I think she's less specifically talking about not having considered the underlying theories and more about polarisation and lazy thinking.
It is easy to assume people haven't thought when their thought process is hidden from you and they happen to have arrived at the same conclusion as other people.
*nods* I've done this myself. And have experienced it from the other side, which is always very annoying.
My one thought on the class v. racism thing is that while racism may seem more important from the point of view of ethnic minorities, when upper or middle class white people raise the issue of classism it may be because from their position of double privilege they may genuinely be more aware of which prejudice is stronger and is actually causing other people more trouble.
Ehhhh.... I think "which is worse?" is almost always an unhelpful and often meaningless question, regardless of what answer you come up with. They both exist, work in different ways, and in certain contexts one or the other is more significant. But it's always important to take both into account.
And I don't think one can set out a bunch of rules for other people about what historical fiction should or should not be.
That's very true. I personally am more interested in the social rather than superficial accuracy (to a point, I like a certain amount of unrealistic glossing over of attitudes too) but there's nothing wrong with people writing other sorts of period fiction.
no subject
It is easy to assume people haven't thought when their thought process is hidden from you and they happen to have arrived at the same conclusion as other people.
*nods* I've done this myself. And have experienced it from the other side, which is always very annoying.
My one thought on the class v. racism thing is that while racism may seem more important from the point of view of ethnic minorities, when upper or middle class white people raise the issue of classism it may be because from their position of double privilege they may genuinely be more aware of which prejudice is stronger and is actually causing other people more trouble.
Ehhhh.... I think "which is worse?" is almost always an unhelpful and often meaningless question, regardless of what answer you come up with. They both exist, work in different ways, and in certain contexts one or the other is more significant. But it's always important to take both into account.
And I don't think one can set out a bunch of rules for other people about what historical fiction should or should not be.
That's very true. I personally am more interested in the social rather than superficial accuracy (to a point, I like a certain amount of unrealistic glossing over of attitudes too) but there's nothing wrong with people writing other sorts of period fiction.