ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: crusher_bob on June 24, 2013, 07:59:27 AM
-
I've been thinking about the mindset difference between the 'old' Wardens (recruited before Dead beat) and the 'new' Wardens (recruited after Dead Beat)).
It's my hypothesis that the 'old' Wardens could mostly be described as something like 'peace officers' while the new Wardens can more accurately be described as 'soldiers'.
Notice that the poster boy for old school wardens is Morgan, who is described several times as a 'burnt out police officer'. But note that what little we see of the new warden training looks much more like military training than police training.
Article discussing a bit about this difference:
Asking Our Soldiers to Do Police Work: Why It Can Lead to Disaster (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/01/asking-our-soldiers-to-do-police-work-why-it-can-lead-to-disaster/251380/)
Anyone else have any thoughts about this?
-
Old school Wardens are essentially soldiers in occupied territory whose goal is to further the goals of the occupying force (The White Council). They aren't there to be nice but to do a dirty, dangerous and potentially soul-destroying job without breaking any of the Laws. At the same time. Due to the gray areas of magic, they are encouraged to act the part of judge and executioner as well, so they take the axiom 'judged by 12 than carried by 6' closer to heart than normal. Probably more likely to be more concerned with protecting the White Council's goals than mundanes in general (which is why Dresden gives them such a headache).
Young Wardens as typified by Ramirez strike me as soldiers of a liberating army ("We're here to kick ass and save the day") and have the mindset to match. They haven't been burned out yet and might be more tolerant in gray ares of the Laws. More likely to have a "Serve and protect while kicking ass while looking good" attitude (which is why many of them side with Dresden on some issues). More likely to have a somewhat more benevolent attitude towards mundanes,IMO.
-
I think the difference is also a matter of experience. I got the strong impression that old-school Wardens weren't recruited until they'd accumulated several decades of maturity, seasoning, and life-experience. New Wardens, by contrast, are mostly in their teens and twenties, and have all the recklessness and lack of good sense that that implies.
-
The only real issue that I can see with that analogy is that soldiers are much more dangerous than police officers.
But the "police" Wardens like Morgan are way tougher and scarier than the "soldier" Wardens like Ramirez.
-
I see the old Wardens as being much more intolerant of Lawbreakers than the newer Wardens, mostly because of the mortal cultures they grew up in. Morgan was raised in 1800s Brtain, at the height of the Empire and East India Company. His wasn't an era where prevention was emphasised in the justice system, which shows pretty heavily in his views on Black Magic. Ramirez grew up in 1990s California. That's a pretty huge difference in culture right there.
-
Speaking of ancient Wizards...I wonder how the White Council acts when it comes to issues of race and sexuality.
Slavery was legal in America until 1863. That's only 150 years ago, there are people in the White Council old enough to have owned (legal) slaves in their younger years.
I would hope that the international nature of the Council would help with that, but...I'd expect a lot of senior Wizards to be old-fashioned in the worst sense of the term.
-
I would think that the Wardens would not be particularly fond of slavery, on the whole, since it's not a long step from owning slaves to making them with black magic. That said, they wouldn't have enforced it since it was a matter for mortal politics.
-
They might still be super racist, even if they weren't actually slave-owners.
-
Speaking of ancient Wizards...I wonder how the White Council acts when it comes to issues of race and sexuality.
Slavery was legal in America until 1863. That's only 150 years ago, there are people in the White Council old enough to have owned (legal) slaves in their younger years.
I would hope that the international nature of the Council would help with that, but...I'd expect a lot of senior Wizards to be old-fashioned in the worst sense of the term.
Since magical talent is not affected by gender or ethnicity, I'd suspect the Council's "powerism" trumps their racism or sexism.
-
I see the old Wardens as being much more intolerant of Lawbreakers than the newer Wardens, mostly because of the mortal cultures they grew up in. Morgan was raised in 1800s Brtain, at the height of the Empire and East India Company. His wasn't an era where prevention was emphasised in the justice system, which shows pretty heavily in his views on Black Magic. Ramirez grew up in 1990s California. That's a pretty huge difference in culture right there.
