Daomadan, Wendi, and anon,
I read the “Tequeerla” more as a snarky comment on how VH1 is fetishizing Tequila’s queerness, like OMG THIS HOT ASIAN CHICK DOES IT WITH GUYS *AND* GIRLS! HAWT HAWT HAWT! As if that’s all she is: a symbol of non-hetero-ness.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 12:24 pm ¶
lemure wrote:
I’ll take offense to the notion that Tila is “Hawt”, she’s naked but she is ugly in the face. Yes, its bitchy and off topic but I just wanted to put that out there.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 1:10 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
this whole “girls of color as accessories” is pretty standard when you understand the casting objectives and the audiences they’re targeting.
the CW network is a combo of the old UPN and WB which were largely built on stereotypical shows of stereotypical black comedies and pretty, MTV style suburbanite-ish white kid dramas like Dawson’s Creek, Gilmore Girls, Some-White-Person-As-Outsider-With-A-Dark-Past-in-School/Town-of-Other-White-People, etc.
Their core audiences ( across the board) are 12-17 year olds white with 18-34 year white viewers with “urban’ youth as a secondary. (you can get this stuff from their media kits or if you’re in the ad industry as i am)
in short, long as mainstream america is okay with these stereotypes and marginalized characters, then it’ll continue.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 3:08 pm ¶
B wrote:
I feel bad for the actresses–the whole reason they’re forced to play accessories is that there aren’t enough good roles for WOCs. (Granted, the buddy/confidante/sidekick of the “pretty white person with problems” offers more lines, but usually, the actors & actresses chosen for such roles can’t be too good looking, or there’s a chance that the love interest of the p.w.p.w.p. might get distracted.)
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 3:21 pm ¶
TheLostGirl wrote:
I agree whole heartedly about this article. The weird thing is, it is never exactly subtle, is it?
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 4:25 pm ¶
Mimi wrote:
Yes, it is a sorry state that there are few good roles for WOC and that they’re not a non-stereotypical norm on TV. But no one says they have to take these roles either.
What would happen if WOC just said no to these roles? Maybe the film and TV industry would be more sensitive to the portrayals of POC’s and not see us as mere props.
Worst case scenario? Angelina Jolie and Rod Wheeler open up an acting school for p.w.p.w.p.’s to fill these vapid roles.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 4:38 pm ¶
Ann wrote:
Are there any shows out there that have examples of good roles for WOC? What would a show like that be about?
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 4:49 pm ¶
Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:
Ann, I’ve always enjoyed the sitcom “Girlfriends” on UPN, now CW. It’s gone seriously downhill in the last couple seasons, but it’s about 4 black women who are best friends. They’ve dealt very well with issues of class, race, money, social issues, etc. And the characters are pretty complex. Oh and it’s funny too, which helps.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 5:07 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:
Start your own stuff !!!! don’t trust the white media to portray ANY MINORITY with any sense of humanity because in the last 30 years, White Americans were the true victims of racism according to white conservatives and their minority legions of spokespeople. The corporate media with it’s hands in the demeaning sterotypes of started with many of these Ivy- League educated jerkoffs who went to school and read the “Dartmouth Review and other conservative rags during the late 70’s to the early 90’s and were doing racist humor in the paper and harassing black students quess who runs network studios and companies who promote the Imus, Limbaughs and rap/rock labels who peddle this smut of racist, sexist, homophobic and violent imagery those white students who felt overrun by thousands of college kids who were not white and secretly wanted the old order back.
That’s why they can do dumb shows like 30 rock and shows like the Haaragossip girls, and try to be anti- P.C. what they want minorites to do is SHUT UP !!!! and be thankful that white people in their good graces of ” racial tolerance” would want to deal with you on T.V. I say it’s time for American minorites to from their own music labels if you challenge the corporate media’s racist agenda or do what Tyler Perry is doing and doing his own stuff and not giving a damn what white folks think. I am sorry folks but these twits pay lip service to true diversity and balance in how POC live their lives.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 5:12 pm ¶
Jenny Jingles wrote:
Actually, I would advise people to avoid what Tyler Perry is doing. In my opinion, his work is pretty brainless, and Madea builds on the “Sassy black woman” stereotype. Plus, he’s said some racist shit about Asian people. Not all of the media PoC create are going to be enabling and substantial, just because they are PoC.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 6:25 pm ¶
Seattle Slim wrote:
This piece was ON POINT! Big ups! Actually I have one bone to pick with the folks at Disgrasian: you’re going to make me watch that darned show so I can see what is going on LOL Thanks!
On to the post: I never watched Gossip Girl or OC before so I didn’t know about the Latina characters, but I am irritated that in both cases they were made to look and act like the “saucy latina” stereotype. It wreaks of white male fantasy. Both scenarios.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 6:54 pm ¶
Helen wrote:
You know I think it’s interesting that the children’s show Hannah montana has the same thing. The black and Asian girl are snotty, conniving, and shallow, dress the same, and always plot against the superheroine.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 11:13 pm ¶
Jaye wrote:
I’ve actually thought “Girlfriends” has improved this season and the last. They seem to have tackled more serious issues and followed through on them with a lot of depth and reality, rather than doing what they had done in the past, which was taking on serious issues in the typical flaky way of sitcom-land.
I kind of thought it was because they thought they might get cancelled when UPN turned into CW, so they decided to just take a chance and do the show the way they wanted, rather than play it safe. But I haven’t followed the behind-the-scenes stuff, so it’s just a guess. But I’ve loved the show more in the past couple of seasons than the previous ones.
