Orientalism in Dominions

[Omnirizon]

Orientalism is the representation of the Orient in and by the Occident. The 'Orient' nations in Dominions would be the Bandar Log nations including Lanka (India), C'tis (Egypt), Tien Chi (China), and Yomi/Shinuyama/Jomon.

Isn't it funny how all these nations, with the exception of TC, are flavored using anthropomorphisms and celestial/demonic themes whereas all other nations are just humans (or giant humans) of some kind? Does this demonstrate the effect of Orientalism in Occidental historical consciousness?

To TC as an exception, historically China and Japan are areas of the Orient that were never fully sublimated to Occidental empiricism. Thus they are always seen as duplicitous in Occidental representations, but rarely sexualized, mysticized, and romanticized in the way that other areas of the Orient were. Incidentally, China and Japan are the only modern competing world powers of the Orient. Both TC and Yomi as relations of their respective nations are still fully under the auspices of Orientalism as TC (and Jomon to some point) is portrayed as very authoritative and hierarchical, while Yomi et al are fleshed out with themes of devious demons. Both nations draw on celestial/demonic themes, things which are seen as irrational in the occident and complete the Oriental representation of these nations.

Not that I don't like the way these nations and their themes were constructed. The thing about Orientalism is that it _is_ the Orient. Its very emergence abolished on originary Orient. But to assume that it alone is responsible for the loss of a pure Orient is fallacy. The western theory that Orientalism draws upon tells us that there is no such thing as a pure history, or even "a history". The relation of these nations in both the Dominions and the Occident as a whole is only a performance then, not a static and deliberate representation.

[HoneyBadger]

Omnirizon, I'm not quite sure what you're arguing, or even if you're arguing something-either for or against, but the language you're using to (potentially) argue it is a little too heavy on the highbrow ideas, and a little low on conversational English, for me to form an opinion on it. It's going way, way over my head, and I'm not seeing the point of why it should...

Could you please reword that a bit, or atleast include some footnotes?

What I can make of it sounds interesting enough that I'd like to talk about it, but every time I try to start, your vocabulary gums me up.

[konming]

I hardly think Egypt is consider "oriental".

[OmikronWarrior]

Originally Posted by konming

I hardly think Egypt is consider "oriental".

When I spent time in France, a Morrocan encouraged me to visit his home country as it was "easiest part of the orient to go to." I think Europe in general has a much broader definition of "orient" then America in general.

As for the original post, I do not think you really thought your initial assumption through. Yes, TC is a human themed "oriental" nation. However, Pangea, R'Lyeh, and Atlantis are hardly human based or eastern.

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by OmikronWarrior

When I spent time in France, a Morrocan encouraged me to visit his home country as it was "easiest part of the orient to go to." I think Europe in general has a much broader definition of "orient" then America in general.

As for the original post, I do not think you really thought your initial assumption through. Yes, TC is a human themed "oriental" nation. However, Pangea, R'Lyeh, and Atlantis are hardly human based or eastern.

R'lyeh and Atlantis are underwater nations, so I chose to not consider them because its hard to be underwater and human at the same time.

Pangaea crossed my mind, but they don't represent a historical nation like most other nations do, but rather a mythical heritage. Same thing for Argatha, Fomo, and TirNaOg; all these nations represent some culture's myths, while that actual culture is represented in human form in another nation. Jomon is able to represent Japan in human form, while Yomi represents their myths; and I understand that this makes my analysis in regards to japan a little shaky. But Jomon only stands in for Japan in the latest age, while they remain represented as devious and demonic in their other ages.


@HoneyBadger:
Postcolonial theory, which Orientalism is a part of, has a long tradition of obscurantism. Postcolonial theory is social theory related to the events of and following colonization. Obscurantism is using a writing style so difficult to read and rhetoric so twisted and thick that text becomes "obscure". This is sometimes done deliberately out of the belief that text must be written in non-conventional ways to avoid hegemonic sublimation. Sublimation is the rechanneling of energy. Hegemonic sublimation is the rechanneling of energy to serve the hegemony. In the context of rhetoric this simply means that rhetoric would only serve to perpetuate the dominant hegemony, even if it appeared transgressive on the surface. Postcolonial theory is in particular sensitive to this because the entire tradition of colonialism, from the actual colonization to decolonization to development, has been to sublimate the colonized to serve the colonizer. Even things like development and aid only serve to eradicate the colonized's culture, modes, and history and replace them with those of the hegemonic power.

