Is this fantasy race design offensive?

[Ghost]

I think your issue is more about
B) The clothing

and

C) The "tribal" paint.
It screams African Tribal person and not in a good way.

Yeah, I'm in agreement that those are what's rubbing people the wrong way. I have some more concrete suggestions now. Nix the headband. Nix the necklace thingy because it reminds me of neck rings. I also question the earlobe stretching. I don't think her eyes look jaundiced, but the yellow irises might read that way to some folks.

I'll again suggest looking at dinosaurs and other animals and seeing what you can salvage from them in terms of clothing. Take what's important to her culture and translate it to clothes. For example, if hunting is most important, she might clothe herself in a way that she can carry more weapons.

You can have something like face paint, neck rings or earlobe stretching, but you have to explain why it's done in her culture. When you do all of them, it looks like an indigenous people mash up. I think that's why I saw "generic tribal person" earlier.

This may be just me--in fact, it probably is just me--but your girl has no support. I can't imagine running around in a tube top without it slipping off during my adventures. If she has to wear a top, it should be one that will stay on.

 

[Xanados]

I haven't read this entire thread, but I feel that, as many have already said, this could be offensive.

 

[Caged Maiden]

Some native Americans used animal heads and horns in their outfits... don't hate me I'm not very knowledgeable about it all.... but what if you had her dressed with like dinosaur claws or like a dinosaur head helmet type thing. That could be really unique to her world and not look anything like what we can relate to on earth.
Actually, I feel a bit more offended by the mention of Nazis than the tribal planet and culture. I think we all know that primitive people the world over used natural things to clothe themselves and some are still quite scantily clad. Nazis are over-done in our whole culture, and like the one big overriding evil that we can all remember because our grandparents fought in that war. Maybe rethink them a little. Couldn't they as easily be Roman legions or something. The great part about Romans is that I don't think anyone thinks of them as "evil". They were probably hated more than Nazis in their day (what with the taking native people as slaves and forcing their religion on people.... but they encompassed North Africa, Asia Minor, all the way up to England. They were not one culture, and that might read as less black vs. white.....

 

[Caged Maiden]

Racism is a fact of life. I am thankful I grew up in a place where racial tension was not high, but it is what it is. While I personally believe there are crap-heads in every race, and I technically view nothing wrong with identifying different people by their skin color in writing, it can be counterproductive to make one group good and another bad. It could be quite harmful to your story. While I appreciate what you're trying to do, it's hard to override several thousand years of human history. I have used eye color and magical abilities and some other traits to develop a racism in my stories, but I would just caution you to consider closely how your material will be taken by people who might not be so open-minded and sympathetic as you are. It would be a shame if your story was not told because some viewed it as "too risky" for a market which encompasses many people of various backgrounds.

I don't know if any of that is helpful, because all I know about your story I have read on this thread, but I hope you in the end find something which makes your story shine and makes readers sympathize with your characters. Best wishes.

 

[Devor]

Actually, I feel a bit more offended by the mention of Nazis than the tribal planet and culture.

I'm really glad you said that because I feel the same way.

I don't understand how leopard skins, face paint and earlobe stretching can be offensive when they were in fact historically done. Combining them into a single culture - done well, in a fantasy world - could be horribly stereotypical, or it could serve to speak for a multitude of cultures at once.

The thing is, it's the attitude of the novel that can be offensive or complimentary towards the people involved, even above the intentions of the author, and that attitude is just hard to see clearly from a bad drawing and a few super-preliminary paragraphs. To be honest, though, Jabrosky, I do think you need to give it considerable amounts of consideration and research before you reach the point you're trying to achieve.

But I think you're using "Nazi" to reflect an attitude, and that attitude is stereotypical. Even the Nazis had complexities and motivations and a history which in their mind justified their actions.

I think you need for your work to reach a level of complexity and involvement where you no longer refer to your characters and their societies by the statements you mean to make about their real-world counterparts.

 

[Jabrosky]

I'm definitely going to ditch the Nazis and give the character a major makeover in response to the critiques I've received here. I'll get back to you guys once I've thought deeply about the whole thing.

