Scientist Supreme!
Banned
I agree with you guys but I don't think we get to decide that for them.
Well I apologize for the assumption.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
JK Rowling under fire for appropriating Native American mythology on Pottermore
- Thread starter Guevara
- Start date
- Status
I don't know what to think, on one hand I think it's fine for her to twist it to an extent so it fits her narrative in the Potter universe, which is a kind of fiction where magic exists, but on the other hand I'd probably be upset if the Incan culture (Peru) was misrepresented in that same universe, as has been the case in other movies and series before.
Theres a difference between asking for respect and asking for silence
Dude, relax. It's up to her and I even used the qualifier "if she gives a shit". To be perfectly honest, it doesn't really bother me either way since I'm not Aboriginal and I don't read Harry Potter. I won't even remember this next week, she will though and so will some of her fans. Your comparison to Christianity really doesn't hold though and is kind of awkward in this context.
Aaronrules380
Member
How many Jews do you see getting super offended whenever Jewish mythological tradition is used in media by non-jews (which is super fucking often)
Sounds like a great idea for her to write her own book series.
A culture isn't a club where you get to decide who comes, who goes, and what gets out. Culture is constantly changing from within and without, and a person being born into a culture has no more right to decide what it is and is not than any other person.
I'm sure somewhere on the internet there has to be some Jewish guy who is supremely offended by Leonard Nimoy "stealing" their live long and prosper sign. The internet has plenty of people with some really wacked out opinions.
Littlefang
Member
Which is ironically exactly what Dr. Keene is trying to do.
MHWilliams
Member
I continued reading beyond that article because I wanted to understand her viewpoint more. You quote one part, but neglect this part:
This points to the idea that she's fine with people learning about Native culture. That's reinforced by this tweet, wherein she literally points towards a resource for creators understanding the culture.
It's commentary on what's given. Much like any thread on a trailer. I note we have a pretty huge one based on a single trailer right now. You engage with what you have and adjust as you receive more context and information. We'd have to strike down a whole lot of NeoGAF otherwise.
Maybe she will. Until she does, she's free to have opinions.
She speaks from her perspective and unlike many, makes note of that.
well god forbid anyone try and put any constraints on your access to their personal heritage, especially in their particular contexts. bleh...
if you ask, and do it respecfully, you probably won't get silence. But if you're going to make stuff up based on some stuff you saw on google, and use a threatened and vanishing culture fighting hard to retain their own truths, to generate billions of dollars in mass media, some silence may be in order. Silence and thought and reflection and hopefully some kind of realization.
She has every right to write her story and put whatever spin she wants on a culture for her fiction book.
They have a right to feel angry if she didn't represent them correctly, but asking her for silence or to change her story is NOT ok in any way.
Rowling's story is in no way obligated to be a 1:1 accurate representation, I've seen far less investigated stuff regarding my country and culture...for example a shitty sitcom once suggested people in my country lived on tree tops and only ate bananas.
They had their right to make the joke just as much as I have my right to not like it
Aaronrules380
Member
I'm just saying that as a Jew, I have literally no problem with the SMT series that makes out our God to be a Tyrannical dictator (in a region where most people probably have incredibly ill defined understandings of all the abrahamic religions, and where even christianity was actively attacked a long time ago) (and while you could argue it's also christian god, I'd argue that SMT's portrayal of that stuff is far more rooted in old testement writings than new testement ones)
So yes, this comes to me as incredibly oversensitive and not really relevant. Why does it matter how people are introduced, so long as it inspires people to learn the truth? And even if it doesn't, who is it really hurting?
So yes, this comes to me as incredibly oversensitive and not really relevant. Why does it matter how people are introduced, so long as it inspires people to learn the truth? And even if it doesn't, who is it really hurting?
MHWilliams
Member
Why not? Is Rowling forced into shackles because a random person asks for her to be better or to change? Seems to me, she's free to do as she pleases.
