I probably should have laid out the framework of the underground society that Save the Pearls takes place in first-thing, but hindsight is always 20/20. In any case, here’s an outline of the underground society’s technology and other relevant bits in the book presented with minimal commentary. Except when I really can’t help myself.
Albinos
All albinos in the book are described as having pinkish eyes, even in dim lighting conditions when the red of the retina should not be visible. They are also all uniformly white of skin and hair, and children are taught to hate albinos as part of the curriculum. I wish I was joking.
The Heat
The Heat, which is responsible for the high mortality rates driving humanity to slow extinction, is implied to be an effect of solar radiation. However, Eden’s society is located underground. The ground happens to be a great insulator of all forms of radiation, including nuclear; this is the reason why cellphones and radios, which use a form of radiation known as radio waves, become useless underground. When you go into a tunnel that is sufficiently long/deep, your call is dropped because the radio waves cannot penetrate the dense earth/stone/whatever above you.
With that said, the symptoms of The Heat as described do not correspond with the effects of radiation sickness. They’re more in line with heatstroke, but considering that air conditioning does exist and is being used…
Technology
As I just mentioned, air conditioning is present and pervasive. Additionally, the society is presented as being technologically advanced, with all members being connected 24/7 to a holographic internet via brain implants. Holographic technology is also advanced enough to make images physically tangible and is supported by the ubiquitous usage of Mood Scents, chemicals released to boost general mood and/or immersion within a holographic scenario.
Transportation involves bullet train-like hovercrafts and shuttles (for the elite), with public transportation the only means of non-foot travel for the general masses. Lasers are the weapon of choice. Androids, as in humanoid machines capable of performing complex tasks, also exist and are used for tasks like monitoring quarantine chambers, analyzing the health of employees, and security. So why is there such an emphasis on human productivity…? And what about the power requirements?
It is also mentioned fairly regularly that everyone’s genome is on file. Things like genetic markers and alterations to the genome are noted as a matter of fact while Eden’s father specializes in inter-special genetic modification, with the rest of the staff of the industrial complex experienced with manipulating and monitoring genomic data. All this implies that both the knowledge and the means for genetically modifying organisms is readily available. So why didn’t they just modify the genomes of those carrying albinism?!
Drug Usage and Distribution
Recall those Mood Scents? They’re ubiquitous, in stark contrast to the strictly rationed food and water supplies. The other non-rationed commodity, for so long as you’re within the system, is a drug called oxy which is all-but stated to be the only reason anyone bothers living. Being cut off from one’s oxy supply is a practical death sentence (unless you’re a prostitute, apparently). Ethical considerations aside, one has to wonder where all these chemicals are coming from, considering the supposedly omnipresent scarcity of everything else…
—
Expect the outline for the aboveground society later, when I draw closer to it in the review.
Pryotra on 2 October 2012, 19:14 said:
…That’s just overblown. No one was ever taught to hate a race in school. They were just…inferior, and that was taught by society and family. Has this woman never even considered how prejudices are made. And that’s leaving out the woeful lack of research that most albinos don’t have white hair and skin.
This heat just sounds stupid. The temperature of the Earth itself isn’t going to change that much with radiation or even excessive heat. And even if it did, they have AC. AC is very good at keeping you from getting heatstroke.
…Wait.
So, this is a classist, racist society where people are categorized according to their skin color…for what reason? Seriously? Racism usually arises as a way to distance yourself from a person or to force others to do jobs you don’t like. Unless there’s some kind of competition for food or something, I can’t see the reason for this whole society.
Because apparently, Foyt can’t write worth a darn.
Drugs are good for you! But you’re right, where are they getting this stuff?
