I've largely been disappointed by the coverage of D&D creator Gary Gygax. Ok, first I was impressed at how widespread and pervasive it was. But then disappointed because all the articles lacked depth. Usually Salon and Slate are good for that kind of thing, but on this subject they were pretty uninspired.
The Economist and New York Times came closest, but I felt let down.
I did like this line from the NYTimes: "For us, the character sheet and the rules for adventuring in an imaginary world became a manual for how people are put together. Life could be lived as a kind of vast, always-on role-playing campaign."
That totally was true. Growing up, I automatically worked up stats on people. i also grew up assuming everyone should have the same number of build points, so figured those with high str and dex must be low somewhere else. (That thought made me feel better about getting picked last in gym class). Only recently did I drop the idea that everyone is given the same endowment just allocated in different ways, though I still try to cling to it. Though now, it's more of a broader egalitarianism.
Plus, I totally dig the last Star Wars reference in the NYTimes.