Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Asian D&D
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8969064" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Okay. You may not like what I have to say, but you have asked, so I will provide. This will get <em>long</em>.</p><p></p><p></p><p>"Cultural appropriation" is a complex and difficult topic that, IMO, a lot of people discuss poorly, even when they mean well and wish only to prevent problems. In the best sense of the term, people use it as a gentle but firm reminder that (a) not every story is appropriate for telling in every context/situation, (b) many cultural things require context or background information that is too complex/nuanced to work with easily, and (c) it's <em>very</em> easy to be <em>very</em> hurtful by talking about something you don't fully understand, even if you have done research first. At its worst, "cultural appropriation" becomes a form of gatekeeping, refusing to let anyone mix, borrow from, or connect with cultures other than their birth culture, chilling creative expression and condemning anyone who takes interest in outside cultures (ironically, thus fighting against the very goal of the term, greater inclusivity, respect, and understanding.)</p><p></p><p>In practice, most discussions are in the middle somewhere, and thus very fraught. But here's a useful starting point: People who come from powerful, often colonizing cultures (which, unfortunately, includes most of the major cultures that comprise "Western culture" collectively) have a very bad history of taking deeply important beliefs, practices, or artefacts from cultures they have subjugated and colonized, and then using those things in simplistic, exploitative, or even derogatory ways. Consider, for example, the enormous amount of Egyptian artifacts....that are kept in England, because England excavated them and then took them away. Whether or not you agree, the Egyptian people believe their culture has been appropriated (physically, in this case) in order to enrich foreigners (museum entry fees, scientific research, etc.)</p><p></p><p>There are some stories which are not intended to be shared with outsiders--ever. The "skin-walker," for example, is a Navajo cultural concept that often gets employed as a more exotic, fancy-sounding term for "shapeshifter" or the like. But this story is considered <em>deeply private</em> by the Navajo people. They <em>do not</em> talk about it with non-Navajo, and it doesn't matter to them why an outsider might want to know. As one Navajo scholar (and tribe member) put it: "these are not things that need or should be discussed by outsiders. At all. I’m sorry if that seems 'unfair,' but that’s how our cultures survive." Using this term in this way is, simply, "cultural appropriation" and frankly pretty lazy--it's a no-effort way of adding exotic spice to a story. We can, and should, do better.</p><p></p><p>BUT. As I said above, that doesn't mean we cannot draw on other cultures. That's something we should be able to do. We just need to be considerate when we do so. Doing research, talking to actual members of that culture, reading books written by them, etc.--that's part of how you do your due diligence and show respect and consideration.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not particularly. They are not precisely historically accurate, but there is a difference between being a <em>caricature</em> and being a <em>fantasy</em>. A caricature is, by definition, distorted to the point of being unrepresentative. Most pseudo-medieval settings are not so; indeed, many of them are rather modest in what alterations they make. (The bigger problem is that pop history tells us that the Medieval Period was the Dung Ages, when it emphatically was not.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not too much. Usually, they are instead represented as distinct <em>components</em> of a world. So the Druids come from one area, the Monks from a different area, the Clerics from a third, etc. Further, while it is true that (for example) Italy and France and Spain have different cultures <em>today</em>, in Ye Olden Dayse, they were much more closely linked, because they retained their Roman roots to a stronger degree than they do now. That's...just sort of how culture works. "French" (or "Frankish" if you prefer) as a completely distinct culture is less than 1500 years old, because 1500 years ago, Rome had <em>only just fallen</em>, and many people at the time didn't even realize it had! (Rome's fall took a lot longer than most people realize. It wasn't abrupt.)</p><p></p><p>Further, because of the unifying influence of Catholicism on Europe, there was a very strong sense in which, while Europe <em>did</em> develop (many!) individual cultures, those cultures retained numerous common identity elements, which only began to really fully split apart when Martin Luther started the Reformation...which was only about 500 years ago. So, while it is correct that many elements are drawn upon, they are not a "miss-mash," but rather (in general) intentional and careful selection of specific elements being mixed together for a specific, intended experience.