What’s Your Type?

Comparisons are odious. That’s what my mother always said to me, and it’s true.

Classification is even odiouser. (Deal with it, spellcheck!) Finding new ways to classify people into groups has been an obsession of Western society ever since the old reliables, class and nationality, went out of style. I remember well how tormenting it was to be in college at the height of the “hyphenated identity” trend: I was classified as a Caucasian-American, but I wasn’t American! And there weren’t any campus groups or insta-friend crowds for white English-speaking immigrants. I felt so misunderstood and left out! Pause and shed a tear or two for my teenage self. Thank you. Now rejoice with me that I’m over it.

I still can’t resist a good classification system, though. My favorite at the moment is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator instrument. Have you taken this test? Based on Jungian psychology, it’s uncannily accurate (go on, put aside your image of Jung as a wild-eyed proto-occultist; he did make sense sometimes). Here’s the estimated breakdown of personality types in the US population. 

The most popular personality classification system in Japan is blood type. Os are gregarious and compassionate, As are uptight and serious, Bs are optimistic and easygoing, ABs are oddballs. I know this is pure superstition because my blood type is A. Uptight, moi? The blood type personality theory got started, like so many unpleasant things, during the interwar heyday of scientific Darwinism. It came back in the 1970s–just like astrology!–and still has a clammy grip on the public mind. In Japan people ask you your blood type the way they might ask you in the West what your sign is.

All this classification business leads in the end to perceived hierarchies. My type is better than your type, sucker. Nowadays we’re required to despise hierarchy and fetishize equality, while simultaneously badmouthing the other lot as a bunch of untermenschen. Breathe deeply. War is peace. Truth is lies. Slavery is freedom.

Fortunately one corner of popular culture remains free from this sort of doublethink and that is fantasy literature. Ever since Tolkien gave us orcs and elves, fantasy worlds have been populated by non-human races which are almost always ranked, implicitly if not explicitly, in a hierarchy with humans at or near the top. And ever since the film versions of LOTR came out, people have been debating whether this kind of thing is really just scientific racism dressed up in horns and hooves.

I generally have no time for this sort of allegorical thinking. “If it’s dark-skinned or non-human, it must represent a black or brown person” is about as shallow as critiques come (and generally quite insulting to black and brown people, too). But when it comes to fantasy films, I think the racism-spotters may have a point. Film transposes humanity onto non-human races by using human actors to portray them. Take the burly chap at left. He does look like a large black man! Presumably because he is one. He’s costumed as one of the Fighting Uruk-Hai, who are my absolute favorite bit of The Two Towers. (I never pictured them looking like this, though. In my mind they don’t look, er … human.)

Then we’ve got Avatar, which utilizes CG to portray the naive (but wise, noble, etc.) natives as … blue-skinned humans! Of course, I get why they did this: the hero could not have had a romance with a native princess who didn’t have more or less human physiognomy. And the romance was the point of the whole film. But it made a lot of people upset.

Perhaps they misunderstood James Cameron’s intentions? Here’s the man himself on his reverence and affection for the downtrodden of the world, whom he explicitly identifies with his Na’vi: “There is a value-system that [indigenous people] naturally have that has allowed them to live in harmony with nature for a long time and those principles, that wisdom, that spiritual connection to the world, that sense of responsibility to each other, that’s the thing that we need to learn.” Oh, all right then.

This is of course unadulterated bosh. Among the many many indigenous peoples of this lovely and teeming world are certainly some principled, wise, spiritual, responsible individuals, and also some pompous blowhards who would fit right in in Hollywood.

At this sort of juncture I always like to remember Professor Challenger among the ape-men:

They all jabbered and chattered together. Then one of them stood out beside Challenger. You’ll smile, young fellah, but ‘pon my word they might have been kinsmen. I couldn’t have believed it if I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes. This old ape-man–he was their chief–was a sort of red Challenger, with every one of our friend’s beauty points, only just a trifle more so. He had the short body, the big shoulders, the round chest, no neck, a great ruddy frill of a beard, the tufted eyebrows, the `What do you want, damn you!’ look about the eyes, and the whole catalogue. When the ape-man stood by Challenger and put his paw on his shoulder, the thing was complete. Summerlee was a bit hysterical, and he laughed till he cried.

Me, too.

This passage demonstrates that comparison can be the enemy of classification. By comparing himself to Challenger, the ape-man overturned the two groups’ classification or each other as enemies. So, by making comparisons across group boundaries, we note similarities that undercut all our easy generalizations.

The comparison between Challenger and the ape-man provokes laughter from both sides. More often, as my mother knew, comparisons provoke envy and contempt or worse.

The most frequently proposed alternative to this sort of odious comparison is tolerance. Can’t we all just get along? We’re all different and that’s OK! Predictably, though, this approach leads at best to mutual indifference and erosion of public spaces. At worst it leads to pressure cookers full of ball bearings at the Boston Marathon finishing line.

I graduated from the same high school as Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. It’s a great school, with some amazing teachers and students from about eighty different countries. Everyone gets along! Everyone is encouraged to be him- or herself! There’s zero pressure to assimilate into American culture or anything else. I experienced this environment as frightfully alienating. I can only imagine how it must have felt to Tsarnaev.

