| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
 Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 12:03:45
|
quote:
Take DC Comics. Alan Scott, the first green lantern who was introduced in 1940 I think, turned gay in 2011. DC Comics messed that up. Suddenly his life with a wife and child that people had been following for maybe decades were just gone. Fans were outraged, not because he was gay but because of all the history that was lost and changed. Don't make the same mistake.
I should point out the issue with Alan Scott is the fact that his becoming gay GOT RID of a gay character since for decades, people had already been reading about Obsidian.
Similarly, I have nothing against Viktra Mordenheim but I wish she'd been retconned as Victor's daughter that supposedly died in the books and took over her father's work.
Respect continuity. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
Edited by - Charles Phipps on 09 Apr 2022 12:04:48 |
 |
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 13:58:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erikor
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Even though I'm an indie writer, I've received heartfelt letters from trans, gay, and black readers who were glad to be included.
The latter surprising me a few times but given the response, I see no reason not to do it and a lot of reason to do it. It helps a lot of people and does nothing to hurt.
Just don't force it on the readers. Your book doesn't need a detailed description of a sex scene, gay or otherwise.
I mean, gay doesn't automatically equal sex. That seems to be a misconception a lot of people have (not saying you do). You can have a same-sex romance in, say, a fantasy novel, and the sex can be just as explicit (or not there at all) as it is with straight characters. People seem to equate gay with porn, and that just isn't true. You can have a gay romance in a novel without showing what they do in the bedroom, or you can, just as you would with a straight romance. I have read some fantasy books that have sexy time (gay or straight), and some that don't, but a gay character doesn't mean there is going to be detailed sex.
But people seem to equate gay with explicitness automatically. Somehow, the panic of "but the children!" arises whenever a same-sex couple so much as kisses, despite the countless kissing scenes in Disney movies. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 09 Apr 2022 14:09:14 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 14:19:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
quote:
Originally posted by Erikor
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Even though I'm an indie writer, I've received heartfelt letters from trans, gay, and black readers who were glad to be included.
The latter surprising me a few times but given the response, I see no reason not to do it and a lot of reason to do it. It helps a lot of people and does nothing to hurt.
Just don't force it on the readers. Your book doesn't need a detailed description of a sex scene, gay or otherwise.
I mean, gay doesn't automatically equal sex. That seems to be a misconception a lot of people have (not saying you do). You can have a same-sex romance in, say, a fantasy novel, and the sex can be just as explicit (or not there at all) as it is with straight characters. People seem to equate gay with porn, and that just isn't true. You can have a gay romance in a novel without showing what they do in the bedroom, or you can, just as you would with a straight romance. I have read some fantasy books that have sexy time (gay or straight), and some that don't, but a gay character doesn't mean there is going to be detailed sex.
But people seem to equate gay with explicitness automatically. Somehow, the panic of "but the children!" arises whenever a same-sex couple so much as kisses, despite the countless kissing scenes in Disney movies.
It's mostly because people transpose themselves as the hero of the novel, and feel like the author is forcing them to be gay.
As for the Alan Scott thing... You do know he was gay when they rebooted the Earth-2 Universe and brought it up to modern day? So, it's specifically NOT the Alan Scott you grew up with, but a new Alan Scott for a younger generation that is looking for role models that look and feel more like the readers. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6666 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 14:35:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
As for the Alan Scott thing... You do know he was gay when they rebooted the Earth-2 Universe and brought it up to modern day? So, it's specifically NOT the Alan Scott you grew up with, but a new Alan Scott for a younger generation that is looking for role models that look and feel more like the readers.
That puts a whole different slant on his vulnerability to wood ....
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Erikor
Seeker
Norway
60 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 14:49:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
quote:
Originally posted by Erikor
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Even though I'm an indie writer, I've received heartfelt letters from trans, gay, and black readers who were glad to be included.
The latter surprising me a few times but given the response, I see no reason not to do it and a lot of reason to do it. It helps a lot of people and does nothing to hurt.
Just don't force it on the readers. Your book doesn't need a detailed description of a sex scene, gay or otherwise.
