I wrote this as a comment to this thread over at Through the Tollbooth, and found the post getting way, way too long, so I decided to bring it back here to open up the discussion. (That thread is part of a larger conversation about Native American content in children’s books which is well worth the read.)
I really appreciate the thoughts of that post and of others I’ve read. I’ve been lurking at Through the Tollbooth for a little while, and they’ve had a number of great discussions on this topic and on writing cross-culturally, so writers, check it out.
![iStock_000005415450XSmall[1]](http://www.tupublishing.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/iStock_000005415450XSmall11.jpg "iStock_000005415450XSmall[1]")
I especially find interesting the idea of the word “multicultural” being taken off the table. I’ve been slightly uncomfortable with the word myself from time to time, honestly—because I feel much the same way about it as Uma Krishnaswami on one hand, and because it’s a stumbling block for some people, on the other. (I’d like, for example, for the books we publish to open up worlds for readers in my hometown, a small western Illinois farm town—where some prejudices run deep—just as much as they might reflect an African American reader. Mirrors and windows.)
I recently saw a YouTube video linked by Renee from Shen’s Books, I believe, of a presentation in which someone used the term “interculturalism” (sorry, no link—it’s been too long). This is the idea that there can be a flow of information between cultures. I looked it up on Wikipedia, and it’s defined there as “an inherent openness to be exposed to the culture of the ‘other.’” I like that definition–the idea that whoever we are (especially if we’re in a majority group), we need to see past our own noses, so to speak. But I’m not sure that it’s the right word for what we at Tu Publishing want to do, because it seems to come with political meanings as well. Yet I don’t really disagree with many of the ideas (freedom for all, while embracing a variety of cultures), so perhaps that’s moot.
Anyway, all that to say: I’d love to just say we’re opening a small press that focuses on fantasy and SF for children and young adults and have it be a given that it would include publishing stories about all kinds of cultures and that the characters would be all hues of the rainbow. And to be able to assume that we’d then get submissions that would reflect those ideals, and that those books would then fly off the shelves by themselves, for their intrinsic interest.
Hopefully they *will* fly off the shelves for their intrinsic interest, actually—because we want to acquire books that are about the adventure, the quest, the mystery, the magic, and most of all, the characters, and have the culture or ethnicities of the characters be the milieu in which the story is steeped, the history that might influence their decisions, the structure of a culture they must navigate. In the case of a fantasy set in a historical setting, for example, characters off adventuring in a Korean setting will deal with certain kinds of magical creatures and cultural obstacles that would differ from what characters in a Kenyan setting might, which would differ again from what a modern U.S. setting might supply. Yet there will also be universal emotions, something everyone reading no matter their background can identify with.
But I don’t know that fantasy is there yet. Some realism and picture books, I think, do a great job at that (though I think we also need more of that kind of story in those categories as well), but genre fiction in children’s and YA books still need some work in that regard, and I think by emphasizing “multicultural” in our mission, we can help with that.
Cindy Pon’s excellent Silver Phoenix and a relatively short list of others notwithstanding, I think there’s room for this niche to grow and to find a readership in a wide audience. I think that when we have a Latino Harry Potter (i.e., a book about a boy wizard who happens to be a Latino, and therefore his Hogwarts might be in Mexico or Texas or California or in any location with a strong Latino cultural influence), when we have a book as popular as Twilight featuring an African American or Native or Southeast Asian character who deals with the average high school angst and a bunch of supernatural beings, then we’ll have arrived at that point.
However, I’m open to feedback—in fact, I love it, because it will help me to make sure that our books reach the readers they’re intended to reach. If “multicultural” isn’t the right word, is there a better one? If we were to drop “multicultural” and just emphasize in our submission guidelines that we’re open to stories from all over, would it work?
Because the idea is not to market niche books to a niche audience, the way that “African American books,” for example, are often currently marketed. Interculturality is definitely something I expect to happen with the books we publish—I hope that readers of all backgrounds will love them because they’re good stories, period.