Honestly, this whole world seems stupidly built for a stupid plot that really does remind me more and more of Birth of a Nation.
swenson on 2 October 2012, 20:13 said:
I’m with Pryotra. What reason is there for racism, then, if there’s no need for human labor to perform tasks (because they have advanced machines) and there’s no significant advantage any race would have over any other due to the air conditioning and LIVING UNDERGROUND things? Is this a leftover from an earlier era, and if so, why isn’t there some sort of protests or resistance or something? You look at the civil rights movement in the United States, for example, in a hundred years we went from slaves to the Civil Rights Act. When the cultural “need” to stigmatize a particular group (Africans for the purpose of slavery) disappears (the Civil War ending slavery and the Industrial Revolution reducing the need for human labor anyway), people will rise to challenge the stigma. Even before the main civil rights movement, people still challenged the system. Sure, they may have gotten lynched for it, but the point is that people went “this makes no sense” and tried to change things. You’ve mentioned nothing of the kind in this novel, leaving me with the impression that such resistance simply doesn’t exist.
I mean, honestly, even in the very worst examples of racism in the real world, I don’t think the subjugated group ever fully thought of themselves as quite so low as the Pearls apparently do… although maybe that’s just Eden being a derp.
Forest Purple on 2 October 2012, 21:12 said:
Wow. Foyt writes herself into a total conundrum. If the only reason “Coals” are superior is because they can withstand radiation (which is total bullshit), but society is underground and has therefore escaped radiation … why does it even matter? Besides, it seems as if the Africans still die after prolonged exposure (correct me if I’m wrong), which ultimately makes it worthless. Besides that, if your single greatest goal is repopulating the human race, it’s totally contradictory and makes no sense whatsoever to leave fertile females to die, regardless of their skin color. And if they’re only going to be exposed to radiation if they’re left to die, again, who cares how resistant they are?
Anyone else notice how white people actually have a positively associated, “pretty” name, while “Coals” is actually a degrading term?
Kyllorac on 2 October 2012, 21:19 said:
Exactly. Geothermal heating is a viable heating option for a reason.
No clue. It’s one of the issues I’ll be dealing with in the second part.
The only mention of any resistance involves the love interest and Eden’s father, though considering how Eden is (unintentionally) a derp and that the story is told from her very limited PoV, this is one point I’m willing to be a little lenient on.
You’re not wrong.
That was one of the major “this work is racist” points. I’ll also be addressing the terms later in the review, though more from a consistency perspective rather than the racist (as that has been covered extensively elsewhere).
Tim on 2 October 2012, 21:53 said:
Wait, for shooting at people they’re using lasers? Chalk up another “author is an idiot” point unless they shine them in people’s eyes, since a laser is the worst possible kind of weapon against people. Primarily because people are made mostly from water, lasers work by heating, and water has ten times the specific heat capacity of steel. A laser that’ll melt through a metal plate would give a human a painful but completely superficial burn.
Pryotra on 2 October 2012, 21:56 said:
Lol.
It looks like the writer’s been watching too much bad sci-fi.
I wonder if she even googled anything.
swenson on 2 October 2012, 22:23 said:
Who needs research when you have a fertile imagination to do the work for you? Or, in this case, a limited and poorly-educated imagination.
Tim on 2 October 2012, 22:43 said:
She probably just interpreted your first thought a little too literally.
“Hey, imagination. Get on Google and find out how radiation works.”
Kyllorac on 3 October 2012, 00:13 said:
Yes. And the damage they inflict is identical to the more primitive projectile weapons of “long ago”.
From all the PHAILs in the book, I doubt it. I seriously, seriously doubt it.
Master Chief on 3 October 2012, 01:23 said:
So this book has:
a weird and highly implausible setting
a teenage protagonist who’s unique in her world doing something different
Very poor science
An illogical swiss-cheese plot
Bad characters
Unfortunate implications
And a failed attempt at making a ‘big statement’
Yep, sounds like a standard science fiction/fantasy YA novel.
On a second note: today is my birthday :D
Tim on 3 October 2012, 01:24 said:
You know, if you’re fed up of primitive projectile weapons you typically just make advanced projectile weapons. Foyt seems to have the typical incorrect attitude that technology is a caste system and you should always use the most “advanced” thing available no matter how well it’s actually suited to the job. It’s the sort of thinking that would have your clothes fasten with battery-operated electric motor-zips because manual ones and buttons are all primitive and shit.
swenson on 3 October 2012, 08:44 said:
@Master Chief – I’d agree with that assessment. And happy birthday, Chief.
@Tim – I feel like I read an article addressing that exact problem (that just because a newer technology exists does not mean older technologies are never used or aren’t useful for different purposes), but I can’t remember where or when. It was an extremely insightful article, though. Every sci-fi writer needs to read it, if only I could remember what it was. :)
lilyWhite on 3 October 2012, 12:56 said:
If Foyt is clever, she’ll have the readily-available “Mood Scents” and oxy be a moral about society wasting its resources on non-essential and even self-harming items rather than providing basic needs for the less-fortunate.
That being said, I don’t think it will amount to anything but a hole that shows how idiotic the society and the author are.
Tim on 3 October 2012, 13:00 said:
Probably this:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Myths/Myths_Tech.html
And / or the linked subpage.
swenson on 3 October 2012, 13:10 said:
Ah, yes, that’s precisely what I was thinking of! Although the original intent was to discuss Star Trek and Star Wars, it’s an applicable concept to any story dealing with advanced technology. (or even un-advanced technology, if you’re a particularly thick author) We don’t abandon older technology simply because newer stuff is available. “Newer” is not necessarily better, and even if it is superior in certain areas, it’s most likely going to have significant drawbacks in other areas. Very few things are direct upgrades to older technology.
Kyllorac on 3 October 2012, 13:11 said:
Actually, the plot is decent. Eden’s father is the head scientist of a super secret project that illegally alters the human genome by recombining it with various animal genomes. When things go south (precipitated by Eden being a derp), Eden, her father, and the company head (who was illegally transformed) are forced to run for their lives, and the only place they can go is the surface. Because things went south, the transformation went out of control, and so the company head has to struggle to maintain his humanity while Eden and her father struggle to survive in a world of highly dangerous solar radiation.
But then all of the interesting plot is sacrificed in the name of romance which makes no sense. The romance that is. Lust =/= Love, Foyt.
The rest is accurate.
@swenson
I want that article. Find it nao. ;P
Tim on 3 October 2012, 13:23 said:
Wait, isn’t this the standardised plot outline for a furry story?
Pryotra on 3 October 2012, 13:59 said:
You know, if I wasn’t getting furry vibes, I might have no real problem with the plot.
What’s even stupider is that she doesn’t need her racism thing for that plot to work. It would probably work better without it.
Kyllorac on 3 October 2012, 14:14 said:
Is it? I’ve always managed to avoid the furry side of the internet, so consider me completely unread in that sort of thing. But the transformed guy does wind up very furry, and bestiality is a major… thing.
I’m going to have to research furry fiction now just so I can draw parallels. Thanks, Tim.
Exactly.
T on 3 October 2012, 18:55 said:
Yes. Yes it is. Although to be fair, I’ve seen a lot more creativity and scientific research done for some ‘furry’ stories than this mess.
Pryotra on 3 October 2012, 19:06 said:
That’s…terrifying.
T on 4 October 2012, 01:30 said:
Actually, not very. Because they are dedicated to a particular fantasy, it makes sense for furries to put more effort into research and development than someone like Foyt, who doesn’t appear to be dedicated to anything much.
Tim on 4 October 2012, 02:51 said:
Basic furry plot is:
The Drunk Fox on 5 October 2012, 12:40 said:
But, but…lasers! [brick’d]
Um……..should I ask?
And today is mine! :D
Nate Winchester on 12 October 2012, 08:35 said:
What’s even stranger to me is that the longer they are underground, wouldn’t the society’s skin start growing lighter anyway? Really, how would they tell the difference between an albino and a white guy anyway? Some of those goths get pretty pale without sunlight.
