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

[Mallus]

That is all you ever have to say- how you keep getting invited back to Toastmasters is beyond me...

SD

Come on, Wizardru's words were innocent and all that's true...

 

[jgbrowning]

I repeatedly fail to understand how deciding to allow an author the creative freedom to describe, detail, and explore a coherent and believable world is lowering standards?

Firstly, the author is not being "allowed" anything. He can write whatever he wants. The publishers of dragon simply makes choices and the author makes choices. If they agree---the work is published. If they disagree, the work is not.

Secondly, if dragon were to publish an article that was simply the F word over and over, most people would find it a lowering of standards. The issue is how much obscenity is considered appropriate and how much is not. The deeper issue, what is obscene and what is not, although an interesting debate, isn't trememdously important in this case. There's a reason why the F word is viewed by the majority of English speakers as an obscenity.

But remember, we're talking about vulgarity and different peoples perceptons of what is vulgar to begin with. Even if many people consider dragon's standards to not have been lowered, if many people do consider dragon's standards to have been lowered, you have to accept that it's a matter of mass perception. Whether you agree with it or not.

I view it as i would view a man answering a cell phone in a theatre. Its inappropriate for the venue and it could have easily been made appropriate. The man deliberately choses to be rude because he considers his call more important than the other people in theatre. Dragon considers the F word more important than the the sensibilites of their readers. Even if they think their readers sensibilities are outdated or silly, lack of consideration is never appreciated.


joe b.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Nevermind.

You know what, if people want to be offended, they'll find something offensive. That's what we do.

 

[jdavis]

This is, I promise, my last post on this thread.

Dragon can make their own decisions about what goes into the magazine. But the readers have the right to air their opinions, positive or negative, and point out why they feel the way they do. Those that don't agree with the opinions have the right to contest them, but ultimately, all of this is a matter of opinion, not fact, so nobody is empirically "correct." Hence, we can argue forever.

Are we all in agreement on these? I hope so.

I think that the above is pretty much the only set of things we can all agree on, so let's call it a day and move on. The horse is dead.

--The Sigil

Agreed this horse is not only dead but drawing flies. You are never going to get any type of agreement on this, we could apply tv/movie stardard ratings to this (PG13 level magazine is where I would rate it in general) but those are subjective too, we could argue about censorship, realism and a trend to more adult topics all we want. In the world today there is only one thing that really matters in this situation, Capitalism, if they loose enough readers then they will change the magazine, if they are gaining new readers then you are complaining to deaf ears. I don't know the sales numbers but they are infinitely more important to this situation than anybody's opinions on the subject. You can like that or dislike that but I can garantee that is how it is. They are selling a magazine for profit and are trying to reach the widest audience possible, are they gaining or loosing sales from this? Only by knowing the sales numbers will we know.

 

[Mercule]

Quick, everyone! Huckleberry Finn is in the public libraries and they'll loan it to a child without express parental approval!

Scandal!

The library may loan it out, but the parent should be aware of what their children are reading. I'm not talking about smothering the kids, but about reasonable responsibility.

Hyperbole doesn't change that.

I've read Tom Sawyer, and have a good idea of what's in Huck Finn (it's still on my too-large-for-a-human-lifetime list). I intend to encourage my girls to read both when they're older. Not at 5, but probably in their early teens. Of course, if I decided they shouldn't, ever, then I've got the right to prevent them from doing so -- at least until 18.

Periodicals have a different standard than novels. It's part of their on-going nature. As I said above, the general expectation for a publication is that it will be appropriate for teens at worst, language-wise.

Also, there is the matter of a track-record. Dragon has always been clean of such material. As a parent, I'd expect a once-clean magazine to continue to be so. The inclusion of the F-word after 300 some odd issues is a bit of a change-up and is something a parent really can't take into account without constant monitoring, which, IMHO, is a bad thing.

Am I saying that Dragon needs to aim at teens? No. I don't know any teen gamers and haven't been one myself for over a decade, so they'd certainly lose my business. On the other hand, they can include articles that appeal to older readers without resorting to inclusion of foul language or "vile" content, which would not only remain appropriate for teens, but could "raise the bar" intellectually and game-wise for the teens.

The inclusion of the Martin piece had nothing to do with D&D (or gaming at all, for that matter). There was no "need" to include it in the magazine.

