Minority characters and violence

[blackbird]

I have a dilemma that I was wondering if anyone could give some insight on. First of all, a bit of background (I know I've mentioned some of this before in previous posts, but for the benefit of those who don't know): I am an enrolled member of the Echota Cherokee tribe, a state-recognized tribe in Alabama (we are direct descendants of the Chickamagua Cherokees, who broke away from the tribe to form their own alliance in southeastern Tennessee/northeastern Alabama, many years prior to the Removal). I write a lot of stories about the Southeastern Native American experience, and most of my protagonists are mixed-bloods dealing with issues of race and identity (again, a situation that is rather unique for us, since many of these descandants are in essence "cut off" and alienated from their Native identity in a region that is predominantly Caucasion, African-American or other racial/ethnic groups).

The problem I've encountered is with my latest novel. I have a character who is a mixed-blood Echota and is very much in love with a white girl (they are a sort of star-crossed "Romeo and Juliet" pair), but the boy is a juvenile delinquint. Mostly this is a result of having fallen into bad company, but nevertheless, he has committed at least one act of murder in his past, and by the end of one partcularly soul-wrenching episode, ends up killing his best friend (who is also Indian) as well.

This ended up being a major source of contention recently at my thesis defense (I just received my MFA in Creative Writing, and a portion of this novel served as my creative thesis). One of my mentors, whose opinion I respect very highly, said that this issue may present a major hurdle to the novel's publication and/or acceptance if it is. The professor who told me this is himself an Asian writer, and an expert on multicultural lit. He said it's going to hurt the book (as in the PC sense) if I present my Native American protagonist as a murderer, even if, granted, he's basically just a scared kid who's been caught in bad circumstances. Reason: He says it harkens back to the stereotype of the Native Americans as bloodthirsty savages, and that these days you have to be very careful about presenting (especially) male minority characters in this light. He says for the characeter to remain sympaethetic, he would have to have much more motivation than what I've portrayed (although here I would somewhat beg to differ. This character has been very much a victim of hatred and prejudice his whole life, which I think does come across clearly over the course of the book, and when he meets the friends who comprise his gang, he is so happy just to have a "family" that he's pretty much willing to go along with whatever it takes to keep his standing with them).

I think that it's hardly realistic that all my Native American characters should be "good," just as it would be unrealistic if they were all "bad." I realize that our people have been unfairly cursed with an undeserving stigma--either the bloodthirsty savage or the noble romantic. In both cases, we are talking extremes, neither of which has anything to do with the truth. Native Americans, like all people, are more complex than that; there is good and bad and every shade of grey in between.

The fact is, I know a lot of succesful Native American writers, such as Sherman Alexie and Adrian C. Louis, who have dealt realistically with issues of violence. (Alexie's "Indian Killer," for example). And it is a well-documented fact that gang violence among our youth, whether on or off the reservation, has become a huge issue. I don't think this is something that I. as a writer, should sugarcoat or ignore just because it isn't "PC."
And it isn't like this is true of every character I write. But after having written my previous novel, whose main protagonist was a very sweet, humble "underdog" kind of character, I felt I wanted a character who would be darker and edgier. In other words, I guess I was going for the "angst" factor.

This really got me to thinking about the whole issue of how minorities and violence are portrayed in fiction. It was suggested that I read Richard Wright's "Native Son," a novel that I did, in fact, read many years ago, to see how this kind of situation was handled by a minority writer then. (In this novel, a young African-American man accidentally kills a white woman). But, frankly, I'm not sure if there's enough correlation between Wright's character and mine to really find this a helpful model. I'm much more interested in how contemporary writers, particularly contemporary Native American writers, have dealt with these issues, especially in regard to the rising violence among our youth and the incidents of Natives perpetuating violence against Natives, which is happening with more and more heartbreaking frequency on the reservations and off.

