[GUEST POST] Bradley P. Beaulieu on Writing in Discomfort: One Writer’s Thoughts on Political Correctness
Bradley P. Beaulieu is the author of The Winds of Khalakovo, the first of three planned books in The Lays of Anuskaya series. In addition to being an L. Ron Hubbard Writers of the Future Award winner, Brad’s stories have appeared in various other publications, including Realms of Fantasy Magazine, Orson Scott Card’s Intergalactic Medicine Show, Writers of the Future 20, and several anthologies from DAW Books. His story, “In the Eyes of the Empress’s Cat,” was voted a Notable Story of 2006 in the Million Writers Award.
Years ago I had a discussion with a group of writers about writing beyond the boundaries of politeness. It wasn’t couched in quite this way at the time, but I think that’s what it boiled down to, at least for me. The subject came up because someone in the group, a young white man, had written a story about an underprivileged black man from the D.C. Metro ghettos. I remember how uncomfortable I was when reading the story, not because the language wasn’t on the money–it captured the slang and cadence quite well–but because I knew it had been written by a white guy.
Now, this says more about me than it does the author who wrote it. I was born and raised in Southeastern Wisconsin in mostly white bread areas. I never saw anything like drugs or gang violence. The neighborhoods we lived in never had trouble. I don’t even remember interfacing with blacks until I’d entered junior high. In some ways this made me a blank slate. I had no bias toward blacks, though as I went through junior high and entered high school, I started to become more aware of the lay of the land in America when it came to political correctness. I largely felt that speaking for blacks, or even about blacks, was not my place. I didn’t know enough about it; I didn’t come from that culture; and so I should probably just keep my mouth shut.
That was before I started writing. Anyone who writes long enough, especially a writer of science fiction and fantasy, where in some ways it’s easier to manufacture a situation where cultural or religious or racial or sexual tabboos can be explored, will come across this sooner or later. For me, it was during that conversation about story of the black man from D.C. When that group of writers–all of us white–had this conversation about writing outside of your comfort zone, it struck me hard. It challenged me and my preconceptions of what I should be writing about. Why can’t I write about Black America? Why can’t I write about things that are taboo from my current, somewhat-limited point-of-view?
The lesson I learned that day was this: writing takes courage. We can and should write about things that are uncomfortable for us. It will not only expand our own boundaries, but those of others as well, and if there’s some chance of stepping on toes, of embarrassing yourself, then so be it. That’s the risk we take, and it’s a risk we should take, because only by examining ourselves as a people–be it through writing or otherwise–will we rise above the issues of the day.
Determined to challenge myself, I later wrote a story about a black woman in Harlem with a child who’s taken by the ghost of a young man who committed suicide decades ago. It was called “Good Morning Heartache,” and it was eventually printed in Spells of the City, a DAW anthology. Even now I’m rather self-conscious of the story, wondering if a black woman from Harlem would be offended if she read it. I hope not. I tried hard to do the characters justice.
When I started writing The Winds of Khalakovo, I didn’t know what it would be about. I only knew I wanted a big epic fantasy that included a major culture clash as part of its primary, driving thread. I remember during college, after Operation Desert Storm began, sitting in front of the TV, watching intently as forces were deployed, as we clashed with the Iraqis. Tanks and troops and laser-guided bombs. It was the first war I hadn’t experienced through the lens of a history book. I was seeing it (or the newsroom-filtered equivalent of it) right before me through news footage and war reports and news articles and so on. The conflict expanded, and I grew more and more despondent. I felt terrible for all those caught in the middle, and it continued with 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Without getting into the politics, my heart cried for those killed–regardless of nationality–because they happen to be in the wrong place at the worst possible time.
I couldn’t help but think: what if this was happening here in the U.S.? What if someone invaded Wisconsin? On the surface, this seems a ridiculous notion, the American military machine being what it is, but reality has nothing to do with empathy. So when I began writing Winds, I didn’t try to make these feelings and thoughts surface, but surface they did. From all of these pent-up feelings were born the Aramahn, a peace-loving people, and the Maharraht, a fringe group of the Aramahn who want to push the Landed (who amount to white colonialists in the story) from the shores of the islands throughout which they once enjoyed complete freedom. I modeled the culture of these people off of ancient Persia, but one need not look too hard to see parallels with what happened in the Middle East.
