Mana, Shamans, and the Cultural Misappropriation behind Fantasy Terms

Status
Not open for further replies.

log in or register to remove this ad

The Suel are part of the Lost Race genre started by H Rider Haggard's King Solomon's Mines, which was based on the racist (and then colonialist) idea that Great Zimbabwe wasn't built by black people but by light-skinned Phoenicians. The Mound Builders Myth in the US was very similar.


The World of Greyhawk (1980):
"The humanoid bands of the Pomarj, particularly kobolds, orcs, and gnolls, seem to love this forest [Suss], and many hundreds are known to dwell within its depths... A lost, ruined city of the Old Suloise is said to be hidden somewhere in the Suss forest"

Well- there's something to what you say here, but on the other hand, the GH lore includes ancient migrations by the Suel, Baklunish, etc, and even has pictures of where they migrated. And I think that, especially in the 1e conception of the humanoid (as opposed to the demihumans), it's fair to say that this is a different case than in the real world examples, because it's the actual history of the fantasy world instead of the sort of pseudohistorical nonsense promoted by the real world examples you cite. I'm not saying that makes it immune to the concerns raised here, but I do think it puts it on a different footing, as does the explicitly nonhuman nature of e.g. orcs and goblinoids in 1e. Remember, those were absolutely NOT player races in their early edition incarnations- they were monsters. Again, not that that puts them above concern; just that it really is a beast of a different type than the real world lost race myths. I mean, in fantasy, the 'lost civilization' trope is a longstanding one and one that leads to a lot of adventures. I don't have a problem with a lost human people having ruins in an area now populated by savage orcs and gnolls, but I do think it's worth having examples of the converse as well- savage humans living on the ruins of an elder civilization of hobgoblins or lizardfolk or what have you.

I do think that the idea of having adventurers go into such an now-savage-once-civilized area and discovering that the so-called elder human ruins are actually the ruins of the previous orcish (or whatever) civilization is a cool way to twist the stereotype, though.
 

Again, that isn't true. Drow were a player race in 1e. I'm pretty sure Dragon had rules for playing humanoids.
 

Hiya!

You say...

But as noted above, using these terms are not without their problems, as these terms (and a number others) entered our lexicon through Euro-American cultural misappropriation.

...and I say "...entered out lexicon through our shared Euro-American culture and the flexibility of the English language".

ToMAYto toMAHto and all that.

"Europeans" and "Americans" have their own cultures. They have their own ways of describing the world. That typically involves taking what they like from other cultures, keeping what they want, tossing out what they don't, and then adapting what's left for their own purposes/uses. Just like how other cultures do the exact same thing, but taking from Euro-American, dropping what they don't like, adapting what they want to their own particular country/culture's "style". For example, all the "American Idol" copy-cat shows from other countries; all basically the same idea, but with slightly different rules, expectations of what is a "good act" and what is a "bad act". But this is a TV show for entertainment...hardly anything to worry about.

...or maybe the idea of the modern hamburger, but with toppings, condiments, etc being switched out for what the culture/country/ethnicity likes (e.g., McDonald's in Japan has a Big Mac with teriyaki, and they have something called a 'Moonviewing Burger'...which is a burger with the main topping on the patty being an egg). That would be considered "cultural misappropriation", would it not?

Are all those McDonald's "misappropriating American culture"? No. Because EVERY culture/country does the same thing; it's human nature to see something from another culture, equate it to something familiar within that persons own culture, and then adapt it to what they want (e.g., an egg on a burger). It's not a bad thing. It's a good thing. At least in my view. :)

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 

...or maybe the idea of the modern hamburger, but with toppings, condiments, etc being switched out for what the culture/country/ethnicity likes (e.g., McDonald's in Japan has a Big Mac with teriyaki, and they have something called a 'Moonviewing Burger'...which is a burger with the main topping on the patty being an egg). That would be considered "cultural misappropriation", would it not?

Are all those McDonald's "misappropriating American culture"? No. Because EVERY culture/country does the same thing; it's human nature to see something from another culture, equate it to something familiar within that persons own culture, and then adapt it to what they want (e.g., an egg on a burger). It's not a bad thing. It's a good thing. At least in my view. :)
Hiya? I think that your understanding of cultural misappropriation may be sorely lacking if you believe that an American fast food chain customizing their menu for Japanese customers somehow debunks the concept. Because, no, that would not be considered cultural misappropriation.
 

