It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
tinyE: Lovecraft was a Nazi?
Yes, he was married to a Jewish woman and his beloved cat was named "Nigger Man".
Post edited October 19, 2016 by PetrusOctavianus
Looks like the avatar bug is back.

Fuck.
Sometimes, game design decisions that come from the author's beliefs can affect my enjoyment.

For instance, if the developer decides that people shouldn't play female characters and penalizes the player for doing so (for example, the Gold Box SSI games), then that will negatively affect my enjoyment of the game (and will likely make me want to hack/mod around that rule). Similarly, if a game expects the PC to represent the player (or otherwise be freely created), but forces the PC to be male, that is also a problem (for example, Ultima 8-9 and Eschalon Book 1 did this).

(Final Fantasy 4 SPOILER in the next paragraph.)

On the other hand, it's not so much a problem if characters in the game have that attitude, provided the game doesn't reinforce it (and preferably if it's subverted later). For example, in Final Fantasy 4, there are a couple of instances where the main character tells the female characters to stay behind for their protection. Of course, in the first instance, they obey and one of them gets kidnapped anyway (after an annoying sequence of battles where you don't have access to magic, because guess who your mages were?). The second time, however, is one of my favorite parts of the story (though it made me nervous the first time); the two female characters (appear to) get off the spaceship, the shipo travels to the moon, and then those two characters *get back on* the spaceship, insisting on accompanying the male characters to the end of the game.

On the other hand, I enjoyed Final Fantasy V's majority female playable cast (and I note that the male main character doesn't have much of a role in the plot), as well as Final Fantasy 6's main character (by which I mean the first controllable major character) being an asexual girl.
Should an artist's beliefs influence your enjoyment of their work?

It shouldn't have to (though we all have our limits or places where we draw the line; for me, I can't watch anything with Tom Cruise based on his strong links to Scientology). However, at the same time, that doesn't mean that other people should or shouldn't based on how you react, which is unfortunately what this discussion can ultimately lead to. For me, while I won't watch anything with Tom Cruise in it, I won't stop anyone else from viewing and enjoying his work.
Everyone has a worldview, or standards they live by.

Not knowing what they may be when looking at art allows one to enjoy the art for the art sake alone.

However, if the individual's worldview is known and is in direct conflict with your own, then of course it will influence you. It does not take away from art itself in any way, but it will influence you one way or another.

If you knew a person's worldview would you support them by purchasing their art?
avatar
jamyskis: Pot, meet kettle...
Yeah, but i am not an artist. And i don't give out artist's work. It is entirely different... Besides being out of topic, you didn't even read my post. You picked a sentence and derailed it to minus infinity. Strange, i thought it was the exclusive reason of existence of 2 people around this forum, to do that to my posts... I never thought you were of that specific bunch, or you had a thing for the exact same pointless habit.
avatar
jamyskis: Pot, meet kettle...
avatar
KiNgBrAdLeY7: Yeah, but i am not an artist. And i don't give out artist's work. It is entirely different...
So being completely the void of creativity or any semblance of original thought gives you the right to foist your opinions on others?

Having the ability to come up with new ideas and ways of expressing them on the other hand takes away that right.

Interesting. :P
Post edited October 19, 2016 by tinyE
avatar
Trilarion: So sneaking in political or religious viewpoints as side comments is okay as long as it doesn't distract too much from the entertainment? Maybe like kind of an advertisment which also only tries to send subliminal messages through happy faces?

I'm not sure this is so much better. Even the most idiotic entertainment movies have some kind of philosophical basis (some norms/moral/conventions) and promote some values (freedom, having fun, drinking a lot, free sex, ...) one way or another. They all want to tell a story. So how can you tell a story without basing it on some idea you have about the world?
Depends on how obtrusive the political, religious or philosophical viewpoint is. The worst ones of course are the films that deliberately set out to demonise or defame a certain group based on their ethnicity, religion or gender, but even the more well-meaning messages can be overbearing.

A few months back I saw a Turkish movie called Five Minarets in New York. It was marketed as an action thriller, but in reality it spent most of the first half telling us how stupid, belligerent and arrogant Americans are in the face of the mighty Turkish people, while the second half (being set in Turkey and involving practically no Americans) was basically "peace and love in the name of Islam".

It could have been a good film, but it had this overbearing negative nationalism in the first half, countered bizarrely in the second half with a happy-hippy-clappy "be excellent to each other" religious message that, as a non-Muslim, didn't really resonate with me. It's as if the film regularly pauses to give the viewer religious teachings in peace and tolerance.

There's also another Turkish film that you may have seen that was very popular among the "Asitürken" community here in Germany - Valley of the Wolves - which also had an overbearingly anti-American and anti-semitic tenor to it. Decent action scenes, but it was ruined by the makers trying to push their political message too far (I believe the director later said that it was deliberately filmed that way not because he believed in the anti-Americanism or anti-semitism, but to highlight the one-sidedness of the political messages a lot of American action cinema. If that's true, then it's certainly successful, as it does have a very conservative "us versus them" vibe to it like a lot of 80s action cinema).

