Yesterday, I wrote about Vox Day’s extravagantly evasive — yet highly revealing — interview with David Pakman. But the interview also featured a few striking moments of candor. One of these came when Day — a sometime gave developer as well as the biggest asshole in Sci Fi — offered his answer to the question: “What is Gamergate really about?”
Suggesting that the issue of “corruption in game journalism” was little more than “the spark that set the whole thing off,” Day declared that
what Gamergate is fundamentally about is the right of people to design, develop and play games that they want to design, develop and play without being criticized for it.
Which is an. er, interesting perspective, as there is in fact no “right” to be immune from criticism.
If you write a book, if you make a movie, if you post a comment on the internet — you should be ready for it to be criticized. Because that’s how free speech works. That’s how art works. And that’s how ideas work.
Criticism — whether it is positive or negative — helps to sharpen ideas and make art less self-indulgent; it pushes creators to hone their craft and expand their vision of the world. And it helps the consumers of art not only to look at art with a more critical eye but also to appreciate it more fully, by helping to draw out the more subtle meanings of this art and to put it in a broader cultural (social, political) perspective.
Of course, neither the artists nor the consumers of art are required to listen to this criticism, but they have no right to demand that such criticism be eliminated.
But Vox is right in one sense: the elimination of criticism is in fact is what #Gamergate has been about all along — or at least the elimination of criticism aimed in their direction. Indeed, that’s what most #Gamergaters mean when they talk about fighting “corruption in game journalism” — shutting down those writers and publications that have dared to critique the prejudices of a backward portion of the gaming universe that is hostile to any challenges to the status quo ante — particularly from women with opinions different from theirs. That’s what drove the outrage over the “death of gamer” articles last Fall. And that’s what has driven “critics” of Anita Sarkeesian from the start.
Speaking of which: If you want to see how testy Gamergate types get when the criticism they lob at others gets turned back in their direction, even in jest, take a look at Jordan Owen’s new video responding to a post I wrote a few days ago gently mocking Owen’s recent plea for more money to fund The Sarkeesian Effect, the alleged “film” he and far-right Anton LaVey impersonator Davis Aurini are allegedly putting together.
Owen has devoted much of his life over the past several years to attacking Sarkeesian, a woman whose main “crimes” in the eyes of her detractors have been that 1) she raised more money than she asked for to produce a series of videos looking at sexist tropes in video games, and 2) that she’s taken longer than originally planned to put out these videos (which is largely because the extra money she raised has allowed her to research these videos more thoroughly and increase her production values, but never mind).
Yet Owen is outraged that anyone would even gently tweak him and his partner Aurini for going over budget and missing deadlines on their own film. Of course, Owen and Aurini are planning on charging their Patreon supporters more money at the end of the month unless these supporters specifically opt out; Sarkeesian herself never even requested any of the additional money she received.
In his video, Owen also compared me with Bill Donohue of the Catholic League which is, er, weird. But hey, it’s his right to criticize me, no matter how ineptly.
Here’s the video, if you’re interested. Alas, he did not film it in his famous bathtub.
Hey yo, Pelagic, there’s like this whole theory of literature where that author is dead and it is the reader that does the work.
I’m not making this up.
Yeah, I know what death of the author is. However, I feel that if there was literally zero authorial intent then the work is meaningless.
Games do not have stories? The Last of Us did not have a story? The Walking Dead, The Wolf Among Us, the Fallout games… no stories there? No storytelling involved?
Not all games have stories/focus on storytelling – sure. Games don’t have stories – have to disagree.
@ Scarletathena
Yup “Death of the author”
Issac Asimov used to relate a time that he’d sat in on a lecture about his own work. Afterwards he introduced himself to the lecturer and said that he found the lecturer’s interpretation of one story interesting but that wasn’t what the story was actually about.
The lecturer’s response was “Just because you wrote it, what makes you think you have the slightest idea what it’s about?”
I’d say advertisements can be art, and I’d consider pop music art, and that’s often created by a team rather than 1 artist. I don’t see how having a group work together on a project denies it the right to be called art. Art also doesn’t have to give clear answers, it can leave holes to be filled by the imagination.
Whether things are “high art” or “good art” is up to debate, but I think it’s rather silly to write off games as an art medium.
What’s your definition of what “is” art?
@Pelagic
Papo & Yo! YOU HAVE NO PLAYED PAPO & YO!
PLAY PAPO & YO AND THEN TELL ME GAMES ARE NOT ART! SDASDFJHAS!
Or, here, watch my fav Let’s Play of it at least.
