Rebecca F. Kuang's novel, Yellowface (2023), is an engaging and compelling read that keeps the reader hooked until the very end. The novel is a well-crafted work that addresses a number of pertinent issues within the literary realm. These include the concepts of literary authenticity, the nature of creativity and ownership in the literary domain, cultural appropriation, the role of the literary industry and the market, and the function of the writer as a disseminator of experience and voice.

Opportunistic rise: cultural appropriation and its consequences

What are the subtle distinctions between authenticity and inauthenticity in the context of storytelling? What are the consequences when a writer crosses the boundaries of cultural sensitivity, thereby compromising the authenticity of her narrative? Writers often find themselves in a position where they must navigate a fine line between exercising their creative freedom and accepting responsibility for their act of storytelling. Balancing these factors can be challenging, but it is fundamental for maintaining authenticity. These questions form the basis of the narrative evolution in Yellowface, wherein the reader follows the young writer June in her pursuit of success, maintenance of credentials, redemption, and navigation of the intricacies of the writing process.

In the aftermath of a tragic event, the protagonist finds herself navigating a complex moral terrain, where the boundaries between the act of drawing inspiration from and the act of appropriation of another's work are increasingly unclear. The distinction between these two concepts is highly subjective and open to debate. However, from the perspective of the protagonist, the result of her crafting process is a form of a previously unheard-of kind of literary collaboration, a laudable project (36) in which she assumes the role of the one who rescues an unfinished work (46).

As the novel progresses, the protagonist faces increasing scrutiny and criticism for her actions. She justifies her actions by stating that she has not fabricated or misrepresented any of the narrative content and has not attempted to claim a persona that she does not genuinely embody (62). Notwithstanding her rationale, she is denounced for cultural appropriation, resulting in substantial public and critical disapproval. The backlash is pronounced, with social media platforms intensifying the critique and condemnation. Such a critique highlights the ethical complexities inherent in the construction of any narrative and in writing about cultures without sufficient attention to the experiences of others. This issue is particularly pertinent in the contemporary era, where cultural sensitivity and representation are subject to heightened scrutiny.

Conversely, the act of drafting a narrative about another culture without a profound comprehension or respect for its nuances can result in cultural appropriation and misrepresentation. Furthermore, this section of the novel provides a compelling illustration of the influence of online culture on writers' professional lives and the capacity of the Internet to shape intellectual trends. Indeed, this section of the narrative explores the ways in which online platforms can become the setting for the formation and destruction of reputations. The internet's role is a double-edged sword: it provides a platform for voices to be heard and for diverse perspectives to gain visibility, but it can also amplify misinformation and hostile attacks, targeting individuals who might otherwise not be subjected to such treatment.

As the novel reaches its climax, the protagonist is forced to confront the consequences of her actions. Indeed, the novel's culminating moments bring June into direct confrontation with the repercussions of her actions, compelling her to grapple with the intricacies of cultural appropriation, the tenets of writers' integrity, and the nuances of authenticity in storytelling. Consequently, the concluding sections of the novel examine the complex concept of authenticity in writing, investigating the writer's responsibility to maintain integrity when representing the experiences of others and the question of ownership of a text once it has been published.

Furthermore, it addresses the malleable concept of truth, which is subjective and varies from one individual to another. Indeed, in the final two pages, the protagonist reflects on the fluidity of truth: "The truth is fluid. There is always a way to spin the story, another wrench to throw into the narrative" (317). Additionally, the protagonist considers the complex nature of narrative, the power dynamic inherent in the act of narrating and storytelling, and invites the reader to reflect on their own perception of truth and the stories that are told (319). As evidenced by the aforementioned passage, the concept of truth is not absolute; rather, it can be interpreted in a multitude of ways, contingent upon the perspective from which it is viewed. In addition, any narrative can be adapted to align with a specific narrative framework.

This suggests that even the concept of truth can be shaped and reshaped to serve different purposes. The passage highlights the significance of the writer's role and the power of storytelling, which is a crucial element that should be considered by every reader. By drafting and controlling the narrative, a writer or speaker can undoubtedly influence how events are perceived, understood, and remembered. June's concluding remarks address the theme of authenticity in writing and the integrity that a writer should adhere to when portraying the experiences of others, even when truth itself is subjective. From a broader perspective, the final passages also pertain to the question of who is entitled to tell and narrate specific stories and how these stories are conveyed.

Ethical dilemmas of storytelling

Yellowface chronicles the trajectory of June's achievements, setbacks, and potential for redemption, and through the description of its central character, the novel prompts a pertinent inquiry into the concepts of literary authenticity and ownership. The decision to assume authorship of another author's manuscript raises a crucial question: who is entitled to tell certain stories, and what are the implications of the evolving concept of ownership in the literary realm? This practice touches on the ethical dilemma of whether a story can truly belong to someone who did not originally conceive it. Moreover, it offers a thought-provoking examination of the boundaries between inspiration, collaboration, ghostwriting, and plagiarism.

These considerations pertain to the ethical dimensions of writing and producing, particularly with regard to the obligations, if any, that a writer may have to other individuals whose experiences are narrated. To fully comprehend the concept of story ownership, it is essential to examine the circumstances under which an individual is permitted to narrate and recount a story, as well as the circumstances that may lead to a challenge to this entitlement. It is widely acknowledged that writers draw upon a multitude of sources, including other literary works. However, the practice of blurring the boundaries between inspiration and appropriation represents a clear ethical transgression. When the boundaries are transgressed, it undermines the integrity of the creative process and can lead to severe consequences, including a loss of trust among readers and critics, a loss of the writer's originality and authenticity, and, in some cases, even cultural insensitivity.

Furthermore, the act of appropriating another's work raises the question of what constitutes originality and authenticity in literature. This leads to the question of whether originality is determined by the idea for a book alone, or also by its execution. The final pages of the novel and the intense debate that arises from the protagonist's exposure demonstrate that originality is not merely about having a unique idea for drafting a novel, but also about the integrity of its execution. Consequently, while writers may draw on experiences outside their own, they are nevertheless bound by significant ethical responsibilities. These responsibilities include ensuring authenticity, originality, integrity, transparency in storytelling, and respect for the communities or persons being depicted.

Parallels between literary and political discourse

As readers, critics, and members of the literary community, we must consider the following questions: What are the boundaries of creative freedom? Who has the right to tell a story? Who owns a story, if there is an owner, and what are the implications of such an ownership? Reflecting on these questions can help us navigate the landscape of literary ethics. By considering these issues, we can better comprehend the responsibilities that come with storytelling and narrating, not only in the literary realm, but also in political discourse.

Much like the protagonist of the novel, many politicians claim to represent the people and bring their voices to the table, yet their actions often prioritize gaining popularity, votes, and economic gain over the interests of those they claim to represent. It is of the utmost importance to foster both a literary and political atmosphere that upholds authenticity. As we engage with literature and, by extension, political campaigns, it is vital to acknowledge that both are integral components of discourse, relying on language as a potent instrument for influencing and disseminating trends. Therefore, it is imperative to adopt a discerning and contemplative approach to the narratives, whether political or literary, that we consume and the ethical implications they engender.

A critical reading of these narratives allows for a more nuanced understanding of the power dynamics at play and the potential consequences of misrepresentation. Such awareness can inform more informed and ethical consumption of media, literary productions, and political campaigns, encouraging accountability and integrity in both literary and political spheres.