One step forward, six steps back (Say Yes to Gay YA)

[pameladean]

sartorias and rachelmanija have an essay up on Genreville (a site well worth the attention of readers of sf and fantasy in general) about sending a collaborative YA fantasy novel to an agent and being told that the agent would represent and expect to sell it if they would just remove a gay viewpoint character, or make the character, at least apparently, heterosexual -- one suggestion was that, should the series the book is part of be a huge hit, the character could be revealed to be gay later on. Ugh.
I am frankly astonished that anybody should have such an experience in 2011, but that just shows my naivete, and my enormous good luck in having an editor who told me that the same-sex relationship in my forthcoming novel was one of the things she liked.
The article is set up so that other authors who have had similar experiences can comment pseudonymously if they like. I am curious but alarmed to see how many more writers have had this happen to them.
Pamela

ETA: The agent not named in the original Genreville post has responded:

http://theswivet.blogspot.com/2011/09/guest-blogger-joanna-stampfel-volpe.html

sartorias and rachelmanija have responded in turn:

http://rachelmanija.livejournal.com/969918.html

And Malinda Lo, who has published YA novels with gay characters, produces some statistics, which demonstrates that really, there is a serious problem here:

http://www.malindalo.com/2011/09/i-have-numbers-stats-on-lgbt-young-adult-books-published-in-the-u-s/

Having known sartorias for the better part of 25 years, and having known rachelmanija for a much shorter but non inconsiderable amount of time, I am inclined to look askance at the agent's version of events.

Comments

[pameladean]

I'm sorry, I really can't keep up with you; you are arguing against things nobody has said. Nobody actually called the agent homophobic, either, and nobody actually need be homophobic for this whole thing to have happened: people just have to think that the broad reading public, or the largest possible audience for books of this kind minus a gay character, is homophobic.

I also doubt that people who used to get books with gay characters published are that relevant. Diane Duane hasn't published anything with overtly gay people in it for quite some time, and the Door Into books are not YA. The Young Wizards books have no overtly, unambiguously gay characters.

Again, nobody is saying that nobody will publish YA books with gay characters. The claim is quite specific: some agents are telling writers that their books can be sold if the writers remove gay characters, or their gayness. SOME agents. Your responses seem to be to a much broader and more general statement that nobody has actually made.

I think "whisper campaign" is a serious mischaracterization, also. If you disagree with Rachel and Sherwood's reasons for not naming the agent, fine, but all this innuendo is unhelpful.

P.

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure the local set of senior wizards are gay. Am I hallucinating? Not protagonists, and full adults, though.

[daedala.livejournal.com]

I believe it's strongly implied, but not actually stated; nor are they POV characters.

[rachelmanija.livejournal.com]

They are subtextually signposted as gay, but it's never explicitly stated, nor do we ever see them doing anything (like kissing) that would prove that they are more than very close friends and roommates. Many readers do, in fact, assume they are just friends.

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

Thanks. That's entirely compatible with my memory. Possibly, as adults, they're excused from having sex lives (at least in the minds of many of the YA range of readers).

I suspect it's very relevant that they don't engage in much of any flirting or any even subtextually sexual behavior.

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

I went and looked this up awhile ago, and there is also a minor and unrelated issue, apparently, of their being based on friends of hers who are /not/ together.

Which nicely dovetails with the perceived need to not have the gayness be particularly obvious.

Fried Green Tomatoes, the movie version, was a perfect example of the latter. (My father was one of the folks who chose to see them as not a lesbian couple.)

[willshetterly.livejournal.com]

Are Francesca Lia Block's gay characters also never explicitly stated as being gay? I would swear there was kissing, but readers add the damndest things to stories.

[pameladean]

I am sure too, but it's quite deniable and oblique. It's not overt; there's no kissing, no physical demonstrations at all, no commentary that couldn't mean friendship only.

P.

[willshetterly.livejournal.com]

Then what is the argument? You say, "some agents are telling writers that their books can be sold if the writers remove gay characters, or their gayness." I would say those agents are homophobic or they know of homophobic editors who won't buy the books, 'cause it sure sounds like they're saying the books can't be sold unless they're de-gayed.

[pameladean]

AS I SAID IN MY COMMENT, they need only believe that audiences are homophobic and to think this is a problem.

This is really pretty much beside the actual point, anyway.

P.

[willshetterly.livejournal.com]

Why would they think audiences are homophobic* if people like Francesca Lia Block and Holly Black can sell books?

*Because this is the internet, let me add that, yes, of course some audiences are homophobic. But I rather doubt Block's and Black's audiences are, and I dunno about you, but I would happily have their readership, and I doubt their publishers are unhappy.

[pameladean]

I can't do this anymore. I am not interested in psychoanalyzing a bunch of people I don't know to justify the experience that Rachel and Sherwood related. I find it plausible and believe it. If you don't, I can't help you.

P.