Even worse, imagine how woke the books of Karl May (not to be confused with Karl Marx) the most successful German author of all time that were originally published in book form in the 1890s [sic] would be if they came out today:
The foreword to the main trilogy would be so spicy that no modern English translation would include it. Like: He would call out the genocide of the native Americans as such and explicitly assign the full guilt for the decline of their cultures to the whites.
He would have the self-insert heroes telling people that the N-word that “Once they scrape you into the ground, your white-skinned body will become straight and exactly as much a stinking carcass as a negro corpse. You will admit that, and now have the goodness to list your other merits!”
He would have trans coded characters being presented in an unambigously positive light.
And so many more incredibly woke things, like trash talking Christians that don’t respect all other humans and do evil shit…
Morrowind is a basically the thesis of Things Fall Apart in video game form, with a good deal of Dune. It’s an examination of colonialism. Every detail of that game is dripping with politics. The Dunmer are racist and engage in horrific chattel slavery - but does that mean it is right for the Empire to colonize them and take their resources? There’s substantial evidence that your character is a spook sent to “fulfill” an indigenous prophecy to tighten the Empire’s control - is that morally right?
There’s also a hermaphrodite male presenting god who has had hundreds of children with something quite close to the Devil.
Dagoth Ur is woke as fuck and he will awaken all you sleepers.
In RL Vivek is the racist one.
Somebody has been hitting the moon sugar a little too hard.
I have stock if you have coin…
Is the crusader gay?
Yes. Also a cyborg.
The Legend. The Elf Slayer. Pelinal Whitestrake
Comments are closed because: In 2020 this was made for my when subscribers and based exclusively on the writing of MK in its most unedited form. Whoever else stumbled onto this later bearing a delusion it was made for them (e.g. fans of a Baltimore computer game corporation) were never meant as a target audience. Do not sub.
What?
Good, now make it gayer!
What about a politician who sexually harasses an employee and making that employee read their erotic interspecies fan fiction.
Aye, I could do that.
“Hey kid, ya wanna be Hortator?” - Harvey Weinstein voice
Hey, don’t talk shit about The Lusty Argonian Maid, it’s a classic!
In short, exactly how it was and how it should be.
🎶 🎵 How it is, and of course how it could be. 🎵 🎶
I wish all representation was done as well as when it was done out of creative choice rather than trying to win progressiveness points
It’s kinda weird to try to include representation without it feeling shoe horned. The world of TES (of any fictional world) is entirely hand-created. There are no accidents, all of it is intentional.
This means that, no matter how it’s done, any character deviating from the “norm” was consciously chosen to be so. These things that need representation (disabilities, gender identity, sexuality, race, etc) are all things people don’t get to choose, so there’s an inherent disconnect between the hand crafted world choosing to include diversity, and the real world necessarily having diversity because of chaos.
Following this thread, there’s never been a case of inclusivity, or exclusivity, that isn’t shoehorned in. It’s always been entirely the will of the author to include or exclude these representations. With that in mind, I think it’s only a good thing to see more diverse authors bringing more diverse worlds and characters into existence.
It only feels shoe horned when they don’t write the character well.
There are a lot of cases where the person isn’t allowed to have any flaws or character development because they’re too scared to make them look bad in any way, which also means none of their achievements feel earned. Ohers where they just don’t care enough to waste screen time on things that aren’t highlighting whatever group they’re a part of
Have been a fair few shows I’ve seen where they’ve done it right, recently Kaos had a trans character who actually felt like a human being instead of a token “hey look we have a trans person”
The recent doctor who special is one of the bad examples, most of the time the woman in a wheelchair is onscreen it’s because they’re drawing attention to the wheelchair (oh no, a ladder, oh no a set of stairs etc etc) and not to develop her character in any way besides that
That’s kind of a weird argument. I always took “shoe-horned” to imply that it is pressed into something by force where it doesn’t quite fit. So, in my mind just because something is intentional doesn’t mean it is shoe-horned.
Creative works always come from the authors lived experiences. The reason why we often find representation of minorities missing in media, is because these minorities don’t get to work on them. If there would be more diverse teams working on something we would naturally see more of their diverse experiences represented.
However, for this to be the case a lot would have to change in our society. It is way easier to just keep things more or less as they were and let people without minority experiences write and add minority characters. These, in turn, feel off, feel shoe-horned in, because they aren’t based off of lived experiences. They are just there to check a box.
Conversely, the reason why it feels like we used to have better (though less) diverse representations in media is because these actually came from people who had these experiences.
Eh, I think we just have different perspectives on things being short horned. In my view, anything that isn’t critical information to the story, it’s shoehorned in. If you tell me the main characters favorite food is pasta, and then don’t do anything with it, it’s shoe horned in. If you tell me a character is gay, and then don’t do anything they couldn’t have done the same with a straight character, changing a couple of pronouns, it’s shoehorned in.
To be clear though, I don’t think this is a bad thing. A story with only critical information will… Well, it’ll work, but it’ll be bland. Same if you make all of your characters blond, blue eyed, straight white men. Adding these details tends to be what makes us remember and identify with a character. That doesn’t make it any more strictly relevant to the story. Most characters people would view as “diverse” - even the ones people like - fall into this category, i think.
I think a better argument is, if these traits ARE shoehorned in, their alternative “normal” traits would be as well. If you go out of your way to state a character is straight, it’s just as shoehorned if everything else is equivalent. Do THOSE characters inspire the same ire? If not, we should examine the why of that specifically.
Yeah, I can see our difference in how we defined what’s shoe-horned in. And I get that you’re not saying diversity in media is bad. However, respectfully, I don’t think your definition of shoe-horned makes a lot of sense if you think it through. Is the music shoe-horned in, because it’s not critical to the plot? You said yourself that adding information that isn’t critical to the plot is necessary or the movie will be bland. If it’s necessary to the movie, wouldn’t you agree that it is critical? It may not be for the plot, but it is for the movie. Movies aren’t just plot. A lot of great movies (Nomadland, Patterson, Dazed and Confused, Coffee and Cigarettes, The Straight Story, …) don’t have a lot of plot or tell a great story. Instead they focus on the characters and the mood.
I think your example with the “blond, blue eyed, straight white men” betrays your perspective. This isn’t describing the default human being. Most people on earth aren’t like that. But it is the de facto default in western media. Why is it that? Because for a long time it was white men who made the decisions. Now that it has become a norm, everything that deviates needs a justification. And that’s kinda fucked up, isn’t it?
So, I think the question isn’t, why don’t “normal” character traits get the same hate as “alternate” traits? The question is, who defines what is normal?
I’m still taking that over no representation at all 🤷♀️
Seriously though, representation as a background noise is - imho - one of the most potent tools for normalisation.
And the persons who did good representation haven’t disappeared. They’re still doing the lord’s work.
Background noise isn’t an issue for me, if there isn’t an unnatural amount of attention being drawn and the pace of the story isn’t interrupted that’s just adding interest
The problem lies for me when said character isn’t fleshed out in other ways and their only defining trait is that they’re x, or that they don’t give them any character flaws because they’re too afraid to offend that group. Results in a character that doesn’t feel natural to the story
I see your point and don’t disagree exactly… but…
I will say it is odd that I hear this kind of criticism of flat gay/female/minority/etc characters but for some reason never hear complaints about the equally-flatly written comic relief characters, or best friend characters, or sage characters, etc. Video games and other stories frequently contain flat characters that are used more as props for the protagonist or other characters to react and respond to, yet complaints about these characters seem to only pop up when said characters happen to represent an under-represented demographic.The issue is the intention behind it, if the intention is comic relief they might not add much to the plot, but generally are still relevant in some way and make the film more entertaining
I’m not a huge fan of poorly fleshed out characters in general if they’ve got any amount of screen time
If they haven’t got much screen time and aren’t fleshed out it’s even worse if the one defining character trait they have is that they’re gay, black, trans, etc etc
Imagine if some adventurers go into a tavern, they talk to the generic hooded loner on their own in the corner, they give the adventurers the quest as usual and then for some reason mention that they’re vegan or something, no relevance to the story and it becomes kinda obvious to the viewer that they were only given that character trait to check a box
Kaos is one of the good examples I’ve seen recently sorry if I already mentioned it, there’s a trans character in the underworld who was part of a female only Amazon tribe and was thrown out and eventually killed for transitioning to male, but they don’t even mention any of that until he’s already been well established for a couple of episodes and they do it in enough detail that it doesn’t feel forced
I’m all for representation in media I should clarify I just want it to be done well, there are a fair few good examples but also a good number of bad ones
That’s fair and I see your point, even basically agree with it. That said, I still wonder sort of what standards we’re holding for “good” characters and how realistic that is. And I want to make a brief caveat that I don’t know you and can’t speak to your personal opinions so I will be making some generalizations about the topic in general; I apologize if it feels like I am unfairly lumping you in with anyone and promise that is not my intention. It is clear to me you aren’t a right wing chud screaming about DEI but rather you’re a very decent person looking for fleshed-out representation that isn’t shallow or driven by stereotypes.
Okay, caveats out of the way now, here’s the thing: I have a gay friend who is very proud of their community and themselves for being who they are despite any social pressures. This friend frequently goes out wearing full-blown rainbow attire, speaks with the affectation of their community, and they will absolutely inform you of their orientation upon their first meeting. Of course my friend has vastly more depth than just their community affiliation, but that affiliation is definitely going to be the largest and most prominent quality you associate with them, especially if you never move beyond acquaintanceship to friendship.
If my friend was in a video game, they would absolutely be described as flat or tokenism. But they are a real person. Even if you’re thinking to yourself right now “well frankly it sounds like your friend is lacking in depth in real life,” (I’d disagree, but go with the argument none the less, please), the fact is they still exist. There are people who define themselves by their identifiers first. So I don’t think the mere inclusion of these “flat” representations are inherently problematic.
I don’t think a flat character of an under-represented demographic is harmful in the way that a bad or stereotypical representation is. I think there is still benefit in the normalization of lesser-represented groups in media, even if those representations aren’t the deepest or most compelling characters. A gay shopkeeper who is flamboyant and one-note still helps normalize the idea of gay people in normal aspects of life.
But of course we can’t settle for these characters as the whole piece of representation. We have to still demand deep and complex under-represented characters, especially in lead or primary roles. I just personally don’t think the flatter characters are inherently problematic or detrimental to those goal. If anything, I think they’re almost kind of tangential or non-sequitur to the topic. The point isn’t to complain about flat under-represented characters and discourage their inclusion, the point is to demand good and complex under-represented characters regardless of the inclusion of these flat other representations.
I’m very sorry for the novel I wrote, my brain is crazy today and I couldn’t make it more concise in this moment.
Also I have no yet watched Kaos so I can’t comment on the representation in that show, but it does sound compelling from what you describe.
Also also, in case it’s not clear, I don’t think we’re arguing; I think we probably agree with each other about 90% of the way here.
Does seem that way
I’m not sure real people can be compared to fictional in that way, as your friend has infinitely more character because he’s a real person
If you were to ask your friend what his favourite food is, or what his opinion on pineapple on pizza is, or what he has for a desktop wallpaper he’d have answers for all of those questions or a reason he doesn’t have an answer
If you were to take one of these hollow characters I’m talking about and ask them that question the answer would just be made up on the spot
If your friend showed up in a TV show for 5 minutes just as himself in a situation he would realistically be in I can guarantee he’d feel real and natural because he is a real person with a history
Woke basically applies to the bigots just realizing and getting worked up by things that had existed for decades. Either they’ve been dozing off for decades or have been “woken” up to it by propaganda with political undertones, and neither speaks highly of their mental faculties.
Although the thing about The Elder Scrolls in general is that it doesn’t hand hold you, so you are free to be a racist bigot and not realize it. They don’t force realization onto the player, you can happily adopt and become a tool of the point they are trying to criticize, you can willfully remain as ignorant as you would be in real life. In contrast to Starfield, where all companions are like the borg, of one mind telling you or nudging you into what you should have actually done.
Unfortunately what I really think is happening/happened with “woke hate” is manipulation for political gain as you mentioned with propaganda.
These people couldn’t care less before, other than the religious zealots that would crusade against anything “gay.” The political right (I really believe this started in earnest in the US) found a pressure point to use that puts them in direct opposition to what their political adversary aims to achieve (acceptance of all people for who they are). As it stands in the US the right operates almost entirely based off of “whatever the left aims for, make it appear evil. Always oppose all that they do.” as opposed to having specific goals of their own other than “shower the wealthy with benefits, remove all barriers to retaining the entirety of profits.”
Steve Bannon recently aimed their manipulation at what he described as “rootless white men” through the lense of gaming and societys affect on games/movies. Ever since that started there’s been an “explosion” of “this game woke?” discussions in Steam discussion fourms and in regard to movies. Before this manipulation these people just wouldn’t care and if anything you’d just see the odd person here or there complain about 2 guys kissing in a specific scene or something. They are made to be even more angry now because they’re made to believe it’s an affront to them and an attempt to manipulate them and society… Which is “funny” because they are being manipulated, just not by gaming/movie media.
Yeah the real reason they’re doing this cultural stuff is that they need a distraction from the fact that their material/economic platform are becoming more and more unpopular every year. So the anti woke/anti immigration frenzy must continue
Dem politicians should point this out more, but their economic program isn’t very popular either. I miss Bernie :(
I think what the image is trying to say is no one gives a shit that plays elder scrolls about this sorta thing because it’s a Fantasy game. No one needs to boot up a video game to be reminded how unfair and shitty our world is. We go to the game and escape that ( hopefully).
whoosh
It’s not like fiction (including Fantasy) is often used as a means to do social commentary. ^^`
No, you go to the game to play a power fantasy regardless of how unfair and shitty that fantasy world clearly is because of how your status or your skills help you surpass it. The Elder Scrolls goes that extra step to give you the choice to contribute or fight that unfair and shitty to such an extent that people mod it in when the choice is not given, and the player does not even have to be aware of it.
People play videogames for the control, replayability, and often the narrative (which honestly was never The Elder Scroll’s strength), not necessarily to escape the world’s problems, problems which some games embrace. At a more basic level, games just need to provide gameplay and a player just needs to explore it.
There’s no shortage of games where you play as a jackass in a shitty unfair world. GTA comes to mind.
I miss the time when people realized that fiction, even if possibly metaphoric, is ultimately not real.
I’d buy that
Todd Howard wants to know your location
But how many times and on how many platforms?
All of them
Let’s hear it for badly written caricatures of racists that are so over-the-top that they allow real racists to say to themselves “I’m not actually a racist, because I’m not extreme as this flimsy caricature of a racist, which is what racists are really like.”
I hate the idea that we have to write more well-developed racists just to get racists to recognize that they’re, you know, fucking racist, but god damn it, it needs to happen. Skryim is just one of many offenders, video games alone are just one of many offenders as well. Really its the whole US media landscape that has nothing but flimsy, weak caricatures of racists. I personally think these weak caricatures are part and parcel to why it’s hard to get racists to have self-reflection because we’re not actually doing the hard work of writing realistic racist characters who don’t start so extreme. Becoming a virulently violent racist takes time and doesn’t happen overnight, and those events that lead to it fall under the umbrella of what’s often called “character development.”
/end unrelated rant
Write a well rounded racist character and you get racists rooting for that character. Racists will never self reflect when they see a well written racist character. It’s like how there are men who don’t see that the characters in Fight Club and Joker are bad people, and rather see themselves in them.
like the cops who identify with punisher, they’re literally not getting it.
Rooting for bad people in fiction is a fine way to process that part of your own self with no actual risks or consequences. It has as much risks of actual bad consequences as role-playing games turning people into satan worshippers.
Worth noting that whenever the subject comes up, people will defend the Stormcloaks, praising Ulfric’s fight for the province’s right to self-govern and-
Wait.
Isn’t all Daedric Prince genderless? They just assume the form they like, some are just a pile of tentacle.
In a literal sense, yes. But they present themselves as male or female usually. So it’s still appropriate to refer to Boethia as “genderfluid” because they send to switch it up.
