It's A Great Time to Speak Up

Sometimes, I look at my timeline on Twitter, and see authors, myself included, squeeing about new book covers, pleading with readers to buy/help promote books, discussing ways to hone one's skills and increase chances of getting published, etc. Usually, this is in the midst of tweets from other parts of the world where people are tweeting about the very real climate crisis, the very real revolutions going on in different parts of the planet, and the very real movements for social justice during one of the most critical times our collective human brain has witnessed to date. In case you missed it, we're teetering on a cusp right now. The decisions we make as a collective can really affect whether we survive. Seriously.

As I've written before, many, many voices and expressions are routinely muted while others are lifted in this society of ours. That's what the Occupy movement is all about. A handful of people make decisions about who gets to sit in the spotlight and how many thousands hold audience in the dark. A limited few perspectives get held up to the light, receive financial support, or are aggressively marketed and amplified. But you know what? We're not living in times where we can afford to wait for someone to give us the nod before we express our thoughts and opinions. One voice can and does make a difference. We've seen it time and again throughout history.

Things are changing--fast. There is access to new technology. Anyone can record and broadcast human rights violations and police brutality as they are happening. Thousands tweeted the eviction of the Occupy Wall Street protesters, despite Mayor Bloomberg's "media blackout." In fact, Occupy Wall Street has morphed into Occupy Our Homes -- taking back hundreds of thousands of empty, foreclosed homes in one of the highest periods of homelessness in this country, ever. Ebooks are widely accepted and read, and are available globally to anyone who has access to a reader, computer, or cell phone. Thoughts, ideas, and information are exchanged with lightning speed over the internet. The balance of power is totally shifting.

If ever there was a time it was more important for people to speak up, to not wait for someone else to provide validation, to throw their contribution into the ring to help shape the future of this little planet under siege, now is it.

Some of my friends have said to me, "Come on. It's not that bad. There are some really great publishers/filmmakers/singers, etc., doing great stuff, no?"

Yes, there are. But they're not the most visible or as widely publicized. And there are not enough of us to compensate for the tremendous imbalance in access and representation. I tell my friends, "If you think things are not 'really that bad,' you haven't been paying attention. Or you've been paying attention to the loudest, not necessarily the truest. Turn off mainstream media for a week and seek out other sources of news and information, then let's talk." Because guess what? We're not supposed to know how bad things are. If we did, we'd all be dropping everything to make it right. We'd unplug from the buying machine, and demand something different -- create something different.

Things are that bad. But the good news is that there is time for change. The U.N. Summit for Climate Change just took place in Durban, South Africa. There are scientists pleading with nations to take responsibility, to implement policies that will reverse some of the damage we've done to the planet, to reduce greenhouse emissions and help steer us toward another path -- a less destructive path. But the most powerful nations on the planet are, at best, not listening. At worse, they are flat out denying that climate change is even real, or even worser, putting the blame/responsibility squarely on the shoulders of poorer nations.

The message is: We don't have to change anything. Things are working fine the way they are. Don't worry your pretty little heads, we got this.

The problem is that things are not working fine for a huge majority of the planet. And that huge majority just happens to be mostly PoC, mostly women and children, and mostly working class.

So, yeah. Now is the time to speak up. Artists/writers/storytellers/musicians have, historically, helped shape the cultures and societies they've lived in. They've served as a voice and mirror for the people. They've entertained, educated, and enlightened.

Folks in positions of power are not about to give their power up. But the rest of us are not completely power-less. If someone won't help you put your book out, you can put it out yourself. These days, the production quality of independently published books is right on par with corporate publishers. Just make your book the very best piece of art you've ever created. Put your expression as an artist, a world citizen, as someone with something valuable to contribute, out there. Release your voice into the world, so that more and more perspectives are heard. Until there is a strong chorus, challenging the same tunes we keep hearing over and over again. Art that supports the status quo is akin to propaganda. Art that challenges and throws the status quo into a new light is creativity. It's dynamic love.

The audience always outnumbers the performers. Participate. And totally squee about books and promote them and buy them. But let's help get more voices out in the mix. It'll completely change the landscape. More people speaking up and putting their perspectives out there is the only thing that will create the kind of change we need right now.


"I write for those women who do not speak, for those who do not have a voice because they were so terrified, because we are taught to respect fear more than ourselves. We've been taught that silence would save us, but it won't." -- Audre Lorde

"Life is very short and what we have to do must be done in the now." -- Audre Lorde

"Say something!" -- Bob Marley

Muslish

Here's Colbert's report on media coverage of the gunman in Norway's recent tragic attack...

Water, and an Interview

I'm thrilled to be part of Chasing Ray's Summer Blog Blast Tour this week. I was interviewed by Doret at The Happy Nappy Bookseller blog and that post is up today. She asked me some very interesting questions about Jazz In Love, publishing, and dating shady characters. Please check it out if you get a chance!

Speaking of very interesting questions, I came across this very interesting video called The Story of Bottled Water. I highly recommend watching it. There is a counter video on Youtube, but it is rather weak in comparison. Watch both for yourself and see what you think. (Plus, I had NO idea bottled water waste was being sent to India for land fills! Did you?).

The Politics of Story

I have a post up at Hunger Mountain, an arts journal put out by the Vermont College of Fine Arts. In The Politics of Story, I address the idea that only some stories are political and only some stories are message-driven. I argue that ALL stories are political and ALL stories put forth messages.

Here is a brief excerpt:

"Author and poet Suheir Hammad once said, “Writing must always have intention because words have power.” I know well the power of words. I know how a single slur can reduce a person to shame and humiliation . . . and fear. Some words—like racial epithets—have long and brutal histories of violence behind them. They carry with them the power to dehumanize and the inherent threat of attack. In an interview with Al-Jazeera English, Hammad stated, “I think it’s a political decision to leave politics out of your work.” Within a cultural, social and economic structure that advantages and privileges some over others, there is no way to make writing the “other” a non-political act. The very fact that there are “others” means that some perspectives are put forward more frequently and more consistently to create a norm, or dominant narrative. [...]

"As soon as voices of the marginalized are brought front and center, out of the fringes of the dominant narrative and into the center, our stories are automatically politicized. Because “othering” certain segments of the population is a social, political and cultural act. In the same way that leaving certain voices out of a narrative, or certain faces out of a film, book cover, magazine, television show, etc. is a political act, bringing those voices into the spotlight and giving them a platform, assigning them equal value and importance and weight, and listening to what they have to say is also a political act, intentional or not."

You can read the full post at Hunger Mountain. Let me know what you think!

Ahmed, on Killjoys

I saw this excerpt on Leonineclaire's tumblr and wanted to share. It's an extract from Sara Ahmed's "Feminist Killjoys (and Other Willful Subjects)". I could see great classroom discussion/debate emerging around this one excerpt:

“Take the example of racism. It can be willful even to name racism: as if the talk about divisions is what is divisive. Given that racism recedes from social consciousness, it appears as if the ones who “bring it up” are bringing it into existence . . . . To recede is to go back or withdraw. To concede is to give way, to yield. People of color are often asked to concede to the recession of racism: we are asked to “give way” by letting it “go back.” Not only that: more than that. We are often asked to embody a commitment to diversity. We are asked to smile in their brochures. The smile of diversity is a way of not allowing racism to surface; it is a form of political recession.

Racism is very difficult to talk about as racism can operate to censor the very evidence of its existence. Those who talk about racism are thus heard as creating rather than describing a problem. The stakes are indeed very high: to talk about racism is to occupy a space that is saturated with tension. History is saturation. One of the findings of a research project I was involved with on diversity was that because racism saturates everyday and institutional spaces, people of color often make strategic decisions not to use the language of racism.[18] If you already pose a problem, or appear “out of place” in the institutions of whiteness, there can be “good reasons” not to exercise what is heard as a threatening vocabulary.[19] Not speaking about racism can be a way of inhabiting the spaces of racism. You minimize the threat you already are by softening your language and appearance, by keeping as much distance as you can from the figure of the angry person of color. Of course, as we know, just to walk into a room can be to lose that distance, because that figure gets there before you do.

