D&D General The Art and the Artist: Discussing Problematic Issues in D&D

[Ruin Explorer]

I think some of those observations are more specific than I would want to get onboard with, without some more rigorous study behind it. But, I do think the general point that critical analysis, especially critical analysis of media, is a blind spot in many people’s education. It can also just be hard to accept critique of something one is emotionally invested in.

Yeah totally fair lol I'm not sure I'm fully on-board with them either!

I've never entirely got the "emotionally invested" thing though, I have to admit. Like, I kind of like it when a product/show/etc. I'm invested in gets critiqued, and I sort of always have. I guess I just don't take it personally when someone points out that Tintin is racist as hell at times, say.

I also detect (sometimes) an undercurrent of smug superiority in these discussions, as in, "Thank goodness we're so much better people than those monsters from before we all became enlightened", as if our views weren't shaped by our experiences and environment as much as theirs were.

Sometimes that does happen.

But also, like with people taking mild requests as deadly insults to their moral character, there's a hell of a lot of projection on the part of the people perceiving smugness. Particularly re: the assertion you're making that people believe our own views aren't shaped by the environment. Obviously they are. Most of us (including me) going to burn in future readings of our society for not being vegetarians or at least severely reducing meat consumption, for example.

I think the issue tends to be most pronounced when something is retrograde even compared to the environment of the era.

Have they actually used that language to describe said harm to you ?

He literally said they did in the text you quoted. Like immediately above where you ask this, in your own post, he answers that. So why are you asking that?

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think there is an element of that, but what you don't seem to get is, the "labelled a sinner" is often 95% on the person who is being talked to, or more. Like it said, it doesn't matter how polite you are, how clear you are that the other person isn't "evil" or "depraved" or "a sinner" to use your religious language, some people, not bad people, note, just habitually push back on ANY suggestion that they change their behaviour or thinking in ANY way for ANY reason. Very often the same people then rationalize their pushing back as being told they're a "bad person", even if when they literally told the opposite. I've seen this happen countless times. Some ultra-nice person is like "Hey, maybe we could use this language instead because it's a bit more inclusive, I know this is new, please don't feel bad!" and somebody is still going to say "OMG!!! HOW DARE YOU! HOW DARE YOU SAY I'M A BAD PERSON!!!!!!!!!". You can't tell me this doesn't happen. It happens all the time. It even happened in a work situation to one of my friends, where they got in an amazingly polite and kind person to basically do very mild racial sensitivity training, which went to huge lengths to not demonize anyone or point anyone out as bad, and still one staff member was horribly offended and was abusive to the person doing the training to the point of reducing her to tears.

Certainly people overreact and get defensive at times. But also, many people who aren't responding that way, and are really just taking a different view on the issue (for instance people who question whether the language itself is a problem, or if the solution isn't perhaps creating more problems than it is solving, etc) find their reactions get characterized as "OMG HOW DARE YOU SAY I AM A BAD PERSON!". This is further complicated by the fact that some people are saying we are bad people. There have been plenty of posts where the point people are making is "if you don't see what I am seeing here, if you don't agree with my conclusions, you are bad" or "You are causing harm". The issue for me is I share a lot of the values people are expressing but I disagree with their assessment of the problem and their suggested solutions.

I think workplace sensitivity training is a much bigger and separate topic, and not one that we can delve into on EnWorld without running into issues. It just isn't the appropriate venue to discuss that topic.

 

[Gradine]

Again, who where these people ? Do you know them ? Have they actually used that language to describe said harm to you ? On these specific supplements ?

In the case of OA, or Tomb of Annihilation? Many gamers of color, some of whom I know personally, who have described said harm in multiple spaces. So yeah, I can answer these in the affirmative. I also tend to believe them.

 

[Bedrockgames]

That's fine, but equally if you want to discuss this productively, please stop framing it in religious terms when responding to me at least. It's unhelpful.

