Thursday, April 21, 2011


Today, I just have a couple questions to bounce around. A friend and I were talking about stereotypes; he was talking about minorities on food stamps a the local Aldis, I mentioned the loud fat American tourists.
Aztec Cheerleaders

Is it an author's job to dispel stereotypes with fresh new characters that break out of the modern idea of who they should be? Yet how is that character still grounded in reality (some blondes are bimbos, just saying...)? Should people, and characters, be taken on a one on one basis, throwing out generalizations?


  1. Stereotypes are there for a reason. If there were no facts backing them up, it would never become an excepted description of people.

    Having said that, my personal opinion (and I pray, my personal actions) are to approach individuals as exactly that, individuals. There are always people who "break the mold", so to speak. If we already have preconceived ideas of what a person will be like, it hinders us from truly learning about that person.

    For instance, I had my rear kicked (figuratively) when I judged a young woman who TOTALLY looked like a "typical homeschooler". And who was this person? A Christian from Czech, who as a child walked for 6 hours round trip to get to church with her mother. Multiple times a week! She now travels into Russia to share love with the children in the schools, even if she can't share Christ's name.


    As far as writing goes, writing stereotypical characters is so cliche. And so is showing someone to be something the opposite of what their stereotype is suppose to be (the whole "be yourself!"). I guess it comes down to simply individuals. Some fit the stereotype...others don't. So maybe, yes? to your last question. :D

  2. Okay, so I was typing up a comment but then it got RIDICULOUSLY long so I decided maybe that was a sign I should do a post on it. So I shall respond on my blog soon...rather that leave a 500 word comment.

    Good topic! Thanks for the thought food.