Revising Revisionism In Popular Culture

 

One thing which has started to become apparent from my reading is that whilst Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson get a lot of press for 'their' rules, much of the stuff they did was actually derivative of Tony Bath, and provably so. 

Whilst it's a common thing for rules writers to borrow, I do think that Gygax 'borrowed' from Tony Bath, but when someone borrowed from him it was 'theft'. 

Anyway, I enjoy the work of both, so I've not got a dog in the fight as it were, but it's a real pleasure to read gritty and detailed accounts of how the hobby evolved.

What does get my goat up, is when someone, 50 years down that line decides that someone who wrote something great or designed a fantastic world was 'racist' or 'misogynistic' and therefore the sum of that work is zero - Really? Go screw yourselves with a rolled up copy of whatever manifesto you read that in. In fact do it twice, and reflect on your idiocy.

I'm sure that M.A.R Barker for example was a man of his time, but that was the point, it was his, time. Likewise, if you don't like the way say Lovecraft wrote a century ago, don't read it. Seeing 'cleaned up' texts because a small number who make being offended a hobby or profession in it's own right, is as bad as holocaust denial in the long run. Of course many of those people also think Israel shouldn't exist, but call them a holocaust denier and watch them melt down...

The point is, culture is 'what it was 'at the time it became culture, not what we would wish it to be 40 years hence. Things change and evolve, but without that cultural pedigree, the history is lost or distorted.

I often read things or watch things which make me uncomfortable, or hear a comic go what I think is too far, but that's OK, becuase if I am so triggered, I can just avoid that comic, switch channel or put down that book. It's really that easy... I get the relief from what upsets me and the thing that triggered me still exists without being changed. Radical, huh?

I meet people I don't like - I don't go out of my way to speak to them again. It's like a guy who for 20 years has consistently walked up to me at shows, seemingly very familiar wiyth me and then called me 'Steve'. He get's ignored after a good hard stare.

Look, call me whatever you want, but when you get close enough that I can smell you, and you pat me on the back, I assume you know me. If not, just fuck off, OK?'

The point is, that person gets to call me Steve for the rest of his life, and I get to ignore him. it's a win/win situation.

Go we really need to be constantly re-appraising and revising everything lest we offend someone? That's pretty fucking offensive itself isn't it?

I did note recently when reading some articles by Donald Featherstone, that he could be pretty distasteful himself, but, because he is one of our ivory tower-ensconced gods, we let it slide. Why not just let it slide because the past is a different place altogether?

Now, it's perfectly fine to ignore it, it's perfectly OK to be critical of it; but don't rewrite it. It's part of the geological record so to speak, which has made me reflect on my own opinions of Featherstone, particularly when taken together with writings about him and letters written by him to gamers, but god forfend anyone erases it from the record and never in my name...

When popular culture ceases to be popular, is thence only 'culture'? To those who lived it, and actually experienced that time in the world it is their popular culture, even if it's not yours. I suppose the same can be said of where we are now. The past is indeed a different place and I'd like it to stay that way, rather than be reshaped and reinvented after editing by people who were not there, and those Quislings who were but see fit to erase it lest they be considered the enemy of the current 'regime'.