Depends on how you look at it, actually. If you’re in a situation where everything has collapsed, coal itself will still be useful (and thus valuable) to people, whereas pearls are just a decoration with no marginal use, meaning their value becomes nil. Sort of like Todd’s point about Fireworks vs Firewood.
So at least in a smart world building, in this situation “coal” would be the compliment and “pearl” would be the insult.
Two words: Troop morale.
Speaking of foxgirls…
(lol j/k, happy b-day DF)
Tim on 12 October 2012, 11:40 said:
No, not really. Pearls are only ever useful because they’re beautiful, while coal, while useful, is common as dirt. So it’s still full of degrading associations and isn’t something you’d be proud to call yourself.
Nate Winchester on 12 October 2012, 13:33 said:
No Tim, coal is only “common” in the US (and even then not too much). Yes it is more common than the other fossil fuels but fossil fuels are still rarer than other fuels. Even then, it’s only a “common” in certain areas. Thus, if this story took place in the Application mountains or near the Mississippi (or England or China), it could be degrading, whereas if it took place elsewhere, coal would be a lot harder to come by. Thus, less degrading.
Also, beauty is not a “use”, it is a luxury. Something like a pearl will not help an individual survive. Also, since they are produced in the ocean, how do these people even know what a “pearl” is? Not to mention that it is possible for a pearl to be farmed or cultivated like any other animal product whereas coal cannot be, again, making pearls less valuable to a surviving community. Finally, pearls are formed by an irritant whereas coal is formed by pressure on carbon underground.
You know… kind of like how humans are in this world?
Thus, you have one term which mirrors and reflects humans’ situation and another that would be considered “outside” of the situation. And… last I checked, most insults in all human cultures can be boiled down to “outsider”. Thus, logically speaking, (if the other wasn’t inept) “coal” would be compliment and “pearl” would be the insult.
You’re projecting your own cultural values onto a group not in your situation, Tim. (And that’s probably the biggest flaw in most shoddy world-building.)
Tim on 12 October 2012, 13:51 said:
Stop making dumb excuses. The associations of a word before the collapse would still exist after it; the world didn’t vanish and reappear new with everything forgotten, and the previous associations of “coal” and “pearl” would continue to colour how people perceived those words.
There is nowhere in the world where coal is precious or valuable; it’s common as muck, dirty, and in order to use it you expend it. Coal is valued for what you can do with it, not what it actually is, and to relate people to a resource has unpleasant echoes of slavery, especially when you do it to a people who were actually enslaved. I can’t see any way any human being would ever accept such a title willingly.
Not to mention your reader doesn’t exist in your world and will read it in the context of real life. It’s bullshit to try to use “worldbuilding” as free license to have whatever offensive connotations you see fit.
Tim on 12 October 2012, 14:12 said:
In addition, it’s not good worldbuilding to create a world which most closely resembles a white supremacist apocalyptic fantasy, with the evil blacks using a name which celebrates how common, dirty and ugly they are while tacitly confirming the value of whites even as they try to insult them. If you’re absolutely set on this stupid naming scheme, why not call them “irons” and “chalks?” Chalk isn’t beautiful, strong, or anything like as useful as iron. And why is the series called “save the pearls” if the reader isn’t supposed to be reading real-life values into the term “pearl” rather than the flimsy it’s-not-racist-honest excuse the author presents in the story itself?
Nate Winchester on 12 October 2012, 15:33 said:
Depends on the length of time between past and “now” in the world. It wouldn’t make any sense to go the other extreme and have NOTHING change about the language and their subtleties after successive generations.
Yeah, it’s that way NOW because economics and technology allow it to be shared and transported everywhere. Collapse all that (like say… an apocalyptic event) and that won’t necessarily change the status. I mean, you just pointed out people have to expend it to use it. So if worldwide shipping collapsed, you think coal will maintain its low value? If the book takes place in one of those areas with low natural occurrences of it, what happens once they’ve burned up their store? Ship more in from England or Kentucky? (oh wait, we said worldwide shipping is no longer) This is why I asked what the location of the book is.
