I don't know which way you go on Starship Troopers. I saw the film when it came out. I thought it was (i) bad and (ii) laden with right wing tropes. I have a copy of the novel but have never read it, but have heard that the film is not true to it.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
M.A.R. Barker, author of Tekumel, also author of Neo-Nazi book?
- Thread starter Ancalagon
- Start date
Davies
Legend
It's not, but there have been arguments against the book as well, from its first publication forward. But this is way off-topic.
As an artist, I can’t say this is 100% true…or false. I think it is extremely case specific- for both the artist and the art being produced.
You may be able to find evidence of misogyny in Bill Cosby’s later stuff, but it would be next to impossible to point to signs of it in most of the stand-up that brought him fame, like the routines involving his brother, his dentist, or feeding kids breakfast.
It would be even more difficult to detect my flaws and beliefs in my sketches, stories, jewelry designs or musical compositions.
OTOH, some artists are VERY keen on expressing their inner states through their creations. Some art is provocative by design.
Last edited:
The most obviously provocative aspect of Tekumel - given where it was created and who its immediate audience was - is its departure from European and (post-Colombian) North American norms in its presentation of what it is to be a human being.
Which I think is part of what makes the current revelations about Barker puzzling and unsettling.
IMHO, the greater harm was done by Barker releasing his pro-Nazi fiction under a pseudonym, not by the revelation of the fact.
Humans like to fill narrative gaps with conjecture. Anyone aware of Barker’s duplicity could wonder if a given fan of Tekumel was unaware or a fellow sympathizer, and that speculation would be a factor in how they interact.
It is possible that Barker was conflicted. That he had doubts. That he changed his opinions over time, first one way, then the other.
Perhaps Tekumel was the product of a mind not yet fully embracing the bigoted ethos of his father.
It sounds like you have good faith in your ability to suss out whether there might be Nazi tropes in Tékumel. From your description of your resume, that sounds accurate. But most people don't have those advantages. I think I might feel confident in my own ability to run a Tékumel game and to have it (mostly) reflect the progressive tropes I was more interested in. But all people might not feel the same. And if I were a retailer, I'd be very reluctant to sell Tékumel at this time, not knowing it had the potential to do damage.
If Tékumel isn't already dead, as I said, I think some experts on facism and Nazis and cults and indoctrination reading through it could set some minds at ease (or reveal uncomfortable messaging). But, I honestly think it's already dead because it just hasn't been well-treated at the level required for ongoing success since 1975. (Yeah, maybe it was dead whenever this neo-Nazi revelation came out, no matter how successful it was, but I feel like the Foundation's cover-up ensured that.)
Yeah, you're certainly right that there are some types of arts that make it easier to detect the biases of the creator and some where it's less. But I still think every piece of art is the embodiment of its creator in some way. Your music may touch back on what you found nostalgic in your youth or rebellious in your young adulthood; your jewelry may touch upon what you find beautiful, what stones or metals or patterns delight you; your sketches may highlight what you think is important in a scene or portrait, even if what you find important is just straight realism.
Similarly, Tékumel ultimately reflects what M.A.R. Barker found nostalgic, what he found rebellious, what he found beautiful, what delighted him, and what he found important. Those may or may not be Nazi ideals, depend on whether he was a different person when he designed Tékumel and when he wrote that book. They may or may not be meaningfully represented.
--
I should make it very clear that I feel like the decision to choose to enjoy an art even if the artist is repugnant is a personal one, particularly when the artist is dead, and so unable to profit.
I guess one of the biggest issues for me here is the collective nature of roleplaying. If I choose to run a Tékumel game, I'm sharing that worldview that Barker created in Tékumel with others. I'm not just giving it my stamp of approval, but I'm ultimately transmitting Barker's ideas. That's very different from me listening to Thriller or reading a Harry Potter book that I already own.
I'd similarly have issue with reading Ender's Game to young adults because I'd wonder about what messages it was sending, especially since I thought some scenes were a bit creepy, even before I knew about Card's homophobia. But still, it stayed in my collection along with Speaker for the Dead, even when I stopped buying new Card books and dumped another dozen or so.
(And generally, thanks for the thoughtful responses. That article was my first stab at how to discuss this historically.)
Last edited:
Maybe. But did he subsequently renounce Tekumel? I've never heard of such an event.
There are strands in extreme right-wind ideology that emphasis "separateness" of the "races". But I understand that Barker's wife was not white. (And that the same thing is true of the protagonist of his novel.) How did that fit into his political outlook?
One of the unsettling features I had in mind, in my post that you replied to, is the following: it seems possible - even likely - that some enthusiasts for Tekumel found that its appeal, at least in part, consisted in its apparent displacement of some of the Eurocentrism that is dominant in FRPGing. Now they learn that its author was a supporter of National Socialism. That could pull the rug out from just about anyone, I think.
I’m not saying my artistic choices are divorced from my character. My personal aesthetics are clearly on display.
I’m saying the morally laudable or despicable aspects of myself are not usually going to be conveyed via my jewelry designs, my still-lifes, my sci-fi/fantasy illustrations, or surf/metal/jazz/etc. instrumentals. Far more likely is that those seeking to find my “inner soul” in such will instead be looking at mirrors and listening to echo chambers. They’ll perceive themselves, not me.
It can be fairly complicated.
I don't like Heidegger, and never have. Part of this is technical disagreement with his philosophical doctrines. Part of this is because of his unconcealed alliance with the National Socialist government. But Heidegger continues to be taught and studied, and remains very influential, in the contemporary academy, and more so among left wing than right wing scholars at least in the English speaking context.
When I encounter people with a casual interest in inter-war German-language philosophy, I try to encourage them to look into the Vienna Circle and associates. I make the point that many of these philosophers were socialists or liberals who were victims of National Socialism and became refugees in the US, the UK or (briefly, in Popper's case) NZ. But my intellectual sympathies for logical positivism have sometimes made me suspect among left wing philosophers, because they associate "positivism" with right-wing sociology and economics.
I have good friends, who I regard as morally good people, who engage intellectually with Heidegger's work. That's their prerogative. Even I will concede that there's stuff in Heidegger that's interesting.
