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

[guyminuslife]

Thanks! I looked for that feature shortly after I joined and couldn't find it. My mind must be turning to mush.

[Miang]

I think I always get confused by threads like this because when I read the books I just don't see it. I looked over GRRM's maps and concluded that if the Dothroki were light-skinned I would find it fairly absurd. Not because of the way they behave, but just because a light-skinned people would have serious problems (heat-stroke, skin cancer just to name a couple) in that environment.

Geography shapes cultures, living conditions and race. Is it really racist to place a dark-skinned nomadic people in an environment that could give rise to such a culture?

Another question I have to ask - does being sensitive to the history of racial oppression mean we ignore other parts of history? The Mongols existed. Ghengis Khan and Kubla Khan existed. Does racial sensitivity demand that we never incorporate elements of their history into our fiction?

I bring this point up because so much of Songs is analogous to world history. Westeros? Britain. The War of the Five Kings? The War of the Roses. The Iron Islands? The Vikings. Martin has an established pattern here so it seems to me that focusing on the Dothraki and gleaning some kind of racial undertone from it is a little strange.

[TrueMetis]

Calling the Dothraki stereotypes is ignoring a lot of history of groups that were very similar to how they acted. And the "dark skinned people are barbarians" thing isn't something I really put together, but that may be because I think of the Germanic Barbarians that Rome dealt with when I here the word. They're included in the groups that I think of when I hear the word savage to.

[Phostopheles]

Geography shapes cultures, living conditions and race. Is it really racist to place a dark-skinned nomadic people in an environment that could give rise to such a culture?

Another question I have to ask - does being sensitive to the history of racial oppression mean we ignore other parts of history? The Mongols existed. Ghengis Khan and Kubla Khan existed. Does racial sensitivity demand that we never incorporate elements of their history into our fiction?

This, and yes, I think that as long as Westeros displays all the horrors of European culture, it's completely fair to be just as honest in the depiction of Asian and African influenced parts of Essos (and maybe Sothoryos?).

The OP did remind me that Dany's story is dangerously close to the predictable Dances with Wolves/Fern Gully/Pocahontas/Avatar storyline. White guy stumbles upon "primitive" culture, eventually becomes assimilated and rises to eventually lead them within an unreasonably short time.

I really hope that the Dothraki eventually revolt against Dany. There are definitely seeds of dissent, and frankly even though by Westerosi laws it was her right to rule them, if any culture could dismiss that claim it would be the Dothraki. And I think they have a right to.

[AquariumDrinker]

I really hope that the Dothraki eventually revolt against Dany. There are definitely seeds of dissent, and frankly even though by Westerosi laws it was her right to rule them, if any culture could dismiss that claim it would be the Dothraki. And I think they have a right to.

They did, didnt they? When Drogo died, most of them left and she mostly just had the old men and women with her. She slowly built up when word of the dragons got out. The bulk of her forces are Unsullied and then the mercenaries that joined her, that is if I recall correctly.

[FilliamHMuffman]

The OP did remind me that Dany's story is dangerously close to the predictable Dances with Wolves/Fern Gully/Pocahontas/Avatar storyline. White guy stumbles upon "primitive" culture, eventually becomes assimilated and rises to eventually lead them within an unreasonably short time.

Out of the ~40,000 Dothraki in Khal Drogo's khalasar, only about a hundred, and mostly old, women, and children at that, choose to follow her. Hardly a meteoric rise to power.

[Phostopheles]

They did, didnt they? When Drogo died, most of them left and she mostly just had the old men and women with her. She slowly built up when word of the dragons got out. The bulk of her forces are Unsullied and then the mercenaries that joined her, that is if I recall correctly.

It's been a while since I read GoT...you're right. Then I'm fine with her character arc again. :P

[Dalan]

Since we are talking mainly about the HBO series...

Am I the crazy or am I the only one who noticed that there were causasion (albeit sun darkened) Dothraki? Not just one or two, but at least enough to have a fair representation among the score or so different Dothraki we saw? There were also Dothraki from a combination of other ethnic groups.

Though I guess it could it could be said that this was due to a shortage of ethnic extras, I would much rather give HBO the benefit of the doubt and agree with the poster who suggested that the Dothraki are a sample of several different cultures from Essos.

Or I'm crazy.

[CelticBrennus]

Whats wrong with depicting steppe nomads as brutally violent people who raped and slaughtered their way across every part of the world they could - because that is what the real steppe nomads did.