Then one would have to have a world without connotations at all less someone end up reading them as offensive. After all, they did it even to Lord of the Rings. (no, really they did)
The best writers are committed to verisimilitude first, then worry about their readers second. Especially in this modern age where people from around the world can share in the work and much less if you want your stuff to be read past any age you wrote it in. Basically, if you write to avoid all offense, you’ll end up not writing at all.
No argument there, see below on why I made distinction between what could have been done.
Hmm… I do like “chalk” and “iron”.
And of course you’re right about what readers are supposed to bring in. That’s why I initially said:
“So at least in a smart world building”
Which this series obviously isn’t.
Tim on 12 October 2012, 18:03 said:
Well, think about this; if they’re calling people “coals” then it follows that they must be somewhere where there actually is coal, otherwise they’re going off past meanings by default because they’re completely unfamiliar with coal in their current society. Now, coal is a fuel, and fuels have two values:
This places a strict limit on how valuable a fuel can ever be because if 2 exceeds 1 then you cannot actually gain anything by burning the fuel. Now, the absolute value of precious materials is either zero or infinity depending on how you look at it, since they’re not limited in value by their innate traits. This means they can become more or less as valuable as demand makes them without ever hitting any kind of ceiling.
Humans have always appreciated luxury, and it seems this society isn’t short on luxuries what with the drugs on tap and always-on holographic internet, so I can’t see why they wouldn’t value shiny things like every culture in human history before them. It doesn’t make any sense that you’d insult people with a label which associated them with beauty, especially when one premise is that Pearls are thought of as ugly.
There’s a big difference between being offended at traits which could be assigned to races and names the author is actually assigning to them, though.
Nate Winchester on 12 October 2012, 18:32 said:
That would entirely depend on the setting. It’s also possible they could have a stockpile that’s been shrinking or heavily rationed. Kyllorac hasn’t told us yet those details (if the author themself even thought about it – which I doubt).
Yes and no, it also depends on the need itself. Like that old riddle, “how much is a glass of water worth a man dying of thirst?” Even if you were on Arrakis and that glass was worth billions, the man’s immediate needs would probably override the value considerations (or he would die, thereby getting the same result).
Yes but in a post-apocalyptic world (seriously, from what Kyllorac described, does this really sound like one?) the value is probably going to be pushed to zero as everyone concentrates more on survival.
Though, really this brings up another point. How familiar can people underground be with a material that is from the ocean? Though it would be funny if they were getting the name from a leftover box of crayola. This is the ‘greener’ bit from Battlefield Earth all over again.
Wait, what is the power situation of this society? Does the author ever say?
And… “pearls” are supposed to be ugly? That was a South Park episode where the “richers” moved into town! Except in that episode it was supposed to be funny that everyone was using “rich” as an insult.
(of course, that’s why I said in some story you COULD do a word that’s turned around to have a new meaning, but doesn’t look like this one)
Kyllorac on 12 October 2012, 18:47 said:
For the record, Coal is used as a racial slur in-book. “Coal” also has been used as an actual racist slur in the past, which makes the use of it in this book all the worse. Last, the “coal is more valuable survival-wise than pearl” explanation was made up after the book had been published by a fan, i.e. it was not considered by Foyt while she wrote the piece.
Also, it’s Appalachian Mountains – not Application.
And anyone that says coal isn’t pretty hasn’t seen anthracite coal. It’s is super shiny and I have a HOARD. Because. Shiny.
It also burns hotter than the bituminous variety, so it’s even more useful.
Nate Winchester on 12 October 2012, 22:32 said:
Bloody spellcheck.
Is “pearl”? Man, there’s just so much wrong with this book it’s like “suckception”.