Posted 14 Nov 2007 at 11:37 pm ¶
Adrianna wrote:
Greetings from Haiti
Yes these girls are fierce. I bet they would make more interesting characters then the main Characters. I agree with eric daniels POC”S in the US has to make their own media, movies. They have to start owning their own channels. White media conglomerate is not going to change now. They have had centuries. And still is the same crap.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 1:21 am ¶
Michelle wrote:
I bristle a little at anyone avoiding Tyler Perry. If nothing else, he represents someone completely outside the studio system who has proven that A. Black people go to the movies, B. Movies with more than two Black people make money C. Movies with Black people do not have to be about drugs, money and gangs to be profitable.
Also, the Madea character is no longer in his movies or television show.
What exactly did he say about Asian people? And where was it published/heard?
Tyler Perry is by no means perfect, but he is creating something that is potentially very positive.
And if WOC did not accept those roles then…well, it’s just not that simple. Not accepting those roles means, in many cases, that there will be no other jobs. Taking the role, doing the best job you can, means that maybe they will write more for your character, or it will lead to other jobs. In the past, before affirmative action, there were many Black people denied jobs that they were qualified for who took what they could get. We are just seeing the same thing played out on the big and small screen. Trust me, there is no such thing as affirmative action in Hollywood casting offices. The Black best friend is like a stock character in Hollywood. If people don’t watch the CW, in particular, Gossip Girls, if people, especially White people, write letters complaining about why the WoC don’t even really speak, then you will see change…well, you will see it when the strike is over.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 2:05 am ¶
Daomadan wrote:
Carmen: Good point.
Perhaps that’s more what’s bugging me on the whole issue…how MTV is portraying the entire mess.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 10:25 am ¶
Gregory A. Butler wrote:
I’ve never been a big Tyler Perry fan.
One, I have a big problem with the whole Black man in drag as an asexual “Black mammy” stereotype thing.
Two, I did not have the typical African American upbringing, (I’m biracial, and both my parents were bohemian hippyish New York artists) so I really can’t relate to the cultural background of the Madea movies.
Beyond that, it just seemed very stereotypical – not to mention not particularly good artistically.
Think about it – do any of the characters in the Madea series ever really grow or change? Or do they just keep getting in the same disfunctional relationship situations, again, and again and again?
To go a bit off topic (but I think it’s a related issue), that’s the problem I have with “urban romance” literature.
For those who aren’t familiar “urban romance” novels are these romance novels by Black writers, ususally self published, which have become very popular among African American women.
Where I live, in Harlem, every day out on 125th St there are dozens of vendors who sell these books from tables on the street.
One of the most popular urban romance novelists, a strip club owner’s son and ex drug dealer who goes by the name “Relentless Aaron”, actually got a $ 500,000 advance from Simon and Schuster because he’s sold so many of these novels from his table on 125th St.
Despite their popularity among their target audience, these novels are AWFUL.
The characters, typically Black women from abusive families, drift from horribly abusive relationship to horribly abusive relationship – they never grow, they never change, they never trancend their circumstanses (or even really struggle against them).
For me, it’s actually pretty depressing reading these novels – I start feeling really bad for the heroines of these books.
Perhaps for the target audience, reading these books makes them normalize their own life.
Perrhaps that’s the kind of relationships the readers have been in, and, like the heroines of these books, they’ve resigned themselves to always being in relationships like that (”that’s just how men are” ect).
In any case, Tyler Perry’s audience (in particular, the folks who cop his DVDs on bootleg) has a big overlap with the folks who buy these novels.
And I like Tyler Perry/Madea about as much as I’m a fan of the work of Relentless Aaron.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 10:32 am ¶
Jennifer wrote:
Michelle, this is Tyler as Madea “speaking Chinese”:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FDdvWJi2LH8
Charming.
This is an excellent commentary on something similar, the brilliant Beau Sia:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=VJCkHu3trKc
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 11:44 am ¶
Orville wrote:
It is really offensive that the black girl and Asian girl on Gossip Girl don’t get to talk and are treated like “slaves”. I think those two girls would be really interesting if the writers would actually give them their own storyline. Its just racist to treat women of colour as window dressing. And once again of course white females are the stars of Gossip Girl. CW once again ignores the very lucurative women of colour demographic. When will TV networks get it, young women of colour want to see shows about themselves WITH WOMEN OF COLOUR IN THE LEAD. Wake up CW network! Because the big mainstream networks ignore black and Asian women.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 1:02 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
I think Eric has a point we can complain in circles on and on forever. The bottom line is most of the people that visit this website are young, intelligent, and educated. Why not get involved in the movie or TV business? I would like to find out how to get involved I’m doing some research right now. And the reason is I am tired of complaining about seeing racist shit on TV. I think more people of colour need to be PROACTIVE and GET INVOLVED. I don’t care if its community theatre, or if its making you’re own play or whatever. But we got to get invovled. We nay not be able to save the world but we can contribute and MAKE A DIFFERENCE. If we don’t then we are doomed. I’ve written a play and I am willing and able to work hard to get my play produced. I haven’t found a theatre company yet but I’m not giving up and I am trying. I think that’s the key. We have to engage in art if we want to change art. Its the ONLY WAY to make change. We cannot expect the white mainstream to present realistic and non racist representations of people of colour on TV, on the theatre stage, or on film. Its never going to happen. We have to help ourselves.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 1:08 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:
I got news for everyone who feels slighted, I am not a conservative but a Black Nationalist in the mode of Malcolm X , Marcus Garvey, John Henrik Clarke and W.E.B. DuBois. and my issue is many of you are waiting for sexist black rappers and their white handlers to stop doing their “music” and their sexist and violent imagery but that will happen when ‘dogs fly over the moon’. After all the town hall meetings on Oprah and the gnashing of teeth by black females that Imus is back on the air and Soulja Boy making of classics, it seems to me that the white media and their allies won the battle and used Black Feminists as the weapon of choice in this “racial cold war confrontation”.
