Subject:
|
Re: Factions (and violence)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.castle
|
Date:
|
Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:11:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1782 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.castle, Leonard Hoffman writes:
>
> > Lego has been so anti-violent ...<
>
> im sorry, but a few people have said this before and ive gotta ask: how is • lego
> is anyway nonviolent? every castle set includes weaponry of some sort. it is • a
> given conclusion that each faction is at least sometime in combat with
> eachother? even though there are non overtly cruel acts of violence, such as
> torture devices, the idea of a SWORD is innately violent. what purpose to
> swords, spears, bows and arrows, and catapults have? violence!
>
> there are only three castle sets that are non-martial (the blacksmith,
> merchant, and inn). that means that all other sets are related to the • military
> somehow (either defensively or offensively), which precludes warfare and
> violence. in other systems as well: almost all space vehicles have guns of • some
> sort on them.
>
> so im just wondering, where did this nonviolent thing get started?
>
>
You must ask yourself, just how many sets have you seen where a minifig was
using a weapon on another minifig? I personally cannot recall a single one,
though I'm sure there are a few. Yes, the sword, spear, axe and whathaveyou
are innately violent, but lego has tried their best never to actually let that
point be shown. Look at the latest set, the Royal Joust I believe its called,
the two knights don't joust with each other, they joust with a dummy machine.
Granted, the axe might hit their opponent, but it isn't the other minifig
actually swinging the axe. My point I was trying to convey is not that lego
castle is NONviolent, but it is ANTIviolent. That is to say that though there
is inharent violence in the sets, the sets that lego makes instructions for and
the pictures they place on the set boxes do not show such violence. And with
that, then the different factions that lego has created cannot be finitely
portrayed as 'good' or 'evil.'
> > So to me, it all comes down to one simple thing. The factions are who they • are
> > to you. If you think the black monarch's troops are evil, then thats what • they
> > are. If you think they are good, or chivalrous, again, thats what they are.
> > All I know for sure is that the Black Monarch was a guy with good taste when • it
> > came to his crest and architecture. I mean, after all, the black monarch's
> > castle is still my favorite.
>
> i agree, it is my favorite, too. it is the only lego made castle that has
> really boggled my mind in innovative design. (also i like the black color
> scheme).
>
> -lenny
If only lego would go back to that building style.
--Anthony
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Factions (and violence)
|
| (...) and (...) my point is that inherent violence is still violence, and by building toys with a militaristic focus Lego is giving an implied acceptance to violence. now it is granted that such a view flows from a 'defensive' violence than (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.castle)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Factions (and violence)
|
| (...) im sorry, but a few people have said this before and ive gotta ask: how is lego is anyway nonviolent? every castle set includes weaponry of some sort. it is a given conclusion that each faction is at least sometime in combat with eachother? (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.castle)
|
120 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