I guess that makes most of them gendered but sexless? I mean, sexless in a biological sense, particularly given that they’re not biological beings, but it’s also funny to imply that Vaermina simply never gets laid
They’re literally all-powerful gods that reign over their own worlds that are quite possibly the same size as, if not bigger than Nirn. They don’t play by our rules. I don’t think we can apply our conventions of sex and biology to them lol.
As I said: they can be whatever the fuck they want.
They’re literally all-powerful gods that reign over their own worlds
Kind of but not really. Their “worlds” are just their true bodies. They are all-powerful in the sense that you are all-powerful compared to the bacteria living in your gut, which is to say that they’re not really. They have entirely finite power even within and over their own domains.
See: the Champion of Cyrodiil (in addition to teams of entirely normal people) invading Dagon’s Oblivion gates and shutting them down. An all-powerful god would simply vaporize you the moment you tried to oppose him in his domain. Or forcibly convert you into a warrior of his armies. Or instantly transform all your bones into breadsticks and laugh as you cronched into a pile on the floor–but don’t worry, he decided not to give you permission to die. Enjoy being a breadcrumb puddle.
that are quite possibly the same size as, if not bigger than Nirn.
Kind of a misunderstanding of the cosmology. Nirn is a finite round planet floating in (something equivalent to) space. The planes of Oblivion are infinite planes forced into the rough appearance of round planets by mortals whose minds can’t comprehend infinity. They’re not comparable to Nirn because they aren’t even a similar type of cosmic structure, they only appear similar through the very limited eyes of mortals.
I don’t think we can apply our conventions of sex and biology to them lol.
This is definitely true though. I’m personally in the school of thought that Daedric Princes aren’t really people the way that, for example, the Tribunal’s components are, or for a real world example the way the Greek gods are. The Daedric Princes are concepts personified, or maybe even concepts forced into an anthropomorphic shape by uncomprehending mortal eyes, the same way the Planes of Oblivion will appear like finite round planets from afar.
Mehrunes Dagon isn’t, I would argue, a guy who likes to destroy things. Mehrunes Dagon is destruction. He’s not a bad guy because he’s not a guy at all. Mehrunes Dagon enacts destruction and change the same way a hurricane does–not purposefully, not with malice, not even consciously in the same way a human can. Mehrunes Dagon simply, the same way you or I breathe, destroys.
That isn’t to say that they are all the concept of their spheres. Hypothetically destroying Mehrunes Dagon wouldn’t remove the concept of destruction from the universe. But Mehrunes Dagon is the being representing–made of, perhaps–that concept as it exists in the foundation of the universe.
The universe which I might add is a song, dreamt by the unimaginable and inconceivable higher-dimensional godhead. But that’s a topic for nerds nerdier than I.
Fair points! I was being somewhat hyperbolic. Compared to us, they are all-powerful, but, they are not in the grand scheme.
I couldn’t remember if the planes were infinite or not. But I knew they were at least their own worlds under the Daedra’s dominion.
One thing I do remember though is that Mehruns Dagon was actually created in Nirn by some of the Magna Ge before they peaced out. They created him because the Kalpa Nirn was in was being ruled over by an incredibly cruel and tyrannical race with no hope of change, so theh created the very embodiment of change, but realized too late they didn’t “install any brakes” so to speak.
And his name is
John CenaMahruns Dagon. So you’re right, he isn’t evil, it’s just in his nature to make things change. I don’t remember how he finally ended up banished from Nirn, but that’s why he believes Nirn is his by right, cause he was created there.You sure have Fudged Muppets in the past
No I’m just a nerd who reads a lot
I actually can’t stand fudgemuppet, dude takes 40 mins to say what could (and should) be said in 5
As an ES lore noob, I quite enjoyed their videos a few years back. I guess they could have shortened their videos a lot but explaining all the interconnectedness between characters and events and stuff I liked a lot.
Do you just read wikis or are there actually books to read about TES lore?
Hey, that’s funny, that’s verbatim what I say about trans folks too!
Well, at least the last bit, although I’m not ruling out the former on a case by case basis.
