[Orlion]

the broken, on 10 April 2012 - 08:41 PM, said:

The most common reason for race in fantasy is that authors seem to think they are writing about england.

Why is it always cold to the north? Cold and mountainous. More primitive tribal people attack from beyond some kind of barrier, vaguely reminiscent of Hadrian's Wall or the Scottish border posts. While suave southerners scheme in the court of the ruler. Meanwhile, a large sea exists to the west, where there's a massive continent no one has ever heard of that could well influence the story somehow
. Where the story takes place is on the west side of a landmass, and the main characters all have customs vaguely english. If somewhere sounds like medieval england, readers assume that the characters are english... ie white. That isn't necessarily true.

Race is just another aspect of that. The natives of england are largely white. Other world's don't have to be like that, but they usually are written like that. If you'd like to change it, write and publish something that addresses it. Like the way Erikson's world doesn't have a gender bias.

And, if the people aren't explicitly described as white, they may not be. It's the readers preconceptions that makes it so. If an author is black, or middle eastern, or Maori, do you automatically assume that all the characters they write share that ethnicity? Why?

Yes, yes, yes! I pointed this out to a fan of a SoIaF, including that Westeros is pretty much shaped like the British Isles, and he got all indignant! No, Martin is original! And so is Vance's Lyonnesse which is also just English history told in a fantasy setting with Skas instead of Vikings. It also explains why the 'world building' in most fantasies is so... small. They are not really building a world, they're lifting it from a small portion of ours.

[worry]

Uh you'd think the York/ Lancaster thing would be the first hint.

[Kanese S's]

Orlion, on 11 April 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

the broken, on 10 April 2012 - 08:41 PM, said:

The most common reason for race in fantasy is that authors seem to think they are writing about england.

Why is it always cold to the north? Cold and mountainous. More primitive tribal people attack from beyond some kind of barrier, vaguely reminiscent of Hadrian's Wall or the Scottish border posts. While suave southerners scheme in the court of the ruler. Meanwhile, a large sea exists to the west, where there's a massive continent no one has ever heard of that could well influence the story somehow
. Where the story takes place is on the west side of a landmass, and the main characters all have customs vaguely english. If somewhere sounds like medieval england, readers assume that the characters are english... ie white. That isn't necessarily true.

Race is just another aspect of that. The natives of england are largely white. Other world's don't have to be like that, but they usually are written like that. If you'd like to change it, write and publish something that addresses it. Like the way Erikson's world doesn't have a gender bias.

And, if the people aren't explicitly described as white, they may not be. It's the readers preconceptions that makes it so. If an author is black, or middle eastern, or Maori, do you automatically assume that all the characters they write share that ethnicity? Why?

Yes, yes, yes! I pointed this out to a fan of a SoIaF, including that Westeros is pretty much shaped like the British Isles, and he got all indignant! No, Martin is original! And so is Vance's Lyonnesse which is also just English history told in a fantasy setting with Skas instead of Vikings. It also explains why the 'world building' in most fantasies is so... small. They are not really building a world, they're lifting it from a small portion of ours.

Why would a fan of ASoIaF get mad at the comparison to England?

I'm pretty sure Martin himself has said that his series is at least partly inspired by the RL War of the Roses, fought in England over who got to be King. Westeros is quite clearly based on the British Isles in parts. I thought that's what he was going for?

[Gust Hubb]

amphibian, on 11 April 2012 - 04:16 PM, said:

Gust Hubb, on 11 April 2012 - 10:03 AM, said:

The real world isn't pleasant at all. That's one of the major reasons fantasy/SF does so well.

I don't understand your quasi-objection here. Would you mind explaining it further?

I'll also say that what we write and read shapes us to different degrees and by extension, shapes the world as well. The effects can be negligible or significant, depending on the book and the socio-cultural circumstances surrounding the book and reader. For example, To Kill A Mockingbird has fostered long-lasting changes in the American educational system, although those changes are neither done nor panacea.

In Harry Potter, despite Rowling painting herself in an authorial corner by putting everybody awesome in Griffyndor, she had a non-token set of multi-cultural of characters (although somewhat whitewashed, due to the whole England/Europe setting). Those books sold truckloads after truckloads and may have eased not only the stigma against reading, but perhaps accepting difference in others in a small way.

I'm not sure what objection you are seeing in that observational post. Would you mind explaining your question further?