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not...really? None of the religions in pseudo-medieval fantasy fiction have any real resemblance to...any religion at all, actually. Hardcore henotheism is a relatively rare form of religious practice. I'm not sure what you mean by "concepts" and "values," since both of those things actually <em>were</em> pretty pan-European during the Medieval Period. Courtly love wasn't just a French thing, it was all over the continent. Catholic values weren't just a Papal States thing, they were enforced everywhere Catholicism could reach, which (for basically all of the Medieval Period) was <em>all of Europe</em>. So...yeah, I don't really agree with any of this.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's not a matter of skin hue. The Sami peoples, for example, generally would not be included in this sort of thing. The Romani <em>definitely</em> wouldn't be--they are very frequently depicted in horrible, stereotypical ways in fiction, despite being (to my eyes) frequently indistinguishable from various European groups. Conversely, Egyptian mythology is generally considered to be a part of this whole kit and kaboodle, despite native Egyptians being non-White (IIRC, the actual peoples of ancient Egypt saw themselves as having <em>reddish</em> skin?)</p><p></p><p>Again, the problem <em>isn't</em> that we treat Europe as though it were one singular monolithic culture. It's that we are <em>inside</em> that culture (because there is "Western" culture, and "European" culture within that, and "Greek" or "Roman" or "Egyptian" etc. within those, and further and finer subdivisions from there!) By being inside the European milieu, we necessarily have different awareness. That doesn't mean it's all totally cool, as I noted with Rick Riordan and his unpleasant surprise at learning that modern Hellenism exists. But it's necessarily <em>easier</em> because we share tons of common backdrop that we <em>don't</em> share with, say, sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, or the cultures of North/Central/South America.</p><p></p><p></p><p>That is not true. It's quite easy to erase names, but still evoke something quite offensive nonetheless. E.g., "Ming the Merciless" may be an alien and you could remove the name "Ming" and it would still be a yellowface portrayal. You could re-name the "wendigo" to "danwegi" or something and it would still be lifted out of the context where it has meaning and used as a lazy form of exoticism.</p><p></p><p>The true way to do all this is...show respect and understanding. Think of it like being a guest in someone else's house. You ask politely where the bathroom is, rather than hunting through every room to find it. You don't eat the last slice of pizza without asking. You clean up after yourself without being asked, because that's just basic politeness. Etc. The same applies here.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not really. Greek and Roman mythology is actively taught at public schools in the United States. (I actually read the <em>Odyssey</em> my freshman year of high school, and various other works of Greek and Roman literature in later years.) Norse mythology is somewhat less understood, but this is in part because <em>no one</em> knows the absolute truth there--all we have are filtered, biased, way-late secondary sources.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Except that we never see that former thing. You <em>never</em> see Norsemen do that. That's why I used it as an example. The closest thing that has ever been <em>like</em> that are <em>God of War 2018</em> and <em>God of War: Ragnarok</em>. And in those, it's explicit that Kratos has left his homeland behind--and that the people he's talking to <em>know</em> what happened to Greece and how much of a <em>mess</em> Kratos made of things. There's still no Norsemen swaring on the Styx.</p><p></p><p>Yet we really, actually do get caricatures--things <em>completely</em> distorted far, far away from anything remotely like representation--that mix things like (as Red from OSP put it): the rigid caste system and social structure of Vedic period India (aka <em>thousands of years ago</em>), the honor code of a highly fictionalized form of <em>bushido</em> (Renaissance-era Japan), and the opiate addiction of 19th-century China. That happens...a lot in Western fiction. Prior to the Civil Rights movement, it was <em>effectively all fiction about Asia</em>. This is why I'm saying the depictions simply aren't comparable. The former <em>never ever</em> includes caricatures on this level. The latter <em>almost always did</em> until we started caring about accuracy. At which point the stereotypes flipped to a new and different thing (as stated, "model minority" status for Asians in the West.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>No. Each one is an <em>adaptation</em>. Some adaptations are caricatures. Others are not. That is the key difference here.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Correct. Most Westerners are woefully ignorant about the East, for a variety of reasons--not all of them entirely our fault. Japan <em>did</em> spend a couple of centuries refusing to interact with the outside world, after all!