It is possible we got our wires crossed in this discussion. Sometimes I lay down a point to one poster, another responds, and I both lose sight of what my initial intent with the post was, and I read the wrong thing into what the responding poster is saying. So I am happy to walk this back. Basically my point doesn't have to be framed in religious terms. It is more about realizing sometimes the reason why some of us aren't agreeing with you guys on some of these points isn't a refusal to listen or hear your arguments....it is that we have heard the arguments, but we don't find them persuasive. I am not saying you are doing this. I just see this a lot in these threads, and when I responded to that poster it was in reaction to it: a sense that if we don't agree with you, it is because we are uncomfortable, refusing to acknowledge something, or don't want to hear the truth. We just disagree, and that is okay.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah totally fair lol I'm not sure I'm fully on-board with them either!

I've never entirely got the "emotionally invested" thing though, I have to admit. Like, I kind of like it when a product/show/etc. I'm invested in gets critiqued, and I sort of always have. I guess I just don't take it personally when someone points out that Tintin is racist as hell at times, say.

I too enjoy critique of media I like, but I’m the kind of person who would rather watch a 3-hour video essay about a video game I know I’ll never play than a 90-minute movie. I think we’re the odd ones out in liking to see our favorite things critiqued.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think this is an intellectual dishonest approach, sorry dude. I know you don't mean it to be but I don't know quite how else to put it..


I do think religion plays a part here in that a lot of people get quite worn down early in life by being told they're "sinners" or "bad people" continuously by religious figures, when they know they're not, and then later in life, when a secular person makes a narrow request to change a behaviour, even without labeling them a "bad person", it's easy for them to feel this is just a further burden/attack, especially if they already went to lengths to meet the requirements of the religious figure (or suffered consequences from failing to do so). I do agree again that sometimes people are overbroad or lazy in talking about these issues. But as I said, even when they aren't, the reaction is often nigh-identical.

I just want to be clear that I wasn't denigrating religious conviction here. I was raised very religious, had my period of skepticism and seeking, and came back to the religion I was raised in. I don't have a problem with people proselytizing. But I was noting a similarity between religious proselytizing and some of the moments in these arguments where people get frustrated when others don't concede the truth of what they are saying.

 

[Lyxen]

In the case of OA, or Tomb of Annihilation? Many gamers of color, some of whom I know personally, who have described said harm in multiple spaces. So yeah, I can answer these in the affirmative. I also tend to believe them.

Alright, since you seem to be so knowlegeable, please explain in detail what in the module has caused such harm, and why it was significant.

Because I have run this campaign with a friend of color and his daughter, and they both loved it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The people who call her that are being ironic intentionally.

Which is a huge part of why fans feel so betrayed by her taking an anti-trans stance.

No, it hasn’t. Lots of people who are critical of J.K. Rowling still enjoy the work. How could we not, it was hugely influential throughout our childhoods and young adulthoods. But, many of us also now advocate against supporting the author (with varying opinions on what constitutes support), despite how we feel about her work.

Not just for some. She literally is transphobic.

I think it's pretty clear that Rowling's views are awful, and I don't judge anyone who decided to turn away from her work because of them. But if you are a HP fan, not spending any money on your interest is significantly limiting on your engagement, and I don't think people who choose to continue doing so should be vilified. I think it's OK to focus on the product and whether or not it agrees with your sensibilities, though there's also nothing wrong with weighing the author's character in the mix if that's how you feel. Everyone makes their own decisions on these things. I don't buy HP stuff personally, but I'm not that big a fan, and already consumed the books and movies before these revelations. If I were, or if something I cared about more had a similar problem arise (and we all know it could), i honestly don't know what I'd do.

 

[Charlaquin]

can you imagine in 2059 if people looked back at Strathaven and wild beyond the witchlight and said "Wow, how could such transphobic, racisit, garbage have been printed" without realizing for today it is somewhat (if not very) progressive?

Yes, easily. And while that particular description might be a bit more colorful than we might like, I do certainly hope that people in 2059 look back on today and find things to critique that we don’t currently see. That’s how social progress is made.

 

[BookTenTiger]

One thing to note in the Artist / Art discussion is that you don't actually need to know the intention of the artist in order to give a valid critique of the art.

If I'm looking at Van Gogh's Starry Night, I don't need to know anything about his life or personality to say how the work makes me feel and why.

At the same time, if I'm looking at the way Gary Gygax used black skin to denote evil, I can say "this feels racist to me" without having to know his intentions.

So even when I strongly disagree with someone else's critique, I have to accept it as valid because it is their experience of the work, not mine!