While I’m not a gamer myself, I do appreciate and feel as though there is a great deal of artistic expression in games. From the design of new worlds to the conception of new characters, everything that goes into a game is some manifestation of another person’s imagination. And while the purpose of most games may be entertainment or “to win,” I don’t really see how combining creative and artistic processes to make something commercial makes it become less like art. The topic was debated in our readings this week, particularly in an article called “Video games can never be art” by Robert Ebert. And though I enjoyed the article and thought it made some accurate points, I’ll be honest in saying that the whole time I was reading it, I couldn’t help but think: Who really cares?
Some people call this art:
A screenshot from the video game "Flower."
And some people call this art:
One example of modern day "art."
And while I’m more inclined to say that the former is art, I think it really just boils down to how the individual defines art. Personally, I think art is something that displays careful thought or hard work, or something that brings about an emotional response. Maybe it was just that Ebert seemed a bit desperate to prove his point, or maybe it’s just that I missed it, but I’d always thought that art was supposed to be open to interpretation––something that an individual decides, not something that can be so easily defined. Isn’t one man’s trash another man’s treasure? Isn’t beauty in the eyes of the beholder? Instead I thought the other readings made a more compelling argument: How can gaming be used to change the world?
In an article about a game he created called Cow Clicker, Ian Bogost made a good point in speaking of the compulsion that digital life often brings forth. Personally, I am either checking Facebook (etc.) constantly for new updates or notifications, or choosing to abstain from social networking altogether. There is no in-between or happy medium for me. I have no self control. A video presentation by Jane McGonigal goes into far more detail about how this obsession with gaming can be used for good. Lastly, Rheingold’s article “Learning, Playing, Designing: Video Games in School” does a great job at explaining how gaming can help kids learn in school.
As a student and someone with a little bit of teaching experience myself, I can attest to the fact that most kids simply will not pay attention to material unless they find it relevant to themselves. Besides, you pick things up much quicker when they are fun. I remember struggling in fifth grade to learn how to type in my computer class. We were forced to type meaningless sentences on a screen with our hands under a covered keyboard, and I found it almost painful. The irony is that I picked up typing almost immediately a few weeks later after making an AIM account to instant message my friends. I remember being tricked into learning how to spell and count on interactive computer games as a child, too. Labeling something as “work” or a “lesson” immediately makes it unappealing. I think educators and the community at large could learn a lot from these articles.
