The Woke are furious at Oprah's new Book Club pick

No, that isn't why it's called fiction.

Fiction = lies

It's that simple.

The Times gave it a terrible review this morning.

In my MFA program, one of my professors (a man) said that male writers must never write from a female character’s point of view because men can’t know what menstruation feels like and therefore we can never capture a woman’s psyche.

ALL of the women in the class laughed and groaned and several argued with him: “I’m sorry, do you think every decision we make throughout every day is based on our periods?”

The whole class agreed women can write from men’s perspectives and men can write for women’s perspectives. And they may get things wrong sometimes, and it really doesn’t matter because fiction is the artistic expression of an individual person’s imagination, and if it’s worth reading then even if something seems off, it’s an opportunity for both the writer and their readers to learn empathy by getting into another person’s head.

I finished that program 10 years ago and now it seems the growing consensus is that a fiction writer probably should only write memoir and autobiography because anything else is offensive to the imagined subject and the groups to which they belong.

The fact that a narrative is fictional doesn't mean that it can't have problematic representations of certain categories of people.

Are you gay? Because most gay people know that.

Are you a republican?

Because you type republican.

Twitterers are angry that barbed wire was used on floral arrangements at the book release party. This author will be filleted.

It sounds like the bigger problem was that it stereotyped Latina immigrants because it was based on a lack of actual knowledge of Latina/Latino culture which is hugely problematic.

It also sounds like this white woman capitalized on current controversy and decided to write this book because it would bring her money and fame, meanwhile several other Latina authors writing about the authentic Latina experience are being simultaneously ignored and can’t get their stuff published.

I think it’s fair to be upset about this one.

Does anyone still remember that we used to be represented primarily as crazed perverts and/or murderers? lol Read your queer history.

Upside-down world.

The closet is now a 'discreet lifestyle choice' and the most tired, ubiquitous, f-ed up stereotypes are now defended as 'artistic license'.

A friend of mine, a novelist with considerable successful novels (both in terms of sales and critical praise/awards) said she thinks it is a good novel, tells a story worth telling, and the writer’s identity seems irrelevant to whether it’s a valuable. I will start it today. I trust her opinion more than that of Paul Seghal, who seems to be trying too hard to be the next Zmichiko Kskutani, with some of the breezy style of Paulline Kael. Lauren Geoff has an interested, balanced column in the Times about the complexities of authorship and readership.

Things have gotten so deep in what a colleague of mine calls the narcissism of small differences that we are rapidly nearing s point where I could only write about being an aging gay man originally from Chicago and living in upstate New Zyork. Yhat’s Not fiction, it’s memoir, a legitimate genre, but as another wise woman once said, “Everybody has a story they need to tell. Not everybody has a story other people need to hear.”

Seghal criticizes the book on its literary merit and that seems to legitimate grounds, though obviously different readers will respond to the writing quality in different reasons, which is why I want to read it. Dreiser is not anyone’s idea of a great stylist(though not as dreadful, I think, as some would say), but “Sister Carrie” is one of my ten favorite novels, because the characters are interesting and the story matters.

Anyone remember when being socially conscious (aka woke) was considered a good thing because it is a good thing that actually helped us get rights?

And anyone remember when being a warrior for social justice was considered a good thing because it is a good thing that actually helped us get rights?

People go wrong about some things, some times despite their good intentions. But most of the "A Buncha Lesbian Vegetarians on Twitter Got Mad for No Good Reason! LOLZ" crap is exaggerated Breitbart smokescreen shit.

R9. Sorry—typing on my phone. Parul not Paul and Michiko Kalutani.

The writer identifies as mixed race, both white and Hispanic. Her grandmother is from Puerto Rico.

If only gay men can write about gay male experience we lose almost all the books by Mary Renault as well as "The Front Runner" and all of Patricia Highsmith's Ripley books.

If only women can write about women, we lose Becky Sharp, the Wife of Bath, Lady Macbeth, Rosalind, Shakespeare's Cleopatra, Amy Dorrit, Dora Copperfield, Miss Havisham, Molly Bloom, Mrs. Bridge, and Clytemnestra.

