NAG Mascot Art Challenge: Discussion thread (no submissions here please :))
In case anyone missed it, some background: A few weeks ago, NAG's new "Roxy" mascot for rAge was revealed:
This image got a number of people riled up, myself included. There was some backlash on Twitter, and at least two articles were written on the topic:
http://www.htxt.co.za/2015/04/30/opinion-is-rages-mascot-a-step-backwards-for-sas-game-industry/
http://www.lazygamer.net/features/editorial-features/should-the-new-roxy-really-be-representing-rage/
NAG have since revealed a revised version which, in some peoples' opinion (again, mine included) pretty much misses the point of the arguments against it. They basically just covered her up a bit:
There really doesn't seem to be much more that can be done at this point to convince NAG this is a bad representation for the industry locally, but perhaps we can drown out the bad with some good?
@LexAquillia made the inspired suggestion of an art challenge around this. Perhaps some of the amazing artists in this community could put their minds into an incarnation of Roxy that could better represent that we WANT more women involved in the industry and enjoying our products. We've seen some great stuff come out of the Artists for Diversity thread, I'm sure lessons learned there could be applied to this.
Some suggestions on how to use art from this challenge would be helpful, too. Perhaps they can be included in the MGSA booth at NAG? Presented to NAG to use instead of their current one?
This image got a number of people riled up, myself included. There was some backlash on Twitter, and at least two articles were written on the topic:
http://www.htxt.co.za/2015/04/30/opinion-is-rages-mascot-a-step-backwards-for-sas-game-industry/
http://www.lazygamer.net/features/editorial-features/should-the-new-roxy-really-be-representing-rage/
NAG have since revealed a revised version which, in some peoples' opinion (again, mine included) pretty much misses the point of the arguments against it. They basically just covered her up a bit:
There really doesn't seem to be much more that can be done at this point to convince NAG this is a bad representation for the industry locally, but perhaps we can drown out the bad with some good?
@LexAquillia made the inspired suggestion of an art challenge around this. Perhaps some of the amazing artists in this community could put their minds into an incarnation of Roxy that could better represent that we WANT more women involved in the industry and enjoying our products. We've seen some great stuff come out of the Artists for Diversity thread, I'm sure lessons learned there could be applied to this.
Some suggestions on how to use art from this challenge would be helpful, too. Perhaps they can be included in the MGSA booth at NAG? Presented to NAG to use instead of their current one?
Comments
Displaying of posterior is definitely wrong.
Figure-hugging, impractical spacesuit - right or not? (it's sci-fi, not exactly based on "realism") (of course figure-hugging doesn't have to be sexualised, but that's point 1. Is the outfit itself ok or not? I'm really not sure)
Skinny-to-breaking-point physique - wrong or not?
Tentacles... Is that ok or not?
The pose is really really awkward, whether she was presenting her ass or not.
I'd like to hear input from those more knowledgeable on these standards, after all, I'm probably clueless on this matter.
http://muddycolors.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-no-stilettos-rule.html
http://muddycolors.blogspot.com/2013/03/objectify.html
I find the new version to be just as problematic as the first take. In fact, I find it even more harmful because NAG stated that they took a look at the issue of female representation in games and the current discussion on the subject (I assume that means examining harassment and GG and all that crap) and then not only completely missed the point, they put up a straw-man argument around "family friendliness" and have dismissed the valid arguments that have been raised about the mascot and its place as the "face" of rAge. Essentially all that happened is that whoever wanted this art realised that the mascot wouldn't be allowed into rAge under their own cosplay "amount of skin" rules, so they had to change it to at least match that. (And those "decency" rules are a whole different kettle of fish, ugh)
NAG look like they did something when they actually didn't address the real problem and they've given those unaffected by or ignorant of sexist attitudes an excuse to dismiss the points of view of others and set back this discussion all over again. I think @Tuism is very right to say the brief is at fault. Focusing on the art (or the technical execution of a boobs-and-butt pose as a piece of pinup) is a smokescreen, it means that NAG doesn't have to answer why they asked for this art in the first place and it completely ignores the context that this art is going to be displayed in; Not to mention bypassing what it's used for.
