Is there line to be drawn when making MOCs?

[Derek]

I saw this on Brickshelf earlier, and thought it was incredibly--tacky is the best word to describe it. I just think that some things shouldn't be recreated in LEGO, and plane crashes are one of them. I know that the Hudson emergency landing was incredibly miraculous and there were no casualties, but it just feels uncomfortable seeing it in Lego.

There are other things done in Lego that gave me this feeling, such as those concentration camp fake sets, and several 9/11 recreations.

Am I the only one that feels this way? Or am I overreacting? Please give your opinion here.

-darthperson

[Siegfried]

As examples go, this one seems harmless to me. Humans (including me ) seem attracted in violence, conflict and disaster and thus reality can be used for inspiration for MOCs. Even so, I prefer to keep reality out of LEGO; it isn't that hard to make up your own stories and avoid offence.

[General Armendariz]

I almost feel like that but since their were mo casuallties I think its ok

[Motti]

Same here. I've seen plenty of World Trade Centre mocs, and even one that had it in the middle of collapsing with smoke and all. I wasn't offended, but I felt very uncomfortable.

[Natman8000]

Its a troubling thought. Although, there are many paintings of unfortunate events in the world, and LEGO is also like a art. Sorta. but we all must remember it is intentional childs toy, and frankly, most people want it to be seen that way.

[Shadows]

A MOC is art. As such, the only limitation should be decided by the builder. I've seen plenty of MOCs of things I didn't care for, but I wouldn't imagine imposing a restriction on anyone else based on my taste. If the artist/builder is looking for critical acclaim, they will have to find the right balance between their vision and popular opinion, but in the case of LEGO, I don't think many are looking for that anyway.

As for offensive or a line being crossed, this one doesn't even come close in my book.

[Dragonator]

Lego is a building brand. It encourages the use of imagination and creativity. If somebody wants to build something realistic, then I'm fine with that. If I don't like it, I'll just look at something else. As I see it, if somebody wants to take the time and energy to build something, we should appreciate that, even if we don't much like the context. I find it hypocritical that people are happy to see others build gore-filled medieval battle depicting death and slaughter, or build pirates pillaging and raping in the Caribbean and yet don't like the idea of someone recreating a real event. One is just bad as the other, if you take them both out of context. Or put them in it, for that matter. The pirates we all know and love were in many ways just as bad if not worse than, for example, the NAZIs, just in there own different way. Pirates attacked, robed, burned and pillaged, killed children in front of their parents and raped wives before cutting their throats, as well as taking many innocent civilians hostage or to serve as slaves, while the NAZIs gassed people and enslaved them in concentration camps, and persecuted religious groups, etc. These two groups were both just as bad as each other. And yet, we despise the NAZIs, while we idolise the age of pirates. How messed up is that? This is just one example, but the point to this is that people are selective, and chose what they want to see. So, when you really think about it, is someone building a concentration camp any worse than someone building a pirate raid on a village? Not really.

Remember that I do not mean to offend or force my view on anyone, I'm just trying to say what I believe, and why. I think that if you want to build something, then build it. Some people won't like it, as with all MOCs, but there will still be many who do appreciate it. I myself have never wanted to build anything considered to be "bad taste", but if I ever did I would hope that it would be commented on just like any other MOC. I think most builders know the limits of realism in Lego, and I know that most will never build anything truly offensive or hurtful to a group. As long as there is a good reason or inspiration behind a MOC, then I have no problem with it. Of course, building for the sake of offending people is a different matter entirely, I do not support that. However if the builder is trying to get a message across, or is simply building art, then I'm all for that. It all comes down to the individual; we all know what we are happy to build and what we feel uncomfortable about, but we should not try and impose this on other builders.

I respect that many people don't want to build these sorts of "touchy subject" creations, however I do believe that if someone else wants to then who are we to say they can't? Respect that they want to build that, and then if you don't like it, go and look at something you can accept. Just don't try to tell people what they can and can't build because that is just silly. If someone wants to build reality, then that's cool, and if they don't, then that's cool too. It's up to them. In terms of a line, this doesn't come any where near one for me. I have seen far worse being built or created in art, and as we all know, Lego is just another form of art to the AFOL.Don't let it bother you.