If you want this sexist music to go away you have to do what previous generations of Blacks and other minorites have done and what Tyler Perry is doing today, start your own labels, movie companies and promote the type of black music, movies, art salons or plays you would like to see in the marketplace. So many of us have fallen into the false debate of success or making whitey feel guilty so he/she will do the right thing and I feel it’s a waste of time and good air.
I have always considered John H. Johnson of Ebony Magazine the most influential black person of the 20th Century even more infleuntial than our civil rights leaders, sports stars or musicians because in an era of lynchings , negative perceptions by the nation and world of Black People he gave us our humanity by showing us as living our lives in pictures throughout those years and Ebony chronicled every single major black issue of the late 20 th century and for that we should be grateful. instead of trying to reason with buisness shysters, and their crub table eating allies, we should develop our own brands like Jay- Z and Puffy has done.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 5:21 pm ¶
Jenny Jingles wrote:
Jennifer, I was actually not aware of that scene. I was referring to a scene from the movie “Diary of a Mad Black Woman”, when upon hearing the name of the designer Vera Wang, Madea exclaims something like this: “Who’s she?? Does she do nails? Cause I gotta get mine done!” Because, of course, all Asian women work in nail salons.
Michelle, being Asian American myself, I find it difficult to appreciate or enjoy work by artists who have shown any prejudice to Asian people. So while Tyler Perry’s movies and plays might be something fresh and outside the norm, I simply cannot look past those few racist lines. Also, I don’t think that just because something was created by a PoC automatically makes it progressive. PoC can still be racist, and can still perpetuate racism against other PoC. While having more media created by PoC would certainly be better than the current situation, it would do no good if it was racist itself.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 7:03 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:
Orville,
There are many, many Black people doing just what you have suggested.
Here’s the rub…
The “Chitlin’ Circuit” plays do very well, and yet get heavily criticized by many Black people.
People who self-publish, get criticized by others because they don’t like the content.
Black people are doing movies, writing books, plays, music and everything else you can think of. Who supports those people?
And Jenniffer, having never seen any Madea plays, I am sad to say that I am not shocked, and what he did was offensive and crossed the line. Unfortunately, he is still the only Black person who is making mainstream movies that aren’t about drugs, gangs and violence. If we boycott Tyler Perry, then we will be doomed to “Who’s Your Caddy”, “The Friday before Last” and “Who Shot John’s Ho”. I feel like I am between a rock and a hard place. I will say, he has never done anything that offensive in any of his movies. Which, of course, does not excuse his stage performance.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 10:41 pm ¶
Natalie wrote:
Just in case anyone cares, the girl who plays “Vanessa” on GG, Jessica Szor is actually black and Hungarian, not Spanish/Dominican/Latino/Hispanic/ etc., etc.
Posted 16 Nov 2007 at 1:20 am ¶
Orville wrote:
Gregory’s opinion about “not typical African American upbringing” what the hell is that supposed to mean? Its such a generalized statement. So what if you’re biracial do you want a gold star? So because one of your parents is white and “a hippie” you think your better then black people? Whatever. I have noticed some biracial people seem to think they can generalize blacks and put down black people just because they have white heritage.
the so called “urban literature” I don’t agree with. If he doesn’t like those kinds of books that’s his personal opinion. However, plenty of people do. Obviously those black writers are reaching an audience that the publishing industry consistently ignores. And by the way who says what is considered good fiction or not white America? I have noticed a trend in the publishing industry I find it to be very pretentious and snobbish at times. So because the white media says Zadie Smith or Toni Morrison are one of the few “blacks” worthy of mainstream praise I’m supposed to buy their books? Give me a break.
Posted 16 Nov 2007 at 9:31 am ¶
eric daniels wrote:
Thank you Orville, most Americans are not scholars and read Phillip Roth or Toni Morrison many people like reading John Grisham, Zane, or some romantic novels. If wouldn’t read ghetto lit because it bores me intellectually Mr. Butler, but to treat black folks like children who can’t think for themselves unless it is someone from up high like Cosby, Oprah and others is paternalistic . If some black folks like ghetto lit or romantic novels by Eric Jerome Dickey that’s alright, if you want to read smart polticial and science fiction fare that’s great also people are reading books and they don’t have to read the classics.
My main problem comes from when public libraries and schools have Zane books and teenagers check them out when it should be behind the counter because of sexual content. Kids under 18 should not be able to read a Zane book in a taxpayer library or school without personal parental consent. And I have seen high schools with Zane in their African- American sections.
Posted 16 Nov 2007 at 12:11 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:
You have really seen Zane in a high school? Zane writes soft core porn literature. If it is in any high school, I want to know where so I can personally make sure it is removed.
Posted 16 Nov 2007 at 7:08 pm ¶
Gregory A. Butler wrote:
I guess I struck a nerve.
ANY literary work is subject to criticism – and any reader has a right to express whatever criticism they may have of that work.
Therefore I stand by everything I had to say about urban romance novels and the body of work of Tyler Perry/Madea.
If you disagree, and happen to like those works, you have a right to your opinion, and feel free to express it.
But don’t tell me that I don’t have a valid opinion.
Especially since, by objective literary standards, a LOT of the current crop of Black genre fiction is not good literature, because, as I said in my earlier posts, the characters do not grow and change based on their expreiences, they just keep making the same mistakes over and over and over again.
