Diversity vs. Tokenism: What's the Difference?

Written By Sera Wright

A deep dive into whether or not bookish spaces promote a performative version of diversity

By: Allissa Patton

* May contain spoilers for the following books; Harry Potter, Throne of Glass, Hunger Games, and Fourth Wing

Shop this article (*affiliate links): https://bookshop.org/lists/fantasy-sci-fi-readin-magazine

If you have scrolled through book-related social media platforms such as BookTok, BookTube, or Bookstagram, chances are you have come across a fair number of impassioned videos discussing why you should “read diversely.” Some videos are genuine calls for readers to expand their TBRs (to be read list) to include books by authors from marginalized communities. However, a much larger portion of these videos attempt to double down on the fact that the books/authors they read are already “diverse enough.” You are then presented with a list (a short one at that) of all the characters that can be deemed marginalized. Inevitably, whether intentional or by chance, creators and readers begin to discuss what is known as tokenism under the guise of diversity. 

What is Tokenism?

Tokenism is a method used to “check a box” or to “meet a quota.” According to Cambridge Dictionary, tokenism is the “practice and use of symbolic or performative activism and equality” in which authors (and yes, creators) use the presence and mere existence of marginalized people, communities, and characters to give off the idea that a place or book is in fact diverse. Token characters are often written as one-dimensional, stereotypical representations of a marginalized/minority group and their sole purpose is to propel the plot of white main characters. While their white counterparts are written with backstories, goals, motivations, and even favorite foods, the tokens possess very little detail about the heart of their characters, their actual appearance, or much outside of a vague description of eye and skin color (e.g. tawny or olive skin with dark brown eyes). 

At face value, this might not seem that alarming; at least there is some form of representation, right? Quite frankly, the use of tokenized characters is read as flat and monotone at best. At worst? They perpetuate harmful stereotypes, tropes, and rhetoric about marginalized groups in a way that makes readers passive and apathetic to the harm done. In the world of fantasy and science fiction books, authors spend time painstakingly building immense worlds and systems that are both detailed and complex enough to immerse their readers. So why is their “diverse” characterization falling so short?

Woefully Under-Characterized Wizarding World

More likely than not, a vast majority of fantasy and sci-fi readers have either read or come into close proximity to the Harry Potter series and/or franchise. Despite the series’ success, the Harry Potter series is a prime example of tokenism. Though there are only a small handful of characters of color represented in the books, they all are written as one-dimensional background characters that exist solely for the main “heroes” to interact with and learn from. The most notable of these characters is Cho Chang, Harry’s love interest and member of Dumbledore’s Army in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. While Cho’s character has brief appearances in The Goblet of Fire and The Deathly Hallows, it is her role within Order of the Phoenix that raises a clear red flag of tokenism.

Cho is written to be a character of Chinese descent, yet she is given a name that is essentially two surnames combined to create the character. The very existence of the character reflects J. K. Rowling’s lack of research and care that was needed in order to write about diverse characters. In fact, the name “Cho Chang” has been deemed offensive as it does not have roots anywhere across the Asian community’s diaspora. In this way, Cho is written as simply as a watered-down and generic version of an “Asian” character. 

Furthermore, Cho Chang’s tokenized character pushes and reinforces harmful stereotypes forced upon the Asian community. Cho Chang is a student in the Ravenclaw house — the house that values intelligence— and is written as a weak-willed character who does not fight against tyranny due to her submission to older authority figures. This portrayal of a woman of Asian descent directly plays into the “model minority” stereotype in which Asian characters are portrayed as smart and subservient to the main character(s). In 2013, Rachel Rostad’s spoken-word piece “To Jk Rowling from Cho Chang” explains the initial joy of seeing an Asian girl represented in popular media, and the quick disappointment of Cho’s character being “worthless” and incredibly “generic”. These stereotypes have routinely been used to minimize the perceived impact of racial discrimination and have left readers from marginalized communities feeling ostracized (Ruiz, Im, Tian, 2023). 

Hunger Games and the “Magical Negro”

Unfortunately, Harry Potter is not the only franchise that normalizes detrimental tropes. In 2001, while touring and speaking at various college campuses, Spike Lee, a Black filmmaker, coined the term “Magical Negro.” This term takes the idea of tokenism one step further to explain the role of Black characters in media. A “Magical Negro” is one who possess some skill, ability, wisdom, or power that the main character does not have themselves, but needs in order to continue their hero’s journey (Cusic, 2021). These characters lack agency and depth, as their existence is tied to only how much they are able to benefit the white main character. Once they are no longer deemed useful to the plot or development of the white main character, the “Magical Negro” is often unnecessarily killed off.

