?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

So I just learnt that both Mr Correia and Mr Torgersen debuted in 2009. I debuted (as a novelist) that year, too. From the sense of ownership and entitlement they express over sff, I had assumed they were old hands, who'd been working and writing for at least a decade, probably more.
I am, frankly, gobsmacked. I cannot imagine the temerity. This is shared space and in the scheme of things, 2009 is very recent. It would never have crossed my mind to expect to control anything more than my own work, and to feel entitled to it -- to feel ownership in that way.
I got nothing. Maybe this is a gendered thing. Maybe this is a cultural difference. I perceive myself as pretty junior, in the scheme of things. They clearly don't see themselves that way.
I'm a decent enough writer, I think. I am, indeed, an award winning writer, though I feel silly saying so. But you know, getting published is a huge privilege. I am profoundly grateful to have been given that chance. I don't feel I need or merit more than that. Awards are nice things to have. I was honoured and astonished and delighted to win mine -- thank you, British Fantasy Society. But at the same time, I'm conflicted about them. The thing is, writing is not a competition, it's not a sport. It's a creative endeavour, a sharing of vision between writer and reader -- it is, as Lewis Hyde says in his perceptive and thoughtful book The Gift an offering. There is an inherent tension between creativity and capitalism anyway -- how do you define value in art, seriously? Popularity? Quality? No-one agrees what those are. Writing -- and painting and poetry and all the other creative arts -- produce objects whose value can be expressed in far more ways that simply financial. There is no pricing-system for the way a book can comfort or enlighten or support or heal a reader; the way a piece of music can induce sorrow or joy or a sense of immanence in those who hear it. Art has multiple values and msot of them are unquantifiable.

Most of Hyde's book -- which I recommend highly -- explores the dilemma of the artist, negotiating these different sets of values. Writers and musicians and photographers have to eat and pay bills like anyone else. They need for their work to have a level of financial value. But at the same time, many of us also value (hah) the other qualities of their work too. When a friend who has been facing serious problems recently told me that my The Grass King's Concubine helped her to feel safer, I was delighted and touched. I want my words to be useful and meaningful to others.

That is part of the function of awards, of course. They are a way for readers to express appreciation to artists. It's nice to be appreciated. And yet, they also set writers in competition with each other. They infect people with the idea that book X is 'better' than book y, because X won and Y came second. They create hierarchies -- and hierarchies create privilege and exclusion. And people start feeling, sometimes, that they are being unfairly overlooked because... Well, why will depend on the particular individuals. (When I feel overlooked, which I do, sometimes, because, well, human, I usually blame it on my own reticence about self-promotion. I am sh*t at self-promotion, and that harms me.) And that creates resentment and anger and culture wars. So I don't know. Because as writers we are all in this together. We are all committed to the same thing, creating our visions and sharing them. We are colleagues, not combatants, or we should be.

