I am a part of a writer’s group which will remain nameless for this blog. Today I looked at their site and was delighted to see that a major book publisher was going to have a day in which members of this group could submit their book for digital publishing without an agent.
Hooray!
Oh, wait. There’s a catch. In order to submit, you have to be a member of an “underrepresented group.”
What is that? Glad you asked. They define it as:
*Low Income
*Racial Minority
*Sexual identification minority
*Disabled
Or some other “underrepresented group.”
First, let me say that I have been reading books by “underrepresented” authors for 30 years, starting with a very good novel by a gay son of one of my ex-girlfriends. I love reading black and Latino authors who know what they’re talking about and can open my eyes to a different life than I’ve led. I’ve read some excellent books by lesbian authors, trans authors (one of whom was a friend of mine), authors from the Philippines, Chinese and Japanese authors, authors with disabilities (Christy Brown was a favorite).
All of this before the recent trend in the publishing world to suddenly seek out “underrepresented” authors. I have no doubt there are some incredibly wonderful books being written by people who, back in the Sixties, would have had a hard time getting published due to their being from a particular group.
Indeed, I am 100% all for having persons from EVERY group publish books of all kinds because it only makes our literary world more vibrant, more interesting.
But, dear reader, imagine if the announcement had said this instead:
“If you are a straight white male, please don’t bother submitting. We don’t want you.”
Because that’s exactly what they meant.
I’m not whining. I understand the whole concept of white privilege. I understand that as a straight white male, for hundreds of years my kind has been lionized and published, sometimes to the exclusion of other deserving authors.
Still, my question is this: Why make the exclusion? By essentially saying you don’t want straight white men to submit work, aren’t you working the side of the street in which color and gender and sexual orientation are still precluding some persons?
Why not say, “All are welcome, but we especially want to see underrepresented authors”? Where’s the problem there?
As I said, I’ve been reading books by persons who are not straight white males for decades. Talent will rise no matter what the obstacles. American literature is full of gay men (Walt Whitman), black men (James Baldwin), lesbian women (Gertrude Stein and Anais Nin), Latinos (Sandra Cisneros), Native American women (Joy Haro)…
Well, you get the picture. These are great authors. No one asked if they were from a particular group when they published their books. Some met barriers put up by straight white men, and leapt over those barriers with their talent and drive.
And you know, I’m not saying that this recent pendulum swing toward underrepresented persons is wrong, not at all. The more the merrier, I say.
Still, in their haste to remedy a centuries’ old injustice, publishers are inadvertently committing the same crime all over again.
I say, listen to us all. Let everyone under the tent flap with their book and pick the best ones. Period. I’ll bet you we end up with just as many great books by “underrepresented” persons.
Because–here’s a news flash–great writing is not confined to one group. It never has been. It never will be.
Mark Bruce, Writer 