I mean, gay doesn't automatically equal sex. That seems to be a misconception a lot of people have (not saying you do). You can have a same-sex romance in, say, a fantasy novel, and the sex can be just as explicit (or not there at all) as it is with straight characters. People seem to equate gay with porn, and that just isn't true. You can have a gay romance in a novel without showing what they do in the bedroom, or you can, just as you would with a straight romance. I have read some fantasy books that have sexy time (gay or straight), and some that don't, but a gay character doesn't mean there is going to be detailed sex.
But people seem to equate gay with explicitness automatically. Somehow, the panic of "but the children!" arises whenever a same-sex couple so much as kisses, despite the countless kissing scenes in Disney movies.
I agree with you 100%. I don't care if the protagonist is having a gay romance. That can be done just as good as a straight romance.
What I meant was to not go into detail. Unless you're writing a book where sex plays a big part it's not neceassary to spend two pages describing the act. TV-series have become obsessed with sex and the scenes are almost always long and graphic. I mean, if you have a story to tell then you don't need that. That couple slept together, fair enough, but when reading a book you don't need to know how they took eachothers underwear off.
|
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 17:16:06
|
I see no reason not to have gay characters in the books. Male or female, it happens, and it was how Ed Greenwood envisioned the FR before TSR decided to make it conservative in a vain effort to appeal to the moral majority.
People who didn't READ Dungeons and Dragons in the first place.
In the "real" Realms, gay, straight, or otherwise are equally normal and don't raise an eyebrow. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 17:52:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erikor
What I meant was to not go into detail. Unless you're writing a book where sex plays a big part it's not neceassary to spend two pages describing the act. TV-series have become obsessed with sex and the scenes are almost always long and graphic. I mean, if you have a story to tell then you don't need that. That couple slept together, fair enough, but when reading a book you don't need to know how they took eachothers underwear off.
It depends. A story doesn't have to focus on sex in order to explicitly include it. As long as your sex scene is necessary to move forward the conflict in the story (thus leading the character forward in their transformation arc and showing how their old survival system is crumbling apart), you should write it well. And I mean, it's the same for any other scene--always ask yourself: What's the conflict on this scene? How does it contribute to the transformation arc? How does it contribute to my thematic viewpoint? How does it show the psychology of the protagonist and other characters? Would my thematic veiwpoint and transformation arc be deliverd just as well without it? Ideally, also: what does this scene show about the world?
Example: if the character's relationship conflict revolves around being unable to fully trust others, because this character is healing from PTSD and they are terrified of letting go of control, sex can be a powerful scene. Trauamtized brains have troubles discerning when they're actually safe, and they're constantly looking for danger. In order to experience and enjoy intimacy, one has to be able to accept immobilization and a degree of loss of control without fear, which traumatized brains have tons of problems doing.
A scene of sex in which the protagonist who loves their partner and believes to trust them, just can't manage to entrust themselves to the partner, can highlight the suffering of the protagonist and the sacrifice that they will be required to make in the future. It'll also show how their survival system (need for control 24/7 in this case) causes suffering in others and prevents the protagonist from accessing the resources that their partner has, that they need to solve the external conflict.
It's also an excellent prompt for discussing internal conflict, as the protagonist wants to fully experience intimacy with their partner, wants to trust their partner, wants to have a deep connection with their partner, but their fears prevent them from achieving that. Those fears will also cause a profound sense of shame in the protagonist, lots of judgement on themselves, and so on, therefore posing an obstacle in accessing even their own personal resources. And I repeat, in this case sex is an excellent choice to showcase this, because it involves accepting some loss of control and entrusting yourself to someone else, if for a brief time, and because sex is a strong part of the human nature.
You can put this scene in any book that has a protagonist with this problem--be it high fantasy, thriller, romance, etc... (and a side note, genres are labels that are only useful to readers to more easily choose what to read. Writers shouldn't abide to those when writing). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 09 Apr 2022 18:26:44 |
|
|
|
Erikor
Seeker
Norway
60 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 19:59:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by Erikor
What I meant was to not go into detail. Unless you're writing a book where sex plays a big part it's not neceassary to spend two pages describing the act. TV-series have become obsessed with sex and the scenes are almost always long and graphic. I mean, if you have a story to tell then you don't need that. That couple slept together, fair enough, but when reading a book you don't need to know how they took eachothers underwear off.
