> Four, Chaosiana Magazine (with Dan Baker and Simon Bray) - some of you out
> there may remember this. Got two issues completed, a third almost ready.
> Sent a galley of issue one to the States, no reply.
I'd advise no-one to take free (or otherwise) legal advice from me, but isn't Chaosium policy that _periodicals_ (or perhaps, "periodicals") _don't_ require their specific approval?
Apart from this minor detail, I sympathise greatly with Dan, and the seemingly many others in a similar situation. While I won't suggest that Chaosium aren't entirely justified in the position they're taking, it seems a shame that in order to get to the point of having a "professionally published" Glorantha, the first step is to put the kibosh, or even a partial temporary kibosh, on the amateur publications that have been the only thing keeping it going in recent years.
And in reply to DavidC's latest body-blow to Manifest Objectivism:
> Says who?
> So what?
I think David's point here wasn't that taking a contrary view to his various points IOOG would be Morally Repugnant and an Offence Unto the Sight of Greg, just that he was arguing what the Canonical Glorantha situation was, on the basis of the "official" facts. One could reply "Not necessarily so, IMG" to any given message on the Digest, including all the other "Not necessarily so, IMG" ones, but that way lies thermal runaway and an absense of meaningful discussion. Or maybe we need the same sort of disclaimers when discussing "official" Glorantha as we already do when discussing one's own...
> Says who? I personally (as I've mentioned before and have had slagged
> before) that I believe people can become gods - Greg mentioned this at
> Convulsio 3D WRT Julius Caesar.
And clearly, we have hatfuls of examples of this happening in Glorantha, that's not at issue. The question is, after their actual bodily apotheosis, whether they remain a "person" in any meaningful sense. While (say) King Sartar still has a material influence on the world, one can't call him up on the divine telephone and have a lengthy chat about apple wine, them there foxy Grazelander chicks, and the latest kick-the-ball scores, much less expect him to run the kingdom from atop a cloud somewhere, so for all practical purposes, either he's gone beyond Personhood in some intrinsic sense, or his "person" simply isn't "in touch with" the mundane plane in a direct and useful way.
Come to that, Herodom seems to involve setting aside a certain part of what makes one a Person, though to a lesser extent than Godhead. One could _theoretically_ discuss kick-the-ball scores with Harrek, but even aside from considerations of continued bodily integrity, would you get a very to-the-point response from him?
Personally,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail