[BOOK/TV SPOILERS] The Dothraki, Orientalism, and Race

[Kat]

Someone was going to have to start this topic, eventually.

So far, it's only been one episode and there's already some controversy over this. Anyone surprised? Not me. I thought this was already one of the more problematic parts of the books on the face of it. I mean, tiny blonde white chick sold off to brown barbarian horde (which has a tendency to roam the continent raping and pillaging other tribes), where first she gets her romance novel plotline on for a while until her husband dies, and then she magically takes control of a culture which she only recently got to know anything about, becoming a powerful leader who everyone loves.

Of course, the details in the books are a little more complicated. We see everything through the POV of Dany, so of course the Dothraki are "othered"-- she does not know anything about them to begin with and we see everything through her eyes. The only reason she is able to become a powerful Khaleesi, rather than a widow with no power and no followers, is because she magically has access to dragons, something that no one else in the world has. Also, the entire portrayal of the Dothraki as savages is balanced by the fact that Westeros is just as bad by the end of the first book, with Lannister soldiers raping and pillaging the countryside over on the other side of the ocean, violent power struggles, and women, on the whole, in an equal or worse position in society in the "civilized" world in comparison to their "barbarian" counterparts. By the end of the first book, you realize that one of the themes of the book is skewering archetypes. The knights in shining armor aren't so chivalrous after all. But in order to do that, GRRM sets up many of the storylines with what would be, on the face, stereotypical characters out of fantasy, myth, and fairy tale. Dany and Drogo are two of these, and the Dothraki culture, as initially portrayed in the books, is yet another mashup of nomadic tribesmen from various continents.

I will be interested to see how much the theme of skewered archetypes actually holds up for different characters and cultures in the show. For instance, the Dothraki wedding, on the show, seemed to me to be one of the more....um....blog-post inspiring portrayals of another culture as shown on TV. Fighting for fun, public dancing/sex where the actual consensuality on the part of the women was unclear. A basket of snakes as a wedding gift- how exotically pointless can you get? Even the casting of the Dothraki themselves-- as several people have pointed out elsewhere, is this a deliberate choice on the part of the producers to portray the Dothraki as a culture that will absorb and assimilate other tribes that in conquers, or can it be read as casting as "well, all these non-white people look alike, so let's just put them all in one tribe together"? I'm leaning toward the former, but I can see how someone new to the show might read the latter.

In the greater context of the show, I do think the producers could turn their portrayal of the Dothraki wedding into a clever commentary on Westeros and its "civilized" culture as GRRM did in the books. Viserys' snobbiness about the whole affair-- he is obviously meant to be thinking that he's better than them, when we know he's a crazy, pathetic character with nothing but a title and an aspiration, and his refusal to learn the Dothraki language or acknowledge their culture does a lot in making everyone around him seem more sympathetic. The "exotic" wedding violence, where less than three deaths is considered a dull affair, should pretty quickly be compared to the Hand's Tourney, because obviously there's nothing more celebratory than proving you have a bunch of expendable young men by having them fight each other for fun. (And in the larger scheme....weddings....deaths.....)

In any case, those are just some random thoughts. I can certainly see how someone new to the books and show, upon watching that episode, could think, "Shit, not another racist portrayal of a barbarian culture in fantasy." I've frequently found myself thinking that when reading certain fantasy books. Dany's plotline walks a fine line, in the books, of being a bit too much like Dances With Wolves, Avatar, or other movies where an outsider becomes accepted into a tribe. I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for, at the very least, rolling their eyes over this first episode, and of course we have no idea how subtly the producers will convey some of the themes from the books.

Otherwise, this is just a catch-all thread for those thoughts which have been coming up in other topics.

[Balefont]

Thanks, Kat. :)

My post from the other thread:

Again, I see the Dothraki people as being darker skinned out of necessity for the environment in which they live. I found some of the Northern cultures (ahem, wildlings) to be equally savage and barbaric yet they're lighter skinned. They're lighter skinned due to lack of sun exposure. Even the Ironborn are savage and barbaric IMO. So, I don't see this a race thing - as it's known in our world - at all.