When you use the very language of racism you are heard as “going on about it,” as “not letting it go.” It is as if talking about racism is what keeps it going. Racism thus often enters contemporary forms of representation as a representation of a past experience.”

You can read the rest of the article here.

Food, Freedom, Control, and Profit

This link was posted on Facebook and I had to share it here. Jason Taylor is over on Vimeo with a video series about food, freedom, control and farming (hence, the title of this post - clever, huh?). I saw three of the short pieces and was duly impressed. Unfortunately, my connection slowed, so I was frustrated and couldn't watch the rest, but I'll be sure to be back on Jason's channel as soon as I get another chance. Check out the videos - they're really interesting.

Here's one that shows the Golden Temple's langar ritual. Langar is the communal meal served at all Sikh temples. Anyone, regardless of race, ethnicity, class, whatever is given a free meal - it's one of the basic tenets of Sikhism, and one I whole-heartedly agree with. No one should go hungry.

Roy on Obama's Visit to India & Globalization

Here's an interesting clip from acclaimed Indian author, Arundhati Roy (GOD OF SMALL THINGS), on Obama's recent visit to India.

Roy has been an outspoken activist against corporate greed and globalization for years. She has made some controversial statements and has ardent fans as well as staunch critics. Personally, I love listening to her. Besides the fact that she's beautiful, I love that this creative mind, and acclaimed novelist, has become a voice for the poor--who often have no voice in the face of political and corporate power.

Statement Worth Reading

Here is a link to the Carl Brandon Society's official statement on the Elizabeth Moon controversy. I particularly like these two paragraphs:

"Regarding “tolerance”: “Tolerance” is often considered one of our primary duties as citizens. “Tolerance” does not mean agreement, consensus, likeness, or even understanding. It does not mean assimilation. It does not require friendship, nor even dialogue. It is simple. It means refraining from expressing negativity towards things that are different from or alien to you. Tolerance is part of our social contract: you tolerate me, and I tolerate you; we both refrain from attacking one another; we live and let live. On the other hand, tolerance doesn’t deserve reward, either. As a social responsibility, it doesn’t change, lessen, or end; you never cease to be responsible for tolerating others. 

Regarding “teachable moments”: It is not the responsibility of members of marginalized groups to educate others about their group’s reality, history, or oppression. In situations like the current one, where someone has made bigoted statements against members of a particular group, members of that group have the right to be outraged and hurt without being forced into a false “teaching” position . . . " 

Back In A Groove

I finally feel like I'm getting back into a sort of rhythm again. The summer really threw off where I was going and what I had planned. It was like I was on a clear path for the first half of the year, and then everything just got knocked off the tracks. I'm trying to pull myself back on and adjusting the course as necessary, but still not sure where I'm going to end up.

I know that's all a bit convoluted, but that's because it's like that in my head - all muddled, with only a few sure things to lead the way.

In the meantime, a friend forwarded me this link to an interesting post by Amal El-Mohtar, which was in response to this post by author Elizabeth Moon. Just to sum up, Moon is to be honoured at Wiscon next year as an esteemed Guest of Honour. The issue at hand is that Wiscon is the "world's leading feminist science-fiction/fantasy convention." Moon's post, however, is very problematic, to put it mildly. The Wiscon conference committee released a statement that they did not intend to rescind Ms. Moon's Guest of Honour-ship, but that they hoped the conference would be a place for further dialogue on the issues.