That's a really good point. Never occurred to me.
(I don't think Morgan's quite that old, though. I had the impression he was a young man in WWI, which puts him a bit after the East India Company era. I figured he was a bit over 100, not 150+. Though I guess all we really know is that he fought in WWI, given wizard aging I guess he really could have been 60 or something then...)
-
Since magical talent is not affected by gender or ethnicity, I'd suspect the Council's "powerism" trumps their racism or sexism.
Yeah, this would probably have prevented them from slipping really severely into racism.
What I really want to know is, how did the White Council transition from the strongly Eurocentric thing it's hinted to have been till fairly "recently" (in wizard-lifespan terms) to the current fairly multicultural Senior Council? Did they "absorb" pre-existing Asian, Native American, etc. wizard-organizations? Did Listens-to-Wind and Ancient Mai start their wizarding career as members of one of those other organizations? (Rashid probably did, if he's as old as hinted... though the Middle East is maybe within the Council's 'original area of influence', given that the Roman Empire controlled parts the Middle East.)
-
Another thing to keep in mind is that "tribalism" didn't become "racism" until around three or four hundred years ago, possibly even more recently (with the advent of Darwinism and stuff). During the Roman Empire, Roman citizens were the "tribe" and it didn't matter what your race or ethnicity was. Non-Roman citizens were the folks that got stomped on and abused and enslaved. During the Crusades, professed members of the Church were the "tribe" and as long as you were one of them or decided to become one of them, you were all good. Pagans and heathens were not members of the "tribe" and so they got the short end of the stick. During WWII members of the Nazi party were the "tribe" and anyone outside the party (especially fellow Germans) were targeted for subjugation and extermination.
Sorry, this was off the Warden topic, I just felt like I should chime in. When I read history books and stories, the mention of race is rare and people seem to be primarily concerned with "can we get along with these outsiders," regardless of where they come from and what they look like.
-
I would think that the Wardens would not be particularly fond of slavery, on the whole, since it's not a long step from owning slaves to making them with black magic. That said, they wouldn't have enforced it since it was a matter for mortal politics.
I think that's a logically sound argument but I disagree with it just the same, on the basis that The White Council doesn't really care about things outside magic, by and large. If Harry Dresden had killed a mortal with an icepick for no discernable reason rather than kill Justin DuMorne with magic in self defense, he wouldn't have found himself under the Doom of Damocles.
I think non-magical morality seems to be something they're fairly disinterested in, as unpleasant as the implications of that are sometimes.
-
I think that's a logically sound argument but I disagree with it just the same, on the basis that The White Council doesn't really care about things outside magic, by and large. If Harry Dresden had killed a mortal with an icepick for no discernable reason rather than kill Justin DuMorne with magic in self defense, he wouldn't have found himself under the Doom of Damocles.
I think non-magical morality seems to be something they're fairly disinterested in, as unpleasant as the implications of that are sometimes.
It's not just non-magical morality, but morality period. As Luccio pointed out, the Laws Of Magic aren't primarily about right and wrong, but about control, binding wizards and limiting their danger. The Council stands neutral on matters of right and wrong because it's the only way they know to prevent civil war.
-
It's not just non-magical morality, but morality period. As Luccio pointed out, the Laws Of Magic aren't primarily about right and wrong, but about control, binding wizards and limiting their danger. The Council stands neutral on matters of right and wrong because it's the only way they know to prevent civil war.
Indeed.
-
Another thing to keep in mind is that "tribalism" didn't become "racism" until around three or four hundred years ago, possibly even more recently (with the advent of Darwinism and stuff). During the Roman Empire, Roman citizens were the "tribe" and it didn't matter what your race or ethnicity was. Non-Roman citizens were the folks that got stomped on and abused and enslaved. During the Crusades, professed members of the Church were the "tribe" and as long as you were one of them or decided to become one of them, you were all good. Pagans and heathens were not members of the "tribe" and so they got the short end of the stick. During WWII members of the Nazi party were the "tribe" and anyone outside the party (especially fellow Germans) were targeted for subjugation and extermination.