Now, of course, not everyone sees it like this. I've just been reading Hillary Rettig on writing (recommended to me by Stephanie Burgess and I am very grateful to her for that, for it is excellent). One of the things she writes about is how invested writers become in our work and its reception. It can sometimes become all tangled up in our sense of identity, and if it is rejected or ill-received, it feels like an attack on our inner, most sensitive selves. I've been in that place and it hurts. But, as Rettig points out, this belief, however natural, is also not the whole truth. We give others too much power over us, and she offers ways of retaining our love of our work without allowing others to destroy us through negative criticism or commentary. Like The Gift, it's an excellent book, and I recommend it -- it's called The Seven Secrets of Prolific Writers, which is the sort of title I usually avoid, for such books are often prescriptive, but this one is not. It's wise and kind and supportive. However -- to return to my muttons -- many many writers are tightly bound to their work and feel personally injured if it does not achieve as they imagined. (I will own up to having daydreamed of a World Fantasy Award nomination for Grass King for lo, I am human and rather romantic and silly [And, in my heart of hearts, I think it's a pretty good and pretty unusual book]. I didn't get one, and I didn't really expect to. But it was a nice daydream, and I was a little sad.) It seems to me that at least some of the so-called sad puppies feel precisely this -- excluded and ignored and unwanted. Which is not a nice space to be in. But, because of the world we live in, because of our narrow capitalist model of value, reducing everything to 'how much money does that make?', because everything is reduced to competition, they also seem to feel that this is someone else's fault. Someone else has cheated, or got an unfair advantage, or special treatment of something. And their solution is to blame those people and try to disenfranchise them. That the people they blame are people with far less privilege is also an artefact of capitalism, at least in part. White men have dominated the world for millennia through the subjection of those they deem non-white, of women, and, often, those who are not straight, not binary gendered, not cis-gendered, and who may face physical or mental challenges. It is also an artefact of cruel and narrow interpretations of religion, of fear and of bigotry created by fear and greed, and of generations of un-recognised social structures which have meant that rewards and recognition come much more easily to some than to others. If you come from an unmarked class -- from that group which is considered the social default -- of course you will tend to feel more entitled to success than others. You were taught that that was the way of the world. Which, I guess, explains the puppies, at least the sad ones, in part. They have been raised with expectations in a society which is changing (very slowly indeed) in ways which mean those expectations are fractionally more likely to be thwarted. But only fractionally. Not getting on a ballot is nothing in a world where young black men are murdered for walking in public. I don't understand the so-called rabid puppies and the only explanation I have is that they are very very good at groundless hate.

But the thing is, if a writer who is not like you wins an award, it doesn't take anything away from you, because we are colleagues, we are all in this together. You work is still valuable, your readers still value and enjoy it. It's still out there. Our genre is not a lesser place because it has got bigger. I loved Ancillary Justice: in addition to its use of pronouns, which seems to have upset some people, it's a wonderful space opera, and I love space opera. I love the works of Poul Anderson, and Edward Willett, to name but two small-c conservative writers. I am honoured to write and be published in a field which contained Clarke and Bradbury, Leiber and Heinlein. It also holds LeGuin and Delany and Russ, Hal Duncan and Roz Kaveney, Nnedi Okorafor and Aliette de Bodard and Ken Liu. We contain multitudes, and I love that. I love our variety, our scale. I want more writers, more visions of new futures and new worlds, not fewer. Because it isn't a competition. It's a universe and a universe has space for everyone, of every race and gender, sexuality and embodiment, ethnicity and culture and yes, political inclination if only we realised that. If only our cultures (some of them, anyway) weren't teaching us fear and competitiveness and greed.

So, you see, I don't know about awards. I don't want to compete with my colleagues, I want to share and learn, support and grow. I want to open doors, not shut them. And, if we have awards, I want them to be open to good writing from every possible culture and background.

I don't know if we can do that in a world that tells us to compete and be afraid. And that, that makes me sad.


Skirt of the day: blue flags, though given the above, possibly I should go and put on the red one!

Skirt of the day:

Comments

( 83 comments — Leave a comment )
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
Edward Willett
Apr. 11th, 2015 05:30 pm (UTC)
Hey, I don't need a Hugo. I just got mentioned in the same sentence with Poul Anderson. :)
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 06:59 pm (UTC)
:-) I think as a writer, you are quite Anderson-like. It's one of the things that makes you so good.
brithistorian
Apr. 11th, 2015 05:45 pm (UTC)
My feeling about the puppies is it seems like they never grasped the concept that sometimes "your side" wins, and sometimes it loses, and when it loses it doesn't mean the "other side" cheated. (You know, basic sportmanship stuff.) I also think there's a tendency on their part to think that sales should automatically translate into awards. I think if I was a published author I would definitely want sales, because otherwise why go through all the trouble of getting professionally published, but I would also try to remember that awards don't necessarily go hand-in-hand with sales (Stephen King, for all his sales success, has never won a World Fantasy Award, for example.)
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:04 pm (UTC)
Yes, though I don't really understand the need to think in terms of 'sides' in the first place. People are strange sometimes.
My personal take on the anxierty they express around commercially successful fiction not getting short-listed is a side-effect of this competitiveness induced by capitalism, but then, I'm me :-) Another one of the competitive rivalries out there is that 'commercial' vs 'literary' thing, a lot of which is class-based. But the assumption that all work of any kind is automatically bad (because commercial, or because 'pretentious') is false, by and large. There are good books everywhere. There's just as much snobbery to the claim that 'pretentious' books are obviously bad and boring as there is to the claim that commercial books are all shallow and derivative.
(no subject) - brithistorian - Apr. 11th, 2015 07:22 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 11th, 2015 07:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - brithistorian - Apr. 11th, 2015 07:44 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 11th, 2015 08:16 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathellisen - Apr. 12th, 2015 05:16 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 09:07 am (UTC) - Expand
(Anonymous)
Apr. 11th, 2015 06:07 pm (UTC)
I don't expect to win an award, but I'm always delighted when my friends, or authors I admire do.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:05 pm (UTC)
Yes, me too :-)
filkerdave
Apr. 11th, 2015 06:33 pm (UTC)
Only vaguely relevant, but I really enjoyed The Grass King's Concubine
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:05 pm (UTC)
Thank you! That's very nice to know :-)
cathellisen
Apr. 11th, 2015 06:46 pm (UTC)
The whole thing is very strange, though the Boy sometimes talks about the entitlement generation, which really isn't restricted to a single age group, I've noticed.

A friend of mine posted a link about Nick Cave's reaction to an award nomination and it made me happy so I'm sharing it here.

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/02/my-muse-is-not-horse.html

"I have always been of the opinion that my music is unique and individual and exists beyond the realms inhabited by those who would reduce things to mere measuring. I am in competition with no-one."
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:06 pm (UTC)
Nick Cave is fabulous. And that is a perfect response.
It all seems very strange to me, too.
(no subject) - cathellisen - Apr. 12th, 2015 05:19 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 09:07 am (UTC) - Expand
lil_shepherd
Apr. 11th, 2015 06:54 pm (UTC)
I once christened someone 'Mr Entitlement'. (Kari knows why.) I hereby bestow the rights to this name on all the leaders of the Puppies, whether Sad or Rabid. They are all as mad as he was/is. (I got a phone call once from a much larger and more important organisation than the one of which I was chair at the time, asking how the f*ck we got rid of him.)

Edited at 2015-04-11 06:55 pm (UTC)
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:06 pm (UTC)
I have no idea as to their mental health, but :-) on the title.
emmzzi
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:17 pm (UTC)
I love this post. You are amazing. You are the culture I work to create in other spheres of life.

Keep on rocking.

xx
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:36 pm (UTC)
Re:
You keep on rocking, too. You are awesome and mighty.
And thank you.
frostfox
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:36 pm (UTC)
I'd also assumed they'd been around in the writing sphere for a decade or so.
I started doing art for fanzines and con publications in the 80's, it was the 2000's before I was even nominated for any award.

FF
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 07:39 pm (UTC)
Yes. Recognition can take a long, long time.
history_monk
Apr. 11th, 2015 08:12 pm (UTC)
Another possible factor comes from the College of the Man Down the Pub, the "knowledge" that early genre SF was "just like" what the Puppies want to promote. It wasn't, always being a lot more varied, but if you get your knowledge of history from non-specialist media, full of brass-bra magazine covers, it's an easy impression to get.

It's then simply a matter of applying "conservative" ideas of the past always having been better and "modernity" being a conspiracy against that, for no reason that needs to be explained.

The Dunning-Kruger effect might be having an influence, too.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 08:16 pm (UTC)
Yes, that's probably true.
sartorias
Apr. 11th, 2015 08:23 pm (UTC)
Awesome post. Thanks for articulating so many of the things that keep boiling through my mind.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 08:44 pm (UTC)
I'm glad it's useful.
inamac
Apr. 11th, 2015 08:24 pm (UTC)
I think there's also a touch of British reticence in your (and my) attitude to the whole thing. I am interested to see the two threads currently running on my facebook - the Sad Puppies one, which is all about entitlement and bad sportsmanship, and a dog showing one which is all about encouraging newcomers and remembering that, in any competition, playing to the best of your ability is more important than winning (you always 'take the best dog home'). The irony is that, as you say, most writers don't write to enter competitions.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 08:45 pm (UTC)
Oh, I'm sure you're right about the British thing. We don't deal well with promotion.
The dog show debate sounds lovely.
hsb
Apr. 11th, 2015 08:55 pm (UTC)
I'm wondering whether the reason the Puppies are so invested in winning the Hugos is that if you do a day job for 6 years, you might expect to move up in seniority, and they are equating winning awards with that sort of job recognition.

