A Question About "Period Pieces" and propriety

Okay, this question pops up every now and then.

For those who are offended by such, here’s a trigger warning. The ‘N’ word follows.

It’s coming.

Brace yourself, Gentle Reader.

Be aware.

If you’re going to be traumatized, be elsewhere.

So, here goes.

Nigger.

It’s an ugly word, a word I don’t like, a word with too much dark history associated. The world would be better off if it had never been spoken.

But it’s just a word.

Now that I’ve overcome my repugnance and used it, the world continues to turn. The seas are not boiling, the sun has not gone black, the moon has not turned to blood.

The point I am trying to make (and, as usual, am fumbling with) is that we should not be afraid of words. Even bad ones.

Being afraid is entirely different than being cautious or being courteous. There is too much timorousness evident whenever this topic comes up, almost as if merely muttering the devil’s name will bring him into our midst.

It’s a word, dammit. If used carelessly, it should be challenged. If intentionally used to hurt, then its use is something to be instantly and utterly condemned. But the reality is that one cannot look at certain times and places without it being there.

Granted that the issue is complicated by the very nature of this site, but one cannot write something of the slightest depth about, say, the antebellum South or July 1967 Detroit without that word being central. Dry essays and moralistic polemics on history and race relations are possible, perhaps, but any kind of emotional tale involving people actually speaking without that word being used risks Bowdlerizing insipidness.

We mock our Victorian ancestors for their sexual prissiness, for their pretences that some things didn’t exist. Is this any different?

“But,” someone will reply, “all that nonsense was just prudery gone wild. It didn’t hurt anybody and the N-word does hurt!”

I suspect a Victorian matron, intelligent and well-meaning, would differ. How horrible it would be, how emotionally painful it would become if people could just walk around dropping the F-word, the S-word or the P-word or, God forbid, the V-word!

“But words have power!”

So they do, but only that power which we ourselves give them. Let’s not give this one any more power by being too frightened to whisper it, a racial ‘He who must not be named!’

Enough rant. ‘Nigger’ is a bad word. It’s one I don’t use in my daily life and I’ve never used it in writing fiction. But it’s just a word and, sometimes, the only word that works. Be aware of its history, be aware of its potential to hurt, but let’s stop behaving like it’s a satanic spell. Use it when absolutely necessary and then don’t lose sleep over it.
 
Last edited:
Of course your postings were rabid. Glad to see you're cooling down. You're obviously wrong about no black ever tolerating the use of "negro," since the word was used in titles of black organizations at one time.
The word has been used throughout history. In todays environment it is unnacceptable... In most circles of our society...
The fact in history people were indifferent to others. Today it is not the case...
My response was not rabid, simply stating how I feel... I stated quite clearly. It was only my opinion...
I'm a member of several minorities, one being gay... I have heard all kinds of language used to describe members of my circle... All of which I consider offensive...

The fact certain language was acceptable in the 19th century doesn't mean it's OK today...

Cagivagurl
 
I'm in your corner on this. I am not afraid to use whatever word is appropriate to the story. But I don't want to seen needlessly insulting or transgressive to readers either.

Yup. I think the best motivation for fussing over this kind of thing is not the fear of being yelled at but the desire for readers to have a good time.

I don't think I follow that. What's the hangup?

The term "historical accuracy" makes it clear, I think, that "accuracy" refers to how people actually communicated then rather than a judgment about whether the terms used are "accurate" in some other sense.

Historical accuracy is a good thing, but an author who wants to use that as an explanation for filling a story with 1950s racism/sexism/etc. had best be sure that their concern for accuracy is equally evident in other aspects of the story. If they're leaning heavily on "historical accuracy" to justify that content but there are glaring anachronisms elsewhere, readers might reasonably suspect that it's not really about accuracy.
 
That's now, this was then. You have to look at it in the context of the period. Nothing worse than writing a period story and using modern terminology. That rather throws one out of the story. When you're writing something like this it's a balance between historical accuracy and at times offending modern sensibilities - and language changes.

My personal take is, historical accuracy first and foremost. Anyone who's offended by historical accuracy probably shouldn't be reading it.

