D&D General On Early D&D and Problematic Faves: How to Grapple with the Sins of the Past
- Thread starter Snarf Zagyg
- Start date
He works in the horror world. I imagine he would have to be. That place is rife with some... questionable points of view.
If Science Fiction a work of art? Individual things within D&D can be art but the thing itself? Basically, it is a game but not like monopoly. Is a players handbook a work of art? It is full of art but it is a set or instructions to a game.
D&D is not a work of anything, it is a collective, and a whole bunch of things.
Kurotowa
Legend
My take on this issue is that works of fiction operate according to the biases and assumptions of the author. If an author believes that all lawyers are lying weaselly ambulance chasers, then that's how every lawyer who appears in their novels will act. Or to use an all too common example, if an author's just gone through a nasty divorce then their next book is likely to have an ...uncharitable depiction of women and the institution of marriage.
This is important because art tells a story, and we learn from those stories, and use them as inspiration for how to live our lives. And if we're not paying attention to the biases and assumptions that art is operating under then it's easy to learn the wrong lessons. Just look at how many cults and fringe political movements use novels illustrating the world as they see it as a recruiting tool.
So step one is awareness. If you don't know what baggage the author is bringing, you can't make an informed decision about it. Step two is weighing how much negative impact the author's baggage has. Partly it's a question of how central it is to the work of art, partly it's a question of how much distance in time we have from it, and partly it's a question of how close to home it hits for you personally.
What separates D&D from Harry Potter is that D&D has been through a lot of hands over the years, and each hand has laid its own mark. We're decades past the Harlot Table, and most of us are playing a very different game now. Meanwhile Harry Potter is very much still in its original creator's hands, and with her regressive social attitudes in mind you can see them stamped all over the books. Better minds than mine have examined this at length.
The decision on what can be read with an "Of Its Time" disclaimed and what should be discarded is a collective judgment of personal choices. Everyone has to decide on their own, and the weight of popular opinion tips the scale.
This is important because art tells a story, and we learn from those stories, and use them as inspiration for how to live our lives. And if we're not paying attention to the biases and assumptions that art is operating under then it's easy to learn the wrong lessons. Just look at how many cults and fringe political movements use novels illustrating the world as they see it as a recruiting tool.
So step one is awareness. If you don't know what baggage the author is bringing, you can't make an informed decision about it. Step two is weighing how much negative impact the author's baggage has. Partly it's a question of how central it is to the work of art, partly it's a question of how much distance in time we have from it, and partly it's a question of how close to home it hits for you personally.
What separates D&D from Harry Potter is that D&D has been through a lot of hands over the years, and each hand has laid its own mark. We're decades past the Harlot Table, and most of us are playing a very different game now. Meanwhile Harry Potter is very much still in its original creator's hands, and with her regressive social attitudes in mind you can see them stamped all over the books. Better minds than mine have examined this at length.
The decision on what can be read with an "Of Its Time" disclaimed and what should be discarded is a collective judgment of personal choices. Everyone has to decide on their own, and the weight of popular opinion tips the scale.
Argyle King
Legend
A question I often ponder:
Does a topic being "problematic" (or other term you'd prefer to use) necessarily mean that including the same topic in a game makes the game "problematic"?
For example, let's use sexism, as that is related to the Gygax discussion.
I may be mistaken, but I feel confident in saying that most people would view sexism as a negative thing (even if there is disagreement concerning how it is categorized.)
Does it follow that including a sexist character or culture as part of a game means that the game itself is sexist?
My initial view is no. But I have also read and heard opinions that feel otherwise.
Does a topic being "problematic" (or other term you'd prefer to use) necessarily mean that including the same topic in a game makes the game "problematic"?
For example, let's use sexism, as that is related to the Gygax discussion.
I may be mistaken, but I feel confident in saying that most people would view sexism as a negative thing (even if there is disagreement concerning how it is categorized.)
Does it follow that including a sexist character or culture as part of a game means that the game itself is sexist?
My initial view is no. But I have also read and heard opinions that feel otherwise.
Just because a thing has a lot of components does not mean that the thing itself isn't art.
D&D is art all the way up and down, from individual books to the whole body of its publication to your particular session.
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him) 🇺🇦🇵🇸🏳️⚧️
Is this a personal home game or a publication for the game? If the latter, I can see why a publisher might want to avoid the issue because a significant portion of the market they want buying their product may have to put up with it all day and want a refuge in their gaming pleasure.
I don't think you will find a concensus, but I would say that it is about intent. If the harlots table is there because Gary thinks women are harlots, then yes, the work is sexist.
Vael
Legend
Rowling and Orson Scott Card are the two, for me, that deserve special consideration, because they are alive, unrepentant and ... at least in Rowling's case (haven't kept up with Card), actively engaged in continuing their attacks on the trans and queer communities. Peter David is another that might go into that category, but I haven't gone into depth on what he's done lately.
Similar Threads
