There have been a few instances of censorship and inappropriate behaviour in the publishing world recently. The instance of an anti-Obama cartoon, following claims of censorship from other cartoonists, in The New Yorker magazine. Then the rejection letter and William Sanders’ reference to “sheet heads” with regards to a Helix submission. (Spontaneous Derivation has a tight and lucid summary of the whole thing.) And the usual goings on in Romancelandia regarding reviews, stalking, contracting under false names, and so on.

While talking about all this, J commented that perhaps we tend to forget that writers are just ordinary people. That just because they (I) have stuff published doesn’t mean they’re (I’m) any more educated, or broad-minded, than anybody else.

He’s right, but — to me — that just means that people involved in something like the publishing world have to be extra careful. I consider editors, for example, to be gatekeepers. They decide what’s appropriate for public consumption and what’s not. And, in such a position, where their decisions are already rife with subjectivity (and necessarily so … I’m not quibbling with that aspect of the biz), it’s still important to try to be as impartial as possible, whether we’re talking about political cartoons or the greenhouse effect.

By the same token, I think of authors as “influencers”. Yes, I know we’re writing fiction, and it’s entertainment when all’s said and done, but I sincerely believe that, where my work is being read by people outside my immediate circle of friends, I have a responsibility to think about what I present and how I present it. After all, it’s not as though a reader in Bukina Faso cared about my character, Jo Bloggs, before s/he started reading my story. But part of what I do as a writer means that I attempt to cajole, or seduce, that reader into caring about Jo. I am, in effect, influencing the reader’s thoughts to look upon Jo either favourably or unfavourably or — my preferred option — some mix of the two. So, yes, I really do believe that authors influence people, and a responsibility like that is not one that — I think — should be taken lightly.

It’s why, for example, I’ve sworn off virgin heroines since The Commander’s Slave. (And you can’t believe how frustrating that is, when TCS is my best-selling book evah.) Upon reflection, I think that the sub-text of a virginal, but otherwise accomplished kick-ass, heroine is one I’m not comfortable with, and I doubt I’ll be visiting that trope again in the classic sense. That’s a personal choice of mine, and I don’t expect everyone else to agree with me but, at the same time, I do expect every writer to at least think about the ramifications of the character/plot/setting choices before s/he puts fingers to keyboard.

Or do you think that’s a bit harsh/unrealistic?