Subtle Racism in Lotro

This is post isn't intended to be inflammatory, or concern trolling. It is just food for thought for the mature Lotro community.

These are some examples I noticed of insults that the bestowal text from quest-givers directs towards the enemy.

In Bree-land, the southern invaders are called "swarthy", as in swarthy southerners. This is intended as an insult. Swarthy means dark-skinned.

Also in Bree-land, the term "half-breed" is used as an insult against Sharkey's half-orc followers. Half-breed is a very old insult against mixed race people. The same term is not used, to my knowledge, to describe the half-elf characters in the game, only the dark "swarthy" skinned ones.

Goblins and other evil non-human characters (e.g. the tribal enemies in Lossoth) are shown as having camps full of animal totems. This appears to be a signifier for "primitiveness". To my knowledge, none of the cultures player characters come from have totems. Especially in North America, having totemic people = primitive = evil is very problematic given the treatment of aboriginals.

I suspect most of these tropes come from the original books themselves, which, to be fair, were written from the 1930's-1950's. Other stereotypes from that era have been updated for a modern game. For example, female characters can do anything male characters can, though this was very rare in the books. Perhaps outdated racial stereotypes should be removed too.

The only people who should be discriminated against are filthy dwarves. I'm just kidding, they're not really people.

I understand where you're coming from, but you have to keep a few things in mind:

1: It's a fantasy world, created a long time ago. You can't ask filmmakers to remove racism from a Civil War movie, or WW2 movie right? Why ask gamedevelopers to do it?

2: The primitive part is just silly imho. Just because something evil has it, doesnt mean everybody who has that is evil.
The people in Forochel that aren't evil use totems as well, and they ARE primitive ( being secluded from the rest fo ME for a long time)

3: Female characters are just there to please the players. Not because of racism concern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

This is post isn't intended to be inflammatory, or concern trolling. It is just food for thought for the mature Lotro community.

---

Nom nom nom, and now thinking...

Sorry mate but, thou thinkest too much. Don't read too much into things, gives one a migraine.

I actually don't know what you are trying to do here?
Swarthy means "Having a dark complexion"
So, it is a description of the person and in my mind, no way derogative.
Do a little reading before you post nonsense because Swarthy is actually used as a compliment in europe as it descibes the mediteranean healthy good looking man.

As to your other comments pfft!!! I am mixed race and have never even come close to being offended by Half orc!
I think this is more a reflection of where you are with your own life and mind.

The only real racism I've seen in the game is from RPers, honestly. I don't know how many times my elf with 8k morale has been accused of being feminine. Or how many times I've seen dwarves called fat and smelly.

But racism towards orcs, thats just epic lulz. Orcs are primitive in the books, and frankly should be. They are servants of the eye. They have no will of their own and live only to destroy. Orcs serve no other purpose other than to destroy their enemies. It's not like they have a sophisticated culture where they have to put their pinky out when drinking hobbit blood stew.

Orcs aren't a race, either. They are in my mind a species. Their blood is a different color and they spawn from holes in the ground....that's not really similar to human/elf creation (I dare not hypothesize on dwarf replication).

Whether the LOTR books themselves are racist is the subject of a lot of debate - all this talk of dark-skinned foreigners marching over our green and pleasant land with their guttural language and funny ways, it doesn't take a scholar to start reading it in that way. It's something you can go and google and read about.

The game will handle the issue as sensitively as it can. I see no reason to alter the goblin totems - isn't Sauron known for liking totems and idols of himself, or at least his followers are always building them. We do see totems in player-zones - I think the Angmarim have some, the Lossoth do and the Algraig do also. We can even put them outside our own homes. Describing the half-orcs as half-breeds is correct, for the people will see them as half animal (if you'd like to re-educate the people of Bree into the correct nature of the orc, you may... :) ) and it fits the setting that they would wish to insult their enemy in such a way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanimir

Orcs aren't a race, either. They are in my mind a species. Their blood is a different color and they spawn from holes in the ground....that's not really similar to human/elf creation (I dare not hypothesize on dwarf replication).

---

In the books orcs breed normally. Their females are segregated and kept far far away from the front lines.

Additionally, according to various notes of Tolkiens, orcs originated from elves captured and tortured by Morgoth and then bred into what they are now. So there's an especially bitter hatred of orcs coming from the elves for that.

When orcs have nothing to guide them they generally tend to disband into smaller tribes and fight amongst themselves.

As for the other humans, I've always loved the way Faramir wondered at the southrons and if they were truely evil or just motivated by fear and lies and that they would rather not fight and just live out their lives.

But I'm sure there are plenty of people among the free peoples with an unreasonable (and in some ways reasonable depending on personal encounters) hatred of Easterlings and Southrons. After all, they've been fighting for centuries. I'd say that would be pretty realistic of any society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

I suspect most of these tropes come from the original books themselves, which, to be fair, were written from the 1930's-1950's.

---

Yep, it's one of the criticisms the original works have gotten. It's as mild in the books as your examples however (and I don't know where you're coming from with swarthy either, as another poster pointed out).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanimir

The only real racism I've seen in the game is from RPers, honestly. I don't know how many times my elf with 8k morale has been accused of being feminine.

---

Don't worry, they're just jealous that all the elf men get all the elf chicks! ;) *has no problem with the male elf look, but faces across the board (and hair) really need work, for all races*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Okamion

The only people who should be discriminated against are filthy dwarves. I'm just kidding, they're not really people.

---

The only thing worse then a dwarf is a ginger dwarf.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

This is post isn't intended to be inflammatory, or concern trolling. It is just food for thought for the mature Lotro community.

These are some examples I noticed of insults that the bestowal text from quest-givers directs towards the enemy.

In Bree-land, the southern invaders are called "swarthy", as in swarthy southerners. This is intended as an insult. Swarthy means dark-skinned.

Also in Bree-land, the term "half-breed" is used as an insult against Sharkey's half-orc followers. Half-breed is a very old insult against mixed race people. The same term is not used, to my knowledge, to describe the half-elf characters in the game, only the dark "swarthy" skinned ones.

Goblins and other evil non-human characters (e.g. the tribal enemies in Lossoth) are shown as having camps full of animal totems. This appears to be a signifier for "primitiveness". To my knowledge, none of the cultures player characters come from have totems. Especially in North America, having totemic people = primitive = evil is very problematic given the treatment of aboriginals.

I suspect most of these tropes come from the original books themselves, which, to be fair, were written from the 1930's-1950's. Other stereotypes from that era have been updated for a modern game. For example, female characters can do anything male characters can, though this was very rare in the books. Perhaps outdated racial stereotypes should be removed too.

---

I only thought on that only when you brought up that. You should not think about it. If I never noticed until "Now", that means you are really "Digging" into that, the deeper you go, harder it will get.

Hm. That makes me wonder if there are human-hobbits or elf-hobbits. Although a human or an elf "getting it on" with a hobbit would seem so wrong :( And I'm not even going to say anything about half-dwarves.

Fledermaus

I completely agree with you. I don't think it's all that subtle, either. You got it right though - the game is based of books written by Tolkien, and Tolkien was a product of his time, which was a loooong time ago. Perhaps you might want to do some reading up about Tolkien. As Lilka said, a search with your search engine will show you a heap of stuff. A novel I can recommend is "Banewreaker" by Jacqueline Carey. And there are heaps of non-fiction works analysing Tolkien.

As to whether it needs to be taken out or not....I'm not sure. I have thoughts that say yes, and I have thoughts that so no. I was, for example, very unimpressed when I heard they were removing some of the (now) profane words from "Huckleberry Finn". Whether it actually would happen or not is another story entirely.

Cheers,
Kelly

This issue is always going to happen when you are dealing with material that was written a long time ago. You can't expect it to fit current moral standards.

Obviously when adapting older works you inherit all those dated values. You can remove them, cleanse your adaptation, but you then run the risk of losing a lot of the meaning and value in the process, and pretty much producing a farce.

I am ok with the balance in this game, because its in the context of a game.

Frankly, if the church is still allowed to preach from a book that sentences all gays to death [Leviticus 20:13 KJV], then LOTRO is ok by me.

It is not just the men from Bree, even the goblins of Moria are at it.

There was a picture posted in the Codemasters forum showing goblins saying "Moria belongs to the white now!"

