Brimshack Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Another question going through my mind, how much of our objections are determined precisely by the content itself, and how much by suspicions about the intent of others? Does it really matter if someone might see in a morbid picture a profound message? Does that make it better? Or conversely, what if we know a positive message was intended, is that enough to controvene the very real prospect that someone else will just get a vicarious thrill out of it? Sometimes, I think comments and concerns relate to the objective features of the piece, and sometimes they relate more to the possibilities of abuse, so to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duende Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 forced sex (that is any kind of sex were the other has no choice.) is the sole exception to this, nobody with a sane mind can ever come up with a good excuse for doing this, period. I have to disagree with you on that point. There's plenty of people out there that consider themselves sane and have excuses for why they would commit rape. Have you never heard of "date rape" or "marital rape"? Excuses range from "Look at the way she was dressed, she was asking for it.", "She was teasing me all through the party, I know she wanted me, that 'no' didn't mean anything", "She's my wife, she's supposed to submit whenever I want, it says so in the Bible." It's not always a stranger that jumps out of a dark alley. So the so-called "sane" people have plenty of reasons for it. I think that's what really makes it so despicable, because unlike theft, murder, crippling, torture which "sane" people can agree are wrong things to do, some of these same people can think rape is excusable under certain circumstances. THAT is the worst thing about it, the ones who think that they did no wrong because "she had it coming." Now, more specifically, about the Helldorado picture... hard to say without actually seeing it. Is it blatant or more suggestive of what's happening? And does it belong? As a depiction of Hell, it would be fitting, it's HELL after all and rape is one of the most degrading and humiliating things that can be done to a person, male or female. But does it belong in a miniatures game book, even one set in Hell? That's questionable, that's where I'd have to see the picture itself to make a call. But it is only one picture in book, just as long as they don't have any rules for it. Now THAT would be terrible to have in a rule book. And as for the other subjects spoken of in this thread... nudity? I don't care. Let anybody or any mini be as naked as they wanna be, I don't have to look (or buy) if I don't want to, ...or if i do, I will. Simple. It's just a body after all, some people get waay to hung up on it. And as for violence, I'd just have to reiterate what Wren and Brimshack wrote earlier about that. Pornographic miniatures? Hey as long as it's depicting consentual sex and there's somebody willing to sculpt, cast and distribute them to buyers, whatever floats thier boat. X-rated minis just make me laugh. Well, that's gotta be the longest post I've written in a while. I hope it's intelligible, I tend to garble stuff sometimes. -MC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malebolgia Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 So the conclusion is that functional nudity is okay but things like rape are out of the question? Okay, cool. MORE NUDITY!:bath: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonsreach Posted February 25, 2007 Report Share Posted February 25, 2007 This is an interesting and an articulatley expressed thread. My two pence worth, I am not and never will be offended by Nudity. It is after all the human body and we all have one regardless of gender or shape. To be ashamed or embarrased about it makes no sense to me. Some of the greatest art of any century is the depiction of the human form in all states of dress (or undress). Michaelangeo's David is widely acknowledged as one of the greatest Sculptures as is El Greco's painting of the nude lady (Sorry, Can't remember the name) To depict a human body in 28mm pewter is to my mind no different than the scuplture of David, it is a form, a shape nothing more. It is however when it comes to the depiction of sex that things change. I regard the sexual act as something that is personal. It is an intimacy and sharing of mutual trust and passion and not something that I would either want to buy as a miniature, or as a movie. The depiction of sex within movies doesn't offend me as I know it's only a movie and the actors just mimicing the motions. I personally see pornography as a waste of effort, to me it's demeaning to both men and women. To have a miniature depicting a concentual sex act, wouldn't bother me, but I personally wouldn't buy it. A miniature depicting forced sex, however would be an anathema to me as I regard Rape as the worst crime one human can inflict upon another. I would actively oppose it's production and retail. (In the UK it would in fact be covered under the "Obscene Publications Act" and would therefore be banned). I know there is a strange Dichotomy between Nudity being questionable and Violence being tolerable. Our hobby shows this, our television programmes show it and our news media (Tabloid mostly) re-inforce the viewpoint that Nudity and Sex are "Shameful and Naughtyl" but that Violence is in some circumstances acceptable. And in reality the reverse is true. Those of us who have had to face any form of violence, will tell you that they would far rather have not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosch Posted February 25, 2007 Report Share Posted February 25, 2007 I agree that actual rape is horrible, but this is "only" art. There are dozens of paintings depicting the rape of Proserpine. What about this Dix picture? Why are those paintings more acceptable than miniatures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sculpta the squig Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 Linky anyone? I want to see what the fuss is about. Squig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritual Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 There's no link! The whole discussion came from xenon wulf mentioning an illustration made for the upcoming Helldorado game. I don't think the illustration in question is shown to anyone outside of the Helldorado development team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sculpta the squig Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 oh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosch Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 ....so, we're basically debating the morality of a picture nobody has ever seen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritual Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 The idea behind this thread was to discuss the matter in a more general way, I think! Not discuss the image itself, as, as you say, only a few people know what it looks like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenon_Wulf Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 There's no link! The whole discussion came from xenon wulf mentioning an illustration made for the upcoming Helldorado game. I don't think the illustration in question is shown to anyone outside of the Helldorado development team. Indeed - I'm not allowed to leak anything just yet, even though I pretty much have access to every bit of art from the main book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.