It depends. A story doesn't have to focus on sex in order to explicitly include it. As long as your sex scene is necessary to move forward the conflict in the story (thus leading the character forward in their transformation arc and showing how their old survival system is crumbling apart), you should write it well. And I mean, it's the same for any other scene--always ask yourself: What's the conflict on this scene? How does it contribute to the transformation arc? How does it contribute to my thematic viewpoint? How does it show the psychology of the protagonist and other characters? Would my thematic veiwpoint and transformation arc be deliverd just as well without it? Ideally, also: what does this scene show about the world?
Example: if the character's relationship conflict revolves around being unable to fully trust others, because this character is healing from PTSD and they are terrified of letting go of control, sex can be a powerful scene. Trauamtized brains have troubles discerning when they're actually safe, and they're constantly looking for danger. In order to experience and enjoy intimacy, one has to be able to accept immobilization and a degree of loss of control without fear, which traumatized brains have tons of problems doing.
A scene of sex in which the protagonist who loves their partner and believes to trust them, just can't manage to entrust themselves to the partner, can highlight the suffering of the protagonist and the sacrifice that they will be required to make in the future. It'll also show how their survival system (need for control 24/7 in this case) causes suffering in others and prevents the protagonist from accessing the resources that their partner has, that they need to solve the external conflict.
It's also an excellent prompt for discussing internal conflict, as the protagonist wants to fully experience intimacy with their partner, wants to trust their partner, wants to have a deep connection with their partner, but their fears prevent them from achieving that. Those fears will also cause a profound sense of shame in the protagonist, lots of judgement on themselves, and so on, therefore posing an obstacle in accessing even their own personal resources. And I repeat, in this case sex is an excellent choice to showcase this, because it involves accepting some loss of control and entrusting yourself to someone else, if for a brief time, and because sex is a strong part of the human nature.
You can put this scene in any book that has a protagonist with this problem--be it high fantasy, thriller, romance, etc... (and a side note, genres are labels that are only useful to readers to more easily choose what to read. Writers shouldn't abide to those when writing).
Damn, every time I think I've made my point in English someone comes along and just destroys me 
What I tried to talk about is unnecessary sex scenes that are used as filling. To make a movie, an episode or a book longer. I don't like or see the point of those. If there's a point to the scene then I have no problem with it, be it character development, a flashback that tells something of a characters backstory, anything to do with the story etc.
In short I agree with you. I just don't like when there's a 2 minute sex scene in an episode where the whole point is that someone got lucky last night and it brings nothing to the story. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 20:35:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erikor
Damn, every time I think I've made my point in English someone comes along and just destroys me
What I tried to talk about is unnecessary sex scenes that are used as filling. To make a movie, an episode or a book longer. I don't like or see the point of those. If there's a point to the scene then I have no problem with it, be it character development, a flashback that tells something of a characters backstory, anything to do with the story etc.
In short I agree with you. I just don't like when there's a 2 minute sex scene in an episode where the whole point is that someone got lucky last night and it brings nothing to the story.
My goal wasn't destroying your point, heh, more giving info 
But reading your reply, I see that I misunderstood you, so that was unnecessary. And yes, sex for its own sake is a definite no, just like combat or action for their own sake, or anything, really. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 09 Apr 2022 20:35:33 |
|
|
|
Erikor
Seeker
Norway
60 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 21:54:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by Erikor
Damn, every time I think I've made my point in English someone comes along and just destroys me
What I tried to talk about is unnecessary sex scenes that are used as filling. To make a movie, an episode or a book longer. I don't like or see the point of those. If there's a point to the scene then I have no problem with it, be it character development, a flashback that tells something of a characters backstory, anything to do with the story etc.
In short I agree with you. I just don't like when there's a 2 minute sex scene in an episode where the whole point is that someone got lucky last night and it brings nothing to the story.
