D&D 5E On Representation and Roleplaying

[cowpie]

My question here, is who is sad? Who is objecting?

If Native Americans are frustrated with their portrayal in westerns, it's probably better that writers find something else to write their westerns about if they can't seem to nail the Native American perspective. Yeah, that means they don't get the representation they used to, but no representation is better than bad representation.

That representation might even be well-intentioned, but if you get it wrong, you've still got a bunch of cringing, ticked off Native American viewers going "where does this guy get off pretending like he understands us?"

This is why we do our research and use sensitivity readers and not assume our good intentions will protect us. Imagine being the only Native American watching a western movie and seeing how absolutely wrong the writers got the details of your culture, that they could have found out if they had only deigned to ask... and meanwhile the rest of the (white) audience is just sitting there watching the movie going "Yes, yes, this is fine. Aren't we so enlightened with our sympathetic depiction of Native Americans?" I would want to claw my eyes out.

Before the concepts Representation and/or Cultural Appropriation were talked about, Hollywood would just hire a Native American scholar or cultural consultant, who would work with the writer (whatever their ethnicity) to make sure the depiction was authentic. I guess this is similar to a sensitivity reader, but the consultant would only be an adviser--they would not have veto or censorship power over the script. This is because writing is a talent that only a small number of people can do really well. While the consultant knew about their ethnic background, they did not necessarily know about writing or the movie business. That's a whole different skill set. It's important to get someone who can write, and do it on time, since movies cost millions of dollars to make. If the writing is bad, the movie can end up bad, and it won't make it's money back (ie: the price of failure is very high).

Some movie-specific problems to consider:
1) Finding a good Native American writer who is free to work on your project. Hard since, there aren't very many, and they might all be working on other projects.
2) Find a writer who wants to do the job. Even if you find a writer, maybe they just want to write a book, or aren't interested in telling the story you want them to write about, so they turn the job offer down.
3) Find a writer who is the right fit. Sometimes people don't get along or argue, or are unreliable--if the writer can't get the job done on time, or constantly fights with the producers, then don't hire them. Let's face it, some writers are just bad, and having the right ethnicity is no guarantee of quality (much less, a finished screenplay).
4) Even if you find a writer with the right general ethnicity, they aren't necessarily an expert. For example, you are producing a movie about the Iroquois in 1705, and the writer is Sioux with no history training, the writer isn't going to be an expert on the right tribe, or know their history--being Native American is not a guarantee of expertise. Worse, some Iroquois could see the film, and be mad that the Sioux writer got it wrong.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Before the concepts Representation and/or Cultural Appropriation were talked about, Hollywood would just hire a Native American scholar or cultural consultant, who would work with the writer (whatever their ethnicity) to make sure the depiction was authentic.

They usually would not.

That's how we got Johnny Depp with a dead raven on his head.

 

[Ixal]

They usually would not.

That's how we got Johnny Depp with a dead raven on his head.

Just because they hired them, doesn't mean the movie team listened.
They also had a consultant on medieval history on the team when they made the movie where knights had to be hoisted on their horses by cranes....

 

[cowpie]

They usually would not.

That's how we got Johnny Depp with a dead raven on his head.

Yeah, but that's a sucky Jerry Bruckheimer film, and just one example. There are lots of other films where they hired cultural consultants. For example, Johnny Depp in "Dead Man".

 

[Irlo]

I would just refer you back to the article again. The author passed judgement without watching a single episode.

I just read the article. I don’t see the judgement that you see.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Mod Note:

Understand the overall sentiment, but the opening sentence there is a bit provocative. If someone pushes your buttons like that, try not to add fuel to the fire.

Entirely fair. I'd definitely lost my patience.

 

[cowpie]

Just because they hired them, doesn't mean the movie team listened.
They also had a consultant on medieval history on the team when they made the movie where knights had to be hoisted on their horses by cranes....

I guess my point, is that hiring a sensitivity reader is still no guarantee of authenticity, and it carries with it (since the reader is sometimes given powers of censorship) the risk that you'll interfere with the project so much that it ends up being a failure.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm 3-4 generations separated from my northern European ancestors. All I know about their cultures is what I've read in books or seen on screen. That's going to be true for most people after a few generations. I may have had more interest in those cultures growing up, I just don't think it gives me any special privilege or connection.

That was kind of my point about my Briton campaign. It was set in a fantasy version of a place and time of considerable difference; I don't see that I have a special understanding of that place and time just because I'm part Scots.

I think it gets a little more complicated when you have more modern settings where there are still living people who experienced the time (20's Harlem for example) and can at least have talked about it to family members and the like, so there's some immediacy.

But if you're using locations and events from more than about a century ago, you've either done your research or not, and your ethnicity and national origin doesn't seem to do more than put a thumb on the scale there that I can see (it does the latter because maybe you'd have been more inclined to absorb information about it when you were young--but there's no assurance that information would have been any more correct than anyone else's.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

I guess my point, is that hiring a sensitivity reader is still no guarantee of authenticity, and it carries with it (since the reader is sometimes given powers of censorship) the risk that you'll interfere with the project so much that it ends up being a failure.

I doubt the kind of works that would fail for not being insensitive or thoughtless enough would hire a sensitivity reader in the first place.

 

[Thomas Shey]

My question here, is who is sad? Who is objecting?

If Native Americans are frustrated with their portrayal in westerns, it's probably better that writers find something else to write their westerns about if they can't seem to nail the Native American perspective. Yeah, that means they don't get the representation they used to, but no representation is better than bad representation.

I'll note it doesn't end there, though. There are absolutely people who will take issue with anyone outside their group utilizing their culture, and this goes up to 11 the moment they think there's liberties (as inevitably there will be with fantasy of any stripe). Take a look at the pushback Rebecca Roanhorse got for her work.