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

[Valmy]

Yeah, he's half-Hawaiian , half-white, if we want to get specific, I think. Which I guess explains Valmy's perception of him.

I think it is the facial features of the Dothraki that make me think so.

[Valmy]

This is not about an issue of racism towards any particular culture; it's more the issue of racism towards indigenous horse cultures as a whole, I believe.

Heh by their very nature horse cultures were not very indigenous. The historical record is fascinating how a group will be written about raiding the Chinese and then sometime later the same group will suddenly appear raiding the Romans or the Persians.

[BladeDancer]

Obviously ASOIAF is racist. The villains of the piece is a race of people called the White Walkers. We never see any White Walkers do anything good, the closest we get is when they spare Craster in exchange for his sacrificing baby boys to them. The White Walkers are opposed by those heroes on the Wall, who all have to take the Black and be honourable and stick to their word to serve until death. Unless we see some good White Walkers, perhaps a simple farmer, who is press ganged into service by the forces of the Great Other and forced to evict Wildlings who fail to pay their rent to their Other Landlords, then it will be obvious the story is completely racist against Whites who undertake walking during coldsnaps. :bs:

As a a cross country skiier with pale skin, I feel deeply offended by the story. I feel that readers of the story are looking at me and expecting me to try and steal their babies and create wights out of their beloved pets. Already my Goth neighbour, Brandon who has HBO, has started building up walls off ice on top of the fence dividing our property, I now am feeling increasing ostracized. Whenever I try and speak to Bran about this growing obstruction, he simply states he is watching me from the walls and that not even Stan and Mel (our other neighbours) will deter him. Whenever I complain that the increasing height of this snow barricade is lowering the temperature in my property, Brandon simply mutters that I have an icy personality, and that Autumn will not last forever. So one side, I have Brandon, who is building up a barricade of snow along the fence and on the other side, I have Stan and Mel who have taken to having bonfires at night and refuse to invite me because they are from the Welsh town of Rhyl and they tell me that apparently this means they don't like others, or something. I suspect Bran's relative Ben and his damned wolf hounds keep trespassing on my back garden when I am not looking, he always makes derogative gestures at me, and mutters about sorting me out with his Fist or something. My other neighbours, Mance Wildling, say they have had enough of me and are planning to move South as soon as can be arranged. Anywhere South will do apparently, which is hurtful. I have spoken to Sissy Lancaster, the town Governor but she says that she does not care about the Wildlings and there is no problem with any Wall and she is more concerned with her own impending trial. I am feeling increasingly angry at my neighbours and their treatment of me. I am not being treated as member of this neighbourhood simply because of my appearance and hobby. I am bring shunned and treated as an Other. I blame Martin's racist story on all this. I feel like I will snap soon, if things don't improve when Winter arrives, I may do something regrettable...

:angry2:

[Tywin's bastard]

Put it another way: let's say that someone wrote a book where black people were all slaves, white people were all masters. And it had been that way for generations. And in that book, everyone was totally cool with that notion. Everyone - the slaves, the masters - were completely at ease with it. It's a fictional book set in a non-earth world too, in case you were wondering. The black people had always been slaves of the white people and they were bred for that, even.

Would that be a racist book? Would it be okay if all the black people were totally fine with being slaves, or the white people were totally fine with owning them? In this, the setting dictates that the white people BE okay with owning slaves and the black people BE okay being slaves, but the thing is that's entirely in the control of the author.

It could be, although it still lies with the intent it was written and the messages it sends. The book would be exactly the same on the idea level if the roles were reversed though. This way just makes it touch on some actual wounds that are still not fully healed but it doesn't actually make it more racist. One of my points is that not acknowledging that is helping to strengthen the roots of racism in our society in it's own way.

Similarly with the notion that the Dothraki have to be fucking bastards because they're a warrior culture - bullshit. This isn't a historical treatise on the Mongol horde; these are Dothraki. Why not make them have a very, very deep taboo against rape? Why not have them be specifically concerned about only killing armed fighters and never killing innocents? Warrior cultures in our world have had such tenets too - but even if they hadn't why couldn't they?

They don't have to and as said, I don't think they are. They certainly have some bad traits, just as many others do, but the only notion of racism here lies in that some choose to be offended.

