Answers for "Art Games"

or, A New Lens

I claim it as an eccentricity that occasionally phrases show up on my intersests lists, and I have no idea how they got there. When it was first pointed out to me that I called "Art Games" an interest here on blogger, I expected that I had removed all other game references and condensed my fringe hobbies to a vague and innocuous phrase. That's not the case, but no matter. I am here to answer Robert's weeks-old, perhaps months-old, query, "What is an art game?" [paraphrased].

Contrary to popular Googling, my 'art games' are not intended to teach kids about "art" and the classic painters, and techniques they might've used. In this little world of mine, art games are ones that compel the players to be creative and imaginative during play, especially with an end result of the collective experience driving the players to be creative outside of the game's context.

Despite the number of scholarly buzzwords I used in that paragraph, it's all very nebulous and unformed in my mind. Watch this heat and light, a new universe is being formed. (But leave before Jon comes in and tramples my excitement by pointing out where this has been discussed within the Community).

There's a little bit indicating the possible depths of this idea in my mind. Here's something along the surface, hoping to set ignite light bulbs.

The creative process is usually a journey traveled alone. Human and canvas. One brain, one creation. Art games bring other people into the mix, meaning the story* that will be told is going to be a collaboration. But collaboration isn't anything new, so where's the "art game"? I'll touch, as briefly as I can, on three major differences.

Author = Audience.
With most collaborations, those involve work studiously to create a final piece to show to others. In art games, the participants are involving themselves for the experience and the process, rather than the destination. It's writing, performing, and viewing a play all in one shot, and the lines between those actions are blurred.

Players are driven to create and contribute on the spot, but in my idealized form, the art game gives back more than it takes. Not only do you retain the ideas you bring to the table (because nothing is copyrighted and published at the end), but they spawn slightly changed forms through interaction and feedback, plus ideas brought by others leave seeds in your mind as well.

The Experiment Factor
Scientists judge an experiment as valid if it can be repeated and produce the same results. Art games have a different criteria of success: despite starting with the same materials each time you play, the result should be completely different.

In an art game, there is a document that acts as Prompt, Guidebook, and Prime Collaborator. This benchmarking artifact gives players a foundation to build on. The Document could be specific, for example saying that exactly three players will tell a story of an escape from a Korean POW camp, with one player as Prisoner, one player as Guard, and one player as Treacherous Lover. Alternately the Document could be less demanding, setting up a foundation for Stories of Heroism.

The Document, which is the same for all groups that play an individual art game, lays out a guide for the collaboration, but each group has the freedom to alter the Document for how they want to play the game. There is one starting point, but no finish line. And points are infinite in their own way.

Parts
This is an example of something found in the Document of an art game. It is an "Often", not a "Constant".

The concept of playing a role is not unusual; for the most part, it's How Plays Are Done. And the idea of unscripted performing is not new either. (See: Improv.) I can't speak to how common it is to divide character parts between participants in written collaboration (such as team script writing).

In most art games, each participant assumes the role of one character, and is the only player in the group who can speak that character's words and describe that character's actions.



For all these structures and guidelines about what "art games" are, it's as much player mindset as it is the Document. And it doesn't even need to be a consensus among players, or known at the time the game is played.

The Art Game Manifesto can be told as simple as this:
1 - Get together with friends.
2 - Play.
3 - Leave with more imaginative wealth than you brought.

If all this is too heady, here's an alternate definition of "Art Games"

As an object is considered "art" when it has no function, the games I create are art games in that they have no proven use.

Yes, that is like the "Brains for sale" joke.

If I have kept your attention for this long, I heartily thank you for reading. I had a surprising amount of fun writing this, and would like to explore the idea more, and present it better. If you have any questions, comments, feedback, or feelings on the topic, I directly request that you leave a comment! Fun continues best when I know I'm not thinking about these things alone.

Class dismissed.



------
*Any medium can be used in an art game. I'm choosing to use writing because this concept (and essay) is growing out of my notion of "storytelling games". I have yet to create a visual/physical art game using this theory and method, but I do not doubt that it will happen.

**Footnote with no referral: Game/design (theory) buffs, I'm especially interested to hear what you think of this 'essay'. It's not directly/specificially about rpgs or storytelling games, and connecting it directly/specifically to games I've played or written could be a whole new essay. Which I'm considering writing.

