Home Help Search Members Register
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
Author Topic: Roger Ebert Is Hating On Games Again  (Read 25050 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
dmauro
Moderator
Posts: 915



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: April 19, 2010, 12:43:39 PM »

The general role yes, but not necessarily the only role. While I think this whole argument is pretty damn silly, it's almost just as silly to shoehorn video games in as a sub-category of games when it's clear that they often reach beyond what games are (hence the comparisons to film and literature).
Logged
dhex
Moderator
Posts: 863



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #16 on: April 19, 2010, 01:39:33 PM »

are tabletop rpgs art?
Logged
FortNinety
Administrator
Posts: 2269


FortNinety
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #17 on: April 19, 2010, 02:06:34 PM »

I think they can be, sure.
Logged
dmauro
Moderator
Posts: 915



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: April 19, 2010, 02:29:39 PM »

are tabletop rpgs art?
I wonder if pen and paper players ever get wrapped up in this one?
Logged
dhex
Moderator
Posts: 863



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #19 on: April 19, 2010, 03:01:16 PM »

that's actually a question i'm asking some folks on another forum who are more pnp oriented.
Logged
scratchmonkey
Posts: 90



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: April 19, 2010, 06:56:04 PM »

the disconnect, i think is that "art" means "important, meaningful, morally good" and whatnot to the audience

Or "legitimate form of entertainment".
Logged
Fitz
Posts: 236



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: April 20, 2010, 12:18:31 AM »

the disconnect, i think is that "art" means "important, meaningful, morally good" and whatnot to the audience

Or "legitimate form of entertainment".

Art in the High Art sense doesn't not necessitate entertainment value.

In fact many things considered to have legitimate entertainment value are not considered art.  Like sports, sex, chess, finger painting with toddlers, catching stacks of quarters off your elbow, etc. Their lack of being Art does not invalidate their entertainment value.
Logged
scratchmonkey
Posts: 90



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: April 20, 2010, 12:47:32 PM »

True, I should have shortened that to "legitimacy" because that's what's really in play.
Logged
Fitz
Posts: 236



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: April 20, 2010, 01:22:48 PM »

Who are you looking for "legitimacy" from?
Logged
scratchmonkey
Posts: 90



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: April 20, 2010, 01:43:14 PM »

Well, I'm not looking for legitimacy personally, nor am I really invested in video games on a personal level.

What I'm trying to say (and I blame my total of 7 hours of sleep over the last 72 hours for not doing it very well) is that the reaction to Ebert's article and others like it is because people personally invested in "gaming" desire a certain amount of cultural capital to be attached to their hobby and to have "gaming" have the same sort of "legitimacy" that's associated with more established/entrenched mediums, such as cinema.

So Ebert becomes important because he's exactly the kind of figure that bestows legitimacy by dint of being a kind of cultural arbitrator.
Logged
Fitz
Posts: 236



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: April 20, 2010, 02:52:04 PM »

I think the mistake that may be made is in the notion of legitimacy via Art. 

There's no way in hell that video games are going to find themselves adopted by the High Art establishment of galleries, dealers and buyers.  It is simply not going to happen due to the cultural framework that exists around those institutions. If you are unfamiliar with how these institutions operate there's a fantastic book titled High Art Down Home that was an Ethnographic study of how High Art operates.

If the goal is social respectability going the viable recreational activity route holds more merit than attempting to charge the Art World. The last niche entertainment form that attempted to storm the Art World, Comics, certainly didn't attain what they were looking for. Yet it has largely become a major source of entertainment with a few odd pieces edging into the Low and Middle Brow end of Art.
Logged
FortNinety
Administrator
Posts: 2269


FortNinety
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #26 on: April 20, 2010, 03:12:00 PM »

Maybe I shouldn't say anything since I haven't read the book in question, or maybe it doesn't matter: I think it's impossible to say whether or not High Art will adopt video games many years down the road. People's perceptions might change, as might the form itself in some unforeseen manner (besides, the definition of video games is itself hardly set in stone). Not saying it will, I just don't it's fair to say that video games will never be acknowledged as something else by someone, period, end of story. It might take a while, a LONG while, well after we're all dead, but could happen nonetheless.
Logged
scratchmonkey
Posts: 90



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2010, 03:18:17 PM »

Well, High Art has already pretty much accepted video games in the sense that there is interactive electronic art that gets shown in major galleries -- Electroplankton on the DS was in part made by a major Japanese installation artist.

You're just not going to see games intended for commercial release considered as High Art or interactive High Art regarded as "video games".
Logged
Fitz
Posts: 236



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: April 20, 2010, 08:56:09 PM »

You're just not going to see games intended for commercial release considered as High Art or interactive High Art regarded as "video games".

Right, the same with say Summer Block Busters and Art Films. They're different categories and will be treated differently by the Art establishment.
Logged
FortNinety
Administrator
Posts: 2269


FortNinety
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #29 on: April 20, 2010, 09:28:36 PM »

Well, I guess it's a concession to believe that some folks in art world will consider video games art, but not this High Art quotient. Can't win them all.

But then again, you have filmmakers who in their prime were producing shit, and many years later, they are heralded as innovators or whatever. Fuck, Lloyd Kauffman if I'm not mistaken is getting all sorts of respect from the film elite. Not everyone, mind you, but some. And I can see something similar happening with games as well. Again, like I keep saying, it's hard to tell in my opinion, and while certain patterns will dictate that a certain quotient will always act and behave a certain way, things also always change.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.9 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Reflection Theme by [cer]