Do orcs in gaming display parallels to colonialist propaganda?

[Derren]

So, because everyone is racist it's okay?

Orcs don't symbolize Vikings because orcs aren't described as blond and blue eyed. No. They are SPECIFICALLY described as Asiatic, and leaning hard on Turkic. Sure, they could be symbolizing something else, if you choose to ignore what it actually says in the books.

I played D&D for years and have never seen orks as being specifically asian or middle eastern.
And again, even if you limit it to this part of history because you want to, it has nothing to do with colonialism but with a very common worldview which at several times during history was rather justified.
When horse nomads swarm your country and demand that you surrender or die which they mean quite literally or, when the ones that conquered you steal your children to train them into fanatical warriors for their cause, it is quite understandable that in this situation you see the enemy as CE. And it are those events that got translated into fantasy.

 

[Hussar]

To be honest, I have no problem with allegory. The campaign where I played a paladin and the DM portrayed his orcs as Native peoples being pushed out of their lands by colonial powers had pretty obvious allegories going on. But, it was fantastic. Nuanced, interesting, and a ton of fun.

And, frankly, one of the most interesting campaigns I've ever played in.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

My orcs are deliberately based more on Star Trek Klingons than anything else. Klingons were initially based on the USSR. My orcs are still inherently and reliably evil. So how racist am I?

 

[Hussar]

I played D&D for years and have never seen orks as being specifically asian or middle eastern.
And again, even if you limit it to this part of history because you want to, it has nothing to do with colonialism but with a very common worldview which at several times during history was rather justified.
When horse nomads swarm your country and demand that you surrender or die which they mean quite literally or, when the ones that conquered you steal your children to train them into fanatical warriors for their cause, it is quite understandable that in this situation you see the enemy as CE. And it are those events that got translated into fantasy.

And, that would be perfectly fine if orcs were described as horse nomads.

But, they're not. They're not described as vikings either.

They are being described, rather specifically, as a particular racial stereotype.

But, let's unpack that first sentence shall we? You've never seen orcs as being specifically asian or middle eastern. Fair enough. But, we have direct quotes from Lord of the Rings which does paint them as such. Does your particular experience invalidate that reading? D&D orcs are obviously based pretty heavily on LotR. That's indisputable. If LotR orcs are based on some fairly racist elements, then, well, by association, so are D&D orcs.

And, again, it's not like these are bizarre interpretations that require you to stand on your head under a full moon on the third Wednesday of August. Orcs as "the savages it's okay to murder" is pretty well established in D&D. And, that has some pretty uncomfortable parallels to real world strains of thought, as has been demonstrated in this thread.

See, the problem I'm really having with this discussion isn't the fact that we are having issues talking about what to do going forward. No, my problem is that we've now spent 40 some pages just having to justify having the conversation in the first place. Good grief, how much evidence has to be presented here? If you don't see a problem, fair enough. But, instead of repeatedly insisting that we have to justify that the problem exists at all, why not focus on resolution?

Does anyone really have an issue with the notion that fantasy elements in the game which are linked to racist underpinnings from the past, be given a broader treatment going forward and presented in a more nuanced fashion?

Is that seriously a problem for people?

 

[Hussar]

My orcs are deliberately based more on Star Trek Klingons than anything else. Klingons were initially based on the USSR. My orcs are still inherently and reliably evil. So how racist am I?

Well there's a perfect example.

Even in Star Trek, Klingons were never inherently or reliably evil. And, as Star Trek has progressed through the years, we've gotten a much (sometimes to ad nauseum) broader treatment of Klingons that presents Klingons as a broad range of behaviors from noble to reprehensible.

Would Star Trek be better if Klingons were nothing but mustache twirling villains?

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Would Star Trek be better if Klingons were nothing but mustache twirling villains?

Was Star Trek so much worse when they largely were?

 

[Hussar]

Was Star Trek so much worse when they largely were?

I would argue that they almost never were. Even in TOS, you have episodes like Day of the Dove. But, apart from that? Yes, it was worse. A simplistic caricature, one note race is worse than a deep, nuanced, multifaceted one.

 

[Hussar]

I realize I answered that question wrong. My personal preference isn’t the issue here.

A better question is, does a more nuanced presentation of orcs (or Klingons) make it impossible for you to run simpler orcs?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Obviously if the orcs were clear stand ins for real races (which I don't think they are, but I realize some do) and humans were basically nazis or something that would be different.

I honestly don’t think they’re a stand-in for any real-world race in particular. I think they have been described in terms that have been used as slurs for real-world races. That’s lazy writing and unnecessarily hurtful, even if unintentional, thus problematic.

Imagine, if you will, a case in which nobody would assert that a fantasy race were an analog for a real-world race: a writer uses the word “n____r” as an in-setting derogatory term for the tall, blonde fey who rule the most powerful quasi-European kingdom on the planet. And they’re NOT cast as the antagonists in the main storyline. It’s just that some people in the setting don’t like them, and that’s what they call them.

I think it would still be fair to criticize that author for using real-world racist terminology unnecessarily. He may not be aracist, but he’s definitely being provocative in away that violates The Wheaton Rule.

 

[billd91]

Australia went to war against the Nazis while fiercely maintaing the White Australia Policy. Churchill went to war against the Nazis while resolutely desiring to maintain the British Empire.

Opposed/fought the Nazis doesn't show that someone, or some political outlook, isn't racist.

Yeah, and the US did so with a segregated military.

I didn't say that he wasn't a racist because of his opposition to the Nazis - rather that he opposed using the accomplishments of the northern european culture for racist ends as the Nazis did - which suggests, to me, that his goal in writing an alternative mythology based on northern european culture wasn't in pursuit of racist goals even if his description of orcs and treatment of other cultures is questionable.

And that he's substantially more complicated than your statistical estimation of him. And given Australia's history, you'd probably not like us doing the same statistical estimation of you either.