Talk:Zenna Henderson

See the discussion at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.written/browse_thread/thread/84205c876d03e162

Somebody had added to this page a paragraph about "there were no black characters in Henderson's stories", "there weren't many Jewish characters", etc. I'm certain the person who wrote that was well-meaning, but it would be a hopeless and thankless talk to try to use Wikipedia to chronicle all the things that writers did NOT write about. It seems best to discuss what a writer actually DID write about it. I've noticed that Spike Lee's movies never have any Swedish characters, nor do they ever seem to depict pastry chefs from Belize. But I don't think Spike Lee is racist any more than I think Henderson was, and I don't think such observations are worthwhile in what is intended as an objective, accessible Wikipedia encyclopedia entry.

I wrote that. The reason I added it in was that Henderson's anti-Semitism clashes badly with her overall theme advocating understanding and tolerance of those who are different. She didn't just "not put in many Jewish /Mexican /whatever characters", it was the fact that her few ethnic characters were revolting stereotypes. It's an observation, I admit, and if it isn't NPOV enough it should be removed. I thought it was relevant because it illustrates the gap between Henderson's aspirations and her actual views. Like her acidulous observations of her teaching colleagues in "The Anything Box" and "You Know What, Teacher?", or her many stories that start out "I don't like children", her hatred of minorities was something she obviously fought for a lifetime to control. People who think of Henderson as all sweetness and light with those People stories should read the rest of her stuff. --Bluejay Young 21:02, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

I reverted back to the paragraph discussing racial issues. Any controversy and issues about this subject belongs on the discussion page prior to removing large amounts of text. I'm afraid deciding material "doesn't belong" in the encyclopedia excludes differeing points of view. I would encourage discussion about this -- I love her work, but she wasn't all sweetness and light and deserves a deeper realistic portrayal. WBardwin 03:24, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

With all due respect to Bluejay Young, whose views I'm certain are heartfelt, what he is saying about Zenna Henderson having a "hatred of minorities" or writing characters who are "revolting stereotypes" simply isn't supportable from her actual work. Henderson's body of work is collected into a few books which are relatively easy to find in libraries or purchase from used bookstores. If there's no actual support for these statements, they should be excluded from this article, as per Wikipedia's guidelines that work here should be verifiable and supportable by published evidence. I think we have no way of knowing what Henderson's real views were in life, but unless we can support claims or racial hatred or stereotyping with something - anything - that she wrote, whether in available personal letters or in any of her published writing, stories, books, etc., then these sentences simply have no place here. Henderson's stories explicitly draw upon Jewish stories and themes, as with the names and plots of many of her "People" stories. Henderson never criticized Judaism or Jews in any of her writing. Where somebody got the idea that there is "anti-Semitism" in Henderson's work, I just don't understand.

Read "Sharing Time", in the Holding Wonder collection. --Bluejay Young 04:36, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

"An early editorial review commented that her in-depth treatment of the People's practices indicated a "more intimate knowledge" than she had publicly admitted." A more intimate knowledge of what, psychic abilities? That would be very interesting. Somewhere I seem to remember reading that Henderson had some contact with Rhine, but I can scarcely believe this. I may be confusing her with someone else (James Tiptree Jr.?). --Bluejay Young 02:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Merwin's Comments

How could Sam Merwin have mentioned her as "up and coming" a year and more before her first story. From the article: "In an essay on the increase in women authors of science fiction in 1950, Sam Merwin mentioned her as an up-and-coming woman SF writer.[7]:250 Her first story was published in The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction in 1951."[7]:253. Can whoever posted the link check? Sir Rhosis (talk) 02:32, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

I've checked the source on the Internet Archive, and the article text is correct. Here is the source text:

"Sam Merwin, Jr., editor of Thrilling Wonder Stories, noted in a December 1950 editorial ... that there was a 'Great Invasion' underway of women writers into science fiction."[p.249]; "Some of the newcomers Merwin praised and welcomed were destined for fame. Among them were ... Zenna Henderson."[p.250]; "The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction published 183 stories by 64 different women, including debut stories by ... Zenna Henderson (1951) ..."[p.253].

It's possible that Merwin may have read Henderson's first story in 1950 before it was published in 1951. —Bruce1ee^talk 07:38, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Also, have a look at the inline comments in that paragraph in the article (go into edit mode). That may explain what happened. —Bruce1ee^talk 07:43, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

• I see. Thank you. Sir Rhosis (talk) 08:53, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Zenna Henderson's religion

In the discussion of her religious practice, this article (correctly) states that "During her later years, she attended an independent charismatic fellowship". This is sourced to a couple of Usenet posts from 2014 by Bill Patterson, to which someone has appended the tag "better source needed."

The Bill Patterson who wrote those posts was the late William H. Patterson, Jr., a well-known science fiction historian, author of a two-volume biography of Robert A. Heinlein, and a founder of the Heinlein Society. Bill's father was an evangelical minister in southern Arizona and Zenna Henderson was, in her later years, a member of his church. Obviously a Usenet post is an informal source, but I think Patterson on this particularly subject is as good a source as any number of sources that don't get the "better source needed" tag stuck onto them.