>From: davidc_at_cs.uwa.edu.au (David Cake)
>Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:43:11 +0800
>Subject: the Blue Vadeli
me
>>You also counter your own argument here. I note how grossed out many people
>>have been on this subject. Why? BECAUSE I have been so graphic, NOT vague.
David
> You've missed my point completely. Your ideas on the Blue Vadeli
>sound exactly like the ideas of someone TRYING to gross people out.
> And my point was, if it creates that impression, then it destroys
>my ability to believe or play them, because they are no longer a culture
>but a demonstration of grossness. Whereas to understand that they do
>horrible things, but for reasons deeply connected to Vadeli culture and
>magic, which we can partly explain but not fully, makes them interesting
>enigmas (that the GM can experiment with) rather than an exercise in how to
>appall people.
Thats how you see it. I wasn't trying to gross anybody out. To be honest, I'm amazed that anybody _is_ even remotely grossed out. This is fiction after all, which merely mirrors reality, which, as I have pointed out, is WAY worse.
Joerg suggested that corpses were part of Blue magical immortality, I merely provided the details. Then I was faced with the problem of their procreation, how do they do it etc? So I thought of a way that would fit with their strictures. On a reread, sure it was pretty gross but I've read worse.
Look, you seem like a fair minded kind of guy so if I assume that you aren't attacking me just because what I wrote was offensive to you (which would be pointless and unconstructive) then you can assume that I wasn't _trying_ to gross people out (which would also be pointless and unconstructive) then we can settle down and actually _discuss_ the whole Vadeli culture thing, if you feel like it, instead of getting mad.
> And as for your implications that the squeamish should just get lost
>> If you can't handle a bit of detail then I suggest
>>you go and lock yourself in a box because the RW is WAY worse.
> There is a world of difference between realistically confronting
>real world horror, and setting out to disgust everybody. The Blue Vadeli as
>you have described them are disgusting and unpleasant - but essentially
>they are a moral vacuum - they do these disgusting things because it is the
>only way for their race to survive, because they have been created to be
>disgusting. So their grossness serves no purpose other than to demonstrate
>your ability to be gross.
Again, not true. The impression I had of the Vadeli from others and my own reading of the scant info available was that the Vadeli had almost deliberately chosen a path that would lead them to this "moral vacuum" in the same way that people join the cannibal cult or, even worse, chaos. We haven't as yet gone ito the reasons why they are the way they are. For use in the 1620 period its useful to know what they _DO_ but from an abstract perspective it would be interesting to find out what turned them that way. I suspect it was contact with the Brithini.
> Gloranthan roleplaying has such a following largely because it is
>adult. To realistically confront moral horror such as war or rape or
>torture is something that is part of adult roleplaying. To see how gross
>you can be is adolescent.
Oh, I stand corrected. Personally, I find it adolescent to complain about someone elses view from an emotional perspective and without suggesting a viable alternative. If you want to debate this issue, then please do it from a position of logic not knee-jerk reaction.
And if you want to talk about "adult" roleplaying, I always considered that to be the ability to play any role while looking at it from that individuals perspective and cultural background, NOT using my own personal beliefs and NOT letting my 20th century western moralism twist my play.
>From: Peter Metcalfe <P.Metcalfe_at_student.canterbury.ac.nz>
>Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 13:34:13 +1200
>Subject: Red Vadeli Thoughts
>Red Vadeli thots:
>=================
>However there is one taboo which has not been touched upon yet:
>menstrual intercourse. I believe the Reds require copious
>amounts of blood to be able to procreate effectively. The Male
>also donates blood to enhance the conception rate (or perhaps
>their semen *is* blood...)
>This gives us a good model to imagine what Red Females are like
>instead of saying they don't exist. They are perpetually broody
>and the most Reds have learned the finer arts of cruelty from their
>mothers. There is also the RW example of a Hungarian? Countess
>who bathed in the blood of virgins to prolong her good looks.
Interesting idea. I like this better than my own view of a male only race,
which I was never entirely comfortable with but couldn't think how the females
would fit in.
This makes sense. The females may extremely violent as a result. I'll have a
think about that. BTW is menstrual intercourse a taboo in Glorantha, I hadn't
noticed it being a taboo in the real world so is there something that indicates
it is?
IMMORTALITY
Do you still go with the idea that they tap suffering to maintain immortality or
is there some use of blood involved, perhaps they have to drink or bathe in a
certain ammount per week/season etc?
>From: "Loren Miller" <loren_at_wharton.upenn.edu>
>Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:16:08 +0000
>Subject: not a splatterpunk mailing list
>Martin Laurie writes:
>> I don't agree, much worse horror gets published everyday and lets face it,
the
>> word Necrophilia wouldn't even exist unless there were some sickos out there
in
>> the RW who actually _did_ these things! Imagine your reaction at meeting a
>> homicidal necrophiliac in the real world!! Thats what I want to get accross
to
>> people, the sheer horror of it is mind bending.
>unfortunately this is not a mailing list for budding Skipp &
>Spectors or Joe Lansdales. If you want to exercise your splatterpunk
>muscles there are tons of newsgroups and mailing lists, most with
>"disgusting" or "horror" in the title, that would be glad to have
>you. Glorantha is cruel, but it is not supposed to be even crueler
>than Kult.
You've surprised me here Loren. Plainly I don't wish to get in your bad books but I think you are being rather hard on me here. I have no interest in splatterpunk books, having read quite a few. I find them tedious. A few pages of it here and there I can handle but reading a whole book of it is like reading Anne McAffrey; mindnumbing and purile.
What are you actually saying here? That I can no longer write what? Are you imposing censorship on the list now? If you are, at least _ask_ me what I'm doing instead of assuming I'm doing this for shock value. To think that is an insult to my intelligence and is grossly unfair.
All I have done is talked in an abstract way about an abstract game. Yet some people insist on making it personal! Where is everybodys bloody detatchement eh? The ability to argue with cold logic? Its begginning to really piss me off.
>> Besides, just read an early work of Clive Barkers or a better Stephen King
short
>> story and you'll find worse and they ain't censored are they?
>Try to find one in a high school library.
I have done. Though not a "High School" as I lived most of my life in Britain. I regularily used to read Stephen King there and I first read Clive Barkers "the Damnation Game" which deals with necrophilia to prolong life when I was 12 in my school library in the HORRROR section, which was quite large. Perhaps things have changed but I'm only 26, I don't think they've changed that much.
No wonder all you yanks are so offended by my comments if there is such a degree of control on what you think is right and proper. If I have offended, then I sincerley apologise. I repeat, I'm amazed and stunned that anyone even gives a damn.
Martin Laurie
Powered by hypermail