In the meantime, I am arguing against the idea that fantasy needs to be very careful about stereotyping and implicit racism related to RL. True, it would be very tasteless for an author to, instead of making a satire, make a celebratory parallel universe with a victorious Hitler, however, this doesn't mean that authors who make an Arab-esq race with turbans and curved blades conquering the world for their monotheistic religion are necessarily bigots influencing the world to remain biased against real life Arabs.

I guess, to put it simply, books are a reflection of the times not the foundation for massive shifts in worldview. Uncle Tom's Cabin is haled as a key piece of the antislavery movement. Really, while I believe it captured the sentiments and thoughts within the antislavery movement, I think the book was merely a banner in an already growing movement that was far from being founded on fictional literature.

Books are influential, but the people endorsing, discussing, and acting alongside them are really what make changes in the world. Books pass on ideas, but as this discussion forum may demonstrate, people are rarely swayed by just words and rhetoric.

Back to racism, I stipulate that books are a reflection of the times, that racism, biases, and imprecise worldviews found in SF are not driving such sentiments, but rather that they at best reenforce what people already hold true, however deeply in their subconsciousness. Really the problem is the family and social structure that imprints biases into the next generation's mind. That and the fact it seems like people are wired to give values (positive or negative) to those around them. I would challenge anyone to find someone who truly has no misconceptions, no false impressions of those around them.

[worry]

I don't think anyone's arguing that Jules Verne should have made Phileas Fogg an Inuit, or Anonymous shouldn't have spent so much time focusing on Anglo-Saxons for Beowulf. On the other hand, I'm just not sure I can agree with your Arab example. Sure, real world racism has a lot more to deal with than fantasy fiction, which is a drop in the pond. But if it's industry-wide, and spans a century, and isn't confronted, and counter-examples are few and far between or ignored or shut out...it has a real world effect. Not just for the white reader, but for the Arab reader who sees these ideas reinforced even where they'd least expect it. Fantasy gets accused of being escapist a lot of the time, and though that can be annoying, it certainly can also be true for a lot of the popcorn stuff...but who is it then, in the real world, that gets to escape? That Arab kid who gets to see his people depicted, yet again, as a monolithic world-swallowing horde? If books are a reflection of their times, what's stopping that reflection from being put under a blacklight, with all the flaws, blemishes, and pores exposed? The times didn't stop Mark Twain from challenging them -- in fact, he saw it as an opportunity. So did Kurt Vonnegut. So does SE. And that's an advantage speculative fiction has over just about every other kind out there...and as an industry -- at least until very recently -- it has generally settled for less.

[amphibian]

We're here, we're cranky and we've the magic starship Righteous Fury to steer!

[BlackMoranthofDoom]

It all depends on the type of setting the author is trying to create. If we take a mythological or historical background then it is logical that only the according races will be featured. That's why it is ridiculous to criticize Tolkien for only portraying most men as whites. His story was inspired by Norse mythology, and other ethnicities do not feature there. The part of Middle- Earth shown is supposed to be the equivalent of Europe. Most epic style fantasy is written by white people and set in medieval type settings (European), so it is only logical that only whites would feature.

I remember seing Red riding Hood, and when the two black gys showed up, I was wondering what they were doing there. They definitelly felt out of place in the setting.

Erikson/ Esselmont have created a world that encompasses many continents and other realms, and while the technology can be approximated to medieval, early Renaissance levels, the world itself is far removed from the traditional 'castles and courts' of that timeframe. Therefore it is logical that geography will play a great role in defining a race. The same can be said with Martin, his world covers multiple continents, and each provides different ethnicities, due to diifferences in climate...

[worry]

Typical Black Moranth response.

[King Lear]

BlackMoranthofDoom, on 17 April 2012 - 03:19 AM, said:

It all depends on the type of setting the author is trying to create. If we take a mythological or historical background then it is logical that only the according races will be featured. That's why it is ridiculous to criticize Tolkien for only portraying most men as whites. His story was inspired by Norse mythology, and other ethnicities do not feature there. The part of Middle- Earth shown is supposed to be the equivalent of Europe. Most epic style fantasy is written by white people and set in medieval type settings (European), so it is only logical that only whites would feature.

I remember seing Red riding Hood, and when the two black gys showed up, I was wondering what they were doing there. They definitelly felt out of place in the setting.