</p><p></p><p></p><p>It "can," in the sense that it is physically possible for this to be true. However, in the <strong><em><u>VAST</u></em></strong> majority of cases, it will not be. It will be significantly worse, for many different reasons: language barriers, historical patterns (the aforementioned <em>sakoku</em> period of Japanese isolation, Communist China purging its own history under Mao, terrible wars, etc.), poor demographic interaction (Asian-Americans are almost exclusively found closer to the West coast, where they tend to migrate to the US, much as British-Indians tend to be found more toward the south of England where their ancestors were more likely to make port), racism in <em>either direction</em>, intentional efforts at obfuscation <em>in either direction</em>, etc. It's a difficult and complicated thing, doubly so because the geographic separation means there has been far less literature exchange than there was between the regions of Europe.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure. But you're also going to find it a lot harder to find reliable, unbiased sources <em>in your native language</em>. That's a serious stumbling block. Pictures are good and talking to individual people is useful <em>if possible</em>, but many people need to make use of books and other media sources, and those sources are notoriously difficult to acquire. By comparison, literature about ancient European religious traditions is EVERYWHERE in English. Like, literally. Much of our modern English is built on the work of Shakespeare (and the KJV Bible, but that's not relevant here), and Shakespeare wrote multiple plays about ancient Greek and Roman characters!</p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, I deny that every fantasy is a caricature. Caricature is not the same as <em>adaptation</em>. Some adaptations are caricatures. Some are not.</p><p></p><p>I never said it was IMPOSSIBLE for it to be more accurate. But <em>in order</em> for it to be more accurate, you're going to have to do tons of research on something that, likely, won't have even <em>one</em> written source in your native language. You're gong to have to do a ton of digging, and dubious translations, and (if you're lucky) interviewing real people with expertise on the subject. In other words...you're going to have to do <em>all the things that you would do to avoid cultural appropriation</em>. All the things I've <em>explicitly said</em> were the ways to avoid it earlier in this thread.</p><p></p><p></p><p>But that's the problem. People LITERALLY ARE still using "yellow-skinned orks with devil faced masks" etc. Those <em>blatant caricatures</em>--not just fantasies, ACTUAL, completely lazy caricatures--are STILL being used. Hence why I gave an example of a major film produced in the US by a major company (Universal) with a yellowface character.</p><p></p><p>If you do real, serious research, rather than just inventing stuff based off what you've heard; if you talk to actual members of the culture(s) involved and get their stories; if you ask for help from an editor who can review your stuff and point out mistakes; if you take the time to actually <em>understand</em> the context for the things you're drawing upon; then OF COURSE you aren't engaging in cultural appropriation. Because you've done all the things necessary to NOT be that. That's literally what I've been asking for people to do! Repeatedly!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8969064, member: 6790260"] Okay. You may not like what I have to say, but you have asked, so I will provide. This will get [I]long[/I]. "Cultural appropriation" is a complex and difficult topic that, IMO, a lot of people discuss poorly, even when they mean well and wish only to prevent problems. In the best sense of the term, people use it as a gentle but firm reminder that (a) not every story is appropriate for telling in every context/situation, (b) many cultural things require context or background information that is too complex/nuanced to work with easily, and (c) it's [I]very[/I] easy to be [I]very[/I] hurtful by talking about something you don't fully understand, even if you have done research first. At its worst, "cultural appropriation" becomes a form of gatekeeping, refusing to let anyone mix, borrow from, or connect with cultures other than their birth culture, chilling creative expression and condemning anyone who takes interest in outside cultures (ironically, thus fighting against the very goal of the term, greater inclusivity, respect, and understanding.) In practice, most discussions are in the middle somewhere, and thus very fraught. But here's a useful starting point: People who come from powerful, often colonizing cultures (which, unfortunately, includes most of the major cultures that comprise "Western culture" collectively) have a very bad history of taking deeply important beliefs, practices, or artefacts from cultures they have subjugated and colonized, and then using those things in simplistic, exploitative, or even derogatory ways. Consider, for example, the enormous amount of Egyptian artifacts....that are kept in England, because England excavated them and then took them away. Whether or not you agree, the Egyptian people believe their culture has been appropriated (physically, in this case) in order to enrich foreigners (museum entry fees, scientific research, etc.) There are some stories which are not intended to be shared with outsiders--ever. The "skin-walker," for example, is a Navajo cultural concept that often gets employed as a more exotic, fancy-sounding term for "shapeshifter" or the like. But this story is considered [I]deeply private[/I] by the Navajo people. They [I]do not[/I] talk about it with non-Navajo, and it doesn't matter to them why an outsider might want to know. As one Navajo scholar (and tribe member) put it: "these are not things that need or should be discussed by outsiders. At all. I’m sorry if that seems 'unfair,' but that’s how our cultures survive." Using this term in this way is, simply, "cultural appropriation" and frankly pretty lazy--it's a no-effort way of adding exotic spice to a story. We can, and should, do better. BUT. As I said above, that doesn't mean we cannot draw on other cultures. That's something we should be able to do. We just need to be considerate when we do so. Doing research, talking to actual members of that culture, reading books written by them, etc.