Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Role Playing (Games) Entertainment Games

Where Do Game Subjects Cross The Line? 89

Posted by simoniker from the i-nominate-evil-clowns dept.
Thanks to GameSpy for their 'Spy Vs. Spy' editorial discussing whether any reality-based subject should be made into a game, referencing games like Kuma:War, which offers "the hunt for Uday and Qusay Hussein in Iraq and their eventual deaths in a shootout with U.S. forces" as a scenario. The first editor suggests that " I believe that such 'ripped from the headlines' titles are disrespectful to the soldiers in combat and the issues involved", whereas another editor presents a different view, arguing: "I'm all in favor of games working in contemporary events... one way for games to be more relevant to people is to bring current events to an interactive medium."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Where Do Game Subjects Cross The Line? More

Where Do Game Subjects Cross The Line?

Comments Filter:
  • I have said it before, and I will say it again; Nazis are the only appropriate subject for war game violence.
    • Why? Games like Battlefield 1942 have you fighting against low-level grunts who were poor Germans that were drafted into war as part of Hitler's plan. They weren't directly responsible for executing Jews (and if you are going to start indicting people for making uninformed decisions in a democracy, you're going to have a lot of people to go after) and towards the end of the war, were poorly outfitted and starving.

      And if you are happy to fight Nazis, why not fight against those responsible for genocide in Rw

      • Apparently you missed Indiana Jones (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        The were after the Ark! And their faces melted! God hates Nazis.
      • I wish you had expanded on your thought a little bit - I just don't understand why you limit games to just Nazis. There have been plenty of very cruel military regimes in the history of humankind (the Nazi party ranking right up there at the top) but I don't think that in comparison people like Stalin and Pol Pot are saints.

        I think there's an additional reason for going beyond Nazis, as well. In Germany, it's illegal to display any sort of Nazi symbolism, therefore games that utilize this symbolism to mak
        • On a related but slightly off-topic note: Isn't it great how the German government has banned all Nazi symbolism? In their attempt to prevent anyone from being a Nazi, THEY'RE BEING NAZIS!!

          I can just imagine some high ranking German politician saying, "This book is advocating Nazism! We must burn it!!"

      • Well, first of all, you need to understand that it is only okay to kill white people in games, or at least make sure whites are the majority body count. That rules out games about Pol Pot and the Rwandan murderers right there. And while Stalin is white and did kill a lot of people, they were not from any approved minority victim group, so his genocides do not count. That leaves Hitler as the only one you can make a game about.
      • Actually, it *was* the low-level grunts (and non-combatants) that formed the majority of the "police squads" who herded up Jews and killed them. About 1m Jews were killed in this way. See Daniel Goldstein's book "Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust."
        • Actually, if you read my post you would realize I was making reference to games where you are fighting on the front lines of the war (of which most games in the WWII vein fall) and those front line combatants were exactly as I described. Don't try to give me a history lesson because you didn't want to read what I was saying in context.

          How often in Battlefield 1942 do you shoot down non-combatants who are rounding up Jews?

          I realize that you're proud of the fact that you read a book but you don't need to brin

          • "...Actually, if you read my post you would realize I was making reference to games where you are fighting on the front lines of the war (of which most games in the WWII vein fall)..."

            What, are you kidding me? You're telling me that the majority of WWII games are FPSs where you're battling on the front line? I can count on one hand the number of games like BF1942 where you're only fighting against "soldiers." Are you completely missing the strategy genre? What about tactical games like Commandos 3 whe

            • I've never played Battlefield 1942.

              Compose a list of games themed around WW II. Then tally the number of enemies in those games and break down the percentages of enemies who are actively killing Jews and enemies who are merely combat troops. You will see that my original statement holds - in most WW II games you are fighting enemies who are not "non-combatants" as you brought up.

              If you are to respond to this, try not to nit pick but instead back up your original argument. And don't take such a rude tone - I

              • First of all, I'll thank you kindly to not tell me how to write.

                "I realize that you're proud of the fact that you read a book but you don't need to bring it up at every moment." I'm sorry, but apparently I'm not the only one being rude here.

                Anyway. I think we're talking at cross-roads here. You say that there aren't very many video games in which the player attacks Germans who kill Jews (or Poles, or Christians, or whatever). However, just because you don't actually see any of these ethnic/religious

        • What would of happened to any of those people that refused their duties? I do believe they would of faced severe if not life-threatening penalities. Calling average germans "willing" is disrespectful of their economic and social position we left them in after world war I. We punished germans but not jews in germany who were allowed to prosper and reign in much of the what was left of the middle class.

          If anyone is to blame for hitler and his policies it is not the german people, it is the american, fre

      • There have been plenty of very cruel military regimes in the history of humankind (the Nazi party ranking right up there at the top) but I don't think that in comparison people like Stalin and Pol Pot are saints.

        I agree that Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, etc. were terrible, evil men that deserved to die horrible deaths... the main difference between them and Hitler and the Nazis is that Hitler and the Nazis were certifiably the "bad guy" of WWII. There was no world-wide effort to oust Stalin, Lenin, or Pol Pot
    • How about killing the british boys that bombed dresden, oppenheimer and los alamos crew, and the british and american public who cheered on such bloodbaths?

  • There is no line (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Apreche ( 239272 ) on Tuesday October 21, 2003 @11:32AM (#7271054) Homepage Journal
    I say freedom all the way. If you want to make a game about something, no matter what it is, go right ahead. And if some sicko wants to play that game, that's fine too. If you dont' like it, you don't have to play it. And if you don't think your children should play it, don't let them. And until someone infringes upon my rights, they can do as they please. You know the saying about swinging fists and noses.

    If I made a flight sim where you try to hit buildings to score points, that's ok. If you think there's something wrong with that, then it's perfectly within your right to be that way. But you can't stop me from playing it or making it.

    That's the way it should be.

    • One title I would like to see (Score:4, Insightful)

      by missing000 ( 602285 ) on Tuesday October 21, 2003 @11:49AM (#7271313)
      World conquest through deception.

      You start out as a lowly president's kid, only endowed with a small oil company and a baseball team.
      The object of the game is to use deception and underground systems such as skull and bones [parascope.com] to achieve world domination.

      Pitfalls could include alcohol addiction [thesmokinggun.com], being bad at Political Science [yaledailynews.com], and getting caught lying to your country. [cnn.com]

      Your objective could be a success however if you just talk to the right people [diebold.com]

    • Re:There is no line (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I'd agree with you except for one point: real people should not be used as in-game characters without their permission. It's not a matter of taste or decency, but rather a question of whether you should be able to be secure in your person. If I was making a "kill the kiddy-fiddler" game, and just went out and took photos of people in the street to use as targets in the game, I'm sure they wouldn't be very pleased about it, and I don't think that is acceptable; people should have a right to be left alone.
      • There should be no line. I think that in many cases you should be free to make a game about real people, basically about those who already forsake a large chunk of their privacy. But the courts should have the right to force game developers to pay damages if using real people there was degrading, offensive and blah-blah-blah. Outright banning such games is wrong, because next thing you know books about real people will be outlawed... And then journalists will be required to get a permission from the person

    • I say freedom all the way.


      Until you see tastless games like, "Abortion by coathangar!" or "Rape that chick!"

      There's some behaviors you don't even want to demonstrate much less promote.

      • Re:There is no line (Score:3, Informative)

        by missing000 ( 602285 )
        Until you see tastless games like, "Abortion by coathangar!" or "Rape that chick!"

        Kind of like this? [classicgaming.com]

      • Re:There is no line (Score:3, Insightful)

        by cgranade ( 702534 )
        Until you see tastless games like, "Abortion by coathangar!" or "Rape that chick!"
        There's some behaviors you don't even want to demonstrate much less promote.
        That's nice. Now, who is going to decide where this line is? Who is going to say "this game is good, not that game." What about BMX XXX and GTA:VC? Are they too crude for you? More importantly, are they too crude for a censor? While it may sound all well and good to censor tastless games, it can be and often is a pitfall into a whole can of worms yo
        • If you agree with the censor, then that's it. If you don't, you ignore the censor and come up with your own rules for what your kids an dyou see. EOS.
          • By the very nature of a censor, however, you don't get the choice of ignoring them unless you want to be more strict than they are. You never get the choice to allow your kids (and yourself) to see something the censor doesn't allow.

            That's where the problem lies, not in what the censor lets get by, but rather in what the censor cuts. With a censor on-hand, GTA quickly becomes Crazy Taxi, and RtCW is set in a land populated by robots with most of the symbolism stripped, leaving a game that's decidedly simil

    • If you want to make a game about something, no matter what it is, go right ahead.

      Only to a point. There is a line, though, when it comes to violating certain laws. I don't think you'd have the "freedom" to create a kiddie pr0n game, which other paedophiles could download and play at their leisure. Sure you could do it, but law enforcement would be on its way pretty quick. Flying planes into a building, while certainly murderous, is in an entirely different category.

      • Only to a point. There is a line, though, when it comes to violating certain laws. I don't think you'd have the "freedom" to create a kiddie pr0n game, which other paedophiles could download and play at their leisure. Sure you could do it, but law enforcement would be on its way pretty quick. Flying planes into a building, while certainly murderous, is in an entirely different category.

        In many places you do have the freedom to create a kiddie porn game, as long as you don't use actual images/video of real

        • Many of the games that are fairly commonly available in Japan would be illegal to ship into many states of the US because of these types of laws.

          Perhaps I didn't fully explain my point. You're talking about the scenario in which a game is created in a place where certain preventative laws do not exist. It can't be shipped to certain areas because such laws do exist in other places. Obviously, acting in accordance with the existence/lack of laws within your area is acceptable. On the other hand, by vi

          • On the other hand, by violating laws within that area, you're crossing a line. Thus, AmericanSoftwareCompanyX couldn't release "Pre-teen Gangbang Extreme" alongside the latest Quake sequel.

            I realize that, but then I was trying to point out that the lines are very blurry in some areas, especially this one. In some states, it's perfectly legal for AmericanSoftwareCompanyX to release "Pre-teen Gangbang Extreme", although it may be placed under certain regulations as pornography. In other states, it may be pe
        • In Canada anti-child-porn laws cover any discussion of sex with minors. Of course, it would be really stretching it (no pun intended), but your post may qualify.

          And in the US the Supreme Court upheld the right of developers to make "Pre-teen Gangbang Extreme". It was ruled that a law banning virtual child porn is unconsitutional - porn is definitely speech, child porn is speech as well, and if nobody is direcly harmed (i.e. no real kids are used), the speech is protected. The strange thing is that there ar
  • If I was a programmer, I would create games where you try to kill the President or a game where you get points for each nun you rape. Why? Because it would offend people.

  • End of message.

  • love it or leave it; this is the way to maturity (Score:5, Interesting)

    by *weasel ( 174362 ) on Tuesday October 21, 2003 @12:04PM (#7271535)
    ...artistically.

    does anyone claim that steven spielberg shouldn't have made Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's list? Was he making light, or 'making a buck' on the idea of americans dying overseas, on the idea of jews being tortured and executed?

    yet everyone in the industry aknowledges that the way to grow gaming is to drive for more cinematic, more interactive, more film-like experiences.

    Games may very well be considered 'art' the way people consider film 'art' in 10 years.

    or, they can be relegated to childish whimsy like comics.

    Asking game developers to ignore certain topics, regardless of context, because they might offend someone is very much akin to the self-imposed 'Comic Code' of the 60s-80s. It nearly killed the industry as a legitimate artistic medium. Every american comic became trapped by the restrictive code and fell into a niche as a childish diversion.

    within the code american comic creators could only explore child-safe content as defined by the broadest possible american social definition of 'safe'.

    compare this with the evolution of anime in japan. Sure, we all make derisive remarks about 'tentacle porn' - but anime in japan is -accepted-. it isn't just for kids. the culture treats it on par with film or literature. why? precisely because only a certain subset of anime is devoted to children and child-safe topics (yu gi oh, pokemon, etc) - the larger segment covers mature subjects one might find in a TV drama or film (ghost in the shell, akira). american comics have no parallel (no mainstream parallel, though the underground is growing, but the social stigma will take time to erode). evern american animated movies suffer from this, and are relegated to insistance on 'child safe'.

    visceral emotional response is the key to allowing people to realize that games need not -only- be about mindlessly pulling a trigger. not that there is anything wrong with some twitch play - just as there is nothing wrong with shallow action flicks.

    a game simulating the Uday/Qusay vs USAF shootout would certainly have poor timing, if particularly identifying the subjects by name; but shouldn't be labelled in poor taste so because of its content, but rather depending upon its -context-.

    if the simulation of that situation was created to educate people about the difficulties and human life risk associated in breach/clear/capture operations against a fully dedicated opponent in an urban setting - that strikes me as possibly reasonable. if the purpose of the game is simply to allow people to pump round after round into from-the-headlines political figures, then that is certainly tasteless.

    notice it is the -gameplay-, the context, that indicates tastelessness. people always seem to forget to include context in their discussions of whether it is 'right' or not.

    here is where we decide people. are games to be forever treated as an interactive extension of film? or an interactive extension of american comics?

    (keep in mind i use 'art', and 'artistic' loosely to indicate mature expression, as in sculpture or painting - not to indicate it as being capital-A Art, being hoity toity or 'correct'.)

    • let's not pretend (Score:2, Insightful)

      by sbma44 ( 694130 )
      that there isn't a fundamental difference between videogames and the art forms that came before them. In virtually every non-abstract game (eg not Tetris) You control the actions of some sort of avatar. Movies, books, plays -- sure, you can and frequently do identify with the characters. But it's not guaranteed. If a character in a work of fiction does something detestable, you can just watch in amazement. I would suggest that it's not the same in a videogame. As Raskolnikov's plunge into insanity unf

      • Re:let's not pretend (Score:3, Insightful)

        by cgenman ( 325138 )
        but how many non-despicable rape-related manga are there?

        Mainstream manga explores the theme of rape as often as mainstreem American literature, often times written by women for women. To point out a popular example, The Wings of Honneamise featured a disturbing but mature look at rape as an aspect of hero worship.

        I agree with the fundamental precept that the "avatar effect" of gaming is very different from the "voyeur effect" of the written word. I disagree that this creates a fundamental disjunction
    • The vast majority of comic books sold in America in the last 15 years reflect a pre-pubescent fascination with big breasts, big guns and geek empowerment fantasies. For every Pulitzer winning "Maus" there are 10 X-Men titles.

      Same thing with games-- the female game character most recognizable to the public is Lara Croft, just as known as for the size of her breasts as for her skill with guns.
      • I don't know about you but I'm post-pubescent and I'm still fascinated with big breasts, big guns, and geek empowerment fantasies. Mmmm, big boobs...
      • ...and this is different from movies how? TV?

        Maybe comic books and games have a higher percentage of these things than other media, but a great deal of it is due to public perception. In part public perception is fueled by this, but it also perpetuates it, because games and comics that take themselves more seriously don't sell as well (because the more serious audience is less likely to gravitate towards the medium).

        It takes a great deal of time to overcome the public perception, and even at that point yo
      • which was exactly my point.

        because of the self-imposed prison that the brightest minds and the largest budgets in comic publishing put themselves in, the form stagnated. it features childlike morals and prepubescent attractions precisely because that is the only market left for it.

        If someone sees you pawing through Gaiman's work - they'll -still- derisively scoff at it as 'a comic book' on the same level as golden age Superman. And -that- is what i'm talking about.

        Right now, you can't convince a person
        • Right now, you can't convince a person that Metal Gear Solid 2 may have had the first postmodern storyline...

          Because even if you did believe that, it still wouldn't be the first example of that. :D And I would certainly argue that the same is true of film and novels - very few people, at least in America, would remotely pick up on what you were talking about. Americans (and probably most/all other nation's citizens) just don't really understand critical theory of any kind.
    • I haven't been reading comics for quite a few years, although I do still buy two series, PVP and Liberty Meadows.

      There was mature comics even a long time ago though. Don't you remember DC's Vertigo line? Titles like Sandman, Preacher, I remember in the back of some Sandman book, Death teaches you how to put on a condom using a banana to demonstrate. I think Marvel had a mature line too, don't recall the name but it had the mature book by Peter David called Sachs & Violens.

      Fast forward to today, imagin
  • how much time does it take for it to be politicially correct to use someone else's traumatic experiences as fodder for your entertainment? was Space Invaders written too soon after the incident at Roswell? ;P
  • http://newsgaming.com/ [newsgaming.com]

    So far they only have one game, but there will be more.

    I think the game itself is amusing whether you agree with the point or not. To me games (and programming) are art. Art should have no boundries. Some won't agree with me on that, some will, but that's even another reason I believe it. Because some will disagree and they're entitled to their opinion just as I am.

  • Oh no, the slippery slope fallacy (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 21, 2003 @12:41PM (#7271998)
    Sure, if content may potentially be disrespectful to somebody somewhere who probably needs a hobby, let's ban it out of hand. We'll start with Uday and Qusay. Well, after that comes the "we can't have anyone of X, Y or Z race as a hero or villain because it is racist and discrimnatory" argument... then comes the "we can't have violence because what of the children and their darling minds" argument... ditto sex, profanity and adult situations...

    So pretty soon the only game allowed is Mario Kart... oh no, wait, he's an offensive Italian stereotype and car crashes are violent... I mean Atari 2600 Combat... oh, no, that's offensive to the brave soldiers who flew pixellated bombers maintaining plausible deniability over Cambodia. Pong anyone? (If the paddles aren't too phallic for children, that is.)

    I would be interested in knowing how any actual soldiers -- not some Gamespy blowhard who can't do any better than slinging stereotypes of his own ("jackasses in Montana compounds") -- feels about his actions being emulated by thousands.

    Inappropriate and tacky? Bringing the hobby down to the level of tabloid newspapers? This IS the same Web site that ranked Duke Nukem 3D and Shadow Warrior among the best / most underrated games of all time, right? Did they ever play either of those? No, they weren't "ripped from today's headlines," but they're full of inappropriate and tacky subject matter -- as are a whole lot of games.
    • I don't think their aim was necessarily towards the crude nature of the subject matter. It was simply about real world matters in games. There have always been vulgar or low brow video games. That wasn't the issue, I don't think.

      I think it's pretty simple. Most people view video games as childish wastes of time. So the objection was having important world issues enter into a medium for childish, irresponsible, and careless behavior. From their argument it makes sense. To alot of people, games are not a leg
    • Generally I'm down with the total freedom of information principle. But it's interesting to think about the true extremes. Sim Holocaust, perhaps, where you try your hand at running a concentration camp. Serial Killer, where your object is to kidnap, defile, kill and eat innocent victims - don't accidentally kill them during the torture phase, you lose points!

      Consider the Matrix, both the movies and the game, which are pretty much straight up about anti-state terrorists. But the context tells you you'

      • Allright, and a quick update to say - so I read TFA and sure enough, the "con" guy is saying upfront he doesn't want such things banned - he specifically sites the Sim Concentration Camp idea, I guess it's a pretty obvious example, how embarassing). Just that he personally thinks it's not a good thing.
  • Somehow I doubt this game would be well-received...
  • It's a matter of taste. Some subjects in games, just strike me the wrong way. For example...

    I don't like "Beach Landing" games. I don't like it one bit. I believe that the fact that Normandy was made necessary to be one of the biggest failings of the West over the last centry. That all those lives were thrown away over politics...well...

    I don't like in MOHAA, I don't like it in UT, I don't like it in DoD. Hell, I don't even like it in Conkers Bad Fur Day. Not saying that they shouldn't make it..just that
    • This is off-topic, but you've made me currious. I've done some research on D-Day in the past (minimal, I admit) and, while it certainly cost a disgusting ammount of lives, most historians view it (or something like it) as something that was required to break Germany's back in Europe.

      Do you say "I believe that the fact that Normandy was made necessary to be one of the biggest failings of the West over the last centry," to mean that D-Day was the wrong decision at the time? Or that countries in and out of Eu
      • Without a Second Front in the West, Stalin would not have stopped until he hit the Atlantic. If he managed to beat a Germany that wasn't fighting a two-front war. We tied down a lot of German troops and planes in the West, forces that could ahve won (or forced a stalemate) in the East. Then where would we be ? Looking at a Europe dominated by Hitler's successors that's where.

        I'd like to know what the grandparent poster thinks we should have done instead. Coming up through Italy would have been much more ex
        • No argument there.

          What i'm saying, is that Hitler's march should have been stopped WAY before France. That "D-Day" should not have been necessary, because a beachhead should have been estabilished, to land troops and supplies.

          Maybe I'm incorrect, but all the same, it's how I feel about the subject, on an emotional basis
          • Ahh. Ok, that point was pretty.. indirect. I have to say that 1938 was the last chance. If you like, put all of WW2 on Chamberlain's tab. Or the French, a couple of rifle regiments in the Reinland and Hitlar would never have gotten started. It's no wonder Churchill drank like a fish, he was screaming preparedness for most of the interwar period and nobody listened until it was way too late. Then they gave him the job of saving the country. A lot of people here know what that can be like, with differences m
      • Actually, that's exactly how I feel. I feel that the US should have been involved before Pearl Harbour. (And they were, unoficially, see the story of the Dam Bursters, many of who were Americans).

        That they wern't...frankly I can't even think about it without tearing up.
        • I would argue that the isolationist movement in the USA was a direct result of the carnage and insanity of World War I. It didn't help that British and American propaganda from the period had been publicly exposed as being full of lies and fabrications. The problem was that World War II was not a repeat of World War I.
  • We should definitely pass asinine legislation to moderate this as quickly as possible. Kids are impressionable and their parents certainly can't be held responsible for what they buy for them.

    The only thing I would have to say in seriousness about this is design whatever you want, but expect some flack no matter what you do. Good taste is like yellow speed limit signs, you can ignore them, but it's not always the best idea.
  • If we make games about killing Nazis, the American kiddies will love it, Germans will get offended. If we make games about blowing up American monuments, the Americans will be offended, Saudis will love it. For some kids this is the only way they will find out about what is going on in the world.

  • What's the BFD? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Tuesday October 21, 2003 @04:30PM (#7274728) Homepage Journal
    " I believe that such 'ripped from the headlines' titles are disrespectful to the soldiers in combat and the issues involved"

    Funny, I think imitation was a form of flattery.

    I mean, seriously, what's so disrepectful about it? It raises awareness of what soldiers have done to protect our country. If anything, it helps us appreciate their work even more. So what if a game is made of it? Would they rather hear snoring as that event goes by in history class?
  • In the case of Uday and Qusay, I hope they include over a hundred U.S. troops using heavy weapons including 10 TOW missiles, attempting to kill (not capture and interrogate) 4 people in a house . The best part will be when they storm the building and kill a 14 year old child. I hope they include the large number of murdered and maimed civilians (infants, elderly, etc.)in every one of the military campaigns. Perhaps then people will realize that our escapades abroad do not have the glamour of a Quake styl
    • While we're at it, lets have hundreds of rioters attack the U.S. troops while armed with AK-47s claiming that the Americans are devils. Oh but we can't have females as part of the riot though since they can't be out in public while having their face's revealed. Oh and don't forget to have land mines in the middle of the street. Ooh ooh! And we can't forget having to dodge RPGs being fired from refugee camps!

      Yeah, right. 'glamour in of a Quake style shoot em'up'? Have you even PLAYED Quake? You can blow the

  • ...when little Greek kids were reenacting Homer for kicks. Have you read the Illiad?

    And let's not forget Titus Andronicus. They do some filthy things to each other in the name of theatre.

    Yeah. Let's just ignore what's in our genes. In fact, wouldn't it be great if we could come up with a law where chess players were legally obligated to draw every game, then go have a Coke and a smile.

  • Ender's Game? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Rand310 ( 264407 )
    Anyone read Ender's game?

    Give 50 million teenagers the new US Military game, where you launch a missile with a camera on its nose and tell them they get "points" for hitting targets...

    When does the game become real?

  • hmmm (Score:2)

    by Sj0 ( 472011 )
    Actually, my first response to this would be, bring it into the real world. Let the soldiers have real names and faces, and let your enemies, large and small, have the same. In this way, one of the most interesting feelings of war which I have ever been told about; that you're here to do a job, and they're here to do a job, and you don't nessessarily hold animousity towards them. I think something interesting and real could be brought to life if both your men and the enemy men were more than faceless drones

Slashdot Top Deals

"Buy land. They've stopped making it." -- Mark Twain

Close