Again
Sadly I won't have time to write a more detailed post on this today, but I still wanted to call your attention to another case of whitewashing in the YA book industry: Magic Under Glass, a fantasy book with a dark-skinned Eastern protagonist, displays a white model on the cover. It seems that the Liar controversy a few months ago was not enough to make publishers understand why this is a big no-no, or why it matters at all.
Some have pointed out, in the comments to the post I linked to, that the cover artist probably hadn't read the book to begin with. I don't know whether they did, so I won't argue with that, but I'm sure that somebody somewhere who did read the book saw the cover before it was published. Furthermore, there's something problematic about simply accepting the assumption that, unless given specific instructions, the artist would "naturally" pick the "default" model - a white girl.
But all this aside, I think that when having these conversations it's much more useful to focus on consequences than to speculate about intentions. No matter what the intention was, the message sent out to teens of colour is the same: they're being told they don't matter. If racism were only ever perpetrated by people who set out to be malicious, it would be a much smaller problem than it is.
Ari and Susan have written much better posts on this, so I suggest you visit them. They also link to some other relevant posts, and give you suggestions on how you can help. Also, I hope Susan won't mind if I quote her powerful words:
Since I'm here, I might as well announce the winner of my Tipping the Velvet giveaway: sayer-of-the-word-queer number 13, Michelle. Congratulations, Michelle! E-mail me your address and I'll send the book your away as soon as possible.
Some have pointed out, in the comments to the post I linked to, that the cover artist probably hadn't read the book to begin with. I don't know whether they did, so I won't argue with that, but I'm sure that somebody somewhere who did read the book saw the cover before it was published. Furthermore, there's something problematic about simply accepting the assumption that, unless given specific instructions, the artist would "naturally" pick the "default" model - a white girl.
But all this aside, I think that when having these conversations it's much more useful to focus on consequences than to speculate about intentions. No matter what the intention was, the message sent out to teens of colour is the same: they're being told they don't matter. If racism were only ever perpetrated by people who set out to be malicious, it would be a much smaller problem than it is.
Ari and Susan have written much better posts on this, so I suggest you visit them. They also link to some other relevant posts, and give you suggestions on how you can help. Also, I hope Susan won't mind if I quote her powerful words:
Whitewashing is racist. It says no one is interested in any character other than the white standard. It says we do not value diversity. It says POC at best can be a sidekick. POC can earn the publisher money but we cannot represent them.That's all there is to it, really. And that doesn't change even if it's an honest mistake, even if the person responsible for this particular cover happened to have the best intentions in the world.
Since I'm here, I might as well announce the winner of my Tipping the Velvet giveaway: sayer-of-the-word-queer number 13, Michelle. Congratulations, Michelle! E-mail me your address and I'll send the book your away as soon as possible.
Jen from Multi-Genre fan posted about this also today: http://multigenrefan.com/2010/01/tss-book-covers-that-lie-yet-again%E2%80%A6/
ReplyDeleteThat's where I first heard about it. Going back and reading Memory's post about this book, I saw she mentioned in the review this same issue, and she and the author talked about it a bit in the comments.
This whole thing is so sad and Bloomsbury out to be ashamed of themselves. Again.
I actually hadn't heard of the book before - I'm so behind on blog reading that I missed Jen's post and Memory's review and the interaction in the comments. Off to check them out now. And yep, they should be ashamed of themselves AGAIN :\
ReplyDeleteSigh. I had no idea until this morning and both you and MissAttitude posted, having not read the book. I suspect this is probably quite prevalent in the industry, but you'd think Bloomsbury at least would have learned a thing or two.
ReplyDeleteAna,
ReplyDeleteI am flattered when you quote me. We have to stop making excuses and demand change.
Bloomsbury should be the last publisher to repeat this. Doing so sends a clear message. I will not be dissuaded in the least if others don't want to see the elephant in the room.
It's so weird that Bloomsbury didn't get it the last time! Hard to fathom....
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty amazed that after the upset just last year with Liar that this publishing company still can't get their act together with this issue!
ReplyDeleteNot again. :-( I'm so tired of this. It's one things when covers don't match the book--it happens all too often, but when it's something like this. . . It really is infuriating. I hope the publishers will eventually get the message how wrong whitewashing is.
ReplyDeleteI really, really hope they change the cover for the paperback. I completely understand why people don't want to give Bloomsbury their money, but I'd hate to see Jackie lose readers over this. The publisher made a bad choice, but the book is wonderful and well worth reading.
ReplyDeleteI've read about this at several places now. I didn't know about the Liar controversy, but it does look like something that they've done out of convenience and habit. Very bad.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, thanks for the giveaway. (Lucky 13?) Have sent you an email. =)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on an important issue. Because it does affect and have consequences..and that is the most important thing to remember. I hadn't heard of this book before now but again thanks for sharing this.
ReplyDeleteThe first word that popped into my head was "Unbelievable!" But the sad fact is that it's not unbelievable. It's far too believable. :( And positively unacceptable.
ReplyDeleteI just don't get it Ana :( I just told Shanra on her website, I actually like this cover and the sad thing is, I think it would be so much MORE beautiful WITH a person of color on the cover. It's just horrible...
ReplyDeleteI can't think of a word better than "lame" to describe what Bloomsbury has done here. It's just lame. Lame Bloomsbury! Lame!
ReplyDeleteWith the same strong reactions like that of Liar I do think that Bloomsbury will change the cover for this one. And I'm quite hopeful that the vigilant reading public will continue airing out concerns with respect to issues such as this.
ReplyDeleteI read the controversy the first time around but it's only now I'll air out my thoughts. While it is certainly regrettable that such major mistakes occur, I don't agree with the full-on campaign against a book publishing industry considering that a lot of us probably have no idea how the process of picking covers work.
Think about the book cover artist assigned to pick photos for any book cover for that matter. People don't expect them to have read the entire book since it's probably their job to do book covers for uh, I don't know, more than a handful of books. Maybe a synopsis is given or just titles. Again, I don't know.
I've seen a lot of book covers using photos taken from a bunch available for publication purposes. You know, those photos of kids together, or of a woman looking faraway, an old house, a woman in costume and so forth. There are blogs out there pointing out that the same photos were used for different book covers and while I find it hilarious at first, I also realized it saves time and money using photos from a pile already there instead of doing a commissioned work.
It's easy for me to assume that a photo for a debut novelist would come from that pile instead of a commissioned work specifically for a specific book. It's easy for me to assume that a first-time novelist would have no creative control over the covers and at this point I am saddened by the mistake of the editor approving the book cover of this one. But I'd like to cut him or her some slack given that it's probable that all s/he remembered from approving the photo of this one for the book is probably the title or barely a short synopsis.
It's also possible I'm wrong and that a publishing giant wouldn't want to use a colored woman on the cover. But that point would only be valid if one reviews all book covers from Bloomsbury and not find any single colored person on them. But see, they changed the cover for Liar, if I go by the post here. They changed it after people noticed and complained. They changed it eventually, I mean.
Let's hope they change it for this one as well.
Wow. Sad. I don't even really know what to say. I wish that skin color wasn't a tactical marketing decision. I understand that demographics exist and maybe targeting to a certain crowd happens and I'm sure there is research that goes into a cover-choosing strategy. But come on. When will it stop mattering to people publishing the books and people reading the books?
ReplyDeleteAnd, for that matter, for people writing the books? I'm a little tired of every epic fantasy book I read having northerners be very much like Scandinavian warlords and the "dark-skinned people" from the South always being of a different and militaristic religion.
Sorry for the rant!
Thanks for your thoughts, everyone. It's been pointed out that the cover was picked before the Liar thing happened back in the summer, but I'm not sure if I see how that makes it any better. There was more than enough time for it to be changed. Like Michelle was saying, this sounds like something they do out of habit, which is very bad in itself.
ReplyDeleteAarti, NO sorry! You can talk about that anytime - it's a more than valid concern, and a big problem indeed.
Lightheaded: The fact that we don't know any of that - the circumstances under which the cover artists, editor who approved it, etc were working - was why I said it was better to focus on consequences rather than to speculate about intentions. I don't feel the need to cut them some slack because I didn't see anyone attacking them personally, or implying they were all horrible human beings who kick kittens and steal candy from children. We don't know, and to be honest I don't think it matters. No matter what they were thinking, real human beings feel hurt and belittled when choices like these are made. And that matters more than their intentions or circumstances.
I don't think it is right either.. but (and not in defense of ANYONE)..having beeen in contact with a few authors.. they all seem to have seen the cover well before the release of their books, don't they open their mouth and say anythng?????? curious on that note.
ReplyDeleteAgain? Sigh.
ReplyDeleteI think the fact that this cover was created before 'Liar' may just show that they thought they could get away with keeping the other covers they'd done a similar thing with. They smoke screened everyone by bowing to the pressure and changing Liar's cover but then kept their initial company cover policies in place because they thought they'd get away with it. And because the book didn't have a whole lot of buzz from people who are on the look out for these kind of issues they got away with it until now. It's a total tribute to Ari that she spotted it and called them out.
ReplyDeleteSigh indeed :\ And Jodie, I think you're exactly right.
ReplyDeleteDeslily: I think most authors (unless they're huge names) don't have a final say when it comes to the covers of their books. The author of Liar talked about her disappointment openly, but in this case, I wonder if the author being a first-time novelist helps account for her silence. Could she be worried about repercussions? Which is in itself troubling, of course :\
This is so frustrating. To hear that it happened once was bad enough, but twice? It's really, really disappointing news to come across this...again.
ReplyDeleteThe term Whitewashing is derogatory word for racism. People who use it are no better them the act itself.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, you're wrong. And I think you know you're wrong, or else you wouldn't be too cowardly to sign your own name and stand behind your statement. Also, I'd appreciate it if you'd refrain from making personal assumptions about me or anyone else who uses the term "whitewashing". You'll notice that nowhere did I say that the people responsible for whitewashing practices are "bad". I don't know whether or not they're bad people; probably they aren't. But the point is, IT DOESN'T MATTER. What matters is what they do, not who they are. And what they do makes fellow human beings feel insignificant.
ReplyDelete(Oh dear...I've just fed a troll, haven't I? :S)
Ugh. It depresses me to see that some people consider the term whitewashing to be racist. I think it's an apt term, as turning a POC character as white essentially paints the character white which oh, look at that, is whitewashing. How is it an insult to white people? I'm white and I definitely don't see it as an insult, I see it as a term aptly describing an unjust process. Like My Friend Amy states in her post On Being Offended, I have white privilege, does acknowledging this offend some people, sure, but often we have to confront unsettling truths.
ReplyDeleteI was going to go somewhere with this, but lost my train of thought...
Zibilee: It's disappointing, yes :\ I was hoping the publishing world in general had learned from the Liar thing.
ReplyDeleteApril, I completely agree with you. I'm white as well, and the term doesn't offend me in the least. It's not about making white people "the bad guys" - it's about making decisions that have real consequences for real people visible.
This is infuriating. And aside from its offensiveness, don't they ever stop to think that generic isn't a good thing? How easy it is to pass over a book that has a cover that looks like the same old, same old. I'd be much more likely to pick up something that's looks like it's not a rehash of the usual.
ReplyDeleteDarla, I completely agree!
ReplyDelete