Sorry, this was off the Warden topic, I just felt like I should chime in. When I read history books and stories, the mention of race is rare and people seem to be primarily concerned with "can we get along with these outsiders," regardless of where they come from and what they look like.
So maybe they are really bigoted, against non-Wizards.
That would actually make sense, since Wizards are in many ways a distinct subspecies of humanity. They breed true, mostly, and powerful ones tend to have powerful children.
That could lead to some nasty blood purity stuff.
-
So maybe they are really bigoted, against non-Wizards.
That would actually make sense, since Wizards are in many ways a distinct subspecies of humanity. They breed true, mostly, and powerful ones tend to have powerful children.
That could lead to some nasty blood purity stuff.
I actually have a feeling that Jim was going in that direction in the initial inception phase, until Harry Potter came out. One wizard named Harry with a series that deals with magical racism between wizards and non wizards, family purity, etc. is one thing. If that other, less popular wizard named Harry starts doing the same...you get the idea.
-
So maybe they are really bigoted, against non-Wizards.
That would actually make sense, since Wizards are in many ways a distinct subspecies of humanity. They breed true, mostly, and powerful ones tend to have powerful children.
That could lead to some nasty blood purity stuff.
Not really. The only canon examples we have are the McCoy line. Martha Liberty has multitudes of great-great-grandchildren, but I can't recall if any of them are magical. Luccio looks over her family but she doesn't mention any that have shown talent.
-
Martha's family and Luccio's family are never shown "on-screen", IIRC. So we don't know how strong they are.
But the McCoy line is full of powerful Wizards, and Molly's mother Charity was also a spellcaster. We don't have many examples of spellcaster procreation, but the ones we have indicate that power is partially inherited.
-
Martha's family and Luccio's family are never shown "on-screen", IIRC. So we don't know how strong they are.
But the McCoy line is full of powerful Wizards, and Molly's mother Charity was also a spellcaster. We don't have many examples of spellcaster procreation, but the ones we have indicate that power is partially inherited.
Hence WN.
-
Yeah, this would probably have prevented them from slipping really severely into racism.
What I really want to know is, how did the White Council transition from the strongly Eurocentric thing it's hinted to have been till fairly "recently" (in wizard-lifespan terms) to the current fairly multicultural Senior Council? Did they "absorb" pre-existing Asian, Native American, etc. wizard-organizations? Did Listens-to-Wind and Ancient Mai start their wizarding career as members of one of those other organizations? (Rashid probably did, if he's as old as hinted... though the Middle East is maybe within the Council's 'original area of influence', given that the Roman Empire controlled parts the Middle East.)
I suspect that magical civilization simply followed mundane. In other words, LTW and his traditions were absorbed into the White Council around the same time and in the same way that Native American culture was absorbed into the European-American culture of the United States as a whole.
-
So maybe they are really bigoted, against non-Wizards.
That would actually make sense, since Wizards are in many ways a distinct subspecies of humanity. They breed true, mostly, and powerful ones tend to have powerful children.
That could lead to some nasty blood purity stuff.
This is exactly the sort of conclusion I've come to when trying to read up in Our World and Your Story about what makes a wizard a Wizard. I've also asked my partners in crime on ragnarok.gamingsandbox.com who are much more familiar with the novels than I.
And that's pretty much it. You're only a wizard if the White Council says you're a wizard. Even if you can do everything a wizard can do (or more). If you're not acknowledged as a wizard by the White Council, they tend to see you as a dangerous element that needs to be watched or controlled. They call you a sorcerer, applying negative connotations to that word when they use it. It's almost as derogatory as calling a practitioner a warlock.
Yeah, so, if you have the training, education, and bloodline AND the White Council acknowledges this after you pass their tests -- you're a Wizard. If you have the training, education, and bloodline and the White Council does NOT acknowledge this and you haven't taken or have failed their tests (some people do that on purpose) -- you're not a Wizard! :)
-
Another favorite Aspect: "NOT a White Council Wizard!"