I won't give additional credence to Moon's post by reproducing it here in any of its parts, but here's a bit from El-Mohtar's response:

"I can't help but wonder, if Moon had said that 'many Black people possess all the virtues of civilised persons,' there would have been any 'controversy' at all. Or, to forestall the 'race and religion are different!' arguments, if she had said 'many Jews possess all the virtues of civilised persons.' Basically, if she had expressed bigotry that can't masquerade as a political leaning or a concern for national security, would there be any soul-searching over what to do? Would the committee co-chairs still be 'committed to making WisCon a place where all may participate and be heard'?

For me, it's a tough call with regard to the conference because the other Guest of Honour next year is Nisi Shawl, whom I deeply respect and admire. At the same time, Wiscon is a feminist, progressive conference. It is one of the only spaces of its kind where people of like mind can gather and move dialogue forward. It is one of the few places where discussions around power and privilege are part of the programming and actually take place, front and center, in all their honesty, ugliness, mess and, at times, enlightenment.

Do read the posts if you get a chance. The comments after El-Mohtar's post are lengthy, but worth the read, too.

To Be Or Not To Be . . . Political, That Is

Fellow Deb, Sarah Ockler, put up this beautiful review of SHINE on the YA blog, The Contemps. It brought tears to my eyes because Sarah contextualized SHINE within the recent controversy surrounding the "Ground Zero Mosque" and Quran burning hoopla. And this resonated, especially, because I've been noticing, clearly stated on some agent sites, that those particular agents prefer not to work with authors who have "political" blogs, or who write "politically polarizing" posts on their blogs.

But here's the thing. For some people, being "political" is not a choice. Stating that racism, sexism, homophobia, classism, etc., exist - to some folks - is simply stating a reality, while others have the luxury (privilege) to choose not to address it, engage with it, or even acknowledge it. I'm not really sure what a polarizing political post is - maybe a call to action? But I do think it's good for agents to state their preferences, just as I think it's good for writers to continue stating their views. Because, really, there are no apolitical views.  The political runs through our day-to-day lives, whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. Choosing not to write political posts IS a political act. Choosing not to see "colour" or race IS a political act. Choosing not to engage in discourse around power and privilege is exercizing that very privilege, and it is most definitely a political act.

What Happens If

The South Asia Solidarity Initiative has put forward a response to this TIME Magazine article titled, "What Happens If We Leave Afghanistan." With the strong emotional response an image like that of Aisha on the cover of TIME elicits, it's especially important to read other takes on the issue. Sometimes we get so overwhelmed by strong emotional responses (and the image of Aisha certainly draws justified rage and sheer devastation), that we don't take the time to see the full picture.

Certainly read TIME's post, if you feel so inclined. But then go and read the response to it -- here is an excerpt:

The August 9, 2010 issue of TIME magazine featured a striking cover photograph of an 18-year-old Afghan woman, Aisha, who was disfigured by the Taliban last year.  The cover title read, “What happens if we leave Afghanistan.”  While Aisha’s story and the stories of many other women like her may depict some part of the reality of women’s lives under the Taliban, TIME’s conclusion that continuing the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan is necessary, is highly misleading and troubling. [. . .]

For the last decade, the occupying forces of the U.S. and its NATO allies have nourished warlords and supported a corrupt government, leading many to join the Taliban and increasing their influence across Afghanistan. Increased civilian deaths, a fundamentalist resurgence, and deadly bombing raids have led to a devastated country and a Taliban stronger than ever before. TIME’s claim to “illuminate what is actually happening on the ground” falsely equates the last decade of occupation with progress. The occupation has not and will not bring democracy to Afghanistan, nor will it bring liberation to Afghan women. Instead, it has exacerbated deep-seated corruption in the government, the widespread abuse of women’s rights and human rights by fundamentalists, including Karzai’s allies, and stymied critical infrastructure development in the country. The question should not be “what happens if we leave Afghanistan,” the question should be “what happened when we invaded Afghanistan” and “what happens if we stay in Afghanistan.”

