Writing a form of Fantastic Racism

So one of the major themes in my work is a conflict between people who use magic to extend their lifespans (effectively making them The Ageless) and those who choose not to. One thing about this that's a bit odd is that the prejudice exists on both sides

• Ageless are sometimes a bit unwilling to allow 'Mortals' enter higher positions (as they believe they can't truly be 'experienced' enough) Representation in this setting is very important because Mortals and Ageless often have wildly differing perspectives. There is some stereotyping that Mortals are unintelligent,etc. as well
• Much of Anti-Ageless prejudice is based off of the belief that magically extending your lifespan is disrespectful to the gods and will lead to problems for everyone.

• A problem I'm having is that I'm not exactly sure how to portray this believably, because I haven't been able to find a Real Life equivalent or near-equivalent. Another thing is that I can't base it off of a majority of Real Life prejudices (racism, sexism, etc.) because the Ageless make a conscious decision to become an Ageless.

I'd appreciate if anyone could share their thoughts on it.

As far as I can tell, you're right. There is absolutely no analogous situation to this in real life. I kind of admire you for your willingness to write about something with so many difficult implications, made so much the harder by the issue's unreality.

If I understand correctly, magic essentially gives people effective immortality? My first thought is that people must be massively religious if they'd be willing to turn that down in favor of death, though I imagine the promise of a paradisaical afterlife probably does a great deal to ameliorate that. Are the Ageless particularly atheistic?

yey

Well the immortality is essentially a Resurrective Immortality, it's a bit like on Doctor Who where the Doctor 'dies' and resurrects into a new body sans the personality changes (the situation actually in the story is much more complex than that however) There are some situations where an Ageless CAN die.

• To clarify, there are a variety of reasons why a person might want to be immortal in this setting (besides religious convictions) including the fact that you wouldn't be able to keep the same body your whole life (which could set some people off) Also, sure, you could get stabbed 23 times, die and then come back, but you still have the painful memory of being stabbed multiple times and bleeding to death. Because of the increased likelihood of being exposed to traumatic situations, Ageless people have a slightly greater chance of developing emotional problems (most often PTSD-like) Plus there's the fact that if you're raised in a family/community that's predominantly Mortal people, choosing to become an Ageless would almost certainly mean outliving your family and friends.
  • No, the Ageless aren't particularly more likely to be atheist.

Any thoughts?

That's interesting, certainly. I'm dealing with something quite similar in my own work, insofar as there are circumstances that create their own unique issues not comparable in the slightest to the real world. I can offer my own perspective on how to go about this, if you want. As an example, have you given any thought to the economic implications of voluntary immortality? Someone who has lived multiple lifetimes would have had more time to hone their craft, for one.

Incidentally, I never really bought the typical use of these sorts of issues in fiction, like you see in for example X-Men. I always thought that approach was kind of lazy, using mutation as a stand-in for some other social issue that it doesn't actually resemble in the slightest way. It's a decent way to disguise overt social commentary, but I think it's generally much better to treat the facts of the world as they are rather than breaking from them to try and send a message.

yey

Something I was thinking of trying would be making sure it's made clear to the reader that the prejudice is two sided.

• Ageless to Mortal prejudice is much less in a majority of places, mostly due to the fact they don't have particularity strong reasons (religion) like the Mortals do.
  • Any other tips that could help with this?

Well, what's the population proportion of the immortals? I imagine they'd be outnumber by mortals (thousands to one, at the very least) and the places they'd be best established would be locales with immortal rulers- think Lord Vetinari, only he gets to live forever.

The thing about these immortals is that they don't seem to get any other nifty powers to go along with it- so they can't be as overtly prejudiced in places where they're not in power. Sure, you get a spiffy new body whenever you wear out the old one, but that won't actually save you from a mob with Pichforks And Torches. Even worse, you don't need to be a terribly creative sadist to come up with ways to make a captive immortal really, REALLY regret that decision to live forever. (I shudder to think how this world's anatomy textbooks get written.) So while the prejudice might run both ways, the immortals will probably be less free to exercise it simply by dint of inferior numbers.

edited 26th Jan '14 3:16:44 PM by edgewalker22

I wasn't planning on making a enormous population difference between the Ageless and Mortals, due to the fact A. The Ageless don't have to worry about their biological clocks ticking and can wait much longer to have children B. This universe has pretty effective Fantasy Contraception

• The mention of anatomy textbooks does sound disturbing, but I actually hadn't thought about that. I'm not exactly sure if I will use that, but I commend you for your creativity

edited 26th Jan '14 4:49:46 PM by TheMuse

You might want to think a bit about the populations. If immortality is excessively accessible and irreversible, then the population's going to be some Gallifreyan drift in the population- birth rates will stay more or less constant (assuming the contraception is unrelated to the immortality) but the death rates will drop. Eventually, the population will hit a point where, on the whole, people can be born but can't die. Exploring the consequences of a society where a segment of the population is effectively static is a story in and of itself.

