The Sword and Laser discussion

The website IO9 recently published an article (http://io9.com/daenerys-whole-storyli...) criticizing 'A Song of Ice and Fire' as being a racist 'neocon wet dream', with the Daenerys story-line being the worst offender.

Anyone agree or disagree with this? I'm sure this is an old argument by this time, but I'm wondering if the last episode stirred any new thoughts?

I'm personally puzzled why some people, like the staff at IO9, are very offended by this. I'm not even sure what exactly the source of the anger is. Is it just nerd-baiting for page hits?

Are they arguing that Dany was too white to help darker skinned slaves? Would IO9 be happier if her character, who had the power and will to affect change, had decided not to help the slaves gain freedom? Are they going to criticize the recent movie 'Lincoln' for the same reasons?

Should it really matter what ethnicity or skin tone is of the people involved, be it the slavers, their victims, or the people trying to free them?
Personally I believe that slavery of anyone is a repulsive crime and should be stopped by anyone who can do so, regardless of race.

I don't agree with everything said in the i09 article, but based on your response I don't think you understood it or the writer didn't do a good job of explaining the issue, which is an old one. There is long tradition in our literature and culture, including genre fiction, of depicting the white savior of a brown peoples who are unable or incapable or not advanced enough to save themselves. This is offensive for obvious reasons, even if the story presents a situation where this is literally necessary. Would i09 prefer those fictional people remained enslaved? That's a ridiculous question because these are fictional creations and fictional situations which only exist because the writer wanted it that way. Writers should be aware of these offensive tropes, especially a smart and savvy one like GRRM who deliberately set out to disrupt traditional fantasy tropes. That said I thought it was pretty inoffensive until that final scene in the finale with the brown masses celebrating their relentlessly blonde 'mother' and savior. Wow, I'm surprised nobody in the editing room had second thoughts about that scene, especially when they are proved themselves so clever and savvy in the past.

PatrickC2010 wrote: "Are they arguing that Dany was too white to help darker skinned slaves?"

No, they're saying that dark skinned people whose countries were severely fucked up by white people coming over and telling them, "You're doing it wrong," get rather annoyed by Western authors writing stories about noble white people going to countries full of dark skinned people and telling them, "You're doing it wrong."

Would IO9 be happier if her character, who had the power and will to affect change, had decided not to help the slaves gain freedom?

The issue is Martin giving Daenerys that power in the first place, which is a classic colonialist narrative.

The issue is Martin portraying Eastern cultures as monolithic, as though there are no Dothraki who oppose rape or Meereenese who oppose slavery, while Westeros, despite being just as fucked up as Essos, is full of people who question how their society is set up.

The issue is why a fantasy author writing about a world that is fundamentally different from ours needs to people it with stereotypical Mongol hordes and inscrutable Orientals.

I don't know about racism; but it is definitely "orientalist". Despite deconstructing almost every trope in fantasy literature, curiously G.R.R. Martin followed every cliché about "Orientals" there is in the genre.

Writers such as J.R.R.Tolkien, C.S.Lewis, H.P.Lovecraft can be excused for their inherent orientalism, even racism(which was the norm of their times) but a post-modern intellectual such as G.R.R.Martin should know better.

I'm quite surprised by the article. I never thought of Klingons as any human race - the article says the actors went 'blackface' for the role, but I don't recall them being particularly dark. Same with the Dothraki. I was just enjoying a good story and not noticing skin colour. How terribly racist of me! :P

People are so touchy these days... If they are offended, please tell them see this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmnN3...

[]s from an African decedent. (heck, I'm brazilian, so I'm decedent of pretty much any ethnic group you can think of)

Ruth wrote: "I'm quite surprised by the article. I never thought of Klingons as any human race - the article says the actors went 'blackface' for the role, but I don't recall them being particularly dark. Same ..."

Blackface is an exageration, but the original series Klingons definitely wore heavy brown grease paint.

This is John Colicos in real life:



And as Kor:



Here's Michael Ansara in real life:



And as Kang:



The Klingons don't really correspond to any particular Earth culture, but they're the archetypal example of the Proud Warrior Race trope which is a problematic conception of what non-Western cultures are like.