Edit found the picture

http://gallery.mmoguildsites.com/img92898.jpg

Meh, no where near as bad as WoW. I always thought it was weird how the opposing would /spit on you even though you've never seen them before. And, in the forums there is all the horde/alliance hate. Finally hit me that what hit me as wrong with it is its just players who thought a certain race looked cool or wanted to play with friends, but by default the majority of the opposing faction will hate on them when possible. I thought "hey, thats basically racism".

I understand its just a game, but it never sat well with me, then again I got hit with a lot of racism growing up so Im probably just overly sensitive. LOTRO doesn't seem to bother me though as it seems more pixel related vs. player generated.
Then again, I may just still be in the honeymoon stage as Im new and I am immensely happy with this game so far lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cossieuk

It is not just the men from Bree, even the goblins of Moria are at it.

There was a picture posted in the Codemasters forum showing goblins saying "Moria belongs to the white now!"
]

---

thats because they were White Hand orcs not because of racism. Is using the word white racist now? If so then they should also ban white dye from the game as its a racist dye. It seems some people try to find and be offended by racism when it isnt always there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZimmerBadger

thats because they were White Hand orcs not because of racism. Is using the word white racist now? If so then they should also ban white dye from the game as its a racist dye. It seems some people try to find and be offended by racism when it isnt always there.

---

I thought the sarcasm was implied in my post, but clearly I should have used a sarcasm smiley

The PC brigade could find discrimination in pretty much anything. Please leave a classical well-loved literature - and even this game for that matter - out of the clutches of the speech and thought police.

Racism? Racism? Really, dude? Racism?

FYI..."dark-skinned" does not necessarily mean black African or Middle Eastern or Spanish, etc. It simply means you have a dark complexion. In other words, it could refer to a caucasion who has a dark complexion due to spending too much time in the sun. I belive the intended connotation is akin to calling someone a "red-neck," which is" historically derogatory slang term used in reference to poor white farmers in the Southern United States." "The term characterized farmers having a red neck caused by sunburn from hours working in the fields. A citation from 1893 provides a definition as "poorer inhabitants of the rural districts...men who work in the field, as a matter of course, generally have their skin stained red and burnt by the sun, and especially is this true of the back of their necks". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redneck

Prior to the 20th century, having a tan was a sign of poverty as it indicated you spent most of your time in the sun usually farming or doing some form of labor. It had absolutely nothing to do with "racism" or black Africans.

I won't go into the conclusions you've drawn about the tribal cultures and half-breeds, because frankly, it's just too ridiculous and contrived to discuss.

The only biases and stereotypes I see here are the ones you possess, OP. The fact that you've found, in your mind, racism in such benign things like the word "swarthy" and take offense to a half human, half mythological evil creature being called "half-breed" is much more indicative of your personal frame of mind, than the designers of this game. (On a side note, in looking some of this up online, I found it interesting that the Harry Potter books use "half-breed" to describe "a character who is of mixed human/magical creature ancestry." Is that "racist" too?) Are you next going to tell us that orcs are simply mistreated and misunderstood, and the only reason they are evil is because of being called racist names by their white oppresive humans?

People obsessed with racism will find it anywhere, in anything, in any conversation, and apparently in any video game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanimir

The only real racism I've seen in the game is from RPers, honestly. I don't know how many times my elf with 8k morale has been accused of being feminine. Or how many times I've seen dwarves called fat and smelly.

---

Funny thing about the people who say Dwarves have a fear of hygeine, they obviously don't read quest text. There is a quest in Forochel where a Dwarf really wants to get hot water into the bath halls of the structure where he lives, Z-something... I forget the name. Also, in Moria, a Dwarf who discovers Gredbyg in his bed, mentions taking a bath in the flavor text after the bugs are squashed.

In Ered Luin and Thorins Hall, there are quests that are dedicated to keeping a clean water supply for drinking, and one would assume bathing as well.

In Moria, there's an entire ZONE dedicated to the supply and flow of water in Moria. Look at the waterworks, the shallow pools, sloping ramps into the pools, even sides. It's a huge bath hall!

Dwarves bathe, frequently.

I've never heard a hobbit talk about baths, but they loved hanging out in the pigsties of Budgeford!

Never heard Menfolk talk about bathing, I'm a human, and man on a hot summer day I get pretty sweaty!

Elves? They're content to rub flowers on themselves while crying about how their hearts don't sing or some defeatist ####. Go buy some mascara ya overly emotional coward.


I do wish I could point to something in texts, but Tolkien wrote so little about Dwarves, that much of the society is a total mystery. So therefor I'm at liberty to just declare that anything Elves can do, Dwarves can do better!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanimir

But racism towards orcs, thats just epic lulz. Orcs are primitive in the books, and frankly should be. They are servants of the eye. They have no will of their own and live only to destroy. Orcs serve no other purpose other than to destroy their enemies. It's not like they have a sophisticated culture where they have to put their pinky out when drinking hobbit blood stew.

---

Primitive? check
Slaves to the shadow of the Eye? check
No will and live only to destroy? Mostly check, some orc conversations in the books pointed to orcs being willful, selfish, and cowardly unless they had massive numbers at their backs.
Live for destruction of enemies? Check, and destruction of anything alive really. Check the descriptions of the area after Boromir's death in Fellowship of the Ring. Following the orcs through the woods was easy, they slashed everything in their path, even saplings that didn't need to be cut got chopped. Orcs love to destroy.
Hobbit Stew? Now I'm hungry....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanimir

Orcs aren't a race, either. They are in my mind a species. Their blood is a different color and they spawn from holes in the ground....that's not really similar to human/elf creation (I dare not hypothesize on dwarf replication).

---

Orcs are a race of Elves*. Check the Silmarillion.


*-yeah, it's a stretch, and insulting, but following up what that poster said about Dwarves, it's justified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

This is post isn't intended to be inflammatory, or concern trolling. It is just food for thought for the mature Lotro community.

<edit>

I suspect most of these tropes come from the original books themselves, which, to be fair, were written from the 1930's-1950's. Other stereotypes from that era have been updated for a modern game. For example, female characters can do anything male characters can, though this was very rare in the books. Perhaps outdated racial stereotypes should be removed too.

---

Few things:

Sanitizing the legendarium, or any work of literature, art, etc, is an abhorrent and contemptible solution that never has justification.

As others noted there is a wealth of information regarding Tolkien and cultural bias vs racism.

I think this type of thread would be better served in the Tolkien sub-forum.

This has to be one of the most asinine threads I've ever seen on these forums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

This is post isn't intended to be inflammatory, or concern trolling. It is just food for thought for the mature Lotro community.

These are some examples I noticed of insults that the bestowal text from quest-givers directs towards the enemy.

In Bree-land, the southern invaders are called "swarthy", as in swarthy southerners. This is intended as an insult. Swarthy means dark-skinned.

Also in Bree-land, the term "half-breed" is used as an insult against Sharkey's half-orc followers. Half-breed is a very old insult against mixed race people. The same term is not used, to my knowledge, to describe the half-elf characters in the game, only the dark "swarthy" skinned ones.

Goblins and other evil non-human characters (e.g. the tribal enemies in Lossoth) are shown as having camps full of animal totems. This appears to be a signifier for "primitiveness". To my knowledge, none of the cultures player characters come from have totems. Especially in North America, having totemic people = primitive = evil is very problematic given the treatment of aboriginals.

I suspect most of these tropes come from the original books themselves, which, to be fair, were written from the 1930's-1950's. Other stereotypes from that era have been updated for a modern game. For example, female characters can do anything male characters can, though this was very rare in the books. Perhaps outdated racial stereotypes should be removed too.

---

"Primitive" is a relative term, so you MAKE others "primitive" by calling them so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

This is post isn't intended to be inflammatory, or concern trolling. It is just food for thought for the mature Lotro community..

---

Some people are intent on finding racism so they find it.

I find your comments about half-breed pretty laughable, since a cross between an Orc and a Human would be perfectly legitimately be described as producing a 'half-breed'.

Again, you're intent on finding something abusive, so you find it, in spite of the fact it's perfectly reasonable use of the English language.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ciryandir

This has to be one of the most asinine threads I've ever seen on these forums.

---

You beat me to the 'a' word. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beleg-Of-Doriath

The PC brigade could find discrimination in pretty much anything. Please leave a classical well-loved literature - and even this game for that matter - out of the clutches of the speech and thought police.

---

ive read a lot of your posts on CMs forums and this is the first time i can doff my hat to you

./doff

(tho some of them nearly had me rolling a goat riding RK to follow you about :p)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ciryandir

This has to be one of the most asinine threads I've ever seen on these forums.