Well, glad I got that out of my system. I can get quite strong in my opinions sometimes, please don't take offence from anything I've said. I often get carried away like this, it's probably because I'm really into debating...

EDIT: You know I think Shadows has said pretty much what I wanted to say, just in much fewer words. I feel a bit silly carrying on like I did now.

[JimBee]

Well, I think that it's up to the builder to decide what's appropriate and what's not. They are also able to decide whether to share the MOC (online or otherwise) or not. People who view the MOC that are perhaps offended should just keep it to themselves- just like in any displayed pieces (writing, artwork, Lego...). People who rant about little things such as a 9/11 MOC are usually ignored or annoying, so no big deal if someone comes along and complains (at least online).

[Kakihara Smile]

Lego may be art but it is first and foremost a children's toy. So I'm against some things being created in lego. I find it poor taste given the medium's first intetion is to appeal to children.

[Svelte]

EDIT: You know I think Shadows has said pretty much what I wanted to say, just in much fewer words. I feel a bit silly carrying on like I did now.

Art is worth being passionate about

You know what I find truly offensive here? That carpet

Seriously, if you look at the other MOCs in the brickshelf gallery, this builder usually goes to some trouble to do some nice riverscaping for his many floating craft. Here it looks as if 7893 Passenger Plane has crash-landed in a sea of beige porridge

[Alice]

Lego may be art but it is first and foremost a children's toy. So I'm against some things being created in lego. I find it poor taste given the medium's first intetion is to appeal to children.

This is a website aimed at mature fans of Lego that are capable of seeing things from a mature perspective. I do not find the MOC offensive personally. For me, building is a stress reliever and a creative outlet, much like painting. It would be like saying that someone building a, let's say, brewery is offensive because it isn't in line with what would be topic for a "children's toy". I have seen brilliant off color or adult themed Lego MOCs. Some of the MOCs that I absolutely hate, other people love. I can acknowledge and respect the unique style of the builder whether I personally like their work or not. It's all a matter of opinion and perspective so I believe it is appropriate for Lego to be a medium for such things. I am not a fan of censoring people's artistic and creative abilities.

[Siegfried]

These two groups were both just as bad as each other. And yet, we despise the NAZIs, while we idolise the age of pirates.

I don't admire either; in fact Pirates were one of the themes that caused my Dark Ages! (The other big reason was the newer faces, but that's another story...) I've never liked the "Treasure Hunting Pirates" fantasy, even as a kid. On the other hand, since the "Treasure Hunting Pirates" concept is a fantasy, it could be argued that they aren't real and are little different to trolls and elves...

But I don't care what people make; if I don't like something (realistic or not, offensive or not) I tend to just ignore it. The closest I've ever come to making an offensive MOC is a fake WWII German airplane!

[Diamondback]

Frankly, to me this MOC comes off as a tribute to Captain Sullenberger and his crew's heroism in getting the plane down and everybody out OK, and that of the NY Harbor ferry and fireboat operators in quickly moving in to get everyone on boats and headed to shore.

[MacK]

Honestly I don't think there really is a line that can be crossed when making MOCs or there is a very extreme one at the very least. How come it seems that people always get upset about MOCs such as the Hudson River one you provided yet it seems no one or only a small group of people complain about MOCs based around war weather it be some historical battle between different castle fractions or a modern day tank. War is just as brutal if not more as some of the MOCs we’ve seen. If you are offended by a MOC just don’t look at it simple as that IMO.

[xenologer]

You're overreacting.

Besides, who is to say what someone else can or cannot build? They're his bricks if you don't like it go take them away from him oh wait you can't do that , just don't look at it if you don't like it.

[mrchris]

i dont think it being primarily a toy makes any difference, i bet more kids use paints for painting pictures than adult artists who have infinate freedom.

for me i like this kind of humour, as long as no one gets hurt by it (and i dont mean the easily offended kicking up a stink) i dont see the problem.

Edited January 20, 2009 by mrchris

[Sandy]

I agree with several of you that people need to vent these sort of crises and bad things out of their system, and LEGO is as good a method to do that as any other type of art. In playing out situations like this Hudson River case, the person can go through what happened, what could've happened and what didn't happen, and be done with it.

Same applies to the more gruesome scenes with Nazis, pirates, World Wars and what have you. So let's not be offended by other people's creative works, but appreciate that they have found a safe and creative way to let off some steam.