I can draw a comparison to another kind of offensive language. If someone were to call my mother a whore I can be offended because of the fact that this person obviously wants to disrespect me but as for caring about the actual words, my mother isn't a whore so why would I care if someone says something that's untrue? It could instead be a friend that by some jest calls my mother a whore and since it's a joke I won't take any offense at all because the words are just as empty as before and there's no intent to offend me. Intent is in my opinion by far the most important thing when you choose to be offended. To be offended by something someone says with no intent to offend is intolerant in it's own way.

When the Norse are enslaved, when the Swedes have had attempted genocide against them, when the Danes are regular victims of hate crimes - then I'll care a bit more. But it's a point - GRRM is horribly stereotypical against the vikings too. The thing is that for the most part, people don't go to their school and get beaten up because they're Danish, or people haven't been able to order food at a restaurant because they're Swedish. So yes, it's a stereotype and it's racism, but it's really not nearly the issue the other is.

My point is that racism will always be here if we keep reinforcing that the races are different. Saying that it's worse to be racist towards a black man than to a white man means that you are saying that we are different, which is exactly what racism is. It's also worth remembering that there are lots of countries where Caucasians are a minority. My opinion is that it's as bad no matter who it happens against because it all feeds racist ideas and make them stronger. The definition of racism doesn't change depending on who you direct it towards.

[Knight Of The North]

Heh by their very nature horse cultures were not very indigenous. The historical record is fascinating how a group will be written about raiding the Chinese and then sometime later the same group will suddenly appear raiding the Romans or the Persians.

True, but most can be stated to have originated from a certain areas. I believe you are, in part, refering to the Hunnic Tribes, who were most likely descended from ROUGHLY the same genetic line as Tartars and Siberian Russians. Your point is valid, but the vast majority remained in reasonably non-continent spanning areas for most of their history. See Turcopoles, Native Americans, Scythians, and certain Alemanni Tribes.

A valid point, nonetheless, but I feel my original view is still true.

[Kat]

Kalbear, I agree entirely.

Kat, maybe we're talking at cross purposes here. When The Bare Hand said Westeros = Civilization, I didn't take that to mean quality of life in the sense of better technology or perfect justice, but rather things like how slavery is banned in Westeros and marriages are monogamous. GRRM certainly subverts many fantasy cliches about what a feudal world should look like, but IMO, he still starts building his world from pretty generic stereotypes about the Orient/Occident, where the east is luxurious and decadent, while the west is rough but free.

So, I can see how someone would say Westeros is presented as more civilized, in a certain sense than the rest of world. It's a slightly odd meaning of civilized, but it's one that I think people use in RL. You don't have to be a clueless as Sansa to find a culture that values freedom and chivalry (even if it almost never lives up to those ideals) more civilized than one that is built on endemic slavery and seems to have very little concern for justice.

Then maybe we shouldn't use the word civilized here? In the definition of having an advanced or humane culture....it doesn't seem like there's any teeth in the chivalric codes (that only knights seem to be bound to, anyway). There's still infanticide, women have virtually no rights, and the amount of justice you're likely to receive from on high is pretty low. Did you read The Sworn Sword? A somewhat minor dispute over use of resources leads to everyone getting armed up and ready for a fight.

I have said in nearly every post that I've written that the cultures of Essos are rife with stereotypes and I don't think they were at all handled well. Kalbear's description of Dany's travels being like an after-school special (Daenerys Targaryen Presents: Slavery is Bad!) is spot on. I'm not sure there's a way for an American author, in particular, to write a narrative with fantasy cultures where if one of them is in the business of slavery, it won't lead to some heavy-handed condemnation of the entire concept by someone or another, and certainly the slave-owners are never going to come off looking good. As soon as Dany started traveling through those cities in the books, I winced, because I've read that book before, a few times, by various authors. Like Kal said, I think it's possible for the portrayal of the eastern cities and cultures to be racist and chock full of stereotypes, while at the same time all the cultures in the world look pretty unpleasant. I just don't think that it's a reasonable argument to make that GRRM wrote his non-7K cultures as a contrast in level of civilization to what's going on in Westeros. On the contrary; I think he wrote them (including stereotypes) to be a comparison that would, in fact, make the culture of Westeros come off looking pretty terrible. It doesn't always work, though, but the intention is clearly there. This is a far cry from Tolkien's swarthy Easterling hordes in terms of cultural comparisons.

