THE END: The Story of My Paper

I started the research unit very enthusiastic about this digital/social approach to writing. I had heard reports from some students from last semester's class of their topics and research and was really excited to try my own. I already knew I wanted to do something with Shakespeare and games because I had been digging into the idea of games scholarship of any and all kinds the semester before. Games have always been a huge part of my life, even if I haven't always acknowledged it (no one you know owned a wider array of trading card games as I did--I promise), and I wanted all that time I spent playing games to amount to something interesting and intellectual. Ironically, however, I've played many, many more board and card games in my life than video games--my parents never allowed any video game console into my house until the winter I left for college, so the move to video games was a strange one for me. I figured, though, that in a way gave me an advantage because I could look at games more objectively and intellectually. I could more legitimately answer the question "Can video games be art?" because I hadn't already answered it for myself. I started looking around and found some interesting resources on Shakespeare possibly being a game designer were he alive today, and that helped narrow things down to just four possible paper topics.

The paper I ended up writing was, of course, really a mash-up of all four ideas. (Good thing I had ten pages.) I was pleasantly surprised to find out that other people were actually interested in this topic, and that there was plenty of material from Shakespeare's text itself to support such claims. As I kept looking, I found discussions actually happening about a topic I thought was extremely specific, which was very encouraging. The class really got involved in my paper, too, as I kept getting a lot of good responses on my posts, even when I was just musing. All of this really got me going, so by the time we had to do annotated bibliographies and find possible audiences, I already had tons of info--enough that I could easily pass some of it over to Britton in hopes that he could treat some stuff I didn't have time for but really interested me. By the time I did my first rough draft, my mind was racing all over the place because I had found so much information and so much interest.

That's when my paper took a difficult turn. I realized I was getting too much to say and too many angles on the topic that my paper just wouldn't be cohesive unless I cut. I went back to the primary text because I knew if I stuck close to The Tempest I could keep it tight. When I went back to do research again, I focused a lot more on specific arguments I had rather than general information on video games, art, and Shakespeare like I was doing before. The stuff I found in that round of research actually made up the bulk of my final paper because, thanks to the suggestions of others and some great feedback from author and game philosopher Chris Bateman (twice), I tightened up my paper significantly to be a discussion of the legitimacy of video games in our culture compared to the fight for legitimacy for English drama in Shakespeare's own day, which made for a good first full draft.

In discussions with Dr. Burton late in the game, I found out about the RMMLA conference and, luckily, they had a panel planned for this year's conference about games and new media that instantly became my number one choice for publishing. I got into contact with the panel chair and got enthusiastic responses from her because she was having a hard time getting the panel off the ground, so I was quickly accepted, though with the chance that I might not get to present because the panel might get canceled.

After getting accepted, though, I had to really make sure the paper turned out well, so after a final interview with Professor Burton I made some pretty big organizational changes and brought back a couple elements from my first draft and kicked out some from the full draft and finally submitted my finished paper. I'm still not sure what's going to happen, but I've been so inspired that I'm seriously considering starting a blog about the intersection of the humanities and video games, which I very well might do after this semester ends and I have some free time this summer. It's been a great ride--and it's not over yet.

Learning Came-outs

1. Gain Shakespeare Literacy 

I definitely came out of this class with a greater knowledge of Shakespeare, especially in several different reincarnations of his texts. Perhaps most importantly, I read plays I had never read/heard/seen before--specifically The Winter's Tale and King Lear, expanding my Shakespeare vocabulary and working knowledge significantly. I also understood more deeply plays I had experienced before, especially Henry V. After reading and seeing Henry V in London last summer, I thought I had a good understanding of the play, but after watching Kenneth Branagh's version, seeing the Children's Theater adaptation, and writing on the play myself, I saw much further into the play, especially the role and power of rhetoric both within and outside the play, as the play itself is an interesting work of rhetoric. I realized in London that the best way to experience Shakespeare was in performance, and so I was grateful that we got to watch several live and filmed performances, as well as read about and listen to others (listening wasn't required, I know, but I took advantage of the opportunity to try out a couple audio versions of the plays).

Specifically for my research project, I learned about Shakespeare's legacy in video games and Shakespeare's legacy in the debate of what "art" is. It was especially interesting to learn how society's views of Shakespeare have changed so drastically over the years, and how that has changed both the levels and types of performances his plays have been given. Shakespeare's legacy is perhaps the greatest of any artist not just because his own work was of such high quality, but because he has been the springboard for the work of others' of all ranges thanks to the original quality of his own work. 

All of this information has been buried deeper into my memory than it otherwise would have because I experienced/gained it all with other people--whether it was my wife, classmates, or random internet personalities, I will remember what I learned about Shakespeare much longer than what I learned in other classes this semester because so much of the information has specific people attached to it.

2. Analyze Shakespeare Critically 

I really enjoyed the opportunity not only to discuss Shakespeare's work from the text in class, but also analyze how his work has been adapted to stage, screen, and otherwise (I don't know what medium Sleep No More is supposed to be). I think because we discuss movies so often in our culture anyway, we were a lot more prepared as a class to discuss film adaptations of Shakespeare together than just the text itself, so I feel I learned a lot more from the films not just because they offered their own interpretation, but because discussion of those films was so easy in class. Walking the shelves of the library was (sadly) a new way for me to understand the history of Shakespeare. Just seeing the progression of books and scholarship of Shakespeare and watching the trends of the older books to the newer books was itself a study in contextual analysis as I could see the physical books and journals and feel the influence of that time period of the piece itself. It helped me look at Shakespeare from a broad range of cultures all at once, which invited all kinds of different theories quite naturally into my analyses. I really appreciated Prof. Burton's emphasis on a broad range of sources and people to discuss Shakespeare with because it helped me break into so many different interpretations so quickly, which gave me a freedom to really interpret Shakespeare how I wanted and felt was most important based on what had already been said.

3. Engage Shakespeare Creatively 

While we didn't do much traditional creative work with Shakespeare, I personally feel like my final paper on Shakespeare and video games displays some of the most creative thought of my college career, as far as creative means novel, innovative, and valuable to others. Also, the original sonnet I wrote--and especially the video I made to go with it--was the most satisfying traditionally creative pursuit of my semester, so this class really helped me win on both fronts, even if creativity wasn't a main emphasis. I think the reason for this is because I told more people about my ideas and solicited more help with my work in this class than any other class or project I've ever worked on, and as I worked with others my projects just kept getting better. 

4. Share Shakespeare Meaningfully 

Similar to what I said about creativity above, I feel like my projects for this class have been some of the most meaningful of my college career, again thanks in large part to my increased sharing and invitation for input. Because I felt free to go out on such a limb with my paper (let's be honest, how many professors would have really supported a paper on Shakespeare and video games? Sure, many might have said it was a good idea, but I don't think too many would have actually considered it appropriate, especially for an undergrad), I was naturally forced to dig more meaningfully into Shakespeare's work because the meaning was no longer obvious. The meaning of Shakespeare has already been so well mapped out again and again in the past in relation to so many subjects that I feel most students can just kind of skirt their way around the real meat of Shakespeare and what he means to our culture. By tackling a relatively original connection to Shakespeare, I had to ask a lot of old questions in new ways and really try and pull out my own answers--questions like "What is art?" and "What constitutes a profound experience?" So many people agree that Shakespeare already answered these questions that we almost forget to think about the questions and just gloss over them as old news. Taking Shakespeare into new realms allows us to re-ask those questions with a whole new vigor, and allowed me to rediscover much of the great meaning of Shakespeare for myself.