Before anybody gets upset, I’d also point out that a lot of WHITE genre fiction (in particular, White romance novels and White romantic comedy films) are also not good literature either, for basically the same reasons.
And no, I’m NOT seeking a “gold star” because I’m a biracial African American, I’m just stating a relevant biographical fact about myself.
As far as the “typical African American upbringing comment” which seems to have offended some folks, let me explain.
When I say “typical African American upbringing” I mean growing up in the Black Protestant church, eating what is commonly known as “soul food” and being around Southern Black culture.
My folks (both my Irish Amreican dad and my African American mom) were artists, and were heavily influenced by the bohemian, hippyish culture of the Greenwich Village of the 1960’s.
To the extent we had any religion in the house at all it was Americanized South Asian mysticism, the food we eat was mostly Indian or Chinese derived cuisine and the culture we were exposed to was cosmopolitan, a mix of American, European, Asian and African cultures.
In other words, it wasn’t “typically African American” (or “typically European American” either).
And yes, that DOES have a whole LOT to do with why I really can’t identify with a lot of contemporary African American popular literature – because a lot of those works are very heavily influnced by a whole Southern Black Protestant universe that simply was never a part of my life – a culture that is, quite frankly, pretty alien to me.
If that fact about me offends some folks here, I’m sorry – but I’m just stating a fact.
Posted 17 Nov 2007 at 2:35 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
Your pathetic answer only proves the point that you have an axe to grind with black people. You stereotype blacks by using the “soul food” reference.
What “literary standards” ? The only standards that society seems to accept is “the white standard”. If you feel the need for validation by white society that’s your problem not mine. But you have no right to try to degrade black people and put down black writers that attempt to get their work published yet consistently have to deal with a racist publishing industry.
Again just because white North America says Margaret Atwood or Toni Morrison are “great” writers doesn’t mean I have to agree. I was forced to read Atwood and Morrison’s shit in school and I hated it! I did not relate! I did love reading Zora Neale Hurston’s work and “Their Eyes Were Watching God”. I don’t care what the NY TIMES or some uppity black person has to say about so called “urban literature”. If you don’t like these kinds of books that’s your opinion. I just find it highly offensive when you attempt to insult the intelligence of the black reading audience. You also make the egregious assumption that “only” blacks reads these kinds of books and that’s false.
Posted 18 Nov 2007 at 3:56 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
And no you are not stating a fact you are giving your personal opinion just like everyone else on this site. The bottom line is the so called “urban literature” has forced the book publishing industry to pay attention to the reading patterns of the black readers. Black people we want to read more books about ourselves and our lives. The publishing indstry wants to make money and black readers want more diverse books available. There are a wide range and variety of black writers. The Canadian writer Dionne Brand for example she writes literary fiction I like her work. However, I also like the work of Zane. And I don’t give a damn what some uppity people have to say about it. People have a right to read whatever we want to read. You have no right to attempt to degrade and put down black writers and black readers.
Posted 18 Nov 2007 at 4:01 pm ¶
Gregory A. Butler wrote:
Orville,
I’m not going to get into a personal debate with you.
But I really take exception to the charge that I have an “axe to grind against African Americans”.
If you knew me in real life, you wouldn’t be saying that.
Just go to my blog, to get a flavor of what I’m about, when it comes to the struggle for freedom for our race in this country:
http://gangbox.wordpress.com
And if you have any further questions, you can get in touch with me via the blog – and I will email you back.
Furthermore, I’d like to apologize for being an uppity African American.
I’m frankly amazed that in the year 2007 a Black person would accuse another Black person of being “uppity” (didn’t the house slaves used to say that about the Black folks who tried to learn how to read? or tried to escape? or kept our original African names?)
But I still apologize, for being “uppity” and having the opinion that Black audiences should have the same kind of access to good, high quality culturally relevant literature that White Americans have.
I do apologize for being an uppity Black person, and feeling that we deserve good literature – instead of trashy genre garbage.
Hey, I’m sorry that I dared to criticize the great and glorious Tyler Perry – and I compounded it by taking a serious critical look at contemporary Black literature.
I also apologize for treating Black literature with the same level of respect that I’d treat any other nationality’s literature.
I take literature very seriously – including Black literature – and I hold it all to the same critical standard.
Sorry if that makes me “uppity”….
After all, we do need to listen to Bill Cosby, and know our place – all we deserve in this country is scraps – just like how so called “soul food” is made from borderline inedible table scraps that other races don’t eat (pig intestines, pig feet, neckbones ect), I guess Black literature is supposed to be made of inedible table scraps too.
Sorry for being a Black writer who respects my readers (Black and from other races too) enough to want to see them have good literature that actually respects all aspects of Black life in this country.
I know that all we as Blacks deserve is swill that presents our women as passive victims, and our men as abusive misogynist thugs.
So, in future, I promise to pledge allegiance to Tyler Perry and Bill Cosby, and never be uppity again!!!!
Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 10:09 am ¶
merq wrote:
Gregory Butler,
Don’t be a martyr. It grates.
I don’t remember ever having to take exception to a comment of yours, but I’ve got to say I found myself somewhat disturbed by some of your comments. So please can the holier-than-thou persecution complex.
You defined the “typical African-American upbringing” as:
I live in New York, and know numerous African Americans who don’t really fit any of those criteria. As you wax poetic about your family’s Greenwich heyday, I cannot help but detect a certain snobisme in the ad-hoc associations you make between Black America and the South.
It’s almost as if you’re unable to divorce African America from the monolithic, folksy/ignorant/whimsical/sassy identity forged for her in the media.
