[Silence Keeps Me A Victim] How to properly use metaphor.

[Clyde L. Rhoer]

Hello everyone,

I'm working on my game after some research. Previous threads are located here and here.

I'm using a metaphor, or some other literary term, in my game. The game is about children who struggle to regain their voice from an abuser, and restore themselves and their community. The game is also about my wanting to challenge the silence I feel society has pushed on me before I started, "coming out," about being sexually molested, and raped as a child, and the silence I've faced after coming out also. So the children and the loss of their voices, the oppressive abuser, and restoration can all be seen as a metaphor for my life I guess.

What I would like to talk about is:

• How to best use Metaphor?
• Whether it is better to leave the explanation of metaphor out of the game as it seems many RPG authors do, or if it is best to explain the metaphor?
• Am I use the term Metaphor correctly? Is there a different literary term I should be using instead of metaphor?

What I don't want to talk about:

• Game Mechanics. (Coming to a post near you soon)

[Valamir]

Good questions.

I really like metaphor (that is the right term) in art.  It is a difficult road to navigate successfully however.  Too subtle and the metaphor is missed and ineffective.  To heavy handed and it ruins the aesthetic and comes off clumsy.  The ideal is when you aren't immediately concious that the metaphor even exists when you initially encounter it, but that there's something there that makes you think, and in thinking you start to find deeper meanings and parallels and connections.  Done perfectly you can't even be sure if what you uncover is something the artist intentionally embedded there that you're discovering, or whether you're projecting you're own experiences.

Very hard to pull off, but IMO very rewarding when successful.

Ordinarily, I'm a fan of hand holding when it comes to writing RPGs.  Tell em what you're going to explain, explain it, then remind em what you just explained.  When it comes to embedding metaphor in art, however, I think you'll want to stay away from that...at least in the game itself.  Maybe year's later in an "artist revealed" interview you delve into the issues you were wrestling with with the game but I think doing it straight up detracts from the aesthetic and distracts from the message.  Learning the "lesson" of the metaphor oneself is always more powerful than having it explained.

[dindenver]

Hi!
  I think you are using the term metaphor correctly. And I don't think anyone can tell you if its "better" to push the views you believe in with a feather or a bulldozer. People can support you in telling you that your message is one that needs to get out there, but that's different.
  I think people can seen advantages and disadvantages to both approaches:
Soft touch Pros:
Less uncomfortable moments
Delivers the message to more people because of broader appeal

Soft touch Cons:
Message will be diluted or even potentially lost
Does not totally espouse the belief you hold to be true (i.e., you could be interpretted as keeping yourself silent on this matter)

Heavy handed Pros
Message will be loud and clear
Message is consistent with your method
Will appeal strongly to people who believe as you

Heavy handed Cons
Players may be too uncomfortable or their may be some really awkward moments generated by your text
Some players won't even have the ability to obtain your game

  So, as you can see, this is a value judgment and a design goal question. And I don't think anyone can answer those questions for you. I can tell you that many people on the Forge will support you whatever you decide to do. But how the game will be received out in the wild, I couldn't even guess.
  Maybe, since you intend to publish this in some medium, you need to identify your market and maybe tailor your design to appeal to that market? It may seem crass to suggest this, but I feel that this message is important enough that this kind of method might be more valuable than you would guess.
  I know this post may seem a little wishy washy, but I don;t want to push you in a direction you are not prepared to go.
  Well, this is a good idea for a game, I hope I can help you come up with a good design, because its worthy.

[Ben Lehman]

Hey, Clyde --

I think that the core concern here is that the fiction be interesting even in the hands of someone who doesn't immediately engage with the metaphor.  I mean, right now, I think you don't really have a problem with this (I, at least, find the idea of "a village where all the children have lost their voices" to be fascinating).  But it's something to keep an eye on as you develop the game.

As for whether or not to explain it, well, to me it looks pretty up front to begin with, and I would find an explanation of the metaphor sort of boring and pedantic, but I'm pretty immersed in the culture of child abuse activism.  Also, I'm biased by my own preferences as an author -- I prefer to leave my metaphor well-buried, because I don't want people not playing the game because the metaphor scares them.  I'd rather that they play and the metaphor remain, dim-mak like, in their head until years later they go "aha!  I played a game like this" or whatever.  But I'm not sure if that's right for you or not.  What possible advantages are there to discussing your metaphor openly?

yrs--
--Ben

[TroyLovesRPG]

Hello Clyde,

It's unfortunate that part of your life was abusive, completely out of your control and suppressed. I assume you want to get past that and become an advocate for others who have similar circumstances.