...but is a story in and of itself. The different fundamental facts of this society make it sound more like The Left Hand Of Darkness, really speculative fiction.

To clarify, the immortality is reversable and there are some situations where an 'Immortal' person can die (that don't involve a super rare dark magic or anything) And alot of Ageless people eventually (maybe after a 1000 years or so) choose to end their immortaly.

• I was actually thinking they'd have to worry about OVE Rpopulation, if that makes sense. Either way, I was going to make sure that the government actually puts a great degree of effort into regulating population rates (not to the exent of getting totalitarian-y) to make sure they stay relatively constant.

It can still be an analogue for religious and political prejudice - I mean, its not like you're born a Christian or Republican (no matter how hard your parents try to convince you otherwise). If the Mortals see the Ageless as perverse and blasphemous and the Ageless see the Mortals as self-righteous and fanatical well there's conflict right there. The Ageless would be better able to cultivate and maintain power, even going so far as to keep the Mortals from getting certain jobs; the threat of angry mobs would cause the Ageless to create a culture of fear in which Mortals are more feared than the Ageless. I'm assuming there are non-magical people in this world.

Level 3 Social Justice Necromancer. Chaotic Good.

In this setting, basically anyone can learn some degree of magic, but still, there would be some people who would just not use it for a variety of reasons (see it as promoting laziness, don't want to put in the effort to learn, don't see it as necessary for their lifestyle, etc.)

• And the thing with that is, from how you described the situation, it leaves a lot of room for people to interpret the Ageless as 'oppressors' and the Mortals as the 'oppressed'

I say this because a majority of the main cast happens to be people who are Ageless and if a majority of people see them as people on 'the top of the food chain' and are mistreating the 'normal people' it could make them Unintentionally Unsympathetic and/or harder to identify with

I'm not saying I'm not alright with Alternative Character Interpretation or that one can wholly control audience reactions, but I to avoid the Eight Deadly Words and/or the setting being interpreted as a Crapsack World

edited 27th Jan '14 4:41:35 PM by TheMuse

Overpopulation sounds like a real problem. Even if immortality is irreversible and immortals can be killed against their will (making it not really immortality, more like a renewable lease on life,) "a society where people usually don't die unless they want to" sounds like a place with a skyrocketing population. One thing you might to consider is immortality causing sterility (because reasons) just so you don't have a bunch of children-of-immortals with an inside line on the immortality process who go on to have kids of their own... beyond a certain point you can hit a form of Zombie Arithmatic, and "the government keeps the population stable" in spite of this leads to some impressive Fridge Horror.

I was planning on at least implying that in the ageless society, people not only have fewer children (probably 2-3 maximum) but they are also discouraged from doing so. Including that even the ageless people can die 'normally' before reaching adulthood would also bring down the population a pinch. I'm trying to think of ways the government could try to regulate the population (frequent censuses, etc.) without it making it out to be totalitarian or eugenics-y

Honestly? I'd cheat here. Finagle birth rates, screw up the sex ratio (weight it towards males,) or say that birth rates fall as the population of immortals rises (because they're monopolizing all the life force, or something)- the amount of control a medieval fantasy esque type government could impose on society without Draconian measures are minimal. Remember, a largely agrarian society often has much looser civil control (fewer people, more spread out, harder to manage all 'round) and incentivizes people to grow their own workforce.

Well having the Ageless people have much lower fertility rates would actually make sense for the setting, which addresses one of the major things that could cross the Willing Suspension Of Belief

• One part of the setting, that's back story but still has a great affect on the events of the story is a major war between the Ageless and the Mortals that's still regarded as a rather controversial topic.

I was thinking that one of the major triggers of the war (besides the long seated conflict) could be The Ageless people setting up the age to participate it government to something that many Mortal people regard as unreasonable, some radicals incite violence, escalates into a war, is later resolved, but some resentment is still there

• Does that sound okay so far?

I ask because I don't want to run into Unfortunate Implications by people thinking the Ageless people are oppressive assholes

How close do you think I can get to Does This Remind You of Anything? without it getting blatant?