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

[Darrin Drader]

*raises eyebrows*
Reeeaaaallly...
Haven't gotten my copy of Dragon 305 yet, but if this is true, my subscription is good as cancelled.

**Sigh**

 

[Eosin the Red]

I too have noticed a decline but that is a whole 'nother bag'o beans. Thought: is it me or are the issues shorter?



On to the good stuff. MARTIN! I am here to back up the Evil Dr MIDNIGHT. Not all stories need to pander to the most morally sensitive individuals. Some stories are dark and damning and that is their appeal. Some stories are about good standing up and being good and by virtue of that alone we know that evil will be defeated, that is their appeal. If you do not happen to like the former style of story telling, your condemnation is no more relevant or valid than someone who thinks that without sex and gore a book or game is a childs toy and cannot tell a meaningful story. Condemnation by virtue of language and shocking content says more about the commentor than the subject at hand. IMO. YMMV.


Having said that - Martin is probably a little too bold for Dragon. The marketing appeal of one of the most popular authors in fantasy today vs the inclusion of bad language must have been a bone of contention at Piazo. I doubt the decision was done off the cuff.

I am more willing to tolerate something like this from Martin - the lord of vile darkness - than I am from something like the BoVD. The sealed stuff was by and large a gimmick. Including bodily fluid and Bevis-like "uhhhh, cool. Cut off his thingy" hardly gave the article any literary punch. It could have been done without the gross-out contest. Martin's storys include frank speech that is shocking to some but is part of his style in this setting. It belongs and it feels correct.

As always feel free to skip the fiction section - lord knows I usually do - but in this instance the fiction is what us Martin fans want. I won't disparige you the strories that feature the knight in white - leave me my Martin. There is more than enough room for both of us in the fantasy gaming genere but there is only one magazine to give all of us the content we want.

 

[fba827]

It's just in the fiction story section, right? (that's what I understand from the previous posts). If that is true, then I don't think they are crossing any boundries.

True, any general consumption item (as it was referred to before) like Time, Newsweek, etc would not put in language considered offensive unless they were doing a direct quote or something. However, those are news, fact, and commentary reporting mediums. Colorful language is more accepted in fictional literature.

I can't count the number of times I read fiction novels in junior high, high school, or even at the library that have curse words in there. Not to mention covering topics that would otherwise not be appropriate for younger kids (I know Why the Caged bird sings talks of child molestation, etc. - but it's still a general consumption item.)

This is not to say other people aren't allowed to have their opinion as to when things are and aren't appropriate. Just saying that I don't find anything wrong with some single reference or two to possibly-questionable language in a section of the magazine defined as fictional short story writing.

For frame of refrence, if it were in an "article" section of the magazine, I would think about it a bit more. I would not be offended but I may be concerned (or at least give thought) about what audience it is reaching -- I do work with lots of kids so I often consider how much of an impact something may have on younger minds.

(If I have misunderstood and the language is not in the fiction story section and instead in one of the "articles" then my above comments are null and void)

-- it's late and i'm tired. Apologies in advance for grammer and spelling errors.. I'm too tired to proof read right now --

 

[jgbrowning]

R A. Salvatore... he ever written for dragon?

i do know that it 304 the 'es-dash dash DASH' word is used. which i guess isn't as 'blue' (you funny americans) as the current word, but you know. but you can't censor martin. he's a big deal! and i think he would use 'private parts'.

Well actually you can censor martin. Perhaps they should have. Either way, i haven't bought a dragon in years and I seem to have less and less of a reason to pick one up again.

Was it integral to the story? Doubt it. If it was, it may be wrong venue. Dragon, like it or not, does have some responsibility in this matter.

I just got the scoop on the next dragon cover blurb..

"BATBOY TEARS THROAT OUT OF DM! CLAIMS 'BLACKLEAF IS NOT DEAD! PLAYER SAYS, 'AH (a word a popular author can use but if we were to say it on every page...) IT' "

good to see they're getting better gaming material.


joe b.

 

[The Sigil]

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.

Yeah, it is something of a harsh blanket statement.

But there's a difference between handling mature subject matter and titillation. Some of the best books out there handle mature subject matter. Heck, the Bible has chapters on rape, incest, genocide, mass slaughter of children, and so forth, and nobody complains that it's an unholy book because of it LOL.

There are times when explicit depiction of disgusting acts is in fact necessary to the advancement of the story; some examples that spring immediately to mind are Les Miserables, Hamlet, The Sound and the Fury, and 1984. I don't condemn these either.

I guess the maturity level I expect comes is in the handling of the subject matter, not the subject matter itself. And gratuitous sex scenes - or violence scenes or what have you - are not necessary to the advancement of the story. Sex scenes, and violence scenes, maybe - but not gratuitous ones. After all, it seems pretty plain to me that you can make a great epic without sex scenes (Lord of the Rings, anyone) so there is precedent for doing so.

I understand where you're coming from - I'm not against depicting sex or violence, just against gratuitous depiction of sex and/or violence.

--The Sigil

 

[The Sigil]

Well actually you can censor martin. Perhaps they should have. <{snip} Was it integral to the story? Doubt it. If it was, it may be wrong venue. Dragon, like it or not, does have some responsibility in this matter.

I think you just summed up succinctly what it took me a lot longer to say. This is exactly what I wanted to say, thanks for putting into a more succinct form, joe. "Ditto" to what you said.

--The Sigil

 

[The Sigil]

Having said that - Martin is probably a little too bold for Dragon. The marketing appeal of one of the most popular authors in fantasy today vs the inclusion of bad language must have been a bone of contention at Piazo. I doubt the decision was done off the cuff.

To be honest, given the commentary I have seen coming from Dragon's editors lately, I really doubt it was much of a bone of contention. My impression of them, and it may be wrong, is that they probably didn't even think twice about it and that there was no "author" vs. "foul language" problem because the editors weren't concerned about the "foul language". Gads, I hope I'm wrong... I'm becoming pretty cynical, huh?

I am more willing to tolerate something like this from Martin - the lord of vile darkness - than I am from something like the BoVD.

Martin can do whatever he wants. But not in Dragon. My question, which has only been marginally addressed thus far (though you did address it above, Eosin), is not, "is this appropriate for Martin," but "is this appropriate for DRAGON?" When did we start holding articles to different standards due to the author. By that logic we should expect a Dragon magazine full of articles "first time writers" that are full of grammatical errors, glaring balance problems, and obvious inconsistencies... because we are willing to cut "first time writers" some slack. Come on. The standard as to "what should make the cut and what should be left on the cutting room floor" - both in terms of language and quality of articles - should be a function of the magazine, not a function of the author of a particular set of words.

Martin's storys include frank speech that is shocking to some but is part of his style in this setting. It belongs and it feels correct.

Perhaps so. But again, I ask, REGARDLESS of the writer, does it really belong in Dragon?

I won't disparige you the strories that feature the knight in white - leave me my Martin. There is more than enough room for both of us in the fantasy gaming genere but there is only one magazine to give all of us the content we want.

Agreed that there is room for both of us. Agreed that there is only one magazine. The problem I see is that since about issue #297, I really haven't seen anything for the "white knight" crowd... and have seen no indication that there is intent to include "white knight" content again. There is only one magazine. The magazine can have both and could have both... but now it seems to have chosen not to have both. There is no other source for me to go to. Since it chose "black knight" it leaves me, who wants "white knight" material, unfulfilled. Therefore, it is no longer deserving of my patronage... why should I pay for what I don't want? Herein lies the problem... I am feeling disenfranchised - not because I see "black knight" and "white knight" material side-by-side, but because I no longer see "white knight" material - it all seems to be "black knight." That is disappointing because it feels like I'm being neglected - I think Dragon seems to have decided to go "all black knight" instead of "all white knight" - forgetting that there is an option to have both together.

--The Sigil

 

[Darrin Drader]

I think you just summed up succinctly what it took me a lot longer to say. This is exactly what I wanted to say, thanks for putting into a more succinct form, joe. "Ditto" to what you said.

--The Sigil

As a game designer, I expect to be edited. As a writer of fiction, I would have a take it or leave it attitude - at least with certain sections of the work. Game material is meant to be playable whereas fiction is an art. Maybe Dragon should have just not published his stuff, or maybe this author deserves to be exposed to more gamers. Maybe it would be a disservice to those of us looking for new talent not to publish this person because he is a darker voice in the genre. Honestly I've never heard of him, but I have a feeling I may be picking up one of his books if he is the genius he's made out to be.

 

[Jesse Decker]

When the work warrants it

Including such language in Dragon wasn't a trivial decision, but I feel very strongly that authors and editors alike should have the option to include such language when the work warrants it. The tricky part, of course, is the phrase "when the work warrants it," and the audience is certainly part of the decision. In this case, I feel that language in question is an inextricable part of the characters and feel of "A Song of Ice and Fire" and that the novella, like the series of which it is a small part, would have been weaker had it been removed.

 

[The Sigil]

As a game designer, I expect to be edited. As a writer of fiction, I would have a take it or leave it attitude - at least with certain sections of the work.

Ugh. I can't imagine a writer who would get upset with, "Sir, we would like to publish this but because of our wide reader base that includes some of juvenile age, we would like to change the F-word to 'F---' instead of spelling it out." or "expletive deleted" or what have you. Everyone knows what you wrote - nothing is "lost in the translation." But the word itself never actually appears, so the publication retains some shred of "propriety." That's what newspapers do, even when quoting works of fiction, right?

If I were a magazine editor, and an author turned down a request like that, I flat out wouldn't run the piece. I'm an editor, it's my job to edit. If you don't like it, then there's no place for your piece in the magazine. It's not like Dragon needed Martin to boost flagging sales (right?)

--The Sigil