A metaphor is a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance. I don't think your game has metaphor since it is directly related to the subject of abuse. Metaphor would have you find another type of experience that has elements that are similar to child abuse, control, suppression and resolution.

There is another huge side of abuse that sometimes is addressed, but people don't like to talk about it. Some people (I know of one) whom have been abused actually receive a payoff for having the experience of abuse in their life. It becomes a crutch and often a weapon against others who disagree. That topic would be very interesting and probably take you into areas that can really fire up some conflicts.

Look at child abuse as a list of elements and relationships, then you could definitely see similarities and achieve metaphor:

Abuse: action towards someone with intent to control, humiliate or harm
Abuser: has position to come in contact with the abused on a regular basis. Could be any person of any age
Abused: person sustaining the abusive actions
Relationship: the dialog, activities, dependencies, genealogy and situations that arise with two people
Family: related by genealogy or (loosely) an interdependent group sharing the same household
Child: a minor dependent under the care of parents, guardians, foster care or institution
Adopted child: a minor recognized as a legal dependent to one or two non-biological parents
Mother: the woman who cares for the legal dependent minor
Father: the man who cares for the legal dependent minor
Biological mother: the woman who donated the egg and may also have carried the child to term
Biological father: the man who donated the sperm to fertilize the egg
Surrogate mother: the woman who is implanted with a foreign fertilized egg and carries the child to term
Step-parent: spouse of a biological parent
Step-child: biological child of a spouse
Step-sibling: a familiar brother or sister not related by blood
Half-sibling: a familiar brother or sister related by blood through one parent
Guardian: a familiar or non-familiar person who cares for the child
Foster parent: a non-familiar person who cares for the child
Observers: people who see the relationship of the abused and abuser
Authorities: charged to uphold the law through official channels with proper evidence

What are the objectives of the game?
Who are the audience?
What roles do the players take?
Do you want to develop a metaphor for child abuse?
Do you think silence is the reason why people are victims?

Troy

[Simon C]

Hi Clyde,

Initially I didn't understand what you were asking here, but I've read the previous posts now, and I think I get it.  In initial concept, I think you've described an excellent use of metaphor.  A village where children have lost their voices, and a hidden force coerces them into doing things they don't want to is an excellent metaphor for child abuse, and just as importantly, rich material for a role-playing game.  I think where your game might blur the line between metaphor and something else is in the kinds of conflicts that come up in the game.  In your first post about this game, you bring up a scenario in which the players encounter two boys engaged in sexual acts.  This seems to blurr the roles in the game, which is not a bad thing, but is potentially confusing.  Hmm.  I guess I'm confused myself a little.

Ok.  To clarify.  It's metaphor if the roles of The Abuser and the characters are a way of referencing the issues of child abuse you want to address.  It's not metaphor (though it's still potentially interesting) if actual (imagined) child abuse happens in your game fiction.  Another way of saying it: If players of the game say to themselves "hey, this situation could be a way of thinking about child abuse", then it's a metaphor.  If players are saying "The child abuse that's happening in this game has made me understand real-life child abuse differently", then that's not a metaphor.  Both are good options, but I think the first is more appealing to me, becasue it has a wider scope of play, and it's less unsettling.  Unsettling is a valid design goal though.

I don't know that this is a very productive answer, but that's how I see the issue.  It's interesting that my first instinct was to stay away from this thread becasue I find the themes really disturbing, and becasue I don't want to say the wrong thing and come across badly.  Then I thought about the title of your game, and I realised that to some extent I was buying into the culture of silence about child abuse that, as you point out, keeps people victims.  So, score one for your game!

[contracycle]

I think you MUST explain the metaphor, and how you understand it, in order for the players, specificaly the GM, to present it appropriately.  The actual performers of the piece are the players.  The GM, if any, may not make the metaphor explicit, but by understanding it, is able to cater to it.  Not explaining the metaphor risks the reader simply not understanding what is going on and why, which will of course have the same effect in play.