Sean wrote: "The Klingons don't really correspond to any particular Earth culture, but they're the archetypal example of the Proud Warrior Race trope which is a problematic conception of what non-Western cultures are like. "

It's only problematic if you make the association to start with. Why automatically assume a Proud warrior race must be associated with any non western culture unless you have a deeply ingrained superiority(or inferiority) complex in the first place?

I can't help but notice: 'Aamer Rahman is a standup comic based in Melbourne, Australia. He is one half of the standup comedy duo Fear of a Brown Planet.'

I'm not saying he's joking entirely... but:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rv7be...

NO
This is just another case of too many people with opinions and an internet platform trying to make their name and money by preying on a society that has become ridiculously over sensitive, over dramatic, and over PC.
People need to relax and stop turning fiction, and other entertainment into more than they are.

David Sven wrote: "It's only problematic if you make the association to start with. Why automatically assume a Proud warrior race must be associated with any non western culture unless you have a deeply ingrained superiority(or inferiority) complex in the first place?"

Because warrior races in SF are always defined by their contrast to the protagonist's culture, which is inevitably Western. The warrior culture is treated as monolithic, with the warrior traits being essential to what defines a person as a member of that society -- there are no Klingon farmers or Dothraki lawyers; it's all warriors all the time -- whereas Western culture is allowed to be complex with our warriors being just a small subset of our society. This othering of foreign cultures by reducing them to a single stereotype is problematic and runs throughout SF.

Paul wrote: "NO
This is just another case of too many people with opinions and an internet platform trying to make their name and money by preying on a society that has become ridiculously over sensitive, over..."

Totally agree. I read fictional books for what they are: escapism, and subsequently let my mind drift away. I don't dwell on things like 'oh, is the author trying to make this point etc,'

Personally, I don't consider the books racist. People can make arguments and speculation out of anything if they are choosing to purposefully pick a fight. Sure, there may be some parallels that can be drawn, but I think in this day and age where nothing is truly original, writers can't be blamed for creating characters and races of people that undoubtedly reflect some aspects of human culture.

Sean wrote: "The Klingons don't really correspond to any particular Earth culture, but they're the archetypal example of the Proud Warrior Race trope which is a problematic conception of what non-Western cultures are like."

The writer's insistence that Klingons being portrayed by white people in blackface to represent real-life people of color misses the underlying point of them. They're designed - intentionally, I think -- to subvert that trope because their fictional culture is patterned after the Norse. (Whereas the Romulans were patterned after the Romans.) So putting the very white Norse analogues in dark make-up looks a lot more like commentary *on* racist expectations than being actual racism.

Michael wrote: "This othering of foreign cultures by reducing them to a single stereotype is problematic "

But they are fictional cultures. They have no association with modern day cultures other than what the reader assigns them in their mind - which is more telling about the reader than the author. You are free to impose whatever association you want on the narrative - but you are not necessarily free to impose your associations on the author or other readers.

Michael wrote: "Totally agree. I read fictional books for what they are: escapism, and subsequently let my mind drift away. I don't dwell on things like 'oh, is the author trying to make this point etc,'"

Yes, that's easy for white people to say since we can pick up SF novels at random and be reasonably sure we're going to get a story about a white guy (or girl) doing heroic things. But we aren't the only people who read SF.

When a person of color picks up an SF novel, there's a good chance there's not going to be anyone like them in the story at all, and if there is, they'll be, at best, supporters of the white hero, and at worst part of the vast hordes supporting the Dark Lord. Think about the message that sends to all the black, and Asian, and Arab teenagers out there when they're constantly told, "You can't be a protagonist. You have to settle for being a sidekick or else part of the hordes of raping Dothraki."

If you don't speak up about this problem -- if you dismiss it because you only read for escapism -- you're encouraging this to continue.

David Sven wrote: "But they are fictional cultures. They have no association with modern day cultures other than what the reader assigns them in their mind - which is more telling about the reader than the author."

Oh, please. Westeros is nothing but medieval Europe with the serial numbers filed off, yet we're supposed to believe that the horse riding nomad warriors who live on vast steppes and terrorize surrounding cultures are anything but stand-ins for Mongols?

Writers aren't that original. SF is full of stuff that's only slightly modified from real world history, often based upon only a passing knowledge of the actual facts or, depressingly often, Western stereotypes. You can't pretend this is just stuff the reader brings to the story.