Erikson/ Esselmont have created a world that encompasses many continents and other realms, and while the technology can be approximated to medieval, early Renaissance levels, the world itself is far removed from the traditional 'castles and courts' of that timeframe. Therefore it is logical that geography will play a great role in defining a race. The same can be said with Martin, his world covers multiple continents, and each provides different ethnicities, due to diifferences in climate...

Please study some medieval history.

[BlackMoranthofDoom]

King Lear, on 17 April 2012 - 04:37 AM, said:

BlackMoranthofDoom, on 17 April 2012 - 03:19 AM, said:

It all depends on the type of setting the author is trying to create. If we take a mythological or historical background then it is logical that only the according races will be featured. That's why it is ridiculous to criticize Tolkien for only portraying most men as whites. His story was inspired by Norse mythology, and other ethnicities do not feature there. The part of Middle- Earth shown is supposed to be the equivalent of Europe. Most epic style fantasy is written by white people and set in medieval type settings (European), so it is only logical that only whites would feature.

I remember seing Red riding Hood, and when the two black gys showed up, I was wondering what they were doing there. They definitelly felt out of place in the setting.

Erikson/ Esselmont have created a world that encompasses many continents and other realms, and while the technology can be approximated to medieval, early Renaissance levels, the world itself is far removed from the traditional 'castles and courts' of that timeframe. Therefore it is logical that geography will play a great role in defining a race. The same can be said with Martin, his world covers multiple continents, and each provides different ethnicities, due to diifferences in climate...

Please study some medieval history.

I've already studied it. Did I say something wrong?

[Starling]

BlackMoranth, can I refer you to King Lear's post on the first page, in which she addresses the exact point that you make?

I would like to second KL's point as well. At the very least, the medieval Spaniards had a lot of contact with Moorish peoples moving up from Africa, and in many cases even lived side by side with them in relative tolerance. And consider Columbus. He was at least aware of India, because that is where he was attempting to get when he bumped into America, which then lead to cantact with native American Indians. The end of the medieval era was a time of expanding horizons and exploration, and there were still plenty of kings, queens and royal hangers-on to keep a fantasy writer interested.

This post has been edited by Professor Maximillian Lingenstein: 19 April 2012 - 06:02 AM

[BlackMoranthofDoom]

Professor Maximillian Lingenstein, on 19 April 2012 - 06:02 AM, said:

BlackMoranth, can I refer you to King Lear's post on the first page, in which she addresses the exact point that you make?

I would like to second KL's point as well. At the very least, the medieval Spaniards had a lot of contact with Moorish peoples moving up from Africa, and in many cases even lived side by side with them in relative tolerance. And consider Columbus. He was at least aware of India, because that is where he was attempting to get when he bumped into America, which then lead to cantact with native American Indians. The end of the medieval era was a time of expanding horizons and exploration, and there were still plenty of kings, queens and royal hangers-on to keep a fantasy writer interested.

Yes, the Spaniards had lots of contact with the Moorish, until they finally defeated them in 1492, by taking Grenada . Same goes with the Byzantines interacting with the Ottoman Turks, which lead to the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Contact between Europeans and other ethnicities far predates the Middle Ages, the Romans used to bring slaves from Africa and use them as gladiators and ancient greeks had a strong presence in Asia Minor. Alexander's Hellenistic civilization reached all the way to India. The same goes with the Crusades... In fact the whole Mediteranean area is a hotbed for culture clashes.I never denied there to be any interactions.

I said that most of Tolkien's charcaters were white because the part of Middle Earth spreading from the remains of Beleriand to Mordor, is the equivalent of Europe. Then I stated that geography and climate play a role in defining ethnicity. Kalam and Quick Ben are both from Seven Cities and dark skinned. Coincidence? Definitely not, they came from a very arid environment (desert). I was pointing out that Erikson being an anthropologist, thinks on a global level. Some other authors base their characters on European medievalism, therefore feature prominently whites.

Maybe I was misunderstood, I hope I came across clearer this time.

[amphibian]

BlackMoranthofDoom, on 19 April 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

Some other authors base their characters on European medievalism, therefore feature prominently whites.

Maybe I was misunderstood, I hope I came across clearer this time.

