Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Fralex" data-source="post: 6586147" data-attributes="member: 6785902">Well, as I mentioned earlier I just flipped through the 4e PHB to see how diverse the art there was, and there was only one person with black skin (the female halfling in the race section) in the entire book. Maybe the other books did a better job, but at the very least I can say with certainty that the first one was very homogeneous.&nbsp;I'm sincerely trying to understand your point of view here, but I'm not really sure how you can go &quot;overboard&quot; with diversity. Like, diversity is just having an equal amount of various ethnicities and cultures; how can something be &quot;too equal&quot;? Equality is equality, right?Likewise, the idea of diverse artwork being some kind of &quot;agenda&quot; doesn't make much sense to me, either. What agenda could simply having a large variety of people possibly be pushing, and would such an agenda even be bad? Like, &quot;agenda&quot; just seems to be this word people use when they want to make the fact that something is being done with a purpose sound ominous. So, what, they're trying to be more inclusive? Why is that bad? Acknowledging the existence of non-white races doesn't really say &quot;propaganda.&quot; If it did, then every book's artwork would be propaganda, including the more homogeneous ones, only for erasure rather than diversity.What is the correct way to handle diversity in a book's artwork? Are you sure you aren't just reading more into this than you need to? I'm not really sure what they could've done differently here while still being this diverse.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Fralex, post: 6586147, member: 6785902"] Well, as I mentioned earlier I just flipped through the 4e PHB to see how diverse the art there was, and there was only one person with black skin (the female halfling in the race section) in the entire book. Maybe the other books did a better job, but at the very least I can say with certainty that the first one was very homogeneous. I'm sincerely trying to understand your point of view here, but I'm not really sure how you can go "overboard" with diversity. Like, diversity is just having an equal amount of various ethnicities and cultures; how can something be "too equal"? Equality is equality, right? Likewise, the idea of diverse artwork being some kind of "agenda" doesn't make much sense to me, either. What agenda could simply having a large variety of people possibly be pushing, and would such an agenda even be bad? Like, "agenda" just seems to be this word people use when they want to make the fact that something is being done with a purpose sound ominous. So, what, they're trying to be more inclusive? Why is that bad? Acknowledging the existence of non-white races doesn't really say "propaganda." If it did, then every book's artwork would be propaganda, including the more homogeneous ones, only for erasure rather than diversity. What is the correct way to handle diversity in a book's artwork? Are you sure you aren't just reading more into this than you need to? I'm not really sure what they could've done differently here while still being this diverse. [/QUOTE]

Verification