My goal wasn't destroying your point, heh, more giving info
But reading your reply, I see that I misunderstood you, so that was unnecessary. And yes, sex for its own sake is a definite no, just like combat or action for their own sake, or anything, really.
I knew that wasn't your goal It's just sometimes when I try to tell or describe something in English I forget how it can be interpreted. Second language and all that. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2022 : 22:18:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
quote:
Originally posted by Erikor
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Even though I'm an indie writer, I've received heartfelt letters from trans, gay, and black readers who were glad to be included.
The latter surprising me a few times but given the response, I see no reason not to do it and a lot of reason to do it. It helps a lot of people and does nothing to hurt.
Just don't force it on the readers. Your book doesn't need a detailed description of a sex scene, gay or otherwise.
I mean, gay doesn't automatically equal sex. That seems to be a misconception a lot of people have (not saying you do). You can have a same-sex romance in, say, a fantasy novel, and the sex can be just as explicit (or not there at all) as it is with straight characters. People seem to equate gay with porn, and that just isn't true. You can have a gay romance in a novel without showing what they do in the bedroom, or you can, just as you would with a straight romance. I have read some fantasy books that have sexy time (gay or straight), and some that don't, but a gay character doesn't mean there is going to be detailed sex.
But people seem to equate gay with explicitness automatically. Somehow, the panic of "but the children!" arises whenever a same-sex couple so much as kisses, despite the countless kissing scenes in Disney movies.
It's mostly because people transpose themselves as the hero of the novel, and feel like the author is forcing them to be gay.
The irony with that mindset is that for gays who also enjoy reading, so they too will transpose themselves as the hero. Considering until recently they had to go to a special bookstore to get queer books, or at least really hunt for them, they probably read a lot of books with straight characters. People who argue that gay characters shouldn't be shoved in their faces and complain about "wokeness" don't seem to realize that straight characters have essentially been just that to queer readers. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 09 Apr 2022 22:22:43 |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
141 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 01:55:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
People who argue that gay characters shouldn't be shoved in their faces and complain about "wokeness" don't seem to realize that straight characters have essentially been just that to queer readers.
Do people call (gay author) Armistead Maupin woke? No? Then why are they are calling Bob Salvatore woke? Its not to do with homosexuality or gay characters. Its something else altogether. "Woke" is applicable to Bob Salvatore directly. His wokeness, whether it be getting woke on religion, wanting to be inclusive and ham-fisting it, or writing what he thinks are erotic scenes of lesbianism, Bob Salvatore's wokeness is spilling out onto the pages.
Its clear that Bob Salvatore is giving the readers what he thinks they want, while resolving problems from the ridiculous strawman about the drow that he himself is responsible for creating. The AD&D Book of Humanoids supplement from way back in 1993 put an end to all monsters being evil. Bob Salvatore kept it up until recently, when he suddenly got woke. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 02:01:21
|
I wasn't referring to RAS specifically (as I said, his gay representation is bad), I meant in general (the last several posts haven't really been about Bob. It went off on a bit of a tangent). It is an argument I have seen used against having queer characters in media.
I feel like the use of the word woke gets thrown around a lot when there is any talk of diversity (racial, sexual, etc) in media, which is why I put it in quotations. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 10 Apr 2022 02:04:19 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 02:16:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
People who argue that gay characters shouldn't be shoved in their faces and complain about "wokeness" don't seem to realize that straight characters have essentially been just that to queer readers.
Its clear that Bob Salvatore is giving the readers what he thinks they want, while resolving problems from the ridiculous strawman about the drow that he himself is responsible for creating. The AD&D Book of Humanoids supplement from way back in 1993 put an end to all monsters being evil. Bob Salvatore kept it up until recently, when he suddenly got woke.
