Given the differences pointed out many times on how Brits & Yanks on
"how the Lunar Empire" is seen, I'd be interested if there's different
commonly-held viewpoints in other countries -- especially outside
Western Europe.
I can see where from certain viewpoints (say, of someone living in SE
Europe, or Russia, or Latin America) where one could infer that the
**US* is the model for the Lunar Empire, not the SU. And 1990s America
with its penchant for intervention works even better! Consider:
- The US is one of the few other great ideological empires, though it
managed to assimilate nearly all its sub-cultures one way or another.
But it's an even stronger ideological empire than the Sovs, however
(ideology *=* American identity; the WASP core is a lot weaker than the
Russian core was for the Sovs);
- The Lunars, as does the US, gleefully promotes its ideology over
others left and right, and is not above using "shady means" to do it on occasion;
- Both are willing to intervene in areas where they'll get jack-all
economic benefit (Corflu, Somalia) for ideological reasons, or to
satisfy the whims of certain members of its gov't. (I can see arguements
to both these things, but I had the impression that Corflu isn't that
particularly successful);
- In the matter of Lunars vs. Sartar, the Lunars are a "superpower"
taking on small countries that have not directly injured *them*, which
fits well for much of American intervention this decade. (And, perhaps,
for Vietnam.). [Disclaimer: I'm not espousing a political view, I'm
saying *this parallel could be made.*]
- I suspect there's a significant Isolationist lobby in the Lunar
Empire, that sees little need to raise taxes to give a bunch of ignorant
hillmen windworshippers the benefit of Lunar rule. "Let the nastly
sheepsqueezers kill each other off, why should we bother to help them?!";
- I strongly suspect the Lunars have the same "We get it right" attitude
that's often common in the US -- without 1300 years of history to make
the US "special," it's the "City on a Hill" mentality;
- Both seem to be "pirate cultures" which willy gleefully embrace
foreign influence: there's gotta be a lot more foreign food available in
a Lunar city than in Boldhome ("Mutton? *Again?*");
- Has a relatively tolerant culture relative to others in Glorantha
(e.g., the relative life expectancy of a troll, sorceror or, indeed,
Gbaji-beast is IMO higher in Glamour than in Boldhome, since there's a
stricter sense of absolute equality than Sartarite "if it ain't a
related to nobody, let's kill it" justice.);
- Despite the LE containing a number of extremely conservative cultures,
it embraces a number of bizarre traditions (chaos, illumination, no
doubt much hedonism) many of its subjects would find offensive, much as
"salt of the earth" Americans are outraged by the US gov't allowing all
kinds of "perversions" to legally continue (Satanist cults, secular
humanism, any music you can dance to);
and, lastly, and perhaps best of all:
- This means we can all give the Dara Happans Southern redneck accents.
"Y'all from outta the valleh, boy? We don't cotton to Orlanthay 'round
these here parts." Clearly, the Dara Happan character in the Glorantha
Movie should be Boss Hogg of Hazard County! Truly, a horrifying image
worthy of the Lunars. ;) MOB, you sure it was Belisarius that was part
inspiriation for Count Julian, and not Bo & Luke Duke?
Of course, there's lots of reasons why it's *not* a good model (it's a
settler state, lacks strong ethnic "subregions," tradition of naval
power, "MTV & Nike" chic unsatisfying for Red Moon fashion, etc.) -- but
it works well enough IMO you could use it as the "concept" for a game.
This isn't to mock Chris' model, note; it's a suggestion that in the the
US, too, can be a fruitful model for evoking a certain kind of
atmosphere for the Lunars, with the caveats of ensuring that you don't
use too many anachronistic elements.
End of The Glorantha Digest V7 #593