[Kat]

My point is that racism will always be here if we keep reinforcing that the races are different. Saying that it's worse to be racist towards a black man than to a white man means that you are saying that we are different, which is exactly what racism is. It's also worth remembering that there are lots of countries where Caucasians are a minority. My opinion is that it's as bad no matter who it happens against because it all feeds racist ideas and make them stronger. The definition of racism doesn't change depending on who you direct it towards.

And not talking about race does.....what, exactly? In general, unless you think the world's status quo is perfect equality already, simply ignoring it on the pretense of colorblindness accomplishes nothing at all other than making sure that the status quo is maintained. To avoid derailing this thread with racism 101 stuff, I suggest you Google 'colorblind racism' (ETA: here's a good article to start with) and read some of the first articles that pop up. If you want to have a discussion on racism & discourse in general, start a thread in General Chatter on it.

[Xenophon]

Then maybe we shouldn't use the word civilized here? ...

I just don't think that it's a reasonable argument to make that GRRM wrote his non-7K cultures as a contrast in level of civilization to what's going on in Westeros. On the contrary; I think he wrote them (including stereotypes) to be a comparison that would, in fact, make the culture of Westeros come off looking pretty terrible. It doesn't always work, though, but the intention is clearly there. This is a far cry from Tolkien's swarthy Easterling hordes in terms of cultural comparisons.

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree that civilization isn't a very helpful term to describe the differences between cultures in the world of ASOIF. Even the wildlings are civilized in the sense that they have some sort of culture and society beyond mere family groups, and none of the more "advanced" cultures are so different from the others as to be obviously more civilized.

Like you, I think GRRM intended to use Essos as a mirror that would help reflect the barbarity of Westeros (Drogo's wedding vs. tournaments, etc.). But I also can see where The Bare Hand is coming from. It's really just another form of the problem that we never see much of the good side of Essos, whereas in Westeros we get both good and bad. In Westeros, we know that the nobility are jerks most of the time, but we also know that they at least pay lip service to chivalric ideals, and actually do respect women and the poor enough to ban slavery and polygamy in practice. Also, we see they have institutions of higher learning a code of law/right of trial, which however crazy, at least means that the king is not a complete autocrat. Against that, we see that the societies in Essos seem much richer, a bit more technologically advanced, and better-versed in magic. It's not completely one-sided, but I can see how someone would say that Westeros looks better in comparison. Those slaver cities have absolutely no redeeming features, whereas even the wildlings and ironborn have some decent qualities.

[Kat]

Like you, I think GRRM intended to use Essos as a mirror that would help reflect the barbarity of Westeros (Drogo's wedding vs. tournaments, etc.). But I also can see where The Bare Hand is coming from. It's really just another form of the problem that we never see much of the good side of Essos, whereas in Westeros we get both good and bad. In Westeros, we know that the nobility are jerks most of the time, but we also know that they at least pay lip service to chivalric ideals, and actually do respect women and the poor enough to ban slavery and polygamy in practice. Also, we see they have institutions of higher learning a code of law/right of trial, which however crazy, at least means that the king is not a complete autocrat. Against that, we see that the societies in Essos seem much richer, a bit more technologically advanced, and better-versed in magic. It's not completely one-sided, but I can see how someone would say that Westeros looks better in comparison. Those slaver cities have absolutely no redeeming features, whereas even the wildlings and ironborn have some decent qualities.

Yeah, I agree. I think a lot of it has to do with how little we see most of the non-7K cultures. It's basically been Dany making a brief stop somewhere, dealing with the locals, who don't come off looking well: even in the non-slave cities she visits, such as Qarth, everyone's pretty much out to get her. On the one hand, you can see why they want what she has, because who doesn't want the equivalent of intelligent guided missiles in a world where everyone else is relying on swords and spears? On the other hand, Dany is written in a way such that she's almost untouchable as a character, so rather than in the 7K, where it's often not really clear who is in the "right" in a conflict, there's pretty much only one way that a conflict with Dany can turn out. She's going to win. The disposable, scheming villain will not. When you set up your narrative like that (with a main character exiled to another continent rather than the one where most of the action takes place), it's really easy for stereotypes to occur. GRRM obviously wanted to write his story based off the Wars of the Roses in a medieval European world. There's nothing wrong with that, per say, except that when he focused all his worldbuilding on that rather than the overseas action, it ended up being pretty bad. You can compare this to some other epic fantasy worlds where the author, from the get-go, designed action based around more than one culture, and while the results vary, they tend not to have as much of a "primary action here, completely secondary action over there" feel to them compared to the one-culture-centric narratives. The unfortunate side effect of writing supporting cultures, where one of your main characters is just going to have adventures and bide their time until they can really jump into the action is that it really does make the story All About Whitey, sort of like any story where, say, an American goes overseas and through experiencing another culture, learns Important Lessons about themself. It's like, man, all those other countries in the world must just exist as a mirror so that we Americans can learn some delightful lessons such as Be Grateful For What You Have, Because Someone Else is Oppressed and Starving.

