Is this insensitive?

[Bramandin]

I've decided that the humans of my world don't really have racial diversity. I'm not specifying what they look like, but from my human MC's point of view, the elves are pale and he thinks that having any hair/eye color other than dark is unusual. I haven't done his face-claim yet but Egyptian is a possibility.

However, a lot of the humans were enslaved by the dark lords, with my MC's ancestors being mine slaves that revolted.

Also, the elves think that they're better than humans. According to elf history, they're the ones that uplifted humans from clever animals to intelligent creatures.

Would this be a problem with hints that the humans are equivalent to African-American?

If it is a problem, can I fix it without adding racial diversity?

 

[sknox]

>Would this be a problem with hints that the humans are equivalent to African-American?
Why make this equivalency? What is the story purpose?

In your world, if I read this right, humans are just humans, much the same as elves are elves, dwarves are dwarves, and so on. You don't really say who are the "dark lords" but is the adjective really necessary? Can't they just be lords?

Elves think they're better than humans? Sure. That's pretty standard. I don't see that having anything to do with the matter of racial diversity. Especially since you state that there is no such thing, in your world.

I'm not seeing the problem here. Can you explain?

 

[psikeyhackr]

I am African-American and I am prejudiced against elves so I am not going to read it.

 

[THX1138]

Slavery in the historic human race is common across ALL continents, ethnicities, races and times. Even today in all countries, there is 'slavery' in all of its many forms.
Problem: 400ish or so years of African-American salvery in the US vs 5000 years and current in Noth Africa down to the southern Sahara, as well as 3000 years in central to south and around the coasts...Granted, there are some parts that didn't and don't practice slavery...What's the question?

In the New World pre colonist; North, Central and South America, slavery was very common, as it was in EVERY culture. In Asia, the prized slaves where ones that where light skinned, blond with blue eyes. And where did they come from? Imported. Same for the US. But this is the same even for Africa, even today. So, like asked @sknox, 'I'm not seeing the problem here. Can you explain?' As this is human nature and history.

What Elven lore are you speaking of?
Tolken, D&D, Role Master, a movie? Elves are fictious, humans are not. High Elves. Low Elves. Dark, Forest, Wood, Plains, Desert, Sea or Snow Elves. All, depending on what relm and lore you are thinking are just like humans. Norse? Then Elves are, to my understanding, smart people. And they are who?

If you are going off of the Elves from an Angelic view, there are many issues with that as well; they hate humans and enslave each other. Unless they are Santas Elves, then slavery or obligation or just folk lore? P.S. the real historic St Nicolas was brown skinned in the historic Asia Minor, pre 12th century fasion. (Darn politics!)

So, like asked @sknox, 'I'm not seeing the problem here. Can you explain?'

I'm not trying to be critical my friend. Just helpful. Try not to over think and just express YOUR own views and feelings.
The art of Story Telling. So story teller, please tell YOUR story! and send a copy my way!

It is best to keep it simple and focus on that one or two'ish issues/customs/tech. And emphasize/expand on them.

Think it K,I,S,S; Keep It Simple Scholar!

(I try to do the same, so I tell you the same.)

 

[Wayne Mack]

Having an oppressed race, culture, species is a fairly common theme, so I think you're okay with that. I would avoid, however, dropping any hints that humans are equivalent to African-American treatment, particularly in the Americas. That could be viewed as an objectionable statement and would appear to be out of context with the world that I think you are describing.

For me, the elf description made me think of Japan and some of the atrocities committed in World War II. I bring that up only to highlight that there are multiple historical instances of oppression and their is no reason to assume that the reader will necessarily associate it with the old south in the US.

I say go for it. Just avoid any obvious ties to any real world situations and you should be fine. A good rebellion story is always a fun read.

 

[Bramandin]

>Would this be a problem with hints that the humans are equivalent to African-American?
Why make this equivalency? What is the story purpose?