[AquariumDrinker]

There are Wildlings and Mountain Tribes much more savage than what we see from the Dothraki, this is a non issue

[Kalbear]

There are Wildlings and Mountain Tribes much more savage than what we see from the Dothraki, this is a non issue

1. Being dismissive of other people's thoughts is never a good way to start off a conversation.

2. Just because there are wild tribes that are fair-skinned does not mean there is not a problem with wild tribes that are not.

3. Said wildlings aren't in the first episode, so using them as a point of argument is as useless as using what we know of the Dothraki as an argument.

[neutronicus]

I suspect the ethnic heterogeneity of the Dothraki was a pragmatic choice; they didn't want to have to find a bunch of extras who looked they were from the same part of central Asia.

As far as my thoughts on the matter in general - no one from a sunny climate is going to be fair-skinned. If you want to depict a tribe of grasslands nomads, they pretty much have to be dark-skinned. Whether this depiction is "racist" depends, I suppose, on whether your fictional tribe can be interpreted as slandering some culture that actually exists, and how that tribe is presented in comparison to the other races in your fictional world.

To be blunt, I don't much care if most of the depictions are pretty stereotypical.

2. Just because there are wild tribes that are fair-skinned does not mean there is not a problem with wild tribes that are not.

I hope I'm misreading you here. Do you mean to say that depicting any dark-skinned, primitive, and warlike group in fantasy should be verboten on the grounds of racism? Or merely that there's something specifically racist about this imaginary group of aboriginals?

[AquariumDrinker]

Sorry, I misread the topic as containing book spoilers

[Ran]

There are wildlings, they're just all dead. But there's a presumption from what's seen of them that they're bad guys and that they're barbaric, what with the clothing and Royce claiming they probably got in a fight among themselves and hacked one another to bits.

Which, of course, is a rather slanted view of things, one which is corrected over time.

[Balefont]

1. Being dismissive of other people's thoughts is never a good way to start off a conversation.

2. Just because there are wild tribes that are fair-skinned does not mean there is not a problem with wild tribes that are not.

3. Said wildlings aren't in the first episode, so using them as a point of argument is as useless as using what we know of the Dothraki as an argument.

Anyway, sorry, kal, but knowing what we know as readers of the books, I'd say that George is an equal opportunity savage maker. Yeah, the first episode may appear racist to some - but that's taken out of context of the greater part of the story and I think it's unfair to the series.

[DizoakiusMaximus]

I hope I'm misreading you here. Do you mean to say that depicting any dark-skinned, primitive, and warlike group in fantasy should be verboten on the grounds of racism?

I don't think you're misreading. That is, I believe, exactly his argument.

EDIT: Or rather, that depicting them in any way other than as completely sympathetic, "civilized", and modernistic is racist.

[TerraPrime]

Anyway, sorry, kal, but knowing what we know as readers of the books, I'd say that George is an equal opportunity savage maker. Yeah, the first episode may appear racist to some - but that's taken out of context of the greater part of the story and I think it's unfair to the series.

That is true, except for the TV show, so far, it is the entire series. Therefore, I think *some* of the criticisms aimed at the episode is valid, in this context. Mostly, I think we need to acknowledge that many non-book viewers, particular those from the U.S., are already sensitized to this type of racialized portrayal. Without the benefit of a hundred or so pages of text, it is easy to see how they might perceive the Dothraki as another example of blacksploitation/orientalism. We hope that if they stay to watch more of the series, they may change their view.

Then again, I do find Martin's treatment of the Dothraki over all rather shallow. A tender-hearted savage full of manly man manliness? *shrugs* It is, imo, one of the weaker elements of his world. That said, I appreciate that he's got his plate full and he can't devote the same amount of attention and detail to every aspect of the story.

[ingsve]

I think that peoples reaction after only seeing one episode is perfectly understandable especially since it's such a common trope. I would still agree though that on a grander scale I don't see the problem to be really there.

The dothraki are initially seen as savages but in the books most of the dothraki are generally good guys unless you view the whole Dany storyline as an evil conspiracy against the ruling Lannisters.

Overall there is no distinctive line to be drawn where you can say that white people are civilized and colored people savages. There are white people that are just as savage and colored people like the dornish and the summer islanders that are certainly civilized. There is a greyscale in all of it which is typical for all of Martins writing.