[Tim M Ralphs]

Hi Clyde,

I think the metaphor of the Abuser is pretty clearly obvious. What I don't think you need to make obvious in the game text is that this is about your life, although I wonder if the game starts being self referential if you don't atleast include a note to that effect in the text somewhere.

What I'd like to see more explicit is what you consider the Community to be a metaphor for. I've had this notion since reading the first thread that Silence isn't being written for you, or for other people who've suffered abuse, but as a wake up call to society that it needs to be a space in which people can have a voice. "You," the game seems to be saying "are the thing that keeps silence enforced." If that's the case then it might be worth going to town on this point.

So yeah, what I'd like to see clearly defined is what you see the Communities role as being.

[Valamir]

Gareth, could you clarify what you mean.

Clearly the game setting itself needs to be explained in some detail so everyone understands what's going on and why in the game fiction.  Is this what you mean...explaining the stuff that IS being used as a Metaphor?  Because that totally is a requirement, perhaps also including Tim's thoughts on explaining the role of the community in the game setting as well.

Or are you instead suggesting that it needs to be explained that the game setting itself IS a metaphor for something else and what that something else is.?

If so, I don't agree with that.

I think ultimately players playing the game will have one of two responses relative to the notion that the game setting is, in fact, a metaphor for something else (assuming its done well, of course).

Either 1) They'll have previously been exposed to the issue of child abuse in the past and at somepoint (immediately, during play, or later upon reflection) will make the connection.

or 2) They'll not have previously been exposed to the issue but at some point in the future should such exposure happen they'll be able to reflect back on their experiences with this game and make the connection then.

Having that connection explicitly spelled out "and this is the part that represents..." I strongly think is self defeating.


But I can't determine which of the above you meant when you said "I think you MUST explain the Metaphor".

[contracycle]

I was referring to the setting itself, the whole shebang.  Essentially, it is attempting to refer to something that is not immediately apparent.  I think that is a real problem in RPG, because the end user is also the executor.  It is not analogous to the situation in which a viewer encounter a pre-constructed piece, and walks away with, to some extent, an involuntary impression of the work.  In this case the "viewer" is expected to assemble the piece themselves.

I'm not sure its alid to fast forward to the point that someone has played the game and is thus influenced by it directly or indirectly to whatever degree.  The more urgent issue is whether the game is comprehensible enough to even be played.  I fear that without discussing the metaphor, it may be hard fpr people to figure out what they are supposed to "do" with the game.

[Clyde L. Rhoer]

Hi Folks,

Thanks for your responses. I would like to include the passage that made me think about this question, so it's absolutely clear what I meant by explaining the metaphor, as I didn't communicate what I meant very well. It's from the first draft I'm working on:

So what is the game about?

I'm glad you asked. Well... sort of glad. It seems that every time I try to answer that simple question I say a different thing. This either means I'm very inconsistent or very creative. I'll let you figure that out for yourself.

Silence Keeps Me A Victim, is an attempt for me to draw attention to an issue that's plagued me. As a child I was a victim of sexual abuse and rape. That still causes me problems, but is really only a secondary issue for this game. The game is an attempt for me to stab at the silence I feel is pressed on me by society, with the only creative effort I feel qualified to raise, a roleplaying game.

This is a first draft so likely the wording will change and it may get a few sentences, but that's the extent of explanation I previously planned on pursuing. Let me address responses now...

Hi Ralph:

Thanks for the response, and I think I agree with you that in most cases explaining metaphor is self defeating. I'm still not convinced this is one of those cases, and it seems that I may not be dealing in metaphor anyway.



Hi Dave:

You make some good points about the levels between the feather and the hammer. Thanks.



Hi Ben:

Thanks for the compliment, and I'm curious what you mean by immersed in the culture of child abuse activism? I have no knowledge of this culture, I don't doubt you, but if you feel like sharing and edifying me, please feel free to toss me a P.M.  On to your question.

