Project 2 Reflection
So far this semester, I have asked you to think about video games in terms of two common concerns of the humanities: art/aesthetics and gender/race. In the first project, we explored whether/how games facilitate higher-level aesthetic experience: can they generate powerful emotions? Can they question how to best live a life? Can they deliver a unique perspective on our world? Can they lead us to critique existing poltical, economic, or social relations?
In our second project, I initially asked you to compose a project that extended (or responded) to the work of Anita Sarkeesian, who’s Feminist Frequency series examines the overwhelming misogyny and sexism that appears in many AAA (big budget, mass marketed) video games. The last time I taught the course, I was far more authoritarian on this topic, forcing students to examine the representations of race and gender in different genres. This time, I gave you far more freedom in developing your own topics. I will say I am pleased with the variety of the projects you have developed–while the quality of the videos might have been a bit underwhelming–each project provided us with a different lens for thinking about games.
- Dylan, Antonio, Matt, and Nick’s project articulated 3 popular tropes for male characters in games. The three they focus on are the warrior, the chief, and the lost soul. I think I would have liked for the presentation to do a bit more work to tease out what distinguishes these tropes from each other–but, even without it, we see that male characters are often framed as independent, myopically driven, courageous, authoritative figures. They are strong, both physically and mentally. The chief is the hero in the style of John Wayne (see below)–the lost soul more of an anti-hero in the style of Robin Hood, Batman (The Dark Knight), Wolverine, or Victor Frankenstein. Overall, male characters are motivated by either a sense of justice or a sense of revenge. Our heroes are less Sherlock Holmes and more Batman. So, as I play future games, I can think about what kind of hero I am asked to play. I can also, of course, ask how (many?) female protagonists compare to these male tropes.
- Ryan, Miranda, and Michael’s project focused our attention on the role of death in video games. I will admit that I found this project the most interesting, if only because it asked a question I had not previously considered: to what extent to videogames reflect upon the violence they contain? How many prioritize uncomplicated enjoyment or valorization of war? How many call that enjoyment into question and ask us to consider the horror of war? One might call this the difference between John Wayne and Jon Rambo (or, more generally, “modern” war movies of the 1950’s and 1960’s that champion heroes of WWII and the “postmodern” war movies of the 1970’s and 1980’s that brutally critique the atrocities of Vietnam).
- Alan, Justin, and Chet’s group addressed the third term in the liberal humanist trifecta: class (along with race and gender). I thought the project could have been a bit clearer in its purpose, but what I got out of it is a question about representations of class in games. Are the rich always the villains? Why are poor people poor? Of course, these are questions that also dominant our discussions of politics and exacerbate the contemporary divide between left and right, blue and red, democrat and republican (i.e., are poor people poor because socio-economic structure denies them adequate opportunity to succeed or because they lack the work ethic and/or ability to rise out of poverty?). At the very least, this line of questioning led me to consider how games reflect these basic political orientations and their resulting narrative tropes.
- Jordan, Kiele, Drea, Chris, and Elizabeth’s presentation was, thus far, the most reflective of my origin intentions. They pick up where Sarkeesian left off, examining whether indie games are more sophisticated in their treatment of gender than AAA games. They also had the most rigorous methodology, articulating four clear criteria for their study: abuse, playability, role, and appearance. They advance (and confirm?) a hypothesis that indie games would be more progressive in their representations. Like Dylan, Antonio, and Matt, I believe they leave us with a useful framework for approaching other games.
A final word on what to do with this information. Those who follow me on facebook or have taken me before are likely aware of my mantra: “every dollar you spend is a vote for the world in which you want to live.” Don’t want to live in a world in which civic entities stop producing viable drinking water? Then don’t drink bottled water. Don’t want to live in a world in that perpetuates corporate welfare? Then don’t shop at Walmart. Don’t want to support the ALCU? Don’t buy your car insurance from Progressive. Want to support the ALCU? Buy your car insurance from Progressive.
My point is that, whether you are on the left or the right, with a little research you can look into both what political organizations businesses choose to support and what underlying socio-economic/political factors a business contributes to. Understand that in the era of late/global capitalism, your dollar is probably more effectual than your vote (but you should DEFINITELY vote).
Thanks to new media, and especially social media, you have another avenue for agency. Writing complaints on social media has definite impact on what projects developers pursue. Do not think, for a second, that the controversy surrounding GamerGate hasn’t reached executives at gaming companies. The Bechdel test didn’t cure all movies of sexism, but it did have a clear impact on movies and got things moving in a positive direction. It attracted attention. You have, via twitter and the #hashtag, the same power to contribute to social change. DON’T WASTE IT.
The Research Project
At this point in the semester, I want to amend the syllabus a bit to reflect reality (we have 7 weeks left!). I am going to cut back on the Rhetoric and the Real World unit and move into the research project.
Over the next 4 weeks, I will ask you conduct research on video games and “X.” “X” can be just about any other academic, social, or cultural domain. Research needs to be academic in general. I expect a number of the projects will advance from Bogost, so Videogames and Politics, Videogames and Advertisement, or Videogames and Education. Some of these might continue the work of Project One or Two–Such as Videogames and Art or Videogames and Gender/Race/Class. This research can extend from McGonigal and SuperBetter, such as Videogames and Physical Health. This research work can be more narrowly defined, such as MMORPGs and Race, or First-Person Shooters and the Nietzschean Ubermensch, or Survival Horror Video Games and Psychoanalytic Theory (that one has been done). This research can really be about anything you want; next Thursday I will ask you to prepare a 200 word proposal that speaks to your intended topic. I will provide each student with a list of readings germane to that topic. You will be required to find additional readings.
As you are aware, I am not a big fan of providing specific requirements for topics. But I will provide a few:
- I am looking for a paper in the neighborhood of 3000 words (8-12 pages typed, double-spaced)
- I am looking for you to read between 350 and 400 pages of material for your research. Note: this is not a “source count,” but a page count. I will ask you to develop a reading journal, similar to the gaming journal for project one
For homework this weekend, I want you to read the first 76 pages of McGonigal’s Reality is Broken. We will discuss this in class on Tuesday (and I will provide a bit more materials for the research project).
