So far several folks have expressed some concerns about the New Horizons project that got announced yesterday. I thought I’d take a moment to address some of them from my point of view, and with a couple of quotes from Bruce Baugh, the author of the work.
1. I don’t think I’ll like this book. I want my pulp to be gonzo all the time.
Cool beans! Luckily Spirit of the Century is already set up to do that. If you don’t have interest in the other heroes angle, or are already doing it yourself, then you don’t need this book. You’re probably already rocking with Spirit, and can continue to do so.
2. So, Brand, why would you want to put this kind of stuff in your pulp game?
I love the fact that its going to be full of nifty game coolness, with new villains and new heroes and a renewed sense that the world is full of zany, wonderful, terrible stuff without having to always go gonzo. I mean, I think its fun that we often go back to the Gorilla Kahn aspect of pulps, but I sometimes think we miss out on the fact that lots of the old pulps were really into issues of history and the world in ways we often overlook now. I mean sure, they had lost Atlantis (though that wasn’t the pop culture term it is now until someone went out, researched, and started writing stories about it) — but they also had the Orient Express, and the Mexican Revolution, the Spanish Civil War and a lot of other things that when we cast our eyes out we totally overlook.
I mean, I know its odd to think of now, but there was a time when the Nazis were the ruling government of a country that the US was not at war with in which the pulps were using them as bad-guys anyway. Captain America (comics, not pulp I know, but close enough for hand grenades) punched Hitler in the mouth in March of 1941 — months before the States was at war with Germany. That took guts, because even if anti-German feelings were running high, it was using the image of the head of a foreign state and doing physical violence to him. Legal action could very realistically have ensued, and there was some backlash to it. Pulps didn’t always do just the safe thing, and very often the evil guys that the heroes fought were evil guys or allegories of evil guys, from the real world. Nowdays we think “nazi bash” as good clean fun with no political side, something that we can just all do without a second thought, but that wasn’t always the case. Pulps were not all apolitical, and many of them increased their sense of optimism and the potential of the future by having the guts to stand up and say things directly. And even when it wasn’t direct, pulps and comics were taking stands to make big two-fisted statements about justice. So why not put a little justice and reality back in our pulp?
Nor, in the case above, can I ignore that the writer and artist were Jewish, and so were many pulp writers. The old pulps were full of heroes and heroines of different types, from lesbian detectives to Jewish detectives to black detectives to… well, lots of detectives I guess. I think that having a supplement where we can get back at some of the politics of the pulps, some of the real stuff that they dealt with — even when they only dealt with it in a fun and fast way — can help round out the “Martians stole my death ray” experience into something fuller and richer and more like the vast variety of pulps in their prime.
3. What’s this about a woman not being able to hold patents, or Asian immigrants not being allowed to teach each other English? I know women have held patents in their own name since at least the mid-1800s, and several Asian-Americans set up schools for English language instruction.
While I have a bit to say about this on my own, I’m going to let Bruce answer this one:
The patent issue is actually a good one to illustrate a point: there were legal rights not everyone could exercise in practice. A lot of female inventors got turned down without recourse, and in-house notes make it clear that they were turned down for being women, because individual inspectors didn’t approve. I’ve got examples on my shelves over yonder *points helpfully*. The same is true for other examples in my post - what was legal would often clash with what was actually done, and what could in practice be enforced. In both cases, (problems arose from) matters of official caprice even where the clear text of the law said something otherwise. I’ll be providing examples for this stuff, and likely quoting William Burroughs on the three types of cops.
I should also add that some people in discriminated-against categories of various sorts - and not just celebrities - could and did get treated better than the law actually allowed for, thanks to just plain decent people in positions of authority. The tangle between law and practice should be a major theme in New Horizons, particularly since social aspects let one apply interesting leverage to various parts of the thicket.
4. So are you taking steps to make sure that the past doesn’t look worse than it actually was? I mean, it could get bad at times, but there was also a lot of good out there. Is that going to get addressed?
There have always been stand out cases — on every side. There have been more enlightened friendly, open people in history than we often recognize. The truth is that if the majority of people weren’t willing to accept change, didn’t embrace at least some aspects of it, things wouldn’t have changed as they did. There have been more men and women who triumphed over prejudice than can easily be cataloged. And we in no way want to deny either of these groups their just due and praise.
But even in stories of triumph there are obstacles. And for every good story a bad one. Booker T Washington often went out to dinner with the Steel Barons of the Universe, but Langston Hughes was once asked to go in the back door at a dinner in his honor. Women inventors did make amazing things, and Wollenstonecraft did publish, heck, I have an ancestor who was a female doctor before the American Civil War. But I also have ancestors who were beaten to death, hung, or chased out of a state in campaigns of organized terror, and there are many stories of women who were turned away at the door because they wore a skirt.
The past was full of the best and the worst, and no doubt about it. But the fact that there have always been renegades just means that there was always something to rebel against. So we want to make a book in which there is a chance to get into the real difficulties of the issue, and not just strawmen.
5. So, what else does this book have to say about issues of discrimination and historical perspective? Is it all going to be “they were wrong then and we are right now?” How do you handle such a hard topic and not get didactic.