---

Good to see some sense in this thread. +rep for you.

The problems with posts and attitudes like this is that it's done all under the guise of trying to be informative, or enlightening, when in fact it is an outright ACCUSATION of hostile intent, be it "subtle" or otherwise. Being a white male in America, I am far too familiar with this one-sided, biased, and frankly RACIST perception that all evil and negativity in the universe stems from the white race towards anyone of a darker skin color.

Racism is racism, regardless of the direction it's projected towards. Throwing out accusations here, and labelling certain races "racist" purely due to their skin color never brings harmony or friendliness or peace between anyone. It always ends up dividing, and stirring up hateful feelings on both sides of the fence.

The quicker you understand that every person is capable of reprehensible behavior, and that usually power over people is the source of cruelty, the quicker you will start having a more positive influence on attitudes of people, instead of further dividing them.

Racism? Hardly. What about the game condoning smoking? (neither of these are an issue for me btw)

Tolkein's work was a product of not only its time but the medieval era that directly influenced its themes. To deny the racism inherent in the description of the various servants of Sauron, such as the orcs and goblins, Easterlings, and Southrons, is just as deleterious to the work as attempting to censor it. Either way, you're not actually engaging with the work as it is.

The original poster is exactly right. Tolkein may not have been a hood-wearing ### member, may not have had any personal animosity towards non-white races, etc., etc., but his descriptions do borrow from the language of colonialism. This isn't surprising, given that he grew up and started writing while England was the foremost colonial power in the world. Compare, for instance, the descriptions of orcs in Tolkien with descriptions of the (usually non-white) cultists used by H.P. Lovecraft, for whom xenophobia was an explicit theme. They're very similar, because both were ultimately Anglophiles, and being an Anglophile at the time carried a lot of racist baggage along with it.

As for the word swarthy, I think some of our European friends might be missing a few facts about it. It does, in fact, merely mean "dark-skinned". Of course, so do a number of other words that are now considered profoundly offensive. And while Europeans might primarily use it to refer to Meditterraneans, it's important to recall that Italian immigrants to the United States originally faced serious racism and hatred, akin to the modern attitudes toward Latinos in many parts of the country. So, yes, "swarthy" is an insult when applied to darker-skinned peoples from other nations, and was especially so during the time when LOTR was written.

None of this means that LOTR is suddenly bad fiction or an inherently racist book or anything of the sort, but sweeping it under the rug does nobody any favours.

All of that said, I do feel that LOTRO has done a much better job of avoiding those tropes than the film adaptations did. Partly, this is due to having free reign to flesh out the world and add things like multiple tribes of Dunlendings, some of whom are either actively resisting the influence of Sauron or at least neutral, not to mention the choice to depict the Dunlendings as Celtic rather than swarthy Africans or Middle-Easterners or making variants of the Free Peoples races who can have darker skin tones than suggested by anything in the books, etc.

In fact, the one thing I think the OP was truly off-base about was the mention of totems. Not because they aren't associated with cultural notions of "primitiveness", because they undeniably are, but because goblins are far from the only people using them. There's also the Algraig, the Earth-kin, the Lossoth, and basically a rather large number of good peoples who use totems as well. Tolkein spends basically no time talking about anybody using totems, so I have to assume this is entirely an effort by Turbine to reclaim the idea of primitiveness for the forces of good. (Which, for the record, I suspect Tolkein ultimately would have approved of.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreyMilkweed

Being a white male in America...

---

Oh, fiddlesticks, my irony detector's gone and overloaded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by furtim

Oh, fiddlesticks, my irony detector's gone and overloaded.

---

Your post proves my point. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreyMilkweed

Being a white male in America, I am far too familiar with this one-sided, biased, and frankly RACIST perception that all evil and negativity in the universe stems from the white race towards anyone of a darker skin color.

---

Indeed that is a good point. Most supposed 'racism' these days, whether vocal or physical, is directed against 'whites' by 'minorities', rather than the other way around. That is setting aside the government policies across many European (Western) countries that discriminate against 'whites' in favour of 'minorities' (affirmative action, positive discrimination etc).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oaktree_EU

ive read a lot of your posts on CMs forums and this is the first time i can doff my hat to you

./doff

(tho some of them nearly had me rolling a goat riding RK to follow you about )

---

Of all the wall of texts posts I've done you end up impressed by a single sentence?:o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beleg-Of-Doriath

Indeed that is a good point. Most supposed 'racism' these days, whether vocal or physical, is directed against 'whites' by 'minorities', rather than the other way around. That is setting aside the government policies across many European (Western) countries that discriminate against 'whites' in favour of 'minorities' (affirmative action, positive discrimination etc).



Of all the wall of texts post I've done you end up impressed by a single sentence?:o

---

It's not just from "minorities." Actually the bulk of the negative propagating I've experienced comes from misguided, hateful, accusatory white folks. It's almost like it's better to be calling someone else a racist than to be called one yourself. So the more egregious your accusations, the less "racist" the accuser thinks themself. Most of the black folks I know, are honestly sick of all this and they just want to move forward with their lives.

It's a very bizarre, completely irrational, and outright hateful environment. And it hardly produces any positive results. Take a look at the responses to this post as the perfect example.

Dunno if it adds anything to the discussion but we had a lively on this subject a few years back.

http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...kien-amp-Race/

We say minorities but if you take the world as a whole I'm pretty sure that caucasian is certainly not the majority.

This thread should be cast into the fires of Mt.Doom...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreyMilkweed

It's not just from "minorities." Actually the bulk of the negative propagating I've experienced comes from misguided, hateful, accusatory white folks. It's almost like it's better to be calling someone else a racist than to be called one yourself. So the more egregious your accusations, the less "racist" the accuser thinks themself.

---

Aye, well they're the ones which form the PC brigade. They're often described as "Useful Idiots" - people who purport to be defending a certain ideal or system and yet are in fact simply being used by said ideal/system and are in reality held in contempt by them (the original use of the term refers to many Soviet supporters).

The politically correct do-gooders today believe they're upholding a growing system of fairness, equality and kindness (which it often appears as on the surface) but are in fact useful idiots to the ulterior motives and agendas to the instigators of these ideals - the origins of which are in the bloodthirsty revolutions of France and Russia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ravbek

We say minorities but if you take the world as a whole I'm pretty sure that caucasian is certainly not the majority.

---

And not even in European (Western) countries within the next two to four decades, even going by government figures.


Anyway, this thread should never have been made. I'd imagine it will be closed before long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beleg-Of-Doriath

Indeed that is a good point. Most supposed 'racism' these days, whether vocal or physical, is directed against 'whites' by 'minorities', rather than the other way around. That is setting aside the government policies across many European (Western) countries that discriminate against 'whites' in favour of 'minorities' (affirmative action, positive discrimination etc).

---

Wow first time I agree with Beleg I think.

Anyway in today's society every litte remark about someone that happens to be of a certain race is racist. I've stopped giving a #### about that word ages ago...

On topic: You got to remember that Tolkiens work was written so many years ago in a different type society. If it was written today it would probably be considered racist...

I'm surprised the thread maker didnt find the dwarfs of tolkiens world to be antisemitic as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ravbek

We say minorities but if you take the world as a whole I'm pretty sure that caucasian is certainly not the majority.

---

I'm guessing we are talking about the western world?

There's a fine line between political correctness and historical revisionism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

This is post isn't intended to be inflammatory, or concern trolling. It is just food for thought for the mature Lotro community.

These are some examples I noticed of insults that the bestowal text from quest-givers directs towards the enemy.

In Bree-land, the southern invaders are called "swarthy", as in swarthy southerners. This is intended as an insult. Swarthy means dark-skinned.

Also in Bree-land, the term "half-breed" is used as an insult against Sharkey's half-orc followers. Half-breed is a very old insult against mixed race people. The same term is not used, to my knowledge, to describe the half-elf characters in the game, only the dark "swarthy" skinned ones.

Goblins and other evil non-human characters (e.g. the tribal enemies in Lossoth) are shown as having camps full of animal totems. This appears to be a signifier for "primitiveness". To my knowledge, none of the cultures player characters come from have totems. Especially in North America, having totemic people = primitive = evil is very problematic given the treatment of aboriginals.

