D&D General The Human Side of D&D History - From Gary Gygax to Temple of Elemental Evil

Also, I can’t really put someone who places their family’s financial security in jeopardy because they can’t separate work from their passion on a pedestal. As I mentioned, there are people who are able to separate those two things, and hold down day jobs while working on what they love secondary until the time they can make that move. It always comes with risk but nothing I heard made me believe that it was a calculated decision on Gygax’s part. Again, I don’t applaud luck.
I don't put anyone on a pedestal. Ever.

Maybe David Bowie.

But otherwise, no. I don't worship Gygax. He was just a human being. I am critical of things that he did that I don't agree with (and I think I have been very clear about what: he was sexist and misogynist, not to mention expressing other cultural attitudes that I intensely disagree with), and I celebrate the things he did that I admire. In co-inventing and shepherding D&D and the creation of RPGs, he accomplished something far greater than I or most other people ever will, in terms of leaving a positive legacy for humanity.

Lots of people pursue a passion and maybe could have paid more attention to those around them. On the other hand, most successful creators have made sacrifices and hurt people on the way. Virtually all of them, in fact. That damage is real, but has to be weighed against everything they accomplished.

And in this case, I think it's up to Gygax's family to judge, and no one else. None of us were impacted one way or the other by his work ethic or job as a provider, so it seems pretty unfair for us to be getting all up in the Gygax's business.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

No, my reason for stating the relevance was not shown is because the example is not about his actual work & keeps turning back to "gygax [personally] was sexist" when it comes time to extend that letter to europa to anything specific in d&d, true or not that's not relevant to his work on early d&d itself without further links in the chain. Logic problem faced with extending the example to any of the actual work in question?... that's "gaslighting". Relevance not recognized because problems with it were dismissed as "gaslighting"?... The same person who dismissed those problems as gaslighting declares that is "sea lioning".
The relevance of the Europa zine letter is to a different point about whether he was sexist or not as the argument drifted to whether he was sexist or not. Similar to the 1e DMG goodwife entry (goodwives will make false rape claims in response to any offensive treatment or seeming threat) which is outside of OD&D but still in a D&D sphere. The Europa letter is itself within the D&D sphere but though much less core than one of the OD&D or 1e core books and supplements.

If you want the relevance of the preface to the OD&D materials that is stated up front in the preface and seems straightforward.

I do not have the 500 page book so any information on specific examples in the draft materials on these points would be useful.

If you want the relevance of the Europa letter to OD&D core rules considerations only, it is a public statement Gygax sent to a zine talking about D&D and wargaming and how the fairer sex ruined many a good gamer and women should stay away from gaming. Some see it as supporting evidence providing context concerning their interpretation of other things he said in the OD&D materials such as the specific women's lib chaotic dragon queen comment in Greyhawk. Some see it as merely snapping back in frustration or an attempt at sarcastic provocation humor.
 

You know, it just hit me, with the ‘product of his times’ stuff. I grew up in the 70’s…I guess this means I’ve been way less sexist than I could get away with? I mean, obviously I don’t get to be as sexist as someone as old as Gygax, but surely I should get to be way more sexist than those in their 20’s today, right? If we’re all just pawns to the age we were born in, my generation shouldn’t be fighting this hard about this, right?
 

more the obsessively wargamer part, the cobbler only entered the picture because he considered wargamers to be elite and at least middle class when he was nowhere near middle class at the time

This doesn't mean he was a negligent father. There are plenty of people who are obsessive about their hobbies, activities, work, etc. Again this just seems to go beyond stuff he said and entering into whether he was good to his kids (and his children haven't said anything that would suggest to me he was negligent----though I also don't think how good of a father the creator of D&D was is particularly relevant to evaluating the stuff he made)
 

I don't think you realize the level of proto-satanic panic that Gygax was responding to & really believe that he was brushing off people who simpoly wanted d&d to be "more appealing"... simply because I don't think you would belive I was quoting the Europa 6-article he was responding to if I didn't come bearing scans

It made Chick tracts about blackleaf sound like positively reasonable criticism & we should remember that this is a topic where multiple posters calling Gygax & early d&d sexist have stated that we can't assume sarcasm or anything of the sort & need to take all of that as if it were writted in the totally seriousnes manner it seems to present as.
I'm really not sure what point you are trying to make here. The best I can figure is that one woman used incinderary language and pop psychology in a rant about her boyfriend to a third party and therefore Gygax was justified because he felt attacked?

If anything,. he seems to hold the same basic beliefs that this anonymous woman did - that aggression is hard wired into being male. But that isn't what Gygax is bringing up in his response. He uses in his comment the example of people coming to him with ideas as to how to make D&D more appealing to women - increase the female roles and use more non-gender names. These are not people claiming he has homocidal tendencies, they are people coming to him with ways that he could make the game more appealing to 50% of the population

And I feel that I need to reiterate what I said - sarcasm is not defense. It is a way to respond to someone by indicating that what they said does not deserve a serious answer. It is a display of contempt.
 

it seems pretty unfair for us to be getting all up in the Gygax's business
He’s kinda dead. I don’t think anything I or anyone else says is going to change that. But in all seriousness, no one in the Gygax family is in the midst of this discussion. Our opinions are ours to have and discuss, openly if we wish.
 

It's sort of ironic: if people hadn't been so triggered by a milquetoast and practically boilerplate disclaimer in a preface celebrating Gygax's work, I wouldn't have heard half of this. But the more they fight to defend any perceived stain, the more examples come out.

Instead of admitting that our hobby had a complicated history, like all things it's age do, they keep yelling. And each time they do, it reaches more people. And thanks to trolls like Elon, now huge amounts of people are being made aware if it.

Instead of it bring a small preface that almost no one would have paid much attention to.
 

Se we are back to " it's relevant because I say it is and if you question that you are defending sexism or sea lining"
call it what you want, I am under no obligation to reiterate all the things that are readily available for anyone who cares to look. I refer you to the foreword of the Making Of book and Ben Riggs post, but chances are you are already fully aware of that.

I have no interest in starting over from zero every time someone feigns ignorance
 



Trending content

Remove ads

Top