Black America isn’t all cookouts, southern drawls, and soul food. Odd that I should have to tell someone of African-American descent this… and yet, not so much.
Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 7:55 pm ¶
merq wrote:
And on the subject of your tortured quest to bring a degree of “quality” to African-American literature, I think it would pay you to listen to these posters… to actually listen, and resist the urge to talk down to them.
I cannot stand Tyler Perry, and I’ve never picked up an “urban literature” offering in my life — and from what I can see, some of these posters have expressed similar sentiments. However, I’m not blind to the inherent prejudices in the very notion of high- versus low-culture.
Who gets to define what high culture is? This is what Orville et al are asking. Who gets to make the rules? I’ll give you an example I believe to be as basic as possible.
Whenever I go to a lounge or club here in NY, I cannot but notice the stark differences in the way different races must present themselves in order to gain acceptance. I remember stumbling on this realization while celebrating my birthday with friends at one of the oh-so-cool clubs in the Meatpacking district.
A white buddy of mine walked in, dressed in a tight, stained white tee, tight, “distressed” black jeans, and Chuck Taylor sneakers, and it suddenly hit me:
I would never be allowed into any club in a baggy white tee, baggy jeans, and sneakers. Actually, I don’t think any of my white friends would, either.
This, Gregory, is the point I’m trying to make. While I have a personal distaste for baggy clothes, I’m not blind to the fact that a “tee/jeans/sneakers” combo isn’t (un)acceptable by virtue of what it is. Rather, it’s assigned a value based on what culture it’s associated with.
So the ruling population gets to define the differences between “hipster” and “hip-hop” aesthectics, and the various levels of societal access accorded to each.
Hope you get it now.
Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 8:10 pm ¶
Miss B wrote:
Gregory,
In regards to reading “urban” lit: Reading Zane does not equal lower-order/base thinking. Reading [insert canonical Black author] does not equal intellect. Trust.
Your comment speaks to the harmful belief that only one form of literacy is valid and only one form of voice should be heard. In most cases, Black authors that have been put into the academic canon aren’t part of the culture that places them there. And I must say that a lot of great/popular literature is deemed great/becomes popular because of its deep connections to our own lived experiences. For some, making the same mistakes over & over & over is more authentic and tangible than, say, what ever it was that happened to Milkman.
And now onto the food:
With the culture-hopping you say your parents did, I’m a little surprised to find you have a pretty narrow view of what folks eat (and experience). Traditional soul food includes glorious plant foods such as collard greens, sweet potatoes, corn, okra, string beans, black eyed peas … all of which are so good for us. Frown on the meat if you want, but don’t turn a blind eye to the fact that these other foods have been a mainstay in the culture because of their nutritional value. Slaves may have gotten meat scraps to eat, but they weren’t ignorant of the benefits found in the plants that they reaped and sowed.
And what’s the with high & mightiness? Ew.
Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 10:51 pm ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:
*watches the comments exchanged between Jenny, Michelle, Gregory, Eric, Merq, and Miss B with interest*
Posted 20 Nov 2007 at 11:24 am ¶
eric daniels wrote:
Greg than do your own books and open a publishing house for like- minded people like you if you feel that you have nothing in common with Black books or culture, but I will bet you will get mostly white people and mixed couples (and a small smidget of blacks) buying your work because the average person of any race wants to escape into a world they understand enjoy or fantasize about when they read a book. They do not want to be forced to deal with the reality of their lives on a 24-7 basis in a book.
You may be a “New York Urban Hippie” and grew up with amongst a diverse lifestyle and people but many Americans led separate lives racially and have nothing in common culturally and that’s why I like Tyler Perry because he show the “Black Community” in all it’s forms and warts without judgment like a Mr. Butler. And Jenny Jingles that scene was not racially offensive, I can see if Madea mimicked an accent but she made fun of this girls clothing taste of Vera Wang clothing (many working-class blacks have never heard of Vera Wang) and yes in the Inner Cities and Malls many nail salons and hair care stores are owned by people of Asian extraction
Just like the white media and Americans likes to say because I am a black male I am a sexist, racist criminally- minded, violence prone, quick to anger, hate black women, loves the white women, will kill anybody for a cross word, intolerant of gays and lesbians, believes in patriarchy, and sexually perverted, sexually gifted, is lazy, doesn’t value education and blames black women and whitey for all my problems in this world. I could be wrong, but that’s my rant for the day.
And Greg, 90% of African-Americans who were born in the states came from the South and migrated up North, So I resent people like you who think your “hippie” upbringing makes you better homie.
Posted 20 Nov 2007 at 7:59 pm ¶
merq wrote:
Red herring at its finest… or perhaps not, ’cause by your reasoning, the media portrayal of black men you described above isn’t offensive, either.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 5:36 am ¶
eric daniels wrote:
Merq, I don’t give a damn because I have come to the conclusion that most whites/Americans and many black folks think Black Males worldwide are DBR (damaged beyond repair) as that lady at her black female/white male love site. So I say screw it and why try to change these people’s opinions. I want black people to let white people, black women who loathe brothas and the rest of the white and American population and just say F- THEM.
I am too old and too stressed by everyday life to try to change people’s opinions about me as a black male in this society. All I want right to be left alone and live my life on my terms Merq and trying to plead to the majority in this society to see that the majority of black men aren’t any of those sterotypes is a waste of time. I say let white people, Americans, black women, and others embrace their hatred of black males at least I know where I stand with you and will defend myself against those folks by any means.
Merq , I JUST DON’T CARE ANYMORE !!!!
