The problem with Evil races is not what you think

[Disgruntled Hobbit]

I'm thinking of why science fiction has been such a fertile genre for exploring themes of race and violence and colonization whereas fantasy has not. There's something about the speculative character of that genre that allows for newness, even if it is just of perspective or looking askant of a contemporary issue. Caveat : I am not a reader of much contemporary fantasy, so maybe this is happening or has been happening and I'm just unaware.

Interesting question
Science fiction often is about telling stories set in the future that are analogous to the real world, while fantasy doesn't
Not all sci-fi, but enough
Maybe science fiction is more about who we are and can become and fantasy is about who we were and got to be how we are?

Or maybe fantasy fiction is just that extra level of shallow, with fewer levels and is more escapist

 

[Aldarc]

So is it essential to FRPGing that conflicts consist in the threats to "civilisation" posed by nameless hordes of . . . . ? That the solution to the world's problems is the extermination of those hordes?

If so, maybe it's impossible to prise FRPGing of racialised tropes. That's not a conclusion that can be excluded a priori by merely wishing that it weren't so!

Thing is, I don't even think that this comprises the bulk of fantasy literature out there, though it arguably applies to some big names (e.g., the Others & Wights in ASoIaF, the trollocs in Wheel of Time, etc.). But it's generally absent in Sword & Sorcery where the stakes of conflict are typically more personal and protagonist-focused.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Further to my post upthread about a theory of "little people" euhemerism – that European stories about fairies, dwarves, and other "little people" are based on a real, but now extinct, non-white race of small stature that once inhabited the continent – Bobby Derie's blog article Conan and the Little People: Robert E. Howard and Lovecraft's Theory extensively covers Howard and HP Lovecraft's discussion of the topic.

Lovecraft first encountered it in the writing of Arthur Machen. But the version that influenced him the most was in Margaret Murray's The Witch-Cult in Western Europe (1921). Lovecraft to Lillian D. Clark, Mar 1924:

In this book [Witch-Cult...] the problem of witchcraft superstition is attacked from an entirely new angle… an hypothesis almost exactly like the one used by Arthur Machen in fiction… i.e., that there has existed since prehistoric times, side by side with the dominant religion, a dark, secret, and terrible system of worship nocturnally practiced by the peasants and including the most horrible rites and incantations. This worship, Miss Murray believes, is handed down from the squat Mongoloid peoples who inhabited Europe before the coming of the Aryans​

Lovecraft and Howard both believed in the theory. Lovecraft to Elizabeth Toldridge, Mar 1929:

Prior to the Druids, & to the Aryan race which evolved them, Western Europe was undoubtedly inhabited by a squat Mongoloid race whose last living vestiges are the Lapps. This is the race which bequeathed the hideous witch-cult to posterity, & which lingers in popular folklore in the form of gnomes & kobolds, evil fairies & "little people."​

Howard to Lovecraft, Aug 1930: "I readily see the truth of your remarks, that a Mongoloid race must have been responsible for the myths of the Little People, and sincerely thank you for the information."

Both used it in their published work. Lovecraft, Supernatural Horror in Literature (1927):

Much of the power of Western horror-lore was undoubtedly due to the hidden but often suspected presence of a hideous cult of nocturnal worshippers whose strange customs—descended from pre-Aryan and pre-agricultural times when a squat race of Mongoloids roved over Europe with their flocks and herds—were rooted in the most revolting fertility-rites of immemorial antiquity.​

Derie:

Robert E. Howard would go on to write more "Little People" stories, some of which sold and others which did not—"The Children of the Night" (WT Apr-May 1931), "The Black Stone" (WT Nov 1931), "The People of the Dark" (Strange Tales Jun 1932), "Worms of the Earth" (WT Nov 1932), and "Valley of the Lost" (also as "The Secret of Lost Valley").​

​

In his fiction, while Howard focused on Machen, Lovecraft focused on Murray, referencing Murray or the witch-cult explicitly in "The Call of Cthulhu," "The Haunter of the Dark," "The Whisperer in Darkness," "The Dreams in the Witch House," and "The Trap" (with Henry S. Whitehead)... Some elements from The Witch-Cult in Western Europe, particularly the calendar-feast, find their way into The Case of Charles Dexter Ward and "The Dunwich Horror"—the great homage to Arthur Machen's "The Great God Pan."​

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I was thinking more abstractly in terms of what "fantasy" does as a genre, that it is sort of powered by pulling, sometimes absentmindedly, from tropes, moods, and figures as already established by mainstream culture. Like, in a 'free kriegsspiel' sense, I could say, let's play Arthurian Fantasy and its probable that we (those discussing here) wouldn't even need more than a set of dice. There's enough to draw from floating around in culture and in our heads that we could probably figure it out as we go. But that also means that we reproduce without thinking the tropes that are baked into that genre (even if it inevitably becomes "Monty Python meets Westeros" to quote zero punctuation).

