So, thanks to Doug A. for the link to an article revisiting the great Arneson-Gygax credit controversy, arguing once again over which man contributed more to the creation of D&D (and thus all roleplaying games). The article pulls no punches, coming down squarely on the anti-Gygax side. And by 'anti-Gygax' I mean not just Gygax as an interesting person with character flaws who treated people badly but Gygax-as-villain, Gygax as Snidely Whiplash, a figure of melodrama rather than history (most notably in the comments from Rob Kuntz, a former Gygax sidekick). There's plenty to criticize about Gygax, but this attack wd be more convincing if it recognized his enormous contribution.
Here's the link;
https://kotaku.com/dungeons-deceptions-the-first-d-d-players-push-back-1837516834
The same may be said of the trailer for the documentary, which can be seen here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qllXXrx4Aog
The movie itself, I'm happy to say, adopts a milder tone and is much more devoted to boosting Arneson than in tearing Gygax down (I think Gygax first showed up at the 77-minute mark). It's a long and slow version of 'tell me about your character', but since the people doing so were, for example, the first person to ever play a dwarf in a D&D game, it's worth sitting through. Especially when you consider the people who they get on film: progenitors such as Wesely and Megarry and, through archival footage, some Arneson. I'm sorry the late Dave Sutherland (the member of the Minneapolis group to most successfully transitioned to Lake Geneva, where he stayed with the company more than twenty years) is totally absent; if he was more than mentioned I missed it. I wish they'd have included interviews with Mike Carr, who again is mentioned a time or two in passing (regarding his being a neighbor of Arneson's yet the two first met at GenCon) with no hint of how important he was to the D&D/AD&D transition. Oddly enough, the closing credits say they interviewed Tim Kask (the founding editor of THE DRAGON) but didn't use any of that footage. Perhaps it'll be in the second part to this documentary that they promise at the end.
I can't end without a note about Arneson's dad, who appears several times and is surprisingly eloquent about never having really appreciated what all his talented son and his friends were doing down in his basement every weekend for all those years. I get the feeling the lack of underappreciation ran both ways: old Mr. Arneson mentions being puzzled that his son knew everything about Napoleon's battles (and battles Napoleon might have had, had events in history played out differently) yet had no interest in his own father's first-hand experience in World War II and Korean. That reminded me of a story TSR's Roger Moore told in one of his editorials, the point of which was that wargamers don't want to know what war is like.
So, essential if you want to delve deep into the prehistory of D&D and don't mind doing so through an extremely skewed account.
--JDR
current reading: just read four books in three days: a Nero Wolfe (re-read) and three Georges Simenon MAIGRET novels (all bad). Now I've started two more: THE PEOPLES OF MIDDLE EARTH (HME.XII) and ASTOUNDING, the Campbell/Heinlein/Asimov/Hubbard biography.
Consider how muct of what I read is extremely biased in Gygax's favor, and how thoroughly he controled the narrative for years, i'm a bit shocked to see your take on this article. I thought it was rather more fair then Gygax deserved, speaking as an outside observer.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Mike Carr is to be featured a bit more in the second volume of the Secrets of Blackmoor.
ReplyDeleteThat's good news, Seji; thanks for sharing. I'd certainly like to know more about how the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK (which Carr edited) was put together, and more about the decisions that went into the odd format of B1. IN SEARCH OF ADVENTURE (which he wrote).
ReplyDelete--John R.
Hi Paul
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to evaluate Gygax fairly. Some of the things he did when in charge of TSR, and after, are unforgivable. Yet his contributions to our hobby are immense: we literally wdn't be here, as rpg gamers, without him. When I'm in a charitable mood I think of him as he was in his early full-of-enthusiasm days. When I'm in a censorious mood, which happens far too often, I look at Gygax from the mid-eighties to the mid-nineties.
You're right that we cd do with fewer skewed accounts and more that tried to approach the objective truth.
--John R.
--in Milwaukee, but not for long
I only met him twice, at Gencon & Origins, and both times he was perfectly nice to me. But the same is true of Arneson, and the other gaming celebrities I've met have all been extremely nice as well. Unless one is having a bad day, most people are nice to fans. :)
ReplyDeleteI generally have judged him on the tone of his editorials in Dragon magazine and his online posts once the web occured. I certainly agree, he had a huge impact on the hobby. But I personally believe RPGs would have happened with or without Gygax, and perhaps the hobby might have been stronger without some of his early decisions (he comes across as very jealous of anyone else in the 'spotlight' in his Dragon editorials).