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 9:51 am ¶
Gregory A. Butler wrote:
I see I’ve stirred up a hornet’s nest here!!!
First of all, I’m not priviliging my background over anybody elses.
I had the background I have.
You have the background you have.
And that’s perfectly OK.
Now, if you feel insecure about your background, that’s on YOU!
That has nothing to do with me at all.
Now, I can understand that America has spent the last 396 years making us ashamed of ourselves, from the day we came off the slaveships to this morning’s newscast.
So I can see why many of us are insecure.
Like for instance, about skin color – I know our community is colorstruck, and I have personally experienced lots of envy and resentment because of my skin color.
Also, I can see why we would feel insecure about anybody criticizing any aspect of our culture (even the stuff that is bad and toxic) because we feel so insecure and vulnerable.
But, I feel we are as good as anybody else, and therefore we should be treated just like everybody else.
That means that our literature should be as subject to criticism as anybody elses is.
Which means, if you have novels that basically don’t function as novels (that is, that the events that happen to the heroine during the course of the story do not cause her to grow and change as a person) then those novels are fundamentally flawed (no matter how many copies they sell) and they are subject to criticism.
And the same goes for movies that have similar flaws – and also degrade Black men and present Black women as either desexualized mammies or perpetual victims drawn like moths to a flame to disfunctional abusive men.
In particular, if those movies present one narrow section of Black American life as the only “authentic” Black experience.
Yes, I’m talking about the great and glorious Tyler Perry – the great hero who we’re forbidden to criticize, on pain of excommunication.
Remember, America defines us as one homogenous community – Black America really isn’t like that.
Besides the biracial folks like me, there are also those of English-speaking Carribean heritage, and the Haitians, and folks from various countries in Africa, and those who were raised in Islam.
Not all of us are Southern Protestants and that is NOT the only “authentic” Black experience!!!
So no, I don’t like Tyler Perry’s movies and I don’t like the urban romance genre fiction.
I don’t eat the intestines or feet of a pig either.
And I don’t worship inside of a Protestant Church (or any other religious institution for that matter).
And that doesn’t make me any less of a Black man!!!
Some folks here seem to buy into what White America (and White America’s # 1 Uncle Tom – “Dr” William H. Cosby, Jr “EdD” – the Booker T. Washington sellout of our day) believe – that there is only one way to be authentically African American, and anybody who disagrees is somehow not really Black.
Beyond that, would it be so terrible if we got some good literature in our community – some latter day versions of Toni Morrison or James Baldwin?
Why do we always have to have table scraps – are we always going to have to eat massa’s pig intestines (”chitlins”)?????
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 10:49 am ¶
merq wrote:
Like I said, red herring.
What does all that have to do with whether or not a statement about East Asians was offensive?
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 10:59 am ¶
Orville wrote:
Gregory you are using the framework that due to your “hippie” background you are somehow superior to black folks. If you don’t like Urban literature that’s your opinion. However, as I have said before you go on and on about “literary standards” and the only standard that society views as acceptable is the “white standard.” I make my own decisions on what books I want to read. I’m not going to listen to mammy Oprah or the NY TIMES tell me what I should or should not read. If I find a book interesting I will read it. I think the whole urban literature genre has exploded into such a force is due to the need and desire some of us have to READING BOOKS ABOUT OURSELVES. I am tired of white literature being forced down my throat. When I was a child I was forced to read Harper Lee’s racist piecr of garbage “To Kill A Mockingbird”. I hate that book! Yet I had to read that book in order to pass grade 10 English in Canada!
White literature is institutionalized its FORCED on black children and black people. And I refuse to subject myself to this kind of racist framework and thinking anymore. Just because the NY TIMES, Oprah, and people like you Gregory don’t like Urban Literature gives you no right to tell black people what we can or cannot read. I think its great that people are reading and isn’t that the most important thing anyway?
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 1:14 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
I also think people like Gregory are conditioned to the collective thinking that the only “standard” that is acceptable is the “white American standard”. Gregory worries too much about seeking the white man’s validation and acceptance.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 1:17 pm ¶
Lisa wrote:
Not sure if this was already pointed out in another comment however I wanted to bring up the fact that in the original Gossip Girl series Vanessa and the two accesories are all white.
and while I’m on the subject of differences from the book, Dan and Vanessa are pretty much an on-again-off-again couple throughout and his relationship with Serena lasts all of one page, so if they were true to the books in this sense, Vanessa would be one of the main characters.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 2:03 pm ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:
Orville –
Simmer, darling, simmer.
I see things are getting real heated with this exchange.
(I was trying to put off writing on this one, but since this thread keeps rolling…)
Orville – I see your points. Be it high literature, classics, street literature, or chick lit, people have the right to read what they choose. People also have a right to read what speaks to them. I loved to Kill a Mockingbird – but I hated Wuthering Heights. And I wondered why we weren’t reading Upton Sinclair or Ralph Ellison.
Here’s what’s funny – when I asked a lit teacher of mine how a book becomes a classic, she said it was simply how long the book was in print. No evaluation of substance, style, etc. And there are a lot of books I PERSONALLY did not relate to (Catcher in the Rye for one.)
However, all these books mean different things to different people. What I find fascinating about street lit is that it is an exploding art form – people have huge audience bases before they get a publishing deal.
Also, a lot of educated women read street lit. They love Zane and Kwan and LaJill Hunt. Personally, I believe we shouldn’t judge something until we’ve read the books. After reading 6 different novels and two short story collections, I still don’t care for street lit. But I can understand the appeal.