I'm thinking of why science fiction has been such a fertile genre for exploring themes of race and violence and colonization whereas fantasy has not. There's something about the speculative character of that genre that allows for newness, even if it is just of perspective or looking askant of a contemporary issue. Caveat : I am not a reader of much contemporary fantasy, so maybe this is happening or has been happening and I'm just unaware.

I think fantasy HAS confronted these themes, though the borderline between SF and Fantasy can be pretty hard to draw.

Anyway, the core of a lot of imaginative fantasy is wish-fulfillment. That is ESPECIALLY true on RPGs, which obviously put YOU in the story and ask what do you want, and what would you do. Players want to be free of the ordinary constraints of life, and they want to be able to excel at doing things that are impossible for them to attempt, or at which they are not good in real life. There are obviously other agenda, but these two elements must figure prominently.

Clearly one of the things we may wish to be free of, and enact freedom from, is our obligations to be tolerant, civil, open minded, etc. I'm not saying players normally want to be able to go around acting out prejudice or exploiting people or whatever. However they would not like to constantly think about carefully avoiding these situations, possibly even breaking a few taboos. So, if we are bringing sensitivity on these points into RPGs there will be some dissatisfaction and push back. That seems inevitable, and is observed to be present.

 

[Umbran]

(ignoring the right wing *** hats ...)

Please watch your language and don't call people names.

Your side places value on the perceived notions of racial traits and draw the association with east Asian people’s due to certain visual cues and language semantic views? Where as my side again would argue that this is perception of reader

Then, "your side" is ignoring (willfully or otherwise) the writings of the author stating the intended association:

In a private letter, Tolkien describes orcs as: "squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes: in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types."

The connection is fully intended on Tolkien's part, not merely the reader's perception after the fact.

And I think that much of the argument around issues of “a western perspective on orientalism or some such on “my side” is again that notion of “relevance”. A sense of “so what?” (Not intended as a callous and cruel way).

So, you speak of this as "not intended", as if this is some sort of absolution.

If someone is texting while driving, and they hit you with their car, the didn't intend to hit you. But your bones are still broken, and you are still bleeding. And that person is still responsible for their actions, even if unintentional. Harm is not linked to intent.

When driving a car, you're supposed to be mature and responsible enough to not get distracted. When you are living in a nation and world of many cultures, you're supposed to also be mature and responsible in how you treat other people - you should be expected to pay attention to the effects fo your actions, and adjust them to not cause harm.

That we are not curmudgeonly roadblocks on the path of progress, we just disagree on the “relevance” of associations made as it pertains to the real world and the concerns and struggles of the various movements of equality.

So, you aren't curmudgeonly, but you are willing to tell other folks, with different life experiences, what is relevant to their concerns and struggles? The... presumption and condescension implied there does not sound like an improvement over being a curmudgeon.

 

[transmission89]

Please watch your language and don't call people names.


Then, "your side" is ignoring (willfully or otherwise) the writings of the author stating the intended association:

In a private letter, Tolkien describes orcs as: "squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes: in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types."

The connection is fully intended on Tolkien's part, not merely the reader's perception after the fact.



So, you speak of this as "not intended", as if this is some sort of absolution.

If someone is texting while driving, and they hit you with their car, the didn't intend to hit you. But your bones are still broken, and you are still bleeding. And that person is still responsible for their actions, even if unintentional. Harm is not linked to intent.

When driving a car, you're supposed to be mature and responsible enough to not get distracted. When you are living in a nation and world of many cultures, you're supposed to also be mature and responsible in how you treat other people - you should be expected to pay attention to the effects fo your actions, and adjust them to not cause harm.




So, you aren't curmudgeonly, but you are willing to tell other folks, with different life experiences, what is relevant to their concerns and struggles? The... presumption and condescension implied there does not sound like an improvement over being a curmudgeon.

My apologies, I missed the words alt and racist in that when using that language when typing so understood why it’s been received like that and not my intention (I was initially confused as to why you were asking me to be polite regarding alt right racists)

People keep bringing up that quote like I’ve not already quoted and critiqued it for my part so I shan’t repeat the points as the distinction is being missed and I’m not interested in continuing in circles.

The discussion around intention is not the same as a car at all. We are talking about actual, objectifiable harm with regards to a car crash.

I know what the response will be, suffice to say I disagree with that premise. Because who’s the arbiter of what qualifies? Well it’s the individual. It cannot be stated that it does objective harm because I know I have watched discussions by, have gamed with and and am friends with enough people of all walks of life that also disagree with the assertions being made.

When I speak of not intended, I mean just that. And what is not intended to offend and be fine can change as society and values change and become not fine.

