Tag: Debate

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official
policy or position of Nordiclarp.org or any larp community at large.

Editors note: This is a reply to the opinion piece by Sanne Harder titled “The Law of Jante in Nordic
Role-playing” that ran on Nordiclarp.org on 11 July 2014.

I read Sanne Harders text about “good role-playing” with great interest. Harder pinpoints some very important issues
within the Nordic larp scene. Status and nepotism are indeed present, though we perceive ourselves as open minded and
egalitarian. We are absolutely lacking a discussion about “what makes a good role-player” and how to improve ourselves.
I will however argue that discussion must have different premises than the ones Harder suggests.

There are problems
within the Nordic larp arena concerning the perceived equality. Questions about accessibility, equality and everyone’s
right to feel welcome and getting the support one needs (regardless of gender, ethnicity, sexuality, ableness etc, not
to forget previous experience or lack there of). This of course overlaps questions such as “what makes a good larper”. A
non willingness to address questions about what makes “a good larper” can conceal underlying structural problems
concerning status. Status among larpers and status concerning different genres. Believe me, as a player and producer of
Vampire larps, somewhat perceived as the larping
equivalent of Harlequin novels, I have some experience in the matter. But let’s focus on the text itself. What problems
are determined, what is the solution and – of course – what is a good larper? And how can the good larpers help the
Nordic larp scene as a whole?

To pinpoint the essence of the problem Harder exemplifies with “The Law of Jante”.
“The Law of Jante” (established by danish-norwegian author Aksel
Sandemose), I would say, is one of the most misleading descriptions of scandinavian collectivistic culture. The
premise is highly individualistic – the collective holds back and shames any individual that outshines, or threatens to
do so, any other member in the collective. For instance the 6th law of Jante is – “You’re not to think you are more
important than we are”. Well, guess what – I couldn’t agree more. Nobody is more important than anyone else. I do
believe this sentence should pervade every larp. Even if you are an outstanding larper (I will address this question
later on) your experience and your presence is not more important than anyone else. An “anti-Jante-approach” to larping
would be somewhat dangerous or at least counterproductive. Do we want larpers to strive after outshining each other? To
teach them that talent makes you more important than others?

Harder also exemplifies with a stereotypical (and yes, I absolutely agree, highly recognizable) character; the
Gamemaster of Doom. A big problem seems to be letting newbies have their first experience lead by such a person, risking
scaring them off. But what about the Gamemaster her/himself? Who should she/he play with? How should she/he become a
better player/gamemaster? I don’t see how “rescuing” newbies from this horrible first experience benefits the larp scene
as a whole. Simply because the larp scene is a collective. Simply because elitism and focus on individuals will always
be somewhat excluding.

Let me be crystal clear. Opposing elitism does not mean avoiding boosting each other or acknowledging talent. It means
that a talented person (in one particular area) is not more important than a non-talented person. It does not mean not
acknowledging people’s safety concerning questions about gender, ethnicity, sexuality or ableness. What it means is that
no person is more important than another because of talent.

So what
makes a good larper? I will address two issues here. The authors focus is individual talent, acting especially. It seems
like the author means that a good larper enters a group and inspires them with formidable acting. But first of all;
larping is not about acting, not only.  A good experience starts long before the larp itself – making props, building
the group, making people feel welcome and safe, taking care of possible conflicts, communicating and inspiring people.
Not by outshining them, but by making the experience interesting and of course somewhat challenging on a personal level.
This demands a whole set of different talents – logistics, a bit of leadership, communication, craftsmanship, writing,
composing, creativity, social skills and – this is important – the ability to step back and let other people into the
limelight. Not everyone can possess all qualities, but everyone can possess one or a few, which are equally important
and – of course – should be boosted and verified.

A focus on the acting part of larping also makes a rather narrow path to walk on the way of improving. A path demanding
talents that not all players have to begin with. Hence arguing good acting makes a good larper is somewhat excluding.
But once again, there are so many other qualities that benefits the group, should we choose to change our focus. And I
believe we should. Because, second:

Larping is namely not individualistic, it´s collectivistic. Larping is not a tabletop RPG; the “good larper” being the
equivalent of the hero/PC and the “not so good larpers” the NPCs. Every players experience is equally important, some
needing more boost and guiding, others quite self sufficient, and some very experienced and/or talented can help and
push their fellow players.

The players I have
encountered that I would describe as good role-players are the ones that makes the inexperienced player feel more
confident, the ones that easily can take over an entire scene but takes a step back and boosts the quite wallflower to
take the lead, the ones that make people solve problems, challenge themselves and step out of their comfort zones. I
would argue a good larper builds the group, facilitating other players, plays in a giving, generous and not self
centered manner. The good role-player’s focus is one the group, not on her/himself.

I do agree that “leading by example” is not a bad thing. I do agree this is a discussion we should have to improve
ourselves as players and producers. I do agree that recruiting “good larpers” can lift an arrangement or a group, but
not by making it a “one man show”. It`s all about the group. Discussions about what makes a good larper and how to use
the good larpers to inspire and challenge other players are more than welcome. But if so I do believe the premises must
be larp as a group effort where nobody is more important than anyone else, where nobody is excluded due to lack of
talent. Not even the Gamemaster of Doom.