If only black people can write about black people we lose Othello, Gertrude Stein's Melanctha...

You get the drift.

[quote] problematic

[quote] which is hugely problematic.

Fucking massive eyeroll

R14 Your eyeroll is problematic.

I tell my students, "If you want to say 'bad,' just say 'bad' rather than 'problematic.'"

I’m not comfortable with your microaggression, R16. It’s probl—erm, bad. It’s bad.

Badly problematic!

Or, professor, how about just “a problem”?

If you get picked for the Oprah Book Club, you're guaranteed success. What does one need to do to Oprah to have their book chosen?

Oh, honey, you don’t really want to know.

Many, many have been lost to that hole.

"Michiko Kalutani"

Umm, try again please.

R14 R16

I can't even.

It's a word in the english language with a meaning. A word that I used appropriately.

And, R16 dear, you're not the only person here who has occupied the ivory towers.

R13 I’m not saying we can’t write from the perspective of someone from another group at all. But if we do, we damn well better do the background work/immersion to know what we’re talking about instead of relying on stereotypes of a culture we grow up with. The author is 1/4 Puerto Rican at most, and hearing stories from your Puerto Rican grandmother is not the same as educating yourself about Mexican Latino culture.

Just based on some of the laughably bad prose highlighted in the Times review, I'm not interested.

I would guess that Oprah's book club picks these days are most likely are based on the clout of various players in the publishing industry.

The launch party with decorations of the border wall covered in barbed wire was tacky as hell, and no, you're not "woke" if you find that offensive.

The Woke are furious at pretty much everything.

Apparently a Latina author was contacted by Oprah's producers to ask if she knew any of those fashionable illegals who would appear on the show to talk about this book.

My sister, who has always been a good little liberal and feminist, is in academia and says that the last couple of years her student evaluations were filled with "too many white male writers and directors." Her academic interests are stuff like Irish literature and classic film!

[quote] I can't even.

For someone who supposedly spent time in ivory towers, you sure use a lot of twitter speak.

Let me guess, you were a professor of cultural studies.

R28. So only Lady Gregory and writers considered “Black Irish”?

R21. Kakutani--not to be confused with the Delucate, some say flowerlike Miyoshi Umeki.

(Last time I try posting from my phone.)

Delicate, not delucate (as autocorrect insists on making it--what the hell is Delucate, anyway).

God damn it.

Don't post from your phone, please.

Really.

R30, the Black Irish are still white.

The woke need to get a good night's sleep.

There are no black novelists in Ireland. None. I hope there are some day, but as of yet there are not any--and I honestly tried hard to find them when I was planning to teach a course on Irish fiction from 1920 to the present. But there are none.

Why would I read anything that Oprah recommends?

I have had dinner with Myriam Gurba and enjoy her and her books. However, her books are about lesbians obsessed with Morrissey and she was born and raised in Long Beach-how does she add to this conversation?

R7

These days, publishers are falling all over themselves to get minorities published, especially on any topic related to immigration.

This follow up article goes into more detail about the inauthenticity of the author’s work.

[quote] But the central issue here is not that a non-Mexican author wrote a book about Mexico. It is that the publishing industry backed an uninformed Anglo writer rather than a well-informed Latino or Latina writer. That is outrageous, patently unfair, and should make any sensible person queasy.

This reads like a parody.

[quote] rather than a well-informed Latino or Latina writer.

Ooooooooooh. They didn’t say latinx.

That’s not woke!

The woke irritate me just as much as the alt-right types.

UGHHH enough of this shit.

The last ten big books about gay men were written by women. Who cares.

R44, DL very definitely cares, and has very strong opinions, about that.

[quote] Umm, try again please.

Anyone who knows who Michiko Kakutani is knows her name is "Kakutani." "Kalutani" is an obvious typo and not worthy of a DL callout.

