Race & Racism in The Time Traveler’s Wife
By Guest Contributor Aliya; an earlier version of this post can be found at Sanctuary
(*I will try to keep spoilers to a minimum*)
When I started reading The Time Traveler’s Wife, I was already aware that in the movie version of the book, Eric Bana and Rachel McAdams were cast to play Henry DeTamble and Clare Abshire. So I was already aware that the two main characters were white, and I didn’t really bat an eye at it – most successful authors (particularly if their book is becoming a movie) choose white protagonists for whatever reasons (or without even considering other options).
But as I was reading, I started to notice a trend – in contrast to the white main characters, who were rich, musicians, lawyers, artists, etc – and versed in punk music as well as opera, and in German, French and English literature, the characters of color were either silent, strange, and/or did not speak English, but rather english, or slang/broken/obviously-second-language English.
Which annoyed me.
Don’t get me wrong; as an English Major, I fully enjoyed the book, and consider it possibly one of my favorites. To deny the racism/lack of race in the “usual” favorites – Pride & Prejudice, A Tale of Two Cities, Wuthering Heights, etc, or in the general canon of English Literature is a bit ridiculous – so I have come to accept that many books I love were born out of a time of racism, or have subtle or overt racism in them themselves…(Did you know Heathcliff might’ve been a person of color??)
But the fact that representation after representation of smart, intelligent, or ‘worthy’ characters in the Time Traveler’s Wife were white…troubled me. There are flaws to the white characters, but their “flaws” are human flaws – they somehow never struck me as weird, and they never took away from their roles in Henry’s life as saviors and friends, respectable and intelligent.
There are two major characters of color in the book who seem to get wrapped up in stereotypes. First, there is Mrs. Kim, or “Kimy” as Henry calls her – his “crazy Korean card-playing babysitter” (28).
Kimy
The major stereotype/characterization of Mrs. Kim is arguably be a reflection of realities: throughout the 30 + years of the novel, she speaks English as a non-Native speaker, rather than English. While English is a difficult language to learn through immersion without grammar lessons, it was also, on first glance, unneccessary for Niffenegger to make Mrs. Kim to speak English. The significance that emerged, at least for me, was that Mrs. Kim’s english syntax made her ‘other’, ‘different’, and cemented her place as a person of color rather than a mother figure to Henry.
Considering that Henry “spent most of my waking hours with Kimy”, that she had been in America for over 30 years throughout the novel, that she was close friends with the DeTambles – a great violinist, and an opera singer, and that she lived in the same apartment building and frequently takes care of Henry well into his adulthood, it struck me as odd that in world of eloquent dialogue and literary/upper-class references, Mrs. Kim never stopped speaking in broken ESL-english throughout the novel. After Henry’s mother dies, and his father becomes alcoholic, it is left on Mrs. Kim to raise Henry who would become fluent in English, German and French.
Now, I’m not saying that someone who doesn’t speak standard English can’t be friends with the DeTambles of the world, or cannot (or haven’t) raised intelligent, successful children who speak multiple languages to study European literature. On the contrary, women from less privileged countries frequently raise the children of richer (often white) families, and women who don’t speak English can (and do) raise their own children to be successful, intelligent and multilingual. However, in Audrey Neffenegger’s constructed world, by simultaneously denying Mrs. Kim the eloquence of the white companions with whom she is always immersed, and by characterizing her as a “crazy Korean” – she seems to deny Mrs. Kim the equality or respect an adult would otherwise automatically demand.
Seeing how “Kimy” spoke to Henry, and how Henry refers to her, especially as an adult, made me cringe. I often felt that he was talking down to her; that somehow the dynamics of their relationship changed when he got older to a point where he was more familiar and comfortable in the world as a time-traveling librarian; but that “Kimy” would always be the “crazy Korean” who still said spoke in ‘ESL-english’.
In her middle age and Henry’s adulthood, Mrs. Kim speaks thusly: “We did have child… You guys got a baby yet?”‘; while Henry responds: “No news, Kimy. No baby. Clare and I fight about it just about every waking moment. Please don’t start on me.” Immediately, the scene struck me as Henry talking to Mrs. Kim as though she was a child: “Please don’t start on me”. And Mrs. Kim is only asking what any interested mother-figure would. Furthermore, Henry is shocked to find out that Mrs. Kim and Mr. Kim had had a child. The fact that Henry, who is obsessed with his mother and her death (when he was 5) didn’t even know such a significant event in the life of the woman who raised him for the other 30 years, made me sad. It really displayed the power dynamics: no matter how long you know him, and care for him – you, the “crazy Korean”, will never be his dead, white opera-singing mother. The dynamic shifts from son-mother, to man-elderly caretaker/ex-babysitter, etc.
I think Mrs. Kim’s dialogue would be less damning of the racism in Niffenegger’s constructed world if there was a contrasting character of color who spoke English anywhere in the book. It is not Mrs. Kim’s dialogue alone that makes her syntax troublesome, it is instead Niffenegger’s stubborn refusal to write a character of color who speaks English with the same eloquence as her white protagonists.
On another note, I was always waiting for Mrs. Kim (whose husband seems to disappear in the book, which is another question altogether – the missing man of color) and Mr. DeTamble to get together, particularly since she spent most of her adulthood taking care of him and his son.. but alas, no romantic ending there.
Celia
Speaking of interracial couples, that brings me to the next character that awed me. Celia is the book’s angry black woman who is constantly described as “beautiful”, who is a lesbian, who dislikes Henry for how he treats Ingrid (his ex; her friend/girlfriend/crush), and becomes friends with Clare. Celia doesn’t have a large part in the book, but she is certainly not normalized.
Romantically, Celia takes an alternative path – she does not outrightly hit on or date Ingrid; it all seems forced, contrived, and manipulative. Celia also becomes friends with Clare, someone Ingrid despises for ’stealing’ Henry, despite the fact that Celia is in love with Ingrid (the book reads more like “because she is in love with Ingrid”, but I think it is in spite of…because who becomes friends with someone your lover hates!). Furthermore, Celia is the only lesbian in the book. In that alone, she stands apart from other woman characters who are perceived as the “norm” – that is, women who pursue love (Ingrid, Clare), have premarital sex (Ingrid, Clare, Shannon, Clare’s mom), and are heterosexual.
Aesthetically, Celia is described as a “small black woman with beautiful long dreads” by Clare. The fact that Clare pauses to call a black woman’s hair (dreads are a statement in and of themselves) “beautiful” kind of annoys me – it reminds me of exoticization; of declaring the appearances of “others” beautiful because they are “other”. In contrast, in the same paragraph, Ingrid’s hair is just “hair”.
Celia’s speech struck me as much as Mrs. Kim’s did. It alienated her from the white characters of the book, who in contrast become increasingly defined by their use of English. Like Mrs. Kim, Celia is never depicted with other people of color, but rather spends time with Ingrid, Henry, and later Clare. Narratively, Celia’s character, and the small role she has in the plot, does not demand, and is not enhanced by her use of english or ebonics. Nonetheless, Celia speaks like this: “Sister… A word to the wise. You are mixing in where you’re not wanted. Henry, he’s bad news, but he’s Ingrid’s bad news, and you be a fool to mess with him. You hear what I’m saying?” To which Clare responds – “What are you talking about?”.
Celia is the first color of character who we see in the book for a long time – the majority of the plot and characters before this are white, privileged, upper class, and readers are wrapped up in a wealthy world of opera, art and obscure literary quotes. However, Niffenegger seems to go out of her way to further “other” her. Celia’s hair is exoticized, her sexuality is ‘other’-ed from the book’s imaginary norm – she even ‘hates’ the characters we are supposed to love (Henry), and loves the characters we are supposed to side against (Ingrid). In this context, it seems obvious to me that her syntax and dialogue is not a stylistic, realist or creative choice; instead, Celia’s dialogue seems positioned to further ‘other’ her, to make her ‘different’ from our lovable protags, and, most importantly, suggests that she is ‘less than’.
To take it a step further, Celia is not only characterized as ‘less than’ in a world where English, music, and art are the qualities that make you “worthy”, she is an “angry” lesser-than. Celia’s aforementioned speech is aimed at Clare when she is angry at her – she wants to threaten/scare Clare off of Henry, out of loyalty to Ingrid. What does that say about ebonics, cultures of color, and english in the context of the novel? To me, it is obvious – those who don’t speak English are colored, othered, exotic, and “beautiful”, but ultimately excluded/outside of the DeTamble and Abshire households/worlds/immediate storyline.
