Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chaosvoyager
Is it social commentary? Is the book making a statement to the effect that these social values were good or bad, or simply presenting them to give something for the characters to rebel against?
I find it annoying that so many people assume a setting featuring a society with strong values is making some kind of social commentary.
|
When it comes to avoiding turning people off outright, I think there's a right way and a wrong way to go about this.
If you are dealing with <u>real-world</u> politics, set up a situation that seems reasonable and allow people to draw their own conclusions. <b>Blue Planet 2.0</b> does this.
If, on the other hand, you set up a real-world political viewpoint as an objectively evil straw man, you can't be surprised if the people you're demonizing don't care to play the game. <b>Blue Planet <u>1.0</u></b> did <u>this</u>.
And you can substitute "politics" for any number of things. I mean, I'm sure <b>RaHoWa</b> gives its players a "good reason" for working together against a common enemy, but that doesn't make the game any less distasteful.
Please understand that I'm not equating <b>Victoriana</b> with <b>RaHoWa</b>. I'm just suggesting that calling (or even suggesting) that real-world political or social viewpoints are evil -- or even that some are objectively <u>good</u> -- is bound to turn people off.
<br>