As many have said, if you don't like it, look elsewhere. This isn't good in real-life situations, but it applies well to art.

[slimninj4]

Let people build what they want.

[Fluyt]

It is just up to the builder. Many people create military vehicles and minifigs, make battlescenes with pirates and knights, even LEGO creates this, along with the weapons.

+what are all the emergency vehicles released by LEGO for otherwise? LEGO just lets amagination do the work, at least I live in a free country where you can express yourself, so I think anything is fine, as long as certain age-groups who might be too young to see a certain moc are "protected". But Eurobricks is officially an adult site anyways.

[Dadster]

I don't see this as a big deal. Its an accurate representation of a true event. Maybe the creator simply wanted to show his respect for the men and women involved in the rescue.

[tedbeard]

The example used to start this thread is nonsensical. There was no loss of life and the pilot was clearly a hero for this. This is no more offensive than depicting the inauguration of the President of the United States. Where a line MIGHT be drawn is in glorifying recent deaths or maimings of specific actual people. Depicting a recent act of heroism in no way crosses any line of good taste that I can see.

[Derek]

I'm intrigued that all of you have so many different views on this topic. I probably should have gotten a better example, its just that I saw that on Brickshelf and it made me think of other MOCS that showed worse events. I can agree that this is depicting an act of heroism, so I think I've changed my opinion of the MOC. I was thinking of how bad it could have been, but I neglected to see the positive of the situation.

I'm not telling anyone what to build or not, but I still think sharing a MOC of the Twin Towers collapsing online is still a little much, especially as depicted using a "children's toy".

I again want to state that I am not telling anyone what they can and cannot do, I was just curious to everyones opinions.

Edited January 20, 2009 by darthperson

[Thee Pirate]

I believe there is no lines that can be drawn depicting what can and cannot be depicted in a MOC. As AFOLS, we are free to depict anything we desire, no matter how offensive the subject matter may be to the general public... (for example: the "nude" minifigs featured in rape scenes in the Brick Testament.) In the case of historical MOCs, such as that shown at the beginning of this thread or the aformentioned sex scenes, they are historical, and in order to depict the truth, there must be a degree of ugliness to them. In the case of fictional MOCs (eg. Pillage the Village submissions) there is a great deal of comic relief to be found in the plunder and "violence" shown.

Since these are creations created by AFOLs for the enjoyment, or appreciation, of other AFOLs there is no line to be drawn when displaying them. A little 8 year old kid isn't gonna catch the same references you and I will.

[Eilif]

Lots of interesting points here. I like these kind of open ended discussions.

I'm a bit suprised at Dragonator's historically misinformed (and terribly so) equating of Pirates and Nazi's, but he does make the valid point that people don't tend to be terribly consistent in their rationale for to allowing some atrocities in our MOCs and popular culture while considering others taboo. Most of us shun torture, and violence, but we just had two contests at EB glorifying those topics.

I think that there are lines to be drawn, but for the most part they are personal lines. It's good to have one's own standards regarding MOCs, and to know what those are. The trouble comes when we try to make our personal standards someone elses.

That said, when moving out of personal building and display and into the realm of displaying your MOCs in public or in a collective setting, a whole new set of issues arises. Questions like....

1) What is the responsibility of the club or individual to the venue that is hosting thier display?

2) Should those displaying respect generaly accepted comunity mores? (assuming those mores can be defined...)

3) How should public complaints about a MOC or MOC topic be handled?

4) What is the responsibility of the individual to the reputation of the group when displaying collectively?

5) What is the responsibility of the group to support each member's unique direcition, or freedom of expression?

These are tough quesitons that do not have black and white answers.

In the LEGO group I belong to, we have had to work through some of these issues because of objections from venues and individuals. I can't go into details, but it was a very sensitive issue for the club to have to decide that the collective group might, at some point, have to decide to disallow another member's MOC in a public display.

Edited January 21, 2009 by Eilif

[SeaKing61]

I noticed on a flight simulator website today (aviation is my other hobby) that someone has uploaded a file that will allow you to land the airbus in flight sim on water, allowing you to reenact the flight exactly. Would you say this is going too far, or just hero worship for the fantastic skills of the captain?

Laurie