OK. now that said. I don't think my writing isn't obscurantist. However postcolonial theory does have its own heritage of words and concepts that it takes for granted. I'll explain a bit...

Occident is the west, Europe and America
Orient is the non-west and non-tropic
"Tropics" is a whole other issue all together. This is sub-Saharan Africa, So. America, and the Pacific Islands.

as Omikron points out, the Orient is much more than the far east. It is North Africa, Middle East, Sinia Peninsula, India, South East Asia, and Far East Asia. This is the Orient because these were the areas of the world that had goods which interested Europe or that they had to travel through to get to those areas of the world.

The idea that there is no Occident or Orient is key however. The idea that there is no "a history" is key. This is simply saying that Europeans constructed the Orient to themselves. This was to justify their behavior towards the Orient, so in turn shaped how they acted towards that area of the world and began to actually shape what "the Orient" was. _This_ in turn acted back on Europe and shaped what "the Occident" was. This is why I said that Orientalism is no longer a (mis)representation but a performance. To have it reflected in a game like Dominions is only a performance of Dominions "Europeaness". The availability of a mythicized Orient is only too perfect material for a game like Dominions though.

What is happening with this theory of Orientalism, the theory of how there came to be an Orient and what that is, is a critique of the constructing of the Orient. More generally it is a critique of the constructing of the "Other". The Other being anything which you are not.

This applies to what I had to say about Dominions like this: All of the Occidental nations are humanlike; these are "Self" to Dominions and its developers. These areas of the world are the Occident from which Dominions and its developers come. All of the Oriental nations are anthropomorphic and/or demonic: Bandar Log is monkeys, C'tis is Lizards, Yomi is demons, Lanka is monkeys and demons, Shinuyama is demon-like. I argued that TC remains human but that this is because China, TC's inspiration, is actually not mysticized and romanticized the way other Oriental areas were, but rather was always regarded as very hierarchical and authoritative. China was the most threatening area of the Orient to Europe, and they couldn't just romanticize them away. Rather Europe developed an idea of China that they could contrast with they way they imagined themselves; as an open industrious and market driven society. We see TC in the game represented with lots of commanders, each one being in some ministerial position or the other. Just like Europe imagined China in the Orient.

I'm against any "highbrow" and obscurantist stuff. But there is still a little background needed to understand Postcolonialism and Orientalism. Did I clear anything up?

[Endoperez]

Many later nations have non-human themes to differentiate from the earlier nations, which were dominantly humans and humanlike giants. Monkeys, Yomon-Jomi nations, Agartha, animal-headed Fomorians are all new in Dom3. I think one of the reasons is that the human nations needed many new eras, and doing humans all the time was boring, so the new nations were chosen from ideas that would be fun to make - that is, not humans. That'd explain why we only got Eriu and Tir na Nog in a patch even though the theme was in Dom2, and why new nations have so many summons, most of them inhuman.

[Ballbarian]

Huh?


(jk )

[Jarkko]

Yep, here in north we are all giants or dwarfs. Also, couldn't help noticing all those vampires, golems and living statues when I have visited Central Europe.


Or perhaps, I don't know, the devs got ideas from local myths, and instead of blind discrimination, as is subtly suggested in this thread, the playable nations are based on those myths, invented by the local people themselves? Maybe the OP has gone slightly over the top in his political correctness? Maybe he is one of the people who thinks "robbery" is a bad word and should be replaced by "self-iniative caused by an economically challenging situation on personal level"?

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Jarkko

Yep, here in north we are all giants or dwarfs. Also, couldn't help noticing all those vampires, golems and living statues when I have visited Central Europe.


Or perhaps, I don't know, the devs got ideas from local myths, and instead of blind discrimination, as is subtly suggested in this thread, the playable nations are based on those myths, invented by the local people themselves? Maybe the OP has gone slightly over the top in his political correctness? Maybe he is one of the people who thinks "robbery" is a bad word and should be replaced by "self-iniative caused by an economically challenging situation on personal level"?

