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

[Lurks-no-More]

Their xenophobia really didn't have much to do with ethnicity as we understand it.

If I'm not mistaken, the "modern" racism and emphasis on skin color etc. started only with the Age of Exploration, and the colonialism that followed.

 

[MrApothecary]

While D&D doesn't have to be in a pseudo-European setting, but if in an individual campaign it is, then anyone who wants to play a black character should probably be a foreigner. Or unless they is part of a migrant ethnic group, like the Roma (Gypsies) that originally come from India. They shouldn't have ancestry indigenous to a pseudo-European climate, because dark skin doesn't make any sense as an adaption there.

Which is why the Drow have always annoyed me. They should be pale as snow. I could say they use if for camoflouge in the shadows, but they have white hair that would render it moot.

 

[The Little Raven]

If I'm not mistaken, the "modern" racism and emphasis on skin color etc. started only with the Age of Exploration, and the colonialism that followed.

I dunno, I found Pope Urban II's speech to incite the Crusades to be chock full of the elements of modern racism. Deus vult, and all that.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

The work takes great delight in describing the color of this brother as mixed, with white and black patches.

So racial diversity was not known in Europe at that time.

LOL patches.

Indicates that the writer never met a mixed race individual as would be expected. There was a medieval travalogue, I forget its name, that describes men of the east as having mouths in their stomachs for Christ's sake and apparently such a bizarre detail was believable to the niave populace of the medieval/dark ages.

That was the way it was bacause outside of trading hubs and cosmopolitan capital cities of expansive empire the common man/woman had no contact with those outside of their own kind.


Wyrmshadows

 

[Celebrim]

The reality is that medieval types did not think of race the way we do and did not pay much attention to it. Nationality and religion was far more important.

Errr.. much of the reason that a medieval person would not think of race in the way we do is that its virtually impossible to separate the concepts of race, nationality, and religion in a medieval text. The medievals or ancients wouldn't have spoken of a race, but of a nation with the assumption that the members of that nation were of a single common ethnic origin. Similarly, they could understand religious conversion to be an individual and national event in a way that we simply don't.

For all practical purposes, this is still playing out in Europe, as it seems every different historic ethnic group wants to carve out its own sovereign nation.

Skin color in medieval Europe plays a small role in defining nationality and ethnicity in no small part because the average medieval would have encountered such a small range of skin tones. A 'swarthy' skinned person could have meant almost anything including north africans that we today would tend to lump together with 'white'. St. Maurice has a black face for much the same reason that he's wearing high medieval armor - the artist has very little conception of what St. Maurice might have looked like. As evidence, witness the various items passed off as relics of or associated with St. Maurice that are obviously of medieval origin - and not even what we'd call 'forgeries' since they make no attempt to look like 3rd century weapons. St. Maurice has a black face solely because he's associated with Africa. It's not meant to protray his actual skin tone, even if the artist had some idea what a 3rd century Egyptian woudl have looked like, but to simply convey 'African' to the viewer of the icon.

The real St. Maurice dressed in totally different, utterly Western armor, being a Roman commander and all. The point, however, is that people actually *living* in the period are apparently more openminded than some of us. This suggests to me a massive screwed up fantasy fandom.

I think you are far more charitable with medievals for far less cause than you are with other people in this thread. I love the medieval period, and there are all sorts of misconceptions about it especially in portraying its people as stupid, dirty, etc. However, I know of no particular evidence that they were any different in thier racial intolerance than anywhere else.

The real St. Maurice, if such a person existed, did not leave enough evidence behind for us to know how he dressed. If he really was from a Roman Legion drawn from North Africa, he probably used a style of armor appropriate to that (now largely vanished) culture. That might have been scale mail or chain mail or who knows. But even then, we can't really be sure because Roman carvings representing soldiers often seems to show the Legions in a sterotyped manner not intended to represent actual appearance but to convey simple ideas in much the same manner as the Catholic icons. We can't know what the Theban legion looked like, nor can we know if it was uniform in appearance.

I don't think anyone here would object overly to fantasy to unique heroes with an exotic origin in some alien cultures, whether that alien culture be Drow Elves or Saracen inspired African/Persian kingdom. Nor do I think anyone would object to a well realized cosmopolitan setting where different racial groups live side by side.

But the notion that these are inherent to historical D&D and not merely potentials rarely realized and certainly rarely emphasized is not I think very supportable. For one thing, if this were the case, it would not have been necessary to have analogue non-European settings like Kara-Tur and most of the map of the Forgotten Realms. There aren't analogue northern European settings because the core setting has always been primarily European in conception and execution. Even Eberron's core setting is to a certain extent industrial age Europe.