“Games do not have stories. Games are written by committee, wherein the committee members play a long and elaborate game of telephone. The end result bears no resemblance to anything envisioned by individual writers. Silent Hill was used as an example, and it is often considered one of the frontrunners for good writing in games; however, how much of that was intentional? How much of that game’s story was just a fun coincidence, and the developers just decided to run with fans’ interpretations? How much was just things placed in the game because they seemed creepy?”
You can say that about a lot of movies, too. I guess all movies don’t have stories and aren’t art either with that logic.
@Pelagic,
If you’re trying to tell me that FFVII or Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time did not have a story, then we cannot and shall never be friends.
Oh boy. I’m going to have to get into this discussion here:
Okay, this is kind of vague, but let’s break this down piece by piece:
If it comes to art, it’s a matter of what direction the game wants to go. You don’t put unedited Hello Kitty-esque graphics in a horror game. There’s always a certain emotion that the artists want to convey, and they use art to do it. In Silent Hill, the colors are very washed out and gray, representing a feeling of hopelessness. The fog is to hide what lies in front of you and to give you a feeling of claustrophobia, even though you’re outside.
If it comes to story, there’s always a story that the creators want to tell. They could have unicorns suddenly appear with rainbows shooting out of their asses, but they have to ask themselves if that fits within their story, or if it suits some other purpose. For instance, in Silent Hill games, they have the UFO ending, which is a really off-the-wall kind of ending where aliens are somehow involved in what goes on in Silent Hill. It’s purpose is to serve as a “joke” ending to give the game a little levity since it deals with such heavy topics in the actual story, like evil cults, guilt, and the death of a loved one. It’s to give the game a little bit of a fun thing to look forward to beyond “death, violence, sex and death”.
If it comes to controls, it’s always a matter of what would work best for the platform you’re putting your game on. You don’t have extensive button mapping for a console game, because the controllers for console don’t have that many buttons, and it would be too cumbersome and illogical to map too many multiple functions to the same button.
TL;DR: Why things go into games is more than just “what’s cool”.
So, because games are sold for profit and has multiple “artists” (Which I don’t think you and I share a definition on) working on only a part of the game that appeals to a wide number of people that makes them not worthy of being art to you?
Are animated movies not art to you as well?
Actually, everything in Silent Hill was carefully planned. The story was left very open to interpretation, but had a definite answer when it came to the majority of it. Much of it was left to the player to discover and discuss with other players, which is why I love those games so much. It’s a great example of “show, don’t tell” that writers are often told to do. Everything in the games, from the cult elements to the elements of the monster design, was carefully researched, and given a reason for existing in the way it did.
If you paid attention and looked around, you would uncover the story for yourself, but there was always one answer to the story, no matter what you did to come to that conclusion. [Spoilers] In the case of Silent Hill, Harry was always manipulated by Dahlia to break Alessa’s seals around Silent Hill and release the cult’s demon god, and depending on what you did in the game, you’d see the consequences of your actions, whether that be that Harry leaves Silent Hill and takes a baby with him, or everyone else dies and Harry leaves by himself, or Harry was dead the entire time. But the only “true” ending is revealed by the third game to be that Harry got to leave with the baby. Whether it was with Sybil or not is up to debate.[/Spoilers]
At least, where Team Silent was concerned. As soon as the franchise came Stateside, it all kind of fell into “Let’s put Pyramid Head/multiple endings/fog in because the fans like it!” and “We’re Silent Hill fans who hated the tank controls, and we want to appeal to Halo fans, so we’re taking them out!”
I’d highly recommend you watch this, it’s a documentary about the making of Silent Hill 2.
Or maybe you just haven’t made the connections for yourself, and you’re projecting the blame for that onto the game for not being more upfront. I don’t know you, so I don’t know if that’s the case or not. Maybe you’re just misinterpreting it?
As someone who studied advertising design, yeah, I would. Would you not?
Also: Andy Warhol made art out of Mickey Mouse and the Paramount Logo. Just sayin’.
So glad to see you write off things like comic books as “not art” then.
Good idea.
As a whole, your argument seems very opinionated and comes down to your personal interpretations of what should and shouldn’t be art, based off your arbitrary standards.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but it does come off as being rather…elitist.
@Jackie: Cry’s voice is made of kittens, rainbows, and the laughter of children. : D
Srsly, you keep proving yourself to be more awesome than I had originally thought.
Something else is eating at me when it comes to the “Stories by committee” argument that Pelagic made:
Aren’t novels and the like looked over by editors? Publishers? Are changes not made to them? Wouldn’t that count as “stories by committee”? Does that mean that published novels are not “art”?
What about indie games with only one writer? Are they suddenly art because only one person worked on the writing? Or are they still not because that writing still had to be looked over by the rest of the group to make sure it was good?