You are still misunderstanding just how far the cultural/ethnic spreading went. As said earlier in the thread by others, Shakespeare knew black people in England of his time. There was at least one black emperor of the Roman Empire. The Celts somehow got from mainland Germany to the furthest reaches of the British isles and to the middle of Turkey. Ibn Batutta in the mid-1300s tripled the distance Marco Polo traveled and got to go through essentially the entire Islamic world in his own lifetime. Before that, we have the Lapps/Sami, the Ainu in Japan, the blue/green-eyed, brown/red-haired peoples of the entire Middle East (of whom my father's family descends from in a convoluted way), the traveling Indian/Chinese sages and the Middle Eastern merchants and so on. People knew of places like India and China - they just didn't understand how far they were or how exactly to get there. The sailing crews recruiting from all over helped further diversity in some ways too.

There is a TON of historical evidence of mixing of cultures and ethnicities all the way back to pre-Roman times and it too often gets ignored because a wholly white Western Europe is easier to believe for some reason (despite the idiocy of that statement).

[Orlion]

amphibian, on 19 April 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

BlackMoranthofDoom, on 19 April 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

Some other authors base their characters on European medievalism, therefore feature prominently whites.

Maybe I was misunderstood, I hope I came across clearer this time.

You are still misunderstanding just how far the cultural/ethnic spreading went. As said earlier in the thread by others, Shakespeare knew black people in England of his time. There was at least one black emperor of the Roman Empire. The Celts somehow got from mainland Germany to the furthest reaches of the British isles and to the middle of Turkey. Ibn Batutta in the mid-1300s tripled the distance Marco Polo traveled and got to go through essentially the entire Islamic world in his own lifetime. Before that, we have the Lapps/Sami, the Ainu in Japan, the blue/green-eyed, brown/red-haired peoples of the entire Middle East (of whom my father's family descends from in a convoluted way), the traveling Indian/Chinese sages and the Middle Eastern merchants and so on. People knew of places like India and China - they just didn't understand how far they were or how exactly to get there. The sailing crews recruiting from all over helped further diversity in some ways too.

There is a TON of historical evidence of mixing of cultures and ethnicities all the way back to pre-Roman times and it too often gets ignored because a wholly white Western Europe is easier to believe for some reason (despite the idiocy of that statement).

I think this gets at a problem with modern literature. 1) It's still based on aristocratic models developed in Victorian times (you know, when all stories seem to be about nobles trying to marry other nobles with a variety of sometimes, minor nobles married higher nobles). This problem is that even though there could have been/probably was some racial interaction on the normal level, one probably did not see this in 'polite society'. Books about nobility or based upon this principle have a very narrow view on race and economic class. 2) The exotic model. Here, we have people traveling to distant lands, and you know these lands are distant and exotic because they are populated with dark skinned savages. You see a variation of this model in Westerns.

Of course, all these novels were written by and for white people. They have been given such prominence in our society and culture above actual history that whenever we think of Medieval history, we think about white bearded folk. Very few writers want to leave these models because the reading populace doesn't want to leave them. Books about white protagonists sell. The only bestselling books featuring non-white characters to my knowledge were Tony Hillerman's Navajo mystery novels, and Joe Leaphorn might as well have been a white guy with a tan.

[amphibian]

Orlion, on 19 April 2012 - 03:00 PM, said:

I think this gets at a problem with modern literature. 1) It's still based on aristocratic models developed in Victorian times (you know, when all stories seem to be about nobles trying to marry other nobles with a variety of sometimes, minor nobles married higher nobles). This problem is that even though there could have been/probably was some racial interaction on the normal level, one probably did not see this in 'polite society'. Books about nobility or based upon this principle have a very narrow view on race and economic class. 2) The exotic model. Here, we have people traveling to distant lands, and you know these lands are distant and exotic because they are populated with dark skinned savages. You see a variation of this model in Westerns.

Of course, all these novels were written by and for white people. They have been given such prominence in our society and culture above actual history that whenever we think of Medieval history, we think about white bearded folk. Very few writers want to leave these models because the reading populace doesn't want to leave them. Books about white protagonists sell. The only bestselling books featuring non-white characters to my knowledge were Tony Hillerman's Navajo mystery novels, and Joe Leaphorn might as well have been a white guy with a tan.

The bolded text makes a fairly good point - however, it is not quite the absolute truth. The Help made the bestsellers list in 2010. A few others didn't make the bestsellers list, but have moved considerable numbers since their publication (The Color Purple comes to mind, as well as Their Eyes Were Watching God, Things Fall Apart and The Good Earth, might even count the Jean M. Auel books that feature neanderthals too). There are yet others scattered here and there, often as YA books too, but honestly, the vast, vast, vast majority of books that make it really big feature white protagonists. That's kind of screwed up.