Additionally, not only did this happen once or twice as I worked on two formal projects, but kept happening as I kept having to write more and more and search for more new people to share my ideas with. I literally searched the whole spectrum of human intelligence to find answers to my questions--everything from the great Bard's words and highly-respected, peer-reviewed academic articles all the way down to the lowest comments on the dumbest blogs of the video game industry. Studying Shakespeare in class and online simultaneously felt something like it must have felt to see Shakespeare in the original Globe--with groundlings and royalty alike watching on in awe at one man's words.

5. Gain Digital Literacy 

I can quite honestly say my online world has shifted thanks to this class. Because the internet was validated for me as a source of legitimate information (as long as its wielded correctly), I dug deeper into the internet for answers to intellectual questions than ever before. I joined at least two new social networks for this class (Disqus and Reddit) and found several, several others to read and respond to regularly. I also actually started using my Twitter account, which I had only sort of used before for my job. Rather than see the internet as a place to escape life or wander around, the internet to me now is a place to really connect with real, good, intelligent people in ways that would never be possible before. I know better than ever how to mine the internet for great information, and also how to collect, store, and organize that information for future use and even new, creative material to be given back to the community in the form of Tweets, posts, and comments. It helps that I was looking for better ways to use the internet already, so when I was given the opportunity, I really tried to run with it, and I'm very grateful now.

All in all, I learned far above what I learn in the average class in this class, but not so much because of more material to cover or a more insistent professor, but because of wider information resources and more freedom to explore and connect with others on important questions.

Submitted and Accepted!...Sort of

I submitted my paper to the ScholarsArchive without problems.

I also submitted to the Rocky Mountain MLA, as I've reported earlier. I paid my membership fee (it was only $25) so that the panel chair could submit my name as a presenter. I'm in this weird limbo state, though, because I'm still not sure if it's actually happening because the panel might get cancelled due to lack of submissions. And there's the issue of funding, but I can't really work on that until it's confirmed that I'm actually going. Here's to hoping it all works out.

I submitted to the panel "Games, New Media and Virtual Spaces: At play in new media," found under "Special Topics" here.

Just to save the jump, here's my abstract I submitted:

"Such Stuff as Dreams are Made On": Shakespeare and the Cultural Legitimacy of Video Games

For years now, the debate has raged over "video games as art." While the medium has taken several steps forward and we now have many strong examples of artistic games, they still have not achieved the sense of legitimacy our culture gives to anything considered "art." In many ways, video games are fighting the same battle that English drama fought in Renaissance England, a battle chiefly won by William Shakespeare.  The video game industry is currently in much the same state that English drama was in when Shakespeare entered the scene, and game designers could learn much from his example, as he arguably innovated a new medium as much as he achieved anything else.

Part of Shakespeare’s success depended on looking backward to bring already culturally important stories to the stage in order to prove that this new medium could be a vehicle for powerful art. I will argue that in order for video games to win cultural legitimacy they must prove they can do the same, and this paper specifically includes ways in which a video game adaptation of The Tempest could help expand scholarship of Shakespeare's text and exploit some of the unique mechanics of the video game medium to create a new and excellent artistic experience. This is experience would be beneficial to both Shakespeare and video game scholars, but also to students, inviting naturally the kind of engagement that teachers so often struggle to produce. While video games may not yet have their “Shakespeare,” such a legitimizing influence can and will come soon to the video game medium, and, someday, sitting and playing through a video game can and will be seen as a cultural experience and not just a waste of time.

Here's hopin'!

Paul Bills: "'Such Stuff as Dreams Are Made On': Shakespeare and the Cultural Legitimacy of Video Games"

Paul Bills: "'Such Stuff As Dreams Are Made On': Shakespeare and the Cultural Legitimacy of Video Games"

In many ways, video games are fighting the same battle for cultural legitimacy that English drama fought in Renaissance England, a battle chiefly won by William Shakespeare.  The video game industry is currently in much the same state that English drama was in when Shakespeare entered the scene, and game designers could learn much from his example, as he arguably innovated a new medium as much as he achieved anything else.  Part of Shakespeare’s success depended on looking backward to bring already culturally important stories to the stage in order to prove that this new medium could be a vehicle for powerful art. I will argue that in order for video games to win cultural legitimacy they must prove they can do the same, and this paper specifically includes ways in which a video game adaptation of The Tempest could help expand scholarship of Shakespeare's text and exploit some of the unique mechanics of the video game medium to create a new and excellent artistic experience.

More than Fun: Where this Gaming Paper Has Gone

They want it.

Thanks to Dr. Burton, I found the RMMLA last week: the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association. Their annual conference this year includes a panel called "Games, New Media and Virtual Spaces: At play in new media." Just to try, really, I sent the panel chair an email to ask if I could still submit. She responded very quickly, telling me she would love to see my paper and she's been trying really hard to get this panel off the ground but no one else had submitted yet. So, kind of freaking out, I found Dr. Burton and asked his advice on how to write an abstract. Within a few hours, I had my abstract typed up:

Logo for the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association

"Such Stuff as Dreams are Made On": Shakespeare and the Cultural Legitimacy of Video Games

For years now, the debate has raged over "video games as art." While the medium has taken several steps forward and we now have many strong examples of artistic games, they still have not achieved the sense of legitimacy our culture gives to anything considered "art." In many ways, video games are fighting the same battle that English drama fought in Renaissance England, a battle chiefly won by William Shakespeare.  The video game industry is currently in much the same state that English drama was in when Shakespeare entered the scene, and game designers could learn much from his example, as he arguably innovated a new medium as much as he achieved anything else. 

Part of Shakespeare’s success depended on looking backward to bring already culturally important stories to the stage in order to prove that this new medium could be a vehicle for powerful art. I will argue that in order for video games to win cultural legitimacy they must prove they can do the same, and this paper specifically includes ways in which a video game adaptation of The Tempest could help expand scholarship of Shakespeare's text and exploit some of the unique mechanics of the video game medium to create a new and excellent artistic experience. This is experience would be beneficial to both Shakespeare and video game scholars, but also to students, inviting naturally the kind of engagement that teachers so often struggle to produce. While video games may not yet have their “Shakespeare,” such a legitimizing influence can and will come soon to the video game medium, and, someday, sitting and playing through a video game can and will be seen as a cultural experience and not just a waste of time.

Today, she responded again and told me she loved the abstract and would submit my name to the conference as a presenter. She added, however, that they can't run with just one presenter on a panel, so there's still a chance that it could get cancelled, but as far as acceptance for my paper, it's there.

However, that means I've gotta actually get this thing done and awesome enough to prove why an undergrad is speaking at this professional conference. And as so many posts have proven this week, I've got work to do.