Racism and Misogyny are often used against one another, to justify the existence of one over the other. In this case, "protecting the women" seems to be the guise under which US racism and imperialism justify their presence. The truth is that both racism and misogyny go hand in hand. Where there is one, the other always lurks nearby.

Read the rest of SASI's response here.

On Terminology

I've seen the word "Caucasian" used to describe white people often enough that I feel compelled to do a post on it.

First off, here is the term as defined by dictionary.reference.com:

"Anthropology. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of one of the traditional racial divisions of humankind, marked by fair to dark skin, straight to tightly curled hair, and light to very dark eyes, and originally inhabiting Europe, parts of North Africa, western Asia, and India: no longer in technical use."

The above definition, and this one on wiki which corroborates it, would mean that I would, technically, be considered Caucasian. As would Morrocans, Algerians, Iranians, Iraqis, Pakistanis, Indians, and many other peoples of colour. It's obvious to me that most of the references I've seen to "Caucasian" are not intended to include myself, or any other people of colour. My guess is that in these instances, the writer actually means to say "white folks". This seems to be a very North American usage of the term. If you read the above-linked wiki entry, and any other info on the topic, really, you'll get a sense for why the term "Caucasian" is problematic, and how it has been rooted in racist and racially-motivated designations (that have nothing to do with reality).

The term irks me, in particular, because I am always reminded of the United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind case whenever I see/hear it. As anyone who has ever taken an Asian Studies class probably knows, this was the case of Bhagat Singh Thind, a Punjabi Sikh man, who argued with the US courts that, because he was technically Caucasian and Aryan, he was entitled to become a naturalized citizen of the US, according to the 1790 statute governing naturalization.*

As you might imagine, this threw the courts in a tizzy and all kinds of new findings were brought about, and stuff was re-worded to make it abundantly clear that when the word "Caucasian" was used in the 1790 statute, the writers WERE NOT referring to brown people. According to wiki, "The Court found that the authors of the 1790 statute probably ascribed to 'the Adamite theory of creation' and understood 'white people' in its popular, and not scientific, sense."

After the Thind decision, not only was he not allowed to become a naturalized citizen, all Indian-Americans who had become citizens before that point had their status retroactively revoked. They were stripped of their land, rights, and citizenship. More than half of the Indian-Americans, who had settled on US soil as land-owning citizens, at that point left the US.

So, the term is a loaded one, and dotted with racial/racist history. I know many folks use the term "Caucasian" to mean white people, particularly here in the US. I don't know if it's supposed to be more polite than saying "white" or if it somehow sounds more like a technical (therefore, more valid?) term, akin to "African-American" or "Asian-American" (but then why not "European-American"?), but it is one that I, personally, cringe at every single time I read it or hear it.

*The complexities of why he should choose to argue this at all is for another post.

More Links

Check out Nnedi's post on FGM and her right to address the issue in fiction - even while some argue she has no such right because she is not African "enough", or that she is a witch, or that she has never experienced it herself or witnessed a ceremony. Some of the comments make interesting points - my comment is somewhere near the bottom, shortly after a post-racialist one, arguing that because we have Obama, and the likes of Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, and Clarence Thomas, racism in the US has essentially been stamped out. Ha. I did not have the energy or inclination to respond to that one.

And here are a few links to articles about what's going on in Toronto around the G20/G8 summit riots. It pains me as a Torontonian to see these, but they're no different from what's going on everywhere. Here's an article with more info from CBC Canada; and here's one from Xtra!. And here's a video with commentary at the end. The interesting stuff, for me, was before the reporter's commentary :P . . .