One more time, from the top. The unique inclusion of the word in the context of a fiction excerpt being used to hype a new campaign setting (or whatever the event on the horizon is) wouldn't have bothered me overly (annoyed at best). I still would say they shouldn't have done it, but it's not a "Hold everything, Dragon's lost all value," move. But... when you add in the S-word in the previous issue and the pathetic "vile" issue all within 6 months, if not less, it becomes cause to ask, "_Is_ Dragon really a worthwhile read? Is this a magazine I want to support?" Those are the questions I'm asking right now. I don't have an answer, but I'm definitely asking.

For the record, I don't have a problem with foul language in fiction. I fully understand (although I reserve agreement, I also reserve disagreement) the arguement that some characters need it. I love Joel Rosenberg's work and that's pretty vulgar at times. I've run World of Darkness games that included rape and other atrocities, as well as foul language. I own, and plan to use, the BoVD.

My entire point is that Dragon is not an appropriate venue for these things.

I'm relatively certain I've made my points fairly well (or at least as well as I'm going to be able to). Anyone who doesn't understand them (regardless of agreement) by this time is either trolling or making an attempt to _not_ understand (since only one person has asked for clarification, which I hope I gave). In light of that, I'm going to join the Sigil in refraining from beating my head against a brick wall.

 

[Mercule]

Read Mercule's last post- it is well written and has the tact I often lack.

Thank you, very much. Tact is something of which I'm rarely accused. I'm quite happy when I actually use some.

 

[jdavis]

The inclusion of the Martin piece had nothing to do with D&D (or gaming at all, for that matter). There was no "need" to include it in the magazine.

That's open for debate, they are doing a article on setting rules for playing in Martin's world. It is also up for debate whether fantasy fiction belongs in the magazine, D&D is a fantasy setting, many people who play D&D enjoy fantasy literature, to me it sounds like a sure fit, a short story in the magazine that caters to the fans of fantasy whether it be game setting or fiction. THat is my opinion and I could be right or wrong, but any statement on whether fantasy fiction belongs in this magazine is also a subjective opinion.

My entire point is that Dragon is not an appropriate venue for these things.

Also a subjective opinion, on every topic that has been brought up. I feel that Dragon is a appropriate venue for all of these things, who is right? This is all subjective, when it gets treated like it isn't then you get problems, people do not agree and that is a fact, people all have their own subjective opinions and none of us are actually right because they are personal opinions not statements of fact. We can agrue till the cows come home and we will never get any closer to one single fact as we are right now. The only thing that matters here is "does the magazine sell good?" Because that is the bottom line until the government steps in and tells them they are out of line with what they are publishing.

 

[Eosin the Red]

Does anybody but me read other peoples posts? or am I on everyones ignore list

 

[Jemal]

Agreed this horse is not only dead but drawing flies. You are never going to get any type of agreement on this, we could apply tv/movie stardard ratings to this (PG13 level magazine is where I would rate it in general) but those are subjective too, we could argue about censorship, realism and a trend to more adult topics all we want. In the world today there is only one thing that really matters in this situation, Capitalism, if they loose enough readers then they will change the magazine, if they are gaining new readers then you are complaining to deaf ears. I don't know the sales numbers but they are infinitely more important to this situation than anybody's opinions on the subject. You can like that or dislike that but I can garantee that is how it is. They are selling a magazine for profit and are trying to reach the widest audience possible, are they gaining or loosing sales from this? Only by knowing the sales numbers will we know.

Don't you know logic and common sense don't work in cases like this? If people want to be angry and vent at something they will! No matter how well thought out anyone elses opinion may be, the simple fact of the matter is that Human beings are stubborn, arrogant, pig-headed fools who seldom listen to what anyone else has to say except to pick out points to argue against.
Why else do you think governments still exist? B/C people can't agree on anything so they need someone to TELL THEM what to do, how to act, and what is appropriate or not appropriate. If everybody could rationally come to an agreement on anything, there would be no need for lawyers, judges, politicians, military, or police.


PS> eosin the red... as I just finished saying, ALMOST EVERYONE reads the posts, and/or listens to their 'opponent' in any argument, but all anyone ever actually gets out of it what they need to nitpick on, or arguments, or insults.

 

[Azure Trance]

I recieved the magazine yesterday. I read the story and enjoyed it immensely, and put the three GRRM books on my wish list at Amazon. Lots of you have opinions for, and against ... I wouldn't mind seeing it again in the future, at least where appropriate. But I'm a subscriber, and I enjoyed it, and that's all I wanted to say. I hope most of the others feel the same way.