Mostly, I know I need to pin down my organization. I'm making so many points that it's hard to build them right. Also, I need to keep a scholarly tone--but still make sure my point comes across clearly and powerfully. I need to bring my thesis in sooner and make the connection to Shakespeare make more sense as well. I'm confident I can make it. It's very possible I've received more feedback on this paper than any paper I've ever written, which gives me all the more hope that it can hold its own at an actual academic conference.

Thanks again to everyone for their feedback and support. Best of luck to us all and all our great ideas and efforts!

Bailey's Draft is Real

I read a little about Bailey's paper at the start of the unit, but I haven't read/heard much of her stuff as it's developed. However, when I saw her full draft posted I was really excited to see where she'd gone with it.

I felt kind of bad when I found out she was waiting for a book that talked about how Shakespeare's theater was viewed in his own day from inter-library loan when I have three piled by my bed right now. Bailey--if you want, you can steal from my draft some of the stuff from those books!

Bailey's intro was great. I loved reading the numbers of viewers for popular reality show and the way she set up the argument--smart, but conversational at the same time.

I do think Bailey will have to be careful to not look like she's trying to say reality TV is as good as Shakespearean drama. I know she's not trying to say that, but anywhere she tries to get it published that isn't a reality TV blog will blow up instantly if its not very clear that she means, like she says, that reality TV is a "derivative" of Shakespearean theater. I do agree with that claim. Shakespeare is often hailed as creating "real" characters who at times act as crazy as "real" people in reality TV. There's something there.

I can't wait to see Bailey's paper come to full fruition. It's a great idea and I love it.

I Like What Rachel Writes

I read through Rachel's paper and was really intrigued. I especially loved the following sentence:

In reality, this rejection of the romance of The Winter’s Tale is predicated on an inability to recognize that the romantic elements of the play—its mixture of genres and supernatural elements—are in fact what makes it realistic.

This is an awesome thesis, though I will admit I get a little lost in its twists, it makes senses if you think about it for just a second. I'm not sure if there's a way to make this clearer, but in any case, I like it a lot.

I also found Rachel's use of secondary sources excellent. The way she incorporated her correspondence with Dr. Young and his personal experience from the classroom had the nice effect of bringing a personal anecdote into the paper without losing its academic register.

One thing that I could see Rachel could improve about her paper is her transitions. I'm pretty sure she's already planning on improving this in her next draft as she had the sections numbered, but I think it'll be a key component to the overall quality of the final draft, so I wanted to draw her attention to it.

I've kind of watched/heard Rachel's idea develop over the past few weeks and I really like where she's gone with it. Great work, Rachel.

Full Draft: "Such Stuff as Dreams are Made On": Shakespeare and the Cultural Legitimacy of Video Games

I don't know why it chose to do some double-spacing and some single, but in any case, here it is!

Paul Bills

Dr. Gideon Burton

English 382

22 March 2013

“Such Stuff as Dreams are Made On”: Shakespeare and the Cultural Legitimacy of Video Games

            For several years, the debate has raged over “video games as art.” Roger Ebert, the acclaimed film critic, famously declared on his blog for the Chicago Sun-Times that “in principle video games cannot be art” (“Video games” 2010, emphasis in original). Ebert ranked up 4,936 comments from readers responding to this post, the overwhelming majority “united in opposition” against him (“Play” 2010). For many, video games won the battle in 2011 when the US Supreme Court overturned a California law banning violent video games, with Justice Scalia writing for the majority that “like the protected books, plays, and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas—and even social messages—through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot, and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player's interaction with the virtual world)” (Sutter 2011). Despite the Supreme Court ruling, however the debate rages on.

In addition to expressing “social messages” and expressing ideas, video games have already shown that they can certainly move people as much as any art—again, like Justice Scalia said, “through features distinctive to the medium.” Some of the most talked-about games in this debate recently include Fumito Ueda’s Ico and Shadow of the Colossus, Thatgamecompany’s Journey, Irrational Games’s Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite, and Valve’s Portal and Portal 2. All of these games do new and powerful things with the interactivity of their medium to enhance the emotional effects of the story. In Ico, the player controls a boy who tries to get himself and a girl out of a castle safely. The main action of the game is to reach out and grab the girl’s hand to take her along. The act of deciding when and why to do this each time is an emotional experience within the game that could not be experienced in the same way in another medium. Chris Suellentrop writes “My first time doing it gave me goosebumps: I am with her. I am not alone” (2011). Journey’s artwork is highly stylized and the musical score was the first ever from a video game to be nominated for a Grammy. Matt Miller writes “Each time [I played Journey], without fail, individual moments (particularly the final level) managed to give me goosebumps, and those moments have remained on my mind for weeks afterward” (2012). Adam Sessler said of Bioshock Infinite’s story and world, “It only can work as a game. The unique agency and complicity of the player in the game's narrative is part of its commentary. This isn't a game filled with player choice. But it is the best game about the choices we make as a person and a people, their consequences, and their uncertainty of absolution..." (2013). Even the much-debated “Citizen Kane moment” question, the assertion that video games do not yet have a work that defines the medium like Orson Welles’s 1941 masterpiece did for film, may now be closed. As one reviewer put it: “So, when will gaming have its Citizen Kane moment? Forget that. When will anything else have its BioShock Infinite moment?” (Games^TM 2013).

Most surprisingly, one game even saved a boy’s life. Draven Miltenberger played the old versions of the popular game Tomb Raider growing up, before abuse, abandonment, and other family problems sent him on a depressive downward spiral. He considered thoughts of suicide after dropping out of high school—until he heard about the new Tomb Raider game released this year. He waited anxiously and got the game as soon as it came out. In the game, when the protagonist Lara Croft performs her first kill, she breaks down crying at the shock of it before shaking it off and getting up to carry on. As Draven watched this, he realized something about his own life. “Just because life had started off with a wreck doesn't mean I wouldn't survive it,” he said (Hernandez). All of these powerful emotional reactions came from the way the player interacted with the story, and would not have been as powerful had that interaction been cut off by presenting the story through some other medium.

            In a follow-up reconciliation post, Ebert conceded he was wrong to judge video games without ever playing them himself, but maintained that he believed in principle and theory it just didn’t work for video games. Interestingly, he cited a conversation with filmmaker and game auteur Clive Barker where they ran into discussing Romeo and Juliet. “Sooner [or] later,” he writes on his blog, “these arguments all get around to Shakespeare, and have a way of running aground on him” (“Play” 2010). While Shakespeare has gained status as a sort of patron saint of “art” in our culture, he didn’t always enjoy that privilege. In his own time, the Bard wrote in a medium dismissed as mere spectacle and show much like video games now. Shakespeare himself, I will argue, would go beyond the “art” argument and instead just show how video games can explore themes, emotions, and topics at least as well as any other medium, and for that reason they should be as culturally legitimate as any other form of expression. I will then show how The Tempest—Shakespeare’s final, fantastic work about a self-made sorcerer living in exile and seeking revenge—could better be explored and studied if it were developed as a video game.

            Video games are fighting much the same battle today that theater itself was fighting in Shakespeare’s day. Shakespeare’s theater in his own time was literally not much removed from such cheap entertainments as bear baiting, thus Shakespeare’s famous stage direction from The Winter’s Tale: “Exit, pursued by a bear” (3.3). Just like those concerned California parents who wanted to ban video games, in Shakespeare’s time civic officials often petitioned the royal council to abolish drama altogether, causing Shakespeare and other dramatists to build their theaters outside the jurisdiction of London itself (“Theater” xxxv). Similar to video games’ enemies today, drama’s opponents in Shakespeare’s day objected to plays on both moral and academic levels. Stephen Gosson wrote in 1579 a lament on the destruction of England’s dignity by way of plays. He argued that Ovid’s theater “chargeth his pilgrims to creep close to the Saints whom they serve” but in the theaters of his London he saw only “such heaving and showing, such itching and shouldering to sit by women …[and about a half page more of other examples] that it is a right comedy to mark their behaviour” (Harrison 133). In Sir Philip Sidney’s “Apology for Poetry” he claimed that “our tragedies and comedies (not without cause cried out against), observ[e]…rules neither of honest civility nor of skillful poetry” (Harrison 134). In Sidney’s view in 1580, only one English play could claim status as true tragedy—Gorboduc, the earliest known tragedy in the English language written by Thomas Sackville and Thomas Norton around 1560. While we revere Shakespeare in our time perhaps more than any other playwright in history, Shakespeare wrote those same plays we now know and love in an intellectual warzone.

            Shakespeare himself complicates the debate about “art” in The Tempest. Look how Shakespeare plays with several definitions of art in the following lines from Act 1, Scene 2:

my daughter, who

Art ignorant of what thou art,...

Lie there, my art. Wipe thou thine eyes; have comfort.

The direful spectacle of the wreck, which touch'd

The very virtue of compassion in thee,

I have with such provision in mine art

So safely ordered that there is no soul—

No, not so much perdition as an hair

Betid to any creature in the vessel

Which thou heard'st cry, which thou saw'st sink. (20-21, 31-39)

            The word art is used ten times in this single scene, and never with the typical definition of creative expression. Indeed, “art” as we think of it today wasn’t totally solidified as a concept until Immanuel Kant and other thinkers defined it in the 18^th century, and Shakespeare obviously played with the many meanings it carried in his time here. From my reading, in the lines above, Shakespeare uses three different definitions for art: (1) art as in "are" ("thou art"), (2) art as in witchcraft or power ("in mine art"), and an interestingly metaphorical use referring, perhaps, to our standard expression "art," but meaning more literally, "creation" or "product" ("lie there, my art"). Later in the same scene, we even have Prospero say he was well versed in the "liberal arts" (1.2.91), yet another definition of art not quite the traditional definition.

In the rest of The Tempest, the word art keeps popping up, with at least two more additional definitions. In Act 4, we get perhaps the closest to today’s typical definition of art: “for I must / Bestow upon the eyes of this young couple / Some vanity of mine art: it is my promise, / And they expect it from me” (4.1.42-44). Shakespeare uses art here in the same way as definition (2) above, but adding to it the idea of “vanity” gives the sense of aesthetics that we know attach to the term. Finally, the word art is used in a totally new way in the play’s epilogue: “Now I want / Spirits to enforce, art to enchant, / And my ending is despair, / Unless I be relieved by prayer,” (5.1.13-16).  Here again, the definition of art is related to definition (2) above, but now means more directly "ability" or "capability." Shakespeare knew well the debate surrounding his own works and his medium, and while he may not have been directly commenting on this debate by blurring the definition of art so purposely in The Tempest, it is interesting that the very word we’ve attached such value to and labeled his works with so often is a word he purposely exploited for its varied and inconsistent definitions. If Shakespeare could add his voice to the current debate surrounding video games as art, he just might ignore the word art completely because he knew well the risks of the word.

            The debate, then, is not really about art, but perhaps more about a sense of cultural legitimacy. Roger Ebert doesn’t think video games can be art because he doesn’t believe an author can connect with an audience on the same emotional and intellectual level as that same author could by means of novels, theater, or film (“Video games” 2010). No matter people’s personal opinions, our culture agrees with Ebert. We see this based on simple reactions to video games today. Parents the world over lament the amount of time their kids spend playing video games, yet those same parents would praise a child for reading books for the same amount of time, in neither case paying much attention to the quality of the pieces their children engage with, only the medium. Additionally, if those same children read Shakespeare for the same hours they played video games, their parents would tout it to the whole world, lauding their children’s intelligence and maturity. What many don’t know and others too easily forget, though, is that young people attending English plays in Shakespeare’s own day were considered worse off than our gamers of today. Gosson wrote that “the common people which resorte to Theatres [were] but an assemblie of Tailors, Tinkers, Cordwayners, Saylers, olde Men, yong Men, Women, Boyes, Girles, and such like” and felt that, in Andrew Gurr’s words, people “needed protection from corrupting experiences like playgoing” (Gurr 145). What everyone regards now as beautiful and cultural was then ugly trash. The people that made up Shakespeare’s earliest audiences were, effectively, the 35-year-old parental basement gamers of their day.

Shakespeare fought for his medium’s legitimacy and won, but not on his own nor even in his own lifetime. Going to a Shakespeare play now lends to the audience a sense of culture, intellect, and worth—but it once meant all the opposite. Thanks not just to the extreme popularity of Shakespeare’s play (though that certainly helped), but also to the proliferation of printed versions of the plays and other written works, a culture of criticism and intellectual review rose around English drama that ultimately legitimized the medium. As the culture rose up around Shakespeare, his plays rose up as “art” as well, even though the texts themselves remained essentially the same. Shakespeare’s works were always “art,” but they weren’t always viewed that way, and the sense of cultural legitimacy that they won is what we really refer to when we say now that Shakespeare is great art. The fight for video games as art, then, isn’t really about whether or not the medium fits the definition of art, but whether or not sitting and playing a video game is viewed as a dangerous waste of time or a legitimate cultural experience.

Shakespeare found a powerful weapon to legitimize his theater in looking backward—in harkening back to classical tragedy, medieval history, and other stories already deemed culturally important. When Shakespeare proved that theatre could tackle politics, religion, revenge, love, and all the themes so important to the stories and mediums of the past, the argument for English drama was all but won. Video games could take a page from Shakespeare’s book here, as it were, and in some ways already have. In 2010, EA Games released a video game adaptation of The Divine Comedy entitled Dante’s Inferno. This marked the first major attempt to adapt great literature to video games—others had been done, but none funded as well or marketed as widely as this. The game’s reception was lukewarm, however, from both the literary and the gamer ends, due largely to the conflict between making a game that would sell to the current market and making a game that could do justice to Dante’s masterpiece. Games have taken several strides to release themselves from the need for non-stop slashing and bashing that doomed Dante’s Inferno, however, and the next attempt to adapt great literature to a game will benefit from the strides the game did make—if nothing else, the precedent of game adaptations.