Why did the brief ask for pinup art? Why is having a sexy character the most important part of representing a games expo? What does this brief have to do with games at all (beyond it being linked to games through the overly sexualised representation of women)? What is this art supposed to achieve - what is a mascot FOR in this case?
Assuming that the mascot is supposed to somehow represent rAge as an expo (a concept that I have a hard time understanding), maybe taking a stab at a better brief might look something like this:
Produce a character mascot that represents the spirit of rAge.
-The character (or characters) should be smart (games are smart), interesting (games are engaging) and have a sophisticated sense of humor (games are amusing).
-The character(s) should be fascinated by the possibilities at rAge and obviously excited by the event.
-The character(s) should not display any prominent branding towards a particular platform, console or trademarked product.
-The character(s) should embody the inclusive and diverse nature of South African culture and not conform to objectified, gendered or racial stereotypes.
-The purpose of the character(s) is to invite people to attend rAge and welcome them to the event when they do, acting as a guide and helper throughout the expo itself.
-Cosplay is a very visible part of rAge and game fandom - the character(s) should thus be identifiable in a range of different potential in-game outfits and even whole game-related settings.
-Please produce concepts before polished submissions to allow for feedback.
... I dunno. I suspect that brief could be a whole lot better. I just find it incredibly obvious that trying to have a single character represent something like this is a minefield of stereotypes and bad ideas.
But even if you narrow your focus to just that, there is still some nuance in what exactly "family friendly" means.
There is a sizable body of research indicating that exposure to figures like that (her posture is spine-breaking and it looks like she may be missing some internal organs, for example) damage young girls' self-esteem and create unrealistic expectations for body image, which result in eating disorders and even death.
So does something that damages our daughters (not to mention other women and girls) in that way count as "family friendly"?
Or does "family friendly" merely mean that you cover up her bum?
It's almost as though all that matters is that Roxy is sexy and has a NAG logo on her somewhere.
can we please break this thread into two, one for the discussion around it and the other for people you want to venture into the art challenge part so long?
I'm catching myself reacting heavily on both sides of this artifact (as in a product of our culture produce by and for our culture) still thinking things out and assessing my reactions, and will probably participate more once that's more complete. It might textwall a bit, apologies in advance.
@Pierre, you've obviously never been a girl at rAge, or really empathised with the issue at all yet. Might I suggest using the views you're finding in this community to better your understanding of a thing that clearly affects you too, if not specifically in a personal sense, then at least both your peers in this community and your audience enough for it to 'be an issue', maybe an exercise in genuinely seeing it from that point of view could help your development processes. Alternatively don't participate in this thread, it's pretty obvious there is consensus about this topic being worthwhile having, that's one of the truly great things about a forum's format. In the nicest possible way; tits or gtfo.
EDIT: this post is leapfrogged in the timeline a bit due to forum weirdness
I'm tempted to join in, just out of frustration.
...why are legs inherently sexual? whut.
------------------------oh dat EDIT:
Okay I could not let this lie... like at all..
@Pierre, I've tiptoed around these sort of things all too often and this is starting to get frustrating. I literally want to know do you ever read a sentence on this forum without assuming that you know better? because I'm seeing this waaaay too much. You're not even considering most of @damousey 's words, especially that final area, as well as, no matter how much you can tell us you are learning, you really are simply ignoring the inherent problems of this exact line of thinking: that this thinking you know best with everything is hurting people, and your argument as to why is that people should not be hurt? you simply aren't a perfectly objective force...
(also, good job seemingly TOTALLY not responding to @garethf 's post... doing really well.)
Yes I am aware that I literally just went all fire and pitchforks on a single individual. But simply put, I am inherently silent on these forums because of the nature of not wanting to add totally useless content, if I say something, it's something worthy to say I hope. You stopped on by with us to simply state that you aren't involved because you don't see a problem. and instead of making a shred of argument as to why there is no problem, it's simply assume everyone is wrong and that your perspective is just a protoss level higher grade than our puny existence.