Really, though, there's still a problem of romanticizing a culture which pretty much sucks, other than being the central culture of this grand story that GRRM is telling. No one would LARP or cosplay modern Afghanistan, but that's actually a better situation than Westeros is in, what with its laws and codes that no one really pays attention to or spottily enforces, ineffective and unstable central government, short life expectancy, extreme patriarchy, regional wars, poorly distributed wealth and resources, etc. For 7000 years. Expectations and assumptions are absurd.

[Eponine]

A while back, someone commented that the Dothraki riders have much less personality and are much less memorable than the equivalently minor Northmen. I wondered if that were true or if it might have as much to do with reader bias, so I searched for all the places that specific Dothraki are mentioned (mainly Jhogo, Arro, Cohollo and Rakharo) and they really are a pretty dull bunch. Jhogo has the whip, but until Drogo's bloodriders leave Dany, they only react to things that the main characters do and tell them to do. Also, it's not explained that Jhogo, Arro and Rakharo have any special significance to Dany until almost the end of the book. They aren't introduced in any special way. Jhogo's appearance is mentioned once about 3/4 of the way through the book. By contrast, Bran gives a very specific account of every Northern bannerman, what their house banner looks like, what kind of personality several of them have, and their personal appearance.

[L’Age d’or]

Yeah, I agree. I think a lot of it has to do with how little we see most of the non-7K cultures. It's basically been Dany making a brief stop somewhere, dealing with the locals, who don't come off looking well: even in the non-slave cities she visits, such as Qarth, everyone's pretty much out to get her. On the one hand, you can see why they want what she has, because who doesn't want the equivalent of intelligent guided missiles in a world where everyone else is relying on swords and spears? On the other hand, Dany is written in a way such that she's almost untouchable as a character, so rather than in the 7K, where it's often not really clear who is in the "right" in a conflict, there's pretty much only one way that a conflict with Dany can turn out. She's going to win. The disposable, scheming villain will not. When you set up your narrative like that (with a main character exiled to another continent rather than the one where most of the action takes place), it's really easy for stereotypes to occur. GRRM obviously wanted to write his story based off the Wars of the Roses in a medieval European world. There's nothing wrong with that, per say, except that when he focused all his worldbuilding on that rather than the overseas action, it ended up being pretty bad. You can compare this to some other epic fantasy worlds where the author, from the get-go, designed action based around more than one culture, and while the results vary, they tend not to have as much of a "primary action here, completely secondary action over there" feel to them compared to the one-culture-centric narratives. The unfortunate side effect of writing supporting cultures, where one of your main characters is just going to have adventures and bide their time until they can really jump into the action is that it really does make the story All About Whitey, sort of like any story where, say, an American goes overseas and through experiencing another culture, learns Important Lessons about themself. It's like, man, all those other countries in the world must just exist as a mirror so that we Americans can learn some delightful lessons such as Be Grateful For What You Have, Because Someone Else is Oppressed and Starving.

Really, though, there's still a problem of romanticizing a culture which pretty much sucks, other than being the central culture of this grand story that GRRM is telling. No one would LARP or cosplay modern Afghanistan, but that's actually a better situation than Westeros is in, what with its laws and codes that no one really pays attention to or spottily enforces, ineffective and unstable central government, short life expectancy, extreme patriarchy, regional wars, poorly distributed wealth and resources, etc. For 7000 years. Expectations and assumptions are absurd.

I just want to make myself clear here, I never claimed GRRM did it intentionally and I understand that as an American writer its natural if he unintentionally includes racial stereotypes or 'Others' his Essos characters.

I will not prolong this discussion, since some of the reactions to my posts are pretty ignorant and for me to address them would just make it worse. Its a pity though, it could make up for a good discussion.

[Kat]

I just want to make myself clear here, I never claimed GRRM did it intentionally and I understand that as an American writer its natural if he unintentionally includes racial stereotypes or 'Others' his Essos characters.