--that's part of how you do your due diligence and show respect and consideration. Not particularly. They are not precisely historically accurate, but there is a difference between being a [I]caricature[/I] and being a [I]fantasy[/I]. A caricature is, by definition, distorted to the point of being unrepresentative. Most pseudo-medieval settings are not so; indeed, many of them are rather modest in what alterations they make. (The bigger problem is that pop history tells us that the Medieval Period was the Dung Ages, when it emphatically was not.) Not too much. Usually, they are instead represented as distinct [I]components[/I] of a world. So the Druids come from one area, the Monks from a different area, the Clerics from a third, etc. Further, while it is true that (for example) Italy and France and Spain have different cultures [I]today[/I], in Ye Olden Dayse, they were much more closely linked, because they retained their Roman roots to a stronger degree than they do now. That's...just sort of how culture works. "French" (or "Frankish" if you prefer) as a completely distinct culture is less than 1500 years old, because 1500 years ago, Rome had [I]only just fallen[/I], and many people at the time didn't even realize it had! (Rome's fall took a lot longer than most people realize. It wasn't abrupt.) Further, because of the unifying influence of Catholicism on Europe, there was a very strong sense in which, while Europe [I]did[/I] develop (many!) individual cultures, those cultures retained numerous common identity elements, which only began to really fully split apart when Martin Luther started the Reformation...which was only about 500 years ago. So, while it is correct that many elements are drawn upon, they are not a "miss-mash," but rather (in general) intentional and careful selection of specific elements being mixed together for a specific, intended experience. Not...really? None of the religions in pseudo-medieval fantasy fiction have any real resemblance to...any religion at all, actually. Hardcore henotheism is a relatively rare form of religious practice. I'm not sure what you mean by "concepts" and "values," since both of those things actually [I]were[/I] pretty pan-European during the Medieval Period. Courtly love wasn't just a French thing, it was all over the continent. Catholic values weren't just a Papal States thing, they were enforced everywhere Catholicism could reach, which (for basically all of the Medieval Period) was [I]all of Europe[/I]. So...yeah, I don't really agree with any of this. It's not a matter of skin hue. The Sami peoples, for example, generally would not be included in this sort of thing. The Romani [I]definitely[/I] wouldn't be--they are very frequently depicted in horrible, stereotypical ways in fiction, despite being (to my eyes) frequently indistinguishable from various European groups. Conversely, Egyptian mythology is generally considered to be a part of this whole kit and kaboodle, despite native Egyptians being non-White (IIRC, the actual peoples of ancient Egypt saw themselves as having [I]reddish[/I] skin?) Again, the problem [I]isn't[/I] that we treat Europe as though it were one singular monolithic culture. It's that we are [I]inside[/I] that culture (because there is "Western" culture, and "European" culture within that, and "Greek" or "Roman" or "Egyptian" etc. within those, and further and finer subdivisions from there!) By being inside the European milieu, we necessarily have different awareness. That doesn't mean it's all totally cool, as I noted with Rick Riordan and his unpleasant surprise at learning that modern Hellenism exists. But it's necessarily [I]easier[/I] because we share tons of common backdrop that we [I]don't[/I] share with, say, sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, or the cultures of North/Central/South America. That is not true. It's quite easy to erase names, but still evoke something quite offensive nonetheless. E.g., "Ming the Merciless" may be an alien and you could remove the name "Ming" and it would still be a yellowface portrayal. You could re-name the "wendigo" to "danwegi" or something and it would still be lifted out of the context where it has meaning and used as a lazy form of exoticism. The true way to do all this is...show respect and understanding. Think of it like being a guest in someone else's house. You ask politely where the bathroom is, rather than hunting through every room to find it. You don't eat the last slice of pizza without asking. You clean up after yourself without being asked, because that's just basic politeness. Etc. The same applies here. Not really. Greek