(literally if this sort of passive aggressive calling out is not looked at well on the forums, please issue me warning and i will subsequently move along and behave like a good citizen, but watching @dislekcia doing precisely the act of calling people out on their shit for prettimuch the entire time i've been here, it seems this is a valid thing to do.)
I work simply as an artist, as much as I have aspirations of being taken seriously as a game designer, my lack of booksmart know how of programming leaves me a bit naught there, and yet, I value programmers immensely, as under the circumstance I make any suggestion to do with Game design, I can trust those who know better than me to give me a better answer than what I have in my mind. It's really quite healthy to assume you're wrong, because it's the first state to be in to become right.
@dislekcia I leadned heavily on your list of points, thanks :) And rather than mentioning Roxy, I did keep it more generic. I think the chance of NAG ever actually using any submissions is pretty minimal anyway, so no point in limiting it to aim for that.
Hopefully I can find the time.
The Tentacles debacle; the fact that the setting for this poster is meant to be in space and therefore environment and all lifeforms should go by the theme is very understandable but what really bothers me is that it points so blatantly towards tentacle porn.
Why does the foot need to be wrapped in a giant green tentacle with traces of white glob dangling off the edge?
Why are they so veiny?
But seriously: What is up with the white stuff?? Is the rAGE expo about slimy, gropy green tentacles that want to fondle with your legs?
I might be over dramatizing but these small things should definitely get fixed..
Keen to see the submissions people come up with :)
You're kinda doing this pretty hard. I hope you don't mean to, but you are. The reason I push back is to show that a certain behavior is not the accepted norm. If there isn't at least some sort of challenge when someone says something that contributes to systemic discrimination, people who experience that discrimination get marginalised and the originator is vindicated because they think everyone agrees. It's important to say "No, we don't agree. This isn't acceptable." Otherwise the only voices we'll get are the privileged.
It's essentially saying "These other things are sexist, so our sexism is okay". That's pretty messed up.
Re tentacles and context
it's pretty obvious that the brief is pointing toward sci fi retro future poster and cover art.
examples:
this is echoed by the rocket ship decal, round edges of the promotional art etc.
Off the top of my head there are a few reasons you might want your promotional material to echo this theme:
- it harkens back to a time of boundless exuberance about technology and space travel and great narrative escapades in fictional worlds - This is what games are today, the reason we love this industry as much as we do, right?
- it's classic, A piece that feels like a classic from a genre of yesteryear is not as dated as something intended to be the bleeding edge of today.
- in the context of a games event, this theme isn't favouring a specific area of gaming, whether it be factions of formats or game genres. Example to help- maybe Roxy with a realistic weapon in isolation means Roxy likes fps, maybe Roxy in this very strong theme that comes pre-equipped with ridiculous jetson laser guns (that she is actually currently firing) is less "with guns-fps plz" than we've seen her before.
And the alternative, a Roxy who is not 'in action' leaves us with a Roxy just to stand there and be pretty. A booth babe Roxy, we've met her before too.
Or at least another part of this discussion that needs to happen if we're trying to figure out how to do better.
Surely this expo is the best opportunity to incorporate a larger SA audience than the western second hand media we usually get offers. The stereotype one bumps into here, of games being a 'white' hobby with the exceptions of fifa and fighting games, is surely not helping NAG?
I really struggle to believe that this is a character from the "United African Space Federation"
We've invented a fictional parellel past, a retro future. In which people of Africa are cosmonauts - and Caucasian?
So I've been working on this for the past couple of nights, and I'm finding this to be quite difficult -- not the execution of it, but more in the meta. If I were doing this for myself, just for the fun of it, then it's no biggy. But this one feels like much higher pressure/stakes, because it feels as if it's something that people are going to be using as an example, and therefore potentially heavily publicised and shared. Either people will point to it and say, "Ha! See, you can totally have an attractive female mascot without hypersexualising her!" or "Ha! See, you can't take away the sexiness of a female mascot without her looking ugly/stupid/undesirable!"