So the Guardian is now publishing Twitter outrage as literary criticism. Then it's reposted here so idiots can rail against "the woke." I don't know what's worse: posting crap directly from Twitter or getting outraged by this crap in the Guardian and reposting it here. All of you easily triggered fools should just fuck off to Twitter and yell at each other.

R38: "...how does she add to this conversation? "

With a bitchin' smackdown, that's how. If the author and other white people are allowed to write and critique, why can't she? Why are you dressing down her Latino-ness with her background while giving the author a pass?

Gurba was HIRED to review it, then given a kill-fee when she didn't suck up to the white corporate overlords request to 'be nice.'

The socially conscious are eating each other and I couldn't be more happy.

But is the scrutiny about creators not being the same demographic as those they're portraying, being fairly directed? And who's most responsible -- the creators? The financiers? The promoters? The audience?

Is the criticism truly unbiased, if the creators heritage, ethnicity, race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, and so on, was revealed or discovered before reading? How can that be known without time travel?

I bring up these issues because the criticism seems vague, and keeps circling around the author being (mostly?) Anglo/ not Mexican, but simultaneously backpedals by saying it's really not all about that. Which is it? And if the root of the criticism is about the authors identity, why be so sheepish about having an honest discussion?

I'm very torn about this because there is a decent debate buried in there, but I don't know that I feel it's always coming from the most fair place every time, if without the identity, there's the possibility the response would've been more positive, if the focus wasn't distracted by identity.

And do we want to go as far as saying all creators must match the demographics of their subjects? Is that all characters, or just the main ones? If not wanting to go that far, what is the correct amount? Is it all about the specific numbers; with using specific percentages of xyz creators, to come up with an acceptable threshold? Publish more than 50% of white authors, and that's the limit? What role does the audience, backers, and so forth play in decided what's okay or not?

None of this means having to accept utter shit and refraining from being critical, because there's many times that is required, but if a response is vague, mostly focusing on identities, it begins to feel as if that means more than having standards.

It's because she stole material from two actual Latino authors (who are better writers).

R51 is there a specific book, or regarding the subject matter?

lol, Oprah's been cancelled. Who will the woke destroy next?

Now the Woke are making threats against the author's life.

Jealousy! Jealousy! They are so pissed that they didn't get 7 figures up front and a bidding war. I feel bad for this writer. It's fiction. And does every narrative about a Mexican immigrant coming to the US have to be about poor shoeless jobless desperation? The idea that Mexico is completely backward, uneducated, living in hovels is just ignorant. There are bad places there, sure. But it reminds me of when I hear people in Europe say you can't walk down the street in the US without getting shot. And we think everybody is getting stabbed over there.

So do authors now have to submit their DNA test results to get published?

White people write about other cultures because their culture is tedious.

Petition to Ms O:

Outraged:

Randa Jarrar has been outraged over this, but the evil part of my brain wonders if perhaps the reason they didn't want to publish HER book is that it just isn't that good.

Then again, apparently American Dirt isn't very good either, so...

Write your own book bitches.

Jesse Singal argues that the controversy surrounding the book is overblown. He acknowledges that the book isn't perfect, but also points out that much of the criticism is self-contradictory.

Thanks R62, that's a very interesting article. I spent a bit of time (never again!) on Twitter yesterday looking at the way people were talking about this, and it was so unnecessarily nasty, and as pointed out in the article, involved A LOT of contradictory arguments. One of the most popular articles written against the book is a very angry piece, titled: "Pendeja, You Ain't Steinbeck", but anyone's questions over how something that vitriolic helps the situation get met with accusations of "tone policing". At the same time, they argue no one is attacking the author. As a comment under the article says, it just feels like no one can ever win.

I have a lot to say, but it's all so tiring, I can't be bothered. Instead, some parts of the article I thought were relevant:

"The essay contains many complaints that Latino writers are underpaid, their stories underappreciated, and so on. All of which may well be true! But that’s clearly a sign that something more than an issue with American Dirt qua American Dirt is going on here — other resentments are seeping into the critique."

