Want to read pure D&D fear mongering from 1980s with out a bit of truth, or need for D&D to be part of it. Well the good news is Mazes and Monsters is here to remind us of how people used to see Dungeons and Dragons. But really what makes this book especially bad is three things.It's poorly written in almost every way, entertainly so... though not entertaining enough to recommend it. Dialogue, characters, content, all ... bad. And then it does it in the most heavy handed method. Most people have heard show don't tell? Well Rona Jaffe definitely hasn't. It creates the most blandest story, if instead of Dungeons and Dragons, I wanted to besmirch Rock and Roll music, Video games, or pretty much anything else, you could do it with a find and replace. Granted some small passages about the games would have to be rewritten, but the book itself is generic that you could make it about the dangers of Football and it would work. Finally and most insulting is just as you think the book is over, it decides to make it sound like a true story, one more time. A character decides that she would write a book, in fact the very book you're reading, so you're lead to think... if you're a moron. So take four students at a college in non descript Northeast United States. A good school but not ivy league. All four students COULD go to the ivy league, mit, harvard, but they don't for ... stupid reasons. All four have bad home lives, they are all different ages, (from 14-21). Different years of school (two are sophomores, one's a freshman, one's a senior). Abuse drugs (ok alcohol was legal for college students back in 1980... but they still do pot, I'm only shocked they don't whip out cocaine to really drive the message home). And have premarital sex (THE SIN!) In fact they pass the girl around like am object (this is 1980 so the fact she has any thoughts is pretty amazing, and yes this was written by a woman but we'll get to that).Speaking of the girl, early on she is mentioned to have "The incident in the laundry room" ominious and evil sounding. In fact the reader can be forgiven that they might draw this out. But in fact by the time the book comes around to her again the author just blurts it out. Could it have been a traumatizing incident? Maybe. But the author really doesn't deliver, she was "almost" raped. And by that, it's not really clear what that means. And for that she's afraid of dating... until she's not a chapter or two later... It's not only the female main character that is horribly written, all four children's mothers get a chapter given to them. Why? Are they main characters? Nope. Are they interesting? Well the first was, the second was the same, the third was the same, and the fourth? About the same again. They all have a small amount of trauma that helps explain why their kids are messed up. Except that trauma was already exposed with out a full chapter of exposition from their point of view. None of the female characters feel like they were written by a woman. Well none of the human characters feel like they were written by a human, but same problem. The women are all ditzy pointless bimboettes, that could only work in the 80s. If that's how people saw women in the 1980s I understand bra burning and feminism. Oh wait feminism became big in the 1960s, this is still 20 years after that, only making it more insulting to women. And they play "the game". They keep calling it that, but really like I said, "the game" is just what all the characters escape with to avoid the horrible lives they lead. Those horrible lives of near unlimited money, beautiful cars, beautiful people, random sex (maybe that does happen in college, but not in my experience), and close friends. So devastating that they play a game and get lost in it... But the game isn't even that interesting, none of the rules or ideas are explained, it's just hand waved away after maybe 10 pages of explanation of what they're doing. The subject of the book, the one the book is NAMED after only really appears in about 10 percent of the pages. They make numerous references to the game, but the actual game is pretty non existent. No wonder why people reading this book might not have a good grasp of what role playing games are. The author clearly didn't. The thing is all four characters are paper thing for 75 percent of the book, when they aren't the main character. Each chapter chooses a character and they are the voice for that chapter. The only thing is everything you hear and see and have happen is from that character's perspective, it really TELLS you what they are thinking, or even what they think of each other. But nothing interesting really happens outside of their emotions. Nothing is shown to the reader, you are told one of the characters is giving away a lot of things, by two different characters, but you never see that happen. You are told that Jay Jay now likes Robbie after a break up, but Jay Jay never really shows he dislikes Robbie except that one time he's told it. Worse, most of these events are pointless. Darin is jealous of Jay Jay, and that leads no where. Robbie is feeling alone, and that leads no where. Kate is whoring it up (1980s woman mind you) which creates a love triangle that... doesn't lead anywhere. Am I supposed to think any of these will lead to a missing person, because the missing person case becomes really obvious about half way through and these little stories all would have been a lot better. In fact I could agree because those would involve the game into the main story. But instead... welll....I'll just throw in the moral of the message of what the book might be getting at, because honestly, it's just the icing on the shit sandwich this book was. If your kid has a bad home life, and is prone to have a schizophrenic episode, Dungeons and Dragons might become the basis of that delusion, during which he might move to New York, become a hobo, become a prostitute and stab someone... But at the same time that same game will help him create friendships that may help him, and the other people move beyond "the game" to a better life... potentially. .... At least I think that's the moral of the story, it's what the book told me it was, and considering how the rest of the book is I don't think there's much deeper, but I came up with my own moral.People who confuse fiction with reality can be dangerous, and anyone who used it to inform policy or their decision should probably be checked out by a psychiatrist because they might have a mental problem.And by this I'm directly talking to anyone who confused this pile of BS, with reality. In fact people used letters in this book in news reports, this book is what helped along the big scare of Dungeons and Dragons. Yes, people confused a completely fictional account of what the author thinks role playing games is like, and what college life is like, and what mental illness is like, and thought this is what really happened when people play those "games". No wonder there was a huge amount of panic about children confusing fiction with reality. Their parents were doing it with this writing. Honestly if you want to see where all the fear uncertainty and gloom about Dungeons and dragons really came from, this is the book, it's interesting only to see how easily people were lead around in the 1980s. But besides the fact it's a quick read, it's really not worth the time or energy finding the book or reading it. I'd rather go read Eragon again... at least that is well written.