Nell
Speaking of Clare – she is like a bastion of class privilege. First, her family is rich. Second, they live in a huge house beside a meadow where her mother spends her days gardening (or bossing around the gardener). Third, she has servants: Nell and Etta. And of course, Nell is black. When Henry visits Clare’s home, at one point he walks in on Nell “waggling her large hips” singing Christmas carols with with “a young black girl”.
Like Celia and Mrs. Kim before her, Nell is a characterization more than a portrayal of a character. She doesn’t speak English – not even to her employers or their guests, but rather says “Shoo son, get out of here and go sit in the living room and pull on the bell and I will make you some fresh coffee.. I’m gonna feed you up.” As a character, Nell reinforces the Abshire’s class and race privilege by embodying the stereotype of a black servant – doesn’t speak English, is happy to serve at the ring of a bell, and loves her employers.
Gomez
Then there is Gomez. Gomez is not a character of colour, but he is worth mentioning because of his name. When I first saw the name “Gomez”, I admit I got excited. I thought – “Yay, a main character of color!”. But what’s interesting is the fact that Gomez is white. Gomez is not his real name, but rather a nickname. I found that so odd – it was like having a character of color in the book without him having to actually be a character of color. On paper, seeing “Gomez said” or “Gomez laughed”; you don’t think blonde-blue-eyed, etc etc. So it allows Niffenegger to have a “different” name, while still retaining the idealized, normalized look – white. Which in turn reminds me of Celia’s exotization as a sexual, black lesbian woman with “beautiful” hair.
There are also other characters of color who are characterized by their silence. For example, I don’t recall Mr. Kim ever speaking and he is absent for most of the book (unless I missed something?).
Basically, after reading The Time Traveler’s Wife, and being pleased by the literary references (Derek Walcott? Hell yes.), the ways in which the protagonists speak (complicated and witty), and the way the story itself is crafted and written, I was disappointed by the lack of characters of color who were real, rather than caricatures.
Of course, had Henry been a POC, his time traveling problem would’ve probably been a lot more damning; his white privilege let him escape a lot. Similarly, when Clare is seen in a care with a much older man (a Henry from the future) when she is 16, no one bats an eye because Henry is white. Had either of them been black in the 70s/80s, that would’ve been something to quirk an eyebrow at; they wouldn’t have gotten away so easily. So yes, I understand the plot advantages of having Henry and Clare be white, but even if the secondary characters alone remained racialized as they are, it would’ve been nice to see some diversity of interest, speech, characteristics and class. Instead, Mrs. Kim, Celia, and Nell come off as the same formula with different stereotypes: i.e. “insert Korean immigrant stereotype”, “insert sexualized ‘othered’, angry black woman stereotype”, “insert black servant stereotype”, etc, etc.
In fact, it is not the characterizations themselves that make Niffenegger’s work particularly offensive; instead, it is the context in which the characters of color are (mis)placed – the only characters who do not speak English, who have lower-paying jobs, and who are often in service of the protagonists. The world Niffenegger constructs is one in which the privileged, white, upper class only encounters people of color who serve them (Mrs. Kim, Nell), hate/threaten them (Celia), or are actually white (Gomez). Henry and Clare never describe people they view as intellectual equals (colleagues, etc) who are also people of color.
In a world of time traveling genes, second string violinists, opera singers, lawyers, drug dealers who seek to cure, is it asking too much for the same imagination to be extended to the characters of color in the book?
Ok. That was a long rant that was long overdue. I’m sure I’ve forgotten a lot since I read the book a few weeks ago in preparation for the movie. I haven’t seen the movie yet, but when I do, I hope that whatever characters of color they choose to keep are more believable and less offensive/racially stereotyped than they are in the book.
Although, Brad Pitt produced it, didn’t he? With his “rainbow” of children, I don’t know if I should expect more.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
B wrote:
I hate to break it to you, but I don’t think they kept ANY characters of color in the movie. Henry and Clare briefly hang out with an East Asian woman, but it had been so long since I read the book that I wasn’t entirely sure who she was supposed to be.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 9:23 am ¶
Allison wrote:
I was surprised you didn’t mention Charisse. What did you think of her portrayal?