I'd liken it to the use of "orientals" which, if you read stuff from the 30's and 40's, was quite common, as was "Asiatics". Fu Manchu springs to mind. Not common now, and offensive to some thin-skinned persons of Asian origin, but again, historicall accurate if you're writing in that period, as was the slang use of Nips and Chinks. Doesn;t offend me at all, it was what it was, but I'm not thin-skinned. LOL

Possibly not the best of examples, since Fu Manchu was extremely racist, in ways that went far beyond the language.
 
The fact certain language was acceptable in the 19th century doesn't mean it's OK today...
Quite so. To use certain words in normal conversation is to be deplored. I do wonder, of course, what terms you and I, with the best of intentions, are using today which will be judged as horribly inappropriate in the 22nd century? How much scorn we, in our present innocence of future propriety, must be prepared to accept!
 
Last edited:
Our reading lists seem to contain a lot of overlap.

Which of your stories was it?
The Regency one was "Midnight at the Villa Diodati"

The Anglo Saxon one was "Huginn's Yule."

"One Night in Xanadu" was more old Chinese....

Those were the ones where I really paid a lot of attention to the language used and the way they spoke
 
Possibly not the best of examples, since Fu Manchu was extremely racist, in ways that went far beyond the language.
LOL. No kidding. I was actually trying to write a story with Fu Manchu as part of the background and when you read some of the novels - lol - I cracked up.

Some of the old British novels from that period are similar. I have a collection of old Biggles novels and oh my, "Biggles in the Orient." Very British in the attitude to Asiatics and Orientals.

1720565021068.png
 
Okay, this question pops up every now and then.

For those who are offended by such, here’s a trigger warning. The ‘N’ word follows.

It’s coming.

Brace yourself, Gentle Reader.
Yes, there are a few words like that that I wouldn't choose to use regardless, which goes to show I guess that it's a matter of degree of offensiveness.

I wouldn't even hesitate to use Oriental for example, but that's rather less offensive and with far fewer connotations than the dreaded N word.
 
Quite so. To use certain words in normal conversation is to be deplored. I do wonder, of course, what terms you and I, with the best of intentions, are using today which will be judged as horribly inappropriate in the 22nd century? How much scorn we, in our present innocence of future propriety, must be prepared to accept!
Agreed....
We may be embarrassed to find words of common usage do become offensive. A very good point.

Cagivagurl
 
The word has been used throughout history. In todays environment it is unnacceptable... In most circles of our society...
The fact in history people were indifferent to others. Today it is not the case...
My response was not rabid, simply stating how I feel... I stated quite clearly. It was only my opinion...
I'm a member of several minorities, one being gay... I have heard all kinds of language used to describe members of my circle... All of which I consider offensive...

The fact certain language was acceptable in the 19th century doesn't mean it's OK today...

Cagivagurl
You need to reread your own posts on this thread (especially #13). You are trying to move the goalposts on the tone and content of your posts here.
 
Yes, there are a few words like that that I wouldn't choose to use regardless, which goes to show I guess that it's a matter of degree of offensiveness.

I wouldn't even hesitate to use Oriental for example, but that's rather less offensive and with far fewer connotations than the dreaded N word.
It's the same for a lot of us. As a proud member of the gay community. We use words that are considered offensive. We made a conscious decision to own them. Make them ours. We use them jokingly. We use them to poke fun at the people who use them offensively.

I'm sure that's true of every ethnicity on the planet. As well as religious groups.

Cagivagurl
 
I don't think the real issue with use of problematic words is that they may offend some people or that they may not be historically accurate. It's that they risk violating one of the fundamental rules that I assume every writer tries to follow.

Don't take your reader out of the story. You want them reading along, following and enjoying th story. You don't put speed bumps in front of them. You really don't put road blocks in front of them.
 
You need to reread your own posts on this thread (especially #13). You are trying to move the goalposts on the tone and content of your posts here.
No... I don't think so. Of course... You are entitled to your opinion.

Cagivagurl
 
Sorry, I should have added... By present day society. Which hopefully you are a member of...

Cagivagurl

I surely am, and my replies in this thread reflect that.

But we're specifically talking to an OP who wants to know about stories that are NOT set in present day society. So your comment didn't fit.