Let's not forget AD&D The Drow of the Underdark (1991), by Ed: he added a whole faith of good drow that help other drow escape Lolth, though that book didn't deal with other monsters. The Menzoberranzan supplement (which ironically wasn't written by RAS, he just wrote the description fo the noble houses--yes, he didn't even detail the entirety of Menzo culture) also says that drow in the city would never look back if they ever got a taste for what it means to be free from Lolth's BS. It's hilarious how RAS went full reactionary mode on this for 30+ years, and is now indeed playing woke. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 02:24:48
|
| Yeah, Bob has said more than once that, Drizzt isn't the only good drow, he is just the one who got away, yet he himself ignored all the other goodly drow. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 03:37:08
|
It's always difficult to discuss out-of-universe content, especially with the fact the authors aren't going to smack talk themselves or their employers or the behind-the-scenes decision making that went into things.
However, as I understand it:
1. RA Salvatore created the "good aligned drow" Drizzt Do'Urden.
2. It was massively successful.
3. Plenty of players made their Drizzt clones because he's a great archetype.
4. Ed Greenwood is a master of both storytelling lore AND recognizing game issues. It's one of his fantastic skills as a storyteller that whenever he sees something that is a problem for the setting's play that he creates patches and workarounds to maximize the utility of the Realms' lore for fun gameplay.
5. Ed created the Drow of the Underdark supplement that addressed a large number of drow issues. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drow_of_the_Underdark
6. Drow of the Underdark actually does a massive amount of weaving together disparate drow lore and "gently" addresses some of the issues that Drow had from their conception.
Ex:
* Drow are actually naturally dark-skinned and not cursed by Corellon Lantheon.
* The worship of the Elder Elemental Evil from THE VAULT OF THE DROW that was skipped over by RAS is added in the form of Ghaundaur.
* Ed creates two gods in addition to Lolth in Vharaun and Elistraee in order to help make it easier for large numbers of drow to go to the surface, form communities, and justify them as player characters.
It is, by and large, a FANTASTIC book that weaves together Gary Gygax's Underdark series, RAS, and the Realms as a whole while also facilitating more Drow player characters in an organic way.
7. RAS is not actually concerned about the utility of the tabletop RPG versus telling his own story and setting in the corner of the Realms he's claimed as he owns. When
you've sold 17 million books then you have earned perhaps the right to cast a big shadow.
Player character drow, Elistraee, and so on arguably detracts from Drizzt's uniquness and he has no desire to incorporate any of that. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 07:30:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
It's always difficult to discuss out-of-universe content, especially with the fact the authors aren't going to smack talk themselves or their employers or the behind-the-scenes decision making that went into things.
However, as I understand it:
1. RA Salvatore created the "good aligned drow" Drizzt Do'Urden.
2. It was massively successful.
3. Plenty of players made their Drizzt clones because he's a great archetype.
4. Ed Greenwood is a master of both storytelling lore AND recognizing game issues. It's one of his fantastic skills as a storyteller that whenever he sees something that is a problem for the setting's play that he creates patches and workarounds to maximize the utility of the Realms' lore for fun gameplay.
5. Ed created the Drow of the Underdark supplement that addressed a large number of drow issues. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drow_of_the_Underdark
6. Drow of the Underdark actually does a massive amount of weaving together disparate drow lore and "gently" addresses some of the issues that Drow had from their conception.
Ex:
* Drow are actually naturally dark-skinned and not cursed by Corellon Lantheon.
* The worship of the Elder Elemental Evil from THE VAULT OF THE DROW that was skipped over by RAS is added in the form of Ghaundaur.
* Ed creates two gods in addition to Lolth in Vharaun and Elistraee in order to help make it easier for large numbers of drow to go to the surface, form communities, and justify them as player characters.
It is, by and large, a FANTASTIC book that weaves together Gary Gygax's Underdark series, RAS, and the Realms as a whole while also facilitating more Drow player characters in an organic way.
Although Drizzt certainly made the drow popular, people were playing drow PCs before Drizzt, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Gygax himself presented drow commoners not as evil in his module.
Also, I don't think Ed was trying to correct anything as much as giving a vision of the drow closer to what he already had for his FR. He said multiple times that Eilistraee was already part of his original Realms before TSR asked him to publish her. But this is quite irrelevant. The core of the issue is:
quote:
7. RAS is not actually concerned about the utility of the tabletop RPG versus telling his own story and setting in the corner of the Realms he's claimed as he owns. When you've sold 17 million books then you have earned perhaps the right to cast a big shadow.
TTRPG doesn't have anything to do with this. RAS didn't create the drow in fiction and he didn't create the drow in FR, unlike he says. As a matter of fact, he didn't even create Lolth, her cult, or the various facets of the Menzo society. He came up with a mafia-inspired clan system and the academy thing, while leaving the rest (aka most of the worldbuilding) the exact same as what Gygax had created. His novels don't even expand on the drow beyond that, he repeats the same thing over and over for dozens of books when it comes to drow lore. Moreover, all the massive amount of history and lore about the drow in the Realms? Yeah, nothing of that is his work. Yet, he now claims that he created the FR drow. Again, dude didn't even create Lolth or her cult, let alone other drow deities, faiths, cultures, and cities. Just let that sink in.
quote:
When you've sold 17 million books then you have earned perhaps the right to cast a big shadow.
You don't earn any right to claim that the work of others is yours just because you sold a lot of copies *using their creations*--that allowed you to be where you are, btw (just look at RAS' other series: he wouldn't have got nowhere near where he is if not for the work of other people). That's like saying that a surgeon who saves many lives has a right to do bad things--it's honestly nonsense. If you throw a ball upward and another ball downward they don't remain midair counteracting each other's movements.
quote:
Player character drow, Elistraee, and so on arguably detracts from Drizzt's uniquness and he has no desire to incorporate any of that.
I hope you can see that this is exactly the source of the current problem with drow. RAS went full reactionary mode on non-Lolth drow cultures because he wasn't the one doing that, so he didn't want to acknowledge them. He's the cause of the drow being "an evil race" with a handful of dudes being the exception (because it's always dudes, btw; women in RAS' stuff tend to be underwhelming), and he actively went against any attempt to make the race more nuanced by pushing the "my characters are the most special evah" thingy. He's just playing woke now, while dismissing the efforts of all the people who actually tried to give the drow nuance, and appropriating their work. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 10 Apr 2022 07:51:38 |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 07:50:06
|
quote:
You don't earn any right to claim that the work of others is yours just because you sold a lot of copies *using their creations*--that allowed you to be where you are, btw (just look at RAS' other series: he wouldn't have got nowhere near where he is if not for the work of other people). That's like saying that a surgeon who saves many lives has a right to do bad things--it's honestly nonsense. If you throw a ball upward and another ball downward they don't remain midair counteracting each other's movements.
I disagree.
That's like saying that Tim Burton or Christopher Nolan doesn't deserve any credit for what they did with Batman. The same for other creators who have done things with other preexisting characters like the ones in comic books or literature.
Just because you're using someone else's creations doesn't mean that you aren't deserving of credit for what you do with them.
quote:
I hope you can see that this is exactly the source of the current problem with drow. RAS went full reactionary mode on non-Lolth drow cultures because he wasn't the one doing that, so he didn't want to acknowledge them. He's the cause of the drow being "an evil race" with a handful of dudes being the exception (because it's always dudes, btw; women in RAS' stuff tend to be underwhelming), and he actively went against any attempt to make the race more nuanced by pushing the "my characters are the most special evah" thingy. He's just playing woke now, while dismissing the efforts of all the people who actually tried to give the drow nuance, and appropriating their work.
I mean, the Drow have been 90% evil always and he's hardly the only one who has pushed that narrative. He may have been the publisher of that but WOTC also wanted the elves to get divided into Dark Elves (GOOD) and Drow (EVIL) by killing Elistraee/Vhaeraun and making Lolth a greater goddess.
And also, this is just a piece of advice but using "woke" as a perjorative just confuses the hell out of me because it means, "aware of systematic racism and abuses in society." It gets misused by people online but I primarily associate with the Alt-Right. I don't attribute that to you by any means but it doesn't work as a insult to someone who supports more social awareness in genre fiction. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
Edited by - Charles Phipps on 10 Apr 2022 07:54:19 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 07:56:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Just because you're using someone else's creations doesn't mean that you aren't deserving of credit for what you do with them.
Except RAS said he created the FR drow, not that he created Drizzt and his story. I hope you can see the difference.