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 12:32 pm ¶
Zahra wrote:
Oooh, thank you for this! I HATED the angry black lesbian stereotype in this book, which utterly eclipsed for me the other problematic portrayals; thanks for pointing them out too.
Celia’s portrayal is so icky. She’s basically the villain of the book, the personification of animus against Henry and Clare. It drove me nuts.
But I would add that Celia’s portrayal is part of a larger thread of homophobia that runs through the book. There’s a constant current of weirdness around homosexuality–it comes up and is mentioned, often in oppositional ways, far more than you would expect in a straight romance.
I read this as compensation. Henry’s involuntary time-travel & out-of-sequence relationship with Clare forces the couple to be closeted for much of their courtship, much the way that a same-sex couple would have had to be in the period. For some reason, the book manifests anxiety about this, or a deep need to differentiate the straight star-crossed lovers from queer people.
So it brings up the analogy–most notably in the scene where the adolescent Henry has sex with his counterpart from the future & is caught by his dad–and then squashes it. The childhood scene is all about the injustice of Henry’s secret time-traveling powers leading to him being mistaken for being queer (& paying the penalty of fatherly rejection) when he’s really not. The exorcism of any connection or solidarity between Clare & Henry & other queer people comes largely through Celia & her relentless opposition. (There are other examples, which for me are more forgettable.)
Everything you say about Celia’s othered position is too true–I found her faux-Ebonics particularly painful, as I couldn’t believe the character wouldn’t code-switch–and she allows the author to join the angry, man-hating lesbian stereotype to the angry black woman stereotype.
Making the most prominent queer character black is another way to drive home the message that really, the pretty white straight people at the center of the story have nothing in common with those at the margins. Whatever compassion we feel for their tragedy shouldn’t be extended to those Other groups.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 12:34 pm ¶
Aliya wrote:
@B – I saw the movie last night, and I noticed that as well. I was surprised by the “East Asian Woman”, who is actually Charisse, who is a WOC in the book.
@Allison – I admit I didn’t even realize that Charisse was a WOC. And she speaks English! Outrageous. [/irony, /sarcasm]. I have complicated feelings, some of which I discussed at my blog (xalexiel.blogspot.com).
Basically, I am thrilled there is a WOC in the book who is a main character, is viewed by main characters as their ‘equal’ (read: not servant, not enemy, not talked down to) and is respected/loved by Henry and Clare. On the other hand, it complicates Gomez’s relationship with her with his fascination with Clare – he is in a relationship with a WOC, has a nickname that is associated with POC, and lusts after a white woman. Ouch.
Talk about hierarchy of worth!
I’m glad they kept her a WOC in the movie. What do you think about Gomez’s casting, and the fact that there is an interracial relationship – even if it is undermined by Gomez’s fascination with Clare (and thence the whiteness she seems to stand for)?
@Zahra – Thanks for the comment and insight! I’m glad to know I wasn’t the only one who felt awkward about Celia’s portrayal. On the heterosexual-normality scale; you’re right – even the male homosexual character has AIDS because his partner cheated on him – two stereotypes in one.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 1:59 pm ¶
Tami wrote:
I read this book years ago and loved the story, yet hated the racial portrayals as you did. At the time, I lived in Chicago, where much of the book takes place and where I assumed the author must have spent a lot of time.
I’ve always viewed Niffenegger’s portrayal of race as typical of Chitown, a big city where people of different races huddle in their designated neighborhoods and view other folks from other neighborhoods with suspicion. So much diversity; so little mingling.
I found it not uncommon to meet white folks who had lived their lives in the third largest city in the United States, yet had very little knowlege of POC besides stereotypes gained while rushing through “scary” ethnic neighborhoods to the tonier parts of town. Professionals who fancied themselves broad-minded and liberal, but who rendered the few POC they knew as Celias and Kimys and other one-dimensional beings.
To be fair, I also met black folks for whom venturing beyond the South Side was the equivalent of a journey to the moon.
I found it curious indeed.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 2:05 pm ¶
Persia wrote:
So it brings up the analogy–most notably in the scene where the adolescent Henry has sex with his counterpart from the future & is caught by his dad–and then squashes it.
Wait, Henry has sex with himself? And this proves his straightness because it’s like time travel masturbation? I haven’t read the book and now I’m completely confused.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 2:11 pm ¶
BSK wrote:
I haven’t read the book or seen the movie. However, I believe the book is intended to be semi-autobiographical. It’s possible characters in the novel were based on real people in the writer’s life. Obviously, if this is true, there are questions about the people whom she surrounds herself with. But, it could explain why she framed these particular characters in this way. Possibly.
That doesn’t make the work any more problematic. But it might explain WHY these chracters were developed in this way.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 2:28 pm ¶
four-seven wrote:
Thank You for this! I read the book a couple of years ago and came away from it feeling like it had racial issues. Here are a couple of things I found problematic:
1) Charisse, an Asian-American woman, whose White husband is in love with Clare, a White woman. She accepts this, she’s pathetic.
2) The numerous references to the beauty of Clare’s pale skin. Clare even decides to name her daughter Alba because it means pale. This is Clare’s reward for suffering numerous miscarriages and refusing to adopt, an unquestionably White daughter who carries the same genetic flaw as her father. Just doing her part to maintain a pure genetic line. The entire book is a catalogue of the horrible things that can happen when you time-travel uncontrollably all the way up to the climax, which is the violent death of Henry due to traveling to the wrong place at the wrong time. Is the reader supposed to be happy that now Alba will have to spend her life this way? And most likely die young as a result? The author makes Alba a better time-traveler, but this is a cheat to keep us from worrying about all the bad things that can happen to a young girl who gets transported to strange places and times while naked. I thought Clare’s fertility quest was genetic arrogance caused by a deep-seated feeling of White supremacy.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 3:22 pm ¶
Seattle Slim wrote:
Reading the reviews makes me glad this book was never even a contender to make it on my book list.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 3:31 pm ¶
Jen wrote:
Eric Bana is Greek-Australian. To describe him as “white” is to completely ignore his ethnic background and cultural history, not to mention any racism he may have experienced as a young man. And in the 70s, 80s and early 90s in Australia, Greeks (and Italians) copped it pretty hard. “Wogs” were the Muslims of the time.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 8:08 pm ¶
cocolamala wrote:
if the author based her characters of color on real people, that still doesn’t explain their lack of development, where are the background stories and supporting characters? doesn’t kimy’s husband ever pick her up from work?
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 8:19 pm ¶
Courtney wrote:
I really hope the author sees reviews like this one.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 9:27 pm ¶
jstele wrote:
Eric Bana is not Greek-Australian. His father is Serbian and his mother is German.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 9:52 pm ¶
Aliya wrote:
@BSK – Where did you read that the work was autobiographical? As far as I know, the only autobiographical part is the metaphor of the Henry-Clare relationship (i.e. Niffenegger uses it as a metaphor for her own relationships, in regards to ‘waiting’ in love), and the fact that Clare has red hair. I don’t think the characters themselves are based on real life people she knows.
However, I could be wrong and just haven’t read the article/interview/etc that you read.
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 10:07 pm ¶
BSK wrote:
Cocolamala-
I guess that was sort of part of my point, though I may not have made it clearly.
IF these characters are based on real life, and this is really all the author knows of them, and are the only PoC’s she knows, what does that say about her general relationships with PoC’s?
Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 10:52 pm ¶
Jen wrote:
@jstele My god, you are quite right. How embarrassing. However, that still doesn’t take away the fact that the above review totally strips him of his “other” status in Australia. To pull an example at random from his Wiki page:
In a cover story for The Mail on Sunday, he told author Antonella Gambotto-Burke that his family had suffered from racist taunts, and that it had distressed him. “Wog is such a terrible word,” he said.”
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 12:19 am ¶
Maria wrote:
Everything said rings true. I did want to point out however that being named ‘Gomez’ wouldn’t have potentially, technically made him a person of color; as Spanish/Latino/Hispanic people are an ethnic group that could be made up of every/any race and therefore any color.
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 2:06 am ¶
g531 wrote:
Thank you for this; I found this insightful. A few folks I know read it and loved it. This leaves much to contemplate.
