Something went wrong. Try again later

teekomeeko

This user has not updated recently.

793 1557 1 5
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

A Topic Close To My Heart... and Thumbs.

 

I can't keep my mouth shut about it anymore...

Roger Ebert opens his big mouth and again starts to prove that he is simply an elitist douche. I am, at heart, an optimist. While I am fully capable of admitting a hatred of people who are purposely ignorant, at the same I only wish the best for them and hope they are able to expand their thinking. Ebert, though, just really needs to shut the hell up when it comes to video games; he's ruining his legacy as an intelligent film critic (that's not an oxymoron to me, I think you really can be a smart, open-minded, well-versed critic) and replacing it with that of a typical old cynic in the minds of millions.

Before I move further, I want to state that I know that "art" is a concept in the human mind that is hard to establish a complete set of rules for. It is a very personal perception to believe that something is or isn't art, so Ebert is entitled to his opinion. Unfortunately, he is stating his opinion as if it is an undeniable fact, like the earth is round and the sun is a bit on the warm side. The way I look at it, art is almost entirely up to how hard the artist works to get his work up to a level of skill that is undeniable in its accomplishment. Here's how I interpret the rules:

1. Art is something, anything, that a person uses learned skills to create

This one doesn't need much explaining. Just make something and you're making some level of art.

2. The artist must have a passion for what is being made and work towards its completion.

This is probably the rule that most defines the word "artist." Doing something, like painting a landscape, and not caring what it looks like or whether it is finished doesn't make someone an artist despite the fact that they are using some basic learned skills (how to mix colors, how best to manipulate the media, and so on). An artist will have a passion for what they are making and will work in such a way as to sooner or later get it done. Leonardo Da Vinci was an infamous slouch, never finishing quite a few paintings that he was commissioned to do, but he worked in such a way that he could have sooner or later finished them if he really wanted to and he was passionate about his work.

3. It must be above the "normal" level of something that can be created. If it is not, the creator(s) must have a desire to constantly improve in skill until it is.

And now it gets more complicated. I believe that a chef can be an artist, but someone making a grilled cheese sandwich in the kitchen is not getting to a high enough level of artistry if they don't work to keep making better and better food. Another example could be drawing. Someone who does stick figures in a book on occasion is not creating art, but someone who starts with stick figures and moves forward just might be. I can serve as an example for this one. I started off doing drawings that were just above the quality of stick figures, but something inside my mind fueled a raging fire that told me "get better, get better, get better." So I did.

4. The artist must either consider himself/herself an artist, or be considered as such by others.

 
It does not matter how many others - this isn't a contest - as long as it is more than what would be counted as a few. Being an artist can also be a temporary state. Someone could all of a sudden do something of undeniable brilliance that is considered art by many people, then do nothing of the sort for the rest of their natural lives. That person was an artist, even if just for a little while, because they either considered themselves that or had the title thrust upon them by others.

Those four reasons above are why I think that some video games are art. A video game that is more than a place for a player to input commands is automatically art to me, whether or not I like it. Sports games and a lot of shooters are not art to me; they have artistic elements, but do not fully try to do anything except be a structure strictly meant to be a basis for player input. A game like Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, or the upcoming Alan Wake? Yes, that is art to me. The player has their role in furthering the adventure through input, but the game as a whole is more than that. It is a story, with characters and atmosphere that propel the player into wanting more.

That last sentence can be used to describe films if you replace the word "player" with "viewer." That's not a coincidence to me. In my mind I probably have a couple more rules, but for now I think that explains my beliefs and opinion on this topic sufficiently.

PS: Whew, longest one in a while. I think this time it was actually needed instead of me just being a longwinded fool.
 
Note for Giantbomb: This blog post is copied from my site, so all content is Copyright (c) 2010 Michael Valdez and OddProdigal.com

1 Comments