What isn't prejudice?

My grade tens have just finished writing their essays on Harper Lee's classic novel, To Kill a Mockingbird. So, I've been reading a lot about prejudice. And that means I've been thinking a lot about prejudice.

This is the first year I've taught this book with a student in the class who is black. I know that for some teachers out there, that's hard to believe, but here at Elmira high school we're mostly all just variations of white. I myself happen to be really-really-don't-put-me-in-the-sun white.

Because Emeka, that's the student's name, was in this class, I found myself thinking more carefully than usual about every word I was saying when I talked about the book. I wanted to analyze my own language to make sure I wasn't being in any way exclusionary. You know, using any language that was of an us/them variety. Now, does the fact that I found myself extra-aware of my whiteness and his blackness during this unit make me prejudiced?

I don't think so. I don't think that noticing differences and being sensitive to differences is what we call "being prejudiced." I think that's just human nature. But I do think that pre-judging (the root of the word prejudice) someone based on a physical trait could lead to unfair actions--to "being prejudiced."

But it could also just be common sense. Here's what I mean. I'm really short and heavy for my height. People might pre-judge that I would not be a good marathon runner just by looking at me. Now, in fact they'd be right. I can't last past 5K without wanting to go read a good book. But, I wouldn't be offended by their pre-judgement of me--it's a sensible conclusion based on my physical appearance. I wouldn't be offended, that is, until their mental pre-judgement evolved into a negative action. If I went to enter the Toronto marathon and someone said, "You're too short and fat to be in this competition," then I'd be livid. I would feel that someone who first pre-judged me has now acted on that prejudice and has limited my human rights.

So, is it human for me to recognize Emeka's blackness as I teach a novel about racial prejudice to an otherwise all-white class? I think so. Is it racism? I don't think so.

I'll ask Emeka and see what he thinks.

I'm so tense about tense!

Well, at my last writer's group meeting, I came to an impasse.

I'm at about the 35,000-word mark in the second version of a novel I'm working on. I've got two main characters in two different time periods: Saint Columba in 560AD and Rose 2007AD.
I've been writing both sections, which more or less alternate, in present tense. My readers, both of whose opinions I respect, told me that my choice of present tense in the Saint Columba sections is getting in their way. They say it sounds as if I'm trying too hard.

I know they're right. I find myself as I write forcing the present tense. I wrote the whole 100,000 words of the first version in past tense. Then I purposely decided to use present tense for the second version--I think I wanted it to sound more immediate and perhaps more contemporary. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Now, I'm debating about whether to switch back to past tense. I really need to make the decision before I go any farther because it affect every sentence I write--every sound, every word. It will be laborious to go back and change the latest 30,000 to past tense--it's just not as easy as just switching tenses--some sentences just don't sound right anymore when I just switch the verb. Hmmmm.

So, this past weekend, I started the next section and I switched back to past tense. It feels easy and comfortable--and somehow a cop-out. But maybe that is because I was trying too hard to be something I'm not yet. I don't think I'm a good enough writer yet to pull off present tense, especially in the historic fiction sections where I have to refer to the past and then the past of the past and sometimes the past of the past of the past.

I'll finish this next section and throw it to the lions at my next writer's group meeting. I hope it survives:-)