Skip to main content

Foregrounding

Before we begin the analysis of the video game as a new zeitgeist, we'd be well served to create our own fictional avatar. Rather than selecting any one particular game, this imaginary game and avatar will prove useful in allowing us to apply different thought exercises to the same symbol-an intersubjective agreement of the highest magnitude.

The character's name is "Petitor", a small sounding name for a small character. You can picture him how you like; I think of a boy dressed in sandals and ragged robes, dirty with too much exploration. A short sword girds his hip. Dark hair dangles in his face. The world in which he lives is littered with different types of cities-modern, classical, Victorian, postmodern, futuristic. There are sprawling landscapes, endless lands of dust and scrub grass, barren rock formations. There are jungles, lush and verdant. There are dark caves (of course-what game can escape the Cave?) and dungeons and sewers. There are pinnacles that Petitor can ascend, vehicles to control, people to interact with, and games to play. It is everything that an avatar could want, a PlayStation Home that is beyond the plastic beta: it's an avatar's utopia. The world is called "Mendax."

I won't pretend to great depth with the chosen names; anyone with high school Latin (or a ready internet connection) could look them up. Petitor means 'seeker' or 'one who strives for [something]'. Mendax means 'deceitful'. These names are powerful and important, as will be discussed later on. For now, let them be the imaginary game in which these introductory essays take place.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rage Against the Video Game Machine?

NOTE: If you haven't read the ' Foregrounding ' blog post or the one entitled ' Rough Draft ', please do that first. They're both short, but they matter a lot for what you're about to read. Okay. Done. Enjoy. Zach de la Rocha: "On truth devoured/Silent play in the shadow of power/A spectacle monopolized/The cameras eyes on choice disguised." Rage Against the Machine's single "Guerilla Radio" from their Battle of Los Angeles album is a reaction against the political circus and faux-choice presentations during the 2000 elections. The quote is not in full context (it is much more political than theoretical) here, but it provides a powerful starting block. A little bit of re-punctuation will help to clarify the thrust: "On truth devoured, silent play in the shadow of power [is] a spectacle [that] monopolized the cameras' eyes-on choice disguised." Line by line, we see parallels between how video games are perceived outside o...

Dark Necessities

The second of my "music video essays", I'm exploring the single from Red Hot Chili Peppers' newest album, The Getaway , "Dark Necessities". As I did before, I'm posting the video and the lyrics here on the essay, and encourage you to watch and read along. In the case of the Peppers, it's always a good idea to have the lyrics handy, as the lead singer, Anthony Kiedis, has a tendency of mumbling and/or pronouncing words uniquely to create a particular effect--or he's super high, either possibility is there.  The Set Up Here's the video: And here are the lyrics : Coming out to the light of day We got many moons than a deeper place So I keep an eye on the shadow's smile To see what it has to say You and I both know Everything must go away Ah, what do you say? Spinning off, head is on my heart It's like a bit of light and a touch of dark You got sneak attacked from the zodiac But I see your eyes spark Keep the breeze and go Blow...

On Violence

NOTE: This is a long one. It's also a lot more theoretical than conversational. If you have a question, please feel free to post so that I can try to be more clear. There is little debate on what the greatest debate is when it comes to video games: Does the imaginary violence of the game translate into violent behavior in the real world? It seems to be very much a 'depends on your point of view' type of argument. Not only does it depend on one's point of view, but also the particular study itself, what it focuses on, and how well it's managed. It is also important to note the rhetorical tricks of the debate*, since most of the data are coming from second or third sources. But I am no statistician, so numbers do nothing to help me to understand the issue. In fact, numbers about this argument are superfluous, since the entire point of gaming (whether the gamer/designer/critic is aware of it or not) is the individual as the ideal. Let's look at violence, then, shal...