I suspect most of these tropes come from the original books themselves, which, to be fair, were written from the 1930's-1950's. Other stereotypes from that era have been updated for a modern game. For example, female characters can do anything male characters can, though this was very rare in the books. Perhaps outdated racial stereotypes should be removed too.

---

I think you're looking for an issue where there is none.

First, I think branching off into the "PC" debate is potentially more offensive to some people than the original post and also more likely to get this thread closed because of its "political" overtones.

Second, I think Turbine has done an admirable job in balancing the orignal "lore" if you want to call it that, with a more equitable sensibility. As one person has already pointed out, there are equally good "primitive" peoples in the game as there are "evil". I am not sure how the original poster would expect the representation of tribal cultures other than they are in the game. Additionally, in the character creater the Gondorian and Dale options give people a vast range of skin tone from pale to dark and I have seen many people in the game take advantage of them on both ends of the tonal range.

As for the term "half-breed", when I hear that all I can ever think of is the Cher song from the seventies....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

Half-breed is a very old insult against mixed race people. The same term is not used, to my knowledge, to describe the half-elf characters in the game, only the dark "swarthy" skinned ones.

---

There is only one half-elf character in the game, Elrond. Also, the half-elven were given the choice to live either as men or elves. For all intents and purposes, Elrond is an elf.

Subtle? No. The whole story is a struggle to control Middle Earth, and the factions involved are all racial for the most part. There is constant confrontation between races even ones on the same side. The Dwarves mistrust the elves. The Elves want to retain their purity and leave town. Both want to destroy all Orcs and Goblins. Racism, genocide, you name it...

The story itself is inspired from the European struggles of WWI & WWII, and there was plenty of evil to go around and the people on the so-called 'good' side had their own issues.

To point out items from this game and try to apply them to some modern day concept of 'racism' is ridiculous.

This thread makes my head hurt.

First, the whole "Tolkien was a product of his times, and that was a LONG time ago" line is complete garbage. The novels this game covers were published from 1952-1954 in the UK....although he'd been writing them before that, the published material is less than 60 years old. From a literary/social perspective, that's not that long.

Also, Tolkien was indeed the product of his culture...and he was British. Anti-black racism was hardly a hallmark of the 20th-century British social landscape....particularly among university professors.

That dealt with, "swarthy" is a descriptive term, with an etymology dating to the 1580s.If you hadn't noticed, Tolkien's literary style is.....wordy. Ascribing his use of that term to racist motivations is simply asinine. Was he displaying his "product of the times" racist tendencies when he called Moria "dark"?

If you'd done any significant reading, you'd see Tolkien's an equal-opportunity critic of human flaws and evils.

The "white" Numenoreans began their decline when they stopped trading with the peoples of Middle-Earth and started conquering them. Their downfall came when they captured Sauron, took him back to Numenor, and allowed him to seduce them into fearing the elves, craving power and immortality, and making war against the Lords of the West.

The decay of their exile-kingdoms in Middle-Earth (Gondor and Arnor) came about when their arrogance got the better of them and they again withdrew into ivory towers to chase immortality, hastened by Isildur's inability to resist the lure of the power to conquer offered by the One Ring.

Seriously, pull your heads out. Unless every author avoids any words that describe a color, you can certainly find something with which to offend yourself.....but it's you who put that overtone there, not the author.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dotlbeme

The story itself is inspired from the European struggles of WWI & WWII

---

Sidebar: no it isn't. Many scholars have tried to draw allegorical parallels there, and Tolkien denied them all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

For example, female characters can do anything male characters can, though this was very rare in the books.

---

Sorry, missed one.

Were you reading the same books? Did you catch the names Luthien, Galadriel, Eowyn?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ailedra

Sidebar: no it isn't. Many scholars have tried to draw allegorical parallels there, and Tolkien denied them all.

---

Did not say 'allegory'. I said 'inspired'. Tolkien had been living through the first part of the 20th century where war raged across Europe. If he was not influenced by that in any way, he must have been a robot.

From http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ng...uences.html#ww

"In the trenches of World War I, Tolkien began recording the horrors of war that would later surface in The Lord of the Rings. Later that year he caught trench fever, an illness carried by lice, and was sent back to England. During his convalescence, he began writing down the stories and mythology of Middle-earth, which would form the basis for The Silmarillion. "An author cannot of course remain wholly unaffected by his experience," Tolkien acknowledged, but he strongly denied that his story was an allegory for World War I or II.*"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ravbek

We say minorities but if you take the world as a whole I'm pretty sure that caucasian is certainly not the majority.

---

Very true, the single largest ethnic group on the planet is Han Chinese. Since they are the majority, this means that everybody else is part of a minority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dotlbeme

Did not say 'allegory'. I said 'inspired'. Tolkien had been living through the first part of the 20th century where war raged across Europe. If he was not influenced by that in any way, he must have been a robot.

---

"Inspired by", to me, implies a stronger foundation for the story in those experiences. Of course the war in which he served, and the later one he lived through, had an effect.

Maybe we settle on "influenced by"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gui_Incognito

There is only one half-elf character in the game, Elrond. Also, the half-elven were given the choice to live either as men or elves. For all intents and purposes, Elrond is an elf.

---

Something good did come of this thread! I had no idea Elrond was a half-elf! What is the story behind this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silchas

First, I think branching off into the "PC" debate is potentially more offensive to some people than the original post and also more likely to get this thread closed because of its "political" overtones.

---

Please...how an earth is it going to be avoided in a topic like this?

The whole notion that there are "racist" implications riddled throughout the books/game would only come from a politically correct mind.

This thread, like it or not, is so close to political it is bound to play a large part in the proceedings.

"For a moment he caught a glimpse of swarthy men in red running down the slope some way off with green-clad warriors leaping after them, hewing them down as they fled. Arrows were thick in the air. Then suddenly straight over the rim of their sheltering bank, a man fell, crashing through the slender trees, nearly on top of them. He came to rest in the fern a few feet away, face downward, green arrow-feathers sticking from his neck below a golden collar. His scarlet robes were tattered, his corslet of overlapping brazen plates was rent and hewn, his black plaits of hair braided with gold were drenched with blood. His brown hand still clutched the hilt of a broken sword.

It was Sam's first view of a battle of Men against Men, and he did not like it much. He was glad that he could not see the dead face. He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil of heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace-all in a flash of thought which was quickly driven from his mind."

In terms of 'races' in the lore: that term is best used to describe the differences between Northwestern men (Gondorians, Arnorians, Northmen etc), Haradhrim and the men of Khand and Rhun.
It isn't really applicable to use the term 'races' to describe Elves, Men and Dwarves. 'Species' would seem more accurate but is perhaps too scientific-sounding to be authentic with the lore.
Sub-races is most applicable for differentiating between, for example, the men of Numenorean blood and the Northmen, who had broken off from the Edain 'proper' long ago in the First Age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beleg-Of-Doriath

Please...how an earth is it going to be avoided in a topic like this?

The whole notion that there are "racist" implications riddled throughout the books/game would only come from a politically correct mind.

This thread, like it or not, is so close to political it is bound to play a large part in the proceedings.

---

Well, since I assume most of us are intelligent beings, I assume most of us control our discussion and do not let our discussion control us.

Next thing you know, they will remove the n-word from Huckleberry Finn...oh wait...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreyMilkweed

Something good did come of this thread! I had no idea Elrond was a half-elf! What is the story behind this?

---

There are more lengthy sources I could cite to but try this as a starter:

http://lorebook.lotro.com/wiki/Lore:Half-elven

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beleg-Of-Doriath

Please...how an earth is it going to be avoided in a topic like this?

The whole notion that there are "racist" implications riddled throughout the books/game would only come from a politically correct mind.

This thread, like it or not, is so close to political it is bound to play a large part in the proceedings.

---

Indeed. And by "politically correct" I'm assuming you mean it's completely acceptable, almost expected, that a white person be accused of being racist solely based on the conclusion that white people are inherently racist with ill intent towards dark skinned people. The conclusions drawn by the OP are completely absurd, but by virtue of our current cultural climate, they are the anticipated norm. There is NO evidence to draw the conclusions the OP has drawn. It is pure speculation based on what he interprets as a racial bias based on his interpretation of the intentions behind the game designer's word choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silchas

There are more lengthy sources I could cite to but try this as a starter:

http://lorebook.lotro.com/wiki/Lore:Half-elven

---

Thank you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silchas

Well, since I assume most of us are intelligent beings, I assume most of us control our discussion and do not let our discussion control us.

