Can video games ever be art?
Can Video Games Ever Be Art? If you ask famed movie critic Roger Ebert, the answer is a resounding no. Why not? Let’s take a moment to critique the critic’s latest blog.
Ebert argues “No one in or out of the field has ever been able to cite a game worthy of comparison with the great poets, filmmakers, novelists and poets. To which I could have added painters, composers, and so on, but my point is clear.”
Story Link: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/04/video_games_can_never_be_art.html
While this statement maybe true, it does not support his original argument – and that is “video games will never be art”. Before we continue, perhaps we should define just what “art” is. Not an easy task by any means, but one I will try to accomplish.
I think a logical place to being is Webster’s dictionary, which defines art as “the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects”. It’s hard to argue that video games don’t involve skill and creative imagination.
Amy Lowell describes art thusly, “Art is the desire of a man to express himself, to record the reactions of his personality to the world he lives in.” Let’s take a moment to reflect on this definition. Can one express and record one’s personality through the medium of a video game?
My response to that question is absolutely. Some of today’s finest artists ply their trade in a video game studio. Their expressions, their personality and their vision can be seen in the design of characters, vehicles and the creation of vivid and imaginative worlds. The programmers and writers also have a vision as to how the story will unfold, and how the player will interact with that story. The player is immersed in the expressions and personalities of a whole team of people.
Edgar Degas wrote that “art is not what you see, but what you make others see”. Is there any easier way to accomplish this than through the immersive world of a video game? I cannot think of a better way to make the view “see” what you wish them to experience.
Now let’s examine a few definitions that Ebert picked out himself. The first is “Plato, via Aristotle, believed art should be defined as the imitation of nature. Seneca and Cicero essentially agreed.”
To argue that a video game cannot imitate nature is simply absurd. Video games can render the natural world beautifully and vividly, especially with the rise of high-definition and 3D. It’s no wonder Ebert doesn’t dwell on this definition for very long.
Instead he quickly moves onto this definition: Wikipedia believes “Games are distinct from work, which is usually carried out for remuneration, and from art, which is more concerned with the expression of ideas… Key components of games are goals, rules, challenge, and interaction.” Ebert goes onto elaborate by saying “One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome. [One] might cite a immersive game without points or rules, but I would say then it ceases to be a game and becomes a representation of a story, a novel, a play, dance, a film. Those are things you cannot win; you can only experience them.”
We have established the video games can be expressive, have vision, personality and even imitate nature. However, the question at hand is do rules, points, objectives and an outcome void the artistic values of a video game?
Let us, for a moment, look at the example of the über-popularHalo series on the Xbox and Xbox 360 gaming platforms. The story is most definitely immersive, and there are no points to be collected. There are levels to be completed, but are those any different than the chapters of a novel? The only objective is to survive and fight another day. Does that not imitate life itself? The only rules are the ones that govern the world in which the game takes place (gravity, physics etc). This is no different the rules which govern our world. The eventual outcome is that after years of death and destruction, the war ends favourably. However, it is a pyrrhic victory. Does this differ at all from countless stories and movies?
Does this mean that one of the best selling “video games” of all-time, is in fact not a video game at all? Or can there be more to a video game experience than a simple set of rules and points that determine a win or loss? It is true that some games will simply be just that, the way that not all songs are considered fine art, or photographs, or paintings etc etc. However, some most definitely are.
If I may go an a bit of a tangent, our society is based on competition. There are countless awards and competitions set up for paintings, music, film, novels, poems, plays, musicals, and dances – the very things Ebert says one cannot “win” at. In fact, the Oscars are presented following the phrase “and the winner is”. Someday our society and humanity may change, and maybe at that time the nature of games will change with it, but I don’t see that day coming in my lifetime.
Ebert goes on to say “I tend to think of art as usually the creation of one artist. Yet a cathedral is the work of many, and is it not art? One could think of it as countless individual works of art unified by a common purpose. Is not a tribal dance an artwork, yet the collaboration of a community? Yes, but it reflects the work of individual choreographers. Everybody didn’t start dancing all at once. “
A video game is not different than a tribal dance, a great cathedral or a community mural. All of them are art, all of them involved the skilled talents of may artists, but like a video game someone artist had to have the original vision.
Ebert’s argument really begins to fall apart when he himself tries to define what art is or is not. “My notion is that it grows better the more it improves or alters nature through an passage through what we might call the artist’s soul, or vision. Countless artists have drawn countless nudes. They are all working from nature. Some of their paintings are masterpieces, most are very bad indeed. How do we tell the difference? We know. It is a matter, yes, of taste.”
Like nudes, there are bad video games, and there are good video games. There are some that lack vision and creativity, and those that with vision and soul. Games that draw you and make you go “wow”. There are games that communicate personality and meaning. There are games that alter the natural world, or that even create an entirely new, and beautiful world. I suppose the difference, like Ebert says, “is a matter, yes, of taste”.
One must only look to a recent art exhibit travelling across North America, Krazy! The delirious world of anime, comics, video games and art, to see that the artistic tastes of many people are changing to include popular culture.
Finally, Ebert rests his case on the pillars of a successful video game launch, which include Development, Finance, Publishing, Marketing, Education, and Executive Management. Yes, it all sounds very corporate.
However, there was once a time when the world of painting was very much the same. During Medieval and Enlightenment times the only source of art patronage was the wealthy ruling class, aristocracy and the church; therefore ones art had to suit their needs and demands. In 16th and 17th century France, art was almost exclusively the domain of the Salon – an exhibition organized by aristocrats and wealthy bourgeoisie patrons of the arts. Only art approved by the Académie royale de peinture et de sculpture was accepted. If one hoped to be a recognized and financially viable artist, one’s art had to meet those strict qualifications. It wasn’t until the rise of the Avant Garde that art began to take off in all sorts of creative and independent directions.
Ebert began his argument with this thought, “Perhaps it is foolish of me to say “never,” because never, as Rick Wakeman informs us, is a long, long time”. Foolish indeed Roger, foolish indeed. If Duchamp can question the very definition of art, and turn a urinal into fine sculpture, then surely the art of video games cannot be far behind. Perhaps Mr. Ebert should stick to critiquing film, a medium that he is familiar with.
Enter email