Some people (and men are more prone to this) make their jobs their identity, and if writing is their job, they want recognition.

I say this as someone who has been in the same job for 10 years, mind you *sigh*.

H
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 09:18 pm (UTC)
Oh, that is a very good point. Thank you! You may well be right.
(no subject) - rolanni - Apr. 12th, 2015 01:47 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 03:10 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gillpolack - Apr. 12th, 2015 01:55 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 03:11 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gillpolack - Apr. 12th, 2015 03:26 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 04:36 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gillpolack - Apr. 12th, 2015 11:45 pm (UTC) - Expand
trinuviel
Apr. 11th, 2015 09:49 pm (UTC)
I had a major WTF reaction when I saw this year's Hugo nominations. Usually, it is fairly easy to predict the noms because they tend to correlate with the books and stories that have gotten a lot of attention in reviews and the blogosphere. So I decided to do a bit of research and ended up being rather gobsmacked because from my Scandinavian POV it seems that the Hugos have been made into a battlefield of what looks like a decidely American culture war.

Culture wars can happen in all sorts of arenas. A decade ago a culture war was waged in Denmark on the subject of the humanities and the cultural institutions. It was initiated by the liberalist-conservative government and it had a decidedly anti-intellectual bent but it basically boiled down to the fact that they didn't like cultural experts who didn't have the same political outlook as them. Or rather, they assumed that academics from the humanities had a opposed political stance as this particular group was a monolithic entity.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 10:24 pm (UTC)
Yes: this all seems awfully similar to current US political debates, which I find sad.
We've been having a similar thing to the one in Denmark here recently, around arts funding. It's sad.
(no subject) - trinuviel - Apr. 12th, 2015 01:13 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 09:09 am (UTC) - Expand
ethaisa
Apr. 11th, 2015 09:58 pm (UTC)
A lot of very good thoughts here (a number of which I have not seen explored elsewhere in the context of recent Hugo-related things) - thank you so much for sharing them.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 11th, 2015 10:24 pm (UTC)
I'm glad it was interesting: thank you!
miintikwa
Apr. 11th, 2015 11:12 pm (UTC)
I am so with you. I do not understand how people can be so entitled that they decide they MUST win an award. I will not likely ever win any awards. I don't fly in those circles. And more and more, I am happy that I don't.

That's sad. Or it should be. But all I feel when I think about the fact that I don't qualify for SFWA membership these days is relief.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 09:10 am (UTC)
I am very happy being a minor writer. It's safer and it frees me to be more honest in my work.
But yes, I do see the sadness, too, because we should be free in our heads to aspire and dream.
(Deleted comment)
cathellisen
Apr. 12th, 2015 05:22 am (UTC)
This is completely random, but every time I see your LJ name, I smile (Corona is my birth surname.)
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 09:10 am (UTC) - Expand
naomikritzer
Apr. 12th, 2015 12:44 am (UTC)
I made a similar realization and was similarly gobsmacked -- Correia was up for, and did not win, the Campbell Award in 2011. Six months later was when he launched his first campaign for a Hugo award (though puppies weren't involved until the following year), full of rhetoric about how the feminist-literati conspiracy hated books about manly men blowing things up.

One of the fairly consistent biases in the Hugos is that nominations are more likely to go to people who've been around for a while. There are newcomers who burst onto the scene each year, but not being one is not an indicator that there's a conspiracy against you, that everyone hates you, and that you will never, ever get an award.