I've had quite a few beta readers for this novel. Most of them found my character quite likeable and sympathetic as long as they thought he was simply a "punk" thief who had stolen a few cars and spent some time in detention. However, most admittedly found the revelations of the murder to be jarring. It wasn't that they entirely lost symapthy, but did admit it called for a major readjustment of their perception of this character. So I guess I'm caught in a real dilemma. I really wanted to keep the murder in there, but it seems the idea has a lot of odds stacked against it.

Ideas? Suggestions? Comments? Any and all would be appreciated.

[BardSkye]

Perhaps you could emphasize the circumstances that led to the murder a little more?

I've heard it suggested that kids who end up in gangs do so in order to find attention and a feeling of belonging that they can't otherwise find. I don't know if this is true, nor do I know how to fix the problems, but gang involvement is not limited to any race. Here in Calgary "Asian gangs" seems to be the latest catchphrase despite the fact that there are others of other races in those same gangs.

For myself, I don't think I'd be any less likely to identify with a Native boy driven to murder than with a Caucasian or someone from Iceland. In fact, given that we have a large Native population, the Tsiu Tsina (sp?), I would likely find his plight more understandable than the same scenario with a middle-class white kid as protagonist.

[Tilly]

However, most admittedly found the revelations of the murder to be jarring. It wasn't that they entirely lost symapthy, but did admit it called for a major readjustment of their perception of this character.
I'm a bit clueless here, because I haven't, of course, read your book, but I think this is the key. If your beta readers are right, it sounds as though the murder comes as a revelation that can't easily be assimilated with the rest of the characterisation.

In which case, more foreshadowing might help, so the reader has at some level already accepted they're going to be told something about this character that's deeply shocking. That will give them a chance to prepare themselves for the revelation.

Or perhaps you haven't conveyed enough information about the murder, from that character's point of view, that the reader can comprehend it. They need to understand why he killed and retain their sympathy (if that's the reaction you're aiming for in your readers).

I could of course be completely wrong, so, um, take anything that's useful and ignore the rest.:o

[writeorwrong]

It's a depressing irony when creativity is stifled for the sake of political correctness. What could be more honest than showing a protagonist and all his flaws, regardless of ethnicity? I think it's far less insulting to minority groups than portraying ethnic characters as martyrs or one-note cutouts. Good fiction isn't driven by bland characters.

I hope your professor is wrong about this; if not, it's a sad commentary on the state of publishing today. Hopefully, good writing will rise above such concerns with publishers.I wouldn't compromise on this.

[James D. Macdonald]

Make the character real to the readers, let the action flow from the character, and all will be well.

"If you want to send a message call Western Union." -- Sam Goldwyn

[jchines]

It's possible your advisor is right, and this could be a hurdle. I don't know. If the book is published, I'm sure you'll get some angry e-mails over the issue.

Does that make it wrong? Does that mean you have to rewrite it? That's your call, but I don't think either of those are good enough reason.

One of the few good writing professors I've had talked about a similar problem with a hysterical, helpless female character in one of his books. When he explained it to us, he said, "Guess what. There are people like that in the real world, and good fiction doesn't lie.*"

JDM is right. If the characters are real -- believable people with real motivations and emotions and choices -- then all you need to worry about is being true to the story. And maybe it will be a harder one to sell, who knows. But who here ever claimed this biz was easy? :tongue

---

*Or words to that effect. It was over a decade ago.

[James D. Macdonald]

One of my mentors, whose opinion I respect very highly, said that this issue may present a major hurdle to the novel's publication and/or acceptance if it is. The professor who told me this is himself an Asian writer, and an expert on multicultural lit.

Had this person ever, in fact, sold a commercial novel to a non-academic press?

A depressing number of MFAs and college creative writing instructors don't know beans about the industry.

[blackbird]

Had this person ever, in fact, sold a commercial novel to a non-academic press?

A depressing number of MFAs and college creative writing instructors don't know beans about the industry.

That's true, but in all fairness, the professor I was referring to does have a novel with a New York agent, and his odds of being picked up by a major publisher look good. Although he and I do often disagree on many issues (sometimes heatedly, as is befitting any healthy artistic relationship between mentor and student) I do respect his opinion very highly. However, I was just curious as to what others' take on this issue might be.

And Tilly, I think you hit on something. I think it may well have everything to do with how prepared readers are for this revelation when it comes.

[zornhau]

That's true, but in all fairness, the professor I was referring to does have a novel with a New York agent, and his odds of being picked up by a major publisher look good.

I was feeling a little envious of your MA course until I read the above. He may well know the industry well, and you're probably getting your money's worth in terms of intensive workshopping of your work, but.... his credentials aren't really any better than many of the people on this board.

As regards the original problem: the obvious fix is to find a way to show that the social conditions create the crime - e.g. a subplot involving a confrontation with a character who gets out, through the army and/or education, "If you stay here boy, you'll end up like that old drunk over there." Or perhaps throw a political activist into the mix.

Beyond that, as a consumer of fiction I find there are certain character sympathy showstoppers.

For example, in the early episodes of the new Battle Star Galactica, Psycho Blondie Cylon kills a baby. After that I simply couldn't find her attractive, no matter how much she vamped. Similarly, one of the characters in a Walter Jon Williams trilogy has a rather nasty murder in her backstory, which utterly breaks my sympathy for her.

Having your Romeo as a murderer is somewhat risky, unless you can make the circumstances such that the killing is sort of justified, e.g. self defence which went too far; IMHO he has to be redeemable.

[gp101]

Forget that your protagonist is American Indian for a second. Say he is a white, middle class guy who commits the same acts of murder under the same circumstances. Are there reasons enough that a mainstream audience will find this non-minority character sympathetic although he's got one murder in the past, and he commits another? This is tough to pull off for any character. But if you've managed to portray him as a person who was lead into this lifestyle, who now renounces it, or he had no other choice, or he was an irresponsible delinquent that now seeks repentance and forgiveness, the audience will buy it. It depends on your writing, not the racial mix of your character.

If you're satisfied that your portrayal is just in the above scenario, then come back to his ethnicity now. Why can't an audience feel the same forgiveness or sympathy if the character is American Indian? Sure, there are some yahoo's out there who will say, "See, just what I thought about them peoples." But they probably aren't going to buy the book anyway simply because there is a minority involved, if they can even read to begin with. Your professor is selling minorities short. In his world, every minority would be a saint, or strictly heroic... how enthralling is that? How realistic is that? By his conventions, staying PC here, you could never have an Italian kill another person in a mob story. No, not all Italians are in the Mob, nor are most murderers. But some happen to engage in "The Life" and do some nasty things. How realistic would it be if nobody got killed or beaten at the hands of Italians in SOPRANOS?

I've worked with a Northeastern tribe for 13 years now. The elders are cool, usually pretty spiritual, while the 30- and 40-somethings are pretty middle- and upper-class, and are every bit mainstream as they are American Indian. But the younger generation? I can't tell you how many twenty-somethings and teenagers get into constant trouble and act up like they were a gang. Of course they have some in that age bracket who are college grads and more in line with middle-class America, but they have their share of screw-ups like all groups do.

Don't let an overly sensitive, PC professor stifle your writing. As long as you set it up correctly, you can gain sympathy for that character if that's your intention. If it's a matter of a passing grade, you might have to swallow your pride, but then change things back to the way you want them when it comes time to peddling your story to agents. Ask yourself if you'd be satisfied with the final product that gets published.

And finally, as I step down from the soapbox, threaten your professor that you'll take away his chai mocha latte and take away his Joan Baez CDs. That'll learn him.

[arkady]

So all fictional murderers are now required to be White? Doesn't anyone see how absurd this thread is?

[Tilly]

The fact is, I know a lot of succesful Native American writers, such as Sherman Alexie and Adrian C. Louis, who have dealt realistically with issues of violence. (Alexie's "Indian Killer," for example).

That you can cite works that seem to contradict what your mentor says gives me hope that he's wrong.

[Mike Coombes]

Make the character real to the readers, let the action flow from the character, and all will be well.


