# Stereotypes



## Joe the Gnarled (Jun 15, 2011)

Have you ever noticed how certain stereotypes get put into the same roles?  The last two fantasy series I have read were set in worlds where a Viking-like people were enemies of the main characters homeland.  Another example would be how older American movies always starred English “bad guys” (Peter Cushing as Grand Moff Tarkin).  

I am not saying I do not understand why this happens, just wondering what other reoccurring roles you have noticed for certain stereotypes in your reading?


----------



## Map the Dragon (Jun 15, 2011)

The most stereotyped race across the broad realm of 'fantasy' would have to be the dwarf; think long hair, braided beard, mountain-dwelling, axe-weilding grumpy midget.


----------



## SlimShady (Jun 16, 2011)

I think every race pretty much has stereotypes.  

  Dwarfs: Greedy, axe-wielding with long beards.  

  Orcs: Warlike and savage.  

  Elves: Tall.  Wise.  Magic wielding and long lived.  

  I could go on, but I think you get the idea.


----------



## Derin (Jun 16, 2011)

**** elves. Elves are so pointless. 

Playing too heavily on the Tolkein or DnD stereotypes is the easiest way to turn me off a book. I once read the start of a Forgotten Realms book that featured a devious thieving tiefling (as they all apparently were), and a restrained half-elf whose brutal human father had raped his gentle, wise mother. And magic identical twins. All in the first chapter. I think there might've been a grumpy dwarf too. I put the book down and now actively avoid all Forgotten Realms books until the disgust wears off. If the details are fuzzy it's because this was five years ago... still avoiding.

Don't forget desert nomads! Desert nomads are always slightly brutal people with a strong sense of justice and a simple, straightforward view of life. They have detailed customs for the treatment of guests and make honourable enemies in battle. ALWAYS.


----------



## Hans (Jun 17, 2011)

Derin said:


> Don't forget desert nomads! Desert nomads are always slightly brutal people with a strong sense of justice and a simple, straightforward view of life. They have detailed customs for the treatment of guests and make honourable enemies in battle. ALWAYS.


Partly that's grounded in reality. Hospitality is held very high in that part of earth. And an environment like the desert can form a pragmatic and straight forward view of life that could seem brutal to others.
But of course on earth there is no such thing as "always" when it comes to cultures.


----------



## BeigePalladin (Jun 17, 2011)

desert nomads is kind of a realistic thing, since it seems that the person who did it first (IE: what everyone else assumed was a steriotype) actually did their research.
I know, it's shocking, but true


----------



## Derin (Jun 17, 2011)

BeigePalladin said:


> desert nomads is kind of a realistic thing, since it seems that the person who did it first (IE: what everyone else assumed was a steriotype) actually did their research.
> I know, it's shocking, but true



For earth tribes, sure, but there's no reason all fantasy tribes need to be warlike and ritualised hospitality rules that mimic a real culture. Why can't they be sly, devious traders who flee rather than fight and never steal to preserve their reputation, making a fortune ferretting goods across a desert most people aren't willing to pass? (They'd need a no quarter policy for thieves, of course.) In a world with applicable magic, why can't they be airy-fairy mystics blessed by a desert god with traits to survive in the harsh environment pondering the mysteries of the universe?


----------



## Joe the Gnarled (Jun 17, 2011)

Derin said:


> For earth tribes, sure, but there's no reason all fantasy tribes need to be warlike and ritualised hospitality rules that mimic a real culture. Why can't they be sly, devious traders who flee rather than fight and never steal to preserve their reputation, making a fortune ferretting goods across a desert most people aren't willing to pass? (They'd need a no quarter policy for thieves, of course.) In a world with applicable magic, why can't they be airy-fairy mystics blessed by a desert god with traits to survive in the harsh environment pondering the mysteries of the universe?


Thank you Derin.  This is my point exactly (And I do apologize, after rereading my original post I see that my point was not clear).  There are reoccurring instances where authors take a real people from earth and supplant them into their own works.  Not that this is always bad, it may feel more natural for the reader.  Also, the people may have evolved in a similar fashion due to their environment.  This, however, is fantasy.  Would it not be more original to have a sly desert people, or a cowardly northern nation?

These are just a few examples.  I am sure you can think of other instances where real people from earth are constantly put into the same role in fantasy novels (not referring to made up races, but humans).


----------



## SlimShady (Jun 18, 2011)

Honorable desert nomads are all the rage.  Try to make a cowardly desert race of thieves without being labelled racist.  Although if you have several desert cultures it might work. All in all I think we need to remember that different cultures have different people.  

  There will always be a coward in one of those desert cultures.  
  There will always be a cowardly spiteful elf amongst all his wise brethrn.  
  There will always be a dwarf who isn't as greedy as the rest.   
  etc, etc, etc.


----------



## drumsinthedeep (Jun 21, 2011)

I hate how practically all the races in fantasy are just like humans in appearance. Dwarves are just short with lots of hair, elves fair with pointed ears... Everything looks human.


----------



## Joe the Gnarled (Jun 21, 2011)

drumsinthedeep said:


> I hate how practically all the races in fantasy are just like humans in appearance. Dwarves are just short with lots of hair, elves fair with pointed ears... Everything looks human.



I agree and disagree.  On one side it does seem to lack creativity, and after all this is fantasy.  On the other side it makes it easier to relate to and cheer for characters if they are too far from human.  If your protagonist was a gelatinous blob how hard would it be for you to want him (it?) to succeed?  (to be sure, this is an exaggerated example, but you get my point?)


----------



## Derin (Jun 22, 2011)

Joe the Gnarled said:


> I agree and disagree.  On one side it does seem to lack creativity, and after all this is fantasy.  On the other side it makes it easier to relate to and cheer for characters if they are too far from human.  If your protagonist was a gelatinous blob how hard would it be for you to want him (it?) to succeed?  (to be sure, this is an exaggerated example, but you get my point?)



I disagree. I've read books where unicorns were the main characters and they were compelling. So long at the characters have thoughts and feelings that we can comprehend, I don't think their appearance is all that important.


----------



## Joe the Gnarled (Jun 22, 2011)

True, it can be done.  It may, however, be a little harder for some people to relate to a unicorn.  When you are trying to sell your novel to the masses do you not want to make it as easy as possible for people to latch on to your characters?  

Again, I did not say it cannot be done, or should not be attempted.  It makes for a great read when one pulls it off successfully.  My point is that people by nature relate to, and want to be with their own kind.  You see it every day with teenagers at a school lunchroom.  Cliques from, kids who are similar to one another gravitate towards each other.  It is easier, safer, and more familiar.  As we grow older we learn to appreciate the differences and branch out to other groups.  But the more alien something is to us, the harder it is for us to accept it.

Thoughts?

I would be interested to hear what our published writer Mapp the Dragon has to say on this.


----------



## Joe the Gnarled (Jun 22, 2011)

Apologies, Map the Dragon


----------



## BeigePalladin (Jun 22, 2011)

well, that's because - from a practicality/survivability stand point - the humanoid form is the most all-round efficient, and also because people dfind it easier to emphasise with something that's very simmilar to humanity


----------



## Derin (Jun 22, 2011)

BeigePalladin said:


> well, that's because - from a practicality/survivability stand point - the humanoid form is the most all-round efficient, and also because people dfind it easier to emphasise with something that's very simmilar to humanity



Hands = tools. I think that's the clincher. And things that don't represent anything on Earth take too long to describe.

The aforementioned unicorns did really well for a non-toolmaking species, though. They had sharp hooves and horns.


----------



## Map the Dragon (Jun 22, 2011)

Joe the Gnarled said:


> Thoughts?
> 
> I would be interested to hear what our published writer Mapp the Dragon has to say on this.



Well I think that for the most part, many of you hit on the elements that I too would address. The key here is our ability to feel either empathetic or symathetic with characters. As emotion is thus the key ingredient, a master of the art will weld these intricacies with whatever physical form he or she so selects. 

Take the cliche of the Dragon for instance: we all know and love dragon characters from some of our favorite fantasy pieces. I grew up reading Dragonlance, and some of my favorite protagonists or supporting cast mates were dragons. They were human-like only in voice emotional similarties. This leads me to another thought - perhaps it's simply intelligent construct. Perhaps all a character or species needs is the ability to think. 

But, as mentioned in the thread...would we not all be bored with a thinking, feeling gooey blob?

Think back to Star Trek. Very seldomly did they ever run into a species that didn't appear, act, and think in a human manner. It goes back to the sympathy aspect. We care more when we feel like we could interact with (even more, could be) a given character. We read and write because of those very imaginings. 

In my own novel, I have stuck with mostly human-esque character constructs, though I am not averse to going elsewhere - especially where magic is concerned. The fantasy genre is perfect for experimentation for obvious reasons. I think the most successful fantasy authors are those who flirt with the border of human and non-human; if they can invent something truly original  while still hosting at least of slim mask of humanity, then they have done something great...sometimes.

In the sequel to my first novel, I am trying to do this very thing. Wish me luck.


----------



## SeverinR (Jun 23, 2011)

I try to break the stereotypes, although with Orcs it is just the ignorant evil species.  But someone has to be the ignorant mass enemy. Although I do have peaceful bands of orcs in my story. (the reason why large nations don't wipe out the orcs with military might.)

I have the traditional basic background, elves are more magical inclined, dwarves are more mine oriented, Gnomes are gadgit oriented, dragons are inteligent beings that tend toward their alignment, but can chose to be good evil or some point in between. IMO how can a inteligent being be locked into an evil or good mentality?
They all can have any human trait or characteristic, be good or evil, heroic or arch-villain.

I do support traditional species relations, Elves-orcs=hated enemies. Half orcs not well accepted in society.

Why human-like?
In a world built by biped hand using beings, it is not easy for other forms to thrive.  Creatures without hands will have difficulty in doing everyday things.
Put them in their own element, and they will thrive.  No doors to open, no latches, hooks, ties to deal with.

I have written about Centaurs and Kentauri, it takes some thought on how their world would be, when they built it rather then just moving into the human house down the street from humans.
I have written about dragons, dragons have claws that they can manipulate similar to hands, and they can get humans to help them for the other things.


----------



## Derin (Jun 23, 2011)

SeverinR said:


> I try to break the stereotypes, although with Orcs it is just the ignorant evil species.  But someone has to be the ignorant mass enemy. Although I do have peaceful bands of orcs in my story. (the reason why large nations don't wipe out the orcs with military might.)



I have a plot draft lying around here somewhere about a human child raised by goblins who is sent as an ambassador when humans invade the (fairly peaceful) goblin mountains.

Have you read Dominic Deegan? Their orcs are fairly peaceful. And vegetarian, although they live in a land with vicious, mobile plants.


----------



## JCFarnham (Jun 24, 2011)

Joe the Gnarled said:


> I agree and disagree.  On one side it does seem to lack creativity, and after all this is fantasy.  On the other side it makes it easier to relate to and cheer for characters if they are too far from human.  If your protagonist was a gelatinous blob how hard would it be for you to want him (it?) to succeed?  (to be sure, this is an exaggerated example, but you get my point?)



Maybe I should point you to Schlock Mercenary, a sci-fi webcomic by Howard Taylor, in which the eponymous character is just that, a blob  hehe

Smart-arsery aside, there is a use to stereotypes. I always believe that if something is around long enough to be called a stereotype it must be working well for writers, correct? If it ain broke and all that. My main issue is not with stereotypes, as every character on some level has associations with certain tropes, it's with their use. For instance, I abhor when someone uses a trope with out taking the time to do proper research. I could get behind the honourable desert nomad IF it was rooted in good cultural research, same with Elves, same with Orcs ... but only so long as they fit within the world created for them. If such beings exist simply because it's "the done thing" and could quite easily be replaced with you basic human character, THEN it's a turn-off.

But surely the act of subverting stereotypes is also a trope now days?

I prepose instead that, instead of worrying about stereotypes people should create well rounded worlds and characters, who have been thought through full and have realistic psychological reactions and such (character who AREN'T 2D). I don't think it really matters that a character/object/thing fits a role that has been done to death, as long as it is realistically embedded in a world were such things make perfect sense.


----------



## SeverinR (Jun 24, 2011)

Stereotypes in the created world should be like stereotypes in the real world,
the stereotype is generally correct looking at the masses.  But break it down into individuals and it can be as different as each person.
My stories have some good half orcs, still have tension with elves, but they are not stereotypical.  The big picture, stereotypes are overall correct.
Elves can be honorable intelligent people or idiot drunken slobs just looking for the next coin, the nicest person ever, or the most evil.  Like humans, Elves have free will. Actually all humanoids have free will in my works, but Orcs and mixed breeds are limited by mental capability and attitudes in society.

Elves like the arts and beauty, they are long lived, so they find more time to enjoy the beauty in things.
Orcs are short lived, and focus on aggression, fighting, and living fast, don't notice the beautiful tapestry they rip off the wall in a fight.


----------



## James Chandler (Jun 25, 2011)

> But, as mentioned in the thread...would we not all be bored with a thinking, feeling gooey blob?



I was thinking of Sargent Schlock, too!


----------



## Viktor Greenblood (Jun 25, 2011)

*A noob enters*

OK, first post, and I might as well get straight into the business of things. 

Hi, I've been registered here for a while but this is the first time I've entered into a discussion, so here is my view on the topic. Generally, stereotypes are bad, in my view, because they oversimplify and restrict things, a stereotype seems to me to be a simplified and usually overused image of something. So, the opening poster mentioned 'viking cultures' in some of the fantasy books they had read, the stereotype of the vikings is as savage warriors from a harsh landscape who come and raid the civilised world. Sometimes they're vicious enemies and sometimes they're 'honourable warriors' (whatever that means in the context), but that aspect of their culture is the stereotype, the big, bearded, savage, looting and pillaging, heavy drinking barbarians who spend their downtime in mead halls eating meat, drinking mead, beating each other up and laughing boisterously. The stereotype doesn't have room for the vikings who were the best shipwrites, explorers and metalworkers in Europe, or who settled in new lands from Moscow to Canada. 

Stereotyped cultures can be based on the real world, but they're always a gross simplification of the culture they're stereotyping, which makes the culture both less interesting, because it seems boring and two dimensional, and less plausible, because a culture will both have people with all kinds of different dispositions and will need those people to do different jobs (unless those jobs are all done by slaves or foreigners, and that's a difficult system to maintain).

So I don't think there's a problem in including analogues to real world cultures in a story, the real world is more detailed than an imagined one could ever hope to be, and I don't think there's any shame in taking elements from it to add colour or realism. I think there is a problem if those analogues are only crude, simplified versions of what those cultures really were, because then something which is supposed to add colour and realism looks monochrome and implausible.

This last point applies to entirely invented cultures just as much as to ones which are taken from history, the problem isn't having elves, it's having lots of elves who are all exactly the same.

On the idea of characters and cultures that aren't human at all, I'd say that they're tricky because of striking a balance between making them comprehensible and making them different. Making them comprehensible is easy enough if you have them thinking or acting in human-like ways, but then their inhumanity rings false, and I at least find it quite hard to work out how an inhuman creature would think, being human myself and everything.


----------



## CicadaGrrl (Jun 25, 2011)

I think people stick to stereotypes because fantasy should, at least, involve some foreign things.  When we change everything, we worry our readers won't be able to keep up.


----------