That experience of being an author, and looking at the list of nominees and thinking, "why did this crappy story get nominated when mine got overlooked?" -- I've been there and I think it's nearly universal. But most of us focus on our fans, and our sales, and reserve that sort of open jealousy for private conversations with our trusted friends...we don't declare War on All Fandom.
kyellgold
Apr. 12th, 2015 02:36 am (UTC)
Amen to this.
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 09:13 am (UTC) - Expand
(Anonymous)
Apr. 12th, 2015 01:06 am (UTC)
wonderful note
I like this note, and your sentiment. I had a post like this up at one point, but took it down, because being who I am, it didn't feel like I had the right to say it. I was suffering an ego collapse after a bunch of sales turned into a bunch of rejections and the Bradford Tempest challenge hit me in exactly the wrong way. I got over it.

So I'm going to quote you and put it up on my FB because so much of what is said about the Puppy Situation is so damn sad, And you're not _just_ sad, or angry.

You express the proper sentiment.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 09:13 am (UTC)
Re: wonderful note
Thank you.
I am so sorry that things have been rough for you on the writing front recently. I hope things change soon.
And best wishes.
joycemocha
Apr. 12th, 2015 01:12 am (UTC)
Excellent observations. I find it interesting, because I'm in a rank or two behind Torgersen (started placing in Writers of the Future at about the same time, before a.) work got too nuts and b.) I had second thoughts about the Sc**t*l*gy connection to push it past SemiFinalist). No way would I feel entitled to a Hugo that quickly. It's like no one has taken these guys aside to patiently explain that overnight success=ten to fifteen years lead work. Except I know that at least one of them was participating in conversations with Jay Lake on line, and Jay was not exactly silent about that particular equation. So apparently that lesson didn't sink in.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 09:18 am (UTC)
I think some of them genuinely feel that a Campbell nomination inevitably leads to Hugo nominations, and if they didn't get one it must mean someone else got in unfairly. Which is not only wrong, but unkind and sad.
And yes. I've seen people trying to explain, but the response is 'But these lefty writers and women and PoC don't have to put in that work! They get special treatment!' Which is not true, of course -- indeed, women, writers of colour, openly QUILTBAG writers often have to put in *more* years of work and trying. But it's invisible, as such things always are, and these guys think 'Affirmative action', which their favoured media have taught them to see as a cheat, not as a necessary and inadequate means of trying to address genuine societal oppression.
(no subject) - trinuviel - Apr. 12th, 2015 07:52 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - la_marquise_de_ - Apr. 12th, 2015 09:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 09:21 am (UTC)
LC does seem to have stepped back, which is actually a good sign. It makes me hope he might be open to discussion on this, which would be my preferred way forward.
But yes, there are others who are so wedded to this... Vox Day wants to own and control the genre, which scares me. But then *he* scares me, as does John C Wright. I can imagine sitting down over a cup of tea with Larry Correia or Brad Torgerson and saying, 'Let's talk this through'. I don't want to be in the same room --- the same city -- as Wright or Day. They are genuine committed bigots who hate women, people of colour, and QUILTBAG people.


Edited at 2015-04-12 09:35 pm (UTC)
ksavagexxx
Apr. 12th, 2015 02:33 am (UTC)
The post I have been waiting for.
I have not heard of you or you books before but I will be buying them. Thank you for writing this.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 09:22 am (UTC)
Re: The post I have been waiting for.
Thank *you*: I'm so glad it works for you. And I hope you like the books :-)
kyellgold
Apr. 12th, 2015 02:49 am (UTC)
Met you very briefly at ChiCon when you signed "The Grass King's Concubine" for me. Lovely book, and thank you for it. :)

This post makes a lot of sense to me; people do talk each year about how you can possibly compare books in different genres, let alone books within a genre that have such different sensibilities, both excellent in their own way (Ann Leckie's "Ancillary Justice" and Mira Grant's "Parasite," for example). I like seeing "recommended" lists, and even more, personal recommendations from people. I learn more from reading people's posts about what they liked as recommendations for the Hugo ballot than I do from the Hugo ballot itself.

