Templars, jihadis, and limited print runs
June 3rd 2008 02:16
What’s wrong with these cards?
The first one has been criticized by some players as an undue expression of religion. The second one… has not. I know that sounds odd, especially considering it was released in 1993 a few months after Ramzi Yousef tried to blow up the World Trade Center, but it had a very small print run and has never been reprinted since. Crusade was in the first four core sets before being discontinued to make room for other cards. It was very close to being reprinted in the Eighth Edition, but narrowly lost a popular vote to a similar card named Glorious Anthem.
Considering that the word “crusade” is an English word that can have positive connotations in certain circumstances, I think if either of these cards was to be harmful, it would have been Jihad. As a matter of fact, I’m not convinced that either of these cards ever hurt anyone. Devout Muslims were not and probably are still not one of Magic’s key demographics, and few enough people have ever seen a copy of Jihad (some of my friends didn’t even know it existed until I told them) that you could probably count the number of people it’s offended on one hand.
Still, I could imagine either of the cards becoming a tool of controversy in the right (or wrong) hands. Pro-Muslim or pro-Christian groups could claim that either one is a mockery of their religion. Crusade shows heavily armed Templars – their faces obscured by grim helmets – celebrating as an enemy town burns! Jihad’s game text implies that Muslims favor exterminating enemies to the last man, woman, and child! Also it’s nearly unplayable compared to Crusade, so Wizards of the Coast must endorse Christianity over Islam!
Or do they?
You could equally argue that Jihad’s effect is temporary, so it encourages reconciliation and building bridges after hostilities have ended. You could also argue that the knight’s symbolic role in Western culture is that of protector and champion of the defenseless, and the men in Crusade’s art are celebrating not their enemies’ immolation but the safety of their own homes and the power of their own faith.
One of the hardest things for some people to get through their heads is that a depiction of something in art does not necessarily constitute an endorsement. This is true of literature and cinema and it is true of paintings on Magic cards. Does Tennessee Williams’ writing of Stanley Kowalski in A Streetcar Named Desire endorse domestic abuse? Of course not. It portrays a certain kind of person and mindset. When Joel Shepherd’s Sasha: Trial of Blood and Steel describes a lordling mocking the title character as a “little girl playing with swords,” is it telling us that women shouldn’t leave their kitchens, especially not armed with cavalry sabers? Don't be ridiculous. The next passage, where Sasha outfoxes and decapitates the lordling’s chamberlain in a ritual duel, illustrates and praises her strength and skill!
Maybe the real issue is that we don’t need to be reading so much into a game that’s been provided for our entertainment. Not everything is a political statement or an expression of a social platform. Sometimes a noble Templar is just a noble Templar.
The first one has been criticized by some players as an undue expression of religion. The second one… has not. I know that sounds odd, especially considering it was released in 1993 a few months after Ramzi Yousef tried to blow up the World Trade Center, but it had a very small print run and has never been reprinted since. Crusade was in the first four core sets before being discontinued to make room for other cards. It was very close to being reprinted in the Eighth Edition, but narrowly lost a popular vote to a similar card named Glorious Anthem.
Considering that the word “crusade” is an English word that can have positive connotations in certain circumstances, I think if either of these cards was to be harmful, it would have been Jihad. As a matter of fact, I’m not convinced that either of these cards ever hurt anyone. Devout Muslims were not and probably are still not one of Magic’s key demographics, and few enough people have ever seen a copy of Jihad (some of my friends didn’t even know it existed until I told them) that you could probably count the number of people it’s offended on one hand.
Still, I could imagine either of the cards becoming a tool of controversy in the right (or wrong) hands. Pro-Muslim or pro-Christian groups could claim that either one is a mockery of their religion. Crusade shows heavily armed Templars – their faces obscured by grim helmets – celebrating as an enemy town burns! Jihad’s game text implies that Muslims favor exterminating enemies to the last man, woman, and child! Also it’s nearly unplayable compared to Crusade, so Wizards of the Coast must endorse Christianity over Islam!
Or do they?
You could equally argue that Jihad’s effect is temporary, so it encourages reconciliation and building bridges after hostilities have ended. You could also argue that the knight’s symbolic role in Western culture is that of protector and champion of the defenseless, and the men in Crusade’s art are celebrating not their enemies’ immolation but the safety of their own homes and the power of their own faith.
One of the hardest things for some people to get through their heads is that a depiction of something in art does not necessarily constitute an endorsement. This is true of literature and cinema and it is true of paintings on Magic cards. Does Tennessee Williams’ writing of Stanley Kowalski in A Streetcar Named Desire endorse domestic abuse? Of course not. It portrays a certain kind of person and mindset. When Joel Shepherd’s Sasha: Trial of Blood and Steel describes a lordling mocking the title character as a “little girl playing with swords,” is it telling us that women shouldn’t leave their kitchens, especially not armed with cavalry sabers? Don't be ridiculous. The next passage, where Sasha outfoxes and decapitates the lordling’s chamberlain in a ritual duel, illustrates and praises her strength and skill!
Maybe the real issue is that we don’t need to be reading so much into a game that’s been provided for our entertainment. Not everything is a political statement or an expression of a social platform. Sometimes a noble Templar is just a noble Templar.
| 57 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Cibbuano
20/20 Filmsight
Science News
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
..
excellent post! Interesting history of these cards... certainly, if the first was condemned, so should the second!