I'll never understand this "You can't say a work should be something other than what it is." Of course you can. We do it all the time. Do you wish Olicity was less present in Arrow? Do you think Sansa should be handled better in Game of Thrones? Do you feel the writing in True Detective Season 2 could use some wholesale changes? There's no difference. We can do this because we have our own free speech and creators aren't obligated to do anything with that feedback.
Coffee Dog
Banned
Well, I mean, the purpose of one's wallet is not to be shared, which is not true of a story that is meant to be communicated from person to person. If they don't want to communicate those stories because they're really fucking pissed, I wouldn't blame them.
However I think unwillingness to communicate is something that varies from person to person, and we shouldn't be assuming they speak for all native americans.
I quoted that part exactly, I said that was probably where you got your assumption from and I was apparently right. As I said though what she previously said is in direct contrast to your assumption she is ok with people learning via other ways. Keep in mind this is not a new concept for Native American tribes. It's much more nuanced, especially when you get into individual tribes beliefs and attitudes but taking a xenophobic and seclusive stance against outsiders is not a new concept for Native Americans. Its an understandable position given history but its a known (or at least I thought) thing.
I could argue about how I've said nothing but that Rowling should have been more respectful or more careful, or I could argue about how silencing the outside from your culture is a surefire way to spread misinformation and ridicule from both sides
But instead I'll argue this: Putting a hard restraint on what people can and can not know about a culture or can and can not say in respect to a culture is effectively censorship.
While they have the right to be upset, Rowling has the right to do what she did, and calling for her writing to be silenced or for others to not use specific cultures period is not good. (Edit: this part isn't really in response to the responses to Rowling's writing, but rather to some parts of this thread)
so any criticism is safe from criticism?
MHWilliams
Member
Nope. Salient point: "You can't say a work should be something other than what it is." Further discussion carries on from there.
EDIT: Perhaps I should be clearer: You absolutely can say what you want within reason. That's the point of this forum and most social interaction. People may dislike or like what you say and react accordingly. On and on into infinity. Art is no sacrosanct. It's speech just like everything else. I can say, "I wish Naruto was scrubbed from his show because he's a horrible character." You may disagree and creator is allowed to do with that feedback as he or she pleases. Thus life continues.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
No it's not. People need to stop saying this.
Nope, but it has to better than what's being put out right now.
Not what he's saying.
Note the word "can't" in the quotations. Finality.
You can critique critiques. You can go as far as the rabbit hole goes, and that would still not negate what he is saying
80s Bad Guy
Banned
I want to echo the comments about the Dresden Files employing Skinwalkers to great effect in a couple different novels beforehand. I don't see the issue, unless Adam Sandler will play the Native American role in whatever movie comes out of this.
Like every movie that has ninjas is somehow insensitive now.
Like every movie that has ninjas is somehow insensitive now.
I read what you linked to earlier and was aware of that. But that person's take and qualifications to speak on the matter has nothing to do with the poster I was replying to's attitude. Which is what I was speaking to there.
On the topic of the original person she does acknowledge her perspective, but I think there is some danger with that. Especially since for political reasons it may be beneficial to compress various Native American tribes for solidarity reasons. I also think she's wrong about her approach to culture in general, but that's essentially an opinion so it's not really worth going into.
I was arguing that enforcing "you CAN'T know about us" or "you CAN'T use part of our myths" is censorship. I'm not specifically talking about the current situation with Rowling but rather a more extreme example. I was more focusing on the "constraints" aspect on the poster i was replying to.
Sorry if i wasn't clear.
MHWilliams
Member
Ah, reading back, I see I missed the genesis of your point. My apologies on that one.
I think this is a little different than a singular movie trailer for a film that is months and months away. It's a chronological history of American wizarding that is receiving daily updates. At least wait until she covers the relevant time period before expressing anger that x element is not included or addressed. That'd be like watching Episode 1 of Ken Burns' Jazz documentary and complaining that it doesn't include Dizzy Gilespie. Currently she's only covered up to around 1693, and Marie Leveau wasn't born until 1794.
