LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

nice to see how much effort you’ve put in this article. sadly, i think serious issues overlook it.
i totally agree about Faidutti’s initial awkwardness : dealing with animal sacrifice amid a culture that does not practice it (let’s say on a regular basis). and i totally agree about that (more than) awkward response about the fact that Europeans don’t know about native Americans still being around. most Europeans know about indian reservations, though they usually couldn’t care less.

now please bear in mind a game in general, and this game specifically, is not a history manual. themes in board gaming are most commonly top layers, sometimes merely ornemental. anachronisms and historical mistakes are ubiquitous, sometimes intentionnally, sometimes accidentally.
please bear also in mind that native Americans are depicted in this game as sensible and respectable human beings, some eventually trying to bluff others… like other humans do. illustrations look cute, quite obviously to me. that’s it. they could have been ancient Greeks, slovenian peasants, modern Zoulous, etc.
finally, i stress your suspicion about the term ‘exotic’ which in French refers to anything unfamiliar to the local (western) culture. from a french point of view, i’d say : slovenian peasants are slightly exotic, modern Zoulous are quite exotic, pre-colonial native Americans are very exotic.

i’ll now quote your article. i know it is an unexhaustive (if not partial) and often unpleasant process for the writer, but it’s the laziest way to get to my point.

you write : “But it’s [the free speech excuse] such a convenient excuse to protect bigotry.”. again, i’m not sure we share a common definition of bigotry. i tend to perceive bigotry as a very defensive way of thinking, where any idea or object that seems adventurous or simply stranger to your (rooted) set of values is to be instantly rejected. in that matter, i would tend to see much more bigotry in your reaction than in Faidutti’s design. free speech means Trump can spread his views of the world, like many other dangerous persons. yes free speech is dangerous, but necessary. it doesn’t prevent us from showing a critical mind, i think free speech actually helps exercising it…

“Their culture is not something for us to use for our entertainment.”. this is a weird and divisive sentence to me. would that mean native Americans don’t play games ? and cultures are to be spread, translated, interpretated, détourned, revamped, etc. it is quite clear to me that the native Americans culture can be ‘used’ (as a tool) for our (i’m still unsure who is ‘us’) entertainment, and theirs, and everyone else. many modern cultural goods (mis)interpret other cultures but i’m quite sure the native American culture also (mis)interpretates other cultures.

“The publishing company – in the United States, Cool Mini or Not – needs to take responsibility for rejecting theme ideas or accepting games to be published on the contingency of a theme reworking / better work to keep a diverse theme.”. how rejecting can lead to more diversity ? i’m the devil’s advocate right now, because the board game ‘industry’ themes almost entirely consists of the following universes : ancient mediterranean civs, medieval Europe, western/nordic fantasy, science fiction, lost wonders, victorian era and, well, far West. if bigotry overshadows the mind of board game consumers, companies are sure not going to give diversity a chance and keep it conservative with those long-lived and tolerated themes not to risk any public outcry. though quite peremptory, i’d say ‘no risk no fun’.

overall, i think we need always to put things in perspective. Mombasa was released, i’m anti-slavery and i’m fine with it. Secret Hitler will be released, i’m anti-Nazi and i’m fine with it. you spend many games murdering other ‘races’… could be on a spaceship landing in Pompeii or whatever, i’m fine with it. as long as i don’t perceive a blatant propaganda, enjoy the game and keep in mind it is a game.

i wonder if you ever asked a native American what his/her take on Waka Tanka is ? that would be interesting.

LikeLike

“To start off with your first question: What am I asking for?”
I am asking designers and publishers to be aware at the systems of power and oppression that exist in the world, and specifically the US context when designing games with themes that have to do with other communities culture. I am asking publishers and designers to be respectful of those communities and cultures, realizing that culture is not something for them to take, use, and profit from.

“Who would I like to hold power exactly?”
I would like an equitable distribution of power, which is an ‘ideal world,’ a perfectly social just world. Now I know this is virtually impossible, but I am seeing marginalized communities not having power to even own their own cultures. It can be taken at any time by those in power (in the US White folks) and used for entertainment, fashion, monetary gain, popularity, etc.

“To what end? To protect other human beings from what?”
The end is social justice. The end is a community where we would not have to worry about marginalization and oppression. Protecting communities from perpetuated racism. I guess that is a little too vague. The end for me in this blog is to make hobbies like board gaming and books/reading more inclusive to historically marginalized communities. To me, this requires respectful representation of those communities.

“From carrying out moral and ethical reasoning regarding cultural products that exist in the world?”
I am not quite sure what you mean here. If it is to take away individuals moral & ethical reasoning about cultural products, no. I expect people to develop these ethics more and create community norms around cultural respect.

“Are you against the individual right to create art or craft that is offensive to some or even most in a society? If so, aren’t we risking the loss of any dissident art movement…which is nearly by definition “inappropriate” within a given historical context.”
To be blatantly honest, I am sick and tired of hearing free speech and artistic use to justify and defend the perpetuation of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, genderism, spiritual discrimination, etc. I like free speech. It allows me to write this blog and critique what I think needs improvements and growth. But it’s such a convenient excuse to protect bigotry. I think there is a balance here and I do not know what it is.

“It seems to me that your argument is yearning for such a shortcut”
Oh, you can bet I want a shortcut, but I know there isn’t any. I don’t know what you mean by real experiences and learning. I do think the designer AND publisher have a responsibility here to say, “Maybe we need to rethink this theme.” or “Maybe we can do some more work to make this a more inclusive theme.” My question back to you, how is this not a real experience with potential for learning?! We should have socially just companies and individuals. I think we missed each other about handing power to companies. I do not believe that. I simply want companies to notice these things as well since they are made up of individuals and do influence our community.

“I find a lot of insight in the fact that you call for the game not to be published in the US”
This is my opinion and I stand by it. It’s not about censorship but accountability to the publisher and designer about putting out culturally respectful games. On your suggestions about how else I could go about it. Whenever marginalized communities point problematic things out (like Waka Tanka), we are often dismissed. It’s when we become radical for folks to take notice. Then we get told to have a cordial conversation about it and we are asking for too much. Honestly, the ‘how unfortunate’ piece to me is complacent in the status quo.

“I’m honestly terrified of your process which to me is about fear – undisclosed criteria of judgement – punishment and alienation.”
It is not my intention to alienate or inflict punishment and I understand how my words could impact people in that way. A lot of my writing comes from an experience of oppression and seeing communities I love suffer oppression for their race, culture, gender identity, sexual orientation, and ability. People make mistakes and I make mistakes doing this work but to me it’s not about becoming defensive or afraid of stepping in it again, but realizing those mistakes, learning from it, and doing better next time. When I read your response I honestly think we want to same outcomes. I think it is had to communicate through the comments. I am always happy to talk further about these issues.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Some questions and thoughts based on the hints you do offer about what you are calling for:
Who would you like to hold power exactly? It seems, based on the book publishing company example you provided, that you would like private corporations to determine the suitability of a particular work of art/craft to based on an anticipated response by market forces. To what end? To protect other human beings from what? From carrying out moral and ethical reasoning regarding cultural products that exist in the world?

Are you against the individual right to create art or craft that is offensive to some or even most in a society? If so, aren’t we risking the loss of any dissident art movement…which is nearly by definition “inappropriate” within a given historical context. I just cannot for the life of me understand why one would argue, in the name of social justice, for shifting power away from individuals and groups of artists and towards private entities. We need desperately, it seems to me, all the tools we have to create meaning and culture – for enjoyment, pursuit of beauty AND to pursue justice.

It seems to me the end game of what you are calling for is some kind of self-policing reinforced by norms internalized by companies and and others who disseminate culture. A feedback loop that is created by more socially just people creating more socially just companies. I am all for self-betterment forged by learning and real experience – but there are no shortcuts here for us as individuals or as groups and societies.

It seems to me that your argument is yearning for such a shortcut – that by handing more power and control over to entities like corporations in the pursuit of justice – you think that the outcome will be a more sensitive and appropriate world.

I find a lot of insight in the fact that you call for the game not to be published in the US. You could have said…this game is a lazy and sloppy appropriation of a culture – how unfortunate. How desperately we need honest, hard fought and authentic cultural expressions! Here are some such games that I recommend are worthy of your time as compared to this one. In this way we could have engaged in a collective exercise in digging into an interesting subject and perhaps learned about games that you respect/admire. Rather, you call for censorship.

It’s a vastly different process – one is about learning together and arriving and a hard fought (i would say earned) unity – we maintain and even enrich our humanity. I’m honestly terrified of your process which to me is about fear – undisclosed criteria of judgement – punishment and alienation. I clearly have a bad and incomplete feeling about your views on this matter so please help me out.

LikeLiked by 1 person

I understand the intention of the designer and I do not think every game needs to be educational about identity, culture, etc. However, for me this is less about the game and it’s mechanics, which I am sure is a fun bluffing game. This is about the use of theme, the roots that allow the use of such a theme in this way, and how Bruno Faidutti went about using it and responded to the criticism. There is a difference between a theme trying to be educational and a theme being respectful to the cultural it is borrowing from. Themes do not always need to be educational. Themes should be respectful and accurately representative.

I would caution you using the word harmless and exaggerating. To you, this theme and the way the designer went about it may have been harmless. To other people, this has caused and does cause harm. And no matter what our view is of this game, we should recognize that harm has been done to a community. To say it is harmless invalidates and erases those experiences.

I don’t think people are picking up Waka Tanka to learn about Indigenous culture. I have no such illusion. What caricatures, stereotypes, and cliches do is perpetuate, sometimes subconsciously, false representation of an entire community of people. I think the same theme could have been used simply with some extra work. Diverse themes in our hobby is a good thing, but we have a responsibility too.

My aim is not to convince you. Being stuck in a debate (particularly in a comments section) is neither helpful nor productive. What I do ask for is a consideration around a common understanding that a person from a historically underrepresented community can feel angry / upset / frustrated / harmed from misrepresentation and appropriation of their culture.

LikeLike

I understand these kind of identity politics has grown enormously (and sometimes to ridiculous proportions) in the US, but a lot of it is just that, exaggeration, and the case you make against this harmless game is one example of that.

I understand there can be “unconscious” clichés in some creations that have to be exposes, but this is not even the case here, as here the intention was just to play around with a cliché, anyone who would want an informed opinion on native american culture would do so by other means than playing this game.

LikeLike