Orson Scott Card And Shadow Complex
August 23rd, 2009I’ve been following the semi-debate about Orson Scott Card’s involvement in scripting Shadow Complex with some amusement for the past week or two. For the uninitiated, Card has expressed strongly conservative political views on a whole range of subjects, including homosexuality (he’s not a fan); Card is a Mormon and is opposed on religious grounds. As a result, some gamers have expressed the view that SC should not be purchased as a form of protest against the involvement of someone they view as morally unsupportable.
Leaving the actual merits of those positions aside - I don’t think they’re relevant to the discussion - I have to come down on the side of those opposed to the boycott, for both practical and philosophical reasons. First, boycotts tend to work only when they can clearly target a specific individual: regardless of whether or not you agree with Card, he was hardly the only person involved in Shadow Complex and boycotting the game hurts a ton of people who probably don’t share his views.
Similarly, it’s difficult to conclude that boycotts on political grounds make a ton of sense for a game that isn’t political: the world in which Shadow Complex takes place is apparently based on a politically-tinged series that Card has authored, but as far as I can tell, the game itself avoids inserting itself into the debate. As a result, it’s tough to see where you would draw this line: if you start boycotting products with any connection to people whose ideological views you find objectionable - even if those products don’t reflect those ideological positions - you begin to stifle free debate rather than protect it.
I should be clear that there’s nothing wrong with freely expressing one’s personal views on any range of subjects, and this one should be no exception, no matter in which direction those views tend. However, I don’t see a game boycott being a useful or appropriate outlet for the expression of those views.
Posted in Commentary, Geoff, Personalities |
August 24th, 2009 at 1:57 am
The Gamasutra comments sections is pretty crazy. SO i’ll just post my stuff here:
You have every right to not buy a game for whatever reason. IE. you have the right to boycott.
That said, I can question and criticize your reasoning. If your reason is ‘I am not comfy with playing a game where FoxNews-watching conservatives battle against the menacing Liberals’ then fine. However, if you boycott because you want to financially hurt OSC or ’send a message’ to Chair and future devs regarding working with hateful individuals…then LOL! Realize that there are hundreds of little guys who worked HARD to make this a great as game as it is, and had ZERO participation on whether OSC’s creation should be involved. Realize that OSC is not gonna be hurt no matter how many boycott; he will ALWAYS find business opportunities who take him regardless [or even because!] of his stance. Realize, also, that OSC’s [and any other] collaborations are based SOLELY on business decisions - aka the fact that Orson’s fantasy worlds have sizable fanbases, or that he is creatively talented at thsi stuff, etc.
And gaygamers’ take on this is correct. If this game rocks your gaming senses, go get it. But if you REALLY care about gay rights as you claim, then go volunteer, donate, or speak out for pro-gay stuff…because boycotting hurts innocents far more than the offender [in this case, at least], not to mention less effective.
ANd on an unrelated note….it’s pretty sad that the GOP has come to this. I used to be proud to call myself conservative…now, I just don’t know. I’m sick of them, tbh.
August 24th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
I mirror Geoffs analysis exactly. I totally support anyones right to buy or not buy a product for any reason. I’ll add that I find it mildly humorous that the people who dislike OSC are engaging in identical behavior to OSC, more or less.
They basically hate someone who doesn’t think/live as they do, which is, what I think they accuse OSC of doing.
With regard to my new internet nemesis’ quote,
“ANd on an unrelated note….it’s pretty sad that the GOP has come to this.”
What does that even mean? What does OSC have to do with the GOP? Is he somehow their representative or something? Did he get elected to office as a republican when I wasn’t looking? My understanding of OSC is that he has been a democrat for decades, anti-gun, big affirmative action guy. Hates the segregationist roots of the south, etc. Oh, and he’s anti gay-marriage. Yep, lets hate this son of a bitch.
August 24th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Are you ok man? Calmn down. I won’t get into politics, because that’s a powder keg. Suffice to say, I’m pretty sure you know what’s going on in politics right now, IF you’ve been paying attention.
But I don’t want to say more on that subject.
August 24th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
My apologies, the last sentence was directed at the foolish boycott people, not you. My bad, poor phrasing on my part.
But yeah, I follow politics, and I still have no idea what you mean by a comment like this on a story about Orson Scott Card
“it’s pretty sad that the GOP has come to this”
If you don’t want to get into politics on a gaming blog, I can totally respect that (and agree), but then why make a PURELY political comment that almost demands a further explanation?
August 24th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
That’s why I said “And on an unrelated note.” Although I think it’s related considering what the party is going through.
Nevermind, let’s stay on topic.
Geoff: what’s your take on this? I will give the Gamasutra writer this though: although I think in msot cases you should separate the man from his work, doing otherwise is ok, or rather, understandable and not wrong, per se.
August 24th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Yeah, that’s why I was confused, you said it’s unrelated, but then say “sad that the GOP has come to THIS”
What is “this” if its unrelated to the OSC story?
But ok, yeah, on topic.
I can’t imagine how hard it would be to ever buy anything if you tried to live this way. I mean, just consider how many people contribute to the different products we buy. What if the lighting guy on the set of your favorite sitcom was a neo-nazi. Do you stop watching the sitcom? What if the driver for the catering company that brings sandwiches to game developer thinks the 9/11 bombers were justified? Do you boycott the game? Good grief, we’d never buy anything ever again if we lived like this. Not to say that one shouldn’t stand up for ones beliefs, but c’mon, the gaygamers have it right. If you want to be an activist, then ACTUALLY DO SOME GOOD, you know, go volunteer, go help someone. Not buying this game is NOT going to get gay marriage legalized in Mississippi.
August 24th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Algernon - my take on what? I wrote the original post?
As an aside, having played further into the game, I think the easiest complaint to make about Card is the quality of his writing. I liked Ender’s Game and Speaker for the Dead, but the dialogue in Shadow Complex is at least as cheesy as the average video game, and in some places, worse.
It’s not impacting my enjoyment of the game, but I suppose my expectations for professional authors are higher than for the average.
UPDATE: I should be clear - I know Card didn’t actually write the script/dialogue - but I understand he consulted on the story. And frankly, I don’t see why the world had to be licensed, let alone him consulted: the plot seems pretty cookie-cutter while the world features nothing more than the stereotypical secret society and the generic reluctant hero and girlfriend. Why was it important to set the story in the Empire world? I’m genuinely curious…
August 24th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Geoff,
I think they thought it would raise the profile of the release. Anytime you get someone like this on board as “consultant” on a licensed product it’s because you want to use their name and license to help sales. I doubt they saw the “boycott” coming, but in any case, the profile of the game has been raised, and contrary to the boycotters wishes, the sales have likely been increased.
August 24th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
That would make sense, except that generally, that name becomes part of the product: e.g., “Sid Meier’s Civilization” or “Steven Spielberg Presents.”
In this case, the company apparently relied on Card for publicity, but omitted his name from the most obvious promotional portions of the game: the title and general advertising. Only gamers actively following previews and similar media are likely to know about Card’s involvement, let alone care.
So I’m not sure if this was not, in fact, their intention, or if they were simply inept in their licensing and marketing.
August 24th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
My guess is the latter. I believe in the axiom “don’t attribute to malice that which can be explained by ineptitude”, but you never know.