I suspect the only real way to give legitimacy to these findings is to compare them with the subjective evaluations of other people. Some of the image resolution is poor but it should be enough for basic categorisation purposes. I invite anyone to go through the images as I did, to test what I believe I've found or to look for something new. The best thing about this project, and the thing that decided me on a deeply subjective method of categorisation, is the fact that the entire dataset of images is available online, at the Paizo back issue store here. (It might be argued also that Dragon cover art, doing battle on the mainstream newstand, is different again to regular gamebook cover art.) This means we can't generalise from here to what is going on inside the books with any great confidence. They serve different purposes and we engage with them differently. Still, my best judgement is that the numbers are large enough stats people are invited to advise me about whether that judgement is a good one or not.įourth limitation, cover art is not interior art. A dozen images a year isn't much on which to judge a magazine (let alone gamer culture), especially when several of those images feature flying frogs instead of people. Third limitation, the numbers involved aren't large, particularly in some categories. Not that men like me can't think about and analyse this stuff more that we sometimes forget to shut the hell up and let the women get on with it. This refers to the inevitable bias of my male way of seeing and interpreting, but also to the fact that, as a man, there is only so far I can go with this whole subject before I start to be part of the problem instead of part of the solution. Given that the subject of this study is the representation of females, there are limits to how much I can achieve.
It is my hope that this danger has been avoided, but I'm not really in any position to tell. "suggestive" and "submissive") carry implicit moral judgements that could throw the whole enterprise under a cloud he's right. broin suggested in comments that the categories themselves (e.g.
I have endeavoured to be both consistent and reasonable (in the legal 'reasonable person' sense) but I am just an ordinary person, and inevitably my biases are on display here. First up, I am one person, with no training in these issues, who took it upon himself to evaluate a bunch of pictures. Lets be very clear about the main limitations of this study.
I am, however, saying there are problems here. I am in no way trying to malign the Dragon crew heck, I'm a fan, I buy and read the magazine even though my D&D playing is infrequent at best. What I'm talking about here is what has happened in spite of that. The Dragon editors down the years have seemed, to a man, to be decent, conscientious, nice people. Want to get that out of the way at the start. You should be able to click through to a larger version I googled up.Īaand, my least favourite Dragon cover woman: Its the fact that she's flying that makes me happiest.
0 kommentar(er)