The point is that there is a vast difference between taking ideas for a variaty of cultures and integrating them into a campaign world, and superficially painting in a few non-white heroes solely for the sake of them appearing non-white to satisfy some self-appointed commisars of what is political correct. The former is interesting. The latter is neither interesting nor as respectful to anyone as it would like to pretend to be.

It is rather annoying that there is a double standard that a European centered fantasy setting is exclusive, but that Kara-Tur or Nyambe is not.

It's a problem with cultural attitudes that is deeply ingrained and needs to be corrected with analysis. Remember: This thread is actually about commercial representation -- or was before all the conceptual teleportation that's been invoked to keep alive the limp, sputtering flame of monoethnic ideas. Careful analysis should be *expected* of WotC, and we should *demand* an ethical, inclusive position, rather than one that simply panders to bias. This bias is a problem, but it's important to remember that it is almost never the result of malice. It's a culturally ingrained reflex.

- emphasis added

Speaking of biases and culturally ingrained reflexes...

 

[Wyrmshadows]

Well your right that medieval europeans had no problems with other races, but they were not used to it and found the appearance of others very interesting. If you read the story of parcifal you will come across a part were he meets his brother. The brother is of mixed origin because parcifals father slept with a moor princess. The work takes great delight in describing the color of this brother as mixed, with white and black patches.

So racial diversity was mot known in Europe at that time.

I concur.

The point isn't that medieval europeans were rabid racsist, it is that someone of a exotic ie. non-white background would be quite the sensation and quite the source of interest by folks who never went more than 2 miles from their villages.

Exotic is good, it adds to RPing much more than the "lets have everyone blended together" thing that is more akin to modern New York than any medieval/dark age reality.



Wyrmshadows

 

[Seonaid]

For one thing, if this were the case, it would not have been necessary to have analogue non-European settings like Kara-Tur and most of the map of the Forgotten Realms. There aren't analogue northern European settings because the core setting has always been primarily European in conception and execution.

I would argue that there aren't analogue northern European settings because the majority of the consumer base will not need those to be fleshed out. How many average American Joes know enough about east or south Asia to portray it (even unfaithfully*!)? Compare that to how many average American Joes can portray "medieval Europe."

*I'm not talking about knowing the differences between the Chinese empires, I'm talking about knowing enough to have some sort of "realism" (even if that realism is based on stereotype--as much of popular knowledge about "medieval times" is).

 

[Imaro]

The point is that there is a vast difference between taking ideas for a variaty of cultures and integrating them into a campaign world, and superficially painting in a few non-white heroes solely for the sake of them appearing non-white to satisfy some self-appointed commisars of what is political correct. The former is interesting. The latter is neither interesting nor as respectful to anyone as it would like to pretend to be.

You know I'd really like some examples of diversity and integration that came about naturally and through everyone just accepting it... especially in the U.S. I'm sorry but mostly it was because people demanded it and slowly it came about. As minorities I think there comes a realization that in order to diversify institutions, media, or whatever you have to start small. It is, IMHO, usually those who control the status quo that make such high statements as "You don't really want a little integration if it's not all the way, that's just insulting"... when in actuality history has taught us that this is exactly how diversity and integration starts.

It is rather annoying that there is a double standard that a European centered fantasy setting is exclusive, but that Kara-Tur or Nyambe is not.

- emphasis added

Speaking of biases and culturally ingrained reflexes...

Is it really a double standard? I haven't seen anyone claim Ars Magica should have a wide range of ethnic diversity? Or White Wolf's old line of Dark Ages games. D&D has set it's own precedence for what is default and people are just asking that it better represent this through it's artwork.

 

[eyebeams]

Errr.. much of the reason that a medieval person would not think of race in the way we do is that its virtually impossible to separate the concepts of race, nationality, and religion in a medieval text. The medievals or ancients wouldn't have spoken of a race, but of a nation with the assumption that the members of that nation were of a single common ethnic origin.

No. Clerical history is particularly illustrative of this. One of the primary figures in the Christianization of the British Isles was from Africa. Between the Church and European presence/colonization in the Levant, this assumption . . . is not a great assumption.