You know, I do like pineapple on my pizza. Hawaiian Pizzas taste good, and I will eat one once in a while. Does mean I have multi-classed?

I had a chance to chaperone a HS trip to Italy, and while in Rome we were served a Caesars Salad. I'm now sceptical of the authenticity of both recipes (US and Roman). If Caesar was really eating the same salad we were served, his cook was ripping him off ! (One student said the lettuce had been replaced with garden weeds.)
 

You know, I do like pineapple on my pizza. Hawaiian Pizzas taste good, and I will eat one once in a while. Does mean I have multi-classed?

I had a chance to chaperone a HS trip to Italy, and while in Rome we were served a Caesars Salad. I'm now sceptical of the authenticity of both recipes (US and Roman). If Caesar was really eating the same salad we were served, his cook was ripping him off ! (One student said the lettuce had been replaced with garden weeds.)
Caesar salad is not named after Gaius Julius Caesar, any of his relatives or any Roman Emperor, it is named after restaurateur Caesar Cardini.
 

I don't know what you mean by a "generic tribe". Are you thinking of the Gauls who fought Caesar? The Lakota (and allies) who fought Custer? The Zulu's who fought Chelmsford? Some other people(s)?

I'm not sure why you are adopting the Bill Gates/Mark Zuckerberg level of confusion here where simple words become suddenly unclear. Generic as in any type of tribesman from any era and any location.

I've focused on combat because D&D doesn't use stats for much else (eg it doesn't set out relationships or similar pscyho-social phenomena in stat terms). Ther stats (ability scores and hit points) of all the peoples I've just mentioned are the same as any other generic humans. And their ACs and damage can be worked out from their equipment.

Probably at the heart of my point was that AD&D's "geeneric tribesman" is a cannibal who keeps prisoners for food and lives in a grass, bamboo or mud hut. I don't know if that's part of Ed Greenwood's vision of his "Uthgardt barbarians". But my guess would be that they don't. And that their housing is not described as "huts". Given that "Uthgardt" seems like it's intended to evoke Nordic or Germanic peoeples my guess would be that they're not.

Here I agree with you that the cannibalism was unnecessary, as well as the fixed location (the latter issue I mentioned earlier). Thankfully 5e has evolved from there allowing the DM to decide on the type of primitive culture of the tribe to be injected into the campaign.
 

I think part of the broader issue is that most people aren't genre scholars. They like this story or that story or this author or that author and that's about as far as the examination goes. People don't very often start delving down into the history of the genre (or any genre) unless they are already invested in literary traditions. So, it's entirely possible that someone reading, say, Stephen King loves King's horror but has no idea who H. P. Lovecraft or August Derlith are. And, frankly, they don't care. They like the books ...(snip)...

This is me. I wouldn't event think of looking at the tribesman INT score, nevermind comparing it to anyone other NPC. The INT is not why I would utilise the tribesman stat block.

You hear all these people talk about how they don't see color, or don't see this or that, yet, change Starbuck's gender in BSG and people lose their minds. Or Doctor Who? The one character in genre fiction where gender and race change makes the MOST sense, and people still freak out about it. Imagine how much people would have lost their minds if Gandalf was played by Idris Alba.

The same people would also not want Patrick Stewart to play Luke Cage or Lucy Liu to play the role of Uhura. I'm not saying all changes are bad or all changes are good either, for me it is subjective - but generally (personally) I tend to towards tradition.
I like my Luke Cage black, I like my M-J Watson with red hair and I was no fan of Amy Adams as Lois Lane straight off the bat because of her look (hair) - it didn't gel with thick lustrous black hair of Teri Hatcher or the one I had seen so many times depicted in the comics.
 
Last edited:

You hear all these people talk about how they don't see color, or don't see this or that, yet, change Starbuck's gender in BSG and people lose their minds. Or Doctor Who? The one character in genre fiction where gender and race change makes the MOST sense, and people still freak out about it. Imagine how much people would have lost their minds if Gandalf was played by Idris Alba.

You sure it is the same people? I get a feeling it isn't.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top