I believe what Gregory was trying to get at is two fold – the first idea being that people should be exposed to different kinds of lit. As a person who works in the library system, I am concerned for the young girls who come in and only read street lit. For the older women, it is juicy and reflects their world. For teenagers, though, it can be both freeing and limiting. As long as teens have access to a wide range of lit (say Tia William’s It Chicks, some old 18 Pine Street Novels, and then some Zane on the side) things should be fine.
I have a huge issue with the MARKETING of street lit, which echoes the MARKETING of chick lit – it’s as if all African-Americans (or all young women) read one kind of novel and that is all they are interested in. As a result, story tellers who do not fit that mold are kind of stuck in a catch 22. They want their work to sell, but publishers think that if a book does not follow a formula, it cannot sell. So, in some ways, there is a frustration with the idea that a huge audience can be condensed down into what is popular.
The second part does speak to the idea of standards, and that is a huge issue. Keep in mind, mainstream culture critiques mainstream culture, and so it only makes sense for black culture to critique black culture. I think we (black folks) run into the same issue as other races where we do not want to be defined by the mainstream…or by other parts of blackness.
So, for some, Tyler Perry pictures are a dead on perception of black life. Others have criticized Perry for daring to portray “that side of blackness.” Same with street lit, etc, etc. What is stereotype and what is reality?
It’s one of the reasons I devote so much space here to exploring blackness. I want people to have critical, honest conversations about the representations of blackness and how we -as a community – contribute.
I personally can’t stand the message Tim Alexander has created with “Diary of a Tired Black Man.” But that’s cool. I can dislike what he puts out, and at the same time appreciate the fact that he did it independently. I can steer friends of the same mindset to go see the movie. There are many different ways to support what other African Americans create. And support their right to create it, even when it doesn’t speak to us personally.
Gregory,
It would probably be for the best if we didn’t use the word “standards” in any kind of subjective argument. Art is highly subjective, so while I do not think of street lit as art I am sure there are those who do. LaJill Hunt does not need my approval – she has her fan base.
If there is something I disagree with, I vote with my money. I support people I do agree with. When I work with teenagers, I try not to judge what they read. Just discuss – what appealed to you? What didn’t? You’d be surprised at what people are open to. Also, you should try to explore a little more of something before condeming it. I read a lot of Eric Jerome Dickey. I read tons of chick lit, sci-fi, and fantasy novels, as well as serious fiction and non-fiction. Each different genre of literature speaks to me in a different way.
Also, understand that all things that seem a like are not neccessarily. When I researched street lit, one of the things I personally did not like was the very lax attention paid to characterization or sentance structure. However, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that K’wan actually did follow these kind of guidelines, even in the context of street lit. Therefore, I recommend more K’wan to teens looking for that kind of a read.
When I argue for the diversity of black thought and black ideas, keep in mind that street lit/urban theatre/hip-hop culture are all about that. We do not all have to think the same way.
And high brow is kind of overrated anyway, ne c’est pas? There’s a fairly good book about mainstream culture called No Brow. You may want to consider giving it a read.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 2:04 pm ¶
merq wrote:
Gregory,
This is going to be somewhat long, but I ask that you bear with me and read in its entirety. If I come off somewhat harsh, I apologize in advance. The intention is not to insult or belittle.
The problem is you’re guilty of committing the same crime (I’m glad) we agree the American does.
Remember, you were the one who defined the “typical African-American upbringing” as:
Even after noting that Black America isn’t a homogenous entity, what do you do? You imply that the only black people exempt from the Southern Protestant “Tyler Perry” experience are
By your logic, then, all non-Muslim, monoracial African-Americans (the subset of Black-Americans) are the Souther, folksy, Perry-idolizing lot you speak of.
Yet again, you’ve managed to lump an entire population of people into some foolishly simplistic box. Want proof that this claim was foolishly reductive and stereotypical? Ask yourself how merely being biracial (but not Muslim or AfroCaribbean) somehow exempts people from this classification.
Listen, I’m not insecure about anything to do with my background. There was an extremely condescending tone to your comment on that subject, and I’m sure very few posters here appreciated that. I was fortunate to have grown up in a very privileged setting, yet I manage not to come off like an asshole when discussing these things.
I’m not African American, so this isn’t some response to a perceived slight. The fact is that while I have no problem with the culture you describe as “Southern Protestant African-American,” I do have a serious problem with reductively lumping into one one-dimensional category, all people who don’t qualify as “good black” in society’s eyes multiracial and foreign-born blacks.
I know because not only do I see it every day, I’m often used as “proof” of the “good black” theory by idiotic Americans. (”You’re not American? Ahh… that explains it.”)
And as far as literary standards go, I must again ask that you actually READ people’s comments. I believe only ONE poster said she was somewhat wary of criticisms of Tyler Perry. So all you repeated claims simply come off as high-handed straw-man attempts. Get over it, dude.
Yes, there is a need for literary standards. I’d be the first to say that. But where I take issue is your assumption that the lower literary standard of these books are instantly attributable to the lower sophistication of the authors and/or audience.
Trashy literature exists across the board, and I’m fairly certain you’re aware of this. However, you seem to see the melanin-levels and urban settings of these books as part of the problem. Like I said, I haven’t read any of these, but I’m willing to bet the flawed narratives and poor character definitions would remain intact if they all took place in East Hampton.
Like someone (can’t remember whom) recently put it:
“When a white person messes up, he’s an individual. When a black person messes up, he’s a mascot.”
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 2:15 pm ¶
merq wrote:
Wow. Please forgive the mass of typos in that last post, everyone.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 2:20 pm ¶
Jenny Jingles wrote:
Um, yes, Eric, that statement was racially offensive, as it played off of a racial stereotype. Just because you have seen confirmation of that stereotype doesn’t mean it is true, or that the line in the movie was excusable.