---

Yep and there is a term to describe that, it's called ignoring the elephant in the room.

OP, I'm half agreeing with you.

Tolkien was indeed a racist as we'd define it today. It was a part of his place in time and society. Everything evil in his works is black, dark-skinned, tribal, etc., and much of the evil is from the south or the east. From the perspective of the British Empire as Tolkien visualized it that meant Africans and Asians, respectively. Everything good and noble is western, white, Caucasian. Most of the evil whites are in cahoots with those nasty foreigners.

But was Tolkien an active racist? I've seen no evidence of such. He was merely a man raised in a small world, with a limited perspective passed down by his parents and their peer group, and that societal perspective had a line firmly drawn between white and every thing else. Did that come out in his works? Of course it did.

As for Turbine -- We're allowed to make our characters a wide range of skin/hair tones, a lot of games still don't do that. Yeah, not a lot of good darker npc out there. Yeah, references to swarthy (which carries different meaning to different subcultures, as seen in posts above) and half-breed, and others. I think what we see overall is a group of modern designers, diverse in ethnic makeup and tolerances, who tried to render an inherently narrow world view through a broader lens, without totally losing the flavour of the writing.

"Half-breed" seems to have been used as a dehumanizer. So, oddly appropriate when referring to half-orcs, not elfs. It's a sad truth that humans (us, the RL people, not in-game humans) make derogatory names for anything we disagree with.

A similar issue for the dev team would have been the sexuality thing -- Tolkien repeatedly uses the word "queer" to mean strange, odd. Obviously today (at least in America) that word has a different meaning. Do they change it to be modern? Do they protect the lore and feel of the language and use it?

My unasked-for-advice? Roll a black-skinned champ. Level him (or her) up. Go smite some evil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyBeard

"For a moment he caught a glimpse of swarthy men in red running down the slope some way off with green-clad warriors leaping after them, hewing them down as they fled. Arrows were thick in the air. Then suddenly straight over the rim of their sheltering bank, a man fell, crashing through the slender trees, nearly on top of them. He came to rest in the fern a few feet away, face downward, green arrow-feathers sticking from his neck below a golden collar. His scarlet robes were tattered, his corslet of overlapping brazen plates was rent and hewn, his black plaits of hair braided with gold were drenched with blood. His brown hand still clutched the hilt of a broken sword.

It was Sam's first view of a battle of Men against Men, and he did not like it much. He was glad that he could not see the dead face. He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil of heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace-all in a flash of thought which was quickly driven from his mind."

---

Thanks for posting this. But I'm wondering why you did? To me it's clearly points out that swarthy, used in this context, is a descriptive term, no more offensive than saying someone is tanned, or brown skinned, or pale skinned. And Sam's reaction is wonderful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortinobrand

Tolkien was indeed a racist as we'd define it today.

---

Even this much is not true.

We'll ignore the sinister origins of the term for starters. I think you'll find most people when asked what they think 'racist' means will say something along the lines of 'showing or expressing hatred for those of another race'.

The left of today (aka PC brigade) on the other hand have broadened the term and made it deliberately vague. It can now mean anything from a business employing a disproportionate amount of people from a certain ethnic group, all the way through to committing mass genocide against a people of a particular ethnicity.
This has been purposely done to make almost the mere mention of the word 'race' a cause of eyebrow-raising, and as for discussion on things like immigration...

To most people there is nothing in Tolkien's work that would actively make them think of racism when reading it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyBeard

It was Sam's first view of a battle of Men against Men, and he did not like it much. He was glad that he could not see the dead face. He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil of heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace-all in a flash of thought which was quickly driven from his mind."

---

And there we go.

Thank you for finding that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortinobrand

OP, I'm half agreeing with you.

Tolkien was indeed a racist as we'd define it today. It was a part of his place in time and society. Everything evil in his works is black, dark-skinned, tribal, etc., and much of the evil is from the south or the east. From the perspective of the British Empire as Tolkien visualized it that meant Africans and Asians, respectively. Everything good and noble is western, white, Caucasian.

But was Tolkien an active racist? I've seen no evidence of such. He was merely a man raised in a small world, with a limited perspective passed down by his parents and their peer group, and that societal perspective had a line firmly drawn between white and every thing else. Did that come out in his works? Of course it did.

As for Turbine -- We're allowed to make our characters a wide range of skin/hair tones, a lot of games still don't do that. Yeah, not a lot of good darker npc out there. Yeah, references to swarthy (which carries different meaning to different subcultures, as seen in posts above) and half-breed, and others. I think what we see overall is a group of modern designers, diverse in ethnic makeup and tolerances, who tried to render an inherently narrow world view through a broader lens, without totally losing the flavour of the writing.

"Half-breed" seems to have been used as a dehumanizer. So, oddly appropriate when referring to half-orcs, not elfs. It's a sad truth that humans (us, the RL people, not in-game humans) make derogatory names for anything we disagree with.

A similar issue for the dev team would have been the sexuality thing -- Tolkien repeatedly uses the word "queer" to mean strange, odd. Obviously today (at least in America) that word has a different meaning. Do they change it to be modern? Do they protect the lore and feel of the language and use it?

My unasked-for-advice? Roll a black-skinned champ. Level him (or her) up. Go smite some evil.

---

Just to be clear on the conclusions you've drawn:

1) Since Tolkien is English, and from a "different time and place," he is therefore inherently racist?

2) Since England is North of Africa, and West of Asia, and in the books Mordor is mostly to the South and East, then Tokein was comparing orcs and the evil men in Middle Earth to Black Africans and Asians?

3) In Tolkein's mind, white = good, and black/brown = evil?

4) Tolkein was white, so therefore he was racist?

5) Orcs have dark skin, so Tolkien is racist?

Orcs also were described as having fangs, so was Tolkien racist against vampires as well? Not all white people from a "different time and age" were inherently racist. Have you ever read about something called the American Civil war? How about the underground railroad?

Pretty much everything you said is unfounded speculation based on racial biases of your own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beleg-Of-Doriath

Even this much is not true.

We'll ignore the sinister origins of the term for starters. I think you'll find most people when asked what they think 'racist' means will say something along the lines of 'showing or expressing hatred for those of another race'.

The left of today (aka PC brigade) on the other hand have broadened the term and made it deliberately vague. It can now mean anything from a business employing a disproportionate amount of people from a certain ethnic group, all the way through to committing mass genocide against a people of a particular ethnicity.
This has been purposely done to make almost the mere mention of the word 'race' a cause of eyebrow-raising, and as for discussion on things like immigration...

To most people there is nothing in Tolkien's work that would actively make them think of racism when reading it.

---

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Beleg-Of-Doriath again."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortinobrand

Tolkien was indeed a racist as we'd define it today. It was a part of his place in time and society. Everything evil in his works is black, dark-skinned, tribal, etc.,

---

As is every literary and legendary treatment of evil, from every civilized society, Eastern or Western, "civilized" or "backward", modern or archaic.

The night, darkness, and the color black have all been associated with menace, evil, and death in early Jewish writing (a middle-eastern tribal people), early Sumerian, Babylonian, Assyrian, and other Mesopotamian cultures, Egyptian literature and myth, Sub-Saharan African tribal traditions, Chinese and Japanese cultural traditions, all European cultures, American Indian traditions, transplanted Carribean Negro cultures, and on, and on, and on....

It's a visceral, instinctual shared human condition. So is xenophobia. Your statement is historically and culturally ignorant.

Come on. More posts. This thread is becoming actually quite funny.

I’m personally offended by descriptions of angelic women with white-blond hair that is so rampant in our society today. I might be a Caucasian woman, but I have dark brown hair. You people are all hateful.

/sarcasm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evebel

I’m personally offended by descriptions of angelic women with white-blond hair that is so rampant in our society today. I might be a Caucasian woman, but I have dark brown hair. You people are all hateful.

/sarcasm

---

God, I love brunettes. You know what else I miss? Curly hair. Seems like every girl on Earth now has perfectly straight, dyed hair in some shade of blonde. Bleh, I like tight curls, and dark beautiful hair.

I know its a forum thread but hopefully some of the commentators will take a moment to discern the difference between cultural bias, racism and Tolkien's own history and views to inform their opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ailedra

This thread makes my head hurt.

