The Hugo Awards have always been “political,” in the sense that people campaigned for them (even though I guess that was officially frowned upon.) And they were political, in that they were seen as a reflection of who gets recognition for writing science fiction and fantasy. When the nominees are mostly white men, as they have been during most eras except for the mid-1990s and the past five years, it does send a message about whose work is going to be considered valuable. Read more here.
COLLEGE FEMINISMS: “What White Publishers Won’t Print:” Systemic Racism in (Institutionalized) Knowledge Production
The consistent rejection of diversity in publishing is a paradox. As the industry attempts to stay current, relevant, and malleable in an increasingly digital age, it can no longer afford to deny Black and Brown authors and audiences. Academic and university presses must be accountable to diversity quotas, if not because it makes them money. More ethically, however, publishing is a pillar of cultural and knowledge production and must be all-inclusive because presses have a duty, onus, or what ever you may call it in cultural production. Presses have the power to orchestrate the circulation of knowledge and without the institutional commitment to eradicating injustice they’re asleep at the wheel. Read more here.
When you add in the fact that the majority of the 54 million Latinos in the U.S. are bilingual and yet very few children’s books are bilingual you have a tremendous gap in books that can speak to this community and its culture, particularly the parents. That means they don’t see themselves in the children’s books distributed at their schools, stocked in their local libraries or sold in bookstores. The effect of this invisibility and absence in children’s books is dramatic and negatively affects the self-esteem of these children. Read more here.