Black History Month: A Focus on Haiti

In honour of the fact that it is Black History Month, I wanted to highlight a couple of quotes from a very powerful article I recently read by Shannon Joyce Prince on Racialicious, called "Why Haiti Matters: Barack Obama and the Larger Discourse on Haiti." Ms. Prince hits on so many important points about what's going on politically and economically on that part of the island, and puts it all squarely within a historical framework. And since it is Black History Month, in my view, her essay points to exactly the kinds of things we should be reflecting on, in addition to award winners and the heroes of the past. In Haiti, there are heroes RIGHT NOW who are not winning any awards, and are looking for solidarity, for hope, and for those who can, to stand shoulder to shoulder with them in their struggle...
Says Ms. Prince: "Let’s be clear, if you’re running a race I repeatedly trip you, it’s a bit rich for me to claim you’re “progress-resistant”[...] If I break in your house and steal all your possessions, it would be inaccurate for someone to say that your house is empty because you’re simply poor instead of that you’ve been robbed. If I repeatedly burglarize your house because I’m stronger and it profits me and you can’t fight back, I have no grounds to wonder what innate failing you have that leads to your house being perpetually empty. Nor can I legitimately tell others that if they want to help you have a furnished house they should ignore my past and continued plundering and focus on changing what’s allegedly wrong with you. If I regularly rob you, and those robberies are a matter of public record, it would be silly, to say the least, for your neighbors to wonder, perplexedly, why you don’t have any furniture. If I steal a fortune from you and then give you pennies, it’s ridiculous for me to claim that I’m giving you aid."

and this:

"We are responsible for overwhelming the television programs, newspapers, internet websites, and other forms of media that twist the story of Haiti with letters of protest and correction until the tale of the island is accurately told. We are responsible for sending resources to Haiti responsibly – and recognizing such transfers of resources as small payments on a very large debt – not aid. We are responsible for standing in watchful solidarity with Haiti as governments and investors seek to profit from its misery. It is not for our nation to tell Haiti what it should become – Haiti has never had a poverty of vision. We are responsible for helping the dream of those tortured and daring slaves who attained an improbable freedom, that dream that now belongs to the descendants of those slaves who elected a humble priest as president, to come true. At a time when the powerful will suggest that further domination of Haiti will actually mediate the damage that First World domination of Haiti has heretofore caused, we are responsible for ensuring respect for the nation’s sovereignty and dignity. Haiti is bravery and resistance and majesty and strength. That’s why Haiti matters."

The entire essay is powerful and illuminating. Go read it.

Yearning for Freedom; and Some News!

So many things to blog about today. I was originally going to come here and do a post about my thoughts on the film Amelia, which I saw last night. But because there are other, more timely issues to blog about, I'll just give you a quick summary:

To put it in a nutshell, it was an interesting film. I was mildly interested in watching it at first--not sure which aspect of Ms. Earhart's life would be broached and/or sensationalized. But when I found out that Mira Nair directed it, I was immediately more interested. I kept thinking, as I watched, about how colonization is so much more than the invasion of nations. It is the thorough and devastating invasion of bodies, minds, and souls. Specifically, I thought about the colonization of women's bodies, minds, and souls.

Amelia Earhart was a wealthy white woman who ran with the politically elite. Her husband was George Putnam, as in G.P. Putnam & Sons--the mega-publisher. Earhart had dinner with the Roosevelts. She could afford flying lessons. And yet, she was still a woman in a patriarchal, sexist world. She was still often treated like a child (something PoC encounter on a regular basis), and many decisions were made for her by the men in her life, often "for her own good." She bucked many conventions of her time and she yearned to be free. Something so many of us can relate to.

What caught me by surprise was how sad I was at the end. I knew what the ending was, and history has recorded how Ms. Earhart died, and still, I could not stop the flow of tears. Here is my favourite quote from the movie: "Everyone has oceans to fly, as long as you have the heart to do it. Is it reckless? Maybe. But what do dreams know of boundaries?" --Amelia Earhart, 1897-1937.

Another quote that has resonated for me on this particular day is "Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle." That one is from Martin Luther King, Jr. And how ironic that today I should read about yet another furor, online, over the whitewashing of a book cover. Once again, it is the Bloomsbury team, deciding that a cover with a white model depicting a protagonist who is "brown-skinned" will sell more books, that is at issue. Several posts have been written on the topic already: Ari's heartfelt, powerful open letter, Susan's post/s, and the post and ensuing discussion over at The Story Siren.

