Massive topic obviously, but here goes...
Yes, games clearly are a product, so are movies, and so are books. For example the Lord of the Rings book by JRR Tolkien is largely seen as a work of art, the movie by Peter Jackson probably is too. The game - debatable? The attempt throughout, however, was to recreate the feelings and the emotion (or the artistc appeal) of JRR Tolkiens work. So is art the product, or the process?
Art should be art regardless of the medium chosen. Using advances in technology shouldn't matter. Cave paintings/Graphic design - method is irrelevant.
While multiplayer has no single artist, it is feasible that it has multiple artists (players) that contribute to a combined experience that exceeds the potential of a sole artist's ability and potential. The problem with multiplayer CS isn't the graphics or the scripting, its that some people don't contribute to the experience and detract from its artistic potential.
I agree with Dagan, art is a paradox by its very nature. Its this inherent dichotomy that makes art what it is. Since the audience is the individual self, right or wrong doesn't apply unless you require it for your own individual reasonaing. Therefore, you can't quantify art because it is recieved (and judged) according to your emotional state. And that is different from person to person and even changes frequently within the self.
Finally, valuing artistic worth is revisionist to a large degree. You take the poem, the painting, whatever, and you try and value it on what inspired and contributed to its creation by the artist (feelings, effort, experience etc.) and then compare this to the final piece. In this way you attempt to give credit to the artistic process. I believe CS can be considered art because while the experience is largely up to the audience, CS does attempt to create a unique atmosphere and there is evidence of a creative process.
Shit, sorry its long as, good topic tho.
Yes, games clearly are a product, so are movies, and so are books. For example the Lord of the Rings book by JRR Tolkien is largely seen as a work of art, the movie by Peter Jackson probably is too. The game - debatable? The attempt throughout, however, was to recreate the feelings and the emotion (or the artistc appeal) of JRR Tolkiens work. So is art the product, or the process?
Art should be art regardless of the medium chosen. Using advances in technology shouldn't matter. Cave paintings/Graphic design - method is irrelevant.
While multiplayer has no single artist, it is feasible that it has multiple artists (players) that contribute to a combined experience that exceeds the potential of a sole artist's ability and potential. The problem with multiplayer CS isn't the graphics or the scripting, its that some people don't contribute to the experience and detract from its artistic potential.
I agree with Dagan, art is a paradox by its very nature. Its this inherent dichotomy that makes art what it is. Since the audience is the individual self, right or wrong doesn't apply unless you require it for your own individual reasonaing. Therefore, you can't quantify art because it is recieved (and judged) according to your emotional state. And that is different from person to person and even changes frequently within the self.
Finally, valuing artistic worth is revisionist to a large degree. You take the poem, the painting, whatever, and you try and value it on what inspired and contributed to its creation by the artist (feelings, effort, experience etc.) and then compare this to the final piece. In this way you attempt to give credit to the artistic process. I believe CS can be considered art because while the experience is largely up to the audience, CS does attempt to create a unique atmosphere and there is evidence of a creative process.
Shit, sorry its long as, good topic tho.
Comment