Trike wrote: "The writer's insistence that Klingons being portrayed by white people in blackface to represent real-life people of color misses the underlying point of them. They're designed - intentionally, I think -- to subvert that trope because their fictional culture is patterned after the Norse."

No, they weren't designed that way. That's a retcon from late in TNG's run. There's absolutely nothing "Norse" about the Klingons in TOS, and in the first few seasons of TNG they're portrayed as animalistic savages.

Well a friend who's been involved in our local Science fiction and Fantasy culture here for 30 years is an African-American. This was brought up during a panel at a local convention and I'd like to paraphrase him (its closer to a quote but better to be safe than sorry in case I miss something)

"Oh Please! If people of color are so concerned about portrayals of their people then go write it. It's a non-issue that's brought up more by guilt ridden first world problem white people than it is ever mentioned by any one Black, Hispanic, Asian or Martian (sic). Drop it and move on it's Stupid. I'm More concerned about how ignorant my people are portrayed in WB comedies, Wayan brother movies and people of WalMart websites than in Sci-fi, Fantasy and comics...Move on there's nothing to see here."

Funny that his rant still sticks in my head but I laughed so hard I couldn't forget it. He also referenced the comic con scene from Chasing Amy that addressed this issue...if you haven't seen it go find it :).

Later we were talking and the rant privately was even funnier but not public so I won't share too much without his permission.
BUT it involved discussion that the majority of whites are always on two sides of the issue either being racists and bigots or running to their defense like they're wounded ducks (sic), which in his eyes is just as racist because it seems to conclude that people of color can't deal with an issue themselves without white faces to lead the charge.

He's right its a non-issue. If you want to encourage diverse portrayals of race then donate your old Hitchikers Guide or Enders Game to a YA of color to inspire him so that someday he may write a different view that will change the status quo otherwise Internet and forum rants are a waste of everyones time. Actually Do something about it if it upsets you...Put up or shut up as they say...me (We, me my wife and kids) I donate my old books to school libraries and give them to the neighborhood kids (I live in a pretty economically depressed part of town)....it does a lot more good than bitching about it.

Oh and Happy Father's day...

Since Dany's storyline is centered around slavery there's always going to be issues like this.
I don't quite agree with the extent of the claims in this article or others of similar focus.
See Winter Is Coming and their discussion of Dorne and representation of non-white characters in the TV show: http://winteriscoming.net/2013/06/the...

However the owners of the slaves she freed are of similar ethnicity/race in both Astapor and Yunkai, she has a (former) slave army under her command.

Essentially I think people are creating smoke where's there's no fire, not for one second do I consider GRRM to be racist or pushing that view whether accidentally or not. With reference to the TV show people have said it's bad they've cut out characters of non-white ethnicity, but they've cut out plenty of white characters too.

We know they are limited to the extent they can go to on the show, their decisions to rid themselves of certain characters speaks of story development than a discussion of race in the writers room.

I try and judge characters on their personalities/actions than focusing entirely on the colour of their skin, as if that is their most important distinguishing factor.

Of course it's racist. You can all talk about how it's just escapism or how you judge characters without regard to their skin color, but none of the apologists for this have actually dealt with the points in the article. Your counterarguments amount to putting your fingers in your ears and going "I can't HEEAR YOU!!"

Look, if skin color doesn't matter why aren't the Dothraki white and the people of Westeros colored?

Paul wrote: "Oh Please! If people of color are so concerned about portrayals of their people then go write it. It's a non-issue that's brought up more by guilt ridden first world problem white people than it is ever mentioned by any one Black, Hispanic, Asian or Martian (sic)"

Aamer Rahman is white? How about N.K. Jemisin? Deepa D? Nisi Shawl?

And before someone asks "Who's Aamer Rahman??"... read the io9 article. Note the byline.

Sean wrote: "When a person of color picks up an SF novel, there's a good chance there's not going to be anyone like them in the story at all"

Maybe this is just me being a naive white girl, but I always thought colour was only skin deep. When looking for characters 'like me' in a book, physical characteristics are seldom what I'm looking for. The tall, blonde, golden skinned woman from one book I read is like me (I'm short, pale and have brown hair. The freckled redhead from another book is like me. Hell, Pippin, the short, hairy footed hobbit is like me too (I'll take that second breakfast!). The Japanese girl. Me! The African woman. Me! (very self centred, I know :P)

Or are you saying people who are not white can only associate with characters who are not white?

