Racially diverse artwork in D&D...does it influence you?

[billd91]

It could be either. If the nominal setting is Eberron, with lightning rails and a 20th century aesthetic, it comes across as just a picture of a black guy in a suit of armor. If the nominal setting is Greyhawk, with a medieval European aesthetic, it comes across as a token attempt to pander to "current politically correct morality".

Ah, but a real GH afficionado would point out that you were wrong. The skin color of the native Flan of the Flanaess ranges from light bronze to deep brown.

 

[mmadsen]

So all of fantasy has it's roots in medieval romance? Yeah ok, whatever.

Tolkien's works were a conscious effort to recreate medieval romances. Our modern notion of fantasy is largely derivative of Tolkien's work.

As I mentioned earlier, another sub-genre, swords & sorcery, was not derived from medieval romances so much as from adventure fiction, with roots in all kinds of history and then-contemporary adventures -- to the Far East; Deepest, Darkest Africa; etc.

While I enjoy that sub-genre, and it has had its influence on D&D's basic play style, I wouldn't say it's nearly as representative of modern fantasy as Tolkien.

Just to let you know a statement like that does a big disservice to alot of cultures, or shows how narrow your readings based on other cultures may be.

I have done no disservice to any culture by pointing out that the modern fantasy genre is derived from medieval European popular literature ("romance").

Does it have no other influences? Of course not, but it's silly to pretend that other cultures or races are wronged by "Eurocentric" fantasy.

 

[billd91]

The black halfing wasn't all that jarring to me as it was to some people. I didn't even notice her until she got pointed out.

And your experience is, I believe, the goal. Even if some think it's 'pandering', the goal is for the difference to be simply an aesthetic one rather than a political one. And in order for that to happen, since it isn't likely to happen if you wait for society to do it for you, is for the artists to push the envelope and make it happen.
Social and cultural change happens because individuals make it happen until everyone gets to the point you were at when you looked at he halflings.

 

[eyebeams]

Tolkien's works were a conscious effort to recreate medieval romances. Our modern notion of fantasy is largely derivative of Tolkien's work.

This is a common error. Tolkien's work was a conscious attempt to create an English myth cycle to match similar Norse and Celtic traditions. It is not a recreated medieval romance at all.

As I mentioned earlier, another sub-genre, swords & sorcery, was not derived from medieval romances so much as from adventure fiction, with roots in all kinds of history and then-contemporary adventures -- to the Far East; Deepest, Darkest Africa; etc.

While I enjoy that sub-genre, and it has had its influence on D&D's basic play style, I wouldn't say it's nearly as representative of modern fantasy as Tolkien.

D&D is pretty clearly derived from pulp fantasy, from the basic style of play to what Gary Gygax actually pointed out as influences. D&D's demihumans share some cosmetic similarities, but for the most part have none of Tolkien's associations. D&D elves are not a thought experiment about people born without Original Sin, and dwarves are not based on the Jews. No D&D setting is based on the Inklings' experiments with creating new fictive representations of Christianity. Greyhawk does not have a Satan figure The Realms includes a rather scathing parody of Christianity that it nicked from Lieber.

I have done no disservice to any culture by pointing out that the modern fantasy genre is derived from medieval European popular literature ("romance").

Medieval romance is stuff like the Song of Roland. Tolkien was creating a parallel to the sagas -- but his influence on D&D's fundamentals has some pretty clear limits.

Does it have no other influences? Of course not, but it's silly to pretend that other cultures or races are wronged by "Eurocentric" fantasy.

The thing is, there are examples of default whiteness distorting real fantasy settings like Earthsea. Plus -- and this is a big thing to note -- D&D is at this point *just* as pivotal an influence on fantasy fiction as Tolkien. D&D is its own genre and literary locus now and it's about time people stopped trying to fix it to represent something outside itself.

 

[Imaro]

Tolkien's works were a conscious effort to recreate medieval romances. Our modern notion of fantasy is largely derivative of Tolkien's work.

As I mentioned earlier, another sub-genre, swords & sorcery, was not derived from medieval romances so much as from adventure fiction, with roots in all kinds of history and then-contemporary adventures -- to the Far East; Deepest, Darkest Africa; etc.

While I enjoy that sub-genre, and it has had its influence on D&D's basic play style, I wouldn't say it's nearly as representative of modern fantasy as Tolkien.
I have done no disservice to any culture by pointing out that the modern fantasy genre is derived from medieval European popular literature ("romance").

Does it have no other influences? Of course not, but it's silly to pretend that other cultures or races are wronged by "Eurocentric" fantasy.