I totally agree. Your tutor 'has a novel with an agent' - so do a million others. He may know how to teach, it doesn't make him any more of an expert on what is and isn't marketable than anyone else.

You have to write honestly, and I don't think - assuming you have written the tale well - that this will enforce any stereotypes. The alternative would be to write about Black LA Gangbangers and portray them as innocent lambs who do good work for charity.

Be true to what you want to say. The final arbiters will be agents and publishers, not tutors.

[James D. Macdonald]

Having your Romeo as a murderer is somewhat risky, unless you can make the circumstances such that the killing is sort of justified, e.g. self defence which went too far; IMHO he has to be redeemable.

Remember, in Romeo and Juliette, Romeo himself kills Tybalt and Paris.

[James D. Macdonald]

The final arbiters will be agents and publishers, not tutors.

The real final arbiters are the readers. Agents and editors work for them; we writers are their slaves.

[Celia Cyanide]

blackbird, I'm not clear as to whether your mentor was saying that the way you have written the incident would hurt the book, or just having it happen at all?

[JonMoeller]

If I read the murder scene and think:

"What a total bastard"

Then there goes the book.

But if I read the murder and think:

"What a poor bastard. I can see why he did that, and maybe I'd even do the same thing in similar circumstances"

Then the character is real, and it works.

[blackbird]

Maybe I will try to post a little sample from that scene later today on the "Share Your Work" forum so you can get an idea of how I handled it. I just did some browsing of that forum and it looks like you have to actually type the text in the body of the post rather than being able to cut and paste, so I'll have to wait until I have the time to do it. Maybe this afternoon?
The actual text can probably say more than all my feeble attempts at paraphrasing the incident in this thread.

[PeeDee]

I think you should post a bit of it, I'd be interested in reading.

Remember, if your censoring your book for political correctness or to make someone feel more comfortable, you are lying to yourself and to your reader. You're breaking the bond between you and the reader, and that will shatter the story, no matter how good your intentions are. Above all else, the most important thing when you write fiction is to tell the truth.

If the murder has to happen, the murder has to happen. Let other people worry about the controversy. Just worry about your story, your characters, and your writing. Lord knows, that's enough on your plate the way it is.

(...and I was gonna pint out that Romeo killed people...and indeed, killing was a major pastime in Shakespearen plays...but James beat me to it.)

[DeadlyAccurate]

Maybe I will try to post a little sample from that scene later today on the "Share Your Work" forum so you can get an idea of how I handled it. I just did some browsing of that forum and it looks like you have to actually type the text in the body of the post rather than being able to cut and paste, so I'll have to wait until I have the time to do it. Maybe this afternoon?
The actual text can probably say more than all my feeble attempts at paraphrasing the incident in this thread.

You should be able to cut and paste, though you may have to play around with the formatting to make sure you have paragraph breaks.

[zornhau]

Remember, in Romeo and Juliette, Romeo himself kills Tybalt and Paris.

IIRC, Tybalt seeks to provoke a fight, and gets one. Paris - though a love rival - is collateral damage to the SNAFU at the end, and even then is killed in a duel, rather than with a knife in his back. Also, the setting is a violent one, with faction fights and no real sense of the Public Peace.

So though Romeo knocks up a body count, he's not irredeemable.

Had he poisoned Paris, and taken out Tybalt with a sniper rifle, we might have liked him less.

[sharra]

The PC stuff drives me crazy!! It's not real & at the end of the day I think it's insulting to everyone - not just the minority group concerned. People are people, no matter what colour/religion/sexual orientation, and chopping out the negative (or positive, if we're talking about a bad guy) turns them into cardboard cutouts nobody feels anything for.
I think if what you are writing feels real, stick with it, otherwise you'll start second-guessing every move or action a character makes. Then take a step back & see if you need to finesse it a wee bit.

The story sound interesting already - hope to see it someday.

[kristin724]

Hey Blackbird, I had a few relatives that came from a Cherokee Rez in Oklahoma and moved to Alabama.

Who knows? We could be related! <spooky!>