Queer Crime Writers

 Just because my books are straight white male oriented doesn’t mean I’m not sensitive to those who aren’t straight white males. I’m a straight white male, so those are the characters I’m most comfortable writing. I’ve tried to make my books more diverse over the years, but it can be awkward for someone of my background.

 

This past spring’s Malice Domestic conference brought Queer Crime Writers to my attention. I spoke with a friend of mine who is a member and he suggested I get in touch with John Copenhaver, who I knew casually.

 

Today John answers my questions about QCW, as well as talking about some of the hurdles queer writers and characters have to clear, and what straight cisgendered writers can do to help. I learned a lot, and my future books will be better for it.

 

One Bite at a Time: Thanks for coming on the blog, John. It’s great to have you.

 

Queer Crime Writers is a relatively new organization, founded in 2019. What was the motivation to begin the group?

 

John Copenhaver: From the beginning, QCW was Kristen Lepionka’s brainchild. She identified the need early on. There was no centralized community or support network for queer crime writers aside from a few Facebook groups. Kristen reached out to Jeff Marks and me, and we began brainstorming. We’d seen the great things that Crime Writers of Color had accomplished, and we wanted to create a similar organization to support aspiring and published LGBTQ+ writers. Then, COVID hit, and life became much more complex. Eventually, we began meeting and established a groups.io chat and a website. We also added more organizers, including Stephanie Gayle and Marco Carocari.

 

OBAAT: The QCW mission statement reads, in part, “to promote community and collaboration among authors of crime fiction who identify as LGBTQIA+.” How do you do that?

 

JC: We began with a groups.io chat that established a closed, queer crime writers-only space to come together, share ideas, network, and celebrate each other’s work. This in-facing community-building aspect is central, but we also want ourselves to be a resource for readers and the broader crime writing community, so we developed a website that features our authors, their books (as well as books of notable LGBTQ crime writer luminaries), and an events calendar. We also established a relationship with CrimeReads to publish a quarterly round-up of queer crime books coming out seasonally. We produce a quarterly newsletter and invite liaisons with established crime writing organizations like Mystery Writers of America, Bouchercon, International Thriller Writers, Left Coast Crime, etc. We also hope to continue to be a presence at conferences by hosting a table and Queer Crime Writer meet-up whenever possible.

 

OBAAT: I used to work for a company that sent its pre-sales technical staff (such as myself) to customer sites to conduct what they called FIND interviews. “FIND” stood for Facts, Issues, Needs, and Dreams. How would you answer those from a QCW perspective?

 

·       What are the facts of the situation as they exist today?

 

JC: Queer-identifying crime writers are still underrepresented in publishing and in the broader crime reading and writing community. For instance, in 2023 crime fiction anthologies featured a total of 517 stories across 30 titles. Five out of 517 stories were written by LGBTQ+ writers. That’s less than 1 percent. That’s not acceptable. Of course, we understand we are a majority, but the stats don’t fit the size of the population of queer crime writers.

 

·       What issues do you face?

 

JC: Homophobia and transphobia in the publishing, writing, and reading community. While I’m sure some folks are openly biased, I believe most of it is an unconscious bias that emerges in the mind of the biased publisher, editor, agent, writer, reader, or event organizer as a preference or aesthetic sensibility. They can’t imagine a tough guy detective who likes men or a trans lawyer who is a bad-ass lawyer. They say to themselves that the book’s not for them or that the book won’t sell, but that’s just unconscious bias playing out, and it’s a failure of imagination. If we can move beyond that unconscious bias, we can make real strides. To do so means getting the community to discover the imaginative joy of reading and writing a counternarrative, the thrill of telling a story about a queer character that’s surprising because it breaks down old stereotypes.

 

·       What do you need to happen?

 

JC: We need allies to reach out, offer support, and read our books. If you read a wonderful queer mystery or thriller, tell folks about it, share it on social media. If you are building a panel or event, reach out to us or our members. While it’s wonderful to have a strong and supportive in-facing community, it’s getting the greater crime reading and writing community involved that’s necessary for lasting change.

 

·       In this context, what would a perfect world look like?

 

JC: In a perfect world, we’d have no need for this organization because our stories would whole equal status in the minds of mainstream publishing and have a broad readership.

 

OBAAT: Full disclosure: I am an aging (68 years old), straight, cisgendered, white male. What should I be aware of to most accurately and fairly depict LGBTQIA+ characters?

