A Question About "Period Pieces" and propriety

[CarmineBlancheJr]

I am asking this because people tend to be sensitive these days, and I also wanted to get a feel for how others approach of words and ideas that others might find offensive.

I am writing a story that goes back and forth between the 1800s and the present. In it, there is a black house handyman. The Madam of the house will usually refer to him by his name, but others will occasionally refer to him as her "negro" or "boy."

I am not writing this to be prejudicial, but since it is set in a time when that was a common or customary way to refer to black people, how does something like that bode here? I mean I have a limit... I will not use the OTHER "N" word because I find it vile.

 

[Bamagan]

I am asking this because people tend to be sensitive these days, and I also wanted to get a feel for how others approach of words and ideas that others might find offensive.

I am writing a story that goes back and forth between the 1800s and the present. In it, there is a black house handyman. The Madam of the house will usually refer to him by his name, but others will occasionally refer to him as her "negro" or "boy."

I am not writing this to be prejudicial, but since it is set in a time when that was a common or customary way to refer to black people, how does something like that bode here? I mean I have a limit... I will not use the OTHER "N" word because I find it vile.

I don't expect you'll get any profound insights about how best to handle such a thing.
You'll get points for historical accuracy from some people, but accurately portraying ugly behavior is going to bother other people (and if it doesn't bother them, it might indicate your accuracy is wanting). Sometimes the latter groups are mollified by the idea that the 'art' in question is serving a 'higher purpose' of some kind. If it's clumsily executed, they're more likely to assume that it's crassness or bigotry with pretensions of insight.
And, this being an erotica site, you're probably starting at a handicap in getting an audience to accept the idea that you're writing 'serious literature,' although kudos if you manage to pull it off.

 

[Voboy]

That's a toughie. I probably would not shy away from "boy" or "Negro," but I can't be sure of that. It's never really occurred to me to write anything antebellum.

You could square the circle by using the sort of literary circumspection writers might have used back then, especially if you're using a narrator sympathetic to Black people and turns of phrase that might occur back then: clauses like "they referred to him by the most disgusting slurs" or "they showed their ill-breeding by how vulgarly they spoke of him" and then let the reader fill in the blanks.

I dunno. But I don't think you need to worry much about blowback for that.

 

[OffNSFW]

I am asking this because people tend to be sensitive these days, and I also wanted to get a feel for how others approach of words and ideas that others might find offensive.

I am writing a story that goes back and forth between the 1800s and the present. In it, there is a black house handyman. The Madam of the house will usually refer to him by his name, but others will occasionally refer to him as her "negro" or "boy."

I am not writing this to be prejudicial, but since it is set in a time when that was a common or customary way to refer to black people, how does something like that bode here? I mean I have a limit... I will not use the OTHER "N" word because I find it vile.

It's all a matter of context, and it sounds to me like the usage of those terms would be appropriate in this case. There's a big difference between writing characters that are faithful to their time and place versus simply using those words to get a rise out of the reader.

Personally, I also find it dishonest and condescending when people try to write characters from other eras with our modern day social customs, as if modern audiences have to be protected from an accurate depiction of our own past.

 

[SimonDoom]

The word "Negro" is not at all like the other "N-word," in that for a very significant portion of the 20th century it was not considered derogatory and was one of the terms used by blacks to describe themselves. Important black leaders like W.E.B. DuBois argued in favor of its use. If you wrote a story set in the 20th Century in America before the 1960s it would be weird and anachronistic to avoid the use of the term as used by characters during that time. Nobody from 1950, for example, would use the term "African-American."

 

[KeithD]

I try to find the least-currently offence word and then use it sparingly. I've just written a period Gay Male story set in a time a bit too early to be using "gay" for "queer." So, I used "queer" a bit. tossing it off casually, and did as much use of phrases like "folks like us" as I could to avoid "gay."

 

[CarmineBlancheJr]

The word "Negro" is not at all like the other "N-word," in that for a very significant portion of the 20th century it was not considered derogatory and was one of the terms used by blacks to describe themselves. Important black leaders like W.E.B. DuBois argued in favor of its use. If you wrote a story set in the 20th Century in America before the 1960s it would be weird and anachronistic to avoid the use of the term as used by characters during that time. Nobody from 1950, for example, would use the term "African-American."

I get that. Thank you for the response. I think I am more worried about my audience and if other writers actively try to avoid writing period pieces in a way that would require the use of racial words.

I also get that if I were writing a piece, for example, set in the 1930s deep South, it would also be a problem in that most whites were using the more derogatory "N-word" during that time. Likewise if it was set in the 1960s-1970s, there might be more use of the more ambiguous "colored" wording for black people.

I think that I am just a little worried about pissing off any black readers, so I wanted other people's opinions on it.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Interesting problem, one for which there probably just isn’t a good solution. I do wish you luck,

 

[Bramblethorn]

I think the way he's characterised has a lot of bearing on likely audience reactions. If the Madam uses terminology that would be offensive in a modern context, accompanied by attitudes that would be offensive in a modern context etc. etc., and if nothing elsewhere in the story runs against that, readers may end up wondering "is the author okay with that attitude?"