[Kalbear]

I hope I'm misreading you here. Do you mean to say that depicting any dark-skinned, primitive, and warlike group in fantasy should be verboten on the grounds of racism? Or merely that there's something specifically racist about this imaginary group of aboriginals?

I don't think you're misreading. That is, I believe, exactly his argument.

EDIT: Or rather, that depicting them in any way other than as completely sympathetic, "civilized", and modernistic is racist.

No, that's complete bullshit. Why not just ask me?

I'm saying that just because you show some white skinned people acting like savages does not excuse you from doing the same thing with dark-skinned ones. The two are not the same, and balancing the two doesn't work that way. As an analogy, showing men doing horrible things is not a foil for showing women doing horrible things if those things are part and parcel of the women's stereotypes.

I do think that if you're going to show a dark-skinned, primitive, warlike group in fantasy there should be a fairly good reason for it, and it's probably a good thing to also give said group some actual well-written characters with agency who aren't all oooga oooga everywhere. Because if you're not doing that - if you're just having some random dark-skinned warlike primitive tribe, it begs the question - why are they dark-skinned? Why does that matter in the least? If they're going to be The Enemy and not have any character, what does it matter what they look like?

I do think that GRRM did okay sometimes with Dothraki here; it makes sense that a group of people that travel under the plains is going to have eventual darker skin, and I know he modeled it after native americans and mongols. At the same time, I do wonder if there's a reason for them being like that and if it would have mattered that much if they were basically caucasians. Or if Westeros (particularly those from the Andal groups) were Asiatic mostly. As I stated elsewhere, if you reference too much in historical fiction you run the risk of having to deal with these issues in some way, and sometimes that is going to be offensive - especially if you don't really give anything else to temper it with. This is especially true when you're making up an entire world from scratch and can literally write the rules and the history to whatever you choose. Doesn't it strike you as a smidgen, just a tad, odd to you that the major dark-skinned folks we meet in the first book are primitive savages? Or that everyone in Westeros - a continent that has been invaded multiple times - is all light-skinned (aside from Dorne, which we don't see)?

[Kalbear]

How many people exactly expressed this "concern" on twitter? Two? Three? Maybe five?

Time Magazine's review mentioned it, so it's not a minor theme.

The eastern-continent scenes, however, suffer from a kitschy orientalism. The Dothraki are painted savages whose furnishings look as if they've plundered a Pier 1 Imports, and the dialogue here is especially stilted. (There is also one too many uses of the "have some guy explain the backstory while nailing a whore" device.)

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2065251,00.html#ixzz1K76mDvrB

[Kat]

Then again, I do find Martin's treatment of the Dothraki over all rather shallow. A tender-hearted savage full of manly man manliness? *shrugs* It is, imo, one of the weaker elements of his world. That said, I appreciate that he's got his plate full and he can't devote the same amount of attention and detail to every aspect of the story.

Yeah, this is my main criticism of the books. Drogo is the only Dothraki character who seems to have any personality. In her chapters, Dany interacts with Ser Jorah and Viserys a lot-- which I can't really blame her for, given how she's still learning the Dothraki language. However, her handmaidens are never really fleshed out anywhere close to the level that minor characters in other people's plots are, even though Irri and Jhiqui end up as pretty important people in her life once Drogo's dead, along with her new bloodriders. It basically seems like after Drogo's dead and she rises to power, almost everyone she interacts with, except for Jorah, is a caricature more than a character, which makes the orientalism seem a bit more prevalent. Part of it is that compared to other characters, she travels from place to place more quickly, but overall I hope they flesh out some of the people in her storyline with a bit more personality so it's not just the Dany Kicks Ass show. For instance, Arya is also a traveling character over the same books as Dany, and yet the people who she interacts with: Yoren, Hot Pie, Gendry, Lommy, the Mountain's men-- they are all memorable, in that you can assign a personality to a bunch of them. The same isn't really the case for the people in Dany's life, but there's a change for the TV show to fill some of that in, I think, which at least for me would be an improvement in her storyline.

[TerraPrime]

in the books most of the dothraki are generally good guys

I'd disagree. The Dothraki are quite irredeemably savage, brutal, and sexist. What rescues the series from falling into the racial stereotype trap is that the mountain tribes and the wildlings are equally brutal and savage. I certainly wouldn't call the Dothraki "good" in any meaningful way. YMMV.

