Mana, Shamans, and the Cultural Misappropriation behind Fantasy Terms

[Umbran]

Mod Note:

@Raunalyn and @Hussar, please stop. Your quibbling is adding nothing to the discussion. Both of you disengage from each other. Thanks.

 

[Umbran]

Do you think that a D&D rulebook is the place to teach about the problems?

If you're going to make an supplement on Cthulhu Mythos horror, a segment addressing it would be called for.

Do you really think that if we stopped using Lovecraft in games, we would forget about racism?

I don't think my response to a post suggesting boycott of all Lovecraft's writing and derivative works even vaguely implies that I think that.

Do please try to keep up with the context. It matters.

 

[Hussar]

If you're going to make an supplement on Cthulhu Mythos horror, a segment addressing it would be called for.

So, the inclusion of Cthulhu in the PHB is fine without comment?

I don't think my response to a post suggesting boycott of all Lovecraft's writing and derivative works even vaguely implies that I think that.

Do please try to keep up with the context. It matters.

Fair enough. You stated that

If you forget the problematic work, you cannot properly remember the harm it did, either.

so, exactly what can we no longer properly remember if we forgot about Lovecraft?

And, note, I am not suggesting a boycott of all Lovecraft's writing and derivative works. I'm sorry if I implied that. I'm suggesting that perhaps, IN D&D, we could pull out direct references to Lovecraft so that I don't have to explain why we are using material from a raging bigot in our game that is supposed to be welcoming to everyone. The point is rather well made that if we are serious about the game being welcoming to everyone, then perhaps it's a good time to eject some historical baggage that really does have some rather brutal origins.

See, since we're talking about context, let's delve a bit more into the notion of "if you don't like it, don't read it." Because, I agree, context matters. A lot.

If I say, "I don't really like Tolkien, it's not my bag. I find it boring to read", well, that's an opinion and you can pretty much take it or leave it. And, in that context, "don't read it then" is probably perfectly fine to say.

However, "I don't like the Mythos in my hobby because the writer of the Mythos considers my children to be worthless degenerates who should be strangled at birth" is a bit of a different context. Is it equal to tell me, "Just don't read it then"?

 

[Umbran]

So, the inclusion of Cthulhu in the PHB is fine without comment?

Once again, context matters. I am not going to give a general stamp of approval of a pig in a poke.

so, exactly what did that mean then if it doesn't meant that we would somehow forget about racism if we forgot about Lovecraft?

If you forget about Lovecraft, you lose context on the damage done by Lovecraft's writing. And, since Lovecraft came to influence much of the horror genre, that's rather a lot of understanding lost.

See, since we're talking about context, let's delve a bit more into the notion of "if you don't like it, don't read it."

That rather simple statement is not my notion. You're free to delve into it, but you're talking about what other folks have said at this point.

 

[Hussar]

/snip

If you forget about Lovecraft, you lose context on the damage done by Lovecraft's writing. And, since Lovecraft came to influence much of the horror genre, that's rather a lot of understanding lost.
/snip

I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't really need to understand Lovecraft to know that Howard's writing is problematic. Or to take a more modern example, Stephen King. Do I really need to know that Lovecraft wrote X in order to look at a later work and recognize bigotry in the later work?

 

[Umbran]

I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't really need to understand Lovecraft to know that Howard's writing is problematic.

Well, now we seem to be making Lovecraft a special case. Why? If Howard is problematic, too, why isn't his work getting the Lovecraft treatment?

My position is not vulnerable to that cascade failure.

Do I really need to know that Lovecraft wrote X in order to look at a later work and recognize bigotry in the later work?

Given how often folks fail to see racism or sexism when they are not themselves the target? Knowing the history enhances your ability to recognize it when it is in front of you.

 

[TheSword]

A large chunk of Eberron is influenced by Cosmic Horror and the Cthulhu Mythos, Xoriat and the Daelkyr for instance. Keith Baker made the Orcs (who Echo the ‘othered’ tribespeople often pictured in the Cthulhu Mythos) the protectors and guardians of the world against the Mythos. It may not have been intentional but turning things like that on its head is a good way of subverting and undoing the harm while keeping the good.

 

[Hussar]

Well, since you mention it, yoinking Howard out probably wouldn't hurt all that much either.

The PHB lists HP Lovecraft as a source of inspiration for players in Appendix E. There is nothing mentioned whatsoever about the history or background there. How is that educating people about the racism in the works?

And, as far as folks failing to see racism or sexism, well, whether or not they've read Lovecraft probably won't suddenly lift the scales from their eyes. There are none so blind and all that.

 

[Hussar]

To be perfectly fair here, I'm probably making more out of this than it needs to be. Lovecraft, honestly, is a very good example of taking something that is fundamentally flawed and reforming it and reclaiming the good parts. Like @TheSword says, Eberron uses lots of Mythos styles material. And, frankly, that's become so ingrained into so much of genre fiction that it would be completely unrealistic to try to remove it.

OTOH, though, if we reclaim the Mythos material, doesn't that mean that we can take Lovecraft off of his pedastal? You want to know about Mythos stuff? There's a hundred authors I can point you to that are doing fantastic Mythos inspired stuff. Do we need to remember Lovecraft at this point?

 

[TheSword]

To be perfectly fair here, I'm probably making more out of this than it needs to be. Lovecraft, honestly, is a very good example of taking something that is fundamentally flawed and reforming it and reclaiming the good parts. Like @TheSword says, Eberron uses lots of Mythos styles material. And, frankly, that's become so ingrained into so much of genre fiction that it would be completely unrealistic to try to remove it.

OTOH, though, if we reclaim the Mythos material, doesn't that mean that we can take Lovecraft off of his pedastal? You want to know about Mythos stuff? There's a hundred authors I can point you to that are doing fantastic Mythos inspired stuff. Do we need to remember Lovecraft at this point?

So much of Lovecraft fiction wasn’t written by him, I never really put him on a pedestal. In my opinion Lovecraft anthologies should have an essay at the start (or in an appendix at the end) referencing some of the issues. To be clear I’d have no problem with either oriental adventures edition having the same thing as part of a pdf pack sale.