Tu Publishing's editorial director Stacy Whitman has worked as an editor at a trade magazine, at Houghton Mifflin's school division, and at Mirrorstone, an imprint of Wizards of the Coast, where she worked on children's and young adult fantasy. In her current day job, she is the publication manager for the Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series. She holds a master's degree in children's literature from Simmons College. 
The niche audience of African American authors, is thanks to publishers. Our stories are the same. Though this market Black authors to Black readers only has a lot to do with the popularity of Urban lit. Publishers make serious money off of Urban, with little effort, money or time.
Usually many of the authors are formally self published so they already know how to do their own PR. The books are word of mouth sellers so there is no need to place any ads. There doesn’t seem to be much effort into editing.
Even with all those easy sales, publishers can’t be bothered to promote African American authors who don’t write urban lit to a wider audience. (Sorry venting just a little)
Thankfully, there is no racial division in childrens or YA. It will be nice to see more diverse fantasy.
Though as it is I wish children’s books, no matter the genre was more inclusive. It doesn’t make sense for a book with several main characters not to have people of color in the book.
I am not talking about as MC, though its about 2010 its foolish to think all groups of friends are diverse. It doesn’t always happen. However those friends have to go to school, work etc. So, I think it makes sense that a few of these MC will run into poc in their daily lives.
Mutlicultural doesn’t bother me. I saw the Shen video on interculturalism. It was great.
I think think the term “multicultural lit” has always suffered from misinterpretation. Multi means many, so multicultural should mean many-cultured, books with a diversity of cultures represented. And yet the way the Cooperative Children’s Book Center defines multicultural lit is fairly standard: “At the CCBC, we define “multicultural” literature as books by and about people of color: African and African Americans, American Indians, Asian/Pacific and Asian Pacific Americans, and Latinos.”
If we were to go back into the mindset of those who coined the term (and I could research this, but am being lazy) we would probably see that the term was conceived not in terms of the single book, but in reference to a body of literature, multicultural meaning inclusive: that the body of children’s books published in this country should be reflective of the multicultural nature of the reading population—both in terms of who’s writing it and in terms of which races are represented between the covers. At the time this term was coined, we were looking with dismay at what Nancy Larrick referred in her 40 year old essay of the same name as, “The All White World of Children’s Books.” Everybody knew this had to change.
So this led to a flurry of “mutliculturalism” in children’s books and it got people worrying about political correctness (are enough races represented?) It made writers try to include a multicultural cast of characters in their books and it led publishers to actively seek books that could be considered multicultural. This was all well and good, at the time. It drew attention to a dangerous disparity and went a long ways towards correcting it. It did lead to problems of authenticity and accuracy in representation, but these were all good things for us to have to think about. Now the problem is that there is this ghetto called “multicultural” that constrains these books and tells us how we are to perceive them and we need to get past it. Multicultural has become like cod liver oil: here, take this. It’s good for you. Ho Hum. I don’t want people saying of my books—Hey, if you like Eskimo books you’ll love this one. Thanks but no thanks. What’s a kid going to say if you hold up Harry Potter and tell him—hey here’s one that will take you right into the heart of the world of white English boys. Ew.
I like the term People of Color, although it has an unfortunate acronym. Color has good, inclusive implications, I think. I love the blog called “Reading in Color.” How cool is that? It’s like hey, quit reading in black and white and come into the world of COLOR.
Interculturalism is intriguing. Not as catchy but I really like it. And I love TU’s vision.
