Dear Claire Kirch,
In your article, today, you wrote this about Kate Gale's essay in Huffington Post:
The article--which can be seen in full in these screen shots captured by PW--attempted to defend AWP against recent complaints about the lack of diversity represented in its programming, as well as the lack of transparency in its actions. Gale's article, however, featured inflammatory language that drew its own backlash. (Among other things, the article referred to Native American as Indians.)
Really, Claire? If you were Kate Gale's editor, you'd suggest she change this sentence:
I pictured David Fenza saddling up a horse, Stetson in place, going out to shoot Indians.
so it reads like this:
I pictured David Fenza saddling up a horse, Stetson in place, going out to shoot Native Americans.
Really? I'm astounded. Tell me, Claire, why you think that's better. Seems to me you're as clueless as Gale. I hope you'll take time to read what I wrote yesterday: About Kate Gale's post, "AWP Is Us." But even if you don't read what I said, please tell me why you think it would be better if Gale had used Native American instead of Indian.
Sincerely,
Debbie Reese
American Indians in Children's Literature