He didn't create the drow--neither in GH nor in FR (and they're the same, btw, with the exception that FR drow have non-Lolth culture, that RAS didn't create)--he didn't create Lolth, he didn't create any other drow deity or culture, he didn't create the drow history.
He worte a story based on those creations, and that story is the only thing to be his. He has 0 rights to say "I created the drow in FR", especially not when his books just used Gygax's drow with a clan system slapped on. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 08:02:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I mean, the Drow have been 90% evil always and he's hardly the only one who has pushed that narrative. He may have been the publisher of that but WOTC also wanted the elves to get divided into Dark Elves (GOOD) and Drow (EVIL) by killing Elistraee/Vhaeraun and making Lolth a greater goddess.
Sure, but Ed and others pushed for the existence of cultures and faiths that aren't evil. RAS went reactionary mode on that pushing the "good other" trope: "your race is sh*t, but you--you are the exception and therefore ok". Instead of embracing the work of others and taking part in the creation of good drow soceities, RAS always had Drizzt and a handful other characters as the lone exceptions to their race, while refusing to acknowledging the existence of those cultures that other authors were writing, or even creating his own. And this went on for 30+ years.
Btw, WotC decided to erase the drow gods because their goal admittedly was to make Drizzt more special. And even as WotC let Eilistraee and Vhaeraun back in FR, they still get downplayed in favor of Drizzt. So much about the FR drow narrative was about pushing the "good other" trope, which is what caused the current situation with the drow.
quote:
And also, this is just a piece of advice but using "woke" as a perjorative just confuses the hell out of me because it means, "aware of systematic racism and abuses in society." It gets misused by people online but I primarily associate with the Alt-Right. I don't attribute that to you by any means but it doesn't work as a insult to someone who supports more social awareness in genre fiction.
Hence why I used "playing woke". As in pretending while not actually understanding (a scribe, sno4wy, explained this much better than I can in another review thread for this book).
|
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 10 Apr 2022 08:27:41 |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 11:29:11
|
Ah, thanks for the clarification!
Honestly, I don't necessarily blame RA Salvatore for saying what he did. An interview can misconstrue a person's actual feelings and it might be people are reading too much into what he meant by saying. I'm sure he knows the Drow existed in VAULT OF THE DROW and in the Forgotten Realms.
But I could be trying to assume the best of the man. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 19:14:34
|
Of course he knows. I mean he used that material to write his stuff, he can't not know. But when he says that he created the drow in FR, and that *his* vision--the one he claims to have had since forever--is now guiding the WotC team, I can't assume that was in good faith, because it's a statement full of lies and dismissiveness.
For 30+ years, he had the drow as monolithically (and idiotically) evil, with 0 traces of a vision that included nuanced cultures, and instead pushed Lolth as the single defining element of the drow. Other authors tried to reduce Lolth's excessive importance by introducing alternative faiths and even nations in the history of FR (the Miyeritari believed in Eilistraee and the Seldarine and were untouched by Lolth, Ilythiir was revealed as not having been shaped by Lolth but by Vhaeraun's influence, with Lolth only coming in much later, thus diminishing the idea that the drow were somehow forever tied to her).
Now not only RAS says that he created the FR drow, but that the idea that the drow can form good cultures that aren't shackled by Lolth belongs to "his vision" (while, again, we find the exact opposite in his books), that the existence of drow cultures who never followed Lolth also belongs to "his vision" (again, no trace of it in his books, and FR already has MIyeritar), while putting an active effort in retconning all the FR history of the drow, and instead coming up with a banality like: "Some dudes were seduced by Lolth, followed her underground, founded Menzo, and that's bow this all started--no Crown Wars, nothing" (but for some reason the other drow cultures, that outnumber the Lolthites 2000:1, and that have mighty warriors and magic users, had to hide for millennia just to survive). He is pushing away all that the other creators made and replacing it with his stuff while claiming "I created the drow in FR". This just can't be in good faith (aside from being but dirt compared to the level of thought that went into building the history of drow and elves in FR, that he's doing away with).
