D&D General The Art and the Artist: Discussing Problematic Issues in D&D

[Scribe]

It's really too bad that the Lovecraft name is so associated with cosmic horror.

Yeah, probably?

The concepts and tropes stand on their own though, and I suppose my exposure to them well before the revelation that he had the views he had, lets me divorce the 2 as being unnecessary to associate?

Like I get it, that there are concepts in there that still can touch on these issues, but I lean more towards the cosmic insignificance side, and the existential horror of that revelation..

 

[payn]

Yeah, probably?

The concepts and tropes stand on their own though, and I suppose my exposure to them well before the revelation that he had the views he had, lets me divorce the 2 as being unnecessary to associate?

Like I get it, that there are concepts in there that still can touch on these issues, but I lean more towards the cosmic insignificance side, and the existential horror of that revelation..

Exactly. Unlike other stuff such as fantasy or Sci-Fi, Lovecraft seems to have an oversized presence in the cosmic horror genre.

 

[J-H]

Robert Heinlein, in many of his books, referred to "The Crazy Years" in the late 1900s/early 2000s.

We are there now.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I guess I'll repost what I said in the previous iteration, as my opinion hasn't really changed:

It is fine to like problematic things, it is fine to like art made by terrible people and it is fine to take influence from such art. But what I personally am not comfortable doing is financially supporting people who use their fame and fortune to spread hatred. And that makes Rowling a completely different matter to me than Lovecraft. Lovecraft is long dead and pretty much everyone agrees that his views on race were terrible, Rowling is very much alive and using her considerable influence to promote bigotry. So I will not spend one cent that has even a remotest chance of supporting that. Perhaps in hundred years Potter books are cherished fantasy classics and Rowling's odious views are just an unpleasant footnote with no real power. But today they cannot be overlooked.

 

[Lyxen]

It's a factor. Intent isn't everything, but it isn't nothing, and all these things happen by degrees.

Everything happens by degree, and so people change over time. Looking at a whole authors' life from only a specific period of time will also distort your view far more than necessary, if it is even necessary at all.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Everything happens by degree, and so people change over time. Looking at a whole authors' life from only a specific period of time will also distort your view far more than necessary, if it is even necessary at all.

I'm having trouble understanding your argument. Can you give an example in the context of D&D?

 

[Mercurius]

Aren't people writing on forums now products of their time as well?

This is a hugely important point that rarely every gets made, and applies in both directions: Not only should we try to extend tolerance to those we disagree with today, but also recognize that we, ourselves, are products of our time.

One of the benefits of getting older is you start realizing that you change over time. I'm now in the latter half of my 40s and I would disagree with a lot of what I thought even 10 years ago, certainly 20 years ago.

We are not static beings, and there is no singular, final or perfect worldview to aspire to.

 

[Jackdaw McGraw]

After the ugliness with Rowling, I've been operating under the assumption that any living artist/author/musician/etc. I like is just a tweet away from disappointing me. And any dead artist is just a 'discovered letter' or 'family tell-all' away from being a creep or worse.

I think it's dangerous to assume an artist's views align with your own or are generally un-problematic until proven otherwise. The medium(s) create a sense of familiarity - of intimacy - that is an illusion. These people are (mostly) strangers to you and their work is only a facet. You don't know them. You can't know them.

I'm nearly certain that there are people working in the TTRPG industry today, who are paragons of inclusiveness and progressiveness, who will one day slip up or be outed on their regressive ideas or personal failings. It is bound to happen, so I appraise the current wave if gaming content with hope and appreciation, but cynicism when it comes to the creators, all of them.

As to financially supporting the estates of artists who are famously horrible; my own personal failing is I don't have the moral rectitude to evaluate my purchases that closely. I can safely say I avoid the obvious pitfalls (purchasing from their publishers, buying licensed products) but I'm not savvy enough to opt of out of the impacts that artist has had on the culture. I took the Pottermore quiz and know my Hogwarts house, I own a Cthulhu plushie, I own books I love by author's I despise, purchased from thrift stores.

 

[Yora]

I can't even remember what the word problematic used to mean before it became "I find the past offensive".

 

[Deset Gled]

I can't even remember what the word problematic used to mean before it became "I find the past offensive".

This will be 20 years old in a few months.