Since this is fantasy, the assumption probably would be that with no racial diversity, they're all germanic-european and there are no black people. I'm trying to hint that there are no white people without really saying it. I'm probably not going to include it because it's too complicated, but I was thinking that the humans aren't homo sapien but rather a tool-using ancestor. Sort of a scenario that's parallel to Planet of the Apes.

In your world, if I read this right, humans are just humans, much the same as elves are elves, dwarves are dwarves, and so on. You don't really say who are the "dark lords" but is the adjective really necessary? Can't they just be lords?

Humans are humans. Elves have a caste system where they can tell just by looking if someone was born to the warrior-caste, intellectual-caste, entertainment-caste, or there's even a garbage-caste.

The dark lords were human sorcerers that effed up the world for the lulz. They're the ones who created the monsters that are effectively a zombie army. I thought that dark lords was just the quickest way to say it.

Elves think they're better than humans? Sure. That's pretty standard. I don't see that having anything to do with the matter of racial diversity. Especially since you state that there is no such thing, in your world.

I'm not seeing the problem here. Can you explain?

Mostly I'm trying to avoid uncomfortable implications. People are touchy and will probably read the elves as an allegory for white supremacy. I feel like I can literally have an elf say "we are bad and wrong for thinking we are better than humans" (because their civilization is more advanced, they just had longer to develop) and someone will probably interpret it as elves are completely right.

Slavery in the historic human race is common across ALL continents, ethnicities, races and times. Even today in all countries, there is 'slavery' in all of its many forms.
Problem: 400ish or so years of African-American salvery in the US vs 5000 years and current in Noth Africa down to the southern Sahara, as well as 3000 years in central to south and around the coasts...Granted, there are some parts that didn't and don't practice slavery...What's the question?

I'm American and assuming that a lot of the audience will be American. When someone says slavery, the thought is colonial south and not roman empire.

What Elven lore are you speaking of?
Tolken, D&D, Role Master, a movie? Elves are fictious, humans are not. High Elves. Low Elves. Dark, Forest, Wood, Plains, Desert, Sea or Snow Elves. All, depending on what relm and lore you are thinking are just like humans. Norse? Then Elves are, to my understanding, smart people. And they are who?

If you are going off of the Elves from an Angelic view, there are many issues with that as well; they hate humans and enslave each other. Unless they are Santas Elves, then slavery or obligation or just folk lore? P.S. the real historic St Nicolas was brown skinned in the historic Asia Minor, pre 12th century fasion. (Darn politics!)

Right now, they're looking a lot like the elves from Dragon Prince except they're all some sort of pale and only one type is magical. Their lifespans aren't much better than humans. I also watched a video about D&D elves where he suggested a system where elves used to be more like fairies, but they became more like the mortal races/humans and their superiority isn't justified. The elves had some sort of genetic split where the ones that can use magic and the ones who don't can have children together but the children are sterile. They can't have children with humans. (I guess it's like the difference between human and ape, where theoretically science could combine the genes.)

Are caste systems a form of slavery? Pretty much their government provides them housing and more valuable workers get slightly better accommodations. Currency is just a way to control food/clothing/entertainment distribution and the wealth-gap is narrow between the excellent contributors and the basic contributors. (Human currency is mostly non-physical in the form of accounts or verbal agreements.)

 

[Bramandin]

Having an oppressed race, culture, species is a fairly common theme, so I think you're okay with that. I would avoid, however, dropping any hints that humans are equivalent to African-American treatment, particularly in the Americas. That could be viewed as an objectionable statement and would appear to be out of context with the world that I think you are describing.

For me, the elf description made me think of Japan and some of the atrocities committed in World War II. I bring that up only to highlight that there are multiple historical instances of oppression and their is no reason to assume that the reader will necessarily associate it with the old south in the US.

I say go for it. Just avoid any obvious ties to any real world situations and you should be fine. A good rebellion story is always a fun read.

Y'know, I haven't heard much about what bad things Japan did during WWII. Kamikaze and making highschoolers be comfort-girls is about the worst, and not that bad when remembering that their culture isn't the same as ours.