 

JC: So, I’ve been on many LGBTQ+ writers' panels, and we’re often asked a question similar to yours. Usually, a panelist will say: “do your research,” or “do your homework,” or mention some tropes to avoid, like “the gay best friend” (i.e., queer characters shouldn’t be the support staff for your straight journey to self-understanding) or “bury your gays” (i.e., tragic queer characters shouldn’t be written as fodder for straight catharsis. Don’t kill us so that you can come to terms with your homophobia.). Most problematic LGBTQ+ tropes result from centering straight lives in queer stories. While I’m not sure all my fellow queer crime writers would agree, I support cis-hetero authors writing queer characters and even making them point-of-view characters, but you should investigate your reasons for doing so. Do you have a compelling, humanistic reason for including character?  Are you willing to do the research? Are you willing to address your biases, especially those sneaky unconscious biases? Or are you just trying to chase a trend? If you’re chasing a trend, you’ll almost always fail to write a compelling LGBTQ+ character. Also, if you plan to include queer characters, be an advocate for queer writers.

.

OBAAT: When I was growing up and first became aware of such things, “queer” was an insult. Now it’s a term that is self-applied. Is the use context-dependent, or is it only appropriate for use by members who identify as such?

 

JC: “Queer” as a term emerged during the 1980 in academia and, now, has broadly been accepted as a catch-all term synonymous with LGBTQIA+. It’s a lot easier to say than the acronym, and it’s okay for non-queer people to use it as long as it’s spoken in a supportive and affirming way. It’s an adjective, so it’s okay to say “Queer people” or “Queer Crime Writers,” but avoid the noun “the queers” or “Are you a queer?” That’s offensive. The noun version is reductive; the adjective is descriptive. My sexuality is part of me (adjective), but not all of me (noun).

 

I know and appreciate that some older gay men don’t like the term, but it’s fallen into common usage and is here to stay, I think.

 

OBAAT: Which straight crime writers get LGBTQIA+ characters best? Not necessarily the most flattering, but most accurately and fairly?

 

JC: Laurie King did a fantastic job with her Kate Martinelli series and has a substantial gay and lesbian following because of it. Her new character, Raquel Laing, in Back in the Garden is also written in a balanced and compelling fashion. When I heard about the concept of Shawn Cosby’s Razorblade Tears, I raised my eyebrows—two men revenging the murderers of their gay sons—but Shawn, sensitive to the issues surrounding the portrayal of queer characters, balances the narrative beautifully. It’s a great example of how to write a straight redemption story without reducing the queer characters to pawns. It’s not an easy feat, but he did it effectively.

 

Thanks to John Copenhaver for taking the time to supply such thoughtful and thought-provoking answers. If you’d like to learn more about Queer Crime Writers, you can visit their website.

 

 

The Times, They are A'Changin'

Otto Penzler opened his annual controversy last week with an intemperate response to Houghton Mifflin Harcourt’s decision to choose another editor for their Best American Mystery Stories anthology. (Editor’s Note: Otto took down his post so I have included a verbatim copy below so no one can say I slanted his opinion.)

The most charitable spin to Otto’s statement is he is an aging white man who hasn’t evolved with the times. It’s a failure as old as history. Things once commonly accepted prove not to be true. Apollo’s chariot does not traverse the sky to bring daylight. The stars and planets do not revolve around the Earth. The Earth is not flat. White men are not inherently superior in any regard; openly accepting the contributions of others into any aspect of society can only improve it.

It is unlikely HMH would have replaced Otto had they felt his choices reflected the current state of crime fiction. One can argue that his dismissal was a politically correct marketing ploy, but that implies, had Otto opened things up more on his own, they would have felt no need to replace him.

Otto’s own comment allows one to reasonably infer he wasn’t open to accepting more diversity: “This means that stories will no longer be selected for excellence, the major criterion evidently now being the race, ethnicity, or sexual preference of the author.” That’s yet another example of the death of irony in America, as, looking back, it appears race and ethnicity were criteria in Otto’s selections.

There’s another layer of privilege here that hasn’t gotten nearly enough mention: Where does Otto Penzler get off deciding it is his divine right to choose each year’s Best American Mystery Stories in perpetuity? Is he the only person, white or otherwise, qualified to be the arbiter of what is “best?” Even if the Aryan Brotherhood started an annual “Best White American Mystery Stories” anthology, one could argue a different editor each year would create a more representative selection over time.

