Well said, Colleen. It frustrates me to no end that *individuals* (who do NOT think of themselves as racist) fail to see how their silence or compliance upholds *institutional* racism. It's not in the bricks and mortar, it's in the very people who make the big decisions and those who say nothing or "go along to get along." I've met well-intending editors who "wish" things were different but feel powerless to resist. When industry insiders (and that includes authors) keep quiet about problematic practices, they are SANCTIONING them, are therefore complicit, and need to be held accountable...

"The discussion about these cover controversies should only have ever been about racism. That's it."

Colleen, but this is asking participants to deal with the core issue, and it's always easier to focus on anything but the ugly reality of racism. It is easier to argue that we should be polite, worry more about not hurting feelings. Weren't you raised to play nice? Among other issues, I kept thinking how in the book blogosphere we are mostly women and we are conditioned from birth to play nice.

"You see, that's the thing about the internet. No one knows where most of us have worked in the past or the things we have accepted or not in our workplace. An assumption is made by so many recent posts that we must be persuaded to understand how serious speaking out can be."

I don't think anyone has ever asked me about where I've worked, asked if that experience was relevant and I believe many wouldn't have asked anyway. But more to the point you make about being professional and that means remaining silent even when something is personally unacceptable. That is not possible for me.

For the record, in my former life I worked in publishing. I worked in sales. I served on our diversity task force and scholarship panel. I and a co-worker championed a company recognition award in honor of our friend and colleague, an editor(we succeeded in our campaign and we presented the award to his family posthumously). Some of you, librarians and publishers' reps, may have met me at ALA and other trade shows on the east coast. I know exactly what was a stake and no one has to explain the corporate world to me.

In my professional career I was very good at what I did, and I did my job with integrity. While I certainly needed my paycheck, I did not remain silent when I felt something was wrong. This probably contributed to why I never made it to management, but I did earn a very good living. Eventually I walked away from it.

And it's clear why I was never an editor. lol

Thank you for this. There is a bigger picture here, and it involves both 'passive' and 'active' racism, and in case anyone's wondering; those are both bad. I'm grateful that there are bloggers like you, Susan, Ari, Ah Yuan, Doret, and others who refuse to settle.

What was hardest for me personally was the bottom-line belief behind all this that covers with dark faces simply don't sell as well.

All of my books have had brown faces on them.

Do well-intentioned people assume, "Oh, well, they won't do that well anyway," and try to sell our books as a civic duty to the margins only? Is it never a serious consideration to put serious marketing dollars behind PoC-written titles?

Thanks for this post, Colleen. Any kind of real change is only going to happen if/when we take the risk and speak out. Someone really smart once said something like, "The greater the risk, the greater the reward."

So many authors won't speak up out of fear -- fear of losing their contract, fear of being labeled as "difficult," fear of having their hopes and dreams dashed in an instant, after *years* of slogging. Believe me, I totally get that. Yet, at the same time, I think we have to turn inward and question what our priorities are. We are writing for children and teens, after all. I ask myself this with regard to my own children all the time. When I find myself chasing a personal goal or accomplishment, I have to ask myself what I'm sacrificing in the process. And is that sacrifice something I'm willing to pass along as an example to my children?

In other words, now that I have The Contract in my hands, what am I willing to give up for it? My integrity? My beliefs? If I'm asked to become someone I'm not, if I'm asked to be less than who I am (say, by taking down content on my blog that an agent or editor might find objectionable), if I'm expected to muzzle myself when my cover clearly misrepresents the contents of my book ...is that worth the perceived reward?

Those are some important questions for us to consider as authors, and as creators of cultural products for young people.

Colleen, Zetta, Susan, Olugbemisola, Mitali, and Neesha, thank you. You are all so inspiring and I learn so much from all of you.

Mitali - I've been wondering that. Are expectations lower for a book about KOC or with brown faces on the cover. Is Sherman Alexie considered an aberration (for example)?

It's a harsh question but I wonder if it is a reasonable one - which would mean a massive paradigm shift is required in how books are bought and sold and marketed. (And would heavily involve the "gate keepers".)

I think someone at Ari's blog posted during the Magic Under Glass discussion that publishers need to do whatever it takes to stay in business, which just took my breath away, that anyone would basically say 'it's ok, people can be racist if they need to make money'.

Do well-intentioned people assume, "Oh, well, they won't do that well anyway," and try to sell our books as a civic duty to the margins only? Is it never a serious consideration to put serious marketing dollars behind PoC-written titles?

Uh, yeah. That's EXACTLY what I have wondered, too.

I appreciate that we keep talking about this. Our minds are set, open only just so-far, and in order to keep the door open, we need the WD-40 of discussion. Someone said the other week that it's about being a person of color "full-time;" and it's a challenge for many people not to compartmentalize those issues of race and identity to sort of theoretical classroom types of discussion, and leave them out of real life.

In your office example, "Taking the "this is just about proper office behavior" argument then, I'll ask this: You are White and a Black person comes into your office..." I honestly think that most people wouldn't say anything. While your example is blatantly racist, I have seen people within the professional environment do questionable things in the name of "it's business" all of the time.

Somehow because we're in an office, lying, cheating and manipulation become okay, especially now that people have become a bit more desperate in these "hard economic time." As if facing hardship, any sense of morality goes out the window if it means keeping a job.