Definitely agree with your Victorian model too.

[worry]

The other side of that coin though is that if you're writing fantasy, regardless of your real-world influences (conscious, unconscious, whatever), the fact is you have the opportunity to create a whole world. And fantasy authors still routinely focus on white people anyway. This is true in the late 20th and 21st centuries, we don't need to talk about how Tolkien was creating some mythos for the UK, cuz it's irrelevant (or should be) to what people are writing the last few decades. This whole notion of white people writing about white people because it's what they know is ultimately nonsense, because in high fantasy you're not just creating fictional people, you're creating whole fictional worlds. You have full control over who you're gonna let populate it. You don't even have to represent earth cultures at all, or match them up by earth geography: how about a generic medieval farmboy fantasy where the peasants and knights and nobility and royalty are dark skinned and the islands are full of pale-ass platinum blonde primitives. What you "know" in real life is a poor excuse if you're imaginative enough to invent a new planet/continent/nation anyway. You don't have to do SE-level world-building, you can create the most generic fantasy world you desire, but populating it with nothing but white people is a failure regardless of your goals, since everything in this world is yours to decide. Even a "white guy with a tan," whatever the heck that means, is preferable to the same tired palette. Inventing a multi-racial multi-cultural world, even as a white author, is not equivalent to a Jesuit priest writing the official history of the Ojibwa tribe, and drawing that kind of parallel just lets authors -- and the industry -- off the hook. Why should a non-white reader be neutral, let alone happy or satisfied, that you decided to create a world where only white people are important/vital?

This post has been edited by worrywort: 19 April 2012 - 07:14 PM

[JLV]

I think it's fun when authors overturn racial stereotypes, or even use those that are less common.

Can't remember the series, but the main characters are asian-equivilent, but *gasp* not living in a feudal Japan clone. The "barbarians" are white guys, more equivalent to Native Americans, but blonde, and bright eyed. It was interesting

[Tapper]

Terez, on 10 April 2012 - 04:19 AM, said:

Sure, there's a racial element between the Western World and the darker-skinned Islamic cultures

As a side-note: not all Islamic cultures were/ are dark-skinned. iirc, there are a great many 'Aryans' in the middle east: blond and blue-eyed (especially surprising since blue eyes are genetically regressive). There also seems to be at the very least circumstantial evidence that a large part of the Al-Andalusian sultanate was very light skinned, had blue eyes and had to die their hair and beard black thanks to the sheer amount of white harem wives they were having sexy time with. It is one of the reasons why I love Lions of al-Rassan so much: Ammar ibn Kharain is exactly the offspring of one such union.
So it isn't just that the ME were more diverse, it also is that there was inter-racial sex (although I am sure part of it wasn't entirely voluntarily) and thus, mixed offspring.

This post has been edited by Tapper: 20 April 2012 - 07:24 AM

[BlackMoranthofDoom]

worrywort, on 19 April 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

The other side of that coin though is that if you're writing fantasy, regardless of your real-world influences (conscious, unconscious, whatever), the fact is you have the opportunity to create a whole world. And fantasy authors still routinely focus on white people anyway. This is true in the late 20th and 21st centuries, we don't need to talk about how Tolkien was creating some mythos for the UK, cuz it's irrelevant (or should be) to what people are writing the last few decades. This whole notion of white people writing about white people because it's what they know is ultimately nonsense, because in high fantasy you're not just creating fictional people, you're creating whole fictional worlds. You have full control over who you're gonna let populate it. You don't even have to represent earth cultures at all, or match them up by earth geography: how about a generic medieval farmboy fantasy where the peasants and knights and nobility and royalty are dark skinned and the islands are full of pale-ass platinum blonde primitives. What you "know" in real life is a poor excuse if you're imaginative enough to invent a new planet/continent/nation anyway. You don't have to do SE-level world-building, you can create the most generic fantasy world you desire, but populating it with nothing but white people is a failure regardless of your goals, since everything in this world is yours to decide. Even a "white guy with a tan," whatever the heck that means, is preferable to the same tired palette. Inventing a multi-racial multi-cultural world, even as a white author, is not equivalent to a Jesuit priest writing the official history of the Ojibwa tribe, and drawing that kind of parallel just lets authors -- and the industry -- off the hook. Why should a non-white reader be neutral, let alone happy or satisfied, that you decided to create a world where only white people are important/vital?

