The portrayal of characters with varying ethnicities and backgrounds

Recently some authors have been criticized for writing characters with ethnic or experiential backgrounds which they do not share. How did Marra navigate this challenge with his portrayal of Artie and Ned and other Eastern European Jews, Maria and Vincent and other Italian immigrants, and Eddie whose Chinese heritage impacted his career?

Writing characters of other backgrounds and ethnicities is challenging. But if you show compassion for your characters and understand the struggles people like them struggled with in real life, then you can create beautiful representations in story form. It is impossible to avoid writing people who are different from yourself if you want to tell a well-rounded story. The best way to do that is to do your research and approach the task with empathy and curiosity. I think Maara did a wonderful job showing a variety of characters with different struggles and opinions. He didn't settle on a single point of view for people in the same situation even. It made it seem more real.

I think it's great to represent various cultures in a book. One sees the differing cultures and what they value. If this is done with respect and not stereotypes, there should be no problem. Why is it thought that one can't understand the values and ethnicities of another culture and portray it adequately?

I agree. There would be no historical fiction for example if authors couldn't portray people living in different eras experiencing things which might be foreign to the authors own experience. In this case, it is clear that Marra is meticulous in portraying both the differences and universalities of his characters.

I felt that the characters in this book were fairly represented and realistic; the author seemed to take great pains to craft characters that were not - at least to me - stereotypical. I think the criticism that may have started with American Dirt that authors should be writing from their experiences and backgrounds was unfair because the human experience - that is, who we are as people elementally - doesn't change just because the writer isn't of a particular ethnic, socio-economic or other grouping. We'd probably as one responder notes never have any good historical fiction.

Historical fiction does rely on an accurate picture of the times and that includes the characters in the book. Without an accurate portrayal of the characters the reader could not appreciate or understand the experiences of them both positive and negative because people and their experiences and contributions create the history, culture and stories of that time period.

Writing experiences and lives that aren’t the author’s is about research and care. I think there is a difference between contemporary writings and historical writing, but I’m not sure I can make a good argument as to why.

I did feel this book showed respect and avoided stereotypes. However, I think there is difficulty in conveying the experiences of another culture. The facts can be correct, but perhaps not the emotions and perspectives. I have seen this when someone makes comments about my own Chicago Irish heritage - they are looking at it through their lens, not mine. While we all have different family experiences, I am more likely to trust the view of someone who grows up in a culture that they write about.

As someone else mentioned, the category of historical fiction probably could not exist if authors could only have characters of their exact same background. Of course we want knowledgeable, sensitive representation. Even with that as the goal, some authors succeed and some fail; I thought Anthony Marra handled characterization very well.

I thought Marra did an very good job of making his character reflect their background without making them caracatures.

I think Marra did his research and was able to show the characterization of each ethnic group with accuracy .