And Keith is right. You're trying to move the goalposts. Stop that. You made a sweeping statement that was easily refuted, and now you're trying to weasel out by claiming it was "just your opinion." I don't think it adds anything to the conversation.
 
Don't take your reader out of the story. You want them reading along, following and enjoying th story. You don't put speed bumps in front of them. You really don't put road blocks in front of them.
The golden rule.

Whatever you write has to be within the context of the story. If you're writing something in a historical setting, you also have to convey that setting and period in a way that maintains the fantasy in the readers head, while still telling the story and keeping the reader immersed in both the story and the setting, something which the best historical novelists are really good at. I use Mary Renault as an example because she was a genius at it, taking you back to the time of Alexander the Great, and what was essentially a rather alien culture (to us) and immersing you in it, in a way that felt completely natural. The use of language and words in that historical setting play a big part in that, as does the behavior of the characters. An 18th century characters openly behaving and speaking as one does now just throws one right out of the story.

If the Duke of Wellington, for example, said "Person of Color," and not "damned blackamoor" you'd laugh your head of and be thrown right out of the story.
 
Last edited:
I surely am, and my replies in this thread reflect that.

But we're specifically talking to an OP who wants to know about stories that are NOT set in present day society. So your comment didn't fit.

And Keith is right. You're trying to move the goalposts. Stop that. You made a sweeping statement that was easily refuted, and now you're trying to weasel out by claiming it was "just your opinion." I don't think it adds anything to the conversation.
I am in no way trying to weasel out.
I stand by what I said.
I believe a story written today set in a bygone era can still be written accurately and tell the tale without using language that will offend a large majority of modern day society. The story will not be read by people of that era. So the language is not necessary. It will be read by people who live in our world. In our times...
My statement was not wide sweeping. It is my opinion only. I said that many times.
I speak for nobody but myself....
I simply feel that society has moved on...
We can write accurately without offending anybody...
My opinion...

Cagivagurl
 
my thing is, if you're not willing to include the lack of razors or oral hygiene, as well as any period appropriate grossness or weirdness, don't write out slurs from that time period. gloss over them like you would the lack of teeth
 
I am in no way trying to weasel out.
I stand by what I said.
I believe a story written today set in a bygone era can still be written accurately and tell the tale without using language that will offend a large majority of modern day society. The story will not be read by people of that era. So the language is not necessary. It will be read by people who live in our world. In our times...
My statement was not wide sweeping. It is my opinion only. I said that many times.
I speak for nobody but myself....
I simply feel that society has moved on...
We can write accurately without offending anybody...
My opinion...

Cagivagurl
OK, I'm done with you. You got something you posted (#13) waived under your nose with an example of why that is wrong. And now you are dancing around everywhere but what you were called on. I can't believe you're that dumb that you don't know why and on what you were called out. You've been fingered for it multiple times.
 
OK, I'm done with you. You got something you posted (#13) waived under your nose with an example of why that is wrong. And now you are dancing around everywhere but what you were called on. I can't believe you're that dumb that you don't know why and on what you were called out. You've been fingered for it multiple times.
Careful for the use ofnthe word fingered....
It means different things to different people...
Me, I'm always happy to be fingered....
Because I see things differently to you and others here on this site. That doesn't make me stupid my friend...
What it makes me is different...
You don't like my point of view. That's fine. I didn't ask you to...
I am comfortable with my position.
If you can't accept that somebody has a different view than your own... So be it... Shines a light on you as a person...
We don't have to agree... But we don't have to fight either....
My opinion, is as valid as yours...
So sorry it offends you so.

Cagivagurl
 
The Regency one was "Midnight at the Villa Diodati"

The Anglo Saxon one was "Huginn's Yule."

"One Night in Xanadu" was more old Chinese....

Those were the ones where I really paid a lot of attention to the language used and the way they spoke
Thanks, I'll check them out!
 
I believe a story written today set in a bygone era can still be written accurately and tell the tale without using language that will offend a large majority of modern day society. The story will not be read by people of that era. So the language is not necessary. It will be read by people who live in our world. In our times...
But it won't be historically accurate if it doesn't use the language of the period - which is all people here are saying. Such language can be used in moderation, sensitively, but to censor it? That's a slippery slope.
 
Back
Top