Boycott Bloomsbury Publishers? Maybe…if you care about young readers of color
written by Love Isn’t Enough editor Tami Winfrey Harris; originally published at What Tami Said
Regular followers of this blog know how much I love books and believe in the power and importance of reading beginning at an early age. I take so much enjoyment in reading and books have played such an important role in my personal development that it would pain me to suggest that anyone NOT read. In all the kerfuffle between publishers and e-book readers over delayed distribution and prices, I have ignored the various calls for boycotts. Yeah, I think publishers are being short–sighted by preventing e-book readers from getting their hands on hot books like “Game Change” for months after the hardback release. But I reckon they will realize the folly of trying to maintain the business status quo when e-readers like me don’t pay the hardback costs, but instead hit the local library or gleefully pre-order their e-version for less than $8 and wait patiently. I can still read my beloved books; no boycott needed there. But I am considering boycotting books distributed by Bloomsbury Publishing, because the company, known for the Harry Potter series and others, has demonstrated that it disdains readers like me–people of color. The publisher has repeatedly shown that it believes people of color are so unrelatable, so “other,” that our brown faces repel white readers (the readers that matter). And they have decided, for the love of money, to acquiesce to that assumed race bias. So, while I loved Elizabeth Gilbert’s “Eat, Pray, Love” and am eager to read her latest “Committed,” published by Bloomsbury, I am considering leaving the book unread. What choice do I have? Gilbert’s publisher does not want me.
Why would a young adult (YA) book about a black girl with features that reflect her African ancestry and hair that is short and natural have a young, white girl with keen features and flowing tresses on the cover? Folks around the Web (Read this great summary at Chasing Ray) are asking that question about the US release of Australian author Justine Larbalestier’s latest book, Liar, a thriller about a teenage pathological liar. The answer, according to Bloomsbury, the book’s publisher, is certainly one we’ve heard before: Black faces don’t sell, particularly dark ones framed by nappy hair. Beauty sells and black faces are not beautiful. In a post about the controversy on her Web site, Larbalestier mentions a positive review of Liar that brands Micah, the protagonist, “ugly,” though there is nothing in the book that describes her as such. Apparently, it is her blackness and nappiness that offends. Read more…
I’m sure you can’t imagine what it’s like to wander through the teen section of a bookstore and only see one or two books with people of color on them. Do you know how much that hurts? Are we so worthless that the few books that do feature people of color don’t have covers with people of color? It’s upsetting, it makes me angry and it makes me sad. Can you imagine growing up as a little girl and wanting to be white because not only do you not see people who look like you on TV, you don’t see them in your favorite books either…. Do you know how sad I feel when my middle school age sister tells me she would rather read a book about a white teen than a person of color because “we aren’t as pretty or interesting.” She doesn’t know the few books that do exist out there about people of color because publishing houses like yourself don’t put people of color on the covers. And my little brother doesn’t even like to read, he wants to read about cool people who look like him, but he doesn’t see those books in bookstores and now he rarely reads.
Meanwhile, as consumers, we can put pressure on publishers to stop engaging in a deceptive, racist and hurtful practice, and explaining it away with a tired axiom that helps create the very problem it defines. Unfortunately, the most obvious protest, a boycott of these titles or Bloomsbury altogether, would hurt innocent authors and reinforce the impression that the market doesn’t want books about people of color. But as Anna North at Jezebel suggests, there’s no reason not to send a bunch of angry letters. Adds Ari at Reading in Color, “We should keep blogging, emailing, writing about this issue” — Bloomsbury’s been shamed into doing the right thing once before, at least. And as Larbalestier said back in July, perhaps the most important thing we can do — especially white people, who could easily read nothing but books about ourselves, and far too often take that option — is prove the prevailing wisdom wrong. “When was the last time you bought a book with a person of colour on the front cover or asked your library to order one for you?” she asks. If you want to see more of them, here’s her best advice: “Go buy one right now. “
Bloomsbury Publishing
Distributed by Macmillan
175 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10010
marketing: marketing@bloomsburyusa.com
publicity: publicity.adult@bloomsburyusa.com
F: (212) 780-0115 or (212) 982-2837
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of 
hsofia wrote:
Will write them. This is so, so unacceptable!