I became conscious at times that these parallels existed, but I was careful to stay tight to the story. Just as Tolkien said that The Lord of the Rings was no allegory for war, so is Winds no allegory for racial conflict. In this respect I’m a Tim Powers disciple–I’m not out to make my work say anything–but by the same token, if issues come up in the story, I’m fully prepared to explore them and see what comes of it. In fact, I embrace it; I just don’t try to force it.
I suppose any writer will eventually face this crossroads. Do you tackle tough issues or do you not? I think we have to, and though my inner critic is still uncomfortable with doing so, I think it’s a terribly important thing to do.
Related posts:
- [GUEST POST] P.I. Barrington Talks About Random Generators and Writing
- [GUEST POST] Lory Kaufman on Building A Better World – Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy
- [GUEST POST] Teresa Frohock Reveals ‘What Guillermo del Toro Taught Me About Writing Child Characters’
- Free eBook (Nook Only): The Winds of Khalakovo by Bradley P. Beaulieu
- [GUEST POST] Stina Leicht on ‘Things I Learned About Good Writing from Playing Role-Playing Games’
Tagged with: guest post
Filed under: Books
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!








Also, when people speak to each other entirely in Russian, adding Nyet and Da is a callow ploy.
I disagree, Athena. I think it helps keep the reader in the frame that this is a Slavic culture.
Should a translation, of, say, Dostoevsky eschew all Russian words on the basis that its a translation?
Understood, Brad T. You don’t actually have the names you said you had. Yes yes, it’s all about me and you just decided to respond here to save the day from me because I’m so awful you don’t want to respond to me. (Huh? Exactly!) The Crazy Orc Horde of Omarosas certainly isn’t one of your perennial hobbyhorses. And it’s not that you’ve been asked for evidence and object to the very notion of such a thing in other venues (say Scalzi’s joint) on other topics (say, federal budgets).
I’m also amused by your concern with my reputation. Christ, it’s not even “Lurkers support me in email!” it’s “Some unnamed person I was venting at gave me a blow-off and I don’t even know it!”
Brad R. T.: I think you and Seth may be drilling down on this far, far past the point most readers are willing to drill down on it.
Well, sure. That’s our point, or at least it’s mine. In fact, I think it’s Brad B’s original point, and the point of Laura Mixon’s comments. Many people would rather not think about this stuff too deeply; that’s why many people keep getting this stuff wrong. If I use academic terminology, it’s because I’m familiar with those terms, and they’re useful and accurate. I don’t think intersubjectivity is a tough one to grasp.
I’d also point out that the O.P. was specifically about a writer’s perspective, not that of “most readers,” whoever they are. Whatever readers are or aren’t willing to think about, professional authors ought to take care to do their job well, which, again, is Brad B’s point. They ought to want to do their job well. That means accurately representing different kinds of people.
Hey Paul,
Specific words that can not be easily translated, maybe. Like if I’m talking in Spanish I wouldn’t translate “atole” as “mush” because it’s a specific drink. But you should be able to understand that my characters are Mexican without me having to add a gratitious “Si” y “Andale” like they do in the movies where the characters are speaking in English (while supposedly they are speaking Spanish) and then for colour they throw a random word like “por favor”.
Paul:
It’s one thing if you want to denote something that doesn’t exist outside that particular culture or can only be named/described with a long string of words. For example, if you want to say borscht, izba, troika, etc. That will give you plenty of cultural framing, whether it’s an original or a translation. Yes and no… ixnay.
Nick, I’m not sure if I should be flattered or creeped out that you pay that much attention to what I write on other spaces. And yes, the Omarosa factor is a hobbyhorse of mine because finger-pointing of the sort you’re adept at is poisonous in my opinion. Brad B. wrote a conscientious and thoughtful article about what is for many a potentially explosive topic, and your first action was to insult him for it. I realize that a writer like me is low-hanging fruit in your ideological game of whack-a-mole. But what has Brad B. done to earn your scorn? Nothing, so far as I can tell. And this is almost always the case with genre people whom you choose to target. Shabby is the most generous way I can describe it. And now I have reached my quota for talking to you for the year.