Huh, learn something new every day. Foyt should have put… well ANY effort into this.
Wait, this has fans? And so much worthier stuff out there (things where the authors put in EFFORT) doesn’t? There is no justice in the world.
Kyllorac on 13 October 2012, 00:42 said:
Yes. Supposedly.
Yes. Somehow.
Tim on 13 October 2012, 19:11 said:
You still have to be prepared to meet the reader halfway, or they won’t be willing to accept it. This means you can’t expect them to totally set aside the existing meaning of a word for your sake.
As a casual example, you can spend all the time you like building up a religion which values beasts of burden for their contribution to society, their strength, and their quiet determination. You can talk about how former insults are now praises and the names of their idols are the most wonderful names their society has for anything. You can do all that, but they are still going to laugh when the high priest calls the faithful to worship the great stone ass.
Tim on 15 October 2012, 03:12 said:
Also, just to get to theses now I’m not on my phone anymore:
I can’t really see why you’d want to compare yourself to something that’s rationed or running out either, though. And you’re kind of grasping for any situation where this might make sense rather than just admitting that with the available evidence it doesn’t.
To be honest it’s not worth much to him in absolute terms since a glass just means he’ll die of thirst very slightly after he would have done anyway.
Let’s explain this more fully; let’s say Mr. Adams runs a coal-fired power station and Miss Burns runs Burns Industrial Bashing Limited down the road, a plant which produces widgets. Producing a widget requires the bashing machine runs for one hour, using one Arbitrary Unit (AU) of electricity in the process and 50 cents’ worth of metal. The wholesale value of a widget is $1.
Ok, now, as we increase the value of coal, we do not increase how much the Adams station actually generates, or decrease the amount of electricity a bashing machine requires. Only the cost per AU increases. And obviously, if the cost of an AU exceeds 50 cents, Miss Burns is no longer going to be making any money per widget.
The more the cost creeps up, the more the cost of widgets is going to have to creep up with it unless Miss Burns decides to go bankrupt selling widgets at a loss. Eventually the people who actually use widgets aren’t going to be able to afford them anymore no matter how much they actually need them (this is why you can’t ask the man in the desert to give you a billion dollars for the water, even though he might consider it worth that) which means the market will collapse; nobody can make money making widgets, so widget production will cease.
This occurs because the real value of a fuel is defined by the work it can do, which does not change unless you invent more efficient methods of using it. This, by the way, is what the idea of “peak oil” is all about; not that we’ll run out of oil, but that the oil that remains will be so expensive to extract that it will no be possible to do so economically.
Not really; even at its worst, humanity appreciates art and beauty. If anything such trinkets would be valued all the more as a sign of hope and cherished by those who could access them, and valued in trade by those with enough resources to satisfy their immediate needs.
Well, again, one assumes that the language and its associations haven’t disappeared overnight. You’ve probably used phrases like “second rate,” “to the bitter end” and “at loggerheads” even though you’ve never been anywhere near a sail-rigged warship.
Nate Winchester on 15 October 2012, 10:13 said:
Tim, are you dense or just a lover of arguing?
That’s exactly what I’ve been doing all along. I never denied this who set up and story suck. I’ve only been considering… like, if I was an editor, tasked with salvaging this shlock, how (assuming if) could it be done. (think this is the 3rd of 4th time I’ve explained this)
Way back in the early days II wasn’t just about making fun of bad writing, but learning from them so we could be better. “Don’t do that” is too easy of a lesson for me and don’t teach me much. “How could it work” or “How can it be better” is more challenging and instructive to me.
Tim on 15 October 2012, 10:50 said:
Third, fourth, first…
It’s first. If you were trying to explain it before you did a stunningly bad job.
Well, I’m sure every other person on the site is glad you’re here to redress the balance with your powers of haughty condescension.
Asahel on 15 October 2012, 12:53 said:
It’s first. If you were trying to explain it before you did a stunningly bad job.