Merq, I believe this whole discussion stemmed from Gregory saying that he disliked both Tyler Perry and urban literature.
And I would just like to say that I understand why Gregory is criticizing urban romance books. He is not holding them to a “white standard”, or putting down people who read them. He is simply stating that he finds those books poorly written and distasteful. (As a matter of fact, so do I. As a bibliophile, I agree: they ARE awful.) You can rip at him for what he said about “the stereotypical black upbringing”, but don’t judge him for his opinion on the books.
I wonder if this discussion can be related to the “Bougie” article that Latoya recently wrote?
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 2:31 pm ¶
Fiqah wrote:
Merq: seems like you’re being kinda unfairly ripped today. I always like your comments, though, so I’m showing you some love: <3
(That’s a heart, just in case something gets lost in text emoticon translation.)
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 3:09 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
We will just have to agree to disagree.
There is a “white standard” its the standard of all those mainstream literary prizes, its the reason why garbage racist books such as Harper Lee’s “To Kill A Mockingbird” is considered a classic. In Lee’s work all the black characters are stupid simple folks that need to be saved by the great white male saviour Atticus Finch. Next, you got Calpurnia the black mammy maid that’s “nurturing” to Scout and Jem the young white children.
I’m “foreign black” as well because I am not even American I am a black Canadian. In Canada blackness is basically not visible. Canada is all white its a white out.
Although I am from Canada I desire to read black literature from the African Diaspora. In Canada its all about white this and white that. If Americans think their book publishing industry is bad Canada is 100 times WORSE. In Canada, the Canadian media has a very snobbish and uppity attitude about what is considered “good literature” and that’s usually white writers or writers of colour that write a “certain” kind of way. I find this insulting to me personally because I never understood why Margaret Atwood is so popular I think her books are shit but that’s just my personal opinion. I also don’t read Austin Clarke and am I supposed to because the Globe and Mail and CBC says so? NO. I read what I want to read. I like some of the urban literature because I can RELATE TO IT. I just cringe when the NY TIMES or any big newspaper puts some writer of colour on a pedestal like Zadie Smith or whatever and says they are the new generation or voice for writers of colour.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 3:43 pm ¶
merq wrote:
Hahaha. Thanks, Fiqah! Love reading your comments, too.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 3:59 pm ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:
Orville –
Fascinating! I love hearing from black people in other countries, particularly because I always hear mess like “we don’t have race issues in Canada/England/Ireland.” Bullshit! That being the case, I understand your comments a lot better now.
I agree, re: standards of lit in general. Again, highly subjective. (Also, at least in the school system I was educated in, one of my main problems with state sanctioned “black classics” was that they were all written in dialect. I don’t mind dialect books – but why does EVERYTHING we read have to have it? Where the hell are the works by people who don’t write in dialect? It paints an interesting view on AA Lit, if you ask me…)
Do you have alternate reading lists in Canada? Major black mags/news outlets.etc that publish book lists?
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 4:11 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
Hello Latoya, I only really learned about black writers when I reached university. I do have some suggestions of books by black Canadian writers you can check out.
I had a book published in 2005 “You Don’t Know Me” its a collection of poetry by TSAR Publications. The book is available in NYC at the research library, also at the Queens public library in NYC. My book “You Don’t Know Me” is available in the following American public in cities such as Sacramento, Oakland, Los Angeles, Tampa Florida, Fort Laurendale Florida,
Madison Wisconsin, Minneapolis, Rochester Minnesota, Nashville Tennessee, Houston Texas, San Antonio Texas, Austin Texas, Santa Fe New Mexico, Phoenix Arizona,
Portland Oregon,
Dionne Brand is basically the top black female writer in Canada she’s well known in feminist ciricles. Check out some of her non ficiton books “Bread Out Of Stone” published in 1994 and “A Map To The Door Of No Return” published in 2001. Brand also has written novels such as “To The Full And Change Of the Moon”, “What We All Long For” and she’s written a lot of poetry.
Makeda Silvera is a well known black feminist Canadian writer she had a book published a few years back called “The Heart Does Not Mend”.
Nalo Hopkinson she’s a very famous science fiction writer she had several books such as “The Salt Roads”, “Brown Girl In the Ring” ect.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 7:44 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
Evelyn Lau she’s a Chinese Canadian writer and she’s very famous in Canada and she’s only 36. Sandra Oh actually starred in a CBC made for TV movie called “Diary Of A Street Kid” about Lau’s life its on DVD I think now.
Lau had a book published in 1989 that was a huge best seller called “Diary of A Street Kid” it was a story about her tough experiences of being a teen prostitute. Lau also followed up with a second memoir “Inside Out A Reflection Of A Life So Far” published in 2001.
Lau is an amazing gifted writer she’s also written five books of poetry.
Lau wrote a steamy collection of short stories called “Chose Me” a few years back very good read.
Evelyn Lau’s Poetry:
You Are Not Who You Claim
Odepial Dreams
The House Of Slaves
Treble
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 7:48 pm ¶
Gregory A. Butler wrote:
Hey, sorry if I was misunderstood about the whole racial heritage thing. I was a little flippant about some of the “soul food” comments – but I came from a place where I felt that a particular type of Black experience was being priviliged over other Black experiences (including the one that I have lived).
But I do stand by my criticism of the works of Tyler Perry – and the urban romance genre. There are serious flaws in those works, that need to be examined.
Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 9:22 pm ¶
Joe wrote:
wow
Posted 29 Nov 2007 at 7:43 pm ¶