Jonathan Knight, the executive producer of Dante’s Inferno, said in an interview when asked about how Shakespeare would react to the gaming industry, “Shakespeare would have been on the forefront. He was an innovator and not just a great story-teller. Arguably, he’s more of a medium innovator” (Brophy-Warren 2010). Knight makes a valid point here. All scholars (and most students) realize that Shakespeare wrote very few original plots (The Tempest excepted, perhaps) and mostly just converted stories from other mediums to the stage, or even from other stage productions to his own. Knight specifically sites Hamlet, but King Lear, Romeo and Juliet, Othello, and several others also have very clear source material—not to mention all of the history plays. Shakespeare’s genius was not in plot, but style and innovation. Shakespeare’s plays, if we care to saw it this way, were the Citizen Kane of English drama, proving what could be done with the medium and cementing their place in cultural history as great art. Therefore, if we take his track record as any pattern, it is not difficult to believe that Shakespeare would indeed be innovating with the newest medium of our own day that is commonly seen as base and crass—specifically, video games.

            Apart from his pattern of innovation, the very themes he dealt with lend themselves to video games better than other mediums. Most of Shakespeare’s plots—and certainly his most famous plots—center around a single, strong character’s crucial decisions in crucial moments. King Lear’s reaction to his daughters, Hamlet’s reaction to his father’s ghost, Othello’s reaction to Iago’s words, Romeo’s reaction to Juliet’s beauty—the plots of every play hinge on these important choices, and all their choices lead to the ultimate tragedy of each. The Tempest’s Propsero takes this principle even further as he has more power than perhaps any other Shakespeare character thanks to his magical powers and his control of the spirit Ariel. Prospero essentially crafts his own entire plot through his magic, leading his family and friends through the island in a veritable maze, guiding them step by step to their final decisions and his own eventual relinquishment of power. The art and emotion of Shakespeare’s stories comes from the audience identifying with these central characters and wrestling in their own heart with the choices these characters face—then, ultimately, coming to understand and sympathize with the character’s decision despite the tragedy it caused. Video games are better equipped than any other medium to take on this theme of choice and consequence because they can literally put that choice in the hands of the audience like no other medium can.

            Consider, for instance, the ways the following aspects of  The Tempest could be powerfully recast in a video game version of the play:

First, Caliban and Prospero’s relationship. "All the charms / Of Sycorax, toads, beetles, bats, light on you!” Caliban curses on Prospero, “For I am all the subjects that you have, / Which first was mine own king: and here you sty me / In this hard rock, whiles you do keep from me / The rest o' the island” (1.2.406-411). Prospero gained his power after reaching the island—we're not sure how long it took him. However, at some point he had to decide to enslave Caliban and the spirits of the island. Many have connected Caliban with natives that Europeans enslaved upon reaching the New World, bringing up themes of power, abuse, and slavery. An RPG/Adventure game of The Tempest could extend this theme interestingly with game mechanics. The game could be designed as such that the player knows he/she can enslave Caliban, but may not want to morally and so consider that maybe they could get by without him. However, inevitably, the player could be forced to realize that he/she has to enslave Caliban to carry on. This in turn brings a new interpretation to the play itself and the character of Prospero. Prospero has often been interpreted as angry and domineering, but as players play the game version set up like this, it could open a new interpretation of a Prospero turning to his powers to survive as he tries to rebuild his life after exile. Alternatively, players could decide that Prospero is angry and domineering, and enslave Caliban as soon as they learn how to from Prospero’s books. Thus, interpretations of the play itself could become part of the game, and players would naturally reflect on the implications of these decisions without having to be prompted to by a teacher.

Second, the Trinculo and Stephano subplot. Following in the tradition of interactive productions of Shakespeare such as Punchdrunk’s Sleep No More, and even first-person video games like Bioshock, this subplot could be hidden within the game world, never forced upon the player, but rather something to be sought out and discovered. As Ken Levine, creative director for the Bioshock series said, “When people find stuff, they feel like it’s theirs” (NPR). Letting the player find this subplot while navigating through the island in pursuit of the main movement of the narrative would naturally open up more interest in these characters, and could realize the same power this subplot was meant to have on the stage—comedic relief and absurdity, but also plot depth and range of perspective. These subplot moments could even introduce absurd mini-games (“Untangle Trinculo and Caliban!” for example) to draw out the comedic elements in a way that might be missed by an inexperienced reader trudging through the text of the play.

Third, Prospero’s final speech and the theme of vision v. reality. Some moments of The Tempest seem more relevant to a gamer community than any other group of people in human history. Prospero’s speech in act 4, for instance, seems almost directed at gamers: “And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, / The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces, / The solemn temples, the great globe itself, / Ye all which it inherit, shall dissolve / And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, / Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff / As dreams are made on, and our little life / Is rounded with a sleep” (4.1.168-175). This comes in direct response to Ferdinand’s wish: “Let me live here ever. / So rare a wondered father and a wise / Makes this place paradise,” a wish surely shared by many a gamer toward their own game worlds (4.1.137-139). A player controlling Prospero and choosing to stop the visions before hearing Prospero give those words would naturally ponder deeper on their meaning, especially if the “visions” were done with the powerful and beautiful aesthetics modern games are capable of.

This theme could reach a level deeper than even any stage production ever has at the end of the game, after Prospero’s final speech. “Now my charms are all o'erthrown,” Prospero tells the audience, “And what strength I have's mine own, / Which is most faint: now, 'tis true, / I must be here confined by you, / Or sent to Naples. Let me not, / Since I have my dukedom got / And pardon'd the deceiver, dwell / In this bare island by your spell; / But release me from my bands / With the help of your good hands.” (Epilogue.1-10). Having played the game as Prospero in first person, the end of the game could suddenly shift to third-person for the player, and Prospero could speak directly at the player. The game could be programmed as such that the only way to progress to the game’s close and “win” is to answer Prospero’s request and “release” him by turning off the game controller. After some time of great confusion and even frustration before discovering this, the moment would surely stick in the player’s mind long after turning of the TV and leaving the game. The same point Shakespeare made with these lines about the difference between fantasy and reality and the need for both, and especially the need to understand the limits of both would be made in a powerful, emotionally charged way that requires the player to physically and literally fulfill Prospero’s request. Such an ending would have players otherwise unfamiliar with Shakespeare understanding and talking about The Tempest like no other medium of production could ever achieve.

Video games may not have their “Shakespeare” yet, but with how the industry has grown and the strides it has taken—with the possibilities that are now open to the medium and the innovations that have already been made to achieve those possibilities—such a powerful, legitimizing influence cannot be far off. Video games can and will win their cultural legitimacy, and in the not-too-distant future, children and adults alike will sit down to play a video game not just for entertainment, but for some of the most powerful and emotional cultural experiences of their lives—experiences that will uplift, enlighten, and provoke thought along with the very best art humanity has ever produced.

Works Cited:

G.B. Harrison, England in Shakespeare's Day. The Folcroft Press, Inc. Folcroft, PA. 1969. 

Brown, Ivor. Shakespeare in His Time. Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. Edinburgh. 1960.

Gurr, Andrew. Playgoing in Shakespeare's London. 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press. 2004.

"Shakespeare's Theater." The Tempest. Folger Shakespeare Library. 2009.

NPR Interview with Ken Levine, April 2, 2013

Ebert, Roger. "Okay, kids, play on my lawn." 1 July 2010. Web.

__________. "Video Games can never be art." 16 April 2010. Web.

Kotaku.com, "The New Tomb Rader Saved This Teenager's Life"

John D. Sutter, "Supreme Court Sees Video Games as Art"

Jamin Brophy-Warren "Dante’s Inferno: Do Classic Poems Make Great Videogames?"

Games TM Review of Bioshock Inifinite

Matt Miller, review of Journey 

Adam Sessler, Bioshock Infinite Review, 

Sullentrop, Chris, "Video Game Art of Fumito Ueda"

Chris Bateman Responded: 2!!

Hey everybody, so we might now be able to count my email to Chris Bateman as an actual conversation. I was intrigued by what he said, and so I responded:

Chris,

Thanks for the generous reply! This is great stuff and really helps me out.

I'm curious, at which end of the spectrum would you put Thatgamecompany's Journey? Does it represent a kind of a middle-market success?

Also, how well do you think Shakespeare's plays themselves might lend to video game adaptations? I'm specifically thinking of The Tempest with its magic and fantasy elements, as well as its treatment of the theme of vision v. reality. Could the medium benefit from adapting Shakespeare?

Thanks again for your time,

Paul Bills

And then he responded (again!):

Paul:

Journey was funded as a loss-leader by Sony in the manner I described for Shadow of the Colossus. Unlike that title, however, Journey made its development costs back.

The Tempest would make an interesting exploration-adventure game, but I think you could also adapt King Lear, Richard III, Much Ado About Nothing, Romeo and Juliet and possibly even Hamlet (although this one is trickier!) into a game-like format. Most of the histories and all the comedies of errors are open to adaptation in my estimation - and many would produce very interesting experiences! Note that I don't think existing game genre formats would work for these game adaptations - you'd need to be creative in designing new approaches.

The medium of videogames could definitely benefit from adapting Shakespeare, or indeed other classic writers - I have always wanted to adapt Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice into a game, for instance.

All the best,

Chris. 

I know, I know--I have no idea how you would make a game out of Pride and Prejudice either--but hey, the guy is British. I believe it could be done. Any ideas how?

Islands to Crash Land On: Publishing Venues

Thanks to a lot of help and recommendations from other classmates, Dr. Burton, and hours of internet scrounging, I've found a few outlets for my paper that I think are a great fit:

Academic Conference: The Wooden O Symposium at the Utah Shakespearean Festival. The Wooden O "is a cross-disciplinary conference exploring Medieval through Early Modern Studies, through the text and performance of Shakespeare’s plays" held annually as part of the Utah Shakespearean Festival. Selected papers are presented on SUU's campus and from those selected, a few are published in the Journal of the Wooden O. They accept submissions from literally anyone, and, while they don't update their site very well, I was able to find that in 2006 they published an undergraduate paper. This combined with the fact that they're specifically looking for papers on The Tempest this year gives me a lot of hope.

Logo for the online academic journal Game Studies

Academic Journal: Game Studies is an online-only peer-reviewed journal "to provide an academic channel for the ongoing discussions on games and gaming." They publish multiple times a year online and are open to submissions from anyone, though they are very strict about what they publish and have an extensive checklist to fill before you submit. However, articles such as "The Algorithmic Experience: Portal as Art"

Academic Blogging: Gameology is "a scholarly community dedicated to the study of video games," though it isn't a typical blog. However, they do keep a running bibliography of essays and blog posts on their site, and accept submissions openly, so it's a place I could potentially get published. Such articles as "Notes from Form, Culture, and Video Game Criticism" show that my paper would be a good fit here, though from looking around the site, it doesn't seem like there's been much activity on it in around a year, so maybe it's not the best fit.

Bonus: Big Leagues: Dr. Burton found out that last year, they had a panel at MLA totally dedicated to video games last year, and said MLA might not be a bad place to try out. The 2014 Calls for Papers didn't yield any promising results from the Shakespeare or the video game angles, but this might be an outlet later on when I get this idea fully developed.

All in all, I'm excited to get this project wrapped up and out there. I want to see what the world does with this.

Chris Bateman Responded!

Of the three emails I sent out to scholars in the field of video games, the first to get a response went to Chris Bateman, writer of Beyond Game Design. For posterity's sake, here's his response in full:

Hi Paul,

The email you used is the correct one for 'first contact', but please use this email address for any future correspondence.

My basic point is that we need a "Shakespeare of Games." Shakespeare was himself as much an innovator as a storyteller, mostly taking old stories and adapting them to the new medium of English theater. He took this medium from simple popular entertainment to a true art form. Sometime, I argue, someone could/will do the same for video games and change the world of art and expression all over again.

I agree with this claim, and have made similar suggestions myself. In fact, there is a definite gap in contemporary video games for exploring the concept of adaptation. It's notable in Shakespeare's career that he did not create stories, he only adapted them for the stage - and in the process perfected them for that medium.

 

My question for you, then, is simple: What do you think it would take to create such a "Shakespeare of Games"? Is it possible for just one person, or will it have to be a whole team? Or has it already happened, in your opinion? If so, who?

The problem is not the person, it's the economics. At the moment, videogames have a number of viable commercial niches but none of them lend themselves to a Shakespearean moment. In the upper market, budgets are too high and development too constrained by marketing concerns. Experimentation is essentially impossible in this space.

There are those artistically motivated projects that are funded by a corporation, such as Sony, for brand benefits - Shadow of the Colossus or Heavy Rain for instance - but I don't see this space as likely to give rise to a Shakespearean moment, for slightly different reasons. Innovators in this space are too focused on the form, for a start, and far too likely to want to express their own ideas. This is a possible space it could happen, but not a likely one.

There is currently no middle market for games, which is a problem because this is the space a Shakespeare of games would be most likely to happen. We might get it back, but it's not likely at the moment.

The social games market dominates the lower market with cheap, disposable, addictive games, and other games for smartphones and tablets are largely similar economically. This is not a space likely to give rise to a Shakespeare of games.

Finally, the indie developers are too caught up in their own imaginations - obsessed with fantasy and science fiction, addictive game mechanics etc. - and this space is dominated by the programmers for pragmatic reasons. I doubt any programmer has the mindset to be a Shakespeare of games - although I would love to be proven wrong.

So the economics of game development are currently toxic to the kind of narrative innovation Shakespeare is justifiably famous for developing. The best bet for something like this to happen would be a community-driven development network which pooled resources, providing a wide range of assets that could be shared to create worlds. I tried to set this up myself a while back, but no-one understood why it would be useful and it fell flat. Trying to get game developers to co-operate on anything is a trial; trying to get them to form mutual communities is like pulling teeth, although this is not to say that devs aren't friendly, nor that they don't help each other out.

What would really help this would be an end to the obsession with rising technical specifications and what they can do for games - which is to say, an end to the current economics of home consoles. There is already an instability in this space, so perhaps the situation will improve, but I think not rapidly.

 

Also--do you see games ever being studied as part of the "liberal arts" with a "canon" and "conventional interpretations" and other such academic dressings, or will games remain part of "cultural studies" more for sociologists/psychologists? Or are they something entirely new?

No, I don't believe games are something entirely new - they build upon long traditions in both games (which have at least an 8,000 year history, if you don't count non-human games) and stories (which are even older). These ideas are explored in my book of philosophy "Imaginary Games", which suggests that all art forms are a kind of game, although it is really just a part of that book's topic.

I would say that games are already being studied in the liberal arts - narratologists, for instance, have already written quite a lot about narrative in digital games. There are already conventions and canonical trends within the space, so it is only a matter of time before the humanities side of game studies gets picked up and explored more directly. To get there, however, games have to continue to break with their commercial forms. Artistic developers like Tale of Tales are vital to this process, and I continue to support all artistically-motivated games to the hilt in the hope that we can begin to explore the untapped potential of this medium.

All the best,

Chris.

So, the social scholarship actually works! People really are willing to talk if you engage them in a good conversation. This is awesome!

So Happy Together: Social Scholarship

Chris Bateman's Beyond Game Design 

So I have more to report about effort on this subject this week than results, but I still think what I did was important. I emailed three people directly who I think would have great insights on my project: Jane McGonigal, Clint Hocking, and Chris Bateman. McGonigal is a very famous game designer and game activist (she kind of made that a thing all by herself) who believes games can change the world. Hocking is an influential game designer and thinker. Bateman is a philosopher, game designer, and author of Beyond Game Design: Nine Steps Toward Creating Better Video Games. I emailed all three of them slight variations on the following:

My name is Paul Bills and I'm an undergrad English Major at Brigham Young University. I'm currently doing a research project on Shakespeare and video games and I've found your book Beyond Game Design helpful and very insightful.

My basic point is that we need a "Shakespeare of Games." Shakespeare was himself as much an innovator as a storyteller, mostly taking old stories and adapting them to the new medium of English theater. He took this medium from simple popular entertainment to a true art form. Sometime, I argue, someone could/will do the same for video games and change the world of art and expression all over again.

My question for you, then, is simple: What do you think it would take to create such a "Shakespeare of Games"? Is it possible for just one person, or will it have to be a whole team? Or has it already happened, in your opinion? If so, who?

Also--do you see games ever being studied as part of the "liberal arts" with a "canon" and "conventional interpretations" and other such academic dressings, or will games remain part of "cultural studies" more for sociologists/psychologists? Or are they something entirely new?

Any insight you have would be great.

Thanks,

Paul Bills

I chose this messaging because I'm hoping to add any comments I get back from them to the conclusion of my paper--my "so what?" point about calling people to action to take game design to the next level and strive to seek/become the "Shakespeare of games." I haven't received any response yet, but the other reason I chose these three is because they all were very open to being contacted on their websites and all encouraged opening conversations with them. I also was sure to specifically reference the work of theirs that I had read and appreciated to show that I knew what I was talking about (you can see I mentioned Bateman's book in the example above).

Also, Mikaela's post about possible publishing venues got me really excited because the Shakespeare festival is specifically looking for papers on The Tempest this year (already bought my tickets to go see it August 15th!). David has also been a huge help. Dr. Burton, he, and I just sat and talked about my paper for a straight hour on Wednesday. David also offered to have me come over and play some of his favorite games to help me out, an offer I'm pretty sure I'm going to take him up on sometime soon.

As far as helping other people, I think it was last Friday that I talked with Kaylee about her thesis in class and brought up a panel I had attended during the English Symposium that talked about heroes and villains and we talked a lot about the lack of strict heroes or villains in Shakespeare, and whether or not Henry V was an exception. It was a great discussion and Kaylee's since integrated it into her work.

Also, since Britton's topic is so close to mine, talks with him have been very helpful and I feel like I've helped him in return. I brought up the theme of free will v. fate in Julius Caesar and how that would be low-hanging fruit for a game theme because games give players the illusion of free will when really the player is fated to one destiny no matter what they do because the designers (or narrative games, anyway) have to bring the story to a conclusion.

Diversity Day: New Bibliography

One of the suggestions I got from my first draft was to do more with the connection of Shakespeare legitimizing theater with the the battle to legitimize video games, so in my second round of searching I looked for more sources on that subject. Here's what I found:

"Shakespeare's Life." The Tempest. Folger Shakespeare Library. 2009. (source found within a scholarly edition, 1-5 years). This essay helped by giving a good quote from Robert Greene attacking Shakespeare for daring to write blank-verse theater, say he was "in his own conceit he only Shake-scene in the country."

"Shakespeare's Theater." The Tempest. Folger Shakespeare Library. 2009. (source found within a scholarly edition, 1-5 years) This one talks more specifically about theater at the time, even saying "many civic officials were hostile to the performance of drama and repeatedly petitioned the royal council to abolish it." This reminds me very much of the frequent demands by conservatives today to ban violent video games.

Gurr, Andrew. Playgoing in Shakespeare's London. 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press. 2004. (source found from bibliography of another source, 5-10 years, scholarly monograph.) I found this book through "further reading" list in the back of my Folger edition of The Tempest and it is a treasure trove of information about how people received Shakespeare's theater in his own day and how perception changed over time.

Brown, Ivor. Shakespeare in His Time. Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. Edinburgh. 1960. (10-50 years, scholarly monograph.) This book talks a lot about the conditions under which Shakespeare's play were performed in his time, including details about rehearsal, direction, and acting of the day. It has some great stuff about how the acting was probably really bad and not very artful at all. This helps my argument because acting is often bad in video games today, but just like Shakespearean actors have improved, video game actors can/will.

G.B. Harrison, England in Shakespeare's Day. The Folcroft Press, Inc. Folcroft, PA. 1969. (source found by browsing physical library shelves, 10-50 years.) This is the real motherload because it includes primary sources from Shakespeare's time, including "A Moralist's Objection to Plays" from Stephen Gosson and "A Scholar's Objection to Plays" by Sir Philip Sidney himself, as well as "A Defense of Plays" by Thomas Nashe. It even includes a poem by John Marston, "The Playgoer," specifically about going to see Shakespeare's plays.

Kotaku's Review of Bioshock: Infinite. (source comes by way of social network of stakeholders, within days or weeks) This review says the newest Bioshock  will "feel like an operatically violent radio play." A nice connection between games and other art.

Burden, Michael and Sean Gouglas, "The Algorithmic Experience: Portal as Art" Game Studies. 12.2(2012). Web. (article from peer-reviewed journal, source found through a blog post on a blog found on a list of academic blogs on the blog of a guy I found on Twitter because someone else I followed retweeted him and I started following him too *not on Dr. Burton's list, but in the same spirit, definitely*) The intro to this article is my new favorite argument for video games as art, and one I definitely want to use. It discusses algorithms and how they run so many things in our lives, from typical bureaucracy to complicated stock trades, and that video games are also algorithmic representations of physical reality. "Videogames uniquely combine the qualities of game play, world simulation and narrative (Lindley, 2003). As such, videogames provide a fruitful medium for the exploration of what it means to be a human in a world increasingly dominated by algorithms."