For this one, again, I’m going to let Bruce answer:
I think that a lot of gamers never learned how to use history (and other scholarship) to best effect, and in part New Horizons should be a “show by example” book. I’ve never had so much opportunity to talk directly to players and GMs about the methodology along with the stats and all, and intend to make the most of it. 
Different people do different things and have wildly different experiences all against the same background, and deciding how you want to select the specific circumstances to use in play - the overall tone of the campaign, what works for this scene, and in between - can be (should be, I’d say) both challenging and fun.
I was just remarking to Fred, in fact, that I’d like to do something like this: take a particular moment where someone in one of the groups I’m covering has an interesting encountering with the powers that be, and show how very differently it can be described by observers and scholars all of whom are honest and have good will, but who are all bringing different perspectives to bear. “Anything goes” and “it can only be this one way” are both common errors in using history in entertainment, but fortunately, the middle ground is both available and very often more enjoyable once you see how to get there.
6. So Why Does Any of This Matter to Actual Gamers?
Well, for that I’m going to let a couple of actual gamers responses stand as the answer:
sabbatregent writes:
It’s been a long time since I posted on RPG.net. I hope that my comment doesn’t get lost in the deluge this supplement has created.
I’m Mexican. That means I can’t claim any race but a mixture of many. Also, I live in Mexico City. That is, I live in a city where some people still have to use the back entrances to a restaurant, and some people can’t walk on certain neighborhoods without getting arrested. Religious persecution, sexism, chauvinism, homophobia: you name it, we have it plenty. Sure, the Law don’t support any of this conducts, and a lot of them are considered criminal. Still, they’re very much a part of my society.
We’re even racists to ourselves. In many restaurants and bars, they would even unseat you to give your place to a foreigner. There’s a common fear of Asians, of African Americans, of indigenous people, of Argentinians. People of one State sometimes loath anyone from any other State.
Anyway, this is not a sympathy plea. It’s actually a pretty good place to live. I just wanted to give context to my point. I’ve been role playing for almost fifteen years. I’ve had many gaming groups over that period.
A lot of World of Darkness way back when. Despite that the fact that every single one of us were Mexican, most of our characters were either American or European.
A lot of D&D way back when. Despite the fact that most of the time there has been at least one woman on my groups, everyone’s character was male. Very sexist male characters, even when played by women.
I remember some White Wolf books that heavily referenced Mexico: Mexico City by Night, the Giovanni clanbook, Chaos Factor and Tales of Trails. It was really funny the way we get to be depicted in those books. The thing is, most of the players I knew never really pointed out that. We took the caricature of ourselves for granted. We never questioned the way Mexicans got represented in those books.
Actually, some GMs down here, when a Mexican character appears, make funny voices, the same way Spanish gets misrepresented/mispronounced in American TV.
In our last SotC game, even when everyone was free to choose any nationality (the Century Club being international and all) there were two English characters, two Americans, one Rumanian (my own), and one French.
What I’m trying to say here: there seems to be more to this book than only depicting ‘minorities’. This could be the source of stories that really have never been told before, simply because the medium (pulp) never really existed outside of some Occidental contexts. Also, it actually seems really important that the choices are offered: to play a gay character, for example, might be a lot of fun, but if the option isn’t readily available, you may not actually think of using it.
Hence, D&D parties comprised entirely of male characters. Hence, a bunch of Mexican roleplayers who can’t, for the lives of themselves, think of making a Mexican vampire. We do not conceive pulp in our cultural terms, hence we need to come up with concepts based on other cultures.
alexandria2000 writes:
Many people I look up to in history fought to change a world like that; I wouldn’t be here without them. And people today *still* follow in their footsteps.
It certainly won’t {bring my table down}. And I’m saying that as an African-American woman.
Pulp isn’t just about kicking evil in the junk - it’s about bravehearted men and women of every stripe finding adventure and making the world a better place, regardless if it’s stopping a gold-laden Klan train, or finding the hidden last library of Alexandria.
Most pulp doesn’t give a place for women, or people of color, or political dissidents, or LGBTs. They’re background, the people carrying the bags while the brave white men forge ahead, or the evil enemy. Worst case, they’re not mentioned at all.
Or if they ARE mentioned, it’s in a stereotypical way that makes my teeth ache.
So hell yeah, gimme a chance to inject a little reality in the pulp. Stop ignoring the people I want to play because ‘reality and history were boring and sad.’
The entire theme of pulp proves *it doesn’t have to be*.
7. Okay, so I’m down with all of that, but are you having anyone outside the circle do readings on this stuff? Like, having people in affected groups have a chance to look over the material?
Plans so far seem to include that. I know I’ve got my communism in my pocket, and that Bruce has said he’s looking for people from the discussions about gender and race to help him with various aspects. Fred’s talked about doing stuff like that too, and in general we’re looking to give people a chance to make their voices heard. But, considering the book isn’t even written yet, we’re not done with the plan on that.
Any extra worries or comments or whatever, can be left in the comments. There is a lot still to be decided about the book, and Bruce still has to write the thing, so there is also no hurry.