appropriation of a culture

[John Sullivan Hendricks]

I don't think people should cooperate in any way with war games.
Supposedly, since the birth of the UN or League of Nations(?), one of
humanity's official goals has been to end war.  Obviously we haven't done
too great a job, but that doesn't change the imperative.  I probably
wouldn't have responded to this issue, but here in Mexico we have been going
through tough times with respect to authoritarianism vs. democracy.  The
federal government has shamelessly unmasked the difference between its
discourse on democratization, and its real authoritarian practices with
respect to the UNAM.  I'm not knocking Mexico: democracy has never had a
place in US educational institutions.  Mexican public universities are
trying to make it work, and I guess the most visible failures and setbacks
are always suffered by those on the front lines.  Anyway, dialogue is what
we should practice, support, teach, and cooperate with; not games that teach
people how to fight.
	John Sullivan
	Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas

-----Mensaje original-----
De: owner-nahuat-l at server2.umt.edu [mailto:owner-nahuat-l at server2.umt.edu]En
nombre de XocoyoCopitzin at aol.com
Enviado el: Martes, 15 de Febrero de 2000 12:30 p.m.
Para: Multiple recipients of list
Asunto: Re: appropriation of a culture


So when a videogame has this large of an impact on our youngsters and
strategy game-playing adults such as myself, which is the lessor evil?
Including the Aztec and Maya in such a combat game, or excluding them?

Include them, and suffer yet another association to a combative, violent
history -- to this I would ask: which MAJOR civilization on par with the
Aztec/Maya hasn't had is share of battles?  Exclude the Aztec and Maya and
the game will suffer from a lack of cultural breadth -- and ance again
perpetuate the ignorance that all civilization radiates from Eurasia.

The game will be released by Microsoft with or without the Aztecs and Mayas
-- the question is, can it be done tastefully and responsibly?  Will the
goal
be to conquer the native peoples (as some videogames have as their aim) or
to
ally with them?

If we are to believe the the brief description included and the model
provided at the weblink given, the player is supposed to ALLY (read:
sympathize) with the native warriors and rulers, to "fight alongside them"
with their great leaders.  I think we greatly understimate the power of
positive transference this identification might have.  Witness the strength
and resurgence that Celtic culture has had through technology in recent
years
via roleplaying and combat games.  I know non-Celts out there who easily
know
more about Celtic history than American history through such immersive
involvement in using the terms and guiding principles of that culture.

Last time I played a strategic computer wargame (for example Warcraft) the
human characters did not hurl epithets at each other when they were clicked
on for commands.  They said such things as "My Lord, what is your wish?"
and
"Ballista Engaged", etc.  I cannot vouch for Microsoft's Age of Empires, but
based on what Microsoft's request was:

<< Single word statements and commands will occur when the player
    clicks on a villager, priest, military man or king (one set
    each for the various cultures).>>

Single-word statements of acknowledgement hardly equate with epithets such
as
"Die, vile scum!" as was feared.  Was that really what Microsoft was asking
for?  Insults?  Until I know more about the project itself and how the
characters are intended to be used, I'm taking the entire preview with a
grain of salt.

In the end, it sounds to me as if the decline of involvement in this venture
was more a pro-peace statement than one of cultural preservation.
Precolumbian warrior culture deserves to be canonized as much as any other
(Samurai, Celts, Mongols, what-have-you), and be it though popular culture
and videogames, *so be it*.  I hope Microsoft does find somebody to
spearhead
this aspect of the project, and finds a noble, knowledgeable person to do
it,
because I really don't think cultural absorption of this kind can or should
be stopped.  Its foolish to think of the game as an educational tool.  But
with well-researched cultural backgrounds, such as the overview at
http://www.microsoft.com/Games/age2/c_byzantines.htm, it's clearly a game
with educational possibilities and the potential to reach a broad
cross-section of our culture.  If this game gets people to "think like
Aztecs", using their strategies, weaponry and life principles, what is the
harm?  Stong warrior cultures such as the Celts and Japanese embrace the
"fantastical" nature their cultures have come to hold in the eyes of
outsiders, even integrate it to their advantage (witness the HUGE boom in
japanimation and how the genre is received as a legitimate form of
contemporary mythmaking even here in America).

Imagine if the average 14-year-old boy actually knew what a maccuahuitl was,
and was proud to weild it, if only in a virtual manner?  I can imagine this
world.

I write this well knowing my defense of this game might might not be
well-received in this group.  So be it.  I've seen many poor appropriations
of culture in recent years, made somewhat of an informal study of it, and I
feel strongly that this wargaming project has more potential to educate and
evoke sympathy than hurt, breed hate or misunderstanding.

Alison King