”"

What Black Writers Can’t Write About, Part II

February 8th, 2010

(What Black writers can’t write about—or 13 ways of looking at Black literature)

1. Interracial Sex (Romantic)

2. Interracial Sex (Freaky)

3. Black characters who have skin the color of food-- I once wanted to write about a character who had skin the exact color of a McDonald’s chocolate soft-serve milkshake but my workshop vetoed the description

4. Black ghetto life

5. Black middle class life

6. Barack Obama

7. Black liberals

8. Black conservatives

9. Homophobia

10. Being Light-Skinned

11. Being Dark-Skinned

12. The lives of Black women

13. The lives of Black men

So tell me, am I missing anything?

Black Writers

Van Jordan & Hurston/Wright Workshop

February 8th, 2010

Okay–Van Jordan, the Idris Elba of poetry, is participating in the Hurston-Wright workshop, along with novelist Mat Johnson. I’ve read both Jordan & Johnson’s work and both are amazing writers, so this should be a worthwhile experience (wish I could go, but I’ve got a wedding to plan & it’s sucking up all my $$$. ) Tuition, which is only $389 for the whole weekend, is due February 19.

Conquering the Evil Nos

January 27th, 2010

Most writers hear a lot of Nos.

There’s the Fast No: A rejection just a couple of days after you send off your manuscript.

There’s the Slow No
: A rejection months—or even years—after you send something off (This is pretty bad; after a year of no response, when I had basically forgotten I’d sent off a story, one publication rejected me twice, for the same story, in the same week. I guess they really hated it.)

And finally, there’s the Passive-Aggressive No: This No looks like an acceptance because your piece was actually accepted, and it’s only until months–or years later–when the publication never actually publishes your work that you discover that you’ve been rejected yet again.

Sad Face

I believe that good work does eventually get published, and when I’m not drowning in self pity (kidding, kidding) I try to use rejection as a chance to revaluate and revisit my work, and hopefully, make it stronger. And in the event that I can’t find someone to publish the work, but I feel the story or novel is strong enough to go out into the world, I think there’s nothing wrong with self-publishing. Below, you’ll find my essay about self-publishing—why we should be open to reading self-published work and why it may be particularly valuable for writers of color. (Writers who are not of color should note that I wrote an entire essay about self-publishing in New York without ever once bringing up Walt Whitman.) Enjoy!


“Get my book–$1. $1 for the whole thing. Read the back. Good story for only $1.”

I first saw him at last summer’s West Indian Day Festival–a corn-rolled man in his early twenties, backpack full of books trying to tempt passersby to buy his latest novel. The man made me take notice: I’d seen people on the street before selling their $1 poems (that is, the price = $1 per poem), but an entire novel was a bargain–and this young author knew it. He’d get right in your face, his head so close you could smell his hair grease, walking up to people and waiving his book under their faces, telling them in an ominous voice to buy his book or they’d regret it. I couldn’t help but smile at this young writer’s aggressive self-confidence as he metaphorically thumbed his nose at all the major bookstores.

You know major bookstores. Major bookstores have “colored” book sections, an “African-American interest” or “Latino Interest” implying that only persons of color are interested in reading books by authors of color, or worse yet, that the books that we colored read can be confined to one tiny section. But I see us all the time reading—on subways, brownstone stoops, those cute little outdoor cafes–our heads tucked into novels, newspapers, semi-inspirational books on how to get ahead.

And so as this young writer’s T.A.S.M: A Mystery Novel competed with national flags, jewelry, oxtails, Michael Jackson t-shirts and Obama hats for people’s spending dollars, I felt that there was something noble about what he was trying to do. A lot of my friends complain self-published literature is too ghetto, too lacking nuisance, but at least these writers have a chance of getting read, and that’s more than many writers can say. In the past, we’ve been supportive—too supportive—of traditional avenues that could care less about our culture or our art.

We know the value of creativity and reinvention because we already did this for hip-hop—we took the classic R&B of our parents, appreciated its artistry, and used it to create wondrous new art. I hope that today we’re doing the same for literature.

Hy and Barbara Brett—An early Valentine’s Day Post

January 15th, 2010

My neighbors from Brooklyn publish books, travel, write books together, and just generally have a good time. Each day, this loving couple experiences the life I hope to one day live.

hearts and love

Visit them at http://www.brettbooks.com/bretts.shtml.

Still Climbing: Subjects Black Writers Can’t Write About

January 6th, 2010

Are there subjects black writers can’t write about?

I’m thinking about this after meeting one of my former students for dinner. She asked me about a story I had written, a story featuring a character loosely based on her.

I tried to publish the story in a couple of different journals, but now I wonder if I should have. There’s a reason that story got rejected, and as a writer, it’s my job to figure out why.

A couple of possibilities: the end of the story features a rape, a rape that takes place within the black community, and perhaps there are some topics, because of history, because of more subtle—but still present—racial stereotypes, that black writers just need to leave alone? Or, perhaps, more likely, I simply do not have the skills (the depth and maturity) to write about this subject in a complex, truthful way?

There’s an argument to be made that black writers just shouldn’t go there. The first time I read Sapphire’s Push, I wondered if I were witnessing the Jim Trueblood-ing of literature (those of you who have read Invisible Man know what I’m talking about). We live in a society that still views black men as violent, dangerous, and overly sexual (and black women as emasculating, evil, jezebels), and music, movies, and magazines continuously pound those images into our heads. So it makes sense that we want to want to guard our images, to explore other truths, to tell the myriad other stories—stories of black men and women who fiercely love their families, who seek dignity and respect—that aren’t being told.

But do we leave behind the stories that don’t show us in a “positive” light? Truthfully, part of the reason that some “positive” books and movies about black people don’t receive widespread attention is that they’re not well-told; they don’t “keep it real” (the night I met a former student for dinner, one person in our party said that she fell asleep at a recent viewing of a “positive” black movie.) People are full of contradictions, and those contradictions are what make life interesting. Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, Gandhi—these are people who made wondrous contributions to society, despite their personal failings. Shining a glowing light on black folks doesn’t generate good art, and it doesn’t begin to erase centuries of racial oppression. Our humanity comes not from creating work that is “positive” or “negative,” but by demonstrating fairness and honesty in our writing.

How do we do that? If we compare Sapphire’s Push with Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye, we find answers. Both Push and The Bluest Eye deal with incest in the black community, but Morrison provides the MacTeer family, an in-tact working-class black family, and Claudia, a narrator who has just enough emotional distance from the main character’s (Pecola Breedlove) rape to provide depth and insight. We also get chapters in which Morrison explores Cholly’s thought process–why would he want to rape his own daughter? (So much so that when we read The Bluest Eye in high school, a student in my class grew upset with Morrison for “defending” Cholly.)

Still, do black writers have to have the genius of a Toni Morrison to write about sensitive topics? When I wrote my story, I struggled with creating competing several images of black men and masculinity in one short story. I’ll probably revise this story a few more times before I send it out again because, ultimately, I think the balancing act black writers commit to—this questioning of how to keep it real and show black people in a range of situations and development—makes our writing stronger, our stories richer. I’m also trying to be more gentle in my criticism of Sapphire, and other black writers. I know that, to paraphrase Audre Lorde, these writers are trying to tell their truths and write the best story they can, in the best way they know how.

So black writers are still climbing the racial mountain. But my favorite essay in the world—Langston Hughes’ “The Negro Artist and the Racial Mountain”–always gives me hope:

If white people are pleased we are glad. If they are not, it doesn’t matter. We know we are beautiful. And ugly too. The tom-tom cries and the tom-tom laughs. If colored people are pleased we are glad. If they are not, their displeasure doesn’t matter either. We build our temples for tomorrow, strong as we know how, and we stand on top of the mountain, free within ourselves.

For black writers, our commitment to our humanity is part of our craftsmanship.

I am Not Alone–the Twitter Universe Hates Alex Trebek too!

December 23rd, 2009

For years, I’ve thought I was alone in my hatred of Alex Trebek. I’d watch Jeopardy, the condescending/evil smirk Alex would give contestants whenever they would risk all their $$ on the Daily Double and get it wrong (and despite that smug look, I’m sure that deep down, Alex knew he didn’t know the answer either!).

My boyfriend, who is great at Jeopardy, thinks I’m crazy: “Who doesn’t like Alex Trebek? He’s the best game show host since Bob Barker. And he’s Canadian. Who doesn’t like Canadians?”

There not too many things I actually dislike. In fact, I am in love with several things that others find annoying—scotch tape, the sound of loud-clackity shoes approaching, people who talk loudly on cell phones (as long as they’re saying something interesting that I can work into a future story).

And so when I say there are two things that I hate, I mean it! I hate Alex Trebek,and I hate mayonnaise!

One of the joys of social networking sites is that you can find out you’re not alone:

From a Twitterer named @HEALTHANFITNESS: Do you know that I hate Alex Trebek? I really, really hate him.

From a Twitterer called @dino_rider: Hate this guy so much.

And last but not least, from an @PhilthePill: Alex Trebek is kind of a Dick.
Alex Trebek looking excited.

“Good People” shout-out!

December 8th, 2009

Whenever I get down about the violence and anger in the world, it always feels good to remind myself of all of the truly wonderful, kind, and generous people I know. Today, I’m celebrating Ify Amobi,
Pushpa Parekh, Brian Morton, Tzarina Prater, Phyllis van Slyck, Peter McKay, and my father, Ron Spencer. All of you are genuinely good, and doing good things, and I hope you can feel the positive energy I’m sending your way! :)

Victor LaValle, God, and the Big Machine

November 29th, 2009

I think I spotted novelist Victor LaValle the other day. I was on 9th & 49th, leaving the most gully gym in NYC , and possibly the entire country.

