[DRAGON #305] F-bomb dropped, Doc M fascinated.

[Sagan Darkside]

Give in to their attempts at censorship, and you've abandoned the hope of appealing to a wider and more diverse audience by choosing instead to cater to a fanatical (if vocal) few.

I don't recall calling for censorship. Would you like to quote me?

I read GRRM. I enjoy GRRM. I don't even have a huge problem with his sniplet being in Dragon- it is the "mature" trend of the magazine. Perhaps if I was still thirteen, then I may appreciate it. Today, I would rather just have something useful in the magazine instead of items in there for shock value.

For those who don't like what Dragon does, fine. Quit your complaining and move along.

Wow, it never takes long to find a hypocrite.

If you don't like to listen to opposing views on the state of Dragon, then don't read a thread on the topic.

There are literally thousands of other publications out there....

I don't care. I care about my hobby and the a regular publication that has long been a cornerstone of it.

SD

 

[Jemal]

3 things to say, the first 2 are disclaimers.

1 - I haven't had time to read this whole thread, Just the first page, so I hope the discussion hasn't moved too far off topic.

2 - I'm not by any means condoning Swearing or saying vulgarity is a good thing.

3 - (Which contains the actual message)

CENSORSHIP

Moderator edit -- yeah, it's censorship, but you're not allowed to do a run-around on the profanity filter.

 

[EricNoah]

Wow, it never takes long to find a hypocrite.

SD

That's enough (and not just SD -- yours just happens to be a handy example). Express your opinion, but don't attack each other. The thread will close if I feel like attacks are continuing.

 

[Sagan Darkside]

That's enough (and not just SD -- yours just happens to be a handy example). Express your opinion, but don't attack each other. The thread will close if I feel like attacks are continuing.

I apologize- I don't take well to being called a fanatic. Especially when it would be clear when reading my posts in this very thread.

I will just remember to use the ignore list in the future.

SD

 

[Dr. NRG]

I am posting here because I DO like Dragon. I am posting here in an effort to defend what I see as a justifiable and wise editorial decision. I am not posting here because I want to read the particular opinion of any one participant. I hope this clears me of any charges of hypocrisy. And now, respecting the requests of our esteemed moderator, we return to our regularly scheduled topic.

When condemnation is heaped upon the heads of editors for publishing certain material, it is an attempt to convince them not to publish the same kinds of material again. If that is not your goal, Sagan Darkside, I am misinterpreting and ask you to correct me. If, in fact, you are attempting to get them not to publish what you don't like, you are urging them to censor the contents of their magazine, sanitizing it for your protection. I, on the other hand, am urging them not to do so. You can call it something other than an attempt at encouraging censorship if you like, but that will not make it so.

NRG

 

[Arnwyn]

From what I understand, the original post can be pretty much paraphrased as "Should this be in Dragon?".

Simply put, it's all about changing demographics. While Dragon in the past may have been aimed at teens and was fine for younger people, it is clear that the gaming demographic is aging. Rapidly. Therefore, to make the most sales, Dragon must change along with the gamers.

While some might not like it, such is the nature of business. You stay in business by appealing to the largest segment of the population that your magazine is aimed at.

As other posters have alluded to, Dragon does not seem to be aimed towards non-gamers, or even new gamers. Therefore, they do have some flexibility in adding material that is less appropriate for younger audiences.

My guess is that the trend that is appearing in Dragon will capture and hold more gamers than otherwise, based on the changing demographic. Only Dragon staff who have access to sales figures will know for certain. I expect them to take whatever action will lead to such an outcome.

(A good comparison would be the video game industry, which - Nintendo notwithstanding - has pretty much recognized that video game players are aging, and are thus targeting more appropriate games for that particular segment. A wise move that has paid off.)

Personal note: I like this trend, simply because I like companies who recognize and change appropriately to a changing audience. Dragon readers (generally, of course) are probably not that young anymore. If you don't want your kids reading it, you be a good parent and filter it out just like you filter everything else out.

[The whole reason this came up is that some people don't recognize a changing demographic, so such changes are shocking to them. If they did recognize it, they would realize that they aren't the only fish in the Dragon pond.]

 

[Dr Midnight]

All the railing against censorship- it seems to me that people just like having a cause to vent righteous fury against. I mean, I don't mind the word at all, but would it have hurt the story at all for the word to be swapped out with any vaguer term? I'd have (tried to have) done it just to avoid complications with complaint letters and cancelled subscriptions.

I'm guessing a likely reply is "But if you censor the art, you sully the artist's vision," or something thereabouts. To that I'd say read the word's usage on page 101. That's not a necessary passage. It's funny, sure, but would changing it interfere with art? I don't believe so. The story would be just as good... just edited, but that means censored and thus horrid in the eyes of some. C'mon.

 

[dpdx]

Was that what you were going for? I dunno, doesn't read like sarcasm...

Interesting. I would have thought that the context would have been enough for readers to realize I wasn't being serious.

Oh, I know. I didn't put a smiley, or encase my paragraph in mock vB code [SARCASM] tags!

Boy, maybe everybody really DOES need to take a breath!

[on edit: Lest anyone lump me in with the righteous, one of my favorite quotes is "The Internet interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it."]

 

[Dr Midnight]

Interesting. I would have thought that the context would have been enough for readers to realize I wasn't being serious.

Oh, I know. I didn't put a smiley, or encase my paragraph in mock vB code [SARCASM] tags!

Boy, maybe everybody really DOES need to take a breath!

[on edit: Lest anyone lump me in with the righteous, one of my favorite quotes is "The Internet interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it."]

Now now, no call for all that. I despise smilies, but use them as sometimes they're very necessary to communicate that you're not saying things with a hurtful manner. I've joked before and not used the damned smilies here, and people didn't understand and got pissed. You did it too. Your context was deplorable, and should be censored.

 

[mkarol]

I mean, I don't mind the word at all, but would it have hurt the story at all for the word to be swapped out with any vaguer term?

I would say yes because it would not be authentic to the character. One of Martin's strengths is that he designs _and_ implements a believable system where the world and the characters therein are true to the system. I think that is what people mean by 'realism,' not reality measured against the Authors real world, but internal integrity measured against the Author's creative world.

It would be jarring to read about a character in a complete world who was dark, gritty, and mean who expressed his anger by saying "Dangit!"

Could you imagine watching the _Bradey Bunch_ (the tv show, not the spoofing movie) and hearing Carol Bradey say "Mike, I want to ride you like a stallion, come and do vile naughty things to my most intimate parts!" Even without the 'f-word' this would still jar someone who was aware of the normal way that character operates.

Alternatively, ever seen the ‘edited for TV’ versions of movies like _Casino_ or _Goodfellas_? It is simply laughable to hear these tough mobsters simply ludicrous.

---
What does this mean for _Dragon_? Did they err in including this because it crossed a line? Well, I would say no. The context is perfect. Fantasy fiction helping players and game masters show how internally consistent (i.e. ‘real’) characters work in a fantasy setting is eminently useful to some (if not all) the readers and players of D&D. Should they include more material that is again, ‘realistic’ (as I use it above, not as in a reference to the ‘Real World’ as depicted by MTV) although it is not appropriate for every reader? Yes, because it helps _some_ players improve their role-playing, gather ideas for villains or heroes, or otherwise entertain, enlighten, challenge, or amuse.

---
As for Carlin’s “Seven Dirty Words” I believe his point was that the fact that 7 of the 400,000 words in the English language are considered ‘dirty’ is ridiculous and that you should worry about the ideas being conveyed; not the sounds being uttered. I think this is good advice for _Dragon_ as well!!!