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

[S'mon]

That wasn't the thrust of Lindsey's argument. She argued that the way Mel Brooks criticized the Nazis was in a manner that made them seem foolish or stupid. Nobody is going to watch The Producers and be able to walk away with any sort of positive impression of Nazis. Whereas in a movie like American History X, even though it's got an anti-Nazi message, the audience can still away thinking that Derek Vinyard was a badass. Another example she used was a Halloween episode of South Park where Cartman's ghost costume resembled a KKK outfit and when Chef saw it he beast a hasty retreat. The problem was that the Klan wasn't the butt of the joke there. Brooks' jokes about the Nazis worked, according to Ellis, because they made the Nazis look stupid, weak, and not at all badass or powerful.

In the video I watched, at the end of it she said exactly what I said - that Brooks could tell Nazi jokes, but other people should not. I remember it clearly as I'd agreed with most of the video - which included stuff like what you just said - and this final bit was shocking (to me) and something I strongly disagreed with.

 

[Scribe]

If you aren't interested, maybe sticking around in the conversation and arguing is a poor choice for all involved?

"... aren't interested in converting."

Would be the context of the statement. One can be interested in trying to gain an understanding beyond their current position, without being interested in being preached at, judged, or converted.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

That wasn't the thrust of Lindsey's argument. She argued that the way Mel Brooks criticized the Nazis was in a manner that made them seem foolish or stupid. Nobody is going to watch The Producers and be able to walk away with any sort of positive impression of Nazis. Whereas in a movie like American History X, even though it's got an anti-Nazi message, the audience can still away thinking that Derek Vinyard was a badass. Another example she used was a Halloween episode of South Park where Cartman's ghost costume resembled a KKK outfit and when Chef saw it he beast a hasty retreat. The problem was that the Klan wasn't the butt of the joke there. Brooks' jokes about the Nazis worked, according to Ellis, because they made the Nazis look stupid, weak, and not at all badass or powerful.

That's a problem, though. Good art can be slippery, and open to multiple interpretations. This can be an issue when you are looking at such fraught topics like satire, parody, black humor, and related categories.

But it can be an issue in any type of art.

Is it the fault of the artist that people don't understand the message? How obvious does it have to be?

When people blare Born in the USA without listening to the lyrics, is it Springsteen at fault?
When someone requests Every Breath You Take as their wedding song (true story ....), what does that say about the Police?

Multiple canonical movies about the greed and excess of Wall Street and capitalism (Wall Street, The Wolf of Wall Street) are instead lionized by traders.


All that said, I think that these issues are lessened when it comes to D&D. I am hard-pressed to think of a particular topic where people don't understand the purpose of the gaming materials. Maybe I'm missing something?

 

[S'mon]

The evolution of language and the removal of terms from their context, such as privilege in this context, like the touchy Critical Race Theory, from its academic area into modern jargon, has encrusted both with barnacles that have confused their meaning. To the layman racism and prejudice mean the exact same thing but when academics discuss racism they are discussing systemic elements and not necessarily that Bob is prejudice so when the academic says “Bob takes part in the white privilege of a racist system” Bob hears “Bob is prejudice and hates black people”, not “Bob lives in a country where the laws for 100 years were written to target minorities and other marginalized communities that as a result of the luck of birth he is not a member of”. When Bob hears Fox News discuss “Critical Race Theory” in schools he doesn’t hear that it’s a masters degree level course taught to law students discussing how race played a role in determining housing markets, traffic lights and drug laws but that his kids are going to learn about how “white people did bad things and his kids are bad because they are white”. Bob is scared of a ghost because Bob isn’t an academic. We don’t have a culture that rewards academia and have moved away from a culture that has some respect for people of intelligence unless they can blow stuff up real good.

I'm an academic. I work with fellow academics. A (small) minority do resemble Bob's bogeyman. I agree most are much more nuanced. The problem seems to be that it's not just Bob who takes the wrong message from academic discourse. The government and corporate bureaucracies, and to some extent the left-wing general public, also take a far less nuanced position than what I hear in academic seminars.

 

[Bill Zebub]

So I’m not disagreeing with you but you just committed an example of what he’s saying and you’re 100% right and that’s why these things are steps and take time to happen. When people feel preached at they don’t listen but it even extends into those marginalized people at the same time. They don’t want to listen to it either after a certain point even when it benefits them. It’s kind of crazy. Sometimes people shut down because even when they go above and beyond to do these things they feel like they’re being told it’s never enough and they just give up and stop listening to anyone. It does become a sort of passive bullying which is recognized as a form of abusive. To continually repeat the same criticism at someone over and over, even with the best intention and when they are making a genuine attempt to make those changes being addressed, it turns into abuse as browbeating. Does it excuse the other abuses going on? Nah. And I’m definitely not saying shut up or stop or anything but just the mechanism of why people quit listening, including those who are the perceived beneficiary of the advice so don’t take this as me saying anything like “you should stop or shut up”. I don’t think you’re bullying anyone.

One of my college freshman roommates screamed in my face “If that’s your thinking then your thinking has to be changed!” It wasn’t terribly effective at accomplishing his objective.

But some number of decades later I realized he was actually right. (The topic was basically the one we are discussing.)

He’s still an @$$hole, though, so I would never actually admit that to him.

 

[Bedrockgames]

That's a problem, though. Good art can be slippery, and open to multiple interpretations. This can be an issue when you are looking at such fraught topics like satire, parody, black humor, and related categories.

Interesting art is often very messy or intentionally ambiguous, and artists are often imperfect. This is especially the case with stuff like black humor. It actually serves a very important purpose. Anyone who has suffered or experienced death, can appreciate the value of it. But it is also easily misunderstood. My issue with how a lot of this stuff get's interpreted these days is we seem to stop at the most obvious interpretation or the most reactionary interoperation without taking the time to digest and understand the meaning. But like you say, this is more an issue for art outside D&D (though there too I think that can also be the case).

 

[Bedrockgames]

When people blare Born in the USA without listening to the lyrics, is it Springsteen at fault?
When someone requests Every Breath You Take as their wedding song (true story ....), what does that say about the Police?

Or a song like Suicide Solution, which literally led to a lawsuit claiming it caused someone to commit suicide. When it was in fact a song, not only against suicide, but against the suicide by alcohol of the singer singing the song (who himself didn't know that was what it was about). Art is interesting and multi-layered sometimes.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Interesting art is often very messy or intentionally ambiguous, and artists are often imperfect. This is especially the case with stuff like black humor. It actually serves a very important purpose. Anyone who has suffered or experienced death, can appreciate the value of it. But it is also easily misunderstood. My issue with how a lot of this stuff get's interpreted these days is we seem to stop at the most obvious interpretation or the most reactionary interoperation without taking the time to digest and understand the meaning. But like you say, this is more an issue for art outside D&D (though there too I think that can also be the case).

On the other hand, “it’s art” is used to defend the indefensible as frequently as “it’s religion” is used to avoid paying taxes.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

On the other hand, “it’s art” is used to defend the indefensible as frequently as “it’s religion” is used to avoid paying taxes.

Uh ..... given that I am more than familiar with people who used to attack artists like Mapplethorpe as making "indefensible" artwork .... not sure where you are going with that.

EDIT- and not sure about the relevance to RPGs.

 

[S'mon]

Multiple canonical movies about the greed and excess of Wall Street and capitalism (Wall Street, The Wolf of Wall Street) are instead lionized by traders.

That reminds me of the saying "There's no such thing as an anti-war film".
In Legion of the Damned (WW2 war-is-hell pulp) Sven Hassel recounts that he was inspired to join the German army after watching anti-war classic All Quiet on the Western Front. American soldiers get jazzed up for battle watching Full Metal Jacket and Apocalypse Now.

I guess that means, don't try to make an anti-violence RPG by depicting violence as gruesome and traumatic. Make an anti-violence RPG by having people engage in non-violent dispute resolution.