Hlobane Orcs

[Penny-Whistle]

I see I have graduated to the Hlobane Orc category. Huzzah and haha. I do have a soft spot for orcs and really am relieved I am no longer a lousy elf. Lok'tar, y'all.

I had to look up the word Hlobane though. The Wikipedia description of the battle made an interesting read. But um. There is kind of a yuk factor in splicing a real life place with characters who are generally despised by most people. I really hope the Trolls aren't suggesting the Zulu people aren't equivalent to Tolkien-esque Orcs? Similarly, there were all kinds of bad associations created with Peter Jackson's films casting orcs as people of colour. Just saying the category might need some fine tuning. I assume it was an oversight and not intended to offend.

[mmbutter]

Welcome to the tribe.

[Penny-Whistle]

Welcome to the tribe.

=) We pretty much rock.

[Kayolan]

I think the Trolls saw a name that they thought sounded cool and decided to use it. This wouldn't be the first time a real Earth place name or character name was used with no connection to actual Earth history.

[Treebore]

Monsters and Treasures of Aihrde. They are a 2 HD variety of Orc, immune to poison, very militant, and are prized Mercenary companies. They also get a +1 to hit and damage. They are not your "standard" Orc by any means...

[maximus]

Let me just say that I have never met any of the trolls, but I find it impossible to believe they did anything other than create a fictional creature with an exotic name. I'm quite sure as saavy businessmen they realize the effects negative perception can have on their company and go to great lengths to ensure they operate with integrity. That being said, some people have a habit of seeing slights when there are none and are offended at every turn. Nothing you can do about that except stand behind your work. Can't please everyone. I never heard of Jackson's Orcs being compared to anything other than what was presented in the books. Was this a big thing when the movies came out? I thought his Orcs and Goblins were just plain terrible, along with most of the rest of his Middle Earth vision.

[Tadhg]

Let me just say that I have never met any of the trolls, but I find it impossible to believe they did anything other than create a fictional creature with an exotic name.

Hmm, "nothing is impossible"!

Except what you said! And so I agree!

I have met all of the Trolls and most of their wives and other family members and I'll agree that my take is as you've described and as others have mentioned above.

My impression is that they are lovers and students of history and as such, they found and used terms, words, lands, nations and descriptions of our real world and put those to use in the World of Erde (Aihrde). I do very much the same in my campaign world.

But, to Penny's point - I think it's an interesting post as I did not recall that bit of history and so I'm glad for the information!

[Tadhg]

Oh yeah, I meant to say that when I first read about Hlobane Orcs who are deep green ~ I found myself thinking of Barsoom!!

[Penny-Whistle]

Let me just say that I have never met any of the trolls, but I find it impossible to believe they did anything other than create a fictional creature with an exotic name. I'm quite sure as saavy businessmen they realize the effects negative perception can have on their company and go to great lengths to ensure they operate with integrity. That being said, some people have a habit of seeing slights when there are none and are offended at every turn. Nothing you can do about that except stand behind your work. Can't please everyone. I never heard of Jackson's Orcs being compared to anything other than what was presented in the books. Was this a big thing when the movies came out? I thought his Orcs and Goblins were just plain terrible, along with most of the rest of his Middle Earth vision.

As I said I doubt any offence was intended but that doesn't erase the yuk for me. Even nice people can step into a mess. Rather than just stand there it makes more sense to me to scrape it off than go about one's business as if nothing happened.

It is a mark of privilege to dismiss the possibility of offence or to diminish its importance. If it doesn't offend you personally that is nice but I think it is worth wondering if something like that might hurt someone's feelings and if so to fix it rather than just pretend it isn't there. That just seems like good manners to me. Drawing attention to these kinds of unintended slights is is one way to move forward. Yes, it usually feels uncomfortable to examine invisible privileges but imagine how much more uncomfortable it would be to live life from the other side. Where. for example, when you are offended people say your point of view is trivial and not even worth discussing.

There were loads of complaints about Peter Jackson's casting. I assume he didn't intend to be offensive but the fact remains that the good guys are all white guys. The bad guys: orcs, Easterlings and Haradrim all had visual signifiers reminiscent of African, Asian and the Middle East cultures.

[slimykuotoan]

Sorry, isn't Hlobane a location?

[maximus]

Let me just say that I have never met any of the trolls, but I find it impossible to believe they did anything other than create a fictional creature with an exotic name. I'm quite sure as saavy businessmen they realize the effects negative perception can have on their company and go to great lengths to ensure they operate with integrity. That being said, some people have a habit of seeing slights when there are none and are offended at every turn. Nothing you can do about that except stand behind your work. Can't please everyone. I never heard of Jackson's Orcs being compared to anything other than what was presented in the books. Was this a big thing when the movies came out? I thought his Orcs and Goblins were just plain terrible, along with most of the rest of his Middle Earth vision.

As I said I doubt any offence was intended but that doesn't erase the yuk for me. Even nice people can step into a mess. Rather than just stand there it makes more sense to me to scrape it off than go about one's business as if nothing happened.

It is a mark of privilege to dismiss the possibility of offence or to diminish its importance. If it doesn't offend you personally that is nice but I think it is worth wondering if something like that might hurt someone's feelings and if so to fix it rather than just pretend it isn't there. That just seems like good manners to me. Drawing attention to these kinds of unintended slights is is one way to move forward. Yes, it usually feels uncomfortable to examine invisible privileges but imagine how much more uncomfortable it would be to live life from the other side. Where. for example, when you are offended people say your point of view is trivial and not even worth discussing.

There were loads of complaints about Peter Jackson's casting. I assume he didn't intend to be offensive but the fact remains that the good guys are all white guys. The bad guys: orcs, Easterlings and Haradrim all had visual signifiers reminiscent of African, Asian and the Middle East cultures.