Really the story is set a few generations after the evil sorcerers got killed and the monsters can't really keep things running smoothly. If Blackrock hadn't rebelled, the monsters could have left them to their own devices. The servants of the monsters were able to make trade agreements.

The elves are refugees from the past, so I think it's more of a colonial relationship except the elves are nicer about it and letting the humans mostly alone. (The elves are forcibly converting the humans to misotheism or agnosticism.) In the past, humans serving the elves was more like Stargate where the oppressed thought that their oppressors were gods. The current humans aren't that impressed and recognize that the elves just have better tools.

I should look more into how Japan had closed itself off for a while and then got technological boosts when they started trading again. That's probably the sort of effect the elves would have on my world.

 

[sknox]

>I'm trying to hint that there are no white people without really saying it.
Ah, I see. So there *is* a divide, it's just between humans and elves, and there just happens to be a color differentiation that goes along with that. Is the color difference important? If so, then you've made color central to the story. You could easily dodge this by making elves blue or something, maybe even make the humans some color other than black (do you really mean black or do you mean shades of dark brown?). But if you're trying to say something about black and white, then you've jumped right into the middle of that lake, and it's up to you to deal with it.

Also, ftr, you're trying to hint there are no white *humans*. You have white elves.

Also, if you have elves who are differentiated by appearance, that's close enough to racial divisions that I don't think you can duck the uncomfortable implications.

I'm still rather confused. It looks like you're trying to put color and caste at the center of the story, but want to do so without having to deal with the implications of that.

 

[Bramandin]

>I'm trying to hint that there are no white people without really saying it.
Ah, I see. So there *is* a divide, it's just between humans and elves, and there just happens to be a color differentiation that goes along with that. Is the color difference important? If so, then you've made color central to the story. You could easily dodge this by making elves blue or something, maybe even make the humans some color other than black (do you really mean black or do you mean shades of dark brown?). But if you're trying to say something about black and white, then you've jumped right into the middle of that lake, and it's up to you to deal with it.

Also, ftr, you're trying to hint there are no white *humans*. You have white elves.

Also, if you have elves who are differentiated by appearance, that's close enough to racial divisions that I don't think you can duck the uncomfortable implications.

I'm still rather confused. It looks like you're trying to put color and caste at the center of the story, but want to do so without having to deal with the implications of that.

I really didn't want to do blue. The reason I don't do green is because I can't think of any mammal that is naturally green. (Sloths are green because of mold.) There are gray-skinned mammals so I could make the elves gray and the monsters green or orange. Pretty much the point is to make the elves look other without taxing suspension of disbelief too hard. I want the monsters and elves to be distinct enough from each other that no one thinks they have a common ancestor.

I could make it so the magical elves are pale while the non-magical elves have more "normal" and darker skin tones from the human perspective. I'm fine with the elves being more distinct because of the horns and how their hair can be any animal's fur color. (I'm liking the dark-skinned redhead trope for the warrior-caste.)

The humans aren't black-black, just I'm likely to be vague enough where people with a variety of ancestral origins might assume he looks like them. (Oh, the trope is ambiguously brown.) Search results for possible Radley face-claim:

egyptian boy

indian boy

african boy

native american boy

As far as the elves and their caste system, I realize that I'm going to have to be careful with it, but they're also not human so most of them could be fine with a system that we'd consider dystopic. The appearance is an artifact of them purposefully dividing themselves by internal traits. Like how certain dog breeds tend to have certain temperament.

An example is that the warrior-caste is usually logistic-supported by the sturdiest people in the worker-caste, and those people are taught how to defend themselves, but most of the worker-caste lacks the aggression to make good soldiers. People from the entertainment-caste aren't generally considered suited to make anything more vital than a teapot. If given a choice, most elves would do a job that's for their caste anyway. Though the ones that live with the humans are mostly misfits and oddballs. (Fine, you can be a nonconformist, just do it someplace else.) Some of the possible side-characters are a warrior-caste who carries a coward-brand on their face, an entertainment-caste that works as a blacksmith, a science-caste who would rather be a bureaucrat, and some garbage-people who spend more time on their "hobbies" than their assigned jobs.

Bigotry and xenophobia is going to be in the story unless I really can't handle it well enough, but it's going to be more on the level of microaggressions than violent. The magic elves were also religious nutjobs that were responsible for mutual destruction, but the refugee techno-elves were hesitant to commit genocide and I haven't decided if the religious elves are just contained or dead.

 

[Wayne Mack]

Is there an underlying plot reason to specify skin color? There are probably some other defining characteristics that could be sufficient. Give the Elves pointed ears and appear Vulcan-like. Or make the Elves shorter than standard humans or taller than standard humans. Perhaps all Elves are pale skinned and black haired. It could even come down to just being a style of dress.

One of the plot advantages of keeping the differentiations simple is that it allows one group to pass as another. Some humans might be able to pass themselves off as Elves and some Elves may be able to pass themselves off as humans. A lot can be done plot-wise with that ability.

 

[Fiberglass Cyborg]

I do like the idea the the paler-skinned Elves are the "marked category" from the main character's point of view. Ursula le Guin did something similar in the "Earthsea" books, with the Archipelagans and the pale-skinned Kargs. She's a good model for how to do this without it being too "on the nose".

I think it might help to draw on ideas from several different historical periods to help make the situation its own thing rather than a direct historical analogue. That's where you're mostly likely to get kickback: if it's framed as a direct comparision to African-American slavery and there's a nice neat little solution to it in the course of the book.

Something about the scenario reminds me less of the height of American slavery, and more of the later "Scramble for Africa" (1880-1914-ish). That was the point when several European nations justified a string of slightly random conquests in Africa by saying they were "bringing the light of civilisation into the Dark Continent," "shouldering the White Man's Burden," "raising the poor little [insert patronising racist description here]s from the mire of ignorance," and so on. The so-called Congo Free State of King Leopold subjected its people to a system of "forced labour" under the pretence of saving them from Arab slave-traders. In the slave era, there wasn't such a widespread pretence of good intentions. That attitude might be a good model for your Elves.

 

[Bramandin]

Is there an underlying plot reason to specify skin color? There are probably some other defining characteristics that could be sufficient. Give the Elves pointed ears and appear Vulcan-like. Or make the Elves shorter than standard humans or taller than standard humans. Perhaps all Elves are pale skinned and black haired. It could even come down to just being a style of dress.

One of the plot advantages of keeping the differentiations simple is that it allows one group to pass as another. Some humans might be able to pass themselves off as Elves and some Elves may be able to pass themselves off as humans. A lot can be done plot-wise with that ability.

I'm more towards the idea that elves and humans very obviously don't look alike, as in they'd need illusion magic to pass for each other. I want to keep an element where an elf and a human are brothers and the elf jokes that he's the human one.

I'm wanting to use ambiguously brown for the humans because since this is fantasy, the assumption probably would be that with no racial diversity, they're all germanic-european and there are no black people. I'm trying to hint that there are no white people without really saying it.

I do like the idea the the paler-skinned Elves are the "marked category" from the main character's point of view. Ursula le Guin did something similar in the "Earthsea" books, with the Archipelagans and the pale-skinned Kargs. She's a good model for how to do this without it being too "on the nose".

I think it might help to draw on ideas from several different historical periods to help make the situation its own thing rather than a direct historical analogue. That's where you're mostly likely to get kickback: if it's framed as a direct comparision to African-American slavery and there's a nice neat little solution to it in the course of the book.

Something about the scenario reminds me less of the height of American slavery, and more of the later "Scramble for Africa" (1880-1914-ish). That was the point when several European nations justified a string of slightly random conquests in Africa by saying they were "bringing the light of civilisation into the Dark Continent," "shouldering the White Man's Burden," "raising the poor little [insert patronising racist description here]s from the mire of ignorance," and so on. The so-called Congo Free State of King Leopold subjected its people to a system of "forced labour" under the pretence of saving them from Arab slave-traders. In the slave era, there wasn't such a widespread pretence of good intentions. That attitude might be a good model for your Elves.

I'll have to read Earthsea. I'm liking the idea of leaning into how the pale ones are the non-normal. It's not a complete flip, considering how when the pale elves lived among humans, they still thought they were the better ones, but they would have been on the bad side of it if speciest tensions led to violence due to being the minority. Among the elves, magical ones are the hated group, but the group deserved it. One of the few magical elves that's walking free has "traitor" tattoos on his face to signal that he's not part of that group. I decided that the techno-elves have a skin-tone range where some are lighter and some are darker than the humans. In ranking the castes, it's going to be randomized where average level of melanin doesn't correlate with which castes are more valued.

I absolutely do not intend for the fantasy specism to really resemble American racism. Except growing up in a town that was still sundown when I was a teenager means that some of the inspiration is from what I witnessed and heard about. It seems like that sort of low-grade othering happens in a lot of places, more in the base psyche of peoples that have in-groups and out-groups. It could be more like I'm seeing with ableism; the hatred isn't really organized.

The idea of civilizing the savages is close to what I'm planning, but not quite accurate. The magical elves were expecting the humans to treat them like gods, but instead it became a symbiosis of them trading their skills for human goods. The techno-elves weren't being altruistic when they first uplifted the humans, they just wanted trainable monkeys, but when they began sharing knowledge with the humans, it was in recognition that they and the humans could elevate each other.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Slavery in the historic human race is common across ALL continents, ethnicities, races and times. Even today in all countries, there is 'slavery' in all of its many forms.
Problem: 400ish or so years of African-American salvery in the US vs 5000 years and current in Noth Africa down to the southern Sahara, as well as 3000 years in central to south and around the coasts...Granted, there are some parts that didn't and don't practice slavery...What's the question?

This is about the European diaspora having technology versus everyone else not. When in history has genetic slavery been created on stolen land by sailing millions of people thousands of miles? If some people can shove it under the rug by saying slavery has always existed that is there business.

The problem is Black Americans not concentrating on technology and trashy everything else about European culture. What did MLK ever say about science and technology?

 

[THX1138]

This is about the European diaspora having technology versus everyone else not. When in history has genetic slavery been created on stolen land by sailing millions of people thousands of miles? If some people can shove it under the rug by saying slavery has always existed that is there business.

The problem is Black Americans not concentrating on technology and trashy everything else about European culture. What did MLK ever say about science and technology?

No argument from me on that point at all! Apologies on my part as nothing was meant in justifying any form of slavery at all.

European science and technology have its benefits to a point, in cooperation with nature. Past that it tends to be bad news for sure. European science and technology has a lot of African and Asian knowledge in it due to trading. But greed over wisdom. Self-importance over life. Not good when clamed for self at the expense of the contributors.

The slave trade from the Mid-East to Asia of a dozen slaves at a time is one thing, but hundreds at a time on one sail ship after another for the time period of the American Slave trade is something else altogether. That is beyond slavery at that level and reason, it's close to if not genocide. That should never be put under a rug for any reason.

Science, technology and some deal making in this case was very catastrophic on human lives and an abuse of that science and technology to say the least. Total agreement there!

My point is that on a local cultural level, there is/was some kind of slavery/down casting/abuse, unfortunately, in most all cultures at some time of their history.
I'm a 1st generation Eastern European-American here. I cannot compare to US history at all. (we have our own abuse of science/technology and ethnic issues)

I'm going to leave it with that as I want to be on good terms, but I do appreciate your openness and up-front statements!

 

[psikeyhackr]

To me the peculiar thing is the double entry accounting was invented in Italy 700 years ago but is it mandatory in the schools in any Western country?

