by torilen » Wednesday December 13th, 2017 10:26am
Just in case anyone was curious about the discussion that drove me to write this post in the first place:
***NOTE - roughly 15-20 comments, with replies, before this whole discussion began.
(And, going back and looking over all of this again this morning, I think cornixt has a point - this could just be a troll starting it all)
Person 1
The primary issue here is most of the lands outside of Faerun are modeled after non-western cultures. Ancient China, Mongolia, Aztec, Aborigine, etc. Trying to do this appropriately without inaccuracies or offensive cultural appropriation and western stereotype is risky and dangerous and likely doomed to failure for a high profile company and brand. They've already taken heat from their attempts at portraying a jungle type culture in Chult and have recently gone on record saying it was a "miss" and regretful.
There is no upside to Kara-tur or Maztica, only bad PR. The chances of it happening are near zero I would assume. It was a bad idea in the first place.
Person 2
I read that as well and I found the statement interesting in light of 2017 being their biggest year of sales. Tomb of Annihilation is obviously a big part of that success.
Person 3
I can understand not wanting to offend peoples with "Western Sterotypes", but to simply ignore entire cultures out of fear is just plain stupid. Not only does it keep what could be quality fun from getting to the players/readers, but it forever excludes people FROM those cultures from seeing themselves in a fantasy setting. So you don't want to offend folks with sterotypes...hire well-studied historians and cultural anthropologists as consultants. Wizards surely has enough money to do so.
Person 4
Sad but true Scott. There'd be no win, the only question would be how many complain.
Person 5
Really, though, is it even necessary to role-play actual ancient cultures? If so, it seems something that people much smarter on that stuff should be making rather than a fantasy gaming company without proper background or ability to represent it properly.
Person 5
Dnd is not a history simulator. It's a fake fantasy world. There is no need to introduce other peoples real historical culture. WotC has some extremely talented and creative people, surely they can come up with great stories without resorting to stereotypical cultural appropriation, and I'm sure they agree.
Person 3
l I don't think it is really possible to simply create a new culture...unless it is based on a magocracy or something strictly fantasy like that. Even if it is an alien/fantasy creature culture, it is going to be similar in many ways to certain cultures in the real world. If you have a culture that uses black-clad assassins, people will say they are similar to ninja. If you have a culture that smokes a pipe as a symbol of peace with new strangers, they'll say it is similar to Native Americans. Somebody, somewhere, will find a real culture it is similar to.
Person 3
Besides that, in order to get the GM and players involved enough into a setting that they can really begin to role-play things well, it has to be similar enough to the real world that they can relate to things they know. Even if you look at really old-school fantasy, like Middle Earth...I don't know if there are "cultures" per-say, but there is enough relate-able that readers do not need a Middle Earth dictionary and encyclopedia in order to read the books.
Person 1
There is a difference between saying "These are Bullywogs and they have a primitive type culture of X, Y, Z" and "These is ancient chinese culture with ninjas and magic and we are going to use Chinese names to name everything"
Look at these cultures, there is an fake Africa, a fake Latin America, a fake Japan, a fake China, etc, etc, complete with made up names that *sound* like their actual (and still in use) languages. The line is crossed when you intentionally single out a group of people without even consulting people who actually know and are part of that culture. I'm just saying you can put your money on them not doing any of that. It was a 2nd Edition thing and it's likely going to remain something buried with 2nd Edition. Unless of course they decide to go the route of heavy use of very knowledgeable (and likely expensive) cultural consultants, which I wouldn't expect to make much financial sense. D&D is translated and sold in most every corner of the globe now. Reputation is everything and doing it wrong in this day in age could have severe consequences. The Old Guard might object profusely, but the current demographics being targeted for player-base expansion has little tolerance to that kind of stuff.
Person 3
Personally, I don't understand the problem. The use of ancient cultures was never done in a way that denigrated those cultures. They never tried to make anyone look dumb or stupid...they never made an entire culture evil or with low IQ or anything like that. So, just because they used the cultural norms and made up names to sound like that language, that's "cultural appropriation" and that crosses some line somewhere?
Person 1
I just finished The Parched Sea and I disagree. The desert tribes were portrayed as a backwards sand culture whos superstitions and cultures were directly lifted from Western stereotypes of the Muslim world. It was pretty cringy and their culture itself was a secondary antagonist in the story.
Person 3
Never got around to reading the Parched Sea. The experience I do have in the Realms is Horse Lords. It deals with a Mongolian type culture into which an outsider is thrust and must live with them. I haven't read the second book of the series...but from what I saw in Horse Lords, it was handled very nicely.
Person 6
Yeah, most fiction is as syncretic as most of the human cultural and technical creations. We learn from each other and use our collected knowledge to create something "new".
Person 3
I am not saying that The Parched Sea is an example of bad cultural writing. But here is one thing to consider - who is the story being told by? I know it is probably an outside 3rd party narrator, like almost all FR novels. But through whose eyes are you seeing most of the action? Is the main character the person who is viewing the desert tribes as backwards? Were there actual, real events or clues that would lead a reader to believe the tribes actually ARE backwards, or is that just how the main character sees them?
Person 1
Not buying it. A writer can write based on what a character might see sure, but a company has to release products based on what a reader might see. And their readers aren't just teenage boys in American suburbs anymore. Their customers speak dozens of languages and span all races, genders, and backgrounds. That era is over and their products are going to reflect that. As they should.
Person 3
Their products might reflect a change...but I might point out that little of what they have published in the past decade held the quality of their older material. D&D 4th ed was roundly panned, as was the entire shift they made with the Realms. I haven't seen many magnificent reviews of any new Realms material...except that people are happy the spellplague is gone and the other world was sent back. Aside from a handful of more modern novels and/or trilogies, you don't see people constantly talking about newer Realms books the way they do about the novels published pre-1998 or so. Face it, being PC does not make for extraordinary reading or writing.