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 8:00 am ¶
jstele wrote:
Bana may have suffered a lot of racism as a child, but he can pass as an Anglo person. And however much racism he endured, Serbian is considered white. And Bana is and will continue to get “white” roles because that’s what he is.
What’s strange is how the term “wog” refers to people of Mediterranean origin. Serbian isn’t exactly Mediterranean, but I suppose some Serbians can pass as Italian, etc. Until I read that article, I would have never known there was such a history of discrimination. I always thought Greeks and especially Italians were part of the mainstream.
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 8:39 am ¶
Aliya wrote:
@Jen – Thanks for pointing out Bana’s ethnicity, and the discriminatory experiences that went with it in his youth. However, I consider race, ethnicity and culture as different, so while you have informed me that Bana’s ethnicity is Serbian/German, and his culture is Australian, I racialize him as white.
However, I only mentioned Bana to lead into saying that Henry and Clare are racialized as white in the book and the movie. Even if you didn’t want to racialize Bana as white, I don’t think you’d deny that he is playing a white character.
I hope that explains the racialization, and you had a chance to read the rest of the article.
On another note, I also didn’t mention that Henry is also part Jewish (on his mother’s side), and it comes up once in the book when he meets Clare’s family/before the wedding.
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 8:57 am ¶
tanglad wrote:
It’s been a while since I read the book, so I don’t remember the other poc characters very well, but I remember Charisse being a “small Filipino Madonna.” And given how often Filipinos are cited as an example of assimilation, it’s not surprising how the Filipina character is the one who has the most integrated relationships with the main characters in the book. Not ESL-english speaking, not angry woc, not alienated from the white characters. In fact, Charisse is sort of part of their circle, and even got to marry one of them (though it felt to me that she was the consolation prize).
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 12:29 pm ¶
BSK wrote:
Aliya-
I read that part as well. That is what I meant by “quasi-autobiographical” or whatever I said. I don’t know for sure that the characters are based on real life. Just that it’s a possibility. Not a fun one, given some of the problems that brings up, but still, worth considering.
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 1:07 pm ¶
shah8 wrote:
I thought the Time Traveler’s Wife was a pretty good book. I never really thought much either way about Celia, as she mostly confused me. In any event, I’m reading the Quiet War by Paul McAuley in which Earth, which is led by Bahians, wars against the colonies at Jupiter and Saturn and beyond. His portrayal of future black brazillians leaders is thouroughly cringeworthy. Still, that novel is thought to be “brilliant”. It can *always* get worse. ?:~)
Audrey N. might not have been the best, but compared to many out there, she’s far better than many authors. I can think of several speculative fiction novels based in Chicago, and none of them have significant POC. Which I hadn’t really thought about ’till now.
One last point. The end of the novel has a major twist that’s a bit more subtle than the end of Iain Banks Use of Weapons (or the 6th Sense), and I suspect most people missed it. This twist does kinda explain why AN handled Charisse, Celia, and others in the fashion she has.
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 3:05 pm ¶
Natalie wrote:
Wow, really thought provoking article. I read and LOVED this book and didn’t notice any of this.
Thanks.
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 3:42 pm ¶
Minda wrote:
Wasn’t there also something about the ultrasound tech being asian with long nails or something ridiculous like that? Or was that another book I read?
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 5:54 pm ¶
Zahra wrote:
@Aliya—
Thanks! And yes, I had forgotten about the cheating/AIDS gay storyline–one more example. The striking thing for me is how many racist & homophobic things are in the book; it’s thematic, and Celia exemplifies both trends.
@ Persia
“Wait, Henry has sex with himself? And this proves his straightness because it’s like time travel masturbation?”
Um… Yes and yes. I don’t know what to say; it didn’t make sense to me either. There’s a strong salting of “kids just experimental does not equal real freaky gay.”
@four-seven
You are so right. And so brilliant. Thank you for making those points about Alba, adoption, and the Clare white skin fetish.
Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 9:00 pm ¶
Luis wrote:
“Basically, after reading The Time Traveler’s Wife, and being pleased by the literary references (Derek Walcott? Hell yes.)”
No, no, no… I can’t stand this. More privileged white people reading great PoC writers and absorbing nothing into their own lives, but feeling entitled to quote.
Just shoot me. I can’t keep seeing the same story play out over and over again. They won’t even leave Walcott alone.