To be honest, when I saw the word “multicultural,” my first response was to recoil. I even got a little angry (just stay with me a second), because as a white girl from the deep South (Georgia in fact), my experience has been that when something, a story for example, is supposed to be multicultural, it is usually “white people are evil” WHETHER THAT WAS INTENDED OR NOT! In school, I had to read a lot of books that were supposed to be “multicultural” but were mostly about how some people or other are better than whites and many stories that excluded white culture all together, as though being the majority of a few countries in an entire world makes us no longer exist as a culture. For pity’s sake, even Crayola’s multicultural crayon pack didn’t have a color pale enough to use for a picture of a fair-skinned redhead (made family pictures a bit of a challenge), and after a while a word like “multicultural” starts to feel like an attack even if it is supposed to just mean involving or going between multiple cultures. Because of this, when I have to read a “multicultural” story, I can’t enjoy it because I’m just waiting for an attack, and I rarely read them voluntarily anymore. I have the impression that this isn’t the feeling you want to get across, so I think you should try putting it a different way. I think asking for stories of different backgrounds is nice.
I’m sure this is some effect of my own hidden personal bias or something, but I don’t see what all the fuss is about. When I read Harry Potter, I imagined him as a kid like myself. I don’t think it would be any different if my skin were brown or kind of yellow-ish, or whatever. Why does it matter what race the main character is? I don’t think it’s ever even specified that Harry is white – it’s just assumed because he’s in Britain.
So again, why does it even need to be mentioned? A character can be white, yellow, pink, or blue, and, in my head, he or she will be just like me.
William,
Characters are an important part of any story, but from what I understand (based on reading this website) Tu Publishing wants to publish not only fantasy novels with characters of color, but stories that move away from the traditional European/Norse mythology. Ever since Lord of the Rings and Narnia, the fantasy genre has been dominated by European-based worlds. These worlds are often inhabited by elves, dwarves, and other mythological creatures that have their origins in this culture. The industry rarely sees fantasy worlds based on traditional African folklore or the cultures of the Middle East. All kids, no matter what their race, may be intrigued by worlds that step away from the stereotype of the genre. Also, it can be difficult to predict how you might feel if you were a person of African or Hispanic descent, having no books to read that feature characters of your race. Overall I think Tu Publishing will fill an important niche that has been neglected over the past few decades.
William, I don’t know what your own background is, but often that attitude comes from white people, who automatically come from a place of privilege: we assume that a character is “like us” because for white people, often “white” is assumed to be the default. It isn’t like that for people who are of different backgrounds.
I don’t find the word “multicultural” to be an attack on me (and I’m very much a white girl from a small town in the Midwest). Perhaps I’ve been enough on the outside culturally, if not racially (farm girl in the city, Mormon girl, geek girl, etc.) that I can sympathize, if not put myself in someone else’s shoes.
But re: “just like me”–I think that’s important. We all have a whole lot more in common than we have differences. We are all much alike in the essentials–emotions, etc.–and I think it’s important that we recognize that characters from all backgrounds have the potential to be just as interesting and emotionally resonant as Harry Potter, to use the huge example. Yet there will be cultural differences as well, which we can all enjoy exploring.
I have been aware for some time of the negative connotations that seem to have become attached to the word multicultural – and I think it is partly to do with the political take-up of the term, whereby boxes are ticked by catering for “multiculturalism”: and Mary Fitzgerald’s reaction to the term seems to exemplify all that is misguided and wrong with that. I find that deeply saddening – and annoying – for two reasons. One, for me the term “multicultural” means exactly that: multi cultural, as Debbie Dahl Edwardson says above; and two, the word “multicultural” embraces that all-encompassing vision of windows and mirrors: it’s just that we need a greater variety of cultural voices (including disaporic voices) in order to present them authentically. I suppose I also see the term as intrinsically pluralistic – so I am happer talking about multicultural books than I am about referring to an individual book as multicultural. But yes, although I sometimes feel I need to explain our take on “multicultural”, I am happy with it! And looking at it from an author’s point of view, Grace Lin wrote a great personal View for us a couple of years ago – http://www.papertigers.org/personalViews/archiveViews/GLin2.html
I seem to have waffled on but this is something that I have been pondering for a while!