What Happens Next: A Gallimaufry

melancholic romantic comic cynic. bi & genderqueer. fantasy writer. sysrae on ao3.

an excerpt from my response to Lionel Shriver’s BWF keynote speech

“Identity informs personhood, but personhood is not synonymous with identity. By treating particular identities as “subject matter” instead of facets of personhood – by claiming that queer characters can “distract” from a central story, as though queerness is only ever a focus, and not a fact – you’re acting as though the actual living people with those identities have no value, presence or personhood beyond them. But neither can you construct a tangible personhood without giving thought to the character’s identity; without acknowledging that particular identities exist within their own contexts, and that these contexts will shift and change depending on various factors, many of which will likely exceed your personal experience. This is what we in the writing business call doing the fucking research, which concept astonishingly doesn’t apply only to looking up property values, Googling the Large Hadron Collider and working out average summer temperatures in Maine.

To put it simply, what Shriver and others are angry about isn’t the nebulous threat of “restrictions [being placed] on what belongs to us” – it’s the prospect of being fact-checked about details they assumed could be fictionalised entirely, despite being about real things.

If Shriver, in a fit of crass commercialism, were ever to write a forensics-heavy crime procedural without doing any research whatsoever into actual forensic pathology, readers and critics who noticed the lapse would be entirely justified in criticising it. If she took the extra step of marketing the book as a riveting insight into the lives of real forensic pathologists, however – if the validity of what she’d written was held up as a selling point, a definitive glimpse into the lives of real people as expressed through the milieu of fiction – then actual forensic pathologists would certainly be within their rights to heap scorn on her book, to say nothing of feeling insulted. None of which would prevent this hypothetical book from being technically well-written or neatly characterised otherwise, of course; it might well have a cracker of a plot. But when you get a thing wrong – when you misrepresent a concept or experience that actually exists, such that people with greater personal knowledge of or investment in the material can point out why it doesn’t work – you’re going to hear about it.

That is how criticism works. It always has done, and always will do, and I am absolutely baffled that a grown adult like Shriver, who presumably accepts the inevitability of every other aspect of her writing being put under the twin lenses of subjective opinion and objective knowledge, thinks this one specific element should be somehow immune from external judgement.”

- an excerpt from my response to Lionel Shriver’s BWF keynote speech

  1. torrilin reblogged this from fozmeadows
  2. kissmeagainarthas reblogged this from fozmeadows
  3. aeivyen reblogged this from fozmeadows
  4. angryfishtrap reblogged this from fozmeadows
  5. dolphelecat reblogged this from fozmeadows
  6. cinqueform reblogged this from fozmeadows
  7. dani1152 reblogged this from fozmeadows
  8. snowqueenlou reblogged this from fozmeadows and added:
    The entire essay is well worth the time. (If you want to induce migraine before - for the context - google the...
  9. arlinya reblogged this from melredcap
  10. skyboneharper reblogged this from fozmeadows
  11. melredcap reblogged this from fozmeadows
  12. gchisom reblogged this from fozmeadows
  13. brachial-saur-blog reblogged this from fozmeadows and added:
    Excellent read, everybody, have a look.
  14. fozmeadows posted this