Take a look at the original Hunger Games book by Suzanne Collins. After the Reaping and opening ceremonies, we are introduced to Rue during the training and observation phase of the Games. Rue’s character is identified by her dark skin, has the unique skill of being able to move swiftly and deftly alongside the advantageous ability to climb to extraordinary heights. However, Rue’s true utility is not realized until after her death. 

After Rue is killed by another tribute, the entirety of Panem watches Katniss sing to Rue while laying her in a bed of flowers–an unforgettable act of compassion and tenderness against the violent and brutal backdrop of the Games. It is this very act that creates and solidifies Katniss as the Mockingjay — the one to lead the districts into a rebellion against the Capitol and President Snow. The insurgency caused by the death of the Hunger Games’ “Magical Negro” is all that is left behind of Rue -- a character Suzanne Collins deemed undeserving of a last name. 

Rue’s death in The Hunger Games also has real-world implications. For example, the majority of BookTok and other bookish spaces have stood silent or have actively fought against the Black community’s frustration with the author Sarah J. Maas who reduced Breonna Taylor’s legacy down to her own “Magical Negro” or token in order to promote her ACOTAR series. Referencing Breonna Taylor’s death allowed SJM to create the image that she is an ally who is unafraid of calling out injustices while simultaneously using the same breath to encourage readers to buy her books. Through both social media and her own books, Sarah J. Maas has become a master of creating and using “Magical Negroes.”

See full post here.

One of Sarah J. Maas’ most infamous characters is Nehemia Ytger from the Throne of Glass series. Nehemia is described as having brown eyes, brown skin, and wears her hair in braids — all signs pointing to Nehemia’s character being Black. While SJM fans show praise over the diversity that Nehemia’s character adds to the series, this character plays into extremely stereotypical tropes. Like the definition of a “Magical Negro,” Nehemia’s character exists solely as the strong, Black female who has to remain committed to the revolution while simultaneously having to educate and inspire the white main character, Celaena Sardothien. Similarly to Rue, before Nehemia is able to reach her full height of power, she is randomly killed off — directly adding to the progression of Celeana’s storyline.

Authors Writing Racially Vague Characters

One of the key markers of tokenism is the lack of description of characters, which in the bookish world, often looks like authors creating racially ambiguous characters that are “just POC enough.” In Rebecca Yarros’s Fourth Wing, Xaden Riorson, the central love interest, is described in a way that leaves his ethnic background up for interpretation with physical characters such as “tawny” and “warmed toned.” Yarros’ incredibly vague characterization makes Xaden just “dark enough” to draw the eye due to his mysteriousness, but not too dark that it would require her to actually research various cultures and ethnic groups that could have served as the base of Xaden’s character. In fact, when asked about her non-negotiables for Xaden’s on-screen portrayal, Yarros simply stated that, “Xaden will not be white”. Yarros’ vague and non-descript statement makes it incredibly clear that Yarros created Xaden as a open-ended character that has zero ties to any specific culture or ethnic group, giving her the ground to use the ambiguity in a manner that best fits her needs.

Booktok Using “Tokens” to Its Advantage

Though tokenism can be easily viewed through the lens of fantasy and fiction, it can be much more difficult to pinpoint in real life — particularly within social media platforms. Around Black History Month and Pride Month, spaces such as BookTok and Bookstagram are flooded with videos discussing what books written by Black and/or queer creators will read during their respective months. However, outside of these TBR videos, those books are rarely mentioned again on their platforms and in many cases, do not even appear on their carefully curated shelves. They have directly played into tokenism — using a few books written by marginalized authors for their own benefit of increased engagement and views, though their “activism” is incredibly performative. 

That begs the question: what does actual diversity look like both in fiction and in reality? Diversity requires people and communities of marginalized people to not merely be present but have their stories and experiences be thoroughly explored and respected. To actually read diversely. This does not mean reading a book within a designated month or time frame — books by diverse and marginalized authors should be read year round. This makes diverse books an integral part of your overall reading journey instead of a seasonal add on. 

This will also require you to become comfortable with being uncomfortable. Reading books by authors of varying backgrounds and experiences means that you will inherently come into contact with conversations and viewpoints that you have either never encountered or have actively ignored. This does not mean you should disregard serious trigger warnings, but that does mean that you have to ask yourself, “What about this experience is making me uncomfortable and why?” Oftentimes, we tend to cast aside books that can make us feel uneasy or guilty or shameful because reading is simply an ‘escape.’ Though you have agency to read in the manner that best suits you, reading through this lens blinds you to the rich lessons and understanding you can take from fictional stories.

If you do not know what books to pick up next on your journey of diversity activism, check out our last article ‘What Makes ‘Epic Fantasy’ so Epic?’ for fantasy and sci-fi recommendations written by authors of color that explore not only their own communities, but who are also intentional with showing respect to cultures and community groups to which they do not belong.

Sera Wright
Previous

Give Me Lashes or Give Me Death
Next

Our Infinite Fates