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

[gregweller]

All I can say is 'good for Dragon'. One of the things that I've admired about Martin's recent work is that it has actually shocked and disturbed me in places, and that is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. It is fantasy that is not cleaned up for the masses. There is some of that in Terry Goodkind's books, but even all the BDSM stuff in there still seems somewhat sanitized. Martin, on the other hand, creates an environment in which anything can happen. I'm sure that the editors of Dragon knew that going into this, and a big thumbs up for not trying to restrain him. (of course I'm saying all this without having seen the new Dragon, but I'm all for the concept).

 

[starwolf]

Am I forgetting anyone?

J Gregory Keyes (Waterborn, BlackGod, Newton's Cannon..etc.)

 

[megamania]

Good for dragon.

Of course- they figured how many parents would read the stories versus the looking at the headlines and pictures and made a safe gamble.

But hey- it is a start and it is the 21st century- not 1954

 

[Gizzard]

One of the things that I've admired about Martin's recent work is that it has actually shocked and disturbed me in places, and that is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. It is fantasy that is not cleaned up for the masses.

This is the real core of the matter I think. You can edit out all the individual words you want, but Martin's universe is definitely not for the faint of heart. I'm tempted to look back at the opening scene between Jaime and Cirsei to see what happens if you take out the "naughty words".

(OK, I looked. Nary an "F--K" to be edited out. I think you're better off removing the recurrent word "sister" from the dialogue. ;-)

 

[The Sigil]

All I can say is 'good for Dragon'.

*raises eyebrows*
Reeeaaaallly...
Haven't gotten my copy of Dragon 305 yet, but if this is true, my subscription is good as cancelled. Call me prudish if you wish, but the fact of the matter is that printing words of that nature (and I must've missed the S-bomb in 304, but haven't had time to look through it yet with the new baby) is NEVER appropriate in a magazine that is intended for "general consumption."

Dragon, IMO, is a "general consumption" magazine - it is intended for readers of all ages, young and old, with an interest in D&D. It is a general consumption magazine in the same way that Time, Newsweek, or your local newspaper are "general consumption" publications - while the coverage may be of shocking material, there are a few "laws" to go by to make sure that the treatment of the material is done in a mature fashion. And that includes the excision of S--- and F--- from quotes (and, in more reputable magazines, B---- and A--).

I was exceedingly annoyed at Dragon's inclusion of "Vile" (read: puerile) material in #300. This just tells me that my worst fears have been confirmed - Dragon has decided to abandon all pretense of being anything other than a schlock, pandering, standardless rag. At least before, they were merely a "WotC's marketing slave, pandering rag."

When did most people here become interested in D&D? My guess is during your teenage years. Can teenagers handle this sort of material? Yes. Should they have to handle such material? IMO, the answer is a resounding "No." It's great that the older (I am deliberately eschewing the misnomer "mature") audience of Dragon appreciates this tripe, but when all is said and done, Dragon must walk the line between engaging our interests without presenting material in a manner that is inappopriate for children.

One of the things that I've admired about Martin's recent work is that it has actually shocked and disturbed me in places, and that is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. It is fantasy that is not cleaned up for the masses.

I guess I'm just a different audience. I don't read fantasy to be shocked and disturbed. I read fantasy to see the hero triumph over evil - I don't need "evil" protagonists or to see in great detail every act of perversion the bad guy (or good guy) is involved in.

IMO, if you can't tell a story without resorting to titillation, you didn't have a strong story to begin with. And "shocking" and "disturbing" stuff is most often titillation (again, IMO). YMMV.

There is some of that in Terry Goodkind's books, but even all the BDSM stuff in there still seems somewhat sanitized. Martin, on the other hand, creates an environment in which anything can happen. I'm sure that the editors of Dragon knew that going into this, and a big thumbs up for not trying to restrain him. (of course I'm saying all this without having seen the new Dragon, but I'm all for the concept).

Fiction does NOT belong in a GAMING magazine. I have been against the inclusion of non-gaming-related fiction (e.g., good fiction = ecology of the su-monster) in Dragon for as long as I can remember. I never read it, and it's a waste of space as far as I am concerned.

Come to think of it, I have been finding the ratio of "signal to noise" in Dragon (defined as "percent of stuff I can use") has been declining at an alarming rate. I usually can salvage one or two pages per issue now. The rest is completely garbage.