Also, when he says "we aren't retconning" in the dragon+ article, the sentences that follow tell "we aren't retconning what I did with Menzo". His interview entirely ignores the existence of anything he didn't create.
To me, this man took a huge dump on any dignity he had as an artist. The worst part is that he can easily push aside others because he's much more popular than other creators, even Ed, because the history and lore of FR drow is known by few people, and because WotC are just accepting his sh*t (I mean, I can see reasons for them to do so--if people knew that other authors tried making the drow better for years but WotC opposed their efforts with hideous stuff like "chad zak" and by trying to erase the one good drow society, it wouldn't look good for their pretend-woke campaign). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 10 Apr 2022 19:29:43 |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 22:54:25
|
Gods, I'd forgotten about that chad zak thing. That is just... wow.
I am incredulous that someone thought that was a good thing to include. It's both nonsensical and revolting at the same time. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6666 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 23:32:58
|
Chad zak??
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 23:38:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Eh, if anyone wanted to get rid of other good drow, I point the finger at Wizards.
They're the one who tried to kill all the non-Lolth gods.
Sure, but RAS didn't help, and the good drow cultures were never *his* vision (his books regulalry painted Drizzt and a handful of others as the special exception to their race), unlike he's now claiming, dismissing the work of the authors who actually tried to make something out of that.
But the worst part of this matter is the human angle--how RAS is appropriating or dismissing the work of many, many people, and how WotC is just keeping silent, possibly because it's useful to their image. Something like "oh, it isn't our fault, we--the current design team--are cool, woke people. The writers from before are to be blamed for how unredeemably evil the drow were portrayed". An action that kinda supports this is that the first thing they did was labeling all pre-5e work as racist (they literally put that label on the pdfs), even the books that offer a nuanced portrayal of the drow (like Ed's book). Meanwhile, the constant repetition of how evil the drow are and how they love torture in the 5e books gets ignored. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 10 Apr 2022 23:42:03 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 23:43:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Chad zak??
-- George Krashos
There was this bit of "lore" (lol) that said that drow women often got pregnant with multiple children, said children often killed each other in the womb, and when that happened the mother experienced some super orgasm or something. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
141 Posts |
Posted - 10 Apr 2022 : 23:54:15
|
I believe Chad Zak originated in Dragon Magazine. Probably never considered canon.
https://www.realmshelps.net/charbuild/races/elf/drow1.shtml
Honestly, I think the drow problem could have better been resolved by having at least one "white elf" culture being evil. Not just some racist white elf organizations, but a city or nation of them. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 11 Apr 2022 : 00:06:06
|
Thing is evil cities or nations or cultures are just not a thing. You can have evil ideologies and governments/enforcing systems, but these inevitably meet resistance and various forms of disconent from factions within the very nations subjected to them (and that's when those ideologies actually try to offer something to the bulk of people). It's a trivializing way of doing narrative. Stupid Evil (tm) like Lolth, that offers nothing to people, is even worse and is honestly just to be avoided. If you really want to have that, then at least portray the people living under it as certainly not happy with their misery, instead of "oh they're evil too", a bit like the 2e Menzo supplement tried to do at certain points.
You can solve the drow problem by giving the Lolthite culture more verisimilitude (rather than, you know, the current laughable, 0 effort stuff like "love is weakness guys, because we're edgy like that") and adding the plethora of factions and splinter movements that would naturally form over 12000 friggin' years (also, giving more weight to the already existing ones, like Eilistraee and Vhaeraun). But that would require actual thinking and evaluating consequences, rather than saying "this society is like this and remains like this even though it makes 0 sense, because I say so", something that sorely lacks in RAS' and WotC's stories. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 11 Apr 2022 00:11:47 |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 11 Apr 2022 : 02:08:04
|
This oddly enough puts me in reminder of the NEVERWINTER TALES comic book where Drizzt and the now vampirized Pwent struggle with the questions of whether or not a vampire could ever be someone who deserved to live or whether they were automatically creatures of evil.
Without apparent irony, Pwent decides that YES he can be a "good vampire" by restricting his murdering to feeding on goblins. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Starlight Enclave is disappointing