Okay, I 'm not going to argue semantics... but your first statement wasn't about modern fantasy, it was fantasy in general. Even looking at just modern fantasy, it's not limited to Tolkien derivatives, there are whole subgenres that include urban fantasy, dark fantasy and sword and sorcery among others that don't ape Tolkien. Now if you choose not to read them fine, those are your tastes... but they are in bookstores and others do and they are considered modern fantasy. I mean the newest campaign setting for D&D, Eberron, was billed as a dark fantasy/noir setting, not too much Tolkien there.

Again you do do a disservice by making broad blanket statements. I would argue that Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Avatar the Last Airbender, and others are just as prevalent in the minds of fanatasy buffs (probably moreso in younger generations) as Lord of the Rings is. So again the blanket statements are what is a disservice.

I never said other races or cultures were "wronged" by euro-centric fantasy, so really I don't even know how to respond to that. I will argue that your blanket statements do a disservice to those who draw on (as well as the history of cultures) their own fantasy traditions, stories and art rather than Tolkien for their work when you summararily dismiss their contributions.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I find it ironic the whole mention of GH included along eurocentric, since there's something like 5 distinct human ethnic groups there which could be vaguely mapped to real world ethnic groups. One of them being Arabic, and there's sort of a bunch of Native Americans, South Americans and Roma (aka Gypsies) in that setting.

But even taking eurocenticism into account, I don't think it'll seem out of place if there were Gypsies also known as Roma in a medieval setting. The Roma people actually are descendants of Indians who emigrated to Europe.

But usually with ethnic diversity in settings, I generally prefer it if people sort of dress the way their implied ethnicity does since I like there being these different ethnic dress, with some slight mixtures for the sake of practicality and being slightly different from the real world.

Where there's people that resemble Africans who sort of dress African, with the dashiki shirts or those long shirts with the caps, but maybe not quite the bright colours typically associated with some African clothing. Arabs sort of dress Arabic, but maybe since it isn't quite Islamic less women cover their faces (Al-Quadim had the Pantheist league as sort of the stand-in). Those sort of touches for fantasy worlds I'll be alright with.

 

[Korgoth]

I don't really notice diversity in artwork very much. I think it should be present within a reasonable context. When the people depicted are from the frozen north, I would expect them to be pale. When they're from the burning lands of the south, I would expect them to be dark.

I guess it's a tough balance to strike, especially deliberately. I'm of Nordic ancestry, and I really like seeing art that has Viking dudes looking cool. I am conscious of my ancestry and get an extra charge out of seeing good artwork that celebrates it. Nobody should be required to miss out on that experience! There should be cool artwork celebrating african, asian, Mediterranean, etc. folk as well. But... and this is the hard part... it shouldn't be forced.

If you look at a picture of an adventuring party, you don't want to think "there's the mighty paladin, there's the cute sorceress chick, there's the hobbit and there's the black guy". Somehow the diversity should blend naturally into the other areas of excellent in the artwork, like theme, tone, composition, color, etc.

 

[Cirex]

I feel you dawg.

I'm still pissed my Drow ranger couldn't be white.

Irae T'sarran.

 

[S'mon]

Fun Fact: Ursula K. LeGuin's A Wizard of Earthsea (and sequels) were deliberately written to reflect the world she grew up in, which was predominantly non-white. So there's at least one classic work of fantasy where the hero was intended to be non-Caucasian.

I've read LeGuin's discussion about that, and her complaints about the sci-fi channel casting. I think there's a bit of an issue there that the core Earthsea cultures feel very European, at least to me, and certainly my mind's eye image of the Earthseaers is European-looking, albeit bronzed/tanned. Ironically, LeGuin made the people of Atuan white Nordic looking, but gave them a culture that feels more middle-eastern, so that's how I saw them when I read Tombs of Atuan as a child.

 

[Afrodyte]

But usually with ethnic diversity in settings, I generally prefer it if people sort of dress the way their implied ethnicity does since I like there being these different ethnic dress, with some slight mixtures for the sake of practicality and being slightly different from the real world.

Where there's people that resemble Africans who sort of dress African, with the dashiki shirts or those long shirts with the caps, but maybe not quite the bright colours typically associated with some African clothing. Arabs sort of dress Arabic, but maybe since it isn't quite Islamic less women cover their faces (Al-Quadim had the Pantheist league as sort of the stand-in). Those sort of touches for fantasy worlds I'll be alright with.

*confused*

So . . . you find it jarring when you go out and see non-White people wearing jeans, t-shirts, shorts, flip-flops, sweaters, or business suits? There's nothing particularly African about those items of clothing.

I think what I can't wrap my head around is the need for a justification to have non-Whites exist as normal people in a generic fantasy setting. Why is it so hard to simply imagine non-White characters as normal in a generic fantasy setting? Is it really inconceivable to come across a non-White person in a predominantly White town or city who was actually born there?

To be honest, the feel of standard D&D reminds me more of the Wild West than medieval Europe.