 

[The Blue Lotus]

Yeah, I'm in agreement that those are what's rubbing people the wrong way. I have some more concrete suggestions now. Nix the headband. Nix the necklace thingy because it reminds me of neck rings. I also question the earlobe stretching. I don't think her eyes look jaundiced, but the yellow irises might read that way to some folks.

I'll again suggest looking at dinosaurs and other animals and seeing what you can salvage from them in terms of clothing. Take what's important to her culture and translate it to clothes. For example, if hunting is most important, she might clothe herself in a way that she can carry more weapons.

You can have something like face paint, neck rings or earlobe stretching, but you have to explain why it's done in her culture. When you do all of them, it looks like an indigenous people mash up. I think that's why I saw "generic tribal person" earlier.

This may be just me--in fact, it probably is just me--but your girl has no support. I can't imagine running around in a tube top without it slipping off during my adventures. If she has to wear a top, it should be one that will stay on.

I could be ok with the neck ring... its fugly as is the ear lobe thingy. But that is just me on a personal level.

Here is a fun fact. Historicly well endowed or not women we not hunters. Think about everything we know about cave men. Men Hunt, Women Gather. In fact there is a whole Vegas show dealing with that subject that is really really funny called "Defending the Caveman" The few women who did hunt found that their "love bumps" would get in the way...

Men don't understand this because they have never given themselves a black eye on the treadmill. That and it hurts when they bounce too much... Cave women delt with this issue by cutting a length of leather and tying it around their lady bits. Many of them did not wear clothing because when hunting it would cause them to trip, or the smell of the clothing would tip off the prey.

Men however needed to wear something to keep their own parts from dragging in underbrush and the like. I can't say how that would feel but I imagine it is rather unpleasent.

Hope that helps a little.

 

[The Blue Lotus]

I'm really glad you said that because I feel the same way.

I don't understand how leopard skins, face paint and earlobe stretching can be offensive when they were in fact historically done. Combining them into a single culture - done well, in a fantasy world - could be horribly stereotypical, or it could serve to speak for a multitude of cultures at once.

The thing is, it's the attitude of the novel that can be offensive or complimentary towards the people involved, even above the intentions of the author, and that attitude is just hard to see clearly from a bad drawing and a few super-preliminary paragraphs. To be honest, though, Jabrosky, I do think you need to give it considerable amounts of consideration and research before you reach the point you're trying to achieve.

But I think you're using "Nazi" to reflect an attitude, and that attitude is stereotypical. Even the Nazis had complexities and motivations and a history which in their mind justified their actions.

I think you need for your work to reach a level of complexity and involvement where you no longer refer to your characters and their societies by the statements you mean to make about their real-world counterparts.

You know I used to work in a nursing home, there was a nice old man there and when Veterans day came round they ommited his man from the list of people who had served. The list included people who had served in every other armed service you can think of world wide but, he had served with the German Army during WWII.

As I said he was a sweetheart, he and I were talking one day as I helped him down the hall and he told me how much it hurt him to be singled out like that because he was forced to serve or his own family would have been in danger.

It broke my heart, and I fought to have his name restored. It ended up costing me my job in the end I was ok with that because the job stunk... But his name was added to the plauqe that hung in the hallway.

We can't assume we know the reasons behind a persons actions unless we ask them. I learned then that there is more to the Nazi group than meets the eye. There are shades of grey in a black and white history.

That being said, if he included a ultra militant group but gave them a different name, and showed the more complex nature of why one would chose to be associated with that group. It could be a useful tool to bring light to some of the more forgotton people in these situations.

 

[Jabrosky]

I've thought more about this whole issue and I want to respond to this earlier post:

I know you're trying to show black people, and black women specifically, in a positive light because you care.

This has been my major motivator for writing anything in the last several years. I've always been a creative type who enjoyed drawing and writing, but ever since I became interested in racial politics I have hoped to use my creativity as an outlet for activism. However, I am finding that this very agenda is interfering with my storytelling. It's hard to create multidimensional characters when your underlying desire is to uplift an oppressed people and counter negative stereotypes.

I don't know if I should continue with this. I do find black women attractive and I have grown an interest in African culture, so I'll probably still write stories about that subject matter, but I can't let my politics interfere with my creativity. I need to relax.

 

[Penpilot]

I think what's maybe rubbing people the wrong way is just the picture, not the idea behind it. IMHO The style of the picture is a bit of a caricature. I'm assuming this is a prose story, so as long as you keep to portraying these people three dimensionally, as good, bad, and all shades in between, you should be OK.

 

[Ghost]

'Kay, I had a big ole response but it descended into half-lecture half-brainstorming session. You can message me if you'd like, Jabrosky. I'd be happy to talk with you about your goals and setbacks as far as this work goes. We can toss some ideas around, but I figure it should be up to you, especially since this thread was originally about the artwork and not the overall themes of your WiP.

I don't know if I should continue with this. [...] I need to relax.

I think you should take a break from thinking about it or making major decisions for a few days. And, yes, relax for a while. Doubts are normal and getting feedback is great, but there's no need to drop something because people questioned a few aspects. I don't think anyone said they hated your idea and would stomp on your book if they saw it in print. There were simply few things people are concerned about. The kinks can be ironed out when you're not as stressed.

 

[Devor]

However, I am finding that this very agenda is interfering with my storytelling. It's hard to create multidimensional characters when your underlying desire is to uplift an oppressed people and counter negative stereotypes.

I think you're just trying too hard. If you let the agenda dissolve behind your story and really just fall in love with your characters, I think you should find most these issues correcting themselves.

 

[Steerpike]

Jabrosky:

Two things:

1) Don't compromise your underlying vision for the story unless you are absolutely convinced you've gone wrong. I don't believe that to be the case with this race you've created, but you are the only person who can ultimately make that determination; and

2) Let me suggest that the criticism of your race reflects more of a societal bias (which probably was once rooted in racism, though it isn't necessarily so anymore) than your actual race does. I did some searching on black tribal cultures prior to writing this. I saw face paint, I saw arm bands, and I saw any number of features that you might include in your race and be criticized for it. These were images of people celebrating their own cultural heritage by donning traditional garb, face make-up, or what have you. So if the ultimate gist of the criticism of your race is that your black-skinned people have to look and act more like white westerners, I'd be quite leery of that advice indeed, and I'd question why it is that indigenous cultural heritage is being devalued in the thread.

What you are essentially being told is that traditional black tribal culture is somehow inherently sub-standard, and that your race needs to be a bit more like us white westerners.

 

[Queshire]

I'm all for writer integrality, the sanctity of the story, and all that rot, but I think it's important to remember that one of our goals as writers is to have people read our writing and more importantly, pay us for our writing. If you're a super famous writer you can do all kinds of risky things, shaking up the writing world, but considering you're here on this forum, I'm pretty sure you AREN'T a super famous writer. It just seems to me that the risk of what you're doing simply out weighs any possible benefits.

I won't say you can't do it, or that you shouldn't do it. That goes against the very basis of a writer, but I sress, be very, very careful.

One thing I suggest, if it doesn't go completely against your world, is to have the tribal people not be human at all. I mean, it's fantasy, so why not? Maybe have them be Orcs or some type of dinosaur-like humanoi. That way you can do the whole thing without getting into the squickiness of skin color.

 

[Steerpike]

One thing I suggest, if it doesn't go completely against your world, is to have the tribal people not be human at all. I mean, it's fantasy, so why not? Maybe have them be Orcs or some type of dinosaur-like humanoi. That way you can do the whole thing without getting into the squickiness of skin color.

Once again this gets closer to being offensive or racially-biased than anything the OP is proposing. What you're basically saying is that intelligent humans can't be portrayed as tribal, or wearing face paint, or other costumes or ornamentation associated with tribal cultures. Instead, if they're going to be tribal they have to be reduced to orcs or some kind of dinosaur men?

I'm sure the people around the world who don traditional garb and use face paint, jewelry, and the like to celebrate the rich heritage of an indigenous tribal culture would really appreciate that.

 

[Queshire]

The fact is, they simply aren't going to care if they're not human. However, they WILL care about black skinned tribal humans, I can assure you that.

 

[Steerpike]

The fact is, they simply aren't going to care if they're not human. However, they WILL care about black skinned tribal humans, I can assure you that.