I absolutely agree with you. There is no reason to limit characters to stereotypes. I think the reason why epic fantasy is heavily rooted in medievalism is because of the idea of mystery. The Middle Ages were a time of folklore and belief in magic, and fantasy tries to emulate that nostalgia of having magic be a present yet mysterious force. It is also important to remember that the Middle Ages were a rather sombre period. Knowledege from antiquity had been largely forgotten (Greeks, Romans, Egyptians...). The Renaissance period that followed could be viewed as the enlightenement age, where the antiquity was discovered. Having an entire planet populated by white people only is ridiculous.

[Fist Gamet]

I remember, some time ago, watching TV programmes that explored the racial makeup of the Roman Empire and being deeply influenced by the discovery that it was a very multi-racial, multi-cultural Empire that was suprisingly tolerant. Even last week a series exploring this again began on BBC2 (and iirc, another on BBC3) uncovering the vast mix of people who became Roman Citizens. Indeed, it seems that in its later life very few Romans were born and bred in Italy. I envisioned this widespread Empire of many diverse races and cultures where ex-slaves and other 'races' could, through work, merit and connections, rise high in society. It was the idea of what the Empire representated that was all important. Many historians, for example, believe Cleopatra was a black african, which did not perturn either Ceasar or Marc Anthony. There was resentment because she was not Roman, not, it seems, because of her race and colour. In fact, as far as I know, the colour of a man's (or woman's) skin never really mattered to the Romans at all and they had a number of non-Italian Emperors.
My point, is that whilst a large body of Fantasy Works based on the Medieval-European model would, by necessity, be pre-dominantly about white races and cultures, there exists fantasy work that does not. In fact, imho, if a writer chose to write an epic work based on the Euro-Medieval model and made the races predominantly black or asian I think they'd run the risk of that issue becoming the central talking point about their work, rather than the story. Perhaps some writers would welcome this but I know that I write because I want to tell great stories with a host of characters, exploring issues that interest me - but I want to be judged on the merit of my work, not on whether or not I am challenging convention and tackling mighty issues. Fantasy and fiction is about escapism, plain and simple. Suspension of disbelief and wonderous things. Take Robert Howard who, quite in defiance of the complexities of the world around him, wrote magnificent stories of a far simpler life and existence - there is a reason Conan often ended the story with just his sword, his wits and a few coins to go on. Yet he was strapping white warrior who often battled the dark-skinned savages of the south.
There is room for all types of characters and stories and heroes but I really do not believe that it is the duty of the fantasy writer to try and balance modern issues in their work - it's fantasy! It should have a recognisable core for the reader and then lots of exotic peoples and adventures around it. In my own work I have centred the second book around an Empire based loosely on the Rome I first mentioned, but only in the exotic make up of the people - the soldiers are from many lands, bolstered by far flung mercenaries. The third book is of Merchant Republic of sea-farers and conquerers further south and they are pre-dominantly black. But none of this is important beyond allowing me to populate the world with a wide mix of peoples and explore how their cultures and their religious beliefs conflict. I am not trying to rebalance the scales because that's not my job.

Martin has written a terrific and diverse world based on the Euro-Medieval model, but the creation of the mongol-like Dothraki (which he has given a fairly rich heritage, imho) and the dark skinned people who do not live in Westeros is fine by me. In writing epic fantasy you really need to create cultures and races that are different, based upon where they live, where they came from, the geography of their lands, the climate, history, migrations and so on. You just can't have westeros pre-dominantly dark-skinned unless you move it geographically (in which case the whole Wall and Winter thing can't happen) or there is some very good historical reason for it. The one way he could have done this would be to make the Targaryen's black but I suspect he would have been accused by some of racism if he had.

Personally I think the Euro-Medieval model has been done to death and there are many interesting cultures to explore and bend and play with for the writer. Having said that, my northern nations are not wholly free of the influence because you want to have some recognisable elements for the reader, thus, I have Kings and Knights (though they are a bit different) and castles and civil war where soldiers wear armour and hack at one another with swords and axes. And, due to the geography and climate, they are pre-dominantly white. I see nothing wrong with that.