Actually I didn't subtly suggest anything at all. I outright said it.

Vampires/Golems/Statues simply appearing in the game are one thing, entire nations crafted around themes of "unhumaness" is another. Their is a subtle but consistent caesura between Occidental and Orient inspired nations in this game.

If you read my post, you will see that I am not accusing the developers of discrimination, racism, or any other such thing. I'm not even accusing KO of deliberately crafting nations based upon some myth or misrepresentation. I'm only pointing out the effects of what we call "Orientalism" on KOs work. Notice this:

Originally Posted by Omnirizon

To have it reflected in a game like Dominions is only a performance of Dominions "Europeaness". The availability of a mythicized Orient is only too perfect material for a game like Dominions though.

Take for example that the imagery of Egypt, that shows prominently in the themes of Dominions, is a result of European intellectuals and artists travelling to Egypt and generating art and academic knowledge on Egypt. This IS Orientalism. YOU take that imagery for granted, as natural. But imagine what kind of imagery would the world have of Egypt today had not European artists and intellectuals fell upon Egypt in throngs during the period of European colonization and produced all this imagery and knowledge regarding it? If Europe had not told the world "This is Egypt", how would Egypt have represented itself to the world?

The myths that comprise the imagery of Europe in dominions is built from, as you so correctly pointed out (and thank you for it), from _local_ European myths. Europeans saying what Europe and its myths are. Egyptian myths are actually representations of Egypt by Europeans. All the imagery you have of Egypt, the Arab world, and India are the works of Orientalism. The Orient NEVER had the chance to represent itself, because Europe did it for them. This in turn actually began to shape how the Orient would represent itself. Any "true" Orient is completely irretrievable.


As for being PC. The critiques from Orientalism and Postcol theory is anything but. You think it is PC to tell someone that their conception of history and most of the world is fabricated? Postcol theory actually emphasizes _difference_ over diversity, noting how calls for diversity ultimately benefit the dominant groups. Postcol thinkers like Fanon claim that violence against the West, as a group, is the only means of escaping the yokes of a colonial past. Being "PC" is actually part of the problem to Postcol theory. It is unabashedly rebellious, violent (even if only figuratively so), and anti-theraputic.


Sombre:
The above post should be referencing you too. There is nothing ignored or emphasized to reach my goal. You cannot deny that the imagery of the Oriental nations in the game is based upon the effects of Orientalism, because Orientalism is what has produced this mythic and romantic imagery. If we appropriate that just living in the West, a game like dominions which is fueled by myth isn't going to actively resist it. And without actively resisting Orientalism it becomes hard to make humaness out of it; because it isn't based upon humaness. All of the nations based upon myths in this game use mostly mythic figurines (notice how the ones based upon actual European peoples/tribes/cultures/empires have a lot of actual humans); and the Oriental nations are no exception. It's much easier to make monkeys fit to the irrationalized imagery of India than actual humans.


EDIT:
Oh and Honeybadger I agree that we should continue to use this imagery in a game like Dominions. Dominions is an _ironic_ game, that pokes at history. It gives a deadpan delivery of a zealously religous Marignon right next to an obviously India based nation of romanticized imagery... and monkeys. It's the same kind of resistance to hegemonic narratives that we see from a lot of more underground art that presents itself with a sort of ludic front which hides a deeper and more transgressive rebelliousness (I'm thinking, off the top of my head, of Peaches and her music). It is anti-PC, anti-theraputic, and doesn't attempt to glorify anything. This is the kind of stuff we need more of. I guarantee that those few trolls who drop into the forums raising cane on the "political incorrectness" of Dominions are well grounded and ultimately supportive of the hegemonic western narrative.

[Alibenbaba]

It's much easier to make monkeys fit to the irrationalized imagery of India than actual humans.

Ah, here you have failed.

The nations needs diversity - its much more interesting to have a nation based around monkeys than nation #44 based around humans - not easier. If there is a fitting myth, why not exploit it - if that myth originates from european demonization or local superstitions (don't all myths stem from someone demonizing something?) or literature just isn't the point and should not be.

But I thank you for your original post + explanations, I actually like to think about where myths originate. You have pointed out something I have not thought about yet, so your post did achieve its goal I guess