Ruth -Yes, you're being naive. You're also conflating very superficial things like hair color with race which is more than a bit problematic.

You (and I) get to read about characters like us. It's the standard thing. Note that ASoiaF has *white* characters as the main characters. Not colored. Not undefined. White. You and I get to do a bit of projection if we want to identify with non-white characters... but a person of color HAS to do that projection in the vast majority of cases.

As the io9 article points up it's not that people of color don't exist here, it's that they're stereotyped as the primitive, angry, primal folk who find themselves 'tamed' and led by the sophisticated white woman.

Face it, Martin isn't really that innovative in this series... he's just violated a couple tiny bit of fiction's rules, that heroes don't die and that you have heroes at all. That's all that really separates the series from typical epic fantasy fare - there's not a sharp division between good and evil and anyone can die. The rest? Just as stereotyped as most epic fantasy. It's a bit sad that this is seen as so risky and innovative... it just points up how moribund most epic fantasy is.

PS: For those of you defending Martin... note that you're all white. Think about that. "Geez I, the white reader, don't see a problem..."

Everyone, click that N.K.Jemisin link Sean posted. Read it.

Is aSoIF racist? Yes. In its depiction of Eastern cultures it does nothing but build on and enforce stereotypes. Martin does a lot of things right in his books, breaks a lot of stereotypes and turns assumptions on their head. But he did drop the ball with the Dothraki among others.

And no, of course Martin isn't a racist or intentionally pushing a racist worldview. That doesn't mean he doesn't have certain (culturally ingrained) blind spots. By far most people do (and no, not just white people either). I certainly do.

I love the GoT tv show (I have all the books in new edition hardcovers. I'm waiting to read it until it's complete.) And on a day to day basis while watching the show, none of what I said above lessens my enjoyment of it. But that doesn't mean it isn't there.

I did, however, cringe during the season's finale of GoT when I saw a pretty, blonde, white girl literally elevated towards the sky and hailed as a savior by a sea of brown people. How any of the editors thought that was a good scene, let alone one to end the show on, is beyond me.

I don't think there is any point in redescussing well-established orientalist bias in fantasy literature as well as in ASOIF. As a "non-white" fantasy fan I have seen it sooooo much in the genre, I am pretty used to it.

When I read ASOIF the first time my reaction was "Oh, look at those "Essosi" people(Westeros and Essos?! I wonder if there were ever a more obvious and thinly veiled reference to "East" and "West" in literature; of course they are portrayed as either savage rapist barbarians and horrible degenerate slave-mongers. What else could it be?"

What really bugs me though; G.R.R.Martin is such a revolutionary writer in the genre in all other aspect. There is not one trope that he didn't turn on its head; but when it come to orientalism, he followed the same 19th century clichés faithfully.

Ruth wrote: "Sean wrote: "When a person of color picks up an SF novel, there's a good chance there's not going to be anyone like them in the story at all"

Maybe this is just me being a naive white girl, but I ..."

No Ruth, you're NOT being naïve. You're feeling exactly what the author wants you to feel, kinship and sympathy with their creation.

You were also likely raised to believe other people are equal to you, which is much better than the "wounded duck" scenario mentioned above.

Also, we're talking about an unfinished product here. For all we know the Eastern people kick Dany to the curb long before her mighty army ravages the west, or whatever. I'm trying to think how she might die, since Martin loves killing off his characters... I don't think anyone has gotten a mace to face yet.

I believe ASoIaF is all things unholly and evil, one might think of BUT i believe it was done on purpose since G.R.R.Martin gives the impression of wanting to make the reader think and question everything, why I believe so? because:
- he wrote a children fairytale ( The ice dragon)
- in ASoIaF all the naive characters are smelling daisies from beneth the ground

Also Dany's storyline could be seen as a critique of colonialism; she "civilised" the east and all the east got from it was more pain, death, and suffering and Dany herself felt trapped in the miriad of consequences to her actions

Rick wrote: "Of course it's racist. You can all talk about how it's just escapism or how you judge characters without regard to their skin color, but none of the apologists for this have actually dealt with the points in the article. Your counterarguments amount to putting your fingers in your ears and going "I can't HEEAR YOU!!"