Penny, rather than further a most likely pointless and inappropriate political discussion, I'll just say I respect your opinion and leave it there.

From the LOTR books, I remember the Haradrim were portrayed as vaguely Middle Eastern and the Easterlings, while not described in depth, may be equated to the various nomadic steppe peoples. As far as the movies go, I don't recall any negative press, other than from Tolkien purists (like myself) who didn't like much of anything about them. Your comments are thought provocating though, and worth exploring. The Tolkien Gateway has an interesting article on the subject.

[mmbutter]

Sorry, isn't Hlobane a location?

In Aihrde, it's a forest north of the Kellerwald, near the Red Hills.

In our world, it's a mining town in South Africa.

[Treebore]

Sorry, isn't Hlobane a location?

Yeah, it is the site of a battle between the Zulu and Anglo armies. Plus, if the Hlobane are meant to model the Zulu warriors, I am pretty sure they would take it as a compliment, not an insult. Meaning, real, actual, Zulu of today. Not any pretenders living in America. The Zulu in Africa are still extremely proud of their warrior traditions and are still very militant in their over all behaviors.

Sorry, since we were looking at taking job offers in Africa, we've been reading up on all their current issues, etc... figuring out where we would be willing to live/work, and where we wouldn't.

[Lurker]

From the LOTR books, I remember the Haradrim were portrayed as vaguely Middle Eastern and the Easterlings, while not described in depth, may be equated to the various nomadic steppe peoples. As far as the movies go, I don't recall any negative press, other than from Tolkien purists (like myself) who didn't like much of anything about them. Your comments are thought provocating though, and worth exploring. The Tolkien Gateway has an interesting article on the subject.

Like you, I'm a Tolkien fan, as such I'd add that as you read the books looking for 'offensive sterotipes', you will see them with our modern politically correct eyes. These same stereotypes were not see or meant as offensive by the writer or his readers in their social era

He wrote as a WWI veteran and wrote a story to fill the void of 'Anglo-Saxon' mythic hero, and was a devout man of faith. Those to facts will inherently put the enemy - Orcs Haradrim and Easterlings - as non white, non Saxon, and barbaric - non Christian.

Does that mean he hated those people as a stereotype, no. you can see when Sam Frodo and the Rangers see the Elephants and ambush the ... I can't remember if they are Haradrim or Easterlings ... one of them feels sorry for them knowing that they are in the war because a leader and a whip has put them in that place, and they fight for a cause they may not even know is unjust.

Plus, he shows he does not think the Anglo/Christian heroes are perfect, they are easily corrupted by the ring.

With that, I say it is a good cautionary note to all of us modern readers to not paint what we read with our modern love of 'political correctness' and be quick to look for offense in what ever we read. If we do, we would have to throw out every work from every great author from every great era. One can find offense in anything if one reads it looking for offense and ignoring the social context of when it was written and the underlying aim of the work.

[Treebore]

From the LOTR books, I remember the Haradrim were portrayed as vaguely Middle Eastern and the Easterlings, while not described in depth, may be equated to the various nomadic steppe peoples. As far as the movies go, I don't recall any negative press, other than from Tolkien purists (like myself) who didn't like much of anything about them. Your comments are thought provocating though, and worth exploring. The Tolkien Gateway has an interesting article on the subject.

Like you, I'm a Tolkien fan, as such I'd add that as you read the books looking for 'offensive sterotipes', you will see them with our modern politically correct eyes. These same stereotypes were not see or meant as offensive by the writer or his readers in their social era

He wrote as a WWI veteran and wrote a story to fill the void of 'Anglo-Saxon' mythic hero, and was a devout man of faith. Those to facts will inherently put the enemy - Orcs Haradrim and Easterlings - as non white, non Saxon, and barbaric - non Christian.

Does that mean he hated those people as a stereotype, no. you can see when Sam Frodo and the Rangers see the Elephants and ambush the ... I can't remember if they are Haradrim or Easterlings ... one of them feels sorry for them knowing that they are in the war because a leader and a whip has put them in that place, and they fight for a cause they may not even know is unjust.

Plus, he shows he does not think the Anglo/Christian heroes are perfect, they are easily corrupted by the ring.

With that, I say it is a good cautionary note to all of us modern readers to not paint what we read with our modern love of 'political correctness' and be quick to look for offense in what ever we read. If we do, we would have to throw out every work from every great author from every great era. One can find offense in anything if one reads it looking for offense and ignoring the social context of when it was written and the underlying aim of the work.

Well, no one is saying to rewrite Tolkien. The point is simply that in todays world extra effort needs to be taken to be extra sure no one will be unintentionally offended. In this case, I am sure you can find someone claiming to be of Zulu ancestry who will CHOOSE to be offended, but looking at the Zulu of today living in Africa, I doubt they would be offended, since they are very proud of their militant/warrior history.

[Lurker]

First, let me apologize , I slipped into debate mode when the origin of the thread was congratulatory

PW, congrats on graduating from a lowly elf !

It might soud petty and childish, but I looked forward to each time I was close to gaining a new title (sadly I'm stuck on GLD for what seems to be an eternity )

Tree, I think we are agreeing, but I'm miss communicating or making my statements poorly.

I was arguing that we are too quick to find fault and take offence. Just like you point out, the true Zulu have a proud warrior heritage - I never got to go with my team to South Africa, but buddies of mine did and they got to train with SA Ranger & spec Ops guys and some of the 'native' groups too, so I've seen 'second hand' what they are and are like. With that, I can see a link between the real history of the name and the meaning behind it and what the Trolls used it for in their world. With that, I doubt any Zulu - if they bothered to find out about it - would be offended that they are represented in the Troll's world as a race that on a loosing battle stood firm and fought hard and remained in good order when all others fled.