Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Al-Qadim, Campaign Guide: Zakhara, and Cultural Sensitivity
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8665058" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>My <em>preference</em> would, of course, be to rewrite her character such that it was not a rather bad (even by the standards of the day!) Victorian caricature of Indian culture,* and instead make her an interesting, nuanced, and worthwhile character in her own right. But, again, <em>accuracy is a tool</em>, not an end-all be-all objective measure of quality or respect. It would be interesting to hear what the writers thought, because I doubt her exclusion was a trivial matter. Perhaps they considered it, and felt that they would not be able to do justice to the character; perhaps they tried, but executive meddling got in the way (as is the case with a great deal of big-budget stuff); perhaps, as I'm sure you and Crimson Longinus would immediately assert, they did so out of fear, though frankly I find that unlikely. Without hearing their own words on the subject, I've no idea, and I suspect if they had <em>actually</em> said "yeah we were afraid people would hate it if we included this character, so we just left her out to avoid offending anyone," you'd have led with that. (And I would, personally, think that they were being double-barrelled idiots, but that's a separate subject.)</p><p></p><p>But honestly? Yeah, I'm okay with being less faithful to source material and removing <em>racist caricatures</em> from classic media. That's fine by me. The <em>best</em> solution would be to <em>actually rewrite the characters to be good</em>, but sometimes that's beyond the scope of a project or unrealistic for any of a host of reasons. So you haven't really pointed at anything I consider to be an egregious harm; it's unfortunate to be sure, but yeah, I'd rather skip out on characters with nasty stereotype undertones than preserve them as-is with the fig-leaf excuse "well that's how Victorians thought things worked!" I don't care how Victorians thought things worked!</p><p></p><p>*From what information is available to me: the practice of <em>sati</em> (killing the <em>wife</em> specifically--not the "family members" as described in the story--of a deceased man as a sacrifice, thought to be based on a mistranslation of Vedic texts describing the appropriate ceremonial behaviors for a married woman at her husband's funeral) was continuously controversial for essentially its entire existence. It was not practiced in early Hindu India, came into being after a possibly-intentional mistranslation of religious texts, was ruthlessly exploited by men trying to prevent widows from inheriting the property of their husbands, and was suppressed by both the medieval Islamic conquerors of India and by the subsequent British conquerors (who even engaged in theological debate--sometimes with <em>creative</em> interpretations of text--to argue that so-called "wife burning" was not actually supported by the Vedic texts.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Or, rather, that's what I <em>would</em> say.</p><p></p><p>If [USER=7025508]@Crimson Longinus[/USER] were not <em>incorrect.</em> (Though I would still say the more genericized things about <em>other</em> works.)</p><p></p><p>Aouda does appear in the Tennant adaptation. Her role in the story is significantly reduced, so there is still <em>some</em> bite to the criticism, but she <em>is</em> still present and is, in fact, played by a British-Indian actress, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1159038/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t20" target="_blank">Shivaani Ghai</a>. What <em>does not</em> appear is the <em>sati</em> practice, because for exactly the same reasons as harems, <em>sati</em> is far from universal <em>even in its native culture</em>, has had a controversial or mixed record/perception <em>even in its native culture</em>, has been <em>flagrantly</em> abused by outsiders (particularly in the Anglosphere) to demonize that culture, and even its "benign" presentations have been absolutely <em>loaded</em> with crappy tropes and deep, deep cultural misunderstandings.</p><p></p><p>It's almost like, by <em>not</em> leaning on a singular, technically accurate but controversial (and almost always sensationalized), cultural practice, the work can be better at representing the <em>whole</em> of that culture, not crappy, tropey, reductivist caricatures of that culture! Imagine that!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8665058, member: 6790260"] My [I]preference[/I] would, of course, be to rewrite her character such that it was not a rather bad (even by the standards of the day!) Victorian caricature of Indian culture,* and instead make her an interesting, nuanced, and worthwhile character in her own right. But, again, [I]accuracy is a tool[/I], not an end-all be-all objective measure of quality or respect. It would be interesting to hear what the writers thought, because I doubt her exclusion was a trivial matter. Perhaps they considered it, and felt that they would not be able to do justice to the character; perhaps they tried, but executive meddling got in the way (as is the case with a great deal of big-budget stuff); perhaps, as I'm sure you and Crimson Longinus would immediately assert, they did so out of fear, though frankly I find that unlikely. Without hearing their own words on the subject, I've no idea, and I suspect if they had [I]actually[/I] said "yeah we were afraid people would hate it if we included this character, so we just left her out to avoid offending anyone," you'd have led with that. (And I would, personally, think that they were being double-barrelled idiots, but that's a separate subject.) But honestly? Yeah, I'm okay with being less faithful to source material and removing [I]racist caricatures[/I] from classic media. That's fine by me. The [I]best[/I] solution would be to [I]actually rewrite the characters to be good[/I], but sometimes that's beyond the scope of a project or unrealistic for any of a host of reasons. So you haven't really pointed at anything I consider to be an egregious harm; it's unfortunate to be sure, but yeah, I'd rather skip out on characters with nasty stereotype undertones than preserve them as-is with the fig-leaf excuse "well that's how Victorians thought things worked!" I don't care how Victorians thought things worked! *From what information is available to me: the practice of [I]sati[/I] (killing the [I]wife[/I] specifically--not the "family members" as described in the story--of a deceased man as a sacrifice, thought to be based on a mistranslation of Vedic texts describing the appropriate ceremonial behaviors for a married woman at her husband's funeral) was continuously controversial for essentially its entire existence. It was not practiced in early Hindu India, came into being after a possibly-intentional mistranslation of religious texts, was ruthlessly exploited by men trying to prevent widows from inheriting the property of their husbands, and was suppressed by both the medieval Islamic conquerors of India and by the subsequent British conquerors (who even engaged in theological debate--sometimes with [I]creative[/I] interpretations of text--to argue that so-called "wife burning" was not actually supported by the Vedic texts.) Or, rather, that's what I [I]would[/I] say. If [USER=7025508]@Crimson Longinus[/USER] were not [I]incorrect.[/I] (Though I would still say the more genericized things about [I]other[/I] works.) Aouda does appear in the Tennant adaptation. Her role in the story is significantly reduced, so there is still [I]some[/I] bite to the criticism, but she [I]is[/I] still present and is, in fact, played by a British-Indian actress, [URL='https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1159038/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t20']Shivaani Ghai[/URL]. What [I]does not[/I] appear is the [I]sati[/I] practice, because for exactly the same reasons as harems, [I]sati[/I] is far from universal [I]even in its native culture[/I], has had a controversial or mixed record/perception [I]even in its native culture[/I], has been [I]flagrantly[/I] abused by outsiders (particularly in the Anglosphere) to demonize that culture, and even its "benign" presentations have been absolutely [I]loaded[/I] with crappy tropes and deep, deep cultural misunderstandings. It's almost like, by [I]not[/I] leaning on a singular, technically accurate but controversial (and almost always sensationalized), cultural practice, the work can be better at representing the [I]whole[/I] of that culture, not crappy, tropey, reductivist caricatures of that culture! Imagine that! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Al-Qadim, Campaign Guide: Zakhara, and Cultural Sensitivity
Top