[ SECRET POST #2795 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2795 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Law & Order: Criminal Intent]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Jeeves and Wooster]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Yahtzee/Zero Punctuation]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Markiplier]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Jackie Chan Adventures]


__________________________________________________



08.
[The Parent Trap]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Alexander]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Starsky and Hutch]











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 012 secrets from Secret Submission Post #399.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[likeadeuce]

I understand conceptually why a character would behave that way but as far as I remember this is the only time when Shadow comment on his own racial background at all (either in his internal monologue or in conversation). So I'm not sure what the text is accomplishing by withholding that information.

[(Anonymous)]

To me, it accomplishes showing the audience that Shadow's not an idiot. It enforces what's said about him earlier-- that he's kept his head done, down his time in the most pragmatic way possible, that he doesn't have an easily riled temper and he's smart enough to know when he's being played, and that all he wants is to get out of jail and see his wife again. All very useful things to get across to the reader.

I'm not sure what you mean by "withholding that information", though. If you mean Shadow's race, the information hasn't been withheld, it's right there and in other places in the text. It's just not explicit. Not everything the author tells an audience is explicit and out there for everyone to see. Some knowledge is knowledge you have to pay attention in order to appreciate. The way I look at it is, a lot of people will miss those clues and assume Shadow's white. Those are precisely the same people who might stop and wonder why they made that assumption, and they might find that exploration interesting.

Or... they might get angry and defensive about it. And that is also interesting.

[likeadeuce]

Withholding in the sense that Shadow is the POV character but doesn't seem to self-identify by race, which reinforces the validity of the first thing he said about it.

And I'm not being angry or defensive - I said elsewhere I think OP has a good point that I'm still thinking over. At the same time, I think the book's handling of race is rather weirdly indirect and seems to come out of a school of thought (which I've encountered in some writing workshops, pretty much always from white people) that a character's race shouldn't be mentioned directly. More recently I've seen the argument made by POC bloggers that writers who include POC characters should make those identities explicit & unmistakable. I find it interesting to see what approach Gaiman used in this book (which is almost 15 yrs old at this point BTW) and I'm not a huge fan of it. But that's a matter of interpretation & personal preference. I love this book & Gaiman's work overall, I just personally find this part frustrating.

[(Anonymous)]

"Withholding in the sense that Shadow is the POV character but doesn't seem to self-identify by race..."

Why is that "withholding" instead of "business as usual"? I don't know about you, but I don't go through my day thinking to myself, "Here I am, a Chinese-American woman going to the store to get some milk..." or "I, a person of Chinese ancestry, am about to check my e-mail..."

"... which reinforces the validity of the first thing he said about it."

... except that you can't take what he says at face value for the very reasons already covered. Shadow isn't speaking freely and openly to a neutral stranger, he's reluctantly engaging in conversation with a hostile prison guard who has the power to hurt him. So the first thing he says about his race is to be vague-- not because his race is unknowable, but because he very wisely doesn't want to engage a hostile, racist person.

Let me tell you something. If I'm walking down the street and a big angry guy comes up to me and says, "What are you, anyway? Some kind of slanty-eyed chink? A paki? Are you a gook or something?", are you seriously going to blame me for not being frank with him and saying, "Why yes, good sir, I am Chinese!" If I don't come out and state my ethnicity, is my ethnicity now in doubt? Without taking into consideration the context?

Now, I have more freedom than Shadow. I can perhaps get away from my hostile interrogator if I can stall him long enough to reach a place of safty. Shadow does not have that option because he's in a prison and anything but a very, very careful reaction could get him punished or delay his release, something he absolutely does not want. So he'll give a noncommittal answer and try not to give the guard any excuse to come down hard on him.

Is Gaiman's handling of race weirdly indirect? Yes, that's arguable. I think Gaiman wanted to make Shadow a POC, but he wanted it ambiguous enough that if you didn't pick up on the subtle details, your interpretation was different. I think he might've done it for several reasons. One, because the book isn't about Shadow's race on his human side, it's about his heritage from Odin. Two, so people who missed the details, assumed he was white and later found out differently might stop and think about why they'd assume someone is white when they're never explicitly told so, especially when they've failed to pick up on cues that Shadow isn't white.

I'm a POC and also a writer. Is that how I'd do it? Probably not. Especially since Gaiman is famous and this character is well known. But I wouldn't presume to judge how explicit or implicit other writers "should" be about the race of their characters, and I'm not going to view it negatively if they choose to do it as Gaiman has because I think I understand his motives and they make sense to me in the context. As a writer, I think that's all you can do-- try to write in a way that makes sense to you and hopefully your readers.

For the record, I never thought you were angry or defensive, but some of the people in this secret thread have been.

[likeadeuce]

Thanks for your perspective. I've been reading a lot of African-American writers lately talking about how race affects their everyday lives & their awareness of the way other people treat them. For that reason, thinking about Shadow's failure to reflect or comment on this in any way strikes me as jarring & 'this is written by a white dude'. Not that I think it should be in every sentence but that I find it odd he would never think about it. This is obviously just one perspective and I appreciate you sharing yours.

[(Anonymous)]

"Thanks for your perspective. I've been reading a lot of African-American writers lately talking about how race affects their everyday lives & their awareness of the way other people treat them."

That's a good point, but I think that the exchange Shadow has with the prison guard illustrates this very thing. Gaiman chose to show us what Shadow has to deal with rather than tell us. Unfortunately, some people have missed the significance of it.

Thanks for being such a nice person about this, BTW. Not everyone in this thread has been particularly civil, and I appreciate it.