It’s been a few years since I wrote a book and got my social media accounts in order. This is what the professionals told me to do first–work on reaching the crowd who might buy my book. They said there was really no need to even submit a manuscript until a readership was taken into consideration.
They want authors who are popular, you see. It makes it a heck of a lot easier for them to sell your words.
It’s a funny idea, now that I’ve read how John Steinbeck wrote in his crumbling shack in California and mailed entire manuscripts to New York at the request of his editor. He certainly didn’t manage any readership or interaction between himself and his fans. His work was writing, and he did it as well as he could, free from the influence his readers’ opinions might have on him. What if they’d told him there was no Dustbowl, or that he was a fool for writing a fiction stories based on migrant workers? After all, the only people affording to buy books were certainly not interested in poverty. I personally think that back in the day (the John Steinbeck era and all the eons before), literature was much, much better because authors were writing out of excellence and not to simply scratch itchy little ears.
I set out with the goal of getting some work published at the exact time publishers and lit agents decided they were going to be more inclusive. They wanted black and queer voices, not my Christian, white, stay-at-home mom vibe. That was too ordinary and perhaps raised flags of a privileged upbringing (very speculative, and very common). I submitted some work and was turned down immediately, but I wondered if I had hedged the cover letter with a clue that I was, in fact, of a non-traditional culture or race?
But there’s no place in an email for that, is there?
Assumptions are dangerous, or at least they were in older times. It didn’t used to be acceptable to infer someone’s social or physical attributes, privileges and disadvantages, simply by reading one’s words on a screen. You could say it was downright presumptuous and rude. But now it is to one’s advantage to sign one’s name with a preferred pronoun and a headshot and social media handle. Tell me why this is, if we are evolving into a smarter species, one that is more inclusive than ever?
Is our outside appearance representing our inside self, or are we just elevating our shiny outsides because it no longer matters anymore if we have integrity on the inside?
Are we such thinkers that we’ve realized we don’t want anyone questioning our lifestyle, so we stamp it with public approval–whatever attracts the most attention in today’s culture?
You see, inclusivity is just the shinier word for tolerance (now-archaic), that approach to making a wider circle for oddballs. It sounded good back then, and we’ve much improved on the term, haven’t we? But being inclusive (or tolerant) is as two-faced as it comes. Every time a wider circle is drawn, it still is a circle. And a circle, by definition, is a closed shape, one that excludes everything on the outside. Inclusivity is exclusivity, by definition. Tolerance is putting up with people–as long as they owe us their allegiance and probably agree with us.
Who is left outside the circle? Whoever rejects the idea of inclusivity. The folks who believe integrity is born in the heart–they are labeled colorblind, and resented for it. The people who believe in a divine moral code or Biblical teaching that explicitly states appropriate rules for living–they are deemed hateful. The girl who doesn’t sign her email with a social media handle–she is ignored.
The unpopular, the common, the outdated. The folks outside the circle–these are the new outcasts.
Don’t be fooled into thinking your circle truly includes everyone. Watch out for those experts who say there is a new racism problem today (instead of an old, abiding classism problem), or that the solution is more inclusivity. Your closed circle will train you to become more and more closed-minded. You’ll find yourself slapping every label at the end of every email, in some last ditch effort to prove your skin-deep value to the in-the-circle people.
Don’t fall for labeling people like me as the face of oppression, simply because of my skin color and beliefs. Don’t hate a Christian, white, stay-at-home mom for just being her Christian, white, stay-at-home self.
If you do, then tell me now–who is prejudiced?
I really do hope to publish books someday. But what’s more, I really hope to encourage folks who are outside the circle with no hope (and no desire!) of ever making it with the inclusive crowd. You and I have clear instructions on how to live impactful, fulfilling lives even as the world throws shade at us and says we aren’t “inclusive”.
We are to:
- Keep on loving one another
- Show hospitality to strangers
- Remember those in prison and those who are mistreated
- Honor marriage, for God will judge the sexually immoral
- Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have
- Consider other believers, and the outcome of their faith, and imitate them
- Not be carried away by strange teaching
This list is lifted straight out of Hebrews 13, and is followed by an incredible picture of a non-circle kind of guy, Jesus.
He is outside of the circle, bearing the disgrace of sinners.
Jesus suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood (13:12).
He is a humble savior, who has left the camp. He walked away from the inclusive crowd to become a sacrifice for our sin.
We are asked to do the same, to leave the circle:
Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore. For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come.
Hebrews 13:13-14
(If this a newish thing for you to consider, you might also be interested in this post I made last year, which touches on the contrariness of our current culture. And if the thought of it bores you to tears, instead go check out On Honey Creek, where I’m trying to get my new farm life in order, and there are some fun pictures.)