What possible advantages are there to discussing my metaphor openly?
The advantages of discussing where the fiction is coming from, in my mind, is eyeballs. I think that explaining where the abstraction is generated from is likely to create more interest. Open discussion may not create more sales, but more interest means more dialog, and opening dialog is a big part of what I want to use the game to create. I also want the game to be playable and enjoyable to those who play it. Being playable is more important than opening dialog, but on my scales it isn't that much heavier. I think the game is more playable with a level of abstraction.



Hi Troy:

Is the replacing of sexual abuse with the loss of voice metaphor? I totally admit to not being knowledgeable about literary terms. When doing metaphor does the thing you are alluding to have to be more broad, or am I still not understanding the term?

I totally agree with you that people will use many things, sickness, abuse, social stigma, handicaps, etc, as excuses and social tools, and those uses could make an interesting issue to design a game around. I don't think that is this game however.

I'm not going to address all your questions. No offense is intended. I just wanted you to know I did read your whole post before providing answers.

Do I want to create metaphor?
I'm not sure I want to generate metaphor per se. I think the fictional elements of the game are right about where I want them. They are the part of the game I am happiest with right now. If they are far from metaphor, that's okay, I was just using the wrong term.

Do I think silence is the reason why people are victims?
Silence in my mind, is definitely a contributing factor to being a victim, but the way I read your question it seems to ask if silence is the only reason, or main reason. If that is a good read of your question, then my answer is no. Otherwise, yes, it is a contributing factor.



Hi Simon:

Holy crap! Your last paragraph is exactly what I'm trying to achieve. Thanks for sharing your feelings. That fear is what I want to use the game to attack. Even if it is just getting people to ask me their curiosity questions since I am in effect bringing the subject up with everyone who encounters my game.

The scene I set in the other thread you refer to was deliberately made to show the extreme the game could be taken. I did this to generate discussion, and to examine the game in a way that is almost like Ad Absurdum is used in Logic. I don't envision that's how most groups would play, but wanted to see how that scene held up to examination.



Hi Tim:

Why don't you think I need to make it clear that the game is about my life? Also in my reading of your post it seems you mean self-referential to have  a negative connotation.  Why would a game being self-referential be bad? Did I interpret that part of your post correctly?

As far as the communities role? I'm not sure yet, but you have definitely gathered my message correctly, and restated it in a much better fashion. I am saying, you (Society not Tim) enforce silence through your fear of the subject.



Hi contracycle:

You make a really good point. People do have to understand well enough to know what they are supposed to do with the game. The point is so good I think I need to change my question a bit.



So what I would like to do now is change what I'm asking a bit. Do you folks think the quote I included would likely give you enough of an idea to understand the rules and fictions underpinnings? This would include the assumption that the rules support that fiction, and work to produce the appropriate gameplay, since I haven't provided rules yet. If you don't think so, what am I missing?

[Simon C]

Hey Clyde,

Ok, that clears things up a lot.  I think the paragraph is good.  It clearly flags that this game is an attempt to grapple with some pretty serious issues, but it doesn't dictate how the players are to interpret the game.  It shows that these are the issues you're talking about, and why you feel qualified to talk about them, but it doesn't hold up a sign saying "here is the lesson".

As a player, this paragraph would make me feel empowered to explore the metaphor you've created.  If you wanted to change or expand upon this paragraph (though I don't think you should feel you have to), you could stress that there is no "correct" interpretation of the game, and no way it's "supposed" to turn out.  I think it's important, given the difficult subject matter, to make people feel safe in their way of playing the game. 

I'm glad I "got" what this game is about.  Now I'm really looking forward to seeing how it turns out.

[TroyLovesRPG]

Hello Clyde,

I think the metaphor/game/experience combination is causing confusion. Maybe it would be better to just talk about the game in terms of its setting and objectives. The reference to your life is throwing me for a loop. Its because I want to actually separate the game from your life and have a conversation about the game. Otherwise, this becomes a game about you and I don't know much about you. Keeping the game as a unique entity will make it easier for you to come up with some creative elements that generate interest and gain help from this forum.

When you reach a roadblock in your game development, please refrain from recalling your childhood experiences to "explain" the game. It doesn't work. There are many references to child abuse and I see your game in that light. I don't know what you are trying to achieve with your game.

Simon:
What did you get? What is this game about to you, without referring to child abuse?