But if the story presents him as a fleshed-out human being in a way that challenges those attitudes, that reads a lot different. For instance, if you mention that he likes the people who call him by his name better than the ones who call him "Negro", it becomes much clearer to the reader that you're not supporting her view of black people, just depicting it.

 

[AllenWoody]

Perhaps make a note at the beginning of the story to let people know you are aware of the differences between racial relationships between the two periods and that you chose to err on the side of historical accuracy. You appreciate their understanding, etc.

 

[Cagivagurl]

I am asking this because people tend to be sensitive these days, and I also wanted to get a feel for how others approach of words and ideas that others might find offensive.

I am writing a story that goes back and forth between the 1800s and the present. In it, there is a black house handyman. The Madam of the house will usually refer to him by his name, but others will occasionally refer to him as her "negro" or "boy."

I am not writing this to be prejudicial, but since it is set in a time when that was a common or customary way to refer to black people, how does something like that bode here? I mean I have a limit... I will not use the OTHER "N" word because I find it vile.

I'm not sure why you don't already know this. But people hate the word Negro every bit as much as the other N word....
It is not acceptable...
IMO of course....
Yes times were different. White people were a bunch of cruel fucking arseholes... Enslaving people.... It should be despised. So long as your story depicts it as cruel and unacceptable. I'm OK with it... Any other underlying sentiments... Not so much...

I speak here only for myself. Others will have conflicting opinions...

I hate treating people of different ethnicities in anything less than an equal way....

Only one race. The human race...

Cagivagurl

 

[SimonDoom]

Something to keep in mind is that there's a big difference between how you, the narrator, refer to a character, and how other characters in your story refer to that character.

The 1980s novel Lonesome Dove, which won the Pulitzer Prize for fiction, is about a group of men who drive a herd of cattle north from southern Texas in the 19th century, after the Civil War. One of the men, Deets, is black. The book doesn't actually let you know he's black until page 55, because it's not relevant until then, and it uses the modern convention "black" rather than "Negro" or some other term. His color isn't usually an issue in the story, but it is sometimes, as when a few members of the group arrest and hang a bunch of murderers, one of whom, a very unpleasant and uncouth person, refers to Deets with the N-word. Under the circumstances, it would have been inauthentic if the author had selected another word for this character, an extremely bad man, to use when describing Deets.

It seems to me that if you are going to write a period story you should make your characters speak in a way that's authentic for that period, whether it's offensive or not. That's the reality. But as a narrator, in describing action, you have a great deal of latitude in the words you use, and your word choices will be significant.

 

[Cagivagurl]

BTW...
The word negro has always been considered unacceptable.

Cagivagurl

 

[Voboy]

BTW...
The word negro has always been considered unacceptable.

Cagivagurl

It's probably a little more nuanced than that, surely. Mary McLeod Bethune, when founding the United Negro College Fund, plainly found it acceptable. I'd never presume I knew better than she. Ebony magazine used that very term when referring to her, and they meant it as a compliment; I'd imagine she took it that way.

When I was a young man, "black" was considered rude. It's not anymore. These things change, but the motivation of the person using the term does matter. The OP is wise to ask about it, but it should be within any writer's skill to make sure the reader knows that the writer understands the nuance inherent in the use of these terms.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I think the way he's characterised has a lot of bearing on likely audience reactions. If the Madam uses terminology that would be offensive in a modern context, accompanied by attitudes that would be offensive in a modern context etc. etc., and if nothing elsewhere in the story runs against that, readers may end up wondering "is the author okay with that attitude?"

But if the story presents him as a fleshed-out human being in a way that challenges those attitudes, that reads a lot different. For instance, if you mention that he likes the people who call him by his name better than the ones who call him "Negro", it becomes much clearer to the reader that you're not supporting her view of black people, just depicting it.

I thinks there is also the matter of POV and of whether the terms are used in narration or dialogue.

Regarding POV, if you are writing a period piece in third person, you've got some leeway on language, but if it is a first person narrative, you're basically stuck with using the terms that the narrator would use, within tasteful boundaries.

Similarly, your dialogue needs to be true to the period. Again, within tasteful boundaries.

 

[SimonDoom]

BTW...
The word negro has always been considered unacceptable.

Cagivagurl

No, that's false. "Negro" was a term that many black people advocated for using in the 20th century. W.E.B. DuBois, for example. "Negro" was considered a fairly neutral and acceptable term to describe people of African origin from the 18th century until the 1960s, when "black" replaced it.

Consider the United Negro College Fund, which was incorporated in 1944 by a black educator to help provide scholarships for black students. Recently, it's moved away from using the word "Negro," but that wasn't true for decades, including when I was a kid in the 1970s, when I remember TV commercials it ran using the word "Negro."

 

[Cagivagurl]

No, that's false. "Negro" was a term that many black people advocated for using in the 20th century. W.E.B. DuBois, for example. "Negro" was considered a fairly neutral and acceptable term to describe people of African origin from the 18th century until the 1960s, when "black" replaced it.