Another thumbs down to the editors of Dragon. They have shown me that they are not interested in introducing D&D to new generations of gamers. They are not interested in expanding interest in the game. They are obviously not interested in keeping me as a customer. All they appear to be interested in is pushing D&D into the "dark side" of gaming where the so-called heroes are as every bit as despicable as the bad guys and where LG means "not quite as CE as this guy over here." The agenda has, IMO, been to take D&D from "a game that still can be family friendly but also has the potential for a darker style" to "no more is D&D family friendly - it's all about our darker, more puerile style now."

I'm not saying D&D was all picket fences and roses "back in the day" but that it seemed to embrace a variety of playing styles, from G to X. Nowadays, it seems like they have rejected G, PG, and PG-13 and are consistently trying to sell R and X material - which I have less than no interest in.

These are my opinions, all of them, and YMMV, but the fact of the matter is that to me, Dragon Magazine has gone from producing A+ material 3 years ago to producing B material 2 years ago to producing D material 1 year ago to consistently "flunking" as concerns my needs and desires. Thumbs way down and they are getting both a cancellation and an extremely nasty letter to the editor(s) - who, BTW, have shown by their comments in response to the Dragon 300 issue that they "just don't get it" anyway. Too bad, really - but Dragon has less stuff useful to my campaigns than, I dunno, "Big Boobed Women of the WWE Sitting on Volkswagens in Provocative Positions" these days. *sigh*

I'm glad all of you like it, and that it is filling your needs better than the "older" stuff. However, it seems that the more of your needs it is fitting, the less of mine it is fitting. I guess I'm just out of step with "mainstream" D&D.

--The Sigil

 

[Gizzard]

This just tells me that my worst fears have been confirmed - Dragon has decided to abandon all pretense of being anything other than a schlock, pandering, standardless rag.

Ah, now. Martin is a serious author; he's not just whipping out the F to startle The Sigil. Though, I suppose we wander off into the classic territory of "what is obscenity?" here.

 

[Olive]

My guess is during your teenage years. Can teenagers handle this sort of material? Yes. Should they have to handle such material? IMO, the answer is a resounding "No."

um... i reckon most of them not only should handle it, but WANT to handle it. and use it.

i find the idea that using the full extent of the english language is imature a bit odd myself. but american's do seem to be a bit prudish about this stuff (some americans at least) than the average english, australian or new zealander.

 

[Dr Midnight]

IMO, if you can't tell a story without resorting to titillation, you didn't have a strong story to begin with. And "shocking" and "disturbing" stuff is most often titillation (again, IMO). YMMV.

Yikes, that's a hell of a blanket statement. I know you said IMO, YMMV, and all that, and I thank-a you... but really, c'mon, Martin's a genius. He's written the best books I've ever read. There's a difference between not being able to tell a story without resorting to titillation and telling a story that involves titillation. The adult subject matter doesn't diminish the quality. It's not there to give you a page or two of naughties. Wait, I guess some of it is. I mean, that part with Danaerys and Irri... ahem. Anyway.

I don't think I'm helping make my case.

The above is all IMO, YMMV, DMV, and NWA.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I'm glad all of you like it, and that it is filling your needs better than the "older" stuff. However, it seems that the more of your needs it is fitting, the less of mine it is fitting. I guess I'm just out of step with "mainstream" D&D.

--The Sigil

I guess you may be but then I guess so am I. While I may not agree with everything you say, I do agree that I to have noticed a decline in useful stuff in Dragon with the last year leaving me wondering why bother.

 

[The Sigil]

Ah, now. Martin is a serious author; he's not just whipping out the F to startle The Sigil. Though, I suppose we wander off into the classic territory of "what is obscenity?" here.

Ah, but then, I've never said the issue is about Martin.

At issue is not what Martin does. Clearly, his fiction is for more mature audiences. I couldn't give a flying buffalo one way or the other regarding what appears in his works - outside of Dragon Magazine. A writer's novels and a gaming magazine are two very different media.

At issue is what appears in Dragon - whether it's part of Martin's work or not. I am only interested in that portion of "Martin's Published Writings" that intersects with "Writing Published in Dragon." Actually, to tell the truth, I'm not interested in "Martion's Published Writings" in the strictest sence, but merely "Writing Published in Dragon" - which happens to intersect in this case.

I have no problem with Martin writing what he writes. I have no problem with Martin. I *do* have a problem with the editors Dragon choosing to include some of his work without editing. This is not on Martin the writer, it's on the editors of Dragon, IMO.

Hope that clarifies things slightly. It doesn't bother me that Martin writes what he does. It bothers me that Dragon prints what he writes. Bantam or Ballantyne or Puffin can print it in a novel and I don't care - different audience.

--The Sigil