I fully expect that she will have something to say about voodoo in New Orleans. If subsequent updates through the 20th century are posted and Leaveu and her bretheren are excluded, then that seems like a more fair time to push for inclusion.
I think what Rowling wrote was perfectly fair.
Fuck that.
Are you saying they sought refuge in the Native communities, or that the people oppressing them were in the Native communities? Because the former isn't fucked at all, but the latter would be weird.
Dr. Keene said:
Fuck that.
Are you saying they sought refuge in the Native communities, or that the people oppressing them were in the Native communities? Because the former isn't fucked at all, but the latter would be weird.
"not good"? that's your value judgement and would probably conflict with some others. Of course she has the right, no one is arguing that. The question is not of does she have the liberty, the freedom to do this. It is, was it right, or was there a better way? there were no hard restraints here, and none being asked for, besides the ones you put up out of respect. they want people to learn, and see them as real, and they have a real and rich and vivid history and magical tradition that, if asked, someone might have been able to give JK's native influences some real weight. Instead, this opportunity is close to becoming another loss, western culture exercising their right to trample over real people to take what they want.
Fair enough, but isn't the counter point to the criticism that Rowling shouldn't use actual Native myths to base her stories that Rowling is free to write about whatever she wants? isn't that what the core to their criticism is?
i mean the whole counter argument is that it's not Rowling's job to be more "aware". but then again this type of people have more of a problem with social criticism than anything else
Every time I see a complaint like this, I wonder if it's similar to some deranged baptist preacher claiming Harry Potter turns people against God, except we've otherized Native Americans into such a singular foreign identity that we assume any complaint from an individual claiming to be a representative is in fact indicative of the people as a whole.
I don't think think sacred cows should be held when it comes to things like cultural mors. If you are going to represent a peoples you should try to do it right. But it's clear that the fundamental nature of HP takes a remix on the notion of magic within the world.
I don't think it's simply an issues of her not doing the job well enough. That isn't to say she couldn't have. But even if she did, there would still be issues to be had. Hell, look at the flak she gets for Cho Chang. She was not about to escape criticism over her depiction of Native Americans. Especially because they're notions of the supernatural is very different than the wests, and HP already has an established mythos as to how magic works. This is Rowling's fiction. Rowling looks at how different cultures might have developed had magic worked in a different way, or was come to be understood more over time. There is no reason for real world customs to directly map onto her fiction. A good writer hopefully can justify the liberties that they take in the book. What I find absurd, is the notion that some liberties are simply off the table. But then again, I'm someone who champions books like the Satanic Verses.
Outside of the sentence regarding liberty and freedom (i have no idea what your on about there), I understand what you mean. I don't necessarily agree with it since i personally believe that fiction should be able to use any mythology as reference and even alter said mythology to fit into a fictional world. (I also don't think that needing permission is necessary or should be necessary, though I do agree that getting help or better understanding from those whom truly understand the myths would help whatever fictional work a ton)
I don't think Rowling did this well or appropriately, but I also think that thinking of this as a "trample over" of the culture or of the people seems to be a bit hyperbolic founded in anger (justified anger, admittedly).
she might not have gotten it perfect had she tried differently, but she certainly would have done better.
I sympathize with both sides, honestly. But I side with the Native Americans in the end. I'm just disappointed that they found it lacking and when pointed out, I felt they had a point. I'm glad JK gave it a shot, and she clearly is a novelist who gives a shit. But, can could have and maybe still can do a better job with the skinwalkers.
although at this point ego comes in to play.
well if you don't get permission, nothing happens to you. the culture police aren't going to fine you. you just get some bad karma as usual.
trample is just a light example, like this is a (really) light transgression, on top of a really tall pile of bones and history.