First, the whole "Tolkien was a product of his times, and that was a LONG time ago" line is complete garbage. The novels this game covers were published from 1952-1954 in the UK....although he'd been writing them before that, the published material is less than 60 years old. From a literary/social perspective, that's not that long.

Also, Tolkien was indeed the product of his culture...and he was British. Anti-black racism was hardly a hallmark of the 20th-century British social landscape....particularly among university professors.

---

I'm not sure whether you're a troll or if you're being serious.

First, the books were published in the 50's, yes. Tolkien, however, was an elderly man by that time. His formative years were much closer to the turn of the century. Since it's evident you have absolutely no grasp of British history, let's look at some of the things going on in the world while Tolkien attended his whites-only, boys-only school. Subjugation and control through military and economic power. Brutal when necessary. Concentration camps for those societies who continued to resist (research Second Boer War and others). Organized starvation or deprivation or drinking water was a favourite tool too, cheaper than military force. Later, as he was writing, we had the Bengal Famine, others. Read up on an objective history of the era of late 1800's - mid 1900's of India, China, Hong Kong, South Africa, Egypt, Congo, Nigeria, Uganda...bunch of other African nations. Who built the sugar plantations in the "new world" that depended on slave labour, knowing there was no other source of labour available?

You give "professors" too much credit. There have been numerous publications of letters and writings from professors, Tolkien's peers, arguing that the atrocities at the start of WWII were not necessarily a bad thing, as they were braking down some of the power built up by minorities. Of course their attitudes changed when the bombs started falling.

60 years isn't long from a social perspective? Unless you're a child, you really need to stop and connect with the world. Foundational sociological changes can happen so much faster than that.

It's one thing to point at everything and see racism that isn't there. It's yet another to look back and selectively erase it from where it most certainly was. It existed. It exists. I think it exists less today than it did yesterday, and I hope it will exist even less tomorrow. But pretending it wasn't there isn't the way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evebel

I’m personally offended by descriptions of angelic women with white-blond hair that is so rampant in our society today. I might be a Caucasian woman, but I have dark brown hair. You people are all hateful.

---

In which case Tolkien's work is 'positive discrimination' for you as Luthien, the fairest of the Children of Iluvatar, had hair that was "dark as the shadows of twilight".;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortinobrand

... and much of the evil is from the south or the east. From the perspective of the British Empire as Tolkien visualized it that meant Africans and Asians, respectively.

---

The idea of 'evil coming from the east' is a very old perception amongst various European cultures existing long before the British Empire. Indeed the use of the British Empire as an example of this seems rather odd for two reasons. The first being that Britain adopted a policy of 'splendid isolation', in which Britain was so powerful that it could essentially ignore the rest of the world. The second being that the British Empire covered a quarter of the entire planet; enemies of the Empire came from a multitude of places and cultures, from Russians, to French, to native African peoples, to Germans, to Japanese and even Americans. Indeed the British Empire was largely pragmatic in its dealings with native peoples in so far as the British government would rather make alliances with them and 'divide and rule' rather than having them as an enemy.

To more directly address your point though, successive waves of invasion or conflict directed towards or involving Europe came from the east and were often seen as being intent on destroying the civilisations that had been built in Europe or at the very least as being a threat to the way of life in Western Europe. Starting with the ancient Greeks and their conflicts with the Persian Empire in antiquity to the threat against the Roman Empire from the Parthians to the Huns in the 5th century and their attacks on the Roman Empire to the Carolingian war against the Saxons in 9th century Germany (which was to the east of Francia) to the Mongol invasions of the middle ages, which reached as far west as Austria. Later the Ottoman Empire also threatened European nations from the east. In modern times there was an East-West divide where the perceived enemy also came from the east of Europe, this time the Soviet Bloc.

In short the idea of 'evil' or 'enemies' coming from a specific place in the European mindset really has little to do with race as much as it has to do with geography. Since the easiest route for any invader attacking Europe is from the east of the continent this is were the focus has been drawn in terms of instilling an idea in the popular mindset that the east is where their enemies come from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ailedra

As is every literary and legendary treatment of evil, from every civilized society, Eastern or Western, "civilized" or "backward", modern or archaic.

The night, darkness, and the color black have all been associated with menace, evil, and death in early Jewish writing (a middle-eastern tribal people), early Sumerian, Babylonian, Assyrian, and other Mesopotamian cultures, Egyptian literature and myth, Sub-Saharan African tribal traditions, Chinese and Japanese cultural traditions, all European cultures, American Indian traditions, transplanted Carribean Negro cultures, and on, and on, and on....

It's a visceral, instinctual shared human condition. So is xenophobia. Your statement is historically and culturally ignorant.

---

Actually, if you look, in most Asian cultures that derive their perspectives from Chinese traditions, white is the color of death and, often evil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silchas

Actually, if you look, in most Asian cultures that derive their perspectives from Chinese traditions, white is the color of death and, often evil.

---

The Chinese are racists!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreyMilkweed

God, I love brunettes. You know what else I miss? Curly hair. Seems like every girl on Earth now has perfectly straight, dyed hair in some shade of blonde. Bleh, I like tight curls, and dark beautiful hair.

---

I have natural ringlets. Does that work for you? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evebel

I have natural ringlets. Does that work for you? :)

---

Yes! I'm a man, so I don't know what a ringlet is. Lol, but it sounds good. Is that a curl?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

In Bree-land, the southern invaders are called "swarthy",
as in swarthy southerners. This is intended as an insult. Swarthy means dark-skinned.

---

The invaders are dark-skinned. The observation isn't racist, unless it implies a condemnation of all dark-skinned individuals, a phenotype that also expresses among the Free Peoples of Dale and Gondor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

Also in Bree-land, the term "half-breed" is used as an insult against Sharkey's half-orc followers. Half-breed is a very old insult against mixed race people. The same term is not used, to my knowledge, to describe the half-elf characters in the game, only the dark "swarthy" skinned ones.

---

The vein of your argument is: pejoratives in a work of art are inappropriate when they have racist connotations in the real world.

This simply will not do.

The prejudices in the story are integral to the fiction. It has no linkage to reality besides an individual's error, willful or otherwise, to export the fiction as fact. The onus of maintaining integrity is on each of us. The suggestion to diminish a work of art to adhere to your particular political standard is offensive.


By the way:

Quote:

---

Goblins and other evil non-human characters (e.g. the tribal enemies in Lossoth) are shown as having camps full of animal totems. This appears to be a signifier for "primitiveness". To my knowledge, none of the cultures player characters come from have totems. Especially in North America, having totemic people = primitive = evil is very problematic given the treatment of aboriginals.

---

A sub-theme of LOTR has always been the celebration of the primitive and the demonization of industry. The mysticism of the elves, the rurality of the hobbits, these are held as virtuous, while the creativity and enterprise of the dwarves and the ambitions of men are depicted as ill-conceived and craven.

By no means is Tolkien's work devoid of immoral and evil ideas, but to change it vice real life is at best misplacing effect for cause, and at worse committing the evil of evading the responsibility of thinking.

TLDR: Asking to add a hijab on the Mona Lisa if it's on display in the Middle East, is a really stupid idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreyMilkweed

Yes! I'm a man, so I don't know what a ringlet is. Lol, but it sounds good. Is that a curl?

---

It's basically a bouncy curl, yes.

8skyfaller makes some very good points. My own contribution to this thread is clumsy and the same points have been better made by people who continued to study literature after their 16th birthday. But anyway..

Tolkien's mythology arose from his studies of the origins of the English language, and northern European mythology. He was writing something that would appeal to our* cultural background, he didn't attempt to incorporate elements of African, Hindu or Far Eastern Mythology.

Now, in high fantasy such as this, you need good (the Elves, the Dunedain), Evil (Orcs, the Dark Lord, monsters) as well as ordinary folk, who are mostly good. In the end, absolute evil is destroyed, but absolute good is also lost to us, and Men are left to find their own path.

Elves and Men both awoke in the east but migrated to live in the west, the promised land, much as our european ancestors had done.

They came to be hemmed in on all sides by the forces of the Dark Lord. In the Silmarillion, he dwelt in the northern wastes. In LOTR, he now abides in the South and East, controlling all of the lands off the edges of our map, though the grey mountains in the far north remain an abode of goblins and worms.

The only side on which we are not beset is West - where lies a vast ocean, beyond which the valar are said to dwell - thither only the Elves may travel, and none can return.

The unfortunate thing about this mythology is that rather than simply becoming orc food /enslaved, these humans living in occupied territories fall under Sauron's influence and end up fighting on his side. Thus the book gives an unflattering account of African / Eastern humans.

It is worth remembering that in the second age, Sauron ruled over the men living in the west of middle earth too. Yes, that's us white skinned western europeans, worshipping Morgoth and practicing evil. Tolkien moderated Sauron's absolute evil somewhat - rather than practicing genocide, Sauron was content to assume the role of "king of men" - because he wanted to show that man is capable of following evil.

Within the Tolkien universe, it is only an accident of strategic geography that kept men of northwestern middle earth (mostly) free of his influence in the third age. As a practical matter, the legend was told from a European perspective, therefore this is where the "last stand" of civilsation would take place.

In reply to some -- look at the environment Tolkien grew up in. He attended a whites-only school. It actually didn't have a whites-only policy for the simple fact that one was not needed. In his 20's there were a series of race riots throughout the UK because white English were increasingly concerned about the influx of blacks into the country. The UK was coming out of a period of active voluntary participation in the African slave trade, and still very active in oppressing minority natives for profit, to the point of standing against several international organization declarations of racial equality because it would disrupt their business and political activities.

England today is not the England of 100 years ago, and I think that's part of what's being overlooked. Contrary to what some have said there have been dramatic societal changes in the last 100 years. In fact to say otherwise is an absurdity.

As I stated before -- there is no evidence that Tolkien was an active racist. He was a member of a society that had a set of standards that included a long-standing perceived position of superiority over non-whites. These kind of societal standards filter down to the individual level, it's part of the belonging. That found it's way into his writings just as surely as his religious and war experiences did. He spoke of trying to keep them out, but such things shape us so foundationally that "keep them out" is a flawed approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortinobrand

In reply to some -- look at the environment Tolkien grew up in. He attended a whites-only school. It actually didn't have a whites-only policy for the simple fact that one was not needed. In his 20's there were a series of race riots throughout the UK because white English were increasingly concerned about the influx of blacks into the country. The UK was coming out of a period of active voluntary participation in the African slave trade, and still very active in oppressing minority natives for profit, to the point of standing against several international organization declarations of racial equality because it would disrupt their business and political activities.

England today is not the England of 100 years ago, and I think that's part of what's being overlooked. Contrary to what some have said there have been dramatic societal changes in the last 100 years. In fact to say otherwise is an absurdity.

As I stated before -- there is no evidence that Tolkien was an active racist. He was a member of a society that had a set of standards that included a long-standing perceived position of superiority over non-whites. These kind of societal standards filter down to the individual level, it's part of the belonging. That found it's way into his writings just as surely as his religious and war experiences did. He spoke of trying to keep them out, but such things shape us so foundationally that "keep them out" is a flawed approach.

---

I agree. I think for his time he was not a 'racist' as we think of that term, an active participant in dis-empowering people of other races or ethnicities. If I recall, in one of the Letters there is even a discussion of the dwarf/semitic relationship and he clearly stated that was not his intent. Everyone is a product of their environment, some transcend it more than others, some never transcend it at all.

If an MMO were set in ancient Roman and had NPC slaves in it, that would not be an advocation of slavery, something that most people now accept as wrong. It would however be an accurate representation of the time it was set in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silchas

If an MMO were set in ancient Roman and had NPC slaves in it, that would not be an advocation of slavery, something that most people now accept as wrong. It would however be an accurate representation of the time it was set in.

---

Ha I used to play some computer game that would periodically shout "Plebes are needed!" when more slave workers were needed. Civ maybe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evebel

It's basically a bouncy curl, yes.

---

I rep'd you for your bouncy curls. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortinobrand

Ha I used to play some computer game that would periodically shout "Plebes are needed!" when more slave workers were needed. Civ maybe?

---

There are two City Builder games which take very different approaches. Caesar IV has no slaves as I recall. The most menial jobs are done by plebs. Grand Ages: Rome has slaves and slave markets. Of course, there are many other games but those are the two I am familiar with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HumphreyMilkweed

Thanks for posting this. But I'm wondering why you did? To me it's clearly points out that swarthy, used in this context, is a descriptive term, no more offensive than saying someone is tanned, or brown skinned, or pale skinned. And Sam's reaction is wonderful.

---

Sam's reaction is the reason why I posted it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortinobrand

The UK was coming out of a period of active voluntary participation in the African slave trade, and still very active in oppressing minority natives for profit, to the point of standing against several international organization declarations of racial equality because it would disrupt their business and political activities.

---

Tolkien grew up in the 1890s and the early 20th century. Slavery had been abolished in Great Britain in 1772 and the slave trade outlawed throughout the British Empire in 1807. Slavery was also abolished Upper Canada in 1793 and then through the British Empire in 1833, except for Ceylon, St Helena and parts of India.

In the early 19th century the Royal Navy actively worked against the Atlantic Slave trade, patrolling the coasts of Africa to intercept slave ships.

By the time of Tolkien's birth, let alone the period when he grew up, slavery had long since been abolished in Britain and the Empire and the UK was actively working against slavery.

i don't know why it is racist of describing someone's color...But I feel like there are no racism in that....

Im glad so many other people have already shot this guy down. All I can say is, obviously there was too much reading in to things and not enough enjoying of a game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tkdyoo

Im glad so many other people have already shot this guy down. All I can say is, obviously there was too much reading in to things and not enough enjoying of a game.

---

I would disagree with you there. After reading through most of the longer replies (as opposed to the ones that are merely accusations of being "PC"), I think the conclusions are mixed.

Many people have pointed out that the division of black = evil, white = good, is not entirely simplistic in the books. There have also been quotes from Tolkien where he explicitly condemns racist regimes like Nazi Germany and South Africa. It seems clear then that neither the books nor the game are overtly racist.

That was never my original point, however. The point was "subtle" racism. On this, I'd have to say, the jury is still out. One comment pointed out that traditional invaders of Western Europe came from the east and were dark skinned. Since these are the myths Tolkien was working with, he inherited this world view.

A better description then is probably "Eurocentric bias". Unfortunately this still leaves us with the paradigm of dark-skin = the enemy. Such a worldview may have been historically justified, and may be justified in an historically-based work like Tolkien's. However, is it justified in a game made in the 21st century for a North American audience? As I said in the OP, the status of women has been updated for a modern game. Shouldn't the references to "swarthy" enemies be updated too?

On the other points I made.

Many thanks to those who pointed out there were good cultures with animal totems. (I haven't got far enough in the game to meet them, or may have missed them).

Someone pointed out that the only mixed-race Elven character in the game is Elron. I doubt, however, that Elron would ever be referred to as a "half-breed". This insult is directed only at those who have dark-skinned blood. This appears to be another example of bias, rather than overt racism, since Tolkien clearly has no truck with regimes that divide people up like this. I still think, given the way it is used as an insult, a term like "half-breed" should be removed from a modern game.

I would also add that I am certainly enjoying the game. It is by far the best MMO out there. That doesn't mean I have to be a zombie when I play it, and turn off my mind. I used to enjoy watching the Little Rascals as a kid, but didn't stop me from recognizing a caricature like Buckwheat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

The point was "subtle" racism. On this, I'd have to say, the jury is still out. One comment pointed out that traditional invaders of Western Europe came from the east and were dark skinned. Since these are the myths Tolkien was working with, he inherited this world view.

A better description then is probably "Eurocentric bias". Unfortunately this still leaves us with the paradigm of dark-skin = the enemy. Such a worldview may have been historically justified, and may be justified in an historically-based work like Tolkien's. However, is it justified in a game made in the 21st century for a North American audience? As I said in the OP, the status of women has been updated for a modern game. Shouldn't the references to "swarthy" enemies be updated too?

---

I believe you are referencing my comments in this section of your post. With all due respect I don't think you have fully grasped the point I was trying to make so I shall set out my point in, what I hope is, a clearer manner.

My point about threats against European civilisations was exactly the opposite of the point you assume I was making when you say "One comment pointed out that traditional invaders of Western Europe came from the east and were dark skinned". If this was indeed a reference to the comments I made then I would ask you to quote me accurately and not twist my words because I never categorised historical threats against European civilisations as being from 'dark skinned' peoples. I pointed out that such incidents involved a wide range of different peoples; from the ancient Persians to the Huns, to the Saxons, to the Mongols, to the Ottoman Turks to modern day peoples from former Soviet countries.