"In the second sentence, Bowles accuses Cummins of portraying Mexico as “a dark hellhole of the sort Trump rails against.” In the fourth, he gripes that the characters “don’t suffer the maiming, abuse, theft, and rape so common on that gang-controlled artery to the border.” So the accusation is that Cummins (1) presents Mexico as a dark and dangerous ‘hellhole,’ and (2) didn’t include enough rape and theft and abuse in her novel. Got it! That evil book of ‘trauma-porn’ didn’t include enough characters getting raped. This is clearly a good-faith critique."

"I also got a chuckle out of Bowles’ accusation that the novel “does little to explore the complicity of the US in the violence wracking Mexico [emphasis his].” Let’s do the one-two thing again: In the same essay, Bowles accuses Cummins of (1) writing a book that portrays Mexico and Mexicans in an inauthentic light, and (2) not including enough scenes of the characters, as they are fleeing for their lives to the U.S., reflecting on the narcoeconomic and geopolitical nuances of their situation in the left-wing manner of, say — and here of course I’m just grasping at a random example — a “Mexican-American author and translator from deep South Texas… [who] teaches literature and Nahuatl at the University of Texas Río Grande Valley.”"

"It’s almost like outrage is, itself, self-sustaining and often becomes detached from whatever kernel of truth may have initially spawned it, and that people can latch onto outrage and use it to elevate their profiles without being thoughtful or fair-minded."

This issue has started bleeding over to other authors in really unfortunate ways. A woman named Kate Elizabeth Russell has released a book called My Dark Vanessa, and another woman named Wendy Ortiz basically accused her of plagiarising her own memoir because it was a similar theme. People involved in the American Dirt issue were unquestionably supporting Ortiz in this. Roxane Gay allowed her to write an article on it for her online magazine which, while mostly about bias in the publishing industry (Ortiz is Latina and Russell is not), also implied Russell had stolen her story. Things got bad enough that Russell basically had to release a statement saying her story was based on her own experiences of a sexually abusive relationship as a young woman.

The fact someone who wrote a fictional story was forced to out this part of her childhood, that she was also only considered allowed to write fiction on this topic if she had experienced it herself is disturbing. The people who started piling on her before knowing the facts or even looking in to it properly? Silence. Gay gave the book 4/5 stars on her Goodreads page as though that made up for her part in it. Everyone is losing their minds when it comes to discussing these things rationally it seems.

According to one of the book's fiercest critics, if you accuse her of nitpicking you are engaging in racism?

What's so boring about this enitre situation is that everyone seems to have replaced actual literary criticism and debate with jargon of the "if you disagree with me you're appropriating/tone policing/mansplaining/whitesplaining" type.

Do tell us all what IS the right education about Mexican experiences from the right sources, R23? Do they need to also have just the right amount of melanin in their skin to be the right educators, or do native white Mexicans with blue green eyes also pass your scrutiny?

R64 That's awful. Woke people are destroying art as much as right wingers.

R65, she sounds like a cunt, tbh.

Her site says she “co-hosts the AskBiGrlz advice podcast” ... of course she does.

r68, I listened to an episode of that, because I was curious what she sounded like. Very "Valley Girl" type speaking, which I wasn't expecting. I went through some of her Twitter, and she comes across as very unpleasant, I agree. And yet it's hard to say that when to do so is to be accused of not allowing her to have her own voice. What's interesting is she defended the tone of her article against the book (titled "Pendeja, you ain't Steinbeck") saying that she was following "radical rudeness" as practiced by Africans against colonialism. So... is she guilty of appropriating someone else's culture too? I imagine she'd have arguments that boil down to "I'm allowed to do it and you're not!"

I think some of these people need to look up the definition of "fiction".

What exactly are the criticisms? That the book doesn't mirror exactly these other Latinas' experiences?

Can someone condense exactly what people are so pissed off about?

Cynically, I think it boils down to "this woman got a 7 figure advance for her book and we didn't." And I also think many of the members of this Dignidad Literaria group are raising their own profiles on the back of this. Many of their own books are now selling well because of the controversy.