I certainly do not believe we can accept either Arneson or Kuntz purely at their word, clearly they are trying to settle some scores (poor Rob Kuntz though, every time I read about his early life I just feel bad for the guy.)
I suppose most of my frustration lies with Gygax's fans rather then Gygax himself. I firmly believe that the 'Golden Age' of TSR creativity and output was the 2nd edition era. Of course, I don't mean just the 2e products, the 'Known World/Mystara' lines were awesome too, as well as the license games like Marvel. But the products of that time get short-shrift from the 1e fanatics.
Though, maybe that is changing these days. The 'OSR' movement may be at an end.
ReplyDeletePaul W. wrote
". . . But I personally believe RPGs would have happened with or without Gygax"
Dear Paul:
here's where we disagree. I think without Gygax the game (and hobby as a whole) wd never have gotten out of Arneson's basement.
"and perhaps the hobby might have been stronger without some of his early decisions (he comes across as very jealous of anyone else in the 'spotlight' in his Dragon editorials)"
--and here we agree. I put this anti-Tolkien comments in this category
"I firmly believe that the 'Golden Age' of TSR creativity and output was the 2nd edition era. Of course, I don't mean just the 2e products, the 'Known World/Mystara' lines were awesome too, as well as the license games like Marvel. But the products of that time get short-shrift from the 1e fanatics."
--and here we agree entirely. Histories of the hobby tend to skip the decade between Gygax's withdrawal and the launch of 3e, which was an incredibly creative and vibrant part of our history.
--John R.
Good to see a review.
ReplyDeleteNot being fully familiar with how Kotaku spins everything, that article was somewhat of a surprise even to myself. I felt some of my comments were a bit out of context as I am sure Rob Kuntz likely feels about his, yet any PR is good PR as the old adage goes.
Arneson is still being vilified by people who have no idea of the extent of his own works in leveraging Role Playing. All they go off of are some really spurious editorials in the Dragon. All those have been disproven, such as Arneson not making anything, How come I have seen piles of his unpublished works? How come Gygax has to see Blackmoor before he offers to collaborate with Arneson on D&D? If D&D is based on Chainmail why is there no role playing it Chainmail?
And if Gygax is such a complete genius why is his company leaking money like a pasta colander and then why does he lose his share in it? I am more partial to saying that Gygax was a genius in his own right, but he had some blinders just as Arneson did in some areas
Anyone who says it's either Arneson or Gygax is really missing the point of studying history. I have my little brown books and they say Gygax and Arneson on them. With our Movie we don't say bad things about Gygax because our focus is how RPG's are invented. The only path of invention goes from Totten to Wesely to Jenkins to Arneson to Gygax.
Because of how Gygax and TSR made Arneson the Target of thes attacks completely erases everyone else. I bet none of you know how Duane Jenkins is. Or Pete Gaylord who played the first wizard.
One can argue rules, but rules are not Role Playing. I could just as easily run an RPG with a chart from Panzer Blitz as any other mechanic and the experience is the same. hmmm... the Panzer Blits dungeon might be a fun spin off.
I hear a lot of people say that the film is skewed. Yet there is no evidence that Gygax invented RPG's. What can we say about Gygax before he works with Arneson? There's no mystery there and nothing to explore. In fact a lot of the stories are just plain hyperbole. The film is about how the play method for RPG's is invented which happens in the Twin Cities between 1963 when Wesely begins to referee weird wargames, and 1971 when Arneson creates Blackmoor, until 1974 when D&D is published.
If you have a problem with our choice of era, go make your own film. Expect to spend about 5 to 10 years and around 200k on it. In fact, consider that others have tried to make an all encompassing D&D movie and they failed because the subject is just too huge to cover it all. The only films to get finished that are D&D related are those that chose to focus on one small portion of a massive event. i.e. Eye of the Beholder only covers the artwork - Smart business people and film makers.
If you want to argue with me, I'm on Facebook at Blackmoor Secrets and Twitter @blackmoor_film. I will say there is little to argue about because Arneson invented the play method we now call the RPG.
The trailer is here: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/sobfinal
Griff