I wish Otto Penzler no ill will; I’ve never met the man. No one disputes his enormous contributions to crime fiction over the years. That said, publishing, and hopefully society in general, is turning a corner. The new direction is clear. The ruckus raised by those who find themselves left behind is evidence of the desperation born of their realization this is true. The train to a better world is leaving the station, and they lack the currency to buy a ticket. There’s room for everyone, but they’ll have to make some changes in themselves if they are earn the means to ride inside the coach.

(The Facebook post I refer to in this commentary is below:
Hi All--A couple of days ago I posted that Houghton Mifflin Harcourt had decided not to renew my tenure as the series editor for THE BEST AMERICAN MYSTERY STORIES OF THE YEAR. My heart was warmed by the many supportive comments and the kind words about me and the series. I was stunned by the news and didn't understand the motivation for it, and many of you had theories. I now have an answer. According to an announcement from the editor-in-chief of HMH on Monday, the series "is going in an exciting new direction in response to the changing market and evolving readership and with an increased focus on traditionally marginalized voices." This means that stories will no longer be selected for excellence, the major criterion evidently now being the race, ethnicity, or sexual preference of the author. Forgive my bitterness. First off, I published lots of black writers and probably more than I knew since I never required a photo ID. I also published some writers who I know are gay but, again, doubtless others whose sexual preferences were unknown to me--as they should be. No one was marginalized when my first reader Michele Slung, and I, and the guest editors, sought the best stories. I'm now glad that I was not asked to stay on as I never would have agreed to edit a book on these terms. It's not over. I'll make an announcement soon.)

Diversity Fridays

Full disclosure: I am a cisgender white male who can only be referred to as “middle-aged” by exercising more charity than Andrew Carnegie and J.K. Rowling combined. (Even fuller disclosure: I’m 63.) I have always tried to treat others as I would like to be treated and I think I succeed more often than not. Cisgender white men have a lot to answer for in this country. I try not to add to the pile, and to chip away it at when I can.

My reading tastes, as are those of most everyone, were shaped by my background. I grew up in a working class family in a working class town; the first writer to capture my imagination as I moved past adolescence was Mickey Spillane. Anyone who reads this blog or my books knows my reading tastes run toward procedurals and private investigators. That’s a polite way of saying my reading is not as diverse as it might be.

I’ve made efforts to rectify this with limited success. Personal taste and knows and cares little or nothing about the background of the artist who created a work; we know what we like. The reasons may be no more than what I told The Beloved Spouse™ once when she asked why I didn’t like broccoli: “Because I think it tastes like ass.” That’s too harsh for (most) books, but still true at its core; we like what we like. I have a post dedicated to this topic that I’ll publish as soon as I polish it to my satisfaction and have the nerve to make it public.

It occurred to me a while back that just because my reading tastes run strongly toward white males doesn’t mean I can’t do some little thing in the interest of diversity. I don’t have a big enough footprint in the industry for anyone to care if I stage a protest. I’m not in a position to demand Bouchercon have at least one woman and one person of color on any panel they assign me; they’ll just put someone else there and not give me a panel. (Which is as they should. Who the fuck do I think I am?) I am proud of my affiliation and support of the Creatures, Crimes, and Creativity Conference, which is as diverse as any I am aware of.

What I can do is provide a forum. This blog isn’t exactly HuffPo or TMZ, but people do see it and share links. The word gets out. I post three times every two weeks, on alternate Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. I can devote some of that time to women and writers of color, preferably in the crime fiction community but if I’m to be diverse in one regard I should be so across the board, so I’m not locking anyone out.

Here’s my offer: Fridays are diversity days here at One Bite at a Time. If you are a woman or a writer of color and would like to provide a guest post or submit to an interview, please let me know by sending an email to danakingcrime (at) gmail.com. Let me know if you have a general time preference, the title of your book, your web site address if you have one and anything else you’d like me to know at first blush. I will do my best to schedule you as close to your preferred date as I can, and if you request an interview will gin up an admittedly generic version for you, though the more information I can get about you and your book the less generic it will be.

Please understand, my time and space is limited, but I will do the best I can to accommodate as many folks as I can, though I can’t guarantee space for everyone who asks. (Assuming anyone does. See above: “Who the fuck do I think I am?”)

If you’re interested, let me know. If you’re not but know someone who might be, let them know. I’ll keep it up as long as interest is shown.