My community has its own awards and I've been very fortunate where they're concerned, but not even all those nominees are to my tastes. So when the awards don't reflect all of what I like, I'll go out and find the great books that are to my taste, and I'll keep recommending them to the people who listen to me.

Your post also echoes N.K. Jemisin's post regarding people feeling slighted because their sense of entitlement isn't being fulfilled, and I can't agree more strongly with that as well.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 09:24 am (UTC)
I love recommendations and review blogs, because, like you, that's where I find new books and writers and yes, I'm the same regarding the Hugo shortlist -- the real value for me is the lead-up.
I loved Jemison's post: she is such an elegant, intelligent writer.
And thank you: I remember you and I'm glad you liked Grass King.
anghara
Apr. 12th, 2015 03:54 am (UTC)
If our value in this world is measured SOLELY by our awards, we're all screwed, really - because MORE OF US DON'T WIN THEM THAN DO. That's a fact of life. And anyone who goes into this career with the intention of winning awards is... um... please, do tell us, what HAVE you been smoking, dear?

You know the "award" I treasure? The midnight phonecall from a reader who is also a friend, being fully aware that it was three o'clock in the morning in her time zone, in which she was screaming and crying that her favourite character in a book of mine which she was reading had just met an untimely end. The letter from somebody I met in an airplane once, who wrote to me THREE YEARS AFTER THAT MEETING to tell me that she had picked up a book of mine after we'd chatted on that flight and that it STILL haunted her and that she finally thought it was time to tell me. The handwritten note from a fifteen-year-oldstudent in a class which attended a school visit I did, saying only, "Thank you for writing this book."

I've won awards before - the kinds that come with a certificate or a statuette or a check. They pale into insignificance beside the ones I mentioned above. They're received, and maybe displayed, and then forgotten. THe real ones are carried forward through the years.

(And yes, I enjoyed "Concubine". [grin] There, a (perhaps belated) Reader Appreciation Award.)
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 09:26 am (UTC)
Those are the very best kinds of awards :-) They curl about our hearts and keep us going.
You know I love your books: they make me happy, they make me feel that the world is wide and full of potential. And they are so beautifully written.
enggirl
Apr. 12th, 2015 10:32 am (UTC)
2009? Really: 2009?? I'm gobsmacked because I published my first short story in 2009, and I've published a few more since then (and am working on novels to--hopefully--publish) and I am a *nobody* and know just how much work I will have to do to one day be recognized as the author of X rather than the girl with the blonde fringe. 2009?? Jeebus.

When I get all caught up in worrying about this person's book selling more or that person's book being nominated or whatever (because I am human and sometimes have moments of pettiness), I remember something that Scalzi said in relation: It is NOT a zero-sum game. One person's success does NOT take a way from someone else's. I remember that and I put my head down and worry about my own work.

Also, I am so damn grateful that I started working in SFF when I did because even though women/PoC/QUILTBAG/and people with disabilities (and their allies) are still fighting for equal footing, look where we are now compared to 20 or more years ago. Back then I would have been completely discouraged and likely felt that this world was not for me. The SPs and RPs are victims of the philosophy of romanticising the past. It reminds me of something: I used to live in the American MidWest and a house across the street from me flew a confederate flag in one of its front windows. It always made me shake my head because the great great majority of people who fly those flags? Would NOT have been great landowners back in the day; they'd have been dirt-poor like the majority of the population (and, likely, unable to vote). But those flag-flyers like to think that the past was this beautiful time if you were white and male (or even white and female). The populations that the SPs and RPs think are 'taking over' have *always* been there.

And this has turned into more of a rant than I intended.
Thank you for your post above.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 03:12 pm (UTC)
Applauds you. SO much this!
pilgrim_eye
Apr. 12th, 2015 11:43 am (UTC)
Thank you
...for, at least for a moment, lifting this whole snafu out of the muck.
la_marquise_de_
Apr. 12th, 2015 03:12 pm (UTC)
Re: Thank you
I'm glad to have been helpful. And thank you.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
( 83 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

October 2016
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com