Some nitwit socialist who claimed to be a high school teacher objected to mandatory accounting on the grounds that the math would make Capitalism seem logical to the students.

Facepalm**3!

 

[hitmouse]

To me the peculiar thing is the double entry accounting was invented in Italy 700 years ago but is it mandatory in the schools in any Western country?

Some nitwit socialist who claimed to be a high school teacher objected to mandatory accounting on the grounds that the math would make Capitalism seem logical to the students.

Facepalm**3!

Accounting certainly is not core curriculum in the uk, but that has nothing to do with socialism or capitalism. It is not part of the curriculum in posh private schools, quite apart from state schools. Economics is an optional part of the syllabus. I suppose Business Studies, which is another option will include some accounting.

 

[sknox]

To me the peculiar thing is the double entry accounting was invented in Italy 700 years ago but is it mandatory in the schools in any Western country?

Some nitwit socialist who claimed to be a high school teacher objected to mandatory accounting on the grounds that the math would make Capitalism seem logical to the students.

Facepalm**3!

Double entry bookkeeping is only necessary if you're running a business. Might as well point out that plumbing isn't required as a subject.

This is the second time you've cited this item about the high school teacher. Would you mind providing a reference? I looked and was unable find anything.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Double entry bookkeeping is only necessary if you're running a business. Might as well point out that plumbing isn't required as a subject.

This is the second time you've cited this item about the high school teacher. Would you mind providing a reference? I looked and was unable find anything.

Every household is a business. But society indoctrinates almost everyone to think as worker/consumers.

Years ago on a website using a 1984 theme I had lots of conversations about politics, economics and society. Some individual who claimed he was a Swedish high school teacher and avowed socialist objected to mandatory accounting. He reasoning was one of the most absurd things I have ever heard.

A libertarian objected on the grounds that nothing should be mandatory.

Economics is something we all must deal with. Every dollar or pound we spend is a vote influencing the direction of the economy. But there is so much crappy information flying around. I worked for IBM and they produced a machine I regarded as junk. I got a service call on one. As I walked down the hall toward the entrance I was telling myself, "don't walk in and start laughing at these idiots." They turned out to be dumber than I was expecting. They had stretched the power cord so the machine disconnected. I just slid it to the right two feet and pushed both ends of the cord in tightly.

I managed to leave and get into the elevator before i started laughing. The white people in the elevator looked at me and moved away. LOL

 

[sknox]

>Every household is a business
No. Just because a household has income and expenses doesn't make it a business. Otherwise, *everything* is a business and the word loses meaning.

There's a reason why a checkbook comes with a journal rather than a ledger. A simple journal--which is how business books were kept prior to the 15thc or so--is sufficient to a household. But if someone starts running a business out of their house (like some of the authors here, for example), then a more sophisticated form of record keeping starts to make sense. That's why very successful authors hire accountants.

OK on the Swedish high school teacher, sure. But maybe he was wrong because he was Swedish. Or because he was a high school teacher. Or because he was socialist. Or maybe all those things. It's hard to conclude much based on one example.

As for the stupid people, I was in tech support for many years. I tried hard to understand how it was people made "dumb" decisions and behaved in "stupid" ways. I found it was all too easy to judge others and it was much harder to try to understand them. But when I made that effort, it turned out I was able to provide better help. And I was more content in my job. I'm sorry you had that reaction in the elevator.

But I think this has wandered from from the OP, so I'll stop there.

 

[psikeyhackr]

>Every household is a business
No. Just because a household has income and expenses doesn't make it a business. Otherwise, *everything* is a business and the word loses meaning.

How about "Economic Unit" and each being a player in the economic power game?

Sure, the dummies are not supposed to comprehend Net Worth.

If they refused to buy junk designed to become obsolete that would be bad for business.

How to Run a Household Like a Business and Maintaining a Budget

Knowing how to run a household can be like running a business if you want your home to be successful. Is running a house like being the CEO of a business?

moneyqanda.com