[Tempra]

Whats wrong with depicting steppe nomads as brutally violent people who raped and slaughtered their way across every part of the world they could - because that is what the real steppe nomads did.

Because it is in stark contrast to the pious, white knights of Westeros. Oh, wait, nevermind.

[Balefont]

Perhaps the reason why the Dothraki people seemed less "fleshed out" in the books vs. the rest of the seven kingdoms is that all we really have is Dany's perspective at this time. I think, if and when, we have more POVs with the Dothraki, we may get more details.

In addition, I perceive the Dothraki to be a people who truly "live in the moment" because of how brutal their culture is, the moment is really all a Dothraki has. That said, it's kinda a tall order to expect this culture to be as "fleshed out" as the cultures in Westeros who, on the flip side, live less in the moment and more for a moment in the future. That said, it makes sense, to me, that the Dothraki may appear more 2-dimensional becuase, in a sense, they are. They are nomadic tribe. They don't stay any one place for long.

[Balefont]

Yeah, the slaver cities are a bit silly. I got more about what Dorne is like and about how it feels from the first chapter in AFFC than I did from any of Dany's story about the slaver cities in all of ASOS.

Because Dany is an outsider looking in with respect to the slaver cities and we got to see Dorne through the eyes of Dornish.

Why should George invest as much time in the cities across the Narrow Sea when, while there is a bit of action over there, the whole point is to rule Westeros?

[subtle plague]

Perhaps the reason why the Dothraki people seemed less "fleshed out" in the books vs. the rest of the seven kingdoms is that all we really have is Dany's perspective at this time. I think, if and when, we have more POVs with the Dothraki, we may get more details.

This.

I generally got the idea that the east is exotic because the westerosi think of it as exotic and thus only report on the exotic themes they (the POVs) encounter. And to be honest why should they think about a farmer or smith or whatever tehy can recognize? Of course they report on fire mages climbing ladders of fire/air. And of course this may (must?) read slightly racist because the Westerosi (well except later über mother Dany) think of themselves as superior. And we see the world through westerosi eyes. That's why we do not understand the east as well. Becasue the characters do not eitehr. All these things like the decaying ancient city glory, savage hordes, slavery etc. make up the ciché of the eastern contitent. I always thought it was somewhat on purpose. It is supposed to be different. And yes, this unfleshedoutness has the consequence that i think: HUH? how does this strange pyramid slaver society work and has been working for 5000 years? I'm not such a big fan of dany's story arc either because of that. I can't relate to that particular slavery society stereotype, and others, or imagine how the eastern world works, but I don't think it was because of lack of imagination. Rather because we shall see it from a Westerosi perspective and it is supposed to make us (Dany and other Westerosi) feel alien in the east. Otherwise they might not want to rturn home. If the east felt like home too, they would have no reason to go back. it conveys the alienation of the westerosi charcters from their exile environment. And i think Martin is pretty good at that. (But as i stated above it has negative consequences). The skin colour is just another method of alienating the POV charaters further from the native inhabitants. They HAVE to be different because the POVs must not blend in and feel their difference every day. Yes the blonde princess and her savage savages may be a trope, but it has to be one because of the setting.

So i would say the westerosi are racist, not martin or the screen writers ;)

[WaitingforWylla]

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.

I think the main issues with the Dothraki as we've seen them so far are that

- We don't have access to Dany's internal monologue - in the books, it's clear that she knows she lacks information, so we are more inclined to withhold judgement until Dany (who acts as our 'eyes') knows more. By that time, it's clear just how 'savage' the families in Westeros itself are. On TV, we have our own 'eyes', and no real reason to distrust what we see, so we seem to be seeing the 'truth' about the Dothraki in their behavior at the wedding.

- Time constraints meant that some parts of the wedding scene were cut - some of these (such as the weapon-giving ceremony) were our first hints that the Dothraki have more going on than is readily apparent to Dany at the time.

- The implication that Dany would, in normal circumstances, have married Viserys was removed entirely. This is actually important, as the comparison between Viserys and Drogo clearly comes out to Drogo's benefit - in the books, it's clear that those are Dany's two possibilities.

- The racial diversity in the casting of the Dothraki - something that they probably did in an attempt to avoid the appearance of racism against central Asians - meant that some viewers who haven't read the books assumed that most of the crowd at the wedding were slaves of some sort, rather than that the producers have decided that the Dothraki are multiethnic.

