Diversity in Literature & Media (WAS book differences)

[cindysphynx]

No: HPFGUIDX 40497

Bernadette wrote:

> Cindy, what is at issue here is that ONLY the U.S. editions of
> HPPS/SS have been changed to emphasize the point that Dean Thomas
> was black.  The original Brit versions just mentioned him by
> name, not putting in any reference to his skin color.  It really
> has nothing to do with what JKR originally intended the books to
> describe as far as racial and ethnic diversity goes.

You know, Bernadette, I really do understand what you are saying.  I 
just find the argument rather unpersuasive.

Let's assume the absolute worst.  Let's assume that some U.S. 
publicist type contacted his or her counterpart in the U.K. and 
said, "You know, we would reach a broader audience here in the U.S. 
if we made a character black.  How about Dean Thomas?"

If I understand your argument, Bernadette, it sounds like this would 
be a bad thing.  Tokenism, reverse discrimination or some such.  Yet 
you indicated that you already viewed the wizarding world as 
racially diverse in your own mind.  So why would this change bother 
you?  What I can't quite figure out is why it makes *any difference* 
to someone who says she viewed the books as multi-racial in the 
first instance?  If it were me and I already assumed that the 
wizarding world were diverse, I would merely shrug at the change in 
Dean Thomas' race (I say "change" assuming, of course, that he 
wasn't always intended to be black).

Bernadette:
 
> Many people are bothered by the change that Scholastic did when
> they published the books in the U.S. because they deem it as the
> company toadying to the people who want everything, including
> children's literature to be "politically correct" in that you
> must show that there are (token) members of various ethnic/racial
> groups, sexual preference groups, genders, etc., even if the
> story doesn't necessarily rely on whether a person has dark,
> light or even purple skin.  

"Toadying?"  Having a desire that a book reflect or appeal to the 
potential audience is "toadying?"  And if the story doesn't 
absolutely *require* that there be racial diversity, then including 
racial diversity is some misguided effort to be politically 
correct?  Characters in stories should be 100% the majority race 
unless it is *absolutely necessary* to include racial diversity for 
a story-related reason?

Maybe some people (I wouldn't go so far as to characterize it 
as "many" people) are irked by Dean Thomas' race being made explicit 
in the U.S. edition.  Some of us view it differently, though.  Some 
of us approach it from the viewpoint that it would be ideal and 
inclusive and realistic for there to have been racial diversity in 
the books (assuming that this was OK with the author) *from the 
start.*  That this diversity was added a little late in the game 
does not make it less valuable or legitimate.  I somehow suspect 
that if JKR thought it important that Dean Thomas be white, he'd be 
white.

> Some people are so tired of the PC people using social pressure
> to force these kinds of changes that they seem (IMO) to feel
> threatened that these pressures will in turn become reverse
> discrimination.  

Well, Darrin already said it quite well.  Everyone in the U.S. gets 
to vote with their wallet.  Literature, TV shows, movies etc. that 
include only the majority race in our diverse culture may find less 
of an audience.  Members of minority races have every right to 
choose what to read or watch, just as those of the majority race do, 
I would say.  So if anyone is deeply troubled that Dean Thomas is 
black in the U.S. edition, they have the right to vote with their 
wallet and decline to purchase the books.

I fail to see the reason for the irritation people express over a 
decision to make a character of a minority race in this instance, 
which leads me to worry that something deeper may be at work.

Cindy