Saturday, February 16, 2019

Welcome to the Punch

Today, as many of us find ourselves thinking of the MeToo movement, I'm wondering about the hole that is left behind when someone like Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer or Kevin Spacey are suddenly shoved off the mountain.

Picture the lowly cameraman or desker working for NBC News, whose dead-end career ~ stifled because, for whatever reason, Matt Lauer didn't like them ~ suddenly found new life in the man's absence.  How many actors and crew are working today because Weinstein is gone?  Who has a chance to work because Charlie Rose, Kevin Spacey or Mark Halperin have been let go by their employers and now find themselves without power?

Contrariwise, we should ask ourselves, who built their careers on the influence of these men?  And who now find they must earn their way ~ where before they only had to show up?  Who right now, unnamed, is struggling to produce work that has to fly on its merits and not upon the word of some megalomaniac who has been dispossessed of influence?  When these things happen, it leaves a hole.  It leaves an opportunity for persons of worth to excel; while the hangers on must now find another boot to lick.

Enworld has reported:
"DriveThruRPG has stated that it will sell no future works by Zak Smith.
"Veteran author Ken Hite has announced that he will not work with or share credits with Zak Smith again.
"The Gauntlet blog and podcast will no longer cover Zak S or his publications, or attend conventions that he is permitted at.
"WotC's Mike Mearls has noted that they have not engaged with Zak S since he worked for them as a consultant on 5E, although a previous statement from him in 2014 takes a different stance.
"Gen Con has tweeted a brief statement which says it has investigated, but the results are confidential."

And while voices rush forward to claim solidarity with Mandy and others, or arguing that accusation is not guilt, I find myself thinking how eager these entities were to throw Zak under the bus.  We like to think it's about protecting their good name ~ but business commitments are often more complicated than ending one's association with a counter person at MacDonalds.  Clearly, none of these are working with Zak anyway.  Their statement to unalign themselves is cost-free, with everything to gain.

Do I stand with Mandy?  Sure.  I'm not passionate about it.  I'm not infuriated with Zak.  If it's true, I'll contribute $5 to the committee to take him to a farmer's field and shoot him.  That's a dispassionate Russian's answer.  It's probably true, considering my personal number of flame wars with the guy up until I started to moderate this blog (whereupon Zak went away without being asked).

We knew what he was.  We saw it.  There were hundreds of thousands of words splashed on boards and blogs like the blood from a serial killer's knife ... yet it took years and years to ban him, block him or hate him.  It never takes anything like that long to get people to hate me.

This was a guy who built his castle on the fact that he could take pictures of porn stars to legitimize a blog name that produced readers from a click-baity internet.  In ten years of extraordinarily popular blogging I saw little of value in his writing, nothing I can remember now, certainly nothing that justified a blog that lasted eleven years (?) where most gather dust after three.  From my reading, I'm stunned and amazed that anyone ever sold works by Zak Smith, that anyone ever shared credits with him, that a reputable podcast ever covered him or his publications, that Maxim ever showed any interest, that the WOTC ever knew his name or that the leaders of GenCon let him speak.

Clearly, whatever he was offering, despite being a garbage human being down to his boots, it was what a lot of players and pundits considered respectable, "quality" content, worthy of praise, distribution and appreciation ...

... and that being the cold, bitter, brutal reality that most people just will not face: that Zak probably had his head up his ass the whole time, and that many, many people just would not SEE it.

Read through Mandy's letter.  Read through all the letters.  Read through the people posting sections of their discussions with Zak ... there is a ticking theme through it all.  "Zak was an asshole ... but I couldn't see it ... I was lying to myself ... it wasn't until after that I realized ..."

Welcome.  Welcome to what a few of us started to say on the first day.  Welcome to the argument that hundreds of ordinary, common, non-moderator bulletin board contributors recognized in the first hundred words of the first twattle that Zak spewed.  "This guy is full of shit.  Why do you like him?"

Welcome to the hundreds of times we were told, "Hey, you just don't 'get' him. Zak is a good guy.  Really."

Welcome to the Punch.

Is Zak a good guy today?  And as you shake your heads slowly, and recognize that no, Zak was never a good guy, take a moment and think about your complicity in this lie.  Think about your contribution to Zak's cause, Zak's fame, Zak's plans and Zak's ego.  Think about the responsibility you had over the last ten years to look at his words on his blog, and not at the porn stars.  Think about what you were responsible for spreading when you saw his videos with his DMing style.  Think about how you propped this artist up with your support and your fandom, blissfully drifting along until the day you learned that you were actually a shitty person for not doing your part to burn this little cretin to the ground.

For those who embraced this image in 2009, while
 some called it filth. What does it say to you now?
I feel for Mandy.  I do.  And I stand with her.  But she contributed to this shit too.  I can't vilify her for that; I believe she probably had to grow up a lot before she could get herself together to write the letter and I absolutely believe the people responsible over her in her childhood did not give her the tools she would have needed to let the cat out of the bag nine years ago.  She's the victim.

But all of you ... you people who are now SO righteous and offended ... I don't buy your victimhood.  I don't buy your feelings of betrayal.  You wanted to believe his lies were justified and now that your fantasy has been exploded, you want to believe in your innocence.

Fuck that.  People on the net have been saying, LOUDLY, that Zak S is a fucking shit heel for literally ten years and you ignored them. You cut them down, you burned them to the ground, in favor of your personal hero.

Well, look at your hero now.

Welcome to the Punch.

Me, I'm glad that a loud voice that used to say with remarkable arrogance that D&D is about "fun," and "fuck anyone wanting to raise the level of the game," has had his teeth kicked in.  Good.

More room for those who have something legitimate to say.

3 comments:

  1. Amusingly this is the first time I'd ever heard of this guy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In 2010 I was returning to D&D after a long stint with other games. The new editions gave me pause until I decided that I really didn't like them. I dug out some old AD&D books and found some interested players. I wanted to be exposed to a wide array of D&D styles, home-rules and materials - old-school creativity was coming back so... I found Zak refreshing considering my deep past juvenile experiences, those that I would now be embarrassed to discuss at any length. Why not turn the game upside down and give it a shake, there at my new beginning? This blog helped me there too. I have since grown out of Zak. I enjoyed the funnier side of his gaming videos, but it was hardly D&D at all.
    I do like a wide variety to consider when making decisions on stuff, from the lesser to the greater. I have read Zak's response to Mandy, and I m glad it was civil. I think Connie's content was important. That said, I agree. It is time to consider better content and build on sturdier foundations. .

    ReplyDelete
  3. Amusingly me (to me) this is the first time I've read an "I told you so" blog post on this subject.

    ReplyDelete