If Sherman Alexie is an aberration, then so is Walter Dean Myers, and Sharon Draper, and Jacqueline Woodson, and Lisa Yee...

I think the problem is that there are well-intentioned folks operating under false beliefs as to the significance and buying power of certain markets. I'm sure that all of the above-mentioned authors started out the same way--small print runs, a trickle of marketing and publicity support from their publishers (if any), and my guess is that they were *not* lead titles. I'm willing to bet that these authors surpassed the expectations of their publishers rather than lived up to them.

Contrast this with white authors writing about vampires or wealthy, hedonistic teens, and the advances those authors are getting (even in this tough economy), the marketing and publicity support thrown their way, and how many of these are lead titles. These authors are *expected* to sell big.

What's amazing to me is how willfully blind this mentality is. Studies have proven, time and time again, that PoC buy stuff! There is a giant Target mega-complex right smack in the middle of the projects here in the Bronx. The people in the surrounding area are the biggest consumer base for that complex. It will NEVER go out of business.

But maybe the belief is based more in the idea that PoC don't read? Which still doesn't account for the popularity of street lit (Zetta has a great post up on Fledgling about that, by the way), romance novels featuring PoC, and how religious and self-help literature -- specifically targeting PoC -- is flying off shelves.

It would make more sense to me if the wealth were spread around a little more equitably. Rather than giving ONE author ninety percent of the pie, and everyone else meager samplings, why not give more authors sizable support packages and see who sells out? Rather than one author with a seven-figure advance and the support of the entire house behind them, why not seven authors with five-figure advances (and the corresponding marketing support)? Am I missing something? Why does this not seem a reasonable approach?

"and in order to keep the door open, we need the WD-40 of discussion." Tanita - I love that.

Sometimes I wonder if bookstores are refusing to carry books that feature Kids of Color or if the publishers aren't even asking for fear they the bookstores will say no.

A publisher should not be willing to take the first no a bookstore gives. Buyers don't always know what they need. Especially if they have a large market to contend with.

But why should bookstores carry MG or YA books with kids of color if their own publishers won't promote them.

For change to begin publishers need to start putting more marketing money beyond books with KOC. And not just for regular consumers but for teachers and librarians.

A few weeks ago went to the library. It was just me and the kids librarian. She was online so I took moment to tell her about my blog.

She showed some interest in a Robbins picture book Two of a Kind. It's stars two KOC and isn't about race. It came out in early 09 and she had not heard of it.

Teachers and Libarians not hearing about books with kids of color has become the norm.

People can't buy what they don't know about.

Colleen, you said, "I'm looking at my manuscript right now and wondering what I would accept. I imagine a lot of other authors are wondering the same thing."

I hope that you are correct, and thank you for writing candidly about your self-questioning. I worry that too many writers aren't wondering, and that their priorities are "get published first, and make an ethical stand second or not at all."

I understand that I'm able to be uncompromising about my ethics because I work full-time and therefore don't need to sell my MS to eat. I also understand that as a poet, I never figured that what I wrote would result in financial gain; fiction writers are in a different situation. That said, I would love to see more writers take the Justine Larbalestier tack of bringing their ethics with them to their publisher's office. I'm not so naive as to think that writers taking a stand would eradicate racist publishing practices on its own, but I do think it could make a difference.

Thank for your discussion on this. I have been think deeply about the cover art for my own novel due out next Feb. Do I put a black person on the front or don't. I've had white friends confess that they had a hard time picking up books with POC on them. Even had one friend confess that she preferred to read books about people of color written by white people because POC author made her uncomfortable.

As an African American writer I know I have to take a stand or nothing will ever change. I know I have to take a stand or I betray myself as a writer and the characters I have created who take life or death stand to make the world better.

As I said Thank you so much for this discussion because with out frank conversation nothing changes.

I have never sat well with the "writers can't make intelligent decisions about design" argument. First of all, a writer, in theory, has more deeply envisioned their world than anyone reading the book -- and designers do not always read the books that closely, as evidenced by the regularity of factual mistakes on the cover! Writers should be a key element of the design process, as they are most "in the know" about the work itself.

Furthermore, who the heck decided that if you can write, you can't possibly do anything else of use? Think of Julius Lester's photographs -- obviously he has a deep design sense. Many writers are a "double threat" in practice (in theater, a triple threat is someone who can act, sing and dance), and many more are a double threat in aesthetic comprehension if not in actual output.

And some are our own industry's triple threat -- they are writers, designers, and are or have been booksellers/editors/librarians/press agents... they know the territory. Turning off these voices because of a policy that authors can't worry our pretty little heads about something as complicated as design is inherently offensive, and just plain silly.

I'm so impressed by how this conversation has continued and clearly it is an issue that a lot - A LOT - of folks are thinking about.

And that is good.

My article should be up in the next Bookslut (Feb) and when it goes active I plan to run some of the "out takes" here from my many email queries. That will give everyone a bit more to think about as we consider what some authors have dealt with.

I am frustrated by the argument about authors not knowing what is best cover-wise as well Maia. I really think it has always been that way and I can certainly see a publisher being concerned about having to deal with someone else's opinion when it comes to cover (on top of designer/editor/marketing); if you have a pissy author then it might go on forever. And yet, there has to be a better way then the current one because treating an author llke they know nothing just seems really wrong to me as well.