Posted 22 Aug 2009 at 4:22 am ¶
cheezwiz wrote:
thanks for the insightful review!
i remember noticing certain troubling elements, but wrote them off as the work of a novice author who probably led a very sheltered life and has little/no experience with people of color. most likely she recognized that she needed to try to flesh out a story about white people with some “quirky” characters with different racial backgrounds, and has no actual experience with these people as they exist in the real world.
needless to say, it makes it no less troubling that it’s not deliberate racism, but then, it’s amazing that most racism and racial exploitation seems to not be overt and comes from a place of attempting to understand/embrace the “other” to show “acceptance.”
Posted 22 Aug 2009 at 11:47 am ¶
CaitieCat wrote:
This is an outstanding piece of literary analysis, and the comment thread is a sparkly wonderful thing too – not just literary analysis and intersectionalities considered, but anyone who can rightly use “code-switch” in a discussion of a literary work makes me go all swoony.
Excellent post, thank you, Aliya.
Posted 23 Aug 2009 at 3:02 pm ¶
Jen wrote:
@aliya I see your point, but isn’t to racialise someone as white to ignore their experiences? I know he “passes” as white, and that the character he is playing is white, but it still seems like it’s ditching the discrimination he suffered as a kid. Anyways! Derailing!
Loved the rest of the article, just still don’t know that it’s a book or a film I want to read/see…
Posted 23 Aug 2009 at 7:49 pm ¶
mile wrote:
I haven’t read the book for a while, but the only thing I really remember bothering me was the adoption thing, where Clare said something like “I’m tired of faking. I want to have a real baby.” That part bothered me, but I sort of skipped over it. I remember how important the whiteness of her skin was, and of course, I noticed Alba=white, but I didn’t really remember all this other stuff. Good analysis.
Posted 24 Aug 2009 at 1:27 am ¶
Persia wrote:
No promises as to quality but if you’re looking for speculative fiction with non-white leads one blogger has been compliling a list.
Posted 24 Aug 2009 at 10:59 am ¶
gonzo wrote:
I agree with the comments about the racial blindness. I have to ask though, what was the major twist that Shah 8 mentions?? Its driving me crazy.
Posted 24 Aug 2009 at 7:11 pm ¶
bdsista wrote:
Excellent review, not reading it and won’t go see the movie.
Posted 26 Aug 2009 at 12:18 am ¶
Laura wrote:
I have to admit, I’m curious about what shah8 is talking about as well!
Posted 26 Aug 2009 at 1:37 pm ¶
Jocelyn wrote:
i haven’t heard very many good reviews of this book, but i must add that my dad’s been living in North America for 40 years and he still has a thick Chinese accent. just sayin.
Posted 27 Aug 2009 at 2:59 pm ¶
lorah wrote:
Thank you for writing this criticism. I remember reading the book and liking it back in 2004, before I’d ever given any thought to what was happening outside of my little bubble of privilege. I recently glanced back at it, and was disgusted at how totally awash in white and upper-class privilege the thing is. O, the heart-breaking romantic tribulations endured by two fabulously wealthy, overeducated, Michigan Avenue fauxhemians. Ew.
Posted 27 Aug 2009 at 6:23 pm ¶
Golden Silence wrote:
You are reading my mind. Just finished reading the novel last night and I too noticed the blatant racial stereotypes with the secondary characters. It’s as if Audrey Niffenegger doesn’t know much about the world outside which she lives in.
Speaking of Black women and hair in the novel, Dr. Murray (appears near the end) is described by Clare as having a big and “beautiful” bouffant hairdo that only a Black woman can pull off (that’s me paraphrasing, but the gist’s there). What was the point of that comment?! It gave me the vibe that some White women try so hard to not come off as racist, that their overcomplimentary actions come off as trite.
And the idea of Clare wanting a baby of her own annoyed me, but more in the sense of her being a woman than of her being a White woman. It annoyed me because it played into the stereotypes of a woman not being complete without having a baby.
Posted 03 Sep 2009 at 12:31 pm ¶
Kathe wrote:
That’s so funny that this came up! I was just thinking about this! This is my favorite book, but the last time I read it it the racism really struck me.
Posted 24 Sep 2009 at 7:42 am ¶