Ebert, Roger. "Video Games can never be art." 16 April 2010. Web. (source found by way of social network) I already used this in my rough draft, but it wasn't included in my original annotated bibliography so I might as well put it here. Roger Ebert, the guy that brought you half of the "Two Thumbs Up!" on the back of all your favorite movies from your childhood (assuming you had good taste in movies as a child, I guess), decided to talk about video games. Negatively. Sparked a lot of talk.

Ebert, Roger. "Okay, kids, play on my lawn." 1 July 2010. Web. (found by way of social network) Here, Roger eases back a bit in response to the internet's explosion against his comments, but still holds that games are not art.

Clint Hocking, "On Authorship in Games" www.clicknothing.com. 10 August 2007. Web. (source on an academic blog) I didn't know this before, but Clint did a direct rebuttal to Ebert's argument that video games are not art. In direct rebuttal to Ebert saying no game can hold its own against any great work art, he claims that Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas does more to affect the players worldview and make him/her think about racial tensions than the critically acclaimed movie Crash. In his words: "Taken as wholes, GTA: San Andreas is a more compelling, meaningful and important work of art than Crash." Also makes important points about things like the relationship of designer to player, and the difference between interacting with a story and manipulating the story, as well as the player not ruining the art of the game by playing it in ways not intended by the creators--just like fast-forwarding the "boring parts" of Citizen Kane doesn't ruin the "art" of the movie.

So there you go, some great stuff on Shakespeare's own fight, and some great already-historic weapons wielded by the new generals of our current battle. I just hope I can make something great out of all this.

 

Sunbeams from the Primary Text

Though I've blogged about my primary text before, The Tempest, it can't hurt to dig in again and find something else, so here goes:

On the theme of vision vs. reality (which I argue would be well-adaptable to a video game):

You do look, my son, in a moved sort, 

As if you were dismay'd: be cheerful, sir. 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, 

As I foretold you, were all spirits and 

Are melted into air, into thin air: 

And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, 

The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces, 

The solemn temples, the great globe itself, 

Ye all which it inherit, shall dissolve 

And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, 

Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff 

As dreams are made on, and our little life 

Is rounded with a sleep.

(Prospero, 4.1.1877-1889)

I've referred to this quote several times, but never in it's full context like this. I think the effect of Prospero telling this to Ferdinand (and, in turn, the player) of a video game would be especially powerful, because it's reminding the player that this is all just a game, just "baseless fabric," "such stuff as dreams are made on."

Now my charms are all o'erthrown,
And what strength I have's mine own,
Which is most faint: now, 'tis true,
I must be here confined by you,
Or sent to Naples. Let me not,
Since I have my dukedom got
And pardon'd the deceiver, dwell
In this bare island by your spell;
But release me from my bands
With the help of your good hands:

(Prospero, 5.1.2404-2423)

This is from Prospero's final speech in the epilogue of the play, which reminds the audience that this has all been a play ultimately fleshed out by their own imaginations--so in their imaginations they must return Prospero to Naples or he's stuck on the island forever (because in their imagination is the only place he really exists). I have this vision of Prospero saying these final lines in the game version of The Tempest and it being programmed so that the only way to really end the game and "win" is to turn off the controller (or unplug the keyboard or mouse, or something), proving that you won't play anymore and you'll let Prospero go. This would be a powerful, inclusive, interactive way to present this theme of the play in general and the point of this final speech to the player. There would likely be a sense of frustration as the player can't figure out for awhile how to finish the final step and win, but then when they realize (or, let's be honest, look it up on the internet), hopefully they would reflect on what that means, and go away a little better as a person and think a little more about their real life, as well as the video game/play/story. Just like Shakespeare tried to do with the play in the first place.

O, wonder!
How many goodly creatures are there here!
How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world,
That has such people in't!

(Miranda, 5.1.2233-2236)

Here, the vision v. reality theme is reversed, as Miranda has only ever seen visions (she's lived on the island with Prospero practically her whole life), and now she sees real human beings for the first time. She's taken aback by how wonderful real people are, how "goodly" and "beauteous." Video games, like all art, allow us to paint pictures of human beings that can seem startlingly or disturbingly realistic, or obviously and grotesquely false. Either way, watching false humans (whether they be actors or computer-generated images) can lead to real and powerful insights into real humans--just like Miranda appreciated real humanity after experiencing visions for all her life.

Good boatswain, have care. Where's the master?
Play the men.

(Alonso, 1.1.15-16)

"Act like men" or "make the men work" (according to Folger edition note). Even from the very beginning of the play, we see this theme come out--either of vision vs. reality (playing something even if you aren't actually that thing) or power and submission (also a big part of the play).

The Definition of Art

A big part of my argument revolves around the concept of "art," which gets more fluid and indefinite the more I study it. Shakespeare seemed to be aware of this too (another part of my argument is how Shakespeare had to legitimize his own medium in his own time as an art form, so I wonder while reading this if he was struggling with the very same question when he wrote it):

my daughter, who
Art ignorant of what thou art,...

Lie there, my art. Wipe thou thine eyes; have comfort.
The direful spectacle of the wreck, which touch'd
The very virtue of compassion in thee,
I have with such provision in mine art
So safely ordered that there is no soul—
No, not so much perdition as an hair
Betid to any creature in the vessel
Which thou heard'st cry, which thou saw'st sink.

(Prospero, 1.2.104-105,115-122)

The word "art" is repeated over and over again in this scene, with Miranda saying it before Prospero does. We see three definitions of "art" just in these lines, none of which are even cleanly our definition of "art" as creative expression--(1) art as in "are" ("thou art"), (2) art as in witchcraft or power ("in mine art"), and an interestingly metaphorical use referring, perhaps, to our standard expression "art," but meaning more literally, "creation" or "product" ("lie there, my art"). Later in the same scene, we even have Prospero say he was well versed in the "liberal arts" (1.2.172), yet another definition of art not quite the traditional definition.

 for I must
Bestow upon the eyes of this young couple
Some vanity of mine art: it is my promise,
And they expect it from me.

(Prospero, 4.1.41-43)

This is perhaps the closest we get to the typical definition of "art" in The Tempest, despite how often the word is used--Prospero will use his "art," or power, to bring up wondrous visions, beautiful things for them to look at--"art," in the traditional sense through non-traditional methods (hey--that's like video games!)

Finally, the word "art" is used in a totally new way in the same epilogue quoted above:

Now I want
Spirits to enforce, art to enchant,
And my ending is despair,
Unless I be relieved by prayer,

(Prospero, 5.1.2416-2419) 

Here, the definition of "art" is related to definition (2) above, witchcraft or power, but now means more directly "ability" or "capability." While Shakespeare's work is so universally received in our day as "art"--even the highest level of "art"--it seems he himself took a very liberal view of the word, while making that same great art out of a medium that few even imagined could be.

I could go on (I didn't touch on the theme of power and submission--I do a little bit in my previous primary text post when I talk about Caliban and Prospero's relationship near the end), but this is super huge already and I'll stop here.