and Roman mythology is actively taught at public schools in the United States. (I actually read the [I]Odyssey[/I] my freshman year of high school, and various other works of Greek and Roman literature in later years.) Norse mythology is somewhat less understood, but this is in part because [I]no one[/I] knows the absolute truth there--all we have are filtered, biased, way-late secondary sources. Except that we never see that former thing. You [I]never[/I] see Norsemen do that. That's why I used it as an example. The closest thing that has ever been [I]like[/I] that are [I]God of War 2018[/I] and [I]God of War: Ragnarok[/I]. And in those, it's explicit that Kratos has left his homeland behind--and that the people he's talking to [I]know[/I] what happened to Greece and how much of a [I]mess[/I] Kratos made of things. There's still no Norsemen swaring on the Styx. Yet we really, actually do get caricatures--things [I]completely[/I] distorted far, far away from anything remotely like representation--that mix things like (as Red from OSP put it): the rigid caste system and social structure of Vedic period India (aka [I]thousands of years ago[/I]), the honor code of a highly fictionalized form of [I]bushido[/I] (Renaissance-era Japan), and the opiate addiction of 19th-century China. That happens...a lot in Western fiction. Prior to the Civil Rights movement, it was [I]effectively all fiction about Asia[/I]. This is why I'm saying the depictions simply aren't comparable. The former [I]never ever[/I] includes caricatures on this level. The latter [I]almost always did[/I] until we started caring about accuracy. At which point the stereotypes flipped to a new and different thing (as stated, "model minority" status for Asians in the West.) No. Each one is an [I]adaptation[/I]. Some adaptations are caricatures. Others are not. That is the key difference here. Correct. Most Westerners are woefully ignorant about the East, for a variety of reasons--not all of them entirely our fault. Japan [I]did[/I] spend a couple of centuries refusing to interact with the outside world, after all! It "can," in the sense that it is physically possible for this to be true. However, in the [B][I][U]VAST[/U][/I][/B] majority of cases, it will not be. It will be significantly worse, for many different reasons: language barriers, historical patterns (the aforementioned [I]sakoku[/I] period of Japanese isolation, Communist China purging its own history under Mao, terrible wars, etc.), poor demographic interaction (Asian-Americans are almost exclusively found closer to the West coast, where they tend to migrate to the US, much as British-Indians tend to be found more toward the south of England where their ancestors were more likely to make port), racism in [I]either direction[/I], intentional efforts at obfuscation [I]in either direction[/I], etc. It's a difficult and complicated thing, doubly so because the geographic separation means there has been far less literature exchange than there was between the regions of Europe. Sure. But you're also going to find it a lot harder to find reliable, unbiased sources [I]in your native language[/I]. That's a serious stumbling block. Pictures are good and talking to individual people is useful [I]if possible[/I], but many people need to make use of books and other media sources, and those sources are notoriously difficult to acquire. By comparison, literature about ancient European religious traditions is EVERYWHERE in English. Like, literally. Much of our modern English is built on the work of Shakespeare (and the KJV Bible, but that's not relevant here), and Shakespeare wrote multiple plays about ancient Greek and Roman characters! Again, I deny that every fantasy is a caricature. Caricature is not the same as [I]adaptation[/I]. Some adaptations are caricatures. Some are not. I never said it was IMPOSSIBLE for it to be more accurate. But [I]in order[/I] for it to be more accurate, you're going to have to do tons of research on something that, likely, won't have even [I]one[/I] written source in your native language. You're gong to have to do a ton of digging, and dubious translations, and (if you're lucky) interviewing real people with expertise on the subject. In other words...you're going to have to do [I]all the things that you would do to avoid cultural appropriation[/I]. All the things I've [I]explicitly said[/I] were the ways to avoid it earlier in this thread. But that's the problem. People LITERALLY ARE still using "yellow-skinned orks with devil faced masks" etc. Those [I]blatant caricatures[/I]--not just fantasies, ACTUAL, completely lazy caricatures--are STILL being used. Hence why I gave an example of a major film produced in the US by a major company (Universal) with a yellowface character. If you do real, serious research, rather than just inventing stuff based off what you've heard; if you talk to actual members of the culture(s) involved and get their stories; if you ask for help from an editor who can review your stuff and point out mistakes; if you take the time to actually [I]understand[/I] the context for the things you're drawing upon; then OF COURSE you aren't engaging in cultural appropriation. Because you've done all the things necessary to NOT be that. That's literally what I've been asking for people to do! Repeatedly! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Asian D&D
Top