It's pretty ridiculous. The discussion should be "How does GoT employ these traditional tropes?", instead it's gotten sidetracked into "This trope doesn't exist!" despite the copious historical evidence. We get to hear the anonymous grousing of somebody's black best friend instead of what Samuel Delaney and Ursula K. Le Guin and many others have had to say on the subject.

Rick wrote: "Ruth -Yes, you're being naive. You're also conflating very superficial things like hair color with race which is more than a bit problematic."

I used a variety of ways in which characters I have identified with were different from me, including race (gender too, which is hardly superficial). The article talked constantly of 'black' and 'brown'. It made no mention of race - just colour.

Rick wrote: "PS: For those of you defending Martin... note that you're all white. Think about that. "Geez I, the white reader, don't see a problem...""

I don't know if this is your intention, but you seem to be saying that if you are white you have no right to a view on whether or not this show is racist. I don't suppose mine is the only view, but surely it is still a valid one?

Just to note: I've only been on GR for a few months now and pretty regularly GRRM is accused of some form of anti-social personality trait. Racism and sexism are the most common, but having a fetish for hand injuries, hatred of children, etc. have also come up.

In general, such commentary/review is a positive thing because it shows the activity, engagement and awareness of the readership. However, in the long run it often says very little about the author.

Ruth wrote: "Rick wrote: "Ruth -Yes, you're being naive. You're also conflating very superficial things like hair color with race which is more than a bit problematic."

I used a variety of ways in which charac..."

Ruth, I completely agree with you. Rick, your comment did seem to imply that white people aren't allowed an opinion on the issue.
I do think the tropes of monolithic, one-trait cultures can be an issue and maybe they linger here because of GRRM's War of the Roses inspiration and thus it has turned out overly European? But not everyone who chooses to write a white protagonist is racist either...you can't represent every single people group and every single expression of sexuality/gender into every single novel.
Maybe the problem is there needs to be better marketing and more exposure for non-white/non-Western authors, not that white guys should try to write about more non-white protagonists..."write what you know" after all.

Ruth wrote: "Maybe this is just me being a naive white girl, but I always thought colour was only skin deep. When looking for characters 'like me' in a book, physical characteristics are seldom what I'm looking for. The tall, blonde, golden skinned woman from one book I read..."

If you're a white person, you occupy a privileged position in Western society -- you have advantages that people of color lack just by virtue of your pale skin. A person of color can read about white people in contemporary society and sympathize with them, but there are aspects of being a black, Hispanic, or Asian person in America that you will never find in a book about white people because we never experience it.

And that's just fiction set in the modern world. Secondary world fantasy like ASOIAF and Lord of the Rings adds an extra wrinkle in that it's set in a supposedly fictional world -- but almost always a world based upon European history with any non-European settings being peripheral to the real action. Which is awesome if your cultural background is rooted in Europe, but it creates an additional privilege for white people -- our heritage is worthy of being a cool fantasy setting, while India, Arabia, Mali, and Meso-America are just places the hero might visit for a bit of exoticism or to pick up some helpers for her quest.

Sean wrote: "Ruth wrote: "Which is awesome if your cultural background is rooted in Europe, but it creates an additional privilege for white people -- our heritage is worthy of being a cool fantasy setting, while India, Arabia, Mali, and Meso-America are just places the hero might visit for a bit of exoticism or to pick up some helpers for her quest. "

Yes because things like Anansi Boys, Middle Kingdoms, Bridge of Birds and everything ever writen by Paolo Bacigalup and many others doesn't actually exist so lets all attack every euro writer ever because they dont consciously make sure that every single race, sex and religion is perfectly represented and all the heroic good guys instead of just writing what feels natural to them. Or better yet lets make a rule right now that states that only white people in entertainment can ever be portrayed as villains or repressed so as not to offend anyone ever accept maybe a writers personal integrity and common sense.

There are writers of every race creed and color out there and books that represent every single walk of life so lets all attack the guy whos popular because his is based in euro/white culture...cuz god knows it was his fault it sold well/ got watched on HBO and is now mainstream, the bastard should be strung up for what everyone else is willing to buy right?
I subscribe to the idea if you dont like it dont watch read or buy it. Well people bought it in the case of Martin...why is that his fault?

Paul wrote: "Or better yet lets make a rule right now that states that only white people in entertainment can ever be portrayed as villains or repressed so as not to offend anyone ever accept maybe a writers personal integrity and common sense. "

Strawman much? Wow.

I think the problem, exacerbated by the stupid i09 headline, is that one group identifies Martin's use of a traditionally racist trope and wants to discuss that, while the other takes that as saying "OMG Game of Thrones is racist and none of us should ever read any books by white people ever!" People and books are a mixed bag. I seriously doubt Martin is a racist, but good people and good books can make mistakes. The fact is, as much as some want to stick their heads in the sand and deny it, these tropes exist, period, and identifying and discussing them has nothing to do with your race or politics so stop taking it so damn personally, everyone.

Rob wrote: "Strawman much? Wow.
"

I am in no way playing Straw Man (two words) sorry had to be difficult ...your Aunt Sally or anything of the sort its just so incredibly ridiculous to keep hearing the same argument year after year about everything...Friends was attacked for being too white in the 90s for christ sakes...it gets old and tiring listening to people throw the same old crap out over and over that everything is rascist sexist or anti-christian or...on and on why can't everyone just let things be what they are?

Oh yes and brilliant discussion because if the entire cast of ASOIAF had been black, asian, or hispanic or whatever all anybody would have said was "OH MY GOD sure look how they portray us as a bunch of murdering, raping incestuous, scumbags"
Yes the whites in Martin's books are definitely well represented arent they? I'm pretty sure Grey Worm has been the most honorable character so far...not white by the way. Just saying its a matter of perspective...if your looking hard enough you can find anything.

Does creating a society with different values/morals make it inherently inferior? The Klingons were kind of scary but not evil - they just had a more warrior based honor system, and the federation doesn't try to change them, feel justified in conquering them, or attempt to enlighten them, it just wants to co-exist peacefully.

Now Dany, who is A Valeryan (sp?), definitely feels she is superior to pretty much everyone, so she could be classified as a racist, but really she's a supremist. And since we are from enlightened western societies, we agree that the easterners of ASoIaF are bad peoples who own slaves and dress weird, so the white people of Westeros must consider them inferior. But in the story, the white folks are corrupt, savage, brutal, ignorant, etc., etc. but they don't have slaves so they are superior? Aside from Dany, who in the books wants to change the brown-skinned cultures? Who has said anything about them and their way of life, other than Dany's group? No one.

Making the brown-skinned people an orientalist, decadent culture was certainly lazy world-building, but since its supposedly based on medieval europe and its views on the eastern cultures, it makes some sense. And there is nothing to suggest that the people of the east are inherently inferior, just different or less socially advanced.

Racism is the belief that a culture (or skin color) is inferior and so can be mistreated without qualm.

Paul wrote: "its just so incredibly ridiculous to keep hearing the same argument year after year about everything"

We can stop arguing about it when these racist tropes are no longer employed.

Paul wrote: "Yes because things like Anansi Boys, Middle Kingdoms, Bridge of Birds and everything ever writen by Paolo Bacigalup and many others doesn't actually exist

Yes, you are definitely strawmanning here. Nobody said there are no fantasy books with non-white heroes and non-Western settings. But whites currently make up less than two-thirds of the American population, so there should be a lot more than a handful of examples out there.

so lets all attack every euro writer ever because they dont consciously make sure that every single race, sex and religion is perfectly represented and all the heroic good guys instead of just writing what feels natural to them."

There's nothing wrong with having a person of color as a bad guy, provided they aren't the only such person in the story and they aren't a stereotype.

Friends was attacked for being too white in the 90s for christ sakes

I'm puzzled as to why you find this an astounding accusation.

it gets old and tiring listening to people throw the same old crap out over and over that everything is rascist sexist or anti-christian or...on and on why can't everyone just let things be what they are?

Yes, it's very inconsiderate of women and minorities to complain about their treatment -- can't they think of our feelings for once? Can't they accept that racism and sexism are things of the past.

I mean, it's not like a guy who polled 10% in the last SFWA election recently subjected N.K. Jemisin to a racist diatribe for expressing points similar to what's being discussed in this thread, or that Ann Aguirre received emails calling her a bitch for discussing her experiences with sexism in fandom. La la la! Nothing wrong here.