Maybe if someone had laughed at him more often?

Laughter is instant intimacy. Let’s all go and laugh at someone today! But do make sure they get the joke.


Please take a moment to support Amazing Stories with a one-time or recurring donation via Patreon. We rely on donations to keep the site going, and we need your financial support to continue quality coverage of the science fiction, fantasy, and horror genres as well as supply free stories weekly for your reading pleasure. https://www.patreon.com/amazingstoriesmag


  1. Thank you for this closely-reasoned comment, Morgana! I agree that fiction is a mirror of society, and not just that, an engine of society too. That’s why these things matter so much.

    My own reasoning could have been a bit clearer, I see. My point is that I think hierarchies of humans and non-human in books are what they are, and should not be taken to represent the different races of human beings. They’re innocent of racism. But when books are made into films, they do often end up being racist, because the non-humans end up looking more human than the authors intended, and so invite comparisons to human races that were never there in the text! Which is to say if you haven’t *read* LOTR, don’t knock it as racist; that’s all on Peter Jackon IMO.

    Yes, I know many people who *have* read the books also think there is some racism there. But I think they’re wrong 😀

    Where things really get sticky is when authors write multiple non-human races with the *intention* of representing various human races, and say so. To me that is simply egregious. The only way race should be treated in fantasy at all is by literally including people with different skin colors IMO.

    How the market receives that is then a whole other problem.

    1. I do see your point, but I kind of wonder…like, again with the Orcs…I realize they’re not supposed to be human, but they speak and interact with people and have a culture and a society. They are a different race, even if they are non-human, and they are referred to as a race. And so their being inherently evil does kind of make me feel that Tolkien, somewhere along the way, believed that entire races – be they human or otherwise – are inherently evil. And I think that’s really short-sighted, and that it can cause a lot of problems once it gets taken out of context. And while it’s not the responsibility of the author to determine how others interpret their work, I think that an overwhelming majority of fantasy work doesn’t explore race critically enough.

      1. Also, I don’t think there’s anything very wrong with liking something even when you know that it’s problematic. If LOTR /is/ racist, I don’t think that means it should be banned or excluded from reading lists or not lauded as a very important and influential series. But it’s important to consider the media that we consume and understand both what’s good and what’s bad about it.

        1. One more tidbit, just after having re-read your response: Skin color is really not what makes a race. There are entire groups of people with white skin who are considered people of color (I’m thinking of East Asian people specifically, though there are certainly others). Race certainly involves skin color, but there are people whose skin color does not match that of their race. I think a lot more of it has to do with cultural traditions, societal norms, language, etc.

      2. Yeah. I do think taking out of context is the main problem. Yank a fantasy race out of its world and frame it in our own context, and it looks different and perhaps nastier.

        I would argue that it’s fine for an entire *non-human* race to be inherently evil in a fantasy world, because the whole point of fantasy is to, er, be fantastic 😀 This is more of an argument for fantasy as escapism, while you’re arguing, if I understand correctly, for fantasy as a mirror of our world that critically explores topics relevant to us. But at its best, of course, fantasy does both!

        The skin color thing … good point, that’s an important addendum.

        1. I still feel uncomfortable with a non-human race being inherently evil, because they are still a society with their own culture, and that really kind of makes them human, even if they’re not part of the same genetic make-up. They have, at least, human qualities that make them relatable and human-like enough.

          But I’m also uncomfortable with entire races being evil because it’s really kind of implausible. And I understand that fantasy doesn’t have to be based in reality, but there has to be some kind of anchor in it so that people can understand it. And the fact remains that there are people who don’t think it’s implausible for entire races of people to be evil. And we come full circle, I suppose. Man. Unpacking fantasy racism is tough.

  2. This is a topic that is very important to me, since I think that the issues presented in fiction very much represent the way we think as a society. But I’m a little confused as to the point you’re trying to make? Sometimes, you seem to say that fantasy is devoid of racism, and sometimes you seem to be saying that it is rife with it. And I would very much disagree with your assessment of race in LOTR – I don’t think any of the races are considered equal at all. I’ve never actually read the series (I have read The Hobbit), but from what is presented in the films and what I know from people who have read the books, race is a hot-button issue. And I think that’s true of fantasy in general, since so many books have taken Tolkien as their model; there is almost always an entire race of evil people (like the Orcs), and they have nastiness somehow written into their genetic code.

    I personally try to live with the understanding that we are all people and should get along, but that we also shouldn’t forget our own background or belittle the backgrounds of others. It is important to recognize difference just as much as it is important to celebrate similarities. If we were all exactly the same, race issues very probably wouldn’t exist; prejudices would still be there, though, because people aren’t always nice.

    I guess my point is…it’s very important that fantasy authors have historically striven to include many different races in their stories. But the fact remains that most fantasy protagonists are still more-human-than-not, and almost always white, male, and heterosexual. Fantasy works with characters other than that aren’t often given the same kind of acclaim. What does that say about our society?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Previous Article

The Linguistic Wonders of Fez

Next Article

Nuevos trabajos de ciencia ficción en español

You might be interested in …