But you're right that most films have a political or philosophical bent to them, and that the more subtle messages can be the most insidious. I was watching Kingsman recently and it dawned upon me how obviously it was supposed to be right-wing propaganda, but honestly, it was so entertaining and the message subtle enough for me to not really care.
avatar
Ophelium: can you divorce your personal opinion of the creator from his/her work?
Not really, but I don’t revel in my feelings. Quite the contrary – I’m greatly annoyed by them. Especially when I have a friend who is a walking talking Wikipedia. Announce your love for any book/game/move and he’ll promptly tell you about some abhorrent beliefs the creator held. It’s getting to the point where I think he’s just making them up to prove how stupid the human compulsion is to bury everything a famous artist has ever done because they’re not on our sociopolitical team.
avatar
tinyE: Having the ability to come up with new ideas and ways of expressing them on the other hand takes away that right.
No, my beloved artist pal... Exactly as a press becomes yellow press whenever it promotes ideology or a specific side of whatever cause, the exact same way an artist degrades into a degenerate propaganda agent, if he decides to use art as a means to propel forward their own beliefs. I respect new ideas and creativity, but only as long as they aren't hamfisted tools to sick little fascistic minds. Art has power, ergo it needs responsibility and BALANCE; ideally self applied moral code and sense of responsibility from artists themselves. Should art serve a cause, it is no longer art.

As far as i can see, there is a plethora of artists who resist the urge, keep beliefs personal and they are damn good at this. Art is a higher calling than petty little trifles. Its magnificence is only sullied by "agendas". Blindfolds are always nasty and leading to danger, even if an artist twisted them to appear beautiful at first.
Post edited October 19, 2016 by KiNgBrAdLeY7
No, it doesn't affect my enjoyment at all if the artist is a scumbag with the "wrong" opinions. I don't expect other people to be "pure" for me to engage with them. I don't want to live in an echo-chamber and I like diverse opinions. I judge works of art based on how good the art is and not how "pure" the artist is. The Fearless Vampire Killers is a fucking awesome movie, Seinfeld is fucking great, Borderlands is a good game and so is Fez.

Hell, think if we did that kind of judgement on this forum then all conversation would stop: TineE is crazy, dtgreene is a misandrist and a bigot, jamyskis is German and therefore a Nazi etc. I don't judge people like that. I judge them based on individual comments and not on some blanket statements they make. I can enjoy a good comment no matter who makes it.
avatar
skeletonbow: I agree. It can be very difficult at times though too. There's a well known popular American heavy metal band that I would say I am historically a fan of. I had enjoyed their heavy riffs and their unrelenting sticking to form counter to industry trends over time throughout the 90s long after metal was supplanted by Alternative and other music in the mainstream they kept putting out heavier "fuck you" type albums that were just metal, metal and more metal, refusing to change their style whatsoever to adapt to modern trends. I really respected that and hoped that they would continue to do so, and they did all along until the band eventually split up some time ago.

The sad part is that just last year I watched some videos on Youtube where that band's well known singer was caught on camera saying various racist white supremacist comments that shocked and surprised me, then another video, and another one. Turns out he's just more or less a big racist prick, and that really affects me now going back and listening to their music now, as I hear the emotion in their music from a completely different angle. Not only that, someone with the conviction he has could not likely become friends and play in a band with all of the other guys unless they too had similar convictions or they would be diametrically opposed to each other on such a controversial topic. I don't have any direct knowledge the other band members felt the same way as he, but I have to assume some level of guilt by association, and even though they are not all with us anymore and they're no longer collectively a band for some time now - I now see their music in a way that is difficult. I still have some enjoyment of the actual music, but can't listen to it without thinking about it through a lens of the singer's racist viewpoints in my mind.

I already own any of their music I ever planned to buy, so it doesn't affect my decision making much going forward, but if they were still an active band, I would have to make a decision about whether I wanted to spend money on their art in the future, effectively funding a world view I disagree with, and I'm not sure I could do that in that case.
Good write up, I don't really have anything to add. It sucks I guess, but what I mean is I short of separate the music from the actual person. So while I don't mind the music contents, the action of the artist I have to take into consideration. I think Lars Ulrich ruined Metallica somewhat for me.
Post edited October 19, 2016 by eksasol
Hell no.

Listening to Burzum right now. Feeling no motivation to burn down a church or attack any Jewish people.

Not going to stop listening to Pantera like skeletonbow just because Anselmo got drunk and said some stupid shit. "Mouth for War" doesn't suddenly stop being crushing because years later the singer said some stupid stuff on camera.

If I stopped listening to bands I like because somebody associated with them had beliefs I didn't agree with, there'd be nobody to listen to.
avatar
eksasol: Good write up, I don't really have anything to add. It sucks I guess, but what I mean is I short of separate the music from the actual person. So while I don't mind the music contents, the action of the artist I have to take into consideration. I think Lars Ulrich ruined Metallica somewhat for me.
I think Kurt Cobain ruined Metallica for me much more than Lars did. :oP

avatar
yogsloth: ...
Not going to stop listening to Pantera like skeletonbow just because Anselmo got drunk and said some stupid shit. "Mouth for War" doesn't suddenly stop being crushing because years later the singer said some stupid stuff on camera.

If I stopped listening to bands I like because somebody associated with them had beliefs I didn't agree with, there'd be nobody to listen to.
For the record I haven't mentioned any band nor band member names, nor stated whether or not I actually stopped listening to the music I was referring to. Having said that, when I hear the music of the particular band I was talking about, the singer's voice gets me thinking about the things I heard him say and it takes away from the music to a certain degree however. I'm not about to go burn my CDs or anything though either. Having said that though, I have no interest in any future work by the particular individual artist in question either though.
Post edited October 19, 2016 by skeletonbow
avatar
skeletonbow: Having said that though, I have no interest in any future work by the particular individual artist in question either though.
Well, neither do I, but that's because all of his various Housecore records are boring trash. :)