Um, you're posting this in a thread where a white guy is accused of being a racist. As Gary pointed out, he seems to be accused of something every other week. Seems like just being a writer brings controversy of some kind. If people are being mistreated then they should speak up, but I doubt you'll find a single author out there claiming their job is all pretty sunflowers and happy skipping through the forest. Good for Aguirre for pushing forward. I'm sure accusations of being a sexist racist or a racist sexist won't stop Martin from writing what he wants either.

This entire thread is white people arguing about how other white people think white people don't care about white people thinking about not white people. Isn't that interesting...

Sean, I had a feeling that first link featured Vox Day, and I was right. Every time I read his trolling the stupidity makes my brain hurt. I can't believe the SFWA ever let him sit on a Nebula jury. The second link didn't work for me but I found it on her goodreads blog instead. Wish I could say I was surprised by the usual antics of misogynist anonymous cowards.

Thane wrote: "Um, you're posting this in a thread where a white guy is accused of being a racist."

No, Martin's being accused of not putting enough thought into the tropes he uses for the story and the assumptions he makes about other races. That's not the same as calling him racist.

This entire thread is white people arguing about how other white people think white people don't care about white people thinking about not white people. Isn't that interesting...

No, you're assuming everyone here is white, though if you read Rasnac's post you'll see you're wrong. Not to mention that the article that spawned this discussion is by a person of color. But nice try.

Well, my apologies to Rasnac then, I was wrong. Congratulations Sean, you've won THE INTERNET.

Sean wrote: "Thane wrote: "Um, you're posting this in a thread where a white guy is accused of being a racist."

No, Martin's being accused of not putting enough thought into the tropes he uses for the story and the assumptions he makes about other races. That's not the same as calling him racist."

Actually, he's being accused of being racist. That link does a nice job of explaining how one might approach a racist by addressing his/er actions, but the distinction between them is, really, a rhetorical technique. It's not meaningful in practice. "I don't think you're a racist... you just do and say racist things." Trite. Effective, maybe, but essentially a namby-pamby way to dealing with the symptoms of racism rather than the actual character of racism.

Why does it matter? Well, it also allows a backdoor for those who want to walk around accusing people of racism. "Oh, I'm not saying you're a racist. That would be rude and possibly logically impossible for me to prove, making me a not very smart or decent person... perhaps even worse than racist if my accusation is based on thin, subjective evidence. I'm simply saying what you said sounded racist. Therefore, you cannot become offended by my comments based on being offended by your comments even if my comments are really the product of a logical error that intellectually equates to racism."

Sean wrote: "Yes, it's very inconsiderate of women and minorities to complain about their treatment -- can't they think of our feelings for once? Can't they accept that racism and sexism are things of the past."

don't make me get started on the treatment of women in Game of Thrones. xD but you made a good point there.

Ruth wrote: "Sean wrote: "When a person of color picks up an SF novel, there's a good chance there's not going to be anyone like them in the story at all"

Maybe this is just me being a naive white girl, but I ..."

Yes, you are. for instance, in one of the early Vaginal Fantasy Hangouts, the question put to the website was "If you were taken back to medieval Scotland, how long would it take you or others to realize you had gone back in time?" Ummm, for pretty much anyone nonwhite it would take about a millisecond for both them and the people they arrive among.

It's really easy to just assume that everyone is white because you are. They're not.

Rob wrote: "Rick wrote: "Of course it's racist. You can all talk about how it's just escapism or how you judge characters without regard to their skin color, but none of the apologists for this have actually d..."

I will point out that the adaptation of Earthsea was far worse in this regard, as Le Guin set the races up specifically to violate many of these tropes, all of which work was undone by the film. Were I her, I'd still be utterly pissed off.

Gary wrote: "Just to note: I've only been on GR for a few months now and pretty regularly GRRM is accused of some form of anti-social personality trait. Racism and sexism are the most common, but having a feti..."

I think it's more useful to say "is this a racist (gendered, etc) telling of the story" rather than accusing the author of racism because of how he chooses to tell the story.

Thane wrote: "This entire thread is white people arguing about how other white people think white people don't care about white people thinking about not white people. Isn't that interesting... "

I laughed.

/I'm not white, but that was a helluva percipient comment.

Sean wrote: "Thane wrote: "No, Martin's being accused of not putting enough thought into the tropes he uses for the story.."

It's not as bad as George Lucas ;^P