I'm just American. I don't understand.

The political things I understand are limited... mostly limited to the fact that I understand that I do not understand. Thus, I rarely speak out about it. (Following sporadic discussions with a coworker, I've been thinking about my positions and lack thereof more lately.)

*A note before you read the rest of this post: I use the word "Jew" many times, and some of what I say is critical. If that bothers you, replace "Jew" with a parallel word (indicating a comparable group) before reading on.*

This post rubbed me a wrong enough way to write something down, though. (To be fair, this is the original source for the bit quoted below, and I only found it at the previous link.)

Seventeen men and one woman are seeking the nomination of their parties for President of the United States. In the coming months, they will develop and present their platforms and priorities.

Many Jewish organizations are taking advantage of this opportunity to present their agenda on behalf of the Jewish community. But is their agenda also your agenda?

As American Jews, we have a broad range of priorities. Child Care. Civil Rights. Education. Environment. Health Care. Housing. Immigration. Katrina/Rita. Seniors. Wages...

The plan is simple. Thousands of Jews come together to create a domestic agenda that represents our interests. We send this agenda to every presidential candidate and request a written response. As candidates reply we publicize their views on our websites, via email, and through the press.

This bit, however, is from the first link

As American Jews we need to tell our political candidates what matters to us: not just where they stand on "the Israel question," but what stands they're willing to take on critical issues like education, civil rights, the environment, and health care. It's easy to speak out: just click here, select the 5 issues that matter most to you, and provide your name and contact information.

Except for where policy and race/ethnicity/religion and politics specifically interact I find it to be a bad idea to sequester yourself into an ethnic or religious community when speaking out about domestic policy issues. No community of any size has a single hive mind about their political priorities, but that's beside the point.

The recurrent use of "American Jew" bothers me in this context. I don't like the idea of a candidate (or his advisers) discussing the campaign and, as they're trying to decide what to focus on for the next weeks, saying, "Well, the Jews think X so we should consider Y." I also don't like to think of them saying, "Well, the blacks think X..." or "The Asians think X..." or "The pagans think X...." or "The Christians think X..."

When we're asking things of our leaders, shouldn't we just be presenting ourselves as Americans? Save for special interest groups, who have special interests, such as the specific needs of a particular community (whether it be geographic or idealistic), we shouldn't divide and specify ourselves.

Maybe if there's an event, a candidate speaking in front of one of the groups sponsoring this petition, the potential president should take the needs and requests of Jews to heart. But shouldn't they take that opportunity to speak to Jews about the things they're concerned about because they are Jews? Not just because they are Americans? Sure, include some general local/national issues, but it's a good idea to know your audience, and speak to that audience.

My brain is counter-arguing that the poll/petition is designed to help presidential candidates know that audience. To that I say it's still a bad idea to hand a politician two pieces of paper and say, "Here are the domestic priorities of the general population, and here are the domestic priorities of the American Jews". The fact that there may be other pieces of paper there, too, isn't the point. The point is that I only want the first one to be given consideration.

The government and its agents should be blind to the race and religion of its constituents. Do I say this because I have no race or religion? I don't think so, but I have no race or religion, so I can't be sure!

Redirect

Nothing terribly awesome here, but I posted some sketches on the old LJ

visual evidence of why I haven't been posting

Head for brains

This is the fourth post in progress in... a while. offline life has been more consuming and interesting than online life and projects lately. For example, today I finished off my first sketchbook. It's been a while coming, but right before dinner I doodled in a last mbear on the back page of the book. No more pages!

Well, there are a couple sides blank early in the sketchbook, from before I started my current project of referencing nearly every single photo in a book on Italian film. I'm on page 90 of ~250. It's just practice, not exact copying. Mostly figure doodles based on the photos, but I often have to shift the pose or add limbs.

That, work, husband, and some DS playing (pokemon) consume most of my time. I still read every post on my LJ f-list, and all my emails, and spend some time on AIM (but not much)... but haven't put effort into keeping up with my blogs for 6 days. Not even my top 20.

When I get focused in one area, I feel like a slacker in all my other areas, which diminishes my happiness with being focused in the one area. Sucks.

I'll stop here and treat my mild headache. I'm out of practice, and don't need to jump back into the game all at once. Baby steps. :)