I waited a few days on this bc I did not want to diminish the importance of showcasing black writers -- of any gender -- it such a prominent, beautifully rendered way. But I hv been dying to hear frm folks on wht they think of choice to highlight just men.
nytimes.com/interactive/20…
nytimes.com/interactive/20…
I have been conflicted about the decision to have some of the most laureled and storied black women writers in our history as the invisible voiceover for a showcase of black men as the leaders of some "new" literary movement. And the choice of a black woman to write the piece.
@Ayana_Mathis clearly felt some conflict as well. 
I think we are in a new golden era for black writing. It is a wonderful and inspiring thing to witness. But black men alone are not the vanguard, and the piece does not offer a compelling explanation as to why it would focus just on men.
And in some ways, it just repeats the same pattern we have always seen: black males writers are pushed out front, black women of equal and at times greater talent, relegated to a supporting role. Some of the most profound writing out here right now is coming from black women.
Again, I feel conflicted. I love the film, I love the photos, I love the work these men are doing. But black women are not marginal to this renaissance, and damn, can you imagine what these photos would look like featuring them?
*Also, I cannot tweet without writing typos. I like to think it makes me approachable and endearing.