There have been suggestions that the mascot could instead be a monster, or an animal. I think that that's definitely a safer route, but I feel as if that completely sidesteps the problem. Instead of addressing the problem and showing a solution that is aware of everyday issues women face, it instead removes the problem completely, and to me that feels a lot like admitting defeat (i.e. that depicting a woman here is too difficult, so just avoid it).
I'm worried about this being a piece that has a lot of people with stakes in it, that it becomes something that's not just about depicting a woman in a way that makes her empowered and with agency, but has a lot of other (great!) messages attached to it, like body positivity, or depicting under-represented groups of people, or any of a bunch of other (praiseworthy!) issues that are important to intersectional feminists (a group to which I self-identify).
I want to believe that there is an intersection, where there's a mascot that the majority of feminists believe show a positive representation of women, but where the "average white male gamer" also thinks the design is super bad-ass and gets their approval too. I think there have been female protagonists who've shown this done successfully before, like Faith (Mirror's Edge), Red (Transistor) and Jade (BG&E, though I haven't played that to know for sure). Faith and Red, to me, had active, beautiful designs, and they were attractive but not hypersexualised. This is the kind of direction I want to take.
I worry that trying to address all problems with representation (e.g. pose/agency, race, clothing, sexual orientation, wealth level, disabilities) results in an unfocused design that is much more difficult to make appealing. I've seen some of the comments people have made about the SJW/feminists criticising the NAG mascot, and it often results in their claiming that SJW/feminists are talentless idiots who can't make their own work look good/sell and therefore want to ruin everyone else's fun. I want to show that you can have fun, and make an attractive, appealing design -- perhaps one that even has sex appeal -- without being hurtful in the process.
So, basically, I think the most important thing is just to fix the pose. Some women have boobs, and everyone has butts. Thanks, we get it, but there's more to women than that, so those aren't the things we draw attention to in her posing. Fix the narrative in the piece so that she's not posing herself for a viewer, but just being a badass for herself, whether or not someone else is watching, and showing other parts of her personality. Maybe she likes music, or violence, or being light on her feet, or being strong, and all of these are things that she owns for herself, that don't require a (male) observer. And I'll work on proportions, because I think previous depictions of the mascot have made her skinnier, and I'd be favouring a more athletic, "strong" look that better fits someone who's a fighter/athlete/adventurer.
I feel that if I make an illustration that does those two, I can call it successful, because I feel I can confidently pull that off while still appealing to the folks who like the old designs. If I have to try and solve other problems of representation, I feel as if I'll start trying to balance too many things against each other, and that that'll require a lot more effort, research and time than I can afford to put into what is effectively supposed to be a non-commercial, passion project.
What are your thoughts on this? Is there something you think I'm not addressing that is of vital importance here, or would you be pretty happy with this too? (Especially women and people who self-identify as feminists.)
There was something I read today, where's the link...this. The thing about scarcity is what I think is important. Ie, don't expect any one character to represent the full range, or to solve all problems.
Try to make a character who is interesting in herself, not just as eye candy, and that will probably be a huge improvement.
well my biggest problem always with the persona of the 'strong female character' is we seem to have this idea that they must be several millions of things. athletic, attractive, nurturing, strong, emotionally varient, able to cook, mastery of all skills, invisible knees (this sentence is intentionally nonsensical.)
And as much as i am not saying much new, yeah, there's a lot of challenge in shrinking scope to be something a bit more relateable.
all i wanna do is draw a lady, looking a little more human in 'DUDE GRADE' space armour... but that's just me, i'll be fiddling
Like I said, I'm going to try 2 approaches here. The first: coming up with a better alternative for "a new iteration on the Roxy brand mascot".
The second: coming up with completely new characters that offer more diversity.
I think either approach is a valid exercise to undertake. The first to show how they could have done the thing they were trying to do in a way that isn't exploitative and alienating, and the second to highlight the range and variety of cool character designs you could have outside of skinny attractive white girl.
<3
(Gah, I really miss painting. Neeeeed mooooore tiiiiiiimmme.)