These are disparate peoples, from disparate cultures and regions of the planet. In terms of skin colour they were very different; from the dark tanned appearing skin of the Persians and Turks to the Asiatic appearance of the Mongols to the European features of the Saxons and the former Soviet bloc peoples.

The point wasn't that these people shared a common skin colour, or even a common culture for that matter, but rather that they shared a geography, namely that they came from the east of 'civilisation'. That is really the only common factor here. It is that shared geography that bred the idea of threats coming from a particular direction in the European mindset, not the culture, religion or skin colour of the peoples involved.

It is also worth pointing out that this game is not directed as a North American audience, it is in fact directed at a global audience and has been since it launched in 2007.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

A better description then is probably "Eurocentric bias". Unfortunately this still leaves us with the paradigm of dark-skin = the enemy. Such a worldview may have been historically justified, and may be justified in an historically-based work like Tolkien's. However, is it justified in a game made in the 21st century for a North American audience? As I said in the OP, the status of women has been updated for a modern game. Shouldn't the references to "swarthy" enemies be updated too?
.

---

As another poster mentioned, there were several strong female characters in the book who did very significant things, like Eowyn killing the witch king and galadriel refusing the ring, so I dont think that was really an "update" But as for your question, I dont think it justifies updating the game because we are, after all, suppose to be in middle earth at a historical point in time when the enemy was dark skinned. Since we agree it was historically justified, if that is the time period the game is based in, then it is also justified to not change that aspect.

Tolkien was born in a colonial super power. Ever heard of imperialism? To deny that racism does not exist in his writings is ludicrous. Besides racism is relative. What is offensive to one person may not be to another and during Tolkien's time there was not a lot of tolerance or understanding. What Tolkein wrote might not seem racist at all to him because of his upbringing and experience.

"If we consider what Merton College and what the Oxford School of English owes to the Antipodes, to the Southern Hemisphere, especially to scholars born in Australia and New Zealand, it may well be felt that it is only just that one of them should now ascend an Oxford chair of English. Indeed, it may be thought that justice has been delayed since 1925. There are of course other lands under the Southern Cross. I was born in one; though I do not claim to be the most learned of those who have come hither from the far end of the Dark Continent. But I have the hatred of apartheid in my bones; and most of all, I detest the segregation or separation of Language and Literature. I do not care which of them you think White."
- J.R.R. Tolkien, "Valedictory Address to the University of Oxford," June 5, 1959

30 To Rütten & Loening Verlag
25 July 1938
Dear Sirs, Than you for your letter. ....I regret that I am not clear as to what you intend by 'arisch'. I am not of Aryan extraction: that is Indo-iranian; as far as I am aware none of my ancestors spoke Flindustani, Persan, Gypsy, or any related dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people.....

There's more about Tolkien's views on racism in "Letters" but I can't find it right now.

I believe this quote neatly encapsulates the debate on race and Tolkien:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyBeard

"If we consider what Merton College and what the Oxford School of English owes to the Antipodes, to the Southern Hemisphere, especially to scholars born in Australia and New Zealand, it may well be felt that it is only just that one of them should now ascend an Oxford chair of English. Indeed, it may be thought that justice has been delayed since 1925. There are of course other lands under the Southern Cross. I was born in one; though I do not claim to be the most learned of those who have come hither from the far end of the Dark Continent. But I have the hatred of apartheid in my bones; and most of all, I detest the segregation or separation of Language and Literature. I do not care which of them you think White."
- J.R.R. Tolkien, "Valedictory Address to the University of Oxford," June 5, 1959

---

Tolkien clearly denounces Apartheid, which, in 1959, would probably put him in the progressive vanguard, especially for some one born in South Africa.

At the same time, however, he calls Africa the "Dark Continent." I believe this term originated in the 19th century and was meant to describe Africa as unknown and unexplored from the European point of view. Since then it appears to have taken on a more pejorative connotation. In any event, its use is in line with an unintended "Eurocentric bias" similar to swarthy/half-breed = enemy.

As has been said above, this is nothing to denounce Tolkien for, only something that jars in the context of a modern MMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZirasAminstrel

Tolkien was born in a colonial super power. Ever heard of imperialism? To deny that racism does not exist in his writings is ludicrous. Besides racism is relative. What is offensive to one person may not be to another and during Tolkien's time there was not a lot of tolerance or understanding. What Tolkein wrote might not seem racist at all to him because of his upbringing and experience.

---

1) Again, Tolkien was British/White so he is therefore RACIST?

2) Imperialism does not equal racism.

3) Racism is NOT relative. It is a very clear, objectively observable belief system based on thinking ALL people of a certain race have the same characteristics based solely on their race. A common consequence of actual racism is that people make sweeping generalizations about an entire race based on a small sample of people, EXACTLY LIKE YOU JUST DID.

All of the conclusions you've drawn are speculative, not based on any actual facts, and are a clear indication of your own biases and ignorance of the truth. Got your head out of you know where, and stop thinking every single conflict on Earth equals white people are evil, and everyone else is a victim of this.

I guess I need specific examples of the game's use of the terms "swarthy" or "half-breed." For instance, if Harry Goatleaf (or almost any of the Bree-landers) describes a Bounder from the South as being swarthy, well, that's just Harry Goatleaf - he comes across as ignorant and somewhat self-interested in the book, and I wouldn't ascribe any racism to Turbine for it, intended or otherwise. If, on the other hand, Gandalf or Strider were to say "Beware so-and-so; they are swarthy and not to be trusted," then obviously there's an issue.

There is clearly going to be tension between Tolkien's use of certain words and our understanding of them - and so the question becomes, should we (or Turbine) "update" Tolkien's writings to bring it more in-line with today's expectations? For instance, if a hobbit in game describes "those Bucklanders" as "queer folk," should we be concerned about the implicit homophobia?

My own answer to this question is no, if the original context is reasonably preserved. Word ownership works for literary (or derivative) uses just as well as it does for self-identity movements that take words meant as insults and uses them as rallying cries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

At the same time, however, he calls Africa the "Dark Continent." I believe this term originated in the 19th century and was meant to describe Africa as unknown and unexplored from the European point of view. Since then it appears to have taken on a more pejorative connotation.

---

I've only ever seen the phrase "Dark Continent" used romantically (in a literary sense, not a love-story sense). I've never seen it used perjoratively. Again, do you have any specific examples?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

This is post isn't intended to be inflammatory, or concern trolling. It is just food for thought for the mature Lotro community.

These are some examples I noticed of insults that the bestowal text from quest-givers directs towards the enemy.

---

Super, mind if I disect?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

In Bree-land, the southern invaders are called "swarthy", as in swarthy southerners. This is intended as an insult. Swarthy means dark-skinned.

---

Well as Bree-land and its surrounds are essentially a fantasy version of northern Europe those from the south would be 'swarthy'. I honestly don't think this is meant as an insult, more a description. Perhaps a better word could have been used in game, I'm open to suggestions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

Also in Bree-land, the term "half-breed" is used as an insult against Sharkey's half-orc followers. Half-breed is a very old insult against mixed race people. The same term is not used, to my knowledge, to describe the half-elf characters in the game, only the dark "swarthy" skinned ones.

---

Of course half-orcs are named in a pejorative way, they're an evil people (maybe species would be better) force bred with humans to create an invading army that can operate in sunlight. That it happens to chime with the old insult for those of mixed race is coincidental in this case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

Goblins and other evil non-human characters (e.g. the tribal enemies in Lossoth) are shown as having camps full of animal totems. This appears to be a signifier for "primitiveness". To my knowledge, none of the cultures player characters come from have totems. Especially in North America, having totemic people = primitive = evil is very problematic given the treatment of aboriginals.

---

As many others have pointed out many of the 'good' peoples of Middle-earth also use totems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fledermaus

I suspect most of these tropes come from the original books themselves, which, to be fair, were written from the 1930's-1950's. Other stereotypes from that era have been updated for a modern game. For example, female characters can do anything male characters can, though this was very rare in the books. Perhaps outdated racial stereotypes should be removed too.

---

You are quite correct these books were written in the first half of the twentieth centuary and the language used is of its time. The fact that Turbine also chose to use this language isn't laziness or subtle recism it's an effort on their part to write in a similar manner to Tolkien so that the game is further linked with the books we all love.

To sum up, or as some of our lazier readers would say tl;dr, any racism in the works of Tolkien or this game comes from the reader and not the author.