Skin color in medieval Europe plays a small role in defining nationality and ethnicity in no small part because the average medieval would have encountered such a small range of skin tones. A 'swarthy' skinned person could have meant almost anything including north africans that we today would tend to lump together with 'white'. St. Maurice has a black face for much the same reason that he's wearing high medieval armor - the artist has very little conception of what St. Maurice might have looked like. As evidence, witness the various items passed off as relics of or associated with St. Maurice that are obviously of medieval origin - and not even what we'd call 'forgeries' since they make no attempt to look like 3rd century weapons. St. Maurice has a black face solely because he's associated with Africa. It's not meant to protray his actual skin tone, even if the artist had some idea what a 3rd century Egyptian woudl have looked like, but to simply convey 'African' to the viewer of the icon.

Maurice's name can be translated as "the moor." Furthermore, his representation in art as I've shown actually precedes illustrations where he has a local ethnicity. But yes, your statements have merit -- and are kind of my point.

I think you are far more charitable with medievals for far less cause than you are with other people in this thread. I love the medieval period, and there are all sorts of misconceptions about it especially in portraying its people as stupid, dirty, etc. However, I know of no particular evidence that they were any different in thier racial intolerance than anywhere else.

The evidence is in the statements you yourself have made. The categorization that pervades modern public life did not exist. This doesn't mean they weren't mean folks, but they were mean about different things.

The real St. Maurice, if such a person existed, did not leave enough evidence behind for us to know how he dressed. If he really was from a Roman Legion drawn from North Africa, he probably used a style of armor appropriate to that (now largely vanished) culture. That might have been scale mail or chain mail or who knows. But even then, we can't really be sure because Roman carvings representing soldiers often seems to show the Legions in a sterotyped manner not intended to represent actual appearance but to convey simple ideas in much the same manner as the Catholic icons. We can't know what the Theban legion looked like, nor can we know if it was uniform in appearance.

The point is that Europeans from the period were able to apply their imagination to being a figure they admired into a relevant place for them, despite the fact that this person didn't look like them.

But the notion that these are inherent to historical D&D and not merely potentials rarely realized and certainly rarely emphasized is not I think very supportable.

What the hell is "historical D&D?" If you mean assumed D&D settings, the second fantasy setting ever (Greyhawk) is multi-ethnic, cosmopolitan and largely nonwhite.

For one thing, if this were the case, it would not have been necessary to have analogue non-European settings like Kara-Tur and most of the map of the Forgotten Realms. There aren't analogue northern European settings because the core setting has always been primarily European in conception and execution.

No, it's been American. It was the private work of a bunch of white Americans. It is now a template for creative work by thousands of people with widely different backgrounds. It should evolve accordingly.

As for the Realms, the parts of it that were stapled on post-hoc, including Kara-Tur, are pretty obvious outsider fantasies of exotic cultures, because that sells to people's desires for these. The existence of these does not make the Realms quasi-Europe. The Realms is a fantasy parody of Eastern Ontario with a mix of pulp ad fantasy ideas from all over the place. I actually live in the geographic inspiration for the Dales.

The point is that there is a vast difference between taking ideas for a variaty of cultures and integrating them into a campaign world, and superficially painting in a few non-white heroes solely for the sake of them appearing non-white to satisfy some self-appointed commisars of what is political correct. The former is interesting. The latter is neither interesting nor as respectful to anyone as it would like to pretend to be.

Why is it a choice between a choice between whiteness and "superficial" diversity? It's an absurd, false choice that cannot find traction in history, fantasy or even the evolution of D&D -- and make no mistake, even *after* all of that, the right position is to say "screw it" and be diverse no matter what. It's a meta-fail.

It is rather annoying that there is a double standard that a European centered fantasy setting is exclusive, but that Kara-Tur or Nyambe is not.

There's no double standard for me. Kara-Tur was dumb because it was rigidly pseudohistorical in a way other D&D settings are not. I have no idea about Nyambe.

Speaking of biases and culturally ingrained reflexes...

Inclusivity really is superior. Fantasy gaming has no special exception to the rule that pervades every other aspect of public life.

 

[S'mon]

My point was that Greece and Rome were hodgepodges of ethnicities and it would not be unrealistic to have a black in roman armor or a toga and with roman weapons...

Although they'd almost certainly be Nilo-Saharan Ethiopians or Nubians/Sudanese, not Bantu-speakers from west Africa. They'd look a lot more like Barack Obama than Morgan Freeman.

Talking of Bantu speakers, I think a fantasy version of the Bantu expansion and conquest of Africa would make for a cool setting. The lack of written records make it one of the great unsung stories of human history; but the genetic evidence shows that ca 500 AD a small group of people in West Africa began an expansion that would last a thousand years and conquer a vast continent.