Teiman
4141
Shakespeare is frozen till 2030, so theres time for somebody to invent new shit, not recycle old shit. Go go guys.
But how the same story is told in different ways is /interesting/.
(Another great one is the many versions of Buck Rogers).
Heck, remix it all!
Also, Teiman? Asimov wrote a short story called “The Immortal Bard”. I recommend it, and it’s so relevant it’s funny.
(Oh, it’s here). Cough.
Aleck
4143
You’re absolutely right that this is a bigger thing than GG (someone that can be said of just about anything worth talking about…) It’s interesting how context can/does change a work – sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. I saw a great version of Merchant of Venice a few years ago where the play was staged in the larger context of being put on by Jews in a concentration camp for the entertainment of the Nazis. In that context, suddenly Shylock is something of a tragic hero, rather than a villain, while Bassanio and Antonio come off as shallow and somewhat pathetic. Probably not what Shakespeare intended, but valid nonetheless.
I think that whoever is actually putting a work together – whether re-envisioned in a new context or not – should be able to do that. Audiences can/should vote with their wallets. This is just as true for plays as it is for video games or other pieces of “art” (however that is defined). I think it’s kind of silly to tell a creator of a work that they’re racist because their work is historically accurate (and hence not as diverse as current day Europe), just as it’s absurd to tell someone they can’t cast a Shakespearean character as being of a different race. If you don’t like it, don’t support it.
ShivaX
4144
WTF WHY IS OTHELLO BLACK?
Aleck
4145
I’ll admit, this made me laugh.
I’d love to see a production of Othello where everyone in the cast other than Othello was non-white. Maybe instead of King of the Moors, he’s king of the (English) moors.
Nezz
4147
But that’s just switching the default state, when in fact there is no default state. Aesthetically, homogeneity and heterogeneity each have their strengths and weaknesses, and an author should choose the style that best fits his work. He might choose to present his fictional society as racially diverse because he finds that morally preferable or socially desirable, but that too is an artistic choice, and it needs to be justified on artistic grounds, not by an appeal to a historical reality in 15th century Denmark or 21st century USA (the latter, of course, is part of analysing the target market, but that’s a different argument).
Yes there is a default state. The default state is the ethnic/gender/sexual orientation/etc mix that’s really in society. Anyone representing a different state in their media consciously had better be able to point to the reason for the difference from the default, whether it’s historical or part of the message of the work or whatever, because the difference from the default IS a message. Sending it on purpose for a valid reason is fine. Sending it unconsciously just perpetuates bias and spreads stereotypes and marginalizes minorities. Not cool.
Well it’s the difference between appropriation and interpretation, and appropriation is a more political act, since it’s rejecting the status quo (or previous context) in favor of a different, preferred and assumably superior context. Making West Side Story is interpretation. Making Ophelia a black woman (just for example) in 16th C. Europe would be appropriation. Because there are so many implicit assumptions about that kind of choice about values and commentary on contemporary society (the argument would go something like “Why do you NOT want to make Opheila a black woman?”) these sorts of appropriations tend to have an edge to them that can rub people the wrong way. Certainly appropriation exists within a context social criticism, and flows one directionally toward the prevelant social mores. With a certainty approaching a million decimals to 100% reverse appropriation would be seen as the Worst Thing Ever - that revisionist Gone With the Wind where the plantation owners are black and the slaves are white. That’s why - and literally don’t give a care either way - why making Thor a woman, for example, probably rubs some people the wrong way.
The people who get rubbed “the wrong way” by Thor being a woman are misogynists, though. So who cares what they think?
If Master Chief had been black, that would’ve been “a thing”. It would rub people the wrong way.
Surprised your not off attacking Anti-GG’s new public enemy number 1, Brianna Wu, who gained misogynoterrorcidist status after having coffee with Brad.
Does that mean that Brad is likewise GG’s target #1 now?
Can you see the future? Pax is this coming weekend.
Teiman
4154
Imagine “Alien” with Silverster Stallone instead of Sigourney Weaver more explosions and campy 80’s style. IT WOULD BE GLORIOUS!, instead we have a all times classic.
scratchs his nose from the inside
Basically we have a lot of campy and bad stuff that is fun by itself (nothing bad with fun) but the tradeoff is that we don’t have stories that change us, that would make us see the world differently. Is a net loss. Is sad maybe, something to be angry about maybe.
So to reply your question, sometimes having ladies would be really fun, and the people not doing that ever, they lose good opportunities to surprise us and they are pushing his work into mediocrity.
So yea, I agree with LMN8R.
“Anti-GG” doesn’t have targets. Anti-GG is the null state. Anyone who doesn’t agreed with you that there is a scandal of some sort here(and, as we remain at an impasse where GGers refuse to explain what they are angry about. that includes pretty much everyone) is anti-GG.
Oh yeah the mainstream is on the verge of being pro-GG, don’t you lot even worry.
Ha. No. The null state is “not caring and continuing to play games like they always have” aka, the majority of the market. No pro- or anti- anything.
ShivaX
4158
At least until one side or the other comes after you for daring to try to do that.
‘Dealing with harassment’:
On Monday, the Game Developers Conference hosted a session where a trio of industry veterans gave suggestions on how people can avoid harassment happening in the communities they manage. Today, that was followed up by Zoe Quinn (founder, The Quinnspiracy), Elizabeth Sampat (founder, Optical Binary), Neha Nair (user relations, Storm8), and Donna Prior (founder, Salish Events) offering advice on how to deal with being the target of harassment campaigns.
…
Ultimately, companies can do more than individuals to prevent harassment. They can apply more pressure to social media companies to improve their policies. They can also lead by example, moderating their own communities and not tolerating abusive behavior among their player base.
“Harassment is not free speech,” Quinn said. “Tolerating abusive behavior limits other people’s ability to speak freely out of fear.”
Quinn finished by announcing the formation of Online Abuse Prevention Initiative, a non-profit organization partnership between Crash Override and Randi Harper that will study patterns of abuse, create anti-harassment resources, and work with tech companies to improve their communities.
“In conclusion, games are awesome,” Quinn said. “Stop letting jerks hijack them.”
“Harassment is not free speech,” Quinn said. “Tolerating abusive behavior limits other people’s ability to speak freely out of fear.”
Is this even a free speech thing to begin with? I mean, companies are hardly compelled to provide a platform from which people can spew forth whatever they please.