(Weirdly, all the blue body paint at first made me think that they were trying to make some sort of allusion to the Picts - I guess I thought that they were trying to soften down the association with Asia even more. )

- The more sympathetic portrayal of the Lannisters (natural when you aren't seeing them from inside the Starks' heads) meant that the impression that there were savages on both sides of the narrow sea was lessened.

The wedding scene and the previews of the next episode seem to suggest that they are compensating for the above problems by:

- Moving Drogo's post-wedding behavior into the wedding scene itself, so that Dany's impression of him can start to improve more quickly after the wedding. (Note: no derail intended - if you want to argue about the wedding, there's a thread for that!) They seem to have telescoped the whole post-wedding development down, moving Dany's post wedding misery into the wedding and then moving the scene with Doreah (of course that's in! This is HBO!) right into episode 2.

- Speeding up Dany's language learning, so that we can see what Drogo is actually thinking and saying more quickly, as well.

- Perhaps breaking the link between Dothraki raiding and selling captives (since the multiethnic casting suggests that the TV Dothraki incorporate, rather than sell, at least some of their captives.)

[doz Aemon]

How are the pale wildlings less barbaric?

They might seem less so only because they speak the same language as Jon, but man.

Also, I don't consider Drogo unintelligent nor cruel, but they kinda f'ed his character up in episode 1.

I'd blame D&D for that, not Martin.

Not a fan of race changes - in either direction. The Last Airbender springs to mind.

[Mettle]

Wildlings = White

Mountain Clans = White

Brother/Sister sex = White

child killers = white

barbaric tribe = darker toned skin

uh oh, someone call Jessie Jackson

[Tywin's bastard]

People that get upset over that dark-skinned people are portrayed as barbaric, especially since they aren't singled out because there is Caucasian barbarians as well (very obviously indicating that skin color is a geographical matter), become as much of the racism problem as what they intend to criticize. Intolerance and over-sensitivity are both detrimental for the chances of us reaching a tolerant and equal society in my opinion.

When it comes to the Dothraki they will be portrayed in a better and better light as Dany starts understanding them. It's clearly the case of that the Dothraki being looked down upon by those that are narrow-minded and uneducated about them. We also encounter several dark-skinned people that are further ahead of Westeros in areas of culture or technology.

As for being cruel, they are but is there any place in the ASOAIF series where you don't find cruel people? The Dothraki never display anything so cruel as the Bolton's flaying their enemies alive, to name one example. The world Martin has created is cruel. Everywhere.

Also, I don't consider Drogo unintelligent nor cruel, but they kinda f'ed his character up in episode 1.

I'd blame D&D for that, not Martin.

Does that mean that you have forgotten that Drogo takes Dany each night so hard that she's constantly hurting, or that you only think that's less cruel than to complete the marriage ritual with someone that's crying but still accepted to marry (without consummation, there is no marriage)?

[Ser Warpechowski]

I have a lot of criticism for the first episode, but after reading a bit I got to the conclusion that its a PILOT, meaning the purpose of it is to sell the idea to HBO. I figure HBO big shots love nudity, gore and fan service, because that is what we got in the first episode: SHOCKING MATERIAL, including the Dothraki scenes.

I hope the remaining episodes focus more on the true material, and specially try to show the material as its meant to feel. THat is why Im postponing my criticism for later.

[TerraPrime]

Yes, the thread has (d)evolved the way that I thought it might.

Well done, folks, well done.

[Ser Greguh]

The Dothraki are not portrayed in a better and better light as the series progresses by any stretch of the imagination. Remember that in the followup of the Dothraki slaughter of the Lhazareen, Dany herself is appalled at the behavior and stops a great many rapes. The Dothraki remain the Dothraki as GRRM first characterizes them - VERY brutal and savage tribes of people - but our perspective as readers may be skewed because Drogo is our largest single link to the Dothraki, and he personally does change significantly as Dany wins him over.

I can't blame anyone for looking at the pilot and making the observation that the white people are generally civilized and the dark-skinned people are solely represented in this savage tribe. Hopefully over time the series will convince people with that impression that the show has more than enough savagery to go around no matter what the color of one's skin, and I think the most negative of the observations are the result of a rushed desire to include exposition rather than any actual racial malice.

Still, it's certainly not a good first impression in that regard.