site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 30, 2023

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

8
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

there's something to me a little silly about insisting that Superman's Jimmy Olsen must always be a light-skinned redhead, or that Aragorn was, and can only ever be a white man

Exactly! And that's why it's way past time that John Henry be depicted as a trans pan differently abled bi-racial Latinx!

Oh, but John Henry is different? Why?

Magic:The Gathering puts out a deck of cards depicting Aragorn as black. Well, woo-hoo, except why is Arwen still white now? Race swap everybody, or admit you're only doing it to sell more tat.

Tar-Míriel being mixed race in Amazon's "Rings of Rip-Off" didn't bother me. Giving Elendil a made-up daughter and Pharazon a made-up son so they could have a very weak and wet semi-sort of romance bothered me a lot more. The dirty little psychopath Harfoots bothered me more. Dísa popping up out of nowhere with not even "yeah she's a princess of the Stonefoots" bothered me more. Having Galadriel decide to swim the entire Atlantic Ocean, no biggie, bothered me more.

Changes need to be organic, not "how many boxes off the DEI bingo card can we tick?". Mixed-race Tar-Míriel? Can be defended, since we don't know who her mother was and what the maternal bloodline was like - it's possible (however far-fetched) that some of the loyal and faithful Easterlings or people of Harad were included with the Houses of the Edain that were gifted Númenor in the past. But the rest of it - the black Elf? Yeah, and where does he come from? Where are the other black Elves? When you only have one black Dwarf, one black Elf, etc. then it's plain you're not adapting to local circumstances, you're box-ticking. If the 13th century adaptor had changed Sir Orfeo to be a British harper-king, but left everyone else Thracian, we'd see the reason that was a poor choice.

Exactly! And that's why it's way past time that John Henry be depicted as a trans pan differently abled bi-racial Latinx!

Oh, but John Henry is different? Why?

You seem to assume something I don't agree with. Sure, bring on every variant of John Henry under the sun! Give me a white Black Panther, or an Asian Othello - nothing is forbidden in storytelling. I have experienced multiple versions of Cyrano de Bergerac, and I would imagine if you asked a person 100 years ago about a version where he's a little person, they would have thought it strange, and yet I loved Peter Dinklage's portrayal of the character in the musical.

John Henry is not an exception to what I say. Even sacred figures like Buddha can sometimes wander across cultures and become a Catholic saint.

Changes need to be organic, not "how many boxes off the DEI bingo card can we tick?".

I'm curious what you think the process is for a change to be "organic".

Do you also think Kirill Eskov's The Last Ringbearer, which recasts the orcs as the good guys, is inorganic?

Do you think the decision of Marvel's writers to take the originally red-haired Thor and turn him into a blonde character is "organic"?

Do you think that the manuscript traditions of the Mahabharata where the lower caste character of Karna is made more powerful is "organic"?

To me, there is no "organic" or "inorganic" retelling of a tale. There is only the storyteller's art, and what you make of the material you are given. If I was retelling the Greek myths, there are parts I would embellish and polish and things I would omit and they all feel perfectly natural situated in the particular time and place I am in. Saying any of the changes I would make are "inorganic" is to assume there's some way I "should" be telling the story, which I reject.

To me, there is no "organic" or "inorganic" retelling of a tale. There is only the storyteller's art, and what you make of the material you are given. If I was retelling the Greek myths, there are parts I would embellish and polish and things I would omit and they all feel perfectly natural situated in the particular time and place I am in. Saying any of the changes I would make are "inorganic" is to assume there's some way I "should" be telling the story, which I reject.

If all art is organic, you should prioritize a bit more trying to argue against the authoritarians today in control over the race swapping issue.

Since those who are now in charge share your ideals when it comes to art they appreciate but not when it comes to art they label as all sorts of ist. Which relates also with the race swapping they are doing. Clearly some art is better than others in their eyes because it ticks diversity or ideological boxes.

In which case you need to be arguing more against them and it seems your voice is joining them.

You seem to assume something I don't agree with. Sure, bring on every variant of John Henry under the sun! Give me a white Black Panther, or an Asian Othello - nothing is forbidden in storytelling. I have experienced multiple versions of Cyrano de Bergerac, and I would imagine if you asked a person 100 years ago about a version where he's a little person, they would have thought it strange, and yet I loved Peter Dinklage's portrayal of the character in the musical.

Then your proposal isn't particularly relevant since what you say you are in favor and what is happening are quite different. Race swapping in practice is not the one that white black panther happens. I think it is important if you are true to your claims of favoring race swapping in an even handed manner, to oppose the current way it is implemented.

Or you don't care if it is evenhanded and race swapping is good anyway, at any point, even if blatantly one sided? In that case it is suspicious and it seems you are converging with an one sided agenda. It is easy to argue general principles in favor of the outgroup getting it, if you are out to get your outgroup. More convincing if you argue it in a way and in a time and place that would benefit what one suspects your outgroup to be.

It's interesting that you reference the Mahabharata, because I've seen different adaptations of it and I have noticed that the character is made more heroic or a champion of the underclass or what have you, but they've been building him up since at least movies in the 60s.

So that's organic.

Do I care that Marvel movies made Heimdall black? For about three seconds, then I went 'well the comics version of Thor is so different from the mythological original, why not?'

Now, if they made Thor black... but Marvel do squeak past this with the multiverse notion of all kinds of variations on our Earth so that heroes here may be completely different on other planes or not even exist.

Do you also think Kirill Eskov's The Last Ringbearer, which recasts the orcs as the good guys, is inorganic?

Yes I do, but I also understand the political reasoning behind it.

I think the white version of Black Panther is The Phantom, but okay. Give me white Black Panther and Asian John Henry.

Except we won't get them, and you know why as well as I do. So your coyness about "why shouldn't Aragorn be black?" isn't simply "times change, peoples change, we adapt to our own local circumstances the legends we inherit from other cultures". Aragorn should be black! But John Henry should never be anything other than what he is! White Aragorn is racist, but black John Henry is just the way things should be.

"Organic" is not "hey, we need more Purples in this movie. Focus groups show that Purple Representation is the hot new topic. Just write in a few Purples, doesn't matter if it makes any sense or not".

Except we won't get them, and you know why as well as I do.

As big Hollywood movies, maybe not. But even I am sometimes surprised at what people are able to come up with.

Miku Binder Thomas Jefferson might have been super cringe, but I also think it was 100% sincere and "organic", even by your own standards. Some Gen Z artist saw Hamilton, and liked that depiction of Thomas Jefferson by a black actor in a play enough to take it one level further. That's just how people interact with media in this day and age.

Look at this list of Undertale AU's. All of that seems completely organic to me. Some people just like imagining their favorite video game characters in a cozy coffee shop, or as vampires, or whatever. This is only even scratching the surface - there are Undertale AU's that have their own Undertale AU's that have their own Undertale AU's with videos on Youtube that have thousands of views. It's a wild rabbit hole.

If I never have to read another! god! damn! coffeeshop! AU! I'll be a happy camper 😀

Look at this list of Undertale AU's. All of that seems completely organic to me.

Sure. Many changes from the original in fanfiction are organic.

That doesn't mean the same is true for changes in published works.

Now, if they made Thor black... but Marvel do squeak past this with the multiverse notion of all kinds of variations on our Earth so that heroes here may be completely different on other planes or not even exist.

While generally disliking random swapping, I really enjoyed the Loki variants, which were absolutely in line with the theme of the character and show.

What I'm finding really odd is that Loki season one was all over my dashboard on Tumblr (and yeah, the variants were indeed funny). But season two? Not a sausage. I'm very curious as to why that is, but nobody seems to be talking about it and I have no idea why.

Just another victim of the general burnout on Marvel?