We Need to Talk About Race

Does unconscious bias influence how you write and describe others?

One of the most joyous, yet at the same time, sad moments is when you reach the end of a great read and have to pick your next book. If a story has kept me captivated for weeks, I almost don’t want to finish it as it’s like losing a close friend. But offsetting this “pain” is the thrilling prospect of selecting your next read, which you hope propels you into another new and exciting world.

This was my dilemma a few weeks back. I was finishing Carlos Ruiz Zafon’s beautiful The Shadow of the Wind, but was going to be next? After a difficult scan of my bookshelf, I selected Robert Ludlum’s The Road to Gandalfo.

I’ve seen, and loved, all the Jason Bourne films, so was hoping for something filled with action, conspiracy and plot twists. This was my first time reading Robert Ludlum, and on these criteria, it was all there — sex, violence, humour, blackmail, deceit; you name it.

When a book opening surprises you — but not how you were expecting

But something else happened that I wasn’t expecting. Within the first chapter, two passages struck me and remained in my thoughts throughout the book.

Standing beside him was his personal secretary, a young Black priest from America”, from the archdiocese of New York. It was like Francesco to have such a papal aide.

And a couple of lines later…

‘I double-checked. Do you want to argue with him?’ replied the Black, bending down in tranquil solicitousness.

I felt uncomfortable with both descriptions. Was describing the priest as “black” OK? Did it add anything relevant to the plot and the scene that was unfolding? No, it didn’t.

Were any of the other protagonists in the scene identified by their skin colour? No, not any references I spotted. So why was the character of the priest singled out in this way?

In the second extract — the phrase “replied the Black” felt even worse, and the book contains no comparable references such as “replied the White”.

Tokenism or just “of its time”?

Let’s be clear. Black Lives Matter and racial inequality, prejudice and harm is rife and needs to be ended, alongside many other global injustices.

But this got me thinking. Was this way of writing reflecting its point in time? The book was first published in 1975. Further descriptions of the priest in question included: “The young papal aide from the diocese of New York, Harlem District.”

No mention of skin colour here, although maybe the geographical inference is the character was of Black American descent? Maybe, maybe not.

Was this an attempt to show diversity and inclusiveness by drawing clear attention to the fact that not all characters in the book were stereotypically “white”? If it was, it was clumsy. Was it an unconscious bias coming out in the writing? We’ll never know.

I am only too well aware that as a white male in a “developed” country, the prejudices and inequalities I face do not for a moment compare to what others have and continue to face. But equally, I have a personal responsibility to try and be a small cog in the changes needed.

Taking personal responsibility

So my question is this — how we can be more positive in our writing and in literature to increase how we feature, include, describe and celebrate characters of all races, colour, sexuality and background?

We need to write in ways that don’t have the tokenistic character just ticking a diversity box because we’re too uncomfortable to accept and explore how they are part of our stories or describe them in ways that just ghettoize them further.

This book — and I’m not singling out Robert Ludlum exclusively — is almost 50 years old. There are many other examples, such as John Buchan’s The 39 Steps (1915) and Charles Dickens's Oliver Twist (1838), which raise similar questions over their portrayal of the Jewish race and have been analysed at length. Do we just accept them as typical of their times? I don’t think we should.

The ways in which race and religion are described have in many ways moved on since then. But not far enough, as George Floyd’s killing and too many other incidents in recent times still show.

As writers, we have a responsibility to use our words in ways that don’t reinforce stereotypes or slip into unconscious biases, do not — even unintentionally — ghettoize groups or individuals, and do present all characters with respect and consistency.

Sources:

If you enjoyed my article, here are a few more from me that hopefully catch your interest!