I agree with Zetta's sentiment on her blog, "I don’t have time to respond to all the ignorant remarks...", particularly because there are so many. But I do LOVE that there are bloggers out there who see this issue as something that affects them, and are taking it on themselves, or as allies. Brava to you! The only thing that really irked me in the comments I read was the suggestion that those who are outraged about the cover should somehow be "nicer" in their outrage. Let me just point out that sometimes PoC, women, LGBTQ folks, the working class, and other people who've had their voices marginalized, get angry. When you're being battered on a daily basis, you're bound to get a little pissed. And then, if you see people you love--your little brother, your cousin, your mom, your child, your grandpa--relentlessly battered as well, you'll not likely reach out lovingly, softly, compassionately, to "teach" someone that their silence is not only NOT helping you, but that it is helping to keep the very systems in place that bruise and batter you every single day. To tell people who've had long histories of violence, subjugation, brutality, colonization, and/or slavery, that it would be better for them to be "nice" about their pain and outrage at being erased yet again -- because they might hurt someone else's feelings, otherwise -- is really another way of saying "shut up." It truly is. Audre Lorde's famous quote, "Your silence will not protect you" comes to mind; the extension of that being, "Your silence will not help others."

The other thing I wanted to blog about today, that I really shouldn't put last -- but I've written this post in the order things happened today -- is this: some of you know that I am writing in another genre under a pen name. Well, today, I received an offer for my first full-length novel in that genre, and I couldn't be more delighted. I will not reveal my pen name on this blog, nor provide any more information than I just did, but suffice it to say that if you do discover my alternate identity, I will not deny it's me :).

Wishing you all a thoughtful, reflective MLK, Jr. Day as we celebrate one man's message and his life's work.

Brave Dissenting Voices

This past weekend, at a poetry workshop for mentors and mentees of Girls Write Now, I was introduced to HBO's Brave New Voices series. As one of the mentors in the series says, the series proves that not all young people consume mass media culture without questioning it, challenging it, and raising their voices against it. Many (if not most) young people--young adults--are out there actively dissenting--actively and *critically* engaging in the world around them. Railing and shouting in the face of corporate and media giants that muzzle true creativity; the forces of imperialism and colonialism; and oppression and injustice of all kinds.

Check out the below clips of teens letting the fire rage through them; crackling, regenerating, and transforming . . . as it creates hope, and breathes new life.

Here's 15-year-old Alexis, of Team New York City, y'all:



And Aysha, a junior at the University of Pennsylvania:



And Jamaica, "A self-described 'mixed mutt' in ethnic background, Jamaica says, 'I'm Hawaiian, Chinese, German, Portuguese, English, Irish and French. I am almost a quarter Hawaiian and definitely identify mostly as a Hawaiian.'":



Watching these young people rage and express makes my heart swell with pride. It gives me the push I need to keep writing work that speaks to their experience, and reflects their realities. As we head toward Thanksgiving weekend, these videos remind me that Love is the motivating spark behind all true and great creative expression.

Writers On Writing: Nikki Giovanni and Sonia Sanchez

Here is part one of a candid conversation with Nikki Giovanni and Sonia Sanchez where they talk about poetry, activism, politics, art and community. It's slightly dated (Tupac was still alive at the time of its taping), but still worth watching. They are interesting, have a lot of combined wisdom and experience between them, and just plain fun...

Countdown

In light of some recent hate crimes against South Asian Americans and those perceived to be Muslim (in one attack, the victim was called "Obama"), SAALT (South Asian Americans Leading Together) has re-issued a "basic fact sheet about hate crimes." They also list the reported crimes from September to present.

What's interesting is that these attacks took place in NY and NJ -- both solid blue states in this past election.