|
Post by yargling on Feb 21, 2010 12:40:26 GMT 1
I've been thinking recently about the fan reactions to Ashley Williams and Pressly in ME 1.
Btw, there probably will be ME 1 spoilers, so if you've not played it yet, what the hell is wrong with you, that was 2 years ago and this is a forum for Mass Effect fanfic, so why you're here I don't know. ;D
Anywho, basically, Pressly in his opening lines says about how he doesn't like Turians, and Ashley makes comments about how she doesn't trust aliens.
I've seen alot of people complain about their xenophobia, and I've had cause to wonder; is that really justified?
Lets look at it from their PoV - humanity only discovered Aliens less than 30 years ago, and the first interaction between the 2 was Turian gun fire. Now, 30 years isn't a long time to go between being alone in the universe and being one of thousands of species. If it where to happen today, it would be the single biggest shift in humanities understanding of our place in the Universe - and whilst it wasn't as much of a shift to the people of the Alliance, it certainly was a huge change.
Now, looking to Pressly, we see an older man, a veteran who's spend a large part of his career patroling the borders of humanity, and took part in the fight back during the Skyllian Blitz. Its likely Pressly had never seen the Citadel before ME1, and its possible never encountered a no-hostile alien - Batarian slavers aren't known for their wild parties, after all.
As for Ashley, she never served in the FCW, and as far as we know, she didn't fight in the Skyllian Blitz. But she, moreso than Pressly, had likely never encountered aliens before ME 1. Also, she definitely had never been to the Citadel before ME 1.
So, does this explain comments like "I can't tell the Aliens from the animals"? Well, yes, it does - if you didn't know a Hanar could talk, would you assume it was an animal like the gas-bags on Eden Prime, or a person? And the Elcor in bad light could be mistaken for some sort of animal.
And on top of that, both of these characters are Alliance troops, first and foremost - and the Alliance's job is to protect humanity, not the galaxy. And given the nature of First Contact, the way the council doesn't help protect humanity's colonies dispite what they say about security, and so forth, is it really surprising they aren't so sure that alien species trustworthy? Especially given how sensitive the military tech on the Normandy was?
So, why do the fans jump to the conclusions of racist/xenophobia/speciesism?
Well, to be honest, we've NEVER encountered an actual alien, and yet we as sci-fi nerds tend towards xenophilia as a rule rather than xenophobia. To us, we see these creatures as just humans with different faces. In other words, we assume because these characters aren't automatically welcoming the aliens with open arms, they must see something wrong or hate the aliens.
So, what do people think? Does the sci-fi community tend to be unusually harash on characters that aren't as open minded or xenophilic as ourselves? Or are they really a bunch of racists/speciesists/xenophobes?
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Feb 21, 2010 15:42:53 GMT 1
I think sci-fi writers (I can't speak for audiences) do have a tendency to use varied sentient species as a metaphor for human races, particularly to allow them to discuss racial issues or predict their future. Certainly this is at play in Mass Effect. Star Trek was a very preachy show that made a great deal out of pushing racial equality - metaphorically with aliens and more directly, from Uhura, Sulu and Checkov and beyond. This seems like the best example of the SF trend of encouraging tolerance and anti-racism. It's a good thing, if heavy handed. A magnificent thing at the time the show first came out. Now I can't say that happens in all sci-fi... it's a trend. There are a million SF stories in which 'Aliens' are monsters intent on killing us all for some reason or another. This all stems from the 'things we cannot understand are scary and thus make good villains' theory. I don't think it's intentionally xenophobic. Just - monsters are scary, maybe there are monsters out there. 'Star Wars' is interesting, because in it, aliens are not monsters or inherantly villains, but they ARE inherantly ugly, untrustworthy or funny and are (with maybe three exceptions) not worthy of being main characters. "Threepio! You tell that slimy piece of worm-ridden filth he'll get no such pleasure from us!" "Somebody get this big walking carpet outta my way?" Han Solo and Princess Leia are racist, and C-3PO is basically their slave. Mass Effect has hanar and maybe elcor as inherantly silly or funny - and it has stereotype races (krogan are aggressive, salarians are nerdy) so it's somewhere mid-way between Wars and Trek. -- I've had the 'Is Ashley racist' argument so many times now xD Yes, a distrust of alien species (espescially after First Contact which was clearly all the turians' fault) is not only understandable but to be expected among all humans, except those who have an excellent knowledge of the other races. Like Shepard and Udina, I guess. I say she is racist / speciesist, but not much. She says, 'Can't tell the aliens from the animals' which is a fair point - and yargling you make a very very good point indeed about hanar and gas bags. I myself didn't know if keepers were supposed to be sentient or not. But she also says, 'gotta make nice with the bug-eyed monsters' and 'at least she LOOKS like a woman' - both of which are deliberately meant to offend - and maybe that first comment was too. No matter the technichal accuracy, Ashley is trying to insult people based on species. And I reckon she takes her distrust a little too far. She won't kiss a turian. That's not distrust. (Although, turians are not pretty.) Pressley does not trust or like people based solely on their species. Racism. Ba da bing. But with both characters (and all characters exhibiting racism or any racial views) in ME, it's not as simple as 'She hates aliens she is bad kill her' like you get in Star Trek, for example, and it's not 'He looks like a slug so he is evil' either. She's complex, and likeable despite her uncompromising attitudes which I personally find very disagreeable. (I'm borderline Hippy in my views on equality and prejudice.) I've said it before and I'll say it again - she is a beautifully written and acted character... but I don't like following a romance with her because she's a bit racist. Her opinions (whether you find them offensive or racst or whatever) are understandable and fascinating, and raise a lot of issues - about the game universe, and the real one. -- There is a lot of SF in which aliens are monsters or baddies. And there is a lot that uses multiple alien races as a metaphor used to push equality. And those are both good things, mind. Mass Effect is one of the smarter SF's I think, that raises complex issues and doesn't necessarily tell you what's 'right'. Lke Blade Runner, say.
|
|
|
Post by yargling on Feb 21, 2010 16:57:49 GMT 1
True true - I suppose I was mentally excluding the two extremes - i.e. Aliens are monsters like in... well, Alien (the film) and are incapable or unwilling to communicate with us Aliens are saintly-god-like beings like the Ascended beings in Stargate. I was more refering to the Mass Effect/Star Trek/Star War type universes where aliens are similar to us in that we are capable and willing to engage in complex social interactions, for example, trade. And I had forgotten about some of Ash's comments. I have to admit, she must be alittle xenophobic, though hardly the out and out racist people make her out to be (although the aliens aren't different races, they are different species ). As for Pressly, again, its true that he is speciesist against aliens, but I think that is somewhat excusable given the only aliens he'd likely to have encountered where Batarian slavers who don't exactly endear you to aliens as a concept - especially if they manage to escape with a ship load of colonists. And I definitely agree the ME universe is one of the smart SF universes - I mean, it has to be to survive being picked over by millions of sci-fi nerds examining it detail
|
|
|
Post by Knightfall on Feb 21, 2010 23:46:37 GMT 1
Hmmmm. See, I didn't like Ashley. I mean, I really didn't like her. To me, she served as that controversial lightning rod that every big video game needs these days. But what was worse than that is that she worked it on several levels. It wasn't enough that she was racist, but she was also (the only?) theist on the ship.
In addition to her sex scene (plus racism, plus theism) she was a controversy triforce. Which wouldn't have been bad (and actually good), had all of the characters been made as open as she was, but it just didn't seem realistic. To me, it was Bioware saying, "You know, we should have these themes in here, but putting them elsewhere makes no sense." They almost seemed to write themselves into a corner with her. Didn't care for it.
This, in turn, made the racism aspect almost token, with the least possible impact. At least in Pressley's case it was understandable, seeing as people who've been at war for so long can harbor undue animosity toward the opposing nation.
She expects me to just gel with all of her personal hangups, and then judges me when I join Cerberus and save her life. That whore.
With that being said, I think KotOR, with its alien-segregated Taris, had much more to say about racism than ME1 ever tried to do. In fact, every topic ME1 tried to tackle was done too lighthandedly for my taste.
ME2, on the other hand, did a muuuuuuuuch better job. The state of the Citadel after the Reaper attack was fairly realistic. With C-Sec's mistreatment of that quarian when that volus thought she stole his...chit...(pfffff) to how the Citadel became a dangerous place for humans in certain places. Not to mention the many inter-species relationships that take place throughout the game. (The Vorgon krogan poetry bit as he romances the asari stands out.)
Basically, what I'm trying to say is that Buch was right in pointing out how the SF community constantly tackles race, from Star Trek's interracial kiss (one of the first EVER on TV) to Star Wars' treatment of the crazy different races typically getting along for the greater good. IT'S A TRAAAAP!