Or what about indie games who only have one person working on them? Are they art because only one person put their time and effort into it?
Equality came in like a wreeecking baaall!
Fuck you’re ridiculous traditions. Doing something cruel and unjust for several generations doesn’t make it right.
I’ll grind the bones of your precious patriarchy to make my bread. Muhahahahaaaaa!
Is opera considered art if the music and the libretto are written by a team rather than 1 individuel? are paintings art if made for a market of art buyers? Is cake decoration art if you’re just gonna stuff your face with it without considering the thought and creativity that went into it?
@wlindseywheeler –
1. I am a woman who has been actively gaming since I was six. My dad started me on a game called “King’s Quest” and just for your information that game was co-written by a woman named Roberta Williams. She and her husband started a little company called Sierra. So your suggestion that gaming is all male and always has been is demonstrably false.
2. I find it interesting and telling that you have no problem with racism, sexism, and homophobia. I am guessing you are cis, hetero, white and male. I am sure that you being at the top of the social strata has nothing to do with your beliefs, right?
3. Critizing games or really any media does not mean that it shouldn’t exist. I have issues with how Saint’s Row treats women but I still enjoy playing it.
4. I wonder if the reason you are so angry about Anita Sarkessien’s criticism and other feminists like her is that she is making an impact. Gaming has become so large that there is room for a new kind of games. Also, some designers, writers, and companies have suggested they will try to be better about how they write female characters in future games. So it seems no matter how over the top your rhetoric is others feel that change is a positive.
5. On this one, I am the most confused. So you are saying that me critizing Vox is somehow slander and the same as demanding he end up destitute and the executed?!? NO. I could not disagree more with Vox so I will not be supporting him in any way but I would never insist on his death because we disagree.
In a lot of ways, I feel the same about both of you. I hope you live very long lives. I want to give you time to see that the end of -isms isn’t the end of the world. It is a wonderful change that gives every human being the ability to live long, happy, healthy, dignified, and fulfilling lives free from fear.
*your*
*sighs deeply*
@paradoxical intentions
Those are some points worth thinking about.
When you attend a play, the words, music and sets are not designed by one person.
Still art.
To push PI’s point further, is cinema art?
@Pelagic
But, seriously, check out Cry’s playthrough of Papo & Yo. At least the first few minutes of it.
The ending makes me cry, especially with Cry’s playthrough. :'<
Eh, Saint’s Row has issues with how it treats women, but honestly, it’s better than a lot of games considering that women are pretty much right up and center and get way better treatment and character development.
The shit treatment does come in the form of NPCs (and their treatment of sex worker NPCs), though I’d argue that they have it a little better in terms of diversity. There are female NPCs in lots of sizes, body types, and ethnicities.
Many of the main female characters like Shaundi and Kinzie are really well-rounded and don’t have very stereotypical “feminine” traits. Kinzie’s into really rough sex and is an extraordinary hacker, and Shaundi grew from being a relaxed stoner girl into someone who would be considered to be more “masculine” in her way of thinking because she’s very aggressive. (Though in Saint’s Row IV, she reconciled with herself and learned to accept her “other half” for the most part.)
As for the Main Character, you can be a female right off the bat, and you do have a wide variety of choice in your body type, skin color, and voice. You’re given a high position of power, and you can dress however you choose to.
Eh, sorry for the ramble. I really enjoy the Saint’s Row series because it is a little better in its treatment of women than say, GTA.
Oh, and you can be gay in Saint’s Row IV and have sex with your crew members of the same gender. Just throwin’ that out there too.
@Paradoxical
Thanks for the vid. I am totally not twitching at the sounds at the first few minutes at all.
Nope.
I’d say some games can be art, but not all games are art. Also, some commercials are totally art, while others? Nope.
It all comes down to how you define art. If you want a strict view, then a lot of art forms will get excluded. If you have an open view, there’s an awful lot of art out there.
Artists, just like the contrary sort they are, have often purposefully created art to defy both view-points. Because they can, the sneaky little weasels.
Ultimately, it just comes down to what you value.
Although, one thing I’ve learned is that it never goes well when you try to tell someone that something they find very meaningful isn’t art, or isn’t music, for the sole reason that they find it extraordinarily meaningful. Telling someone that something they derive meaning from is meaningless is kind of like smacking their metaphorical face.
@Paradoxical – You are right. I really have a ball when I play it too. I was thinking more of how Saint’s treats the nameless NPC women. I mentioned Saint’s because it does have women characters that I enjoy and still has some issues. And yes, Saint’s is at least 1000x better tan GTA IV.
*than not tan