I sympathize with both sides, honestly. But I side with the Native Americans in the end. I'm just disappointed that they found it lacking and when pointed out, I felt they had a point. I'm glad JK gave it a shot, and she clearly is a novelist who gives a shit. But, can could have and maybe still can do a better job with the skinwalkers.
although at this point ego comes in to play.
well if you don't get permission, nothing happens to you. the culture police aren't going to fine you. you just get some bad karma as usual.
trample is just a light example, like this is a (really) light transgression, on top of a really tall pile of bones and history.
I think this has more truth to it than most people would like to admit.
Hmm...
I'm sure you meant to say you sympathize with Keene. I doubt Keene speaks for ALL Native Americans. She certainly has her own blindspots:
.I mean in general. and literally The End.
Given the diverse belief systems of all the Native American tribes, I don't think there is any way she can do that without stepping on a landmine somewhere.
Silent Chief
Member
Skin changer, like Beorn is fine.
Skinwalker is a term associated with some native culture.
I'm just glad the Japanese don't raise a stink every time somebody throws a ninja in a movie or a game.
Wow you sure told him!
But like. She's demonstrably not *that* interested. This wasn't a book, it was a throw-away little thing on her website. We're talking about like five paragraphs here.
I basically sympathize with the complaints but it's real hard to see any actual stakes in this.
I really dont understand how this is such a big problem. These oversensitive reactions sometimes are just weird. Its like people go out of their way to feel victimized. How many inspirations did JK use in the HP universe before? A lot. She clearly means no harm or to create a fake image of native americans. Its just an inspirations and a mean for the story to make sense. Its not her work to make people know the real backstory of certain culture. Of course her reach is immense as one if not the biggest writer out there, but its fiction and people are aware they not buying history books.
I wasn't trying to "tell" anyone. At least not in the same way you are carrying yourself right now. He clarified his post and that was it.
Do you have anything to contribute?
How is this cultural appropriation? As it's always been explained to me, appropriation happens when a member of a dominant group adopts some aspect of a minority group's culture, and is praised as a bold innovator while the actual innovators are ignored or forgotten (rock n' roll). Or it's an instance where an artist adopts the style of a minority culture and is praised despite the fact that that the same behavior is abhorred when a minority artist does it (twerking, dreadlocks, box braids).
I've never seen the "cultural appropriation" term used in an instance like this, wherein a creator re-imagines and re-configures the mythos of a foreign or minority culture. If a Native American were to re-imagine their tribe's myths, would that also be appropriation? You can make exactly the same argument. "What if somebody sees this clearly fictional work and believes it to be an accurate depiction of a minority culture?"
I've never seen the "cultural appropriation" term used in an instance like this, wherein a creator re-imagines and re-configures the mythos of a foreign or minority culture. If a Native American were to re-imagine their tribe's myths, would that also be appropriation? You can make exactly the same argument. "What if somebody sees this clearly fictional work and believes it to be an accurate depiction of a minority culture?"
#sorrynotsorry
Member
The whole argument seems prefaced on the idea that cultural appropriation is always bad. It's not. It can destroy, but it also preserves.
I also saw a few comments about white people. You guys do realize that cultural appropriation is not a race issue, right? Like literally not at all?
I also saw a few comments about white people. You guys do realize that cultural appropriation is not a race issue, right? Like literally not at all?
Demoncarnotaur
Member
Probably when the Fantastic Beasts sequels leave North America.
when you're talking Native Americans in America....yeah it is.
#sorrynotsorry
Member
No it isn't. Not all native Americans are a part of Native American culture.
The culture is somewhat racial, but only because it's extremely xenophobic.
The point is this isn't white vs. native Americans. It's British culture vs. Native American culture. Which is basically a nonissue. I do notice no one complains that the entire thing is basically Anglo-American cultural appropriation. I guess we only worry about some but not all?
is this going to become the new thing? because if so I'd like to get it put on a sweater. and no if you're honestly talking about this story basically being an appropriation of poor undefended Anglo-American culture, I'm going to go get some cereal.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll