Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
On Early D&D and Problematic Faves: How to Grapple with the Sins of the Past
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 9404232"><p>True but as these threads have shown, people will disagree over which elements are sexist and problematic. And even when people agree, people are going to disagree over how to approach a game that has content like that </p><p></p><p></p><p>I wasn't arguing for ignoring historical context. I would buy art from an artist I consider reprehensible. I consider Norman Mailer to be an utterly reprehensible human being, but bought many of his books, even while he was alive, and his books frequently reflect the bad nature of his character, even advocate for things I strongly disagree with. Another would be Lovecraft. I strongly disagree with many of his beliefs, they are present in the work, and in places even advocate for viewpoints I find objectionable. I don't think engaging with the artwork of people who held views you disagree with means you are endorsing it at all. it also doesn't mean you are popularizing it. This is especially the case when you are engaging with works from different times when there is just greater likelihood of that happening. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't disagree. It is complicated. I agree with you that people need to decide on their own lines. I do think we can separate the art from the artist a lot more than we are doing now (and I think we ought to do that more). I don't think there is zero connection between the two. But I do think the better art is usually produced by flawed people and a campaign to rid ourselves of flawed artists, is going to lead to less interesting art. Which is why I think nuance is important. In my case, as I said before, I am very accustomed to reading books and primary sources from times when people held wildly different views from now. I used to transcribe journals for example when I was a student interning at a museum. You are going to find lots of objectionable thoughts if you read a person's thoughts from 100 years ago. That doesn't mean the journals weren't engaging and interesting and worth reading. By the same token, I read a lot of older fiction. When you are reading a book from 100, 200, 500, or 2,000 years ago, you are going to encounter ideas you disagree with morally. I can note that, but focus on the content. Doesn't mean I don't internally disagree with it, or that I can't have a conversation about it, but I can read the material without stopping and I can still find value in it (and I can ask myself how prevalent I think this view was at the time, which to me makes a difference in how I view it). If Lovecraft were writing today, I would be a lot more shocked by the content than I am knowing he is a New England Yankee writing when many of the ideas he espoused had traction (doesn't excuse them, but it makes them a lot less shocking to me, and even predictable to an extent). Still I adore Lovecraft's writing, I do think he is a genius of the genre. I wouldn't stop reading him, or focus exclusively on his questionable worldviews when doing so. It is something I have always been able to make note of but not my priority when I am reading him.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guest 85555, post: 9404232"] True but as these threads have shown, people will disagree over which elements are sexist and problematic. And even when people agree, people are going to disagree over how to approach a game that has content like that I wasn't arguing for ignoring historical context. I would buy art from an artist I consider reprehensible. I consider Norman Mailer to be an utterly reprehensible human being, but bought many of his books, even while he was alive, and his books frequently reflect the bad nature of his character, even advocate for things I strongly disagree with. Another would be Lovecraft. I strongly disagree with many of his beliefs, they are present in the work, and in places even advocate for viewpoints I find objectionable. I don't think engaging with the artwork of people who held views you disagree with means you are endorsing it at all. it also doesn't mean you are popularizing it. This is especially the case when you are engaging with works from different times when there is just greater likelihood of that happening. I don't disagree. It is complicated. I agree with you that people need to decide on their own lines. I do think we can separate the art from the artist a lot more than we are doing now (and I think we ought to do that more). I don't think there is zero connection between the two. But I do think the better art is usually produced by flawed people and a campaign to rid ourselves of flawed artists, is going to lead to less interesting art. Which is why I think nuance is important. In my case, as I said before, I am very accustomed to reading books and primary sources from times when people held wildly different views from now. I used to transcribe journals for example when I was a student interning at a museum. You are going to find lots of objectionable thoughts if you read a person's thoughts from 100 years ago. That doesn't mean the journals weren't engaging and interesting and worth reading. By the same token, I read a lot of older fiction. When you are reading a book from 100, 200, 500, or 2,000 years ago, you are going to encounter ideas you disagree with morally. I can note that, but focus on the content. Doesn't mean I don't internally disagree with it, or that I can't have a conversation about it, but I can read the material without stopping and I can still find value in it (and I can ask myself how prevalent I think this view was at the time, which to me makes a difference in how I view it). If Lovecraft were writing today, I would be a lot more shocked by the content than I am knowing he is a New England Yankee writing when many of the ideas he espoused had traction (doesn't excuse them, but it makes them a lot less shocking to me, and even predictable to an extent). Still I adore Lovecraft's writing, I do think he is a genius of the genre. I wouldn't stop reading him, or focus exclusively on his questionable worldviews when doing so. It is something I have always been able to make note of but not my priority when I am reading him. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
On Early D&D and Problematic Faves: How to Grapple with the Sins of the Past
Top