There are 7 billion people on the planet. Someone, somewhere will take umbridge with a piece of creative expression. On an individual level, you’ve got to decide who’s opinions are worth it to you (for example, some drag queens on Rupaul receiving comments on Twitter). I could think of numerous things that offend me and my sensibilities, does that make them harmful? For example, the new Vistanii in the New Ravenloft book. That was created with sensitivity readers, best intentions etc. As someone of Romany descent, I find the creative whitewashing and presentation offensive to me. But again, it’s subjective.
Note, that this is obviously different from creative works that set out to offend.

And with regards to telling people, in fact, if you read properly what I wrote, you’ll see I said quite the opposite. That the “relevance” is subjective to the individual, and their group. And that as always, the table space is that place and I wouldn’t presume to dictate to other tables what is ok for their table.

What I was saying, is that the difference in opinion is not solely along specific minority lines and so shouldn’t presented as a fact. And this is the presumption and condescension I objected to. THIS IS NOT TO SAY THAT PEOPLE OF THOSE SPECIFIC MINORITIES, OR OTHERS WHO BELIEVE THAT IT IS OFFENSIVE, WHO DO FEEL THIS WAY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO FEEL THE WAY THEY FEEL, OR BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THE CASE. I feel the need to capitalise this because clearly, a lot of what I have said has been missed etc. Over and over again I have stated, do what is right for your table.

This does not mean, that on the Internet, on a place specifically designed to discuss opinions, that I have to agree with your opinion or even think it’s a good idea with what is right at thetable, and vice versa.

 

[Umbran]

That the “relevance” is subjective to the individual, and their group.

Groups do not exist in happy complete isolation. We buy the same books, engage with the same media, go to the same cons, and so on.

There is a point where, even when something doesn't feel relevant to you, you should not push back on it, because it is relevant to other people, and people matter.

 

[transmission89]

Groups do not exist in happy complete isolation. We buy the same books, engage with the same media, go to the same cons, and so on.

There is a point where, even when something doesn't feel relevant to you, you should not push back on it, because it is relevant to other people, and people matter.

Except that’s not how society works and cannot work. Because that’s naively assuming that what is “relevant” (and bear in mind, as already stated, I’m using relevant here as an ersatz word, it is a diminishing one that I feel doesn’t accurately describe the concept I’m expressing) one group is inherently good and comes at no cost to any other groups and the other groups’ reason for pushing back is inherently bad (and I’m not talking specifically about this issue, as a generalism). And if an issue is relevant to one group but not to another, and changes are made that impact other groups, that then becomes an issue and relevant to them. Telling people that they shouldn’t push back against ideas is inherently undemocratic. Especially if both parties agree in basic principles but disagree in the idea of implementation. Of course people matter, Ive never argued differently.

 

[Malmuria]

Except that’s not how society works and cannot work. Because that’s naively assuming that what is “relevant” (and bear in mind, as already stated, I’m using relevant here as an ersatz word, it is a diminishing one that I feel doesn’t accurately describe the concept I’m expressing) one group is inherently good and comes at no cost to any other groups and the other groups’ reason for pushing back is inherently bad (and I’m not talking specifically about this issue, as a generalism). And if an issue is relevant to one group but not to another, and changes are made that impact other groups, that then becomes an issue and relevant to them. Telling people that they shouldn’t push back against ideas is inherently undemocratic. Especially if both parties agree in basic principles but disagree in the idea of implementation. Of course people matter, Ive never argued differently.

Well this is a bit abstract. In terms of (say) getting rid of evil races and essentialism in the game, we can talk about implementation and the like. In terms of the costs to a group, those costs have already been borne by people who have encountered stereotypes of their culture in media and a worldview that relies on colonialism and essentialism. In the past, typically, you just kept silent about it because you couldn't do anything about it. So yes, that's a little bit different now. That being said, I don't think it's a zero-sum group A vs group B and only one side can win.

 

[Doug McCrae]

CONTENT WARNING: VERY RACIST CLAIMS, IN QUOTATION

This post is about the way features of D&D orcs and goblins — high fertility rates, dominant 'genetic' traits, and abundant population — correspond with racist ideas. These ideas may be found in the writings of late-19th and early-20th century influential proponents of scientific racism — Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Madison Grant, and Lothrop Stoddard — and in Yellow Peril fiction and other popular fears about "Asiatic hordes". There are also similarities, though not as strong, with the present day far right "White Genocide" or "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory.

High Fertility Rates

AD&D 1e Players Handbook (1978): "Orcs are fecund and create many cross-breeds." D&D 3.5e Monster Manual (2003): Goblins have "rapid reproduction." D&D 4e Monster Manual (2008): "Goblins breed quickly."