Depends on how they are depicted. If they are depicted as dim-witted animals, then people will care. If they are depicted as intelligent humans, and shown in a positive manner, no rational person is going to have a problem with it.

This is the problem with the PC mindset. It often relies on fictions, at the expense of reality, and in so doing is also often more insulting to reality than the situation it seeks to address.

If this sort of thing wasn't so prevalent in society, it would be comical. No one will dispute that there have been dark-skinned tribal humans in the history of the planet. But for PC reasons, people are advising that an author can't have a fantasy analog of those tribal humans because it will be offensive. Instead, the tribal beings should be orcs.

Think for a moment about what you are saying about indigenous tribal peoples throughout history, and the inherent cultural biases and negative value judgments that underpin your viewpoint. Here's a novel idea - how about we recognize that these tribal peoples, whether they wore face paint or other adornments or not, were every bit as smart as you and I, and that they had long-standing and complex cultures and mythologies extending back over great periods of time. And how about we recognize that you don't have to turn them into light-skinned mimickers of western european society and values to make them worth writing about?

The only reason you'd have to limit dark-skinned tribal cultures in your work to "orcs" is if the dark-skinned tribal peoples who have been historically present on earth were a bunch of savages with intelligence just a faction above that of animals. I categorically reject that idea.

 

[Queshire]

I agree with you, however I'm not so optimistic to think that the everybody in the world wll see it that way.

It's simple really.

Will people be offended by primative, tribal black humans? Yes. I like to think we're all genre savy enough to accept that.

If you want people to not be offended, then you're going to have to change that mental image of them. You can do this through how you portray them, but the simplest way is to change how they look. People are a lot more willing to accept things that might be stereotypical at first glance, regardless of whether it's actually stereotypical or not, if their portrayed as not human.

Hell, you could change absolutely nothing and just call them Orcs and people would accept it. The mental image of Orc simply overides the mental image of tribal black man. They can still be human, technically, by the definition of species, ie; able to create offspring that can reproduce in turn, DnD Orcs ARE human, but just by calling them that, the difference is enough that the average reader will keep reading past their first impression instead of being offended.

I maintain, vagueness is your friend. Provide only what you absolutely must, and let the reader's immagination fill in the rest.

 

[Caged Maiden]

You've got a lot of good information here, Jabrosky, and ultimately the decision will be made by you, but I don't think anyone here is trying to offend you by giving you their opinion. You are not on a firing line; we are all artists who want you to succeed. That being said, when one is too attached to a concept, it can be detrimental. If you love your tribal people (as I do) then change the invaders to make it appear less like a racial issue. People didn't like the bikini and loincloth... could you rethink the outfit a little? What about my suggestion of making it look more like it came from a dinosaur? That would alleviate the problems people are having with the outfit without you compromising anything. It would make the character look like a character rather than a tribal African cartoon.

You've gotten some really encouraging help from a lot of people who obviously care. I thought my suggestions were a very good compromise.

 

[Steerpike]

If you want people to not be offended, then you're going to have to change that mental image of them. You can do this through how you portray them, but the simplest way is to change how they look.

This is true, but I suppose it gets at what is important in the story. Yes, you can change how they look, but you haven't really done anything apart from avoid the issue. It's like using PC terminology to re-name something - it does nothing to get at the underlying biases, and eventually you have to re-name it again (once all the still existing biases attach to the new term).

If one goal of the story is to portray a positive image of dark-skinned tribal cultures, then changing the appearance of the people defeats that. Whether that is important to Jabrosky in and of itself I don't know.

Also, I'm generally unsympathetic to the idea that art should be changed merely to avoid offending. If there is something within the story itself that doesn't work, then OK. But if it is merely that some people might be offended by it...well, I wouldn't let that rule my judgment. Chances are, most of the people offended will be light-skinned (I suspect that is the case in these forums). It reminds me of the use of the word "black" versus "african american." Of all the black friends, co-workers, and acquaintances I've had over the years (including one girlfriend, who I knew very well), only one person has preferred African American. The rest all preferred "black." A few were indifferent to african american, and a few were offended by that term. But there is no shortage of white people available to be offended if you say "black." I wonder what is up with that?