Consider the United Negro College Fund, which was incorporated in 1944 by a black educator to help provide scholarships for black students. Recently, it's moved away from using the word "Negro," but that wasn't true for decades, including when I was a kid in the 1970s, when I remember TV commercials it ran using the word "Negro."

False for you Mr Doom,
Not so for people of colour...
Remember, you speak only for yourself.
It's simple really. Ask a black person whether they'd mind being referred to as a negro....
My friends would probably clock you if you did.

Cagivagurl

 

[Voboy]

False for you Mr Doom,
Not so for people of colour...
Remember, you speak only for yourself.
It's simple really. Ask a black person whether they'd mind being referred to as a negro....
My friends would probably clock you if you did.

Cagivagurl

Scroll up.

Mary McLeod Bethune was fine with it. She was Black. Ebony's editorial board was fine with it. They were Black. WEB DuBois was fine with it. He was Black. The list goes on.

Nobody here is claiming "Negro" is acceptable. We're pointing out you're wrong by claiming it has "always been considered unacceptable." MANY Black advocates, academics, scholars, and organizers were very happy with the term Negro a hundred years ago.

 

[SimonDoom]

False for you Mr Doom,
Not so for people of colour...
Remember, you speak only for yourself.
It's simple really. Ask a black person whether they'd mind being referred to as a negro....
My friends would probably clock you if you did.

Cagivagurl

No, you're wrong.

You wrote that it's ALWAYS been unacceptable.

That's historically false. It's irrelevant what you and your friends think or feel now. Facts are facts. From about the 18th century to the 1960s "Negro" was generally not considered an offensive term.

In 1963, in his "I have a dream" speech, Martin Luther King used the term "Negro."

In his 1963 nonfiction work "The Fire Next Time," James Baldwin also used the term "Negro."

The use of the term "Negro" would generally not have been considered offensive at that time to describe black people. That changed during the 1960s. Now, you are correct, but that wasn't true in the past.

 

[KeithD]

False for you Mr Doom,
Not so for people of colour...
Remember, you speak only for yourself.
It's simple really. Ask a black person whether they'd mind being referred to as a negro....
My friends would probably clock you if you did.

Cagivagurl

How can you deny blacks using the term themselves in some of their own organizational names? This comes across as your individual hangup. And you're delivering it in rabid tones.

 

[M_K_Babalon]

BTW...
The word negro has always been considered unacceptable.

Cagivagurl

Not really

 

[M_K_Babalon]

I am asking this because people tend to be sensitive these days, and I also wanted to get a feel for how others approach of words and ideas that others might find offensive.

I am writing a story that goes back and forth between the 1800s and the present. In it, there is a black house handyman. The Madam of the house will usually refer to him by his name, but others will occasionally refer to him as her "negro" or "boy."

I am not writing this to be prejudicial, but since it is set in a time when that was a common or customary way to refer to black people, how does something like that bode here? I mean I have a limit... I will not use the OTHER "N" word because I find it vile.

I don't care who I offend. It's not my problem they allow thenselves to be offended.

 

[TheLobster]

I don't care who I offend. It's not my problem they allow thenselves to be offended.

Indeed. This whole thread is ridiculous, to be honest. If historic authenticity is important for you, write it into your story using every possible means.

Including "offensive" words, that are only such because they are incorrectly judged with present sensibilities that aren't applicable to the past.
Including offensive words that were such in the past, if a character or situation calls for it.
Including the hard R, if that's the period where it was used and the character is one that would use it.

The ludicrous idea that an author depicting a racist character is somehow revealing his own racism is laughable. By the same token, it is impossible to "write a kink you don't have," because obviously if you write about X it means you are actually into X.

 

[SimonDoom]

Indeed. This whole thread is ridiculous, to be honest. If historic authenticity is important for you, write it into your story using every possible means.

Including "offensive" words, that are only such because they are incorrectly judged with present sensibilities that aren't applicable to the past.
Including offensive words that were such in the past, if a character or situation calls for it.
Including the hard R, if that's the period where it was used and the character is one that would use it.

The ludicrous idea that an author depicting a racist character is somehow revealing his own racism is laughable. By the same token, it is impossible to "write a kink you don't have," because obviously if you write about X it means you are actually into X.

"How do I avoid offending anybody?" is not, IMO, a worthy goal for an artist of any kind, and it strikes me as especially strange for an author at an erotic story website, the content of which by its very nature is offensive to a big chunk of the population.

I don't mean that a writer should necessarily be completely indifferent to the reaction of the reader, just that, because tastes vary so much it makes no sense to try, as a primary goal, to be inoffensive to everybody.

This might be a good occasion, though, to use a disclaimer, such as "For the sake of historical accuracy, this story features words that some may find racially offensive."

 

[Cagivagurl]

How can you deny blacks using the term themselves in some of their own organizational names? This comes across as your individual hangup. And you're delivering it in rabid tones.

Sprry to disagree....
My statement was not rabid...
I merely expressed, my opinion. Just like every other person within the thread.

My opinion, is as valid as yours....
The fact we do not agree, is of no consequence.... Just two people with divergent positions...

Cagivagurl