Yes, who on Earth reads Scalzi’s blog except for…everyone. What can I say; you make a spectacle of yourself, Brad T., so your hinjinks are easy to remember.
Brad B’s article has some thoughtful elements, though it actually isn’t about what it says on the tin—it’s not about “poltiical correctness” for example. I know that term actually has very little meaning, but I think most people understand the term as having a negative connotation: it’s the social phenomenon of language policing and euphemism. He doesn’t discuss the actually existing phenomenon of “PC” at all.
Then there’s “interface”, which isn’t offensive (no need to apologize for it on that ground Brad B.) but also manages to be at right angles with how English is actually used. He’s a writer, right? This piece is being written to discuss his book—the cover leads right to amazon!—so, yeah, as a regular reader of this site if I see some content that isn’t well-thought out I’m going to mention it here. I also objected to the SFSignal review of Transformers 3 that gave the film 3.5 stars. (Out of five that is, not 3.5 out of “all the stars in the sky.”) Yet no right-wing white-knighting emerged from that!
And when the usual crowd of wannabe He-Men who are just! so! victimized! by…well, by whom, who knows because they’re universally too cowardly to name any names or have a real discussion, show up, I’m going to point that out too. To his credit, Brad B. didn’t engage with any of the usual He-Man hobbyhorses, but when one subtitles one piece “One Writer’s Thoughts on Political Correctness” one is making an open invitation to all sorts of semiliterates to show up and complain about their work being criticized. And hey, you showed up!
But anyone who only wants positive feedback should share their writing only with their mamas. No writer you hold in esteem ever tell you that? They should have.
I don’t read Scalzi’s anything. Ok, I poke in maybe once a year or so and then leave again.
@Paul,
I disagree, Athena. I think it helps keep the reader in the frame that this is a Slavic culture.
What is a Slavic culture? Cultures of Slavic countries vary widely.
Not every Slavic language uses net and da for no and yes. I once corrected a friend who used da to indicate that his character was Czech, while yes in Czech is actually ano. (it matters; perhaps not to everyone, but it matters, just as it matters to get the science right, although many readers may skip the science).
Thee are many ways to describe a culture by talking about the culture’s language(s), but indicating how basic words (such as yes and no) sound in that language tells us very little, if anything, about the actual culture.
Should a translation, of, say, Dostoevsky eschew all Russian words on the basis that its a translation?
Have you ever looked at a translation of Dostoyevsky? There are quite a few of them floating around, by various translators, but to my knowledge not a single one of them has an instance of da or net, or any other common word, floating in a sea of English.
Paul, the words “nyet” and “da” do not appear in English translations of Dostoyevsky’s works – at least none that I have ever read. As far as I’m aware it’s a primarily filmic technique, usually accompanying a comedy Russian accent, and subsequently copied by writers too lazy to develop an actual character. Much easier to use familiar stereotypes that are already embedded in readers’ minds – why should the writer put the effort in when s/he can make the reader recall something, eh?
As Athena subsequently pointed out, a word with a unique meaning within a culture is fair game. FWIW, I checked the Gutenberg editions of various works by D, and did find three instances of “da” in The Brothers Karamazov – in the phrase “auto da fe”, which is a Spanish phrase and a fine example of the sort of usage Athena is talking about!
In the words of Fat Poppa, “Fuck the world, don’t ask me for shit. You wanna get sumthin, gotta work hard for it!”
Tough issues seem to surface in stories from time to time. Race, religion, politics, and beliefs are controversial, often. But, the writer’s beliefs often are expressed in his or her writings.
I agree with the author of the article. We, as writers, should be willing to include controversial subjects in our writings, as opposed to not mentioning them at all. However, one must not go overboard on including controversial topics. We need to tread carefully.
I like Bradley’s insight on this topic. It was an interesting article.