[AquariumDrinker]

The dothraki are initially seen as savages but in the books most of the dothraki are generally good guys unless you view the whole Dany storyline as an evil conspiracy against the ruling Lannisters.

The series appears to have a theme of challenging the viewers initial expectations. The problem with that is that the initial impressions have to be presented the way that they were.

[Kat]

How many people exactly expressed this "concern" on twitter? Two? Three? Maybe five?

Is making a fuss in answering those (probably simpletons or trolls) really necessary?

Why is it that mere accusations of racism suddenly gets everyone on a frantic defensive, even when thee is no issue or need in reality?

I haven't actually seen any of the Twitter messages, but if you would like to interact with a human being, rather than a straw man "simpleton", I'm here. So are some others in the thread.

Believe it or not, it's possible to criticize a show including its portrayals of race without panning the whole thing as offensive and not worthwhile. It's also possible to address those criticisms without going on a frantic defensive....like you did just now, by calling them simpletons and/or trolls. Glass house, stones, and all that. ;)

[Xenophon]

...the Dothraki wedding, on the show, seemed to me to be one of the more....um....blog-post inspiring portrayals of another culture as shown on TV. Fighting for fun, public dancing/sex where the actual consensuality on the part of the women was unclear. A basket of snakes as a wedding gift- how exotically pointless can you get? Even the casting of the Dothraki themselves-- as several people have pointed out elsewhere, is this a deliberate choice on the part of the producers to portray the Dothraki as a culture that will absorb and assimilate other tribes that in conquers, or can it be read as casting as "well, all these non-white people look alike, so let's just put them all in one tribe together"? I'm leaning toward the former, but I can see how someone new to the show might read the latter.

...

I can certainly see how someone new to the books and show, upon watching that episode, could think, "Shit, not another racist portrayal of a barbarian culture in fantasy." I've frequently found myself thinking that when reading certain fantasy books. Dany's plotline walks a fine line, in the books, of being a bit too much like Dances With Wolves, Avatar, or other movies where an outsider becomes accepted into a tribe. I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for, at the very least, rolling their eyes over this first episode, and of course we have no idea how subtly the producers will convey some of the themes from the books.

Yeah, and the costumes hardly helped. For the most part the show has "realistic" costumes and props. The you have the Dothraki who look straight out of cheesy B-movie, with their stereotypical noble-savage outfits and different-for-the-sake-of-being-different weapons.

I'm hoping that things will improve as we get to see more of their culture. And mercifully Viserys is there to keep it from being all mighty whitey teaching the proud warrior race guy how to love.

[Kalbear]

The same isn't really the case for the people in Dany's life, but there's a change for the TV show to fill some of that in, I think, which at least for me would be an improvement in her storyline.

I think even worse than that, the ones that do get a personality are largely Westerosian. We remember Jorah, of course, but we also get a lot of Selmy. Strong Belwas, Irri, Jhiqui, Doreah, her bloodriders are essentially indistinguishable and often are so caricaturish it's played as a joke (Belwas is a good example). If anything that makes it worse; the only 'real' people are Westerosians.

This is a bit better later on in ACOK with the merchants and ASOS with some of the mercenary captains she meets (and the slave she frees), but not hugely.

[Balefont]

That is true, except for the TV show, so far, it is the entire series. Therefore, I think *some* of the criticisms aimed at the episode is valid, in this context. Mostly, I think we need to acknowledge that many non-book viewers, particular those from the U.S., are already sensitized to this type of racialized portrayal. Without the benefit of a hundred or so pages of text, it is easy to see how they might perceive the Dothraki as another example of blacksploitation/orientalism. We hope that if they stay to watch more of the series, they may change their view.

Then again, I do find Martin's treatment of the Dothraki over all rather shallow. A tender-hearted savage full of manly man manliness? *shrugs* It is, imo, one of the weaker elements of his world. That said, I appreciate that he's got his plate full and he can't devote the same amount of attention and detail to every aspect of the story.

All great points, Terra. If we are forced to stick with this one first episode, then yes, I guess we can draw a possible correlation. I just think it's a bit unfair given that that's where the story happens to start.