I've tried to condense it based on what I've read, but attempting to do so is quite difficult, because it's everything and anything really. I think this book has sparked off deeper issues. Some of it I have sympathy with, but their behaviour towards the author has been pretty nasty. They're also deliberately misinterpreting others' words and then basing their arguments off of that, which I find disingenuous. The publishers spoke at one time about threats being made on the author. Dignidad Literaria claimed they specifically said "death threats" and are now continually pointing out how the publishers are huge liars for claiming death threats and then "admitting" there were no death threats. The company had just said there were unspecified threats, so if you see what I mean, this is an example of this group misinterpreting and then changing the narrative of what happened. I've also seen them quote racist sentences from articles when that quote doesn't appear in the article at all; they're creating a quote out of their personal interpretation of what was said and then everyone is running with that. It's just a mess, really.

Now, because these Mexican-American authors have received death threats themselves, they've decided to create a death threats quilt (based off the AIDS quilt - so, is that considered appropriation by their own arguments? Apparently not when they do it), sewn with all the threats they have received.

They did get a meeting with Macmillan, I think it was, to discuss the publishing industry moving forward with better representation for Latino/Latina authors, which is a good thing, and I think they should've just stuck with that. Provide stats showing how publishing these authors will make money and you'll convince the publishers in no time. But instead they were apparently in the meeting being quite antagonistic (proudly on their part) and when asked why, explained it through reference to their own domestic abuses, rapes, the lynchings of Mexicans, the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo... I'm not making this up. They proudly pointed out they said these things to a query on how the book has hurt them. You can see this is a much deeper issue than just the book.

It's really confusing, and I'm sorry I didn't do a great job of condensing it at all. If you spend even a little time trying to work it out, it becomes obvious that nothing will ever make anyone in this situation happy. Unless perhaps the author has her book pulled and loses her money and has to live in hiding for the rest of her life. Which sounds extreme, but while they keep saying it's only about criticism of the book, they spend most of their time attacking the author, laughing at her photos, digging around for information from her past, mocking her background, calling her a liar etc. Even if the author is a wackjob, it's really cruel.

It's not a great piece of literary writing, but it tells a riveting story, and one worth telling. I think there is room for any number of novels about this topic, including the melodramatic version "American Dirt" does, as well as those that aim for more complex style and narrative. And I am tired of people deciding who can and cannot tell which stories.

The Woke crowd should be exterminated. Re-open the concentration camps already

R73 I am totally with you there. Plus, it's so uninteresting when, rather than have interesting debates on things, everyone is just shutting each other down with accusations. In a way, they may have shot themselves in the foot. Whether they like it or not, the success of a book like American Dirt could be positive for other authors who write on similar things as readers who like it will search for other books on similar topics.

I dunno, I'm in my late 30s now and perhaps I'm just out of the loop. I still feel I'm as progressive and Left as I ever was, and yet I don't understand these people at all. I mean, they're all attacking people like Stephen King online, who if they spoke to they'd find is politically on the same side as them. I would never dismiss their experiences with racism and discrimination, but it feels like all these different issues are getting conflated into a giant mess. They're also doing things like complaining of being tone policed, while trying to police others' language too. The 'nitpicking' argument upthread is one example, or they're attacking people who switch between different languages in the "wrong" way. I dunno. I'm old, haha.

Oh, fuck. JFC!

I write for myself almost daily. I write fiction. And I have been EVERYONE I felt like being, when I wrote, and will be whomever I please, as I continue writing.

I have been children, old people, a cat, a fish, a giraffe, a daisy, a grain of sand, a Martian, a prisoner, a war vet, a scientist, a penis, and of course, a CUNT!

This shit is ridiculous. Just write. If you live writing, write, and write freely. It’s called creative writing for a reason: the mind has no bounds.

Be free. Be happy. Be writers. Be predictable, & make Melanie Trump jokes. Please. Just be!

I like you, r76.

I really do.

Ditto, R77, ditto.

Add me to that too. That final line of yours was perfect R76.

That Dignidad Literaria group aren't really right in the head, I don't think. Oprah is apparently doing some panel discussion on the novel. They've been saying recently that Oprah's team had reached out to them to be involved but they refused to be involved in a sham and that they knew Oprah would try and stage things to hide the truth and present them badly on TV. So they had no interest in being a part of it. Now, when people are asking why they aren't involved, they're claiming Oprah never invited them. They seem like people very comfortable in their victim status.

R79, 😘.

This is the best thing that ever happened to Gurba and Bowles’s careers. Now take it and get busy.

Exactly right R82.

r16 and r22 two academics slugging it out in the book club thread.

How exciting. . . and problematic.

It's so funny to see a bunch of mostly white people dismiss the complaints of nearly 100 Latino writers because "It's a good story."

I disagree. People seem to generally be very sympathetic to the need for greater representation in publishing when it comes to writers from different backgrounds, and no one seems to be against people arguing about the literary merits of the novel at all. Where people are getting annoyed is when the conversation turns to who is "allowed" to write what, and the fact that many involved in the pushback (Myriam Gurba, David Bowles etc) are behaving incredibly antagonistically and spending more time being offensive on social media than they are doing anything positive. Their arguments are often contradictory, they misrepresent things people have said to cast racist attitudes onto people who have shown no evidence of that, and they end up attacking people's characters when they disagree with them (like, for example, with the Latino and Latina authors who are fine with the book). For all the claims to the contrary, many of the people criticising the novel are stepping beyond just criticism into trying to get the book pulled from places.

I do love the way the author of DRTY GIRLS SOCIAL CLUB is using the controversy to get back a Sandra Cisneros for a long-ago slight. See you next Tuesday!

Thanks for the Whitesplaining, R86.

R88 - your dismissive insult is exactly why people will never listen to you. You can stomp your feet in anger but you are doing it to yourself.

R86's reply was perfectly reasonable. Instead of having a response, you just try to shut it down that anything a white person says is invalid.

Grow up. You just want to throw insults around.

R88 Another racist who uses inventive terms to make prejudice against a certain group permissable. Outside of your echo chamber, you look incredibly foolish.

Ah, the pissants (R86 R90 etc) have been triggered!

You need an expansive analysis to prove your snippy idiocy? Read essays and comments by any the 80+ women Latina writers whose work is more authentic and who wrote clear critiques of the book. You castigate them by falsely claiming they demanded boycotts and that they threatened Cummins' life. Those are lies spewed by the army of her publisher's publicists. Readings were abruptly shifted to highly controlled Q&As so she could avoid any serious questions. Gurba is just on of Cummins' critics who actually have received death threats.

Cummins lied about her family's immigrant experience. Grandparents from Ireland? How brave is her forebearance.

Look at the hundreds of reviews on Amazon and GoodReads. The gushing praise is from white women whose only contact with Latinos is as domestic workers or via lawn services. The critiques are from people with lived experiences that Cummins' book used to pen a mass market book.

Do author have to have lived what they write? No. But when, after "a few weeks in Mexico," as Cummins admitted, they can get it wrong. She got it wrong.

"... behaving incredibly antagonistically " Yes, you would prefer that any actual Latina writer just shut up. That's what you want. You're quite clear about it. That's because you're a hypocrite.

"... no one seems to be against people arguing about the literary merits of the novel at all. " Your myopic avoidance of critiques serves your limited view of considering a cheap thriller as more than it is, exploitative mediocrity catered to its audience, mostly white straight women.

R89: "your dismissive insult is exactly why people will never listen to you. " I have worked in book publishing for two decades. Sorry to disappoint you, but people in publishing do listen to me. You, on the other hand, are a snippy nobody defending an over-hyped, over-promoted, overpaid author of pop trash.

"... spending more time being offensive on social media than they are doing anything positive. " Look in a mirror, Blanche.

