Well, we are all limited to our own identities, but I still think people can make informed attempts to understand other points of view and other experiences. In terms of not being targeted, maybe not in the case of the OA book, but in many other instances I had in mind for historical readings, I was certainly among the groups targeted. It is hard to read old books and not encounter someone with negative feelings or even hatred towards who you are at some point. Which is my point. And some of that may be having a history background. Where when I encounter something like that, my impulse is curiosity.
That is one of the reasons I brought up Lovecraft. And the Irish and Scottish stuff is no accident. It is one of the reasons people need to take a more nuanced lens to Lovecraft's attitudes on race (I am not defending his views on race, just pointing out it is a different kind of racism than people are accustomed to thinking about). Now I should say, it has been about ten years since I have done heavy reading of Lovecraft (I read him almost religiously in high school and into my 20s). More recently I've been fonder of Howard (I just like Conan stories a lot for some reason). I am hoping to go back and read all of Lovecraft again when I have time to do so. So my breakdown here might be mixing up details I am remembering. I am going by what I remember (the most recent re-read of Lovecraft for me was Herbert West about a year ago when I rewatched the re-animator).
His racism, and I think he is too big a topic to really get into in this thread but I want to address it, is uniquely patrician New England form of racism. And that is an easily misread form of racism. It isn't like the racism of say the segregated south, where the emphasis is on the dividing line between white and black. It is more like a continuum and grounded in xenophobia and concern about bloodlines I think. It is a type of racism that is very specific about what it likes: English Blood (and specifically people in New England with bloodlines that can be traced back to the very early days of the first settlers). The term we used to use her for that is a Yankee. That word means other things in other parts of the country, and even in New England today its largely lost the meaning I am using here. But when I was a kid when my grandfather talked about yankees, he wasn't talking about him and I, he was talking about New England patricians). I am Italian, Jewish and Irish: as far as I can tell from reading his stories and some of the things he has said, Lovecraft had misgivings about all of those groups (though he did marry a Jewish woman, so his feelings clearly complicated). And I believe it was the Irish he held in the lowest regard among the three (I could be wrong on that). My point here is just that, if you are not English, there is a good chance that Lovecraft's xenophobia and racism are targeted at you (some more than others obviously). Because it is about ethnic purity, and the Anglo-heritage of New England, versus the melting pot and new immigrant groups breathing life into the culture. And that kind of thinking is something I remember encountering still in New England as a kid. Again it had mostly faded but there were traces of it. In my grandfather's generation (he was born in the 20s) it was a lot more common. He told me for example the Italian from the brickyard (a section of Lynn where the italians used to live) weren't allowed to go into the Diamond District. I don't think this was an official decree. I doubt there was an ordinance against it, but it was known he couldn't go there freely (unless he was helping build a wall or something).
I do think it is also just a complicated topic with Lovecraft and race, and I am not refreshed enough on his writing to comment deeply. But I think in terms of when and where he lived, that viewpoint wasn't all that uncommon (I even remember bumping into it in the 80s here). And he was a very complicated person. In these discussions I think we often get a very simplified presentation from ether the 'he was not a racist' or 'he was a racist' camp, and the reality is pretty messy and evolves over time (and seems to change in different contexts).
What I will say is I think we sometimes make the mistake of reading everything he wrote through the lens of his racism. Or misapplying exactly what races he has in mind. There are a number of stories I remember where you have these old new england communities and I actually read the racial stuff in some of those as being more about inbred New England patricians in places like Marblehead (but I have seen others interpret them as other groups). I've also read plenty of stories where I don't think race was really a big concern in his mind and people have projected that onto the tales. I am not saying my interpretations are the correct ones, this is just how I reacted to some of those stories when I first read them (and I think being from this region helped inform that intrepration). The race thing is there for sure in places (and it is often directed at everything from black people to Italians), but I think we are so conscious of it now it is becoming our primary lens for reading Lovecraft and lovecraft was a deep horror writer who wasn't soley about race.
It's not complicated at all. Lovecraft was racist. Racist by today's standards, and racist by his day's standards.
Is it valuable to explore the nuance of his racism? Sure, if you are interested in that. Is doing so necessary to having an informed opinion on the man and his work? No.
What do we do about it? The man is, of course, long dead.
Some, once they find out how racist the dude was, decide not to read his works anymore, or even newer works in the mythos. That's fine and fair. Others decide that, despite his racism, his work has value, and choose to read it anyway. That's fine and fair too, as long as your are aware and acknowledging the racism within his stories. Many creators build on his stories, but work hard to remove the racist elements so that more people can enjoy the weird horror of the mythos stories. That's my favorite response!
The response I don't like is from folks who dismiss his racism as "
not that bad" or "
of the time" (not referring to you
@Bedrockgames). Or who adapt or build upon his work and carry over that racism into new stories and games, even if unintentionally. That furthers the harm.
Back to Oriental Adventures . . .
Oriental Adventures is a racist work. Not intentionally racist, but it's a part of the systematic racism of the West towards Asia. It's important to be aware of this, and to strive to do better. Can we have good discussions about the specifics of how OA is racist? Yes, I think that's valuable. But I also think some dishonest debaters deliberately pull these discussions into the weeds as a debate tactic to lessen the problems with the title (again, not aimed at you
@Bedrockgames).
If all a gamer knows is that OA is a super problematic title, and forms an opinion on that without knowing all of the details, that's okay. If they decide to not purchase it, read it, or use it in their games . . . that's fine and fair.
Is it okay for gamers to use the title and build on it? Use it at their table? Create new products, fan products or products for publication, based on Oriental Adventures? In my view, if you going to do that, you do need to be aware of some of the details and have a feeling for HOW and WHY the title is problematic, so that you don't carry that over to your table, or into your new DM's Guild product. And you certainly shouldn't include the word "oriental" in your title!