D&D 5e Monster Manual (2014):

Luthic, the orc goddess of fertility and wife of Gruumsh, demands that orcs procreate often and indiscriminately so that orc hordes swell generation after generation. The orcs' drive to reproduce runs stronger than any other humanoid race, and they readily crossbreed with other races.​

D&D 5e Volo's Guide to Monsters (2016): "Orcs breed prodigiously (and they aren't choosy about what they breed with, which is why such creatures as half-orcs and ogrillons are found in the world)."

Houston Stewart Chamberlain, The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century (1899): "Generative power often stands in inverse relation to the nobility of the race." The "generative power" of "the negro" is superior to that of white people.

Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy (1920):

Treating the primary race-stocks as units, it would appear that whites tend to double in eighty years, yellows and browns in sixty years, blacks in forty years.​

​

The black man is, indeed, sharply differentiated from the other branches of mankind. His outstanding quality is superabundant animal vitality... To it... is due his extreme fecundity, the negro being the quickest of breeders.​

Dominant 'Genetic' Traits

AD&D 1e Monster Manual (1977): "Half-orcs tend to favor the orcish strain heavily, so such sorts are basically orcs although they can sometimes (10%) pass themselves off as true creatures of their other stock (goblins, hobgoblins, humans, etc.)." AD&D 1e PHB : "Some one-tenth of orc-human mongrels are sufficiently non-orcish to pass for human." AD&D 2e Monstrous Manual (1993): "Half-orcs tend to favor the orcish strain heavily and as such are basically orcs, although 10% of these offspring can pass as ugly humans." D&D 5e MM: "When an orc procreates with a non-orc humanoid of similar size and stature (such as a human or a dwarf), the resulting child is either an orc or a half-orc."

Chamberlain:

The predominance of his [the "negro"'s] qualities in the descendants [is]... greater than those of the whites.​

​

In Europe at the present day we… see the growing predominance of an alien race which… by animal force gradually overpowers the mentally superior race.​

Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race (1916):

The result of the mixture of two races, in the long run, gives us a race reverting to the more ancient, generalized and lower type. The cross between a white man and an Indian is an Indian; the cross between a white man and a Negro is a Negro; the cross between a white man and a Hindu is a Hindu; and the cross between any of the three European races and a Jew is a Jew.​

Stoddard: "In ethnic crossings, the negro strikingly displays his prepotency, for black blood, once entering a human stock, seems never really bred out again."

Abundant Population

AD&D 2e MM: Goblins "would be merely pests, if not for their great numbers." D&D 3.5e MM: Goblins have "great numbers." D&D 5e MM: "Individually weak, goblins gather in large—sometimes overwhelming—numbers." "Occasionally, a powerful war chief unites scattered orc tribes into a single rampaging horde."

MP Shiel, The Yellow Danger (1898): "The Chinese host was to resemble a flight of locusts, covering the entire sky from horizon to horizon… Yen How's army would consist of the 400,000,000 which formed the population of China."

Jack London, The Unparalleled Invasion (1910):

The real danger lay in the fecundity of her [China's] loins​

​

China's population must be seven hundred millions, eight hundred millions, nobody knew how many millions, but at any rate it would soon be a billion. There were two Chinese for every white-skinned human in the world… and the world trembled​

Federation on Chinese Exclusion, Memorial to Congress (1901):

Civilization in Europe has been frequently attacked and imperiled by the barbaric hordes of Asia. If the little band of Greeks at Marathon had not beaten back ten times their number of Asiatic invaders, it is impossible to estimate the loss to civilization that would have ensued… Attila and his Asiatic hordes threatened central Europe when the Gauls made their successful stand against them… The free immigration of Chinese would be for all purposes an invasion by Asiatic barbarians.​

John Kuo Wei Tchen and Dylan Yeats, Yellow Peril! (2014):

[During the Korean War (1950-1953)] newspapers across the nation ran headlines such as "Red Hordes Swarm South Korea!" as the Chinese pushed American troops back south. Popular press accounts claimed that the Chinese troops were mere cannon fodder, but their sheer numbers made them invincible.​

The "White Genocide" Conspiracy Theory

Bridge Initiative Team, Factsheet: White Genocide Conspiracy Theory (2020):

Proponents of the white genocide conspiracy theory… claim that the "white race" is under threat due to falling birth rates among white women, the continued growth of "mixed race" marriages, and ongoing immigration of black and brown people into Europe and America. They allege that demographic change will result in white people becoming a minority in the United States in the near future​

​

Brenton Tarrant… attacked two mosques in Ōtautahi/Christchurch, Aotearoa/New Zealand killing 51 Muslims. Tarrant explicitly referenced the white genocide conspiracy theory in his manifesto entitled: "The Great Replacement."​

The parallels here are not as close as they are with the proponents of scientific racism and fears of "Asiatic hordes". But the broader ideas of the threat of higher birth rates, being outnumbered, and being replaced are the same.