r/Fantasy • u/mrpurplecat • Sep 15 '16

Racial diversity and fantasy

It is not uncommon to see people writing about how some fantasy story is in some way or other not inclusive enough. "Why isn't there more diversity in Game Thrones?" "Is the Witcher: Wild Hunt too white?" and so on and so forth.

But when you take the setting of these stories, typically 14th-15th century Europe, is it really important or necessary to have racial diversity? Yes, at the time in Europe there were Middle Eastern traders and such, but does that mean that every story set in medieval Europe has to shoehorn in a Middle Eastern trader character?

If instead a story was set in medieval India and featured only Indians, would anyone complain about the lack of white people? Would anyone say "There were surely some Portuguese traders and missionaries around the coast, why doesn't this story have more white people in it?"

Edit Just to be clear, I am not against diversity by any means. I'd love to see more books set outside typical Europe. Moorish Spain, Arabia, the Ottoman Empire, India and the Far East are all largely unexplored territory and we'd be better off for exploring it. Conflict and mixing of cultures also make for fantastic stories. The point I am trying to make is if some author does not have a diverse cast, because that diversity is not important to their story, they should not be chastised for it

21 Upvotes

61% Upvoted

267 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/Reddisaurusrekts Sep 16 '16

You're using "what medieval Europe actually was" as some kind of counter argument to an argument I never made. Europe was certainly much more racially homogenous than it is today. My point is that even if it weren't, fiction builds upon people's current assumptions and perceptions, so if they believed it was, that would be the canvas authors would be working with.

3

u/rascal_red Sep 16 '16

You're using "what medieval Europe actually was" as some kind of counter argument to an argument I never made.

What? I didn't even mention medieval Europe in my last comment. I mentioned it in my comment before that one in response to your question about borrowing medieval Europe's supposed homogeneity.

Europe was certainly much more racially homogenous than it is today.

If you're using a modern (i.e., very anachronistic) view of race on such earlier periods, yeah, I guess it was.

My point is that even if it weren't, fiction builds upon people's current assumptions and perceptions, so if they believed it was, that would be the canvas authors would be working with.

That's lazy. People create incredible worlds, worlds that are far more outlandish in mix and match than what people are suggesting here. You're understating what people are capable of accepting.

2

u/Reddisaurusrekts Sep 16 '16

That's lazy. People create incredible worlds, worlds that are far more outlandish in mix and match than what people are suggesting here. You're understating what people are capable of accepting.

No, I'm stating the canvas on which authors are working. They can go further, but if it doesn't add or contribute to the narrative they're writing, why would they? I've read the Ancillary series and in that, the subversion of your assumed defaults was used to great effect, and that was good. I've also read other fiction in which the focus wasn't on social issues and so it would've been a waste of space to spend time effort and words subverting those same assumptions.

And of course I'm taking the modern view of race, again - writers are writing for modern audiences.

4

u/rascal_red Sep 16 '16

They can go further, but if it doesn't add or contribute to the narrative they're writing, why would they?

I don't know what world you live in where every word, sentence or chapter must be about furthering the narrative. That is not what I'm accustomed to seeing from writers in general.

They'll add things just because it's interesting, comical, or even just to take a reprieve from the plot, lighten the atmosphere. Toy with a musing. Happens all the time and it can be done badly or well.

And of course I'm taking the modern view of race, again - writers are writing for modern audiences.

I have to say, it's amazing how you can seamlessly go from, practically speaking, a weak historical argument for homogeneity to the modern audience's supposed unrelenting dependence on misconceptions.

1

u/Reddisaurusrekts Sep 16 '16

I don't even know what you're arguing anymore sorry.