I have to thank R91, as their response is the perfect example of the hysteria around this situation, where arguments are based on unfounded accusations, personal bias, and the misrepresentation of others' points of view.

Glad you interpreted it for us, r92.

For me it was TL;dr

R92, proudly reveling in a vat of complete ignorance.

Also, R92, psychotically obsessed with defending Cummins' book (see linked multiple blatherings, easily screencapped).

Paid shill or just deranged queen/frau? Or both? "hysteria around this situation"? Definitely.

^ Unfortunately, I'm not sure that is evidence for the "gotcha" moment you were hoping for.

Unfortunately, R96, you're a dullard. Having only posted about Cummins' book on DataLounge, with a rabid defensive bias in one bloated screed after another, proves you to be obsessed or a shill. Neither amounts to anything worth reading, just like Cummins' trashy 'thriller.'

I know many here at DL are woke weary.

This does seem like a legit complaint to me, though.

Also, the whole Romance Writers association scandal may be shaking the boat on this one a bit. They also had a big kerfuffle, mostly because two white women were writing weird ass and sorta racist romance books.

An author can write characters that are not themselves.....but at the same time, if not a lot of stories from a certain segment of society are out there, I don't think it's a whole lot to ask that the first one, or one that is as popular as an Oprah book would be, be written by someone who has some familiarity with that culture or is IN that culture.

R98 I read up on some of that Romance Writers stuff, I think you're right that it may be shaking the boat here. In fact 'kerfuffle' is probably a fairly mild term to what happened there. Interesting!

R97 this is getting tedious, so I'm out. Accusations like: "Having only posted about Cummins' book on DataLounge...", "you would prefer that any actual Latina writer just shut up. That's what you want." etc, which are so blatantly false that they're hilarious show that you're not interested in conversation, just in using duplicitous methods to attack others' characters in an effort to "win". Have at it and have a nice day.

R98 They do. I think what you're describing is called "nonfiction".

Oh boy, another thread screaming about the "woke".

R100 that reminds me of something interesting I heard on a podcast that was breaking down this issue, where they pointed out that the calls to replace American Dirt with certain suggested authors who have a more authentic voice were also calls to replace a thriller with nonfiction and that those two things have different markets, so it doesn't really work. I hadn't thought of it like that until I heard this.

[quote] Randa Jarrar has been outraged over this, but the evil part of my brain wonders if perhaps the reason they didn't want to publish HER book is that it just isn't that good.

But that photo makes Randa look like such a sane and admirable person!

You're not wrong, R103. I mean, exhibit A:

For a mere $1000, Myriam Gurba will send you her annotated copy of American Dirt!

Um, yay?

R64 I read that book, My Dark Vanessa. It's extremely well-written, and while Wendy Ortiz may claim it was ripped-off her own memoir, it actually reminded me of a novel, called His Favorites.

Honestly, a teacher molesting his students isn't a particularly original idea to being with.

Thanks R106! It makes it even more of a shame that it was affected by that nastiness. I think Oprah pulled it from her book club because she didn't want any more controversies after the whole American Dirt thing, and being in Oprah's book club I imagine is an excellent way of getting your book out there.

I don't like to wish ill on people, but it'd be nice if Roxane Gay had to face up to the things she does sometimes.

R87 Did you read the author's post at all? She hits on many points that the anti-woke on this thread would agree with

Her paraphrasing her father calling authors like Cisneros "comemierdas" because they make their money off stereotyping Latinos and fetishizing victimihood was hilarious and on point. Also, Valdes-Rodriguez describing Cisnero as a writer and public figure who performs "minstrelsy" is absolutely true.

The only part of her blog post that I disliked was her describing a conversation with Cisnero's agent, Susan Bergholtz, where she told Valdes-Rodriguez that she had cancer, and Valdes Rodriguez wrote that she was secretly cheering on the cancer. That's just low and cruel. However, the other 99% is excellent.

R107 Ugh, Roxane Gay. Such a bully on twitter. She makes the phrase "hurt people hurt people" come to life.