This thing was sooooo noticed in it's day. They did a TV movie with a young Tom Hanks. The warning here? Mommas don't let your babies grow up to play Dungeons and Dragons. Oh the game in the book is Mazes and Monsters but I doubt anyone missed the point. The poor sap in the book completely loses himself in his character. I wonder what that says about the electronic games of today? I mean if it was dangerous for a few friends to sit around a table with some paper and dice (which I did and still do occasionally) how much danger does an MMORPG represent? Come on. This thing was pathetic when it came out and it's still pathetic today.If I could I'd give this one less than one star...but if you try to give no stars it just looks like you read the thing without rating it... Had this book not hit a fashionable inquisitory victim it would never have been so popular. It just isn't that good. But like so many things before and after (remember the foo-fa-rah over Harry Potter?) Dungeons and Dragons and the other role playing games (RPGs)that came along were (at least at first) deemed by "society" to be dangerous. Yes a group of nerds sitting around a table with some dice, a few sheets of paper and some books were in imminent danger of losing their minds because they could, for a few hours imagine themselves to be heroes, wizards, rogues and ...yes, clerics.(I wonder how the jocks can handle fantasy football...isn't it a risk?)Since my "hey day" as a Dungeon Master I have raised a family, had a career and been ordained as a minister (yes a Christian church...a real one). Unlike the poor schmuck in the book I don't continue to live in an imaginary world unable to get out. I don't (and never did) wander around "city steam tunnels" dress in costume (though if you do it doesn't bother me...enjoy), nor confuse fantasy with reality. I still read fantasy books, and now and then still play D&D. But I don't own this book anymore and the only recommendation I can give is don't waste your time. Seldom is propaganda this pitifully, woefully, useless. As said before, pathetic. Update 6/27/15I looked back at this review after reading and reviewing Of Dice and Men: The Story of Dungeons & Dragons and the People Who Play It. I a, also old enough to remember when it became difficult to find a comic book. In the 1950s there were congressional hearings about the danger of those nefarious graphic adventures...Like captain America and Bucky or Batman with Robin... Today's books would really freak them out.Then as I noted above many here probably recall the campaign against Harry Potter. Some Christians see danger in any kind of fantasy I think.My Pastor back in the 80s pronounced from the "pulpit" that, "If you're still playing Dungeons and Dragons you're sinning!". I had to lay the game aside for a few years to remain in good standing with the church.Of course I'm a Pastor myself now and play both as player and Dungeon Master (that title freaked a few people out I recall).This book rode the tide of hysteria about D&D...sadly not only is it pretty much pure propaganda, it's not well told propaganda...Oh well. I'm sure you can get it from the library if you want to try it. As noted, can't recommend this one.
Do You like book Mazes And Monsters (1982)?
This book came out in 1981, and, in my freshman year of high school, was made into a t.v. movie starring my imaginary boyfriend at the time, Tom Hanks, and Chris "Rudy the Rabbit" Makepeace. I read the book back then, and recently, having read and fallen in love with Jaffe's The Best of Everything, rescued my childhood copy from my parents' basement to read it again.The story, while loosely based on actual events, has not aged well. Aside from one of the characters being described as being as handsome as John Travolta, and the Donna Summer soundtrack, it focuses on the then-new world of role-playing games. Four college friends are obsessed with playing "Mazes & Monsters" (read "Dungeons & Dragons" obviously) while dealing with the regular stresses and wonders of college life. To spice things up, they decide to physically act out the game in the off-limits caverns nearby the university grounds. Robbie, whose older brother got involved with drugs and disappeared without a trace years ago, has a mental breakdown and begins to believe he is his M&M character. This is as cheesy as it sounds, but it is saved by Jaffe's skill at characterization. Each of the four students, and their parents, has a back story which informs their behavior. I re-read it in two days, because as ridiculous as it was, it was still highly satisfying. There is a blurb from Cosmopolitan magazine in the back of this book that reads, "Reading Rona Jaffe is like being presented with a Cartier watch; you know exactly what you're getting and it's just what you want." For me, it's like really good cheesecake: completely empty calories and completely filling. Let the abebooks.com shopping begin.
—Lee Anne
I was a little trepidatious of reading yat another kids-go-to-college-coming-of-age story. And it's not brilliant, but it is realy good. Jaffe's a very compelling writer and the characters are realistic with slightly haunting but not fantastic histories. I think she captures the surreality and anxiety of progressing from an immature to a mature point of view and how so often it's not a eureka moment so the issues someone has as a child follows them into adulthood. It's very well done and a really enjoyable read.
—Kate
When I was young (well before I got into playing Dungeons & Dragons), I saw a schlock, made-for-TV movie called "Mazes and Monsters". (Shockingly enough, Tom Hanks was in it.) Schlock doesn't even scratch the surface here.The movie was based on this book and is pretty faithful (from what I remember of the movie). I have to admit that the book was just interesting enough to keep me reading. Only just. The depiction of the game (hardly a stretch to know the author is referring to D&D) in the book is laughable. It is quite obvious that the author never read any of the D&D game books, much less played an actual game. She was going off of misinformed, third-hand reports of the game from shoddy reporting in the newspapers back when there was a big news story about a missing person that somehow got connected to the game D&D. In fact, a book was written on the the true events ("The Dungeon Master" by William Dear) and it is those events that provided inspiration for this book.As a D&D geek, I fully expected to completely despise this book, but it wasn't too bad. Not good enough to ever want to read it again, but it had some entertainment value. This story actually had some promise, but the author went off on unnecessary tangents (about the domestic lives of the students' mothers) that, while interesting, added nothing at all to the story. There was also a mild undertone of female empowerment that was a bit off-putting, but probably a product of the time the book was written.
—Eddie