I will not prolong this discussion, since some of the reactions to my posts are pretty ignorant and for me to address them would just make it worse. Its a pity though, it could make up for a good discussion.

I never said you claimed that. I think we're actually mostly in agreement. :dunno: Except on the bit about 'civilized' cultures of GRRMworld. But I'd urge you to reconsider bowing out of this thread; I think you bring a valuable perspective to it lest it devolve too much into a bunch of Americans talking to each other, and so forth.

[Ran]

What's weird is that the Qartheen are white (very white, even), and the Lyseni are fair-haired with blue eyes, and the Valyrians were obviously pale, and so on.

It's kind of sending mixed messages on GRRM's part, when depicting the decadent east, that it's not just brown and yellow and red skinned people doing all this crazy stuff. He needs to get that sorted out to remain consistent.

ETA: In all seriousness, it's just ... "All about Whitey" is just mixing up things that shouldn't be mixed. It's not a matter of skin color. It may be a matter of culture, but "Occidental" culture is not exclusively "White" culture.

[TrueMetis]

Isn't the normal stereotype that feudal Europe = less technologically advanced than the East?

Generally yes, whether that is a true stereotype of not is debatable. I would argue that it was definitely less advanced than say China or the Islamic Empire at the same time, but it was not the total blackhole of intellect that some people think it was.

In the TV show the dothraki language strongly resembles Arabic which makes it all the worse.

The Dothraki language is based on Russian, Turkish, Estonian, Inuktitut and Swahili.

[Kalbear]

What's weird is that the Qartheen are white (very white, even), and the Lyseni are fair-haired with blue eyes, and the Valyrians were obviously pale, and so on.

It's kind of sending mixed messages on GRRM's part, when depicting the decadent east, that it's not just brown and yellow and red skinned people doing all this crazy stuff. He needs to get that sorted out to remain consistent.

We barely have mention of these cultures and barely see them in the book. We've seen two Qartheen so far (one wears a mask), a couple Lyseni and then the Valyrians - who are the super advanced race that's supposed to represent the Greco-Roman culture of the world.

You're right that it's not cut and dried, but again, it's not a matter of balance. Even if the rest of the world were all polynesian-looking save the Dothraki - Westeros, Essos, what have you - the Dothraki would still be a bad stereotype.

[Ran]

We barely have mention of these cultures and barely see them in the book. We've seen two Qartheen so far (one wears a mask)

That's Asshai you're thinking of (and the masked woman is Ashara Dayne. It is known). Qartheen are the characters who almost entirely populate Dany's story in ACoK -- Xaro Xhoan Daxos, Pyat Pree, the Pureborn, the Sorrowful Men...

The first person to ever try to murder Dany in AGoT? A blond, blue-eyed Lyseni.

Who sells Dany to Drogo? Her pale-haired, fair-skinned brother, aided by a white, blond Pentoshi.

George has more issues with blond people than he does with dark-skinned people, by the evidence...

In any case, specifically responding to Kat's "All about Whitey", as I hoped the edit would make plain. It's too imprecise to be useful. Occidental vs. Oriental, fine, but it's clear that it's not as easy as "white=normal, dark=exotic".

[Xenophon]

A while back, someone commented that the Dothraki riders have much less personality and are much less memorable than the equivalently minor Northmen. I wondered if that were true or if it might have as much to do with reader bias, so I searched for all the places that specific Dothraki are mentioned (mainly Jhogo, Arro, Cohollo and Rakharo) and they really are a pretty dull bunch. Jhogo has the whip, but until Drogo's bloodriders leave Dany, they only react to things that the main characters do and tell them to do. Also, it's not explained that Jhogo, Arro and Rakharo have any special significance to Dany until almost the end of the book. They aren't introduced in any special way. Jhogo's appearance is mentioned once about 3/4 of the way through the book. By contrast, Bran gives a very specific account of every Northern bannerman, what their house banner looks like, what kind of personality several of them have, and their personal appearance.

At least in this regard the show is an improvement over the book. I mean, we now know more about Rakhal(?) and Sex-slave (Doreah?)'s backgrounds than we do about Sideburns-beard.

[Kat]

In any case, specifically responding to Kat's "All about Whitey", as I hoped the edit would make plain. It's too imprecise to be useful. Occidental vs. Oriental, fine, but it's clear that it's not as easy as "white=normal, dark=exotic".

