Accuracy or hatred?

[supertailz]

I've been reading a lot of things about entire sections of people - mostly minorities and women - being mistreated, ignored or smooshed in the face by authors, particularly in genre fiction recently. Most of it is just obvious and awful and ohgod why can't a lot of writers just be smarter? Why do publishing houses tried to hide gay characters? Why

Comments

[rm]

The thing about Heyer's Jews is that she's not actually trying to write what the Regency thought of Jews, but what most people (likely including herself) in her period thought of Jews, which is what ticks people off. But hey, if you're going to read something published 50+ years ago, it's there and you have to deal with it. Heyer's Jews aren't, for me, a reason to stop reading her, but it makes it hard to recommend one of her novels in particular to others, and the sad problem there is that otherwise, that novel is one of her best and a good gateway book.

[supertailz]

Was it not though, also relatively indicative of Regency Jewish experience? I kind of thought(assumed) it was, though I'd be happy to be proved wrong. But yes, there is also the whole Wagner question of whether you can love the music and hate the man, compounded with the fact that she actively described it. :(

It is, otherwise however, one of my favourite books of the ever. Oh Sophy! (My favourite Heyer though remains my first; These Old Shades can't be beat in my mind, so that is what I tend to use as a gateway book and it has so far been entirely successful at converting people.)

[rm]

I think it's fairly reflective, except to the degree that Jews may have been less top of mind and there were a limited number of Jews were well-regarded in Society. But I think the Heyer squick for a lot of people isn't the Regency realism but the Nazi-era realism.

Certainly, that was the Heyer book I first read at the recommendation of my writing partner, and I was like "You could have warned me about the Jews!" but she hadn't read it in ages and had forgotten.

I found it interesting, if distracting as a cultural artifact.

A lot of the fiction I do involves looking at the lives of all sorts of people will villainous biases that are perfectly reasonable to them. To me that sort of insidiousness is interesting to read and write about, although I do worry about the reception of such in the current climate.

Just because I'm interested in the Slytherin perspective, doesn't mean I'm "Rah! Voldemort!"

As for Heyer though, her Jew problem? Aside from appalling, it was really, really distracting.

[supertailz]

I just read this which I thought was kind of interesting: http://www.georgianlondon.com/bevis-marks-and-the-georgian-anglo-jewish-com-0

As far as Heyer goes, I understand it was published in 1950 and I'm disagreeing with you about her personal views, but how do you know she espoused them? Is it just from the writing? (In which case I really need to go reread that scene since normally I skim it) or was there other extant text that mentions that?

And OMG yes re: Slytherin thing. I think that is the most perfect way to put it I've ever read.

Also, have you since read all the other Heyer? (Excluding the not-romance historicals which blech in my book and the mysteries which I want to read but don't have.) I have all the romances and am always happy to lend out/make more people read:)

I think I'm going to edit the post slightly to reflect what you are mentioning though, if that's ok.

[thunderemerald]

I had a similar issue with the original Scarlet Pimpernel novel recently, where I couldn't decide whether it was the author or her characters being anti-Semitic. There is a character toward the end whom the others (mostly the bad guys) refer to just as "The Jew." They treat him like absolute shit, they use him to further their own plans (for a price, if I recall), and then when they think he led them astray, they leave him in a remote area, tied up, with only Our Heroine Marguerite for company.

Luckily, (SPOILERS), it turns out that this guy was Percy, Our Hero, in disguise, and he and Marguerite were happily reunited. The relevant bit of dialogue (she types as she pulls out her book) goes like this:

"But if Chauvelin had discovered you," she gasped excitedly, "your disguise was good... but he is so sharp

[lnbw]

I think authors ought to be faithful to the time period they're writing about... but part of that is recognizing that the stories normally told about that time period are not the only ones worth telling. No, a young, flighty, society Gentile probably wouldn't think about marginalization of Jews in Regency England, but that's a good reason not to write only about young, flighty, society Gentiles! (And a "hey, people are people!" realization never hurts, as long as it's not preachy.)

But I also think you can enjoy and even love writers despite their flaws. Every writer is flawed, but their good traits are still worth appreciating. I've read good books that look down on women (Raymond Chandler comes to mind), but I can still enjoy the things that are good about them, while noting what's problematic. (Of course, I've also read many bad books that look down on women, but that's another subject.) And, as you rightly note, it's possible for characters to be prejudiced at the same time as an author makes it clear that she disapproves of that