JG as Arbiters of Morality

Posts: 508 · Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:41 pm

I just received JG Journal M, summer 1977, which includes the following review: "The publishers of National Lampoon have begun publication of an adult fantasy magazine... definitely rated 'X' (we cannot recommend this one)."

They are referring of course to Heavy Metal. Not sure I'd consider it exactly 'X,' & only occasionally 'XXX.' Looking over to my bookshelves, the first decade of Heavy Metal takes up a considerable amount of space, exceeded only by the first decade of RPGs. Quite a year, 1977. Star Wars, punk rock, OD&D becomes AD&D & the first basic boxed set, lots of good stuff.

Posts: 3999 · Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:13 pm

sauromatian wrote:

I just received JG Journal M, summer 1977, which includes the following review: "The publishers of National Lampoon have begun publication of an adult fantasy magazine... definitely rated 'X' (we cannot recommend this one)."

They are referring of course to Heavy Metal. Not sure I'd consider it exactly 'X,' & only occasionally 'XXX.' Looking over to my bookshelves, the first decade of Heavy Metal takes up a considerable amount of space, exceeded only by the first decade of RPGs. Quite a year, 1977. Star Wars, punk rock, OD&D becomes AD&D & the first basic boxed set, lots of good stuff.

Heavy Metal is still pretty racey by today's standards. Back in the days before The Manual of Erotic Fantasy...or whatever it is they call it...(a book that sounds like it might be sexy but pretty much makes me nauseated whenever I chance to look at it...it's pretty revolting) RPG publishers were usually circumspect about what they recommended to their pre-teen and teen audiences.

Posts: 508 · Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:01 am

FormCritic wrote:

The Manual of Erotic Fantasy...or whatever it is they call it.

I wouldn't call it pornographic in content, more clinical like a sex ed text, but there is something indefinably creepy about that book. Definitely a case of too-much-information.

Posts: 3999 · Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:50 pm

sauromatian wrote:

I wouldn't call it pornographic in content, more clinical like a sex ed text, but there is something indefinably creepy about that book. Definitely a case of too-much-information.

Clinical...that is the right word!

I was not morally outraged by the book. I was just grossed out.

There are a number of things about sex that are not particularly sexy.....

Imagine if every story about a fantasy D&D battle also included an autopsy report on the dismembered goblins...including photos of the procedure and notes on notification of next of kin....

One could argue that a real look at the gruesome results of battle would make me dislike violence....

But then, is a book like the Manual of Erotic Fantasy supposed to make me feel sick about sex? If so, the book is a triumph!

Posts: 1200 · Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:52 pm

At the most basic level sex is mechanical...

A little lubrication...
A little friction...

That what you mean by clinical? Twisted Evil

Posts: 3999 · Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:10 pm

jasonw1239 wrote:

At the most basic level sex is mechanical...

A little lubrication...
A little friction...

That what you mean by clinical? Twisted Evil

If only....

How about a spell that gives you a venereal disease? pukel

Posts: 1346 · Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 8:22 pm

All the Book of Erotic Fantasy does is "officialize" the Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge which was a netbook 15 years or so prior. Whoopie. Nothing original and nothing spectacular. In fact, its almost completely useless.

Posts: 1076 · Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:04 pm

FormCritic wrote:

Heavy Metal is still pretty racey by today's standards.

IIRC, nearly all of the content in recent years (2000 or so) has been the translated work of European artists. Or maybe they have been the source of only the hard-R content. And remember that Kevin Eastman, the publisher of Heavy Metal, is married to Julie Strain.

Anyway, I have noticed judiciously-placed word ballons and objects in the panels that cover the naughtiest of naughty bits.

Quote:

[The Manual of Erotic Fantasy] pretty much makes me nauseated whenever I chance to look at it

Heh, but you still look at it. Very Happy

Posts: 508 · Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:39 pm

JohnGaunt wrote:

but you still look at it.

Um.. actually, no, that's sort of the problem with it. I would compare the art to the more extreme varieties of warts-&-all amateur porn. Except instead of real life bodies, & it's their souls & desires.

Some are ugly desires; most are like the 99% of humanity with which any given person is incompatible. As interesting art it succeeds, but in a disturbing sort of way.

JohnGaunt wrote:

Anyway, I have noticed judiciously-placed word ballons and objects in the panels that cover the naughtiest of naughty bits.

That's sort of the marketing pitch for buying the hardback editions.

Posts: 3999 · Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:56 am

Actually, no...not really interested in seeing the inside of that book again.

Only my natural inclination to keep my options open has kept me from tossing it out entirely.