Posted 20 Jan 2010 at 9:50 am ¶
Catherine/Mama C wrote:
This practice needs to be shared wholeheartedly across the internet. (I have only read about it in any depth so far on blogs written by POC.) So, today I explained the term, the practice and the current explosion at Bloomsbury with the entire language arts department where I teach. Suffice it to say it had not landed on their radar before now. I will follow up with links to this article and others. My next step: engage my students in the discussion.
Posted 20 Jan 2010 at 10:19 pm ¶
Kristi wrote:
Just wrote them–thank you for the contact info! This is so disgusting–the cover is a LIE–I am dumbfounded that this situation is being replayed after that with “Liar” or that it ever happened in the first place. ARG!
Posted 20 Jan 2010 at 10:43 pm ¶
dersk wrote:
I wonder how the cover art process works – anyone know? I’m wondering if it’s a sin of commission (i.e., they’re making a business-based decision to have a white cover) or of omission (i.e., they ‘forget’ to include the race of the main character as a salient factor for the cover art). I’m just thinking of how far off most science fiction novel covers are from the actual content…
And somewhat off-topic: eReader clients want to boycott publishers for delaying the ecopy release? How is that any different than waiting for the paperback?
Posted 21 Jan 2010 at 7:37 am ¶
nichole wrote:
That sucks. I bet you thought of this, but reading your local library’s copy might at least add a step between you and the publisher.
Posted 21 Jan 2010 at 11:22 am ¶
nichole wrote:
[oh DUH is me! you said as much in the OP. sorry to not read critically!]
Posted 21 Jan 2010 at 11:22 am ¶
cocolamala wrote:
whether its a sin of omission or commission, it still an error, and still needs to be remedied that issue can be addressed by the publishing company in upcoming printings.
Posted 21 Jan 2010 at 1:38 pm ¶
honeysmoke wrote:
Well, it appears the publisher is aware of the issue and is changing the cover.
From the Bloomsbury website:
Bloomsbury is ceasing to supply copies of the US edition of Magic Under Glass. The jacket design has caused offense and we apologize for our mistake. Copies of the book with a new jacket design will be available shortly.
Posted 21 Jan 2010 at 4:21 pm ¶
Sandra wrote:
I just want to say that while it is helpful to let racist publishers know how you feel, at the same time we can support publishers that strive to show faces of all colors with meaningful stories about characters of color. My daughter who is half Filipina American and half white LOVES the American Girl series (by American Girl Publishing). She has read meaningful, historical accounts of girls from all different backgrounds. While I strongly wish that they would publish more stories about Asian girls, my daughter has loved the Kaya and Josefina stories. I am not about to boycott them for not having more stories about Asian girls, but your call to action puts me in mind to write them a letter about it. Thanks!
Posted 22 Jan 2010 at 2:13 am ¶
dersk wrote:
@coco – Well, there’s a big difference between an artist not knowing what a character’s supposed to look like (and assuming white) and a publisher consciously deciding to change the character’s race to boost sales.
Posted 22 Jan 2010 at 9:44 am ¶
RCHOUDH wrote:
It’s appalling to think the same publisher did this racist act once again! I think it also helps to let white readers (whom the publishers view as the “real” market) know about this injustice so that if they choose to be allies they can also help boycott books from this publisher. That way it wouldn’t just be POC’s boycotting them but theire “mainstream market” which will really affect their future actions.
Posted 22 Jan 2010 at 4:58 pm ¶
cocolamala wrote:
@dersk
this isn’t a matter of first impression.
there is a history of erasing representations of people of color in print publishing and with this publisher in particular.
if you look back through the livejournal racefail essays, this has absolutely happened before…and the publishing industry has issued excuses for actions like this saying “black folks faces don’t sell covers…white folks don’t want to read books about people of color…etc.”
so they know they’re whitewashing covers and believe that market forces are an excuse — but there isn’t really an excuse for having a policy of “Not putting the faces and images of people of color on book covers”
Posted 23 Jan 2010 at 8:46 am ¶
cocolamala wrote:
we do not see black cover models randomly placed on book covers with white protagonists
and if doing that did make books more profitable, you might claim that authors wouldn’t mind having a “more profitable” book cover design.
but these authors, who have had a “more profitable design” imposed on them are not exactly saying that
here’s a response from the author commenting on a blog post about the cover
My cover was already made before the LIAR controversy, of course… It would be nice to see a darker girl on the paperback…the hair, particularly…Nimira’s hair is her best feature! Although I love that dress. =( It will be nice when the industry straightens this out. Ever since Liar I’ve noticed a lot of books with white girls on the cover and non-white girls in the pages…
Well, anyway, I’m glad you liked the final version! I’m so eager to dip back into that world again…
Posted 23 Jan 2010 at 10:35 am ¶
isi wrote:
…and if there could possibly be sci-fi/ fantasy books with black /brown female protagonists, I know my pre-teen daughter would be thrilled.
On a side note- Hermione Granger’s physical description was written in such a way that they COULD have easily depicted her as black or biracial. I think it would have added dimensionality to the series if she had been. A total missed opportunity.
Posted 25 Jan 2010 at 2:54 pm ¶
dersk wrote:
@isi – there are HUNDREDS of good sf novels with female protagonists of color (of course, sometimes the color is green, as in John Scalzi’s Old Man’s War series, but still…).
@coco – gotcha. Was just curious as to where the breakdown was, but seems pretty clear that it’s intentional and done by the publishers…
Posted 26 Jan 2010 at 5:43 am ¶
LaTonya wrote:
Tami,
Like you, I was quite busy voicing my outrage and I called for a boycott. How nice for Bloomsbury to pull the cover, which sadly distracted some readers and gave them a reason to celebrate. I did not celebrate. Instead I formed Readers Against WhiteWashing.
Please join us.
Posted 26 Jan 2010 at 12:44 pm ¶
JenBen wrote:
@dersk @cocolamla
A close friend works as a book editor here in Australia, for major publishing house that also has the local imprint of several American and UK publishers, including Bloomsbury. She followed the Liar row with interest, because there was something odd about it – to wit:
She said that while it was quite true that the artist would rarely have read the book, they would be provided with detailed guidelines on what was expected of them, including a detailed description of the characters etc.
Moreover, the author always gets approval (she’s seen several covers rejected) EVEN IF it’s a local reprinting of a book written by an author overseas.
The only real exception is stuff like Mills and Boon etc, where the author isn’t important.
So the whole thing is a bit strange – I can understand the publishing house’s dodgy logic of brown-girls-don’t-sell-well (well, not understand, but I certainly believe that it exists) but am surprised that the author didn’t say anything until it came out. It seems unlikely. My father had several books published, and I well remember him getting the advance copy to ok.
I’d be curious to hear from anyone who works in the US publishing industry though – perhaps things are different? Do authors get to ok their covers? It would seem odd if they didn’t.
Posted 27 Jan 2010 at 12:52 am ¶
cocolamala wrote:
@JenBen
I don’t understand. Does it make a difference whether the author or the publisher decided to whitewash the cover? Regardless, I want to know why characters of color are “good enough” for the inside but not deemed worthy of receiving equal cover time.
Like I said earlier, it might be different if random white covers were “blackwashed” on ocassion, but we never see that.
There is no sense that displacing images of minority characters is more than at best a knee-jerk decision and at worst a suppressive policy.
Posted 29 Jan 2010 at 9:15 am ¶
JenBen wrote:
@Cocolamala Oh, no, I wasn’t trying to defend the practice! Just wondering how and why it happens – as in, why aren’t authors kicking up more of a stink? It feels like “Oh, I didn’t realise they’d changed it until it was too late” is a bit of a cop out, given the amount of consultation that goes on about covers.
Posted 31 Jan 2010 at 6:00 pm ¶