Because I’m loud, and a bit obsessed with his latest book, I started screaming, “Victor…Victooooor! It’s me, Rochelle!”

Of course, Victor–or the person who may have been Victor–kept walking, his eyes directed straight ahead, his I-Pod plugged firmly into his ears.

Well, you know how southern black folks are. If we’ve talked to you for more than 23 seconds, we expect (demand?) a greeting (or, at the very least, a head nod). So I started muttering, “Why he didn’t speak?” And because I was red-faced (from working out) with little drops of sweat clinging to my naps, and talking to myself, a brother stopped me on the street.

CONCERNED BROTHER:
Miss–are you alright?
ME: Fine. Thanks. I’m just thinking about God.
CONCERNED BROTHER (looking even more concerned because of my disheveled appearance and the fact that this could very well be the start of one of those infamous New York street corner sermons): Okaaaay.
ME: No, seriously I’m fine. Sorry for worrying you. Thank you. Thanks for stopping.
Exit Concerned Brother to bank; Exit Rochelle towards apartment

Before I read LaValle’s Big Machine, I thought belief was something fixed. I grew up in a conservative town, and everyone I knew, whether religious or atheist, held such strong, immovable beliefs. And in many ways, I’ve always envied these people for their convictions, for their ability to know at all times, with absolute certainty, exactly what it is that they believe. Sometimes when I pray (uncertainty hasn’t prevented me from praying), I have these flashes where I feel connected to something grand and joyous and loving, and I think that what I’m feeling could be called God. But then there’s times when that feeling is far less strong, less present, and I question what I ever felt in the first place…The thing that neither my religious nor my atheist friends get is that you can’t make yourself believe, or vice-versa, make yourself disbelieve. What you feel is simply that–what you feel. I can examine all these reasonable, philosophical arguments about the existence (or inexistence) of God, but that doesn’t necessarily change my feelings. Perhaps it’s analogous to understanding the logic behind an emotion; you might understand the reasons why you’re angry, but that doesn’t mean that you’re less angry. And some scientists believe that your ability to feel strongly one way or another may be partly genetic.

So, there’s something comforting (to me, at least) about books like LaValle’s Big Machine, or Graham Greene’s The End of the Affair. Both books suggest that doubt isn’t something to be squelched or ignored.

(This will eventually blossom into an even longer post (my apologies), but right now I just want to do a quickie post on LaValle, his book, and my random thoughts about God and spirituality…)

UPDATE: Victor sent a really nice message explaining that he had just been in deep thought that day and didn’t see me. I know what that’s like (there are days when I’m concentrating so hard on something, I could walk past my own reflection), and we all have those moments when we just need to get lost in ideas, emotions, etc…And by the way, if you haven’t gone out and bought Big Machine, please use this post as a reminder to do so!!!

Steven Pinker & Malcolm Gladwell

November 24th, 2009

I was introduced to Pinker a couple of years ago by my friend Lisa Bauer. I’ve been reading Pinker’s website off and on ever since–and find him provocative and interesting–and also, I’ve long enjoyed Gladwell’s New Yorker essays. Thus, I was particularly excited to read Pinker’s critique of Gladwell’s essay collection, Wag the Dog.

Still, despite my interest in both Pinker and Gladwell, it’s taken me a while to write my own critique of Pinker’s critique.

It seems that Pinker, in his critique of Gladwell’s sweeping generalizations, is guilty of making some generalizations of his own. Pinker argues (and this is a partial paraphrase because I can no longer find the story on nytimes.com) that Gladwell’s belief that after a certain “IQ score,” one’s IQ matters less than other qualities such as determination or creativity, are “categorically untrue.” If I remember correctly, Pinker then goes on to argue that an extremely high IQ is the primary source of success in many fields.

Of course, I know less than either Pinker or Gladwell about either of these subjects, but I know that MENSA, a social club for people with exceptionally IQ scores, acknowledges that there are “Mensans on welfare,” and I believe, at one point, MENSA thought this was a serious enough problem that they developed a program for Mensans who were poverty-stricken. And everyone knows the stereotype of “troubled geniuses,” people who are extremely bright but don’t go on to do much with their lives. So it seems clear to me that IQ is just one of many factors that influences how much these highly gifted people contribute to the world’s body of knowledge.

I won’t argue that IQ isn’t important (maybe, for some people, it is very). But I think that if we look at people who are very successful, in a wide variety of fields, we will probably find that IQ is not necessarily the primary–or even the secondary or tertiary–source of their achievement.

BTW, here’s Gladwell’s critique of Pinker:
http://gladwell.typepad.com/gladwellcom/2009/11/pinker-on-what-the-dog-saw.html

Rice Pudding, Sheppards Pie–DISGUSTING!!!

November 14th, 2009

Foods that combine dessert and dinner are just nasty! These are foods I hate almost as much as I hate mayonnaise! Sheppards Pie