Troy

[Clyde L. Rhoer]

Hi Simon

Thanks for the support. Your statement makes me think you feel I should lean more towards the feather and the hammer. I think this is my inclination also.

Hi Troy

I agree that it's confusing. My hope is that if you answered the question I asked you in my reply, your answer would help clear up one point of confusion. I asked it of you since you had stepped forward as an authority.

I'm not sure what's confusing you. I know I'm not the only one who has attempted to make a game about issues the creator wanted to bring forward. I believe I remember Paul Czege writing or telling me that My Life with Master was about issues that he had in his life. Death's Door is another example and speaking with James at Gen Con was a good part of what got me started on this road. The other was the Game Design seminar. So I don't plan on changing the double meaning of "me" in the games title. However, I would like to help you get a better understanding if I can. Perhaps the next thread I plan will be more helpful for you as I plan to discuss the traits and the way I see conflict resolution working, the Clyde part of the game will be much smaller there.

I also think you misunderstand my intent with this thread. I don't feel I'm at a roadblock. I'm trying to develop somewhat openly and get feedback on issues where I feel more input is good. To let people point out the flaws they see. I feel my game will be better if I listen to more than my voice.

[TroyLovesRPG]

Hello Clyde,

I did read your question, but got sidetracked with the other posts.

Metaphor is the use of two terms that cannot be literally or realistically equated, but conveys similar characterstics or treats the terms as having resemblance.

These are very concrete metaphors.

"The man was a tiger."
The man had a ferocious and predatory attitude.

"The skater ate pavement."
The skater crashed on the pavement, face first, losing his dignity.

Conceptual metaphors go from concrete to abstract. Comparing a tangible object to an abstract concept conjures more than just a simple mapping of elements. It lets you look at the subject in a completely different way.

"Poetry is a journey."
Not easy to understand. This could be interepreted as reading or writing poetry that actually takes your mind to a different location, or could step you through different psychological levels.

If you're going for therapeutic metaphor then you'll need to identify all the elements in child-abuse from cause to resolution. Look at each element, combinations of elements and find other situations that are not the same but could share some abstract concepts. Of course, this is to shine light on the original touchy subject by exposing the players to similar concepts in an environment that they find comfortable. Imagine a pediatrician keeping cacti in the waiting room so the children won't panic when blood is drawn from their fingers.

So, "Silence keeps me a victim" isn't a metphor, allusion, simile or personification. It is a statement describing an action and a result. It also infers that a person is already a victim and now the silence prolongs the state.

An alternate phrase may be "Stolen Voices". It has concrete imagery of someone stealing a recording in an attempt to blackmail or commit plagiarism. If this is extrapolated fantastically then the stolen voice is potentially treated as goods that can be bought, sold, distributed, hidden, investigated and returned to the owner. The stolen voice may be a section of the total capability of the speaker in which his voice is not completely lost, but censored in some way. This may serve to penalize the speaker in limiting the topics of conversation or actually preventing certain words or phrases from being uttered.

Thinking about a game...

Part of play may consist of imposing rules upon the players regarding certain types of speech patterns. Instead of the players just keeping silent most of the time the players have various limitations:
Cannot use words starting with a certain letter.
Must only use words with one syllable.
Must phrase statements as a question.
Must phrase questions as statements.
Must use a certain word in every sentence.
Must not use a certain word.
Must use exactly four words per sentence.
Can only speak when the "secret word" is spoken by someone else.
Can only speak after a chosen person gives permission.
Must use two words from the last sentence spoken.

Players gain points for successfully speaking using the correct rules.
Players lose points when they break the rules.
Penalized players may optionally read a pre-written metaphorical phrase or lose points. The phrase can contain no profanity or common slang. "I trimmed her hedge with my teeth." "I tasted her rotten nectar."

Another possibility is for each player to secretly draw a rule and display it in front of himself. Each player can see the rules of the others, but cannot see his own rule. As they speak, they will obviously break the rules and must learn how to speak properly as the game progresses. Each player gets a different rule.

The players want to prevent themselves from speaking without someone forcing them. It is a conscious act and gradually will escalate to the point where they cannot speak yet think it is all quite normal. When part of the game gives players the authority to censor another and think there's no harm, then you may be taking them to a place they originally didn't want to go, but are gladly doing so.

Troy