I happened to stumble over yet another interview this week with a big name writer - who shall remain nameless - complaining about their fears of being cancelled. And it irked me.
At this point it’s a pattern, so let’s call out a few common idiocies I see in these interviews:
- Drawing false equivalences between Christian fundamentalist book bannings and “but I can’t write a slur any more (without risk of criticism)”.
If you genuinely believe your right to use harmful slurs without censure is of equivalent weight to the right of queer folks to exist, any conversation you and I have is going to be short.
And if you didn’t intend that equivalence, maybe you - a writer - need to choose your words better.
- “But what if someone reads one of my books fifty years after I’m dead and calls me a bigot? I must rail against cultural shifts over time!”
My Dude, your hubris is showing. No-one’s going to want to read your books fifty years after you’re dead.
Less facetiously, yeah, this is gonna happen. Cultural mores change, what is acceptable now may well not be in the future, and you may not be able to prevent that.
What you can control is whether your work harms people now, and mitigate that in the present, and may I suggest this is more important than getting angry at some theoretical strawman scenario occurring long after you’re dead.
- “These days I have to stop and consider the words I use, because what if I describe someone different to me with unacceptable words?”
This one comes up every fucking time, and it blows my mind. “Using words that mean precisely what you want them to convey, to the best of your ability” is literally the job description.
(With a big ol’ side order of “and if you have sufficient privilege to have run roughshod over the job description this long, maybe do some introspection before showing your ass on the topic in a major newspaper interview”.)
Yes, you - a writer - are responsible for the words you choose.
Yes, you - a writer - should understand the nuances and connotations of the language you employ, doubly so when that language has - historically and contemporaneously - been used as a shorthand for dehumanisation and diminishment.
Yes, you - a writer - may need to do some homework if you are not thinking about words in this way.
No, you do not get a pass if you are exceptionally prolific, or mildly famous. If anything, we will expect better from you because you can afford to do that work.
Take that time. Hire sensitivity readers in good faith, and internalise what they’re telling you.
Do the work.
As a writer, as someone who cares deeply about words and their effect on other human beings, I find these interviews baffling.
Do these famous writers really not care about the meanings of the words they use? Are they so afraid of being criticised for harmful language, but care so little about actually causing harm?
Or do they simply not want to do the work required to be a decent human being, and are terrified that someone will make them.
For anyone reading this who agrees with the famous author:
It’s okay. No-one expects perfection.
We are expecting the same degree of work to go into word choice as into your worldbuilding and character development.
We are expecting you to choose words that you can stand by, that you mindfully employed, aware of the impact that they may have on other people who are not like you.
That’s the job.
And if you - a writer - are not willing to imagine yourself in the shoes of someone who isn’t like you, maybe you should give it a try.
I promise it’ll make you a better writer.