Really? Because I was able to comprehend it quite easily. The first time he said it was post #27 when he said if the author wasn’t inept, the terms could be used as compliment and insult respectively despite their current connotations.
The second time he explained it was post #30 in which he explicitly repeated himself:
The third time he explained it was post #32 in which he said:
Though not explicit he also opined in post #34 that the author apparently put little effort into the worldbuilding, so we should probably only count post #38 as simply the fourth instead of fifth time he explained it.
Maybe it was easy for me to see because instead of trying to formulate an argument, I was simply reading for comprehension. Just a thought.
Tim on 15 October 2012, 19:58 said:
Perhaps I was a little distracted with the claim that using racial slurs could ever be considered smart worldbuilding.
Nate Winchester on 15 October 2012, 20:13 said:
@Tim, Really?
“Elevens” from Code Geass
“Muties” from X-Men
“Mundies” from Fable
“Buggers” from Ender’s Game
“Mudblood” from Harry Potter
“Blank flanks” from MLP:FiM
And that’s just a small sample from the list.
Racism totally sucks, yes, but unless you’re creating the happy joy world of sunshine and lolipops, it will be a part of the people and cultures involved.
And also, I wasn’t being condescending earlier, just trying to preempt any accusations of racism.
Tim on 15 October 2012, 21:12 said:
Nate, there’s a slight difference between creating an imaginary slur for an imaginary group of people and creating a fictional world with the express purpose of applying a real slur to a real one as if it’s not a slur at all. The question arises as to why you made a fantasy future where black people happily call themselves names.
You can’t get around that with “good worldbuilding;” all that would mean is that the author spent a long time inventing a reason to have black people call themselves names.
I can see what you’re trying to do here, but pick your fights better. There’s simply no right way to do what the author did here.
Asahel on 15 October 2012, 22:10 said:
I’m not sure where you live, but where I live, the black people do happily call themselves slurs that white people aren’t supposed to call them. So, what does that mean, I wonder?
Tim on 16 October 2012, 02:40 said:
It means that a white author shouldn’t do that.
Asahel on 16 October 2012, 08:51 said:
So, what you’re saying is that people of one race are allowed to say and do one thing that people of another race are not allowed to say or do. That’s different from racism how?
Tim on 16 October 2012, 09:54 said:
http://www.derailingfordummies.com/complete.html#playfair
Nate Winchester on 16 October 2012, 10:40 said:
@Tim, As I pointed to Kyll I had no idea that “coal” was an actual term. (never heard it before and if anything, I would have guessed it was another reference to white trash like “redneck” – but then in the Appalachian mountain states coal has… a complicated social history)
From what I’ve found it’s more of a slur from Russia for blacks, other times a slur against whites.
Here it comes out in Korea too as well as more often referring to the Irish. (now that would have been a funny controversy on this book: the Irish getting offended someone’s taking their words)
swenson on 16 October 2012, 10:47 said:
This is getting thoroughly off-topic. If anyone here would like to say that Nate, Tim, or Asahel is racist, don’t. That is not the topic at hand. The topic at hand, as far as I can tell, is that Nate believes a smart worldbuilder could have chosen “Coal” and genuinely meant it as a good thing. Tim disagrees, saying this still isn’t good worldbuilding and the implications are sufficiently unfortunate to outweigh any good intentions.
If there is anything else someone would like to say on the topic of worldbuilding, go right ahead. Otherwise, drop this conversation or move it somewhere else—whispers on the forum are fine, so long as you don’t spill the conversation over to the rest of us, or e-mail each other, or post incoherent rants on random Youtube videos, I don’t care what. Just don’t do it here.
Nate Winchester on 16 October 2012, 13:30 said:
I’d just like to reiterate that I do think Tim was on the right track with “iron” and “chalk” as slurs (well, I’m not a fan of the word “chalk” but can’t think of anything better) – those would make for better world building.