ME1 didn't carry this theme to my satisfaction and ME2 is much better off. Not sure if this added to the conversation, but what I was basically trying to say is: I don't like Ashley. >=O
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Feb 23, 2010 17:14:09 GMT 1
Interesting topic. i am going to toss my 2 coppers in even though OP and mister Buch hit a lot of good points.
I think Ashley was specifically designed to be a bit of a lightning rod, in some circles if a character even implies they are religious it is taken as an attack on their beliefs. the instant reaction is almost always defensive, than to lash out.
I am not going to defend either Pressly's or Ashley's attitude, but the single biggest item of concern I have seen in the Bioware forum's and elsewhere in assessing the value of a character and their actions is empathy, or a lack thereof.
What is empathy? Empathy is nothing more or less that putting yourself in someone else's shoes. A great deal of the hate direct at both of these characters in my opinion is direct result of refusing to see the universe from their vantage point from a position of different preconceptions knowledge and experience.
Before Eden Prime the sum knowledge of what Ashley knows about aliens is that they ruined her family name launched an unprovoked attack against humanity and are now telling humans where they can and cannot colonize. She had likely never met one since she was stuck on colony garrison duty so she had no direct experience to change her ideas. Lots of reports of Batarian slavers though and little more than lip service from the council when it comes to assisting in stabilizing the human frontiers. So of course she is a bitch, I probably would be too.
I refuse to comment on her religion, because she only mentions it when she is beginning to trust Shepard and wants to know them better. It is not like she is going door to door wanting to talk to people about Jesus. It's her business and her life. hating her on the basis of religion is a refusal to employ empathy in reference to her.
Pressly reminds me of a war vet who cannot let his ideas about his former enemies go long after the politics have changed. change aliens to communists and Pressly's loyalty to NATO and he could be a character sketch of any number of the 10s of thousands of soldiers patrolling the Warsaw pact lines of 60s though 80s. As the data pad in the Normandy crash site showed, he had a change of heart after seeing the other side of the equation. He gave what he disliked a second chance after seeing the other side, maybe we should do the same.
Looking forward to any comments on this.
|
|
|
Post by Zarsthor on Feb 23, 2010 17:39:09 GMT 1
Can't forget Ashely's animal cruelty charges. That's what did it for me. Nobody makes statements about killing their dogs around me and gets to remain in my good books. Ever. It's up there with baby killers.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Feb 23, 2010 17:56:01 GMT 1
Can't forget Ashely's animal cruelty charges. That's what did it for me. Nobody makes statements about killing their dogs around me and gets to remain in my good books. Ever. It's up there with baby killers. She had said she would sic her dog at a bear , rather than kill her dog as I recall. It was a clumsy analogy to represent how anyone will view members of their race, nation or species in higher regard than another. not liking the analogy does not make her point any less valid. Check the national viewpoints of various countries newspapers for validation of this idea right here at home. My response is that if you have a good dog it would sic itself at the bear. Kind of like the turians did at the krogan. my brother worked in forestry in northern BC in Canad for a few years. he kept a dog for companionship. He was attacked by a grizzly bear and Nathan's dog drove the bear off. The dog lived and had not taken any injury. The dog died of old age and the death was not taken well by my brother
|
|
|
Post by Knightfall on Feb 23, 2010 19:02:28 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by yargling on Feb 23, 2010 19:33:52 GMT 1
I am not going to defend either Pressly's or Ashley's attitude, but the single biggest item of concern I have seen in the Bioware forum's and elsewhere in assessing the value of a character and their actions is empathy, or a lack thereof. True. The lack of empathy in the forums is quiet distressing, and makes me wonder for the future of the human race.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Feb 24, 2010 3:53:03 GMT 1
I am not going to defend either Pressly's or Ashley's attitude, but the single biggest item of concern I have seen in the Bioware forum's and elsewhere in assessing the value of a character and their actions is empathy, or a lack thereof. True. The lack of empathy in the forums is quiet distressing, and makes me wonder for the future of the human race. Empathy is a 2 edged sword. people want to recieve it but often crappy at giving it. it is hard enough to express empathy in real life. Nearly impossible where fictional characters are concerned. this is especially true if your intellectual age does not suit the content you are viewing. Sorry should have added that in my first post.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Feb 24, 2010 14:04:54 GMT 1
This thread is confusing on so many levels...
|
|