If you write about white male guys you will be accused of not supporting diversity and part of the problem. If you write about other genders or races you will be told you don't have the right and you couldn't possibly understand their plight.

In other words, someone will always complain whatever you write, especially if it is in any way successful. That's just their resentment and anger.

I would tell any naysayers to feel free to write their own Shaka comic and/or script. (And, I would say it sincerely.)  The more the better. If they believe, like you, that this story needs telling, you certainly aren't going to stop them. In fact, you could even offer advice, should they ever need it.

Suppose you found out that someone was writing a movie based on the history of your family in the 1800s. Just some random person who had heard about your family, developed an interest, and felt like they had a lot to say about your great great etc. grandparents. They'd take some key facts, build their own original story around it, and release it to the public, with your family's real names splashed across the cover next to images of your family based on old portraits, etc.

I'd be pretty touchy about it. Wouldn't you? Personally, I'd prefer they not do it.

Anyway, there are two different elements in this thread. One is the general/philosophical question of writers depicting other cultures. The other is the specific/concrete question of a white writer depicting Shaka. I don't think they should be conflated.

Shaka meets anyone’s definition of a historical public figure. The general response to families (let alone countries) wanting to be left alone has been “get over it.”

Suppose you found out that someone was writing a movie based on the history of your family in the 1800s. Just some random person who had heard about your family, developed an interest, and felt like they had a lot to say about your great great etc. grandparents. They'd take some key facts, build their own original story around it, and release it to the public, with your family's real names splashed across the cover next to images of your family based on old portraits, etc.

I'd be pretty touchy about it. Wouldn't you? Personally, I'd prefer they not do it.

If you write about white male guys you will be accused of not supporting diversity and part of the problem. If you write about other genders or races you will be told you don't have the right and you couldn't possibly understand their plight.

In other words, someone will always complain whatever you write, especially if it is in any way successful. That's just their resentment and anger.

A storyteller's responsibility is to tell the truth in their stories. That truth may belong to someone else but it's your job to tell it. As long as do your research, try your best to tell the story and deliver the truth, that's all you can do.

Don't forget, we're talking about an historical figure, here.

My intention wasn't to create a direct analogy to Shaka or whatever.

Often in this sort of discussion, things operate at the level of abstraction -- here we started with, "what are your thoughts on one race telling another race's story?"

But I think it's also important to try to connect with this in a personal sense, which means a different question: what are your thoughts on someone else telling your story?

If you support writers in telling whatever stories they choose, you support the right of other people to tell your story. We may feel like those are big stakes or meaningless ones, but it's worth considering from the viewpoint of the "written" and not the writer. That's all I was getting at.

It's sad news when a decent story, about such folk, is turned around because of the colour of your skin.

and isn't that what they are trying to avoid. IE to have freedom and not be judged on such matters

I also assume the material is open source, so free for anybody to write about. so why don't they?

Finally, as others have mentioned, none of this is actually about the work.

best of luck

If you write about white male guys you will be accused of not supporting diversity and part of the problem. If you write about other genders or races you will be told you don't have the right and you couldn't possibly understand their plight.

In other words, someone will always complain whatever you write, especially if it is in any way successful. That's just their resentment and anger.

A storyteller's responsibility is to tell the truth in their stories. That truth may belong to someone else but it's your job to tell it. As long as do your research, try your best to tell the story and deliver the truth, that's all you can do.

It's an interesting question, Warren.

I must admit,when I saw Shaka on the Side projects thread, I thought : "That's a weird story for a white person to tell".

Without having read it, it's hard to give a particular opinion on it, but a quick look at the Wikipedia page on Shaka's history shows how divisive and problematic he is as a figure for anyone, let alone a white dude.

You're dealing with a figure who is inseparable from Nationalism, Black Nationalism, Africa, Imperialism, Colonialism and a figure steeped in a completely different culture, religion and race.

Whichever side you fall on, on any side of the issues, it's got the danger of being a strange look.

If you tell the story from the side of him being a great leader and leave out the cannibalism etc of which there is now archeological evidence then it will appear to be black nationalist propaganda, and people would wonder what the white guy's agenda is with it.

If you go with him being a bit of a villain, you're going to be deemed racist and a typical Imperialist.

The balanced middle is also a tough sell, as the good sides you show would be counterbalanced by the bad, and people would accuse you of damning with faint praise..that you may concede black people are capable of their own sovereignity, but don't forget they're also savages at heart.

What's the core theme of the story? What point are you trying to make about modern life and Africa?

All stories, wherever or whenever they are set are about now. So you need to be really careful with the final message you leave. It's a very fine line, and you're brave to attempt it.


On a side note: I wouldn't block people who disagree. Better to engage them respectfully, address their concerns and send them a free digital copy imo.

So... I understand both sides on this issue. But, in the end, I think: it's a creative endeavor. That is, you took a blank page and created something out of nothing. Your writing of the story in no way hinders/blocks/stops anyone else from writing the same story... or, writing the same story better.

If anyone believes the story should be written by themselves instead of you, they can just go do it. And, according to their logic, it should be better received, better told, better connected to the audience and history. So, they should go do it.

This isn't a situation where, for example, a director is hired onto an existing project. In that case, there is one opportunity.

In the creating of the script... literally everyone has the same opportunity. Any single person in the entire world can sit down with a pad and paper and write a script.

The same is true for the comic. You didn't take a slot on an existing project. You went out and created a project from nothing.

I would tell any naysayers to feel free to write their own Shaka comic and/or script. (And, I would say it sincerely.)  The more the better. If they believe, like you, that this story needs telling, you certainly aren't going to stop them. In fact, you could even offer advice, should they ever need it.

Suppose you found out that someone was writing a movie based on the history of your family in the 1800s. Just some random person who had heard about your family, developed an interest, and felt like they had a lot to say about your great great etc. grandparents. They'd take some key facts, build their own original story around it, and release it to the public, with your family's real names splashed across the cover next to images of your family based on old portraits, etc.

I'd be pretty touchy about it. Wouldn't you? Personally, I'd prefer they not do it.

Anyway, there are two different elements in this thread. One is the general/philosophical question of writers depicting other cultures. The other is the specific/concrete question of a white writer depicting Shaka. I don't think they should be conflated.