Subject:
|
Re: 6776... Is this True?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 28 Sep 2001 13:48:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
807 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Jason Spears writes:
> In lugnet.lego, James Simpson writes:
> > In lugnet.lego, Frank Filz writes:
> > > James Simpson wrote:
> > > > Anyway, I don't think this is the 1st step down the ladder; the Union
> > > > soldiers vs. Indians and the Pirates vs. Islanders was pretty bad. Memo to
> > > > self: When I want a toy that doesn't reinforce negative stereotypes, I won't
> > > > go to Lego.
> > >
> > > Interestingly, no Wild West set shows any interraction between the
> > > "Indians" and the "Cowboys".
> >
> > True. Although the Union vs. Indians chess set in the Ultimate Lego Book
> > drops below the level of good taste, IMO.
> >
> > james
>
> Union vs. Indians = White vs. Black. Chess sets have always had two sides.
> Neither color was ever considered good or bad.
Yes, but Union vs. Indians has a clear adverserial implication. It might not
offend you or I, but how would a Native American kid feel about it?
> Why does a Chess set with two
> opposing sides mean that anyone in particular is bad/wrong. The union and the
> indians DID oppose each other, that's history.
But that is very simplified history. Our country should absolutely be appalled
at the crimes committed against humanity by the 19th century U.S. govt. in the
Indian Wars. Don't get me wrong: I consider myself a patriot, but no one who
takes a careful look at history can be proud of how this country added territory
in the 19th century. Frankly, I don't think it's appropriate to simplify and
trivialize such an import and sensitive historical process such that we
communicate it to kids as a clear-cut adversarial relationship with no
particular side hold any pressing claim to justice. Frankly again, I don't
think that Cowboys/Unions vs. Indians is an acceptable toy theme; it's too
fraught with sensitive issues and false assumptions.
> But I don't think Lego's sets
> ever said that one in particular was evil.
No, but, again, there is an implied adversarial relationship between Cowboys/
Unions and Indians. This isn't the Huns vs. the Gauls of 1,600 years ago or 2
imaginary German fiefdoms squaring off (say the Black Falcons vs. Lion Kingdom)
on the chess board; this is a game featuring an implied adversarial relationship
between an ethnic group and a powerful government that still has all sorts of
human rights implicatios in this country today (why is it that Indian
reservations always occupy the most marginal land, for example?) This whole
design concept is, IMO, just negligent ignorance, at best.
> In fact if I remember correctly,
> the Wild West sets had some baddies, bank robbies or something. (On that same
> note, weren't the Pirates the bad guys, sorta, in that them, with them opposing
> the Soldiers, and the Islanders were just sorta around?)
Is that how history really fell out? Where the Polynesians just sort of around
watching while the pirates and imperials fought each other? I know that I'm
running the risk of wading into the muck of PC, but I think that we need to
adequately address some of our assumptions about the historical relationships
between governments and ethnicities before we can really venture into making
toys out of the adversaries.
> I guess I don't
> understand your comment "Memo to self: When I want a toy that doesn't
> reinforce negative stereotypes, I won't go to Lego." I don't see it
> reinforcing anything.
I hope that my above-comments have made clearer the intent behind that comment.
James
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 6776... Is this True?
|
| (...) Union vs. Indians = White vs. Black. Chess sets have always had two sides. Neither color was ever considered good or bad. Why does a Chess set with two opposing sides mean that anyone in particular is bad/wrong. The union and the indians DID (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