Well, I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek with that generalization, to be clear. If I could go back and change the title of this thread, I'd make it more clear that this seems to be slightly more about culture than race. It'll be interesting to see how they cast the Qartheen and some of those other cultures, anyway.

[FantasyFan]

When I first read the "show is racist" claim, I was a bit stunned.

And then, I understood. The villain is the evil blond prince. The "black" guy is his thuggish side-kick. He is shown to be evil by raping the beautiful blond princess. Of course, what will happen is one of those nice white guys, maybe Robb or Jon, will rescue her.

There were even some who worried about how the evil blond prince was returning to power on the backs of slaves--you know, those savage colored people. Is everything about race relations in America? (If the actor playing Drogo claimed he was African-american, and no one checked is actual family background, he wouldn't get too much--you don't really look black. Because of U.S. history, many mixed-race people count as African american.)

It has been years since I first read the books, and I don't think it ever crossed my mind that what I saw as pseudo-Mongols, and then, rather proto-pseudo-Mongols, were bad because of Drogo's arranged marriage with Dany.

Now, at episode 4 of the show, it is pretty clear that the evil blond prince is a marginal character and the blond princess isn't interested in being rescued, but rather accepting the role of queen and mother of Drogo's heir.

Readers of the series, however, have known all along that Drogo is also a marginal character. He is not the villain's thuggish side kick, he is not the villain who will oppose Stark-family heroes. No, he is going to be dead soon.

At this point of the TV show, there is a hint that Dany will be the mother of a pseudo-Ghengis Khan. Readers (at least me) surely had this impression after we learned that Dany's child will be the Stallion that Mounts the World. Come on... Dany's son will unite the Dothraki and intead of wandering around and looting, they will take possession. Like the Mongols going from warring tribes that sure enough terrorized the surrounding civilizations to conquerors who come to rule China, central asia, and Russia.

But.... we readers know..

That won't happen either. Drogo dies. Dany's unborn baby would mean nothing to the Dorthraki, but he dies too. And sure, Dany has a handful of Dorthraki followers, including some guards and maids who have names, but this story is not about the Dothraki, as either villains or heroes.

No Dorthraki are especially interesting? Well, I think GRRM could have done more with Dany's bloodriders or maids. Maybe he still will. But, they just aren't that important.

The villains are alien creatures north of the Wall, and Dany and her dragons are the heroes.

So, those watching the show who wear their racial resentments on their sleeves and assumed that the Dothraki were the dark villains should already feel a bit foolish.

Obviously, in this thread we have had some PC lit types who have read the books carefully, but want to return to academic discussions of whether the great books required at university in the sixties were too western-oriented. Well, English professors have to talk about something.

GRRM is providing gritty medieval realism. And he isn't portraying a pseudo-golden age of Islam, the Mogul empire of India, or the Kublai Khan's China. It is the middle ages of Europe, with all of its ugliness.

Complaints that 19th and 20th century Europeans and Americans discounted the cultural significance of Islam, India, or China apply poorly to a fantasy set in a period where everyone should know Europe was relatively backwards. Westeros is supposed to be the paragon of sophistication? The proto-pseudo-Mongols are the example that is supposed to show that the "rest of the world" is backwards?

Give me a break!

[Artanys]

What does bother me about HBO's take on the Dothraki is that their culture is purposely made to look primitive compared to how it was described in the books. Look at the crude and minimalistic costumes, some of the nonsense wedding gifts (snakes?)...it's almost as if depicting them realistically was a mere afterthought. Where are the beautifully painted vests, leather work, horsehair garments etc. ? This *not* some tribe out of 'Clan of The Cave Bear'! By contrast, look at how much time was obviously spent on the nice duds of the Westerosii. IRL a good many nomadic peoples have rather ornate garb and/or handicrafts. I would even expect Dothraki to make decorative bridles for their horses much like the folk of Turkmenistan etc. There is little mention of their stories, songs etc. when we know for a fact that a rich oral tradition is of extreme importance in such societies. When I pointed out that Dothraki music would probably sound like so I had one person claim that it wouldn't work in the TV adaptation because it would be too 'ethnic'. What exactly is that supposed to mean?

I would also argue that mid to high-ranking Dothraki should have a more uniform appearance, the child of a foreign slave would stand out to some extent. Rhaego would have been an exception as the son of a princess.