Flatter the Emperor, Pander to the Crowd

     This post is dedicated to all you long-suffering parishioners out there who have to endure weekly services interrupted by showboating and shimmying choirs, singing music written in the key of C minus (that is no typo!) to lyrics that Ogden Nash would have been embarrassed to sign his name to.

     When I look at the great periods of artistic flourishing in the western world, I see something I'd like to call The Isles of Greece Syndrome.  Its characteristics are these:

1. An extraordinarily vibrant popular culture, embodied in religious-political traditions and celebrations cherished by the people and handed down for many generations.
2. A canon of recognized masterpieces from the past, which the people revere, but which also admit of reinterpretation and re-formation.
3. A high standard of education in at least some artistic or intellectual fields, not entirely restricted to those of noble birth.
4. A high standard of popular craftsmanship, and something like an apprentice system to develop crafts among those youths eager to pursue a trade.
5. Simultaneous ease and difficulty of communication: the fairly decisive separation of one guild, one theater company, one polis, or one monastery from another, with the result that you have the simultaneous development of many autonomous laboratories, each with its own character and specialization, yet each benefiting, by communication, from the discoveries made by the others.  This anthropological situation reaps the greater benefits when it is joined with a similar combination of ease and difficulty of artistic form: consider the Greek dactylic hexameter, or the black-and-white cinematography of film noir.
6. A relatively high degree of freedom, and enough prosperity in the cities and towns to allow for some leisure for solitude and contemplation.

     These conditions more or less all obtained in Tudor and early Stuart England; in the studio system that produced films in America for three or four decades; in Athens and the other Greek cities from about 600 BC to Philip's triumph at Chaeronea (370 or thereabouts, if memory serves); and in the medieval monasteries and then the medieval universities that sprang up all over Europe.  By contrast, you can tell a decadent age by a shift from popular culture to mass entertainment, the loss of a canon of revered and universally understandable art, the decline in standards of education, the decline of crafts and trades, the abolition of separate "laboratories" or their absorption under a single jurisdiction (for instance, the expunging of the local element from all of our public schools), and the curtailing of political freedom, or the loss of material prosperity.

     Except for the loss of material prosperity, all of these conditions apply right now to American writers of liturgical music.  They are not busy resurrecting American folk tunes -- but they are, in their music, echoing American mass entertainment.  They have blithely ignored the great music of the past.  Their education in liturgical music and in religious lyric ranges from spotty to nonexistent.  No system of apprenticeship in America now exists -- nothing like what characterized the Big Bands, even; though there are traces of it in the sometimes stodgily academic schools of music. The composers respect very little in the way of poetic form, as a glance at their lyrics will show; their compositions are, unlike true folk art, slovenly and unorganized; and they are published readily.  As for freedom, they are eager to bow and duck to the Emperor, which in our day is Political Correctness in all its stupid and stupefying forms.

     A couple of days ago I watched an old U.S. Steel Hour production of Bang the Drum Slowly, with Paul Newman as the star pitcher and Albert Salmi as the half-wit catcher with the terminal disease.  It really was a masterpiece in an admittedly second-rank art form: black and white, ruthlessly edited, directed with an intense focus on the inner turmoil of the main characters (Daniel Petrie), and fearless in its refusal to flatter any emperor or pander to any crowd.  The screenplay, which clearly owes a great deal to film noir, to the popular American playhouse, to the glories and miseries of American culture, and even to vaudeville, does not end happily.  I've always thought that Paul Newman was an underrated actor who was hurt rather than helped by typecasting, and his performance here is stunning.  The production works for every reason that our modern liturgical music does not.  Or I think of Bach's Christ Lag in Todesbanden: combining a relatively simple melody with a stunningly complex harmony, all tightly constructed, reverent of the past yet refreshingly new because of that reverence.  Our tunes are insipid without being simple, awkward without being complex, prone to faddishness without being traditional, and predictable without being orderly.  There are a few exceptions, as there will always be, but that's the general rule.   

Comments

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>These conditions more or less all obtained in Tudor and early Stuart England; in the studio system that produced films in America for three or four decades; in Athens and the other Greek cities from about 600 BC to Philip's triumph at Chaeronea (370 or thereabouts, if memory serves); and in the medieval monasteries and then the medieval universities that sprang up all over Europe. By contrast, you can tell a decadent age by a shift from popular culture to mass entertainment, the loss of a canon of revered and universally understandable art, the decline in standards of education, the decline of crafts and trades, the abolition of separate "laboratories" or their absorption under a single jurisdiction (for instance, the expunging of the local element from all of our public schools), and the curtailing of political freedom, or the loss of material prosperity.<<<

I've got a bit of a problem with your historical examples, Tony. While some would say that Hellenistic art (330-120 BC) is inferior to that of Periclean Athens, others would point out that the synthesis of Greek and Oriental styles inherent in Alexander's successor states had a dynamism of its own, one which, moreover, served as the medium by which Greek culture was brought to--and enriched--all the lands between Libya and the Hindu Kush. That would include Rome, whose own artistic blossoming involved the assimilation of Hellenistic culture and its synthesis with some uniquely Latin elements. All the great Latin poets, historians and sculptors worked with Hellenistic genres--sometimes imitatively, other times with brilliant new insights. But if Hellenistic art was decadent, then so too was Roman art, from the late Republic onward.

Also, you seem to limit art to your own particular field of interest, which is literature. Certainly one could say that Hellenistic literature does not measure up to the Athenian golden age. On the other hand, sculpture continued to develop, as the disciplines of philosophy, history, architecture and engineering.

And as for the Romans, their forte was never literature or the performing arts, but in more tangible forms such as architecture, engineering, sculpture, painting and jewelry. In these, the Romans continued to develop and open new horizons, even during the much maligned "late Empire" of Diocletian, Constantine, and Constantine's successors. Only recently have art historians and critics looked at these with eyes unbiased by the verdict of Gibbon and seen the value in late antiquarian art on its own merit.

[Nick]

Again, what Stuart said.

Also, in all this talk about movie studios flowing from the previous thread, it should also be noted that in both production dollars and revenue movies were passed up by video games in the 90's. You may not like them. You may think their trite. But artisans are there. You're just not seeing any of their stuff because its a medium, I'm willing to bet serious money, you're not interested in.

I'll always have fine memories of the Coastal Highway in Half-Life 2 and watching the waves crash on the shore. The sense of loss and impossible odds that System Shock 2 got across with journal entries and sub-par graphics. I'll remember trying to beat mega-man in a fury of trying to ignore the birth of my brother (the last two of my siblings were home births and hearing your mother scream like that can be traumatic for a child, I couldn't turn the volume up loud enough and I knew they didn't want me back there). Sometimes we don't notice certain pieces of art because we're simply not part of that culture.

[Nick]

Again, what Stuart said.

Also, in all this talk about movie studios flowing from the previous thread, it should also be noted that in both production dollars and revenue movies were passed up by video games in the 90's. You may not like them. You may think their trite. But artisans are there. You're just not seeing any of their stuff because its a medium, I'm willing to bet serious money, you're not interested in.

I'll always have fine memories of the Coastal Highway in Half-Life 2 and watching the waves crash on the shore. The sense of loss and impossible odds that System Shock 2 got across with journal entries and sub-par graphics. I'll remember trying to beat mega-man in a fury of trying to ignore the birth of my brother (the last two of my siblings were home births and hearing your mother scream like that can be traumatic for a child, I couldn't turn the volume up loud enough and I knew they didn't want me back there). Sometimes we don't notice certain pieces of art because we're simply not part of that culture.

[William Tighe]

And I have a problem, too, along the same lines, with regard to Tudor England. All scholars of Tudor England now recognize what an absolute and wide-ranging (although fortunately not complete) havock of popular culture was made, once Henry VIII's "reformation" turned Protestant after his death, briefly between 1549 and 1553, and then after 1559, as Elizabeth's iconoclastic "reformation" slowly wore down popular resistance on the local level from the 1570s onward, and the once-vibrant mystery plays were suppressed, vestments, statues, missals and antiphoners that had been hidden away in the initial years of the reign throughout England in the hope of a "better day" to come were discovered, disgorged, destroyed or transformed into curtains, cushions or table-cloths (in the case of vestments). Even under Henry, though, the havoc that was made of England's architectural heritage in the suppression and (in most cases) destruction of the monasteries and the almost total loss through deliberate destruction or employment for base purposes of the contents of monastic libraries throughout England was quite considerable. Much of the "higher" prose and poetry of Elizabethan England (one thinks of Sir Philip Sydney and always excepting in large part the oeuvre of Shakespeare) was novel, classicizing -- and alienated from the "Catholic severed roots" of England's previous vernacular common and high culture alike. This applies to music as well: anyone who has been able to listen to recordings of such beggarly stuff as passed for "music and song" in Elizabeth's Church, and compare it with pre-Reformation English Church music will recognize the difference immediately, and even in the case of the (religiously conservative) Tallis and (defiantly Catholic) Byrd, the contrast between their Latin works and the English stuff they set to music (which is for the most part little better than doggerel on the part of Tallis, although much better in the case of Byrd) is readily apparent.

[William Tighe]

And I have a problem, too, along the same lines, with regard to Tudor England. All scholars of Tudor England now recognize what an absolute and wide-ranging (although fortunately not complete) havock of popular culture was made, once Henry VIII's "reformation" turned Protestant after his death, briefly between 1549 and 1553, and then after 1559, as Elizabeth's iconoclastic "reformation" slowly wore down popular resistance on the local level from the 1570s onward, and the once-vibrant mystery plays were suppressed, vestments, statues, missals and antiphoners that had been hidden away in the initial years of the reign throughout England in the hope of a "better day" to come were discovered, disgorged, destroyed or transformed into curtains, cushions or table-cloths (in the case of vestments). Even under Henry, though, the havoc that was made of England's architectural heritage in the suppression and (in most cases) destruction of the monasteries and the almost total loss through deliberate destruction or employment for base purposes of the contents of monastic libraries throughout England was quite considerable. Much of the "higher" prose and poetry of Elizabethan England (one thinks of Sir Philip Sydney and always excepting in large part the oeuvre of Shakespeare) was novel, classicizing -- and alienated from the "Catholic severed roots" of England's previous vernacular common and high culture alike. This applies to music as well: anyone who has been able to listen to recordings of such beggarly stuff as passed for "music and song" in Elizabeth's Church, and compare it with pre-Reformation English Church music will recognize the difference immediately, and even in the case of the (religiously conservative) Tallis and (defiantly Catholic) Byrd, the contrast between their Latin works and the English stuff they set to music (which is for the most part little better than doggerel on the part of Tallis, although much better in the case of Byrd) is readily apparent.

[William Tighe]

And I have a problem, too, along the same lines, with regard to Tudor England. All scholars of Tudor England now recognize what an absolute and wide-ranging (although fortunately not complete) havock of popular culture was made, once Henry VIII's "reformation" turned Protestant after his death, briefly between 1549 and 1553, and then after 1559, as Elizabeth's iconoclastic "reformation" slowly wore down popular resistance on the local level from the 1570s onward, and the once-vibrant mystery plays were suppressed, vestments, statues, missals and antiphoners that had been hidden away in the initial years of the reign throughout England in the hope of a "better day" to come were discovered, disgorged, destroyed or transformed into curtains, cushions or table-cloths (in the case of vestments). Even under Henry, though, the havoc that was made of England's architectural heritage in the suppression and (in most cases) destruction of the monasteries and the almost total loss through deliberate destruction or employment for base purposes of the contents of monastic libraries throughout England was quite considerable. Much of the "higher" prose and poetry of Elizabethan England (one thinks of Sir Philip Sydney and always excepting in large part the oeuvre of Shakespeare) was novel, classicizing -- and alienated from the "Catholic severed roots" of England's previous vernacular common and high culture alike. This applies to music as well: anyone who has been able to listen to recordings of such beggarly stuff as passed for "music and song" in Elizabeth's Church, and compare it with pre-Reformation English Church music will recognize the difference immediately, and even in the case of the (religiously conservative) Tallis and (defiantly Catholic) Byrd, the contrast between their Latin works and the English stuff they set to music (which is for the most part little better than doggerel on the part of Tallis, although much better in the case of Byrd) is readily apparent.

[William Tighe]

And I have a problem, too, along the same lines, with regard to Tudor England. All scholars of Tudor England now recognize what an absolute and wide-ranging (although fortunately not complete) havock of popular culture was made, once Henry VIII's "reformation" turned Protestant after his death, briefly between 1549 and 1553, and then after 1559, as Elizabeth's iconoclastic "reformation" slowly wore down popular resistance on the local level from the 1570s onward, and the once-vibrant mystery plays were suppressed, vestments, statues, missals and antiphoners that had been hidden away in the initial years of the reign throughout England in the hope of a "better day" to come were discovered, disgorged, destroyed or transformed into curtains, cushions or table-cloths (in the case of vestments). Even under Henry, though, the havoc that was made of England's architectural heritage in the suppression and (in most cases) destruction of the monasteries and the almost total loss through deliberate destruction or employment for base purposes of the contents of monastic libraries throughout England was quite considerable. Much of the "higher" prose and poetry of Elizabethan England (one thinks of Sir Philip Sydney and always excepting in large part the oeuvre of Shakespeare) was novel, classicizing -- and alienated from the "Catholic severed roots" of England's previous vernacular common and high culture alike. This applies to music as well: anyone who has been able to listen to recordings of such beggarly stuff as passed for "music and song" in Elizabeth's Church, and compare it with pre-Reformation English Church music will recognize the difference immediately, and even in the case of the (religiously conservative) Tallis and (defiantly Catholic) Byrd, the contrast between their Latin works and the English stuff they set to music (which is for the most part little better than doggerel on the part of Tallis, although much better in the case of Byrd) is readily apparent.

[William Tighe]

And I have a problem, too, along the same lines, with regard to Tudor England. All scholars of Tudor England now recognize what an absolute and wide-ranging (although fortunately not complete) havock of popular culture was made, once Henry VIII's "reformation" turned Protestant after his death, briefly between 1549 and 1553, and then after 1559, as Elizabeth's iconoclastic "reformation" slowly wore down popular resistance on the local level from the 1570s onward, and the once-vibrant mystery plays were suppressed, vestments, statues, missals and antiphoners that had been hidden away in the initial years of the reign throughout England in the hope of a "better day" to come were discovered, disgorged, destroyed or transformed into curtains, cushions or table-cloths (in the case of vestments). Even under Henry, though, the havoc that was made of England's architectural heritage in the suppression and (in most cases) destruction of the monasteries and the almost total loss through deliberate destruction or employment for base purposes of the contents of monastic libraries throughout England was quite considerable. Much of the "higher" prose and poetry of Elizabethan England (one thinks of Sir Philip Sydney and always excepting in large part the oeuvre of Shakespeare) was novel, classicizing -- and alienated from the "Catholic severed roots" of England's previous vernacular common and high culture alike. This applies to music as well: anyone who has been able to listen to recordings of such beggarly stuff as passed for "music and song" in Elizabeth's Church, and compare it with pre-Reformation English Church music will recognize the difference immediately, and even in the case of the (religiously conservative) Tallis and (defiantly Catholic) Byrd, the contrast between their Latin works and the English stuff they set to music (which is for the most part little better than doggerel on the part of Tallis, although much better in the case of Byrd) is readily apparent.

[William Tighe]

I have absolutely no idea why my comment was reduplicated so many times: I made only one attempt to post it.

[DGP]

It was not duplicated: There are several other participants here, each with the name "William Tighe" and remarkably similar historical judgment. :-)

[Rob Grano]

I gathered that, DGP, from my reading of all 5 posts several times. :^)

[James A. Altena]

I think that Tony's critics are missing the forest for the trees. Picking at particular examples does not really address his general thesis, since one can always come up with different examples. What needs to be addressed is the logic of his argument.

E.g. (at considerable risk) I must dissent vigorously from my formidably learned good friend Bill Tighe's post(s!). As much as I myself prefer polyphony (Tallis being my favorite pre-17th c. composer), his denigrations of the Elizabethan era seem more to reflect a prior conception from anti-Reformation sympathies than a demonstrable historical analysis, an example of the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy.

I would agree that the quality of English sacred music after Byrd declined. So did that of Italian, French, Flemish, and Spanish music at the same time. Meanwhile, the quality of English literature hit its high water mark during the same period (I see no good reason why it should be "excepted"), and that of German music emerged from virtual nothingness to produce the genius of Schuetz, Buxtehude, and Bach in the 17th to early 18th c. If one is going to blame the Protestant Reformation for the decline of English music after Byrd, then one must likewise blame the Counter-Reformation for the similar decline of music in Catholic lands, and credit the Reformation for the flowering of English literature and German music.

In short, instead of monocausal explanantions that attribute rise and fall of X to one factor, I think we should return to considering the merits of far more complex multi-causal conditions such as Tony has posited. It is quite possible, even likely, that both the Reformation and Counter-Reformation had a hand in e.g. the eclipse of medieval and Renaissnace traditions that produced e.g. the genius of the polypohonic mass, but I reject the idea of a simple one-to-one correlation that resembles an inverted form for high culture of the Weber thesis for the rise of modern capitalism.

By the way, Bill, I've recently experienced the same problem here as you with multiple postings. For me, it occurred when I tried to use the "back" button on my browser to go back to the thread. In my case, it also coincided with recent installation of the Norton 360 Security software on my computer -- did you by any chaance recenlty isntall that as well?

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>I would agree that the quality of English sacred music after Byrd declined. So did that of Italian, French, Flemish, and Spanish music at the same time. Meanwhile, the quality of English literature hit its high water mark during the same period (I see no good reason why it should be "excepted"), and that of German music emerged from virtual nothingness to produce the genius of Schuetz, Buxtehude, and Bach in the 17th to early 18th c. If one is going to blame the Protestant Reformation for the decline of English music after Byrd, then one must likewise blame the Counter-Reformation for the similar decline of music in Catholic lands, and credit the Reformation for the flowering of English literature and German music.<<<

Why does Elizabeth get the credit for the high water mark of English literature, when most of the great works were written during the reign of James VI & I?

[William Tighe]

"I would agree that the quality of English sacred music after Byrd declined."

Actually, I was thinking of English sacred music during Elizabeth's reign, not subsequently -- although the fact that Byrd lived on until 1621 should have made me more careful about what I wrote and how I wrote it.

[William Tighe]

"I would agree that the quality of English sacred music after Byrd declined."

Actually, I was thinking of English sacred music during Elizabeth's reign, not subsequently -- although the fact that Byrd lived on until 1621 should have made me more careful about what I wrote and how I wrote it.

[Maclin Horton]

...American writers of liturgical music...are not busy resurrecting American folk tunes -- but they are, in their music, echoing American mass entertainment.

I may have said this in another such discussion here, but it was something of an epiphany for me when I realized, hearing one of our "folk" hymns at Mass, that most resembled not any sort of folk music but rather the Broadway show tune.

[Nick]

But gaming is an example that comes very close to Tony's proposed environment.
1. An extraordinarily vibrant popular culture -> Gaming culture come pretty close but with no noticeable religious overtones.
2. A canon of recognized masterpieces from the past -> Got that.
3. A high standard of education in at least some artistic or intellectual fields, not entirely restricted to those of noble birth. -> In spades.
4. A high standard of popular craftsmanship, and something like an apprentice system to develop crafts among those youths eager to pursue a trade. -> Has that.
5. Simultaneous ease and difficulty of communication: the fairly decisive separation of one guild, one theater company, one polis, or one monastery from another, with the result that you have the simultaneous development of many autonomous laboratories, each with its own character and specialization, yet each benefiting, by communication, from the discoveries made by the others. This anthropological situation reaps the greater benefits when it is joined with a similar combination of ease and difficulty of artistic form: consider the Greek dactylic hexameter, or the black-and-white cinematography of film noir. -> Has that. Game development groups are very clanish.
6. A relatively high degree of freedom, and enough prosperity in the cities and towns to allow for some leisure for solitude and contemplation. -> Million dollar budgets with hard deadlines. The people involved are all located at recognized cultural centers.

[John Hetman]

Fine article on the vacuity of any higher culture in contemporary America. As for litugical music, I just came from Sunday morning mass at a parish that tries hard to celebrate the mass with reverence. This means that there are no "Disciples of Rhythm" jazzing it up, if Haugan-Haas-Joncas can be termed jazzing rather than snoozing--with a lead singer immitating a buxomly swaying Peggy Lee next to the altar.

Instead, familiar music right off the pens that might have written the ditties for Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers--in fact that seems to be the foundation of liturgical music since the 1960s--and no surprise since PBS's eruption and the St. Louis Jesuits are concommitant events.

[James A. Altena]

"Why does Elizabeth get the credit for the high water mark of English literature, when most of the great works were written during the reign of James VI & I?"

Simple -- aside from the statement being dubious, most of the people writing those great works were already writing during Elizabeth's reign. They simply outlived her by a few years and, typically for most artists, produced their greatest masterworks at the ends of their lives. But those lives and careers were already formed during Elizabeth's reign.

E.g., Shakespeare is believed to have written King Lear c. 1605. It is absurd to suppose that somehow he was only producing mediocre plays before 1603 (Hamlet is dated to c. 1600) and then suddenly burst into genius just because Elizabeth died and James ascended the throne. And, for that matter, the abysmal "Henry VIII" is dated as likely being Shakespeare's final play from 1612-13.

For a chronology, see:

http://www.shakespeare-online.com/keydates/playchron.html

Of course, no-one here is saying that Elizabeth I or James VI/I is personally responsible for the quality of the art under their reigns -- though certain policies they pursued (particularly patronage) may have had more or less favorable influences on the arts (or particular arts) overall. We simply use those reigns as markers to designate eras.

To conclude on a lighter note -- Elizabeth I once sent a note to chapel composer William Mundy (who was apparently partly deaf) complaining that his organ was out of tune. The crotchety old retainer sent back a note telling Her Majesty that her ears were out of tune. Amazingly, he seems to have suffered no ill repercussions (which suggests that Elizabeth was either fairly tolerant and/or had a sense of humor).

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>E.g., Shakespeare is believed to have written King Lear c. 1605. It is absurd to suppose that somehow he was only producing mediocre plays before 1603 (Hamlet is dated to c. 1600) and then suddenly burst into genius just because Elizabeth died and James ascended the throne. And, for that matter, the abysmal "Henry VIII" is dated as likely being Shakespeare's final play from 1612-13.<<<

On the other hand, the King James Bible, arguably the greatest work of English literature ever written, was composed under Elizabeth's successor.

>>>To conclude on a lighter note -- Elizabeth I once sent a note to chapel composer William Mundy (who was apparently partly deaf) complaining that his organ was out of tune. The crotchety old retainer sent back a note telling Her Majesty that her ears were out of tune. Amazingly, he seems to have suffered no ill repercussions (which suggests that Elizabeth was either fairly tolerant and/or had a sense of humor).<<<

One of Elizabeth's courtiers, being announced to the Queen, made his entrance with a low bow, during which "he did breaketh wind". Mortified, the poor man left England and travelled abroad for two years. Returning to court, he went once more before the Queen, who welcomed him back with the words, "My dear Sir ____, I had quite forgot the fart".

[William Tighe]

When a group of aristocratic crypto-Catholics was uncovered at Court in 1581, and started to denounce one another, Charles Arundell (one of the more serious of them) reported this about the Earl of Oxford (one of the more dilettantish of them, and the man who possibly initially denounced the others to win the Queen's favor):

Oxford on the Queen: "... rayling at Fra: Southwell for commending the Queenes singing one night at hamton court, protestinge by the blud of god that she had the worst voice and did everye thinge with the worst grace, that ever any woman did, and that he never was non plus but when he came to speke well of her." (London, Public Record Office, SP. 12/151/46)

The earl absented himself from the Court for some considerable time after this episode.

[William Tighe]

Stuart's story is said to concern the Earl of Oxford as well. It is not contemporary, but in the early/mid 17th century version the Queen is supposed to have greeted him with "You have been so long away, My Lord of Oxford, that we have nearly quite forgot your fart."

[William Tighe]

Stuart's story is said to concern the Earl of Oxford as well. It is not contemporary, but in the early/mid 17th century version the Queen is supposed to have greeted him with "You have been so long away, My Lord of Oxford, that we have nearly quite forgot your fart."

[William Tighe]

Stuart's story is said to concern the Earl of Oxford as well. It is not contemporary, but in the early/mid 17th century version the Queen is supposed to have greeted him with "You have been so long away, My Lord of Oxford, that we have nearly quite forgot your fart."

[Ethan Cordray]

Nick, I'll bet you'd enjoy this blog by a game designer, discussing the finer points of artistic game design and design philosophy, as well as plain old philosophy (mostly ethics at the moment). There's some heady stuff over there, and the writer has stated that he'd appreciate a few more Christian readers.

I agree with you that computer gaming seems to possess many of the proposed conditions for great artistic development. It's so different from other forms of art, however, that I think it may be hard to recognize true greatness (or even "brightness" to bring back my recent dichotomy) for those unfamiliar with the medium.

[Clifford Simon]

Nick and Ethan,

Forgive me for having a hard time believing you...

>>1. An extraordinarily vibrant popular culture -> Gaming culture come pretty close but with no noticeable religious overtones.<<
Yes, they are made all the more vibrant, as the flickering screen illuminates the couch-potatos in vibrant color.

>>2. A canon of recognized masterpieces from the past -> Got that.<<
You mean the game of chess, and the game of go, and the deck of cards with its masterful image of Herny VIII? If you meant mega-man and mario, then I have to quibble with your definition of "the past."

>>3. A high standard of education in at least some artistic or intellectual fields, not entirely restricted to those of noble birth. -> In spades.<<
Yeah, my friend just did a Ph.D in Mortal Kombat (now THIS game is in everyone's canon of recognized masterpieces, or course!), with a minor in Guitar Hero 2. But I'm worried about his mother. Her neighbors' kids were all philosophers and medical doctors. Now she finally has an educated child to put up against theirs...

>>6. A relatively high degree of freedom, and enough prosperity in the cities and towns to allow for some leisure for solitude and contemplation. -> Million dollar budgets with hard deadlines. The people involved are all located at recognized cultural centers.<<
I never knew that the couch was a "recognized cultural center".

I recommend Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death." It explains why television (and games by extension) can never be culture.

Well actually, Nick, Ethan, and all you gamers out there, I should inform you that my own brother is a game developer. Knowing that, you can take my remarks a little more lightly. :)

[Tony Esolen]

For Stuart and Prof. Tighe,

Yes, I do agree with all that you say. Many of the peculiar cultural advantages that were enjoyed in Periclean Athens continued to be enjoyed by the Greeks after Philip's conquest -- not least among them the advantages of geographical partial-isolation; I wish there were a word for it. Also I agree that Hellenistic sculpture continued to develop; my own taste runs toward the Baroque, so I do find The Dying Gaul to be more powerful a work of art than those chilly nudes of the classical period. Mathematics and science were not hurt; but philosophy tailed off, and literature (except for the lyric) fell off a cliff, in both range and quality.

Tudor England is a tougher sell, but I was thinking almost entirely of poetic and dramatic production. That popular culture that Henry VIII did so much to destroy was still very much alive when Shakespeare was a boy -- he had the advantage of a popular drama, the last "mystery plays" and the moral interludes that sprang from them; without that popular drama, there would have been no Marlowe, Jonson, Fletcher, Middleton, Massinger, Webster, and Ford, and there would have been no Shakespeare. When the Puritans finally shut down the playhouses, they sever the link between the "high" and the old popular drama, so that when the houses reopen after the Restoration, we just have the English version of bourgeois comedies of manners a la Moliere.

Spenser's debt to the popular culture -- pageants, holy-days, old songs, medieval poetry -- is simply immense; Sidney is the more "continental" and "modern" of the two.

[Nick]

>>1. An extraordinarily vibrant popular culture -> Gaming culture come pretty close but with no noticeable religious overtones.<<
Yes, they are made all the more vibrant, as the flickering screen illuminates the couch-potatos in vibrant color.

This is a gross oversimplification of gamers made so that non-gamers feel more comfortable. While it is true that TV requires very little interaction games do not. Gamers are not couch potatoes.

>>2. A canon of recognized masterpieces from the past -> Got that.<<
You mean the game of chess, and the game of go, and the deck of cards with its masterful image of Herny VIII? If you meant mega-man and mario, then I have to quibble with your definition of "the past."

I'm not sure where you're going with that. Chess has been around and been more successful than Shakespeare has been. And Mario, as in the original Super-Mario was a masterpiece of its kind. I won't argue that it stimulated the mind as much as showed a craftsman's skill. For more stimulating pieces we can look at the Sid Meir cannon.

>>3. A high standard of education in at least some artistic or intellectual fields, not entirely restricted to those of noble birth. -> In spades.<<
Yeah, my friend just did a Ph.D in Mortal Kombat (now THIS game is in everyone's canon of recognized masterpieces, or course!), with a minor in Guitar Hero 2. But I'm worried about his mother. Her neighbors' kids were all philosophers and medical doctors. Now she finally has an educated child to put up against theirs...

I'm unaware of any claims that Elizabethan audiences had Ph.D.'s. Shakespeare on the other hand was talented. So we look to the creators of games. In the programming field game developers are amongst the most talented. Their generally only second to those who work on medical software. Not to mention the artwork that is generated for games now. See:
http://www.interactive.org/

>>6. A relatively high degree of freedom, and enough prosperity in the cities and towns to allow for some leisure for solitude and contemplation. -> Million dollar budgets with hard deadlines. The people involved are all located at recognized cultural centers.<<
I never knew that the couch was a "recognized cultural center".

Still confusing the viewer with the artists and tv with video games.

I recommend Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death." It explains why television (and games by extension) can never be culture.

Well actually, Nick, Ethan, and all you gamers out there, I should inform you that my own brother is a game developer. Knowing that, you can take my remarks a little more lightly. :)

I'll try to check out the book. I'll have to disagree with you though.

[Katherine Philips]

"Why does Elizabeth get the credit for the high water mark of English literature, when most of the great works were written during the reign of James VI & I?"

When she does get such credit, it's usually because of her political choice to take the via media between high Anglo-Catholicism and strict Puritanism. People who praise her for the cultural flowering of her reign - particularly with respect to music - usually prefer the simplicity imposed on the vernacular compositions of Byrd, Gibbons, et al., to their ornate works written for the Latin service. (The Catholic Church made similar reforms, by the way, at the Council of Trent, essentially judging the old ways too highbrow for laypersons.)

As for the KJV's 1611 publication date, one should take care to remember that it's largely a composite work, relying heavily on earlier translations such as the Tyndale, Coverdale, and Geneva Bibles.

[James A. Altena]

Postman's book is superb. His death is much to be lamented.

As a life member of the US Chess Federation, I would point out that more books have been written on chess than on all other sports and games combined. (Cleveland has a library with perhaps the finest collection of chess literature in the world). It is a uniquely beautiful creation of the human mind that is at once art, sport, and game alike. (The great early 20th c. master Frank Marshall once played a move of such spectacular beauty and ingenuity that gallery spectators showered the chess board with gold pieces.)

Chess also has the capacity to develop moral as well as intellectual character, by inculcating such traits as patience, analytical skills, long term planning, and organizational skills. It is now well documented that prisoners who learn and play chess regularly have far lower recidivism rates than the general criminal population, as chess play teaches them not to act on impulse and how to channel aggressive/competitive instincts into non-violent channels of expression. Similarly, schools in New Jersey now offer chess courses for credit, and once again active involvement in chess tournaments correlates to superior scholastic achievement and few disciplinary problems. A university in Texas now grants a special scholarship to an academically qualified student who also demonstrates potential to develop into a world-class chess player.

This is not to promote chess as a social cure-all, any more than playing the overhyped "Mozart for Baby" CDs will automaically make a child smarter (much as I love classical music). It is rather to point out that the intellectually and morally well-formed mind will be cultivated along certain lines by certain habits, and that both chess and classical music, like great literature and great art in general, contribute to that cultivation.

By contrast, the mind that is devoted to e.g. video games displays a certain technical skill and prowess, but no comparable cultivation of intellectual or moral character.

One of the most pernicious common notion is the idea that recreation should consist in doing something as intellectually as possible, rather than in cultivating the mind in different but equally challenging ways as does. As C. S. Lewis noted, we should not encourage "the natural man's instinctive hatred of excellence."

[GL]

By contrast, the mind that is devoted to e.g. video games displays a certain technical skill and prowess, but no comparable cultivation of intellectual or moral character.

Wouldn't that depend on the game? Video games as video games is a medium (i.e., the chess board, if you will). On it, just as on a chess board, one my play chess or checkers. I am not a player of video games, but I believe some are (or may be) quite capable of cultivating intellectual or moral character. It depends on the precise game being "played on the board."

[Michael]

James,

Go to GameCrazy or GameStop, buy a used Nintendo GameCube and a used copy of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (available in limited edition to accompany the release of the GameCube game The Legend of Zelda: The Windwaker). Go home, take three weeks to complete the game, take two aspirin and call me in the morning.

Failing that, you are welcome to find a used Super Nintendo Entertainment System and a used copy of SquareSoft's Chrono Trigger, the greatest console game of all time (also available for the Sony PlayStation/2/3).

If you don't want to spend money on a system, just go to the local Target and buy any of The Elder Scrolls series, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (you'll have to lay aside your prejudice against the franchise for this) or any of Sid Meier's Civilization games. Heck, send me your address and I'll send you Microsofts Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings free of charge if I can find it around here somewhere...

[Pinon Coffee]

I'm not a gamer myself, but it looks to me as though James is thinking/assuming that games played on the computer are necessarily intellectually inferior to board games. I have all kinds of opinions on technology and its effect on the soul, most of them contradictory, and therefore find this debate fascinating. :-)

Perhaps James could say if I'm reading him correctly, and if so, why he thinks it. :-)

[Nick]

James,

You started off so good and than fell flat. I'll use your favorite line, "some people shouldn't comment outside of their area of expertise." You're expertise on video games is approaching the limit of zero. I'll start with the fact that a computer can be used as a medium to play chess with people in the same way it has been conducted by mail for centuries. Then I'll run to Sid Mier's classic stable:
* Railroad Tycoon
* Civilization I-IV (with special emphasis on I and IV)

Or these other classics:
* Europa Universalis II from which we all could learn a great bit about history and which actually treats history in an important light.
* Crusader Kings was well received by Ethan as a primer on medieval politics.
* Close Combat I-V, for which I can unfortunately not provide a link since the company is defunct and the designer is working for the military now, has even been praised by our own Stuart as a good model of infantry warfare and can be used as a wonderful tool in teaching WWII.

In the "action" area of video games I'd actually avoid Zelda (a populist choice for the groundings!) and instead suggest either Ico or Shadow of the Colossus which are both by the same author. They take a look at how much you can take out of an adventure game while still having a compelling work. They're the minimalist version of a game.

If non-action puzzle games are for you and you want most of the puzzles to include music or sounds there is always the Myst series with its descriptions of an underground empire that can create worlds by writing books (are they gods or do they just make links?).

For benefits to the human person we need only look at the very populist Dance, Dance series. Shown to reduce fat in teenagers all over the globe. However, it tends to be the chick flick equivalent of video games.

Chess is a wonderful game, but even in the realm of boardgames its beginning to show its age under the influence of modern German/Euro based boardgaming. I fully admit to being a former chess snob and a chess club member from elementary through HS . I've just begun to explore the variety in new board games as I've gotten older. An added advantage is chess is a primarily male game because of the raw calculated aggression. The new Euro games are a little bit more significant-other friendly.

In art though games are becoming serious competitors. Many high end artists are now employed by the video game industry. Many games have more artists working on them than high-end movies. There's even an art competition by the MPA equivalent for games with content that, unfortunately, far exceeds what you'd see in many galleries these days.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

Nick, the reference to calculus was hilarious!!

Incidentally, when do you think is an appropriate age to introduce video games to children? Any particular game titles that you recommend?

And do you play Dance Dance Revolution where you tap your feet to the 4 directional arrows?

[Clifford Simon]

Nick, I appreciate your comments. I don't doubt that your thoughts go much deeper than the few words we have been able to exchange.

I feel that the onlookers may want to know why I have grouped games with TV, contrary to Nick. Games as media and TV as media have the following in common. They do not easliy convey the true things worth talking and singing about: namely, abstracts. (This argument is indebted to Postman, whom I mentioned.)

Theology, and human interaction, both traffic in abstracts, necessarily. Visual images by their very nature are not abstract, but particular. Rembrant cannot paint a common (i.e. abstract) noun, only a proper noun. On the other hand, you cannot say ten meaningful words to a human being without using at least one common noun. Take this blog for example. Can you show me even one post with no common nouns? With no "predicating universally," as philosophers say?

I would say that if it doesn't speak in common nouns, it's highly unlikely to be real human interaction. I would say that this fact is neither alterable by the great skill of the artist nor the great culture of the audience. Once people stop trafficing in common nouns (the basis of all ideas and propositional content), they have ceased doing anything meaningful.

To me, that is what demarks the kind of art Professor Esolen is talking about on one side of the line, and TV and video games together on the other.

What about masterpiece painting, and sculpture, and pure music? Ah, that is where TRADITION comes in. These media (even though they are not media of abstracts) used to serve to illuminate the great public discourse of their time (which was a discourse of abstracts, put in motion by the printing press). A Bach fugue for organ does not exist by itself: it existed in the context of the German Lutheran Church, and that is why it sounds like the holiness of God. But what great cultural context does Counterstrike exist in - masterfully crafted and visually stunning as it is?

There, I have said enough. Another may have the last word.

[Nick]

TAUD,

Video games, like every other media, should be given to children with caution. There's mostly harmless reaction puzzlers like Boom Boom Rocket (which is based on exploding fireworks) and Tetris which my three year old plays with me. After that its up to parental discretion. I don't buy into the popular theory that video games never inspire violence. That's silly. Of course they can, just like Ride of the Valkyries can make you want to shake a spear at your foe.

1.) Never let your child play a game you haven't played.
2.) Work hard to avoid letting games be a baby sitter. Play with your child.
3.) Don't forget board games. James is spot on that the beauty behind the interaction of chess is often forgotten. There are many valid family friendly competitors to chess. Take a look at the possibilities.
4.) Don't play violent games where a child doesn't have a context in which to fit the violence.
5.) Don't play games where you are the "bad guy" (frighteningly common).

Clifford,

That's assuming that video games are entirely visual, most of the good ones are not. For that I'll refer you to the game System Shock 2. It is a fairly classic first person shooter in most respects. However, it drives the story by having you read journals from people that have died on a space ship. Other than fleeting glances of two people (in a game that lasts a total of about twelve hours) of two people running through doors and a brief end-game, you only "interact" with the other characters via the journal entries the characters left behind shortly before the ship was attacked. I've never felt so lonely in my life. I was positively depressed when the game ended since it did such a beautiful job of setting up a "lost hope" style ending.

These games also exist in the context of the large body of fiction that supports them. The popular Halo series now has something like five or six pulp fiction paper backs to support the back story. While I wouldn't suggest these (they are probably trash-fluff like most works in that genre) the ones for Myst were nice light fiction and well worth the time reading.

Not to mention the popular culture that is represented by these games. Rainbow Six and the other Tom Clancy games exist because of the cultural influence of geo-politics as written by Clancy. Half-Life is the classic science gone awry story transformed into a war for independence in Half-Life 2.

Originally Tony asked where these artists went. They're still around. They're just doing different things. There are very few large public works projects that are privately funded these days. You're not going to see artists where there isn't anyone to pay them. Game art is going to use some of them, movies really aren't that bad as I think the Batman Begins and GATTACA discussions demonstrate, in books we've had Lewis and Tolkien in the last century. What more could you want?

Did I mention GATTACA? Go see it now.

[Michael]

Nick,

Uh, Zelda may be populist, but there's no denying its genius. Specific games in the series should be lauded more than others to be sure (Ocarina of Time being the pinnacle of the series thus far, mind I haven't played Twilight Princess). I second Myst and Shadow of the Colossus, and of course I already mentioned Civilization and Age of Empires.

Regarding "action" games: would you fit real-time RPG's like Knights of the Old Republic into this group, or even turn-based RPG's like...uh...everything from Square? I don't highly recommend simple shoot-'em-ups, but there is a significant difference between battles in the context of stories--with reference to Square's masterful library and BioWare's KotOR--and violence for the sake of violence. In the former, the game is about the story, which involves action, and in the latter, the game is about the action, which necessitates a story (usually a highly tendentious story meant only to give an excuse/backdrop for the action to take place).

That said, the Halo series--which, for the record, is far overrated--is a classic first-person shooter, but there are definite religious overtones in the game. In the first, you are fighting an alien group known as the Covenant, whose religious obsession has led to the creation of the machine-planet Halo, and the second game deals a lot with the effects of the ruling of the Covenant's High Prophets on an appointed arbiter in a time of war. The end of the second game ends with the loss of the Ark of the Covenant.

I can't believe in your post you said that gaming culture "comes close but with no bovious religious overtones." The gaming canon is rife with religious symbolism...

[Nick]

It uses symbolism but I don't think most developers have anything but a neo-pagan/secularist mindset. I'd assumed that Tony was using that rule to address the religion of the artists and how it informed the work not the other way around. If so, then gaming doesn't really have much in the way of religiously informed pieces. I'd actually be interested to hear if any games worked out that way. I still belong to a developers list that has some big names in the industry on it. I'll see if I can pass the question on.

PS-> Isn't Halo built by the ancients and not the covenant?
PPS-> I'm not a huge fan of computer based RPG's so I can't comment. They tend to frustrate me.

[GL]

There are explicitly Christian video games, including games designed to teach Church history, doctrine, etc.

[Ethan Cordray]

>>They do not easliy convey the true things worth talking and singing about: namely, abstracts.<<

Mr. Simon, I refute your argument thusly:

so much depends
upon

a red wheel
barrow

glazed with rain
water

beside the white
chickens.

(William Carlos Williams)

[Ethan Cordray]

Nick and Michael,

Halo also has the distinction of having, in my opinion, the best starship name ever: the Pillar of Autumn.

[Nick]

The only problem with those is that I've never seen a good one. They amount to the video game version of Tony's hated music. Some of the stupidest I've seen have been simple FPS conversion with angels shooting demons and such like. I'm a big fan of Barbara Nicolosi's view on Christians in movies and I think the same view should be applied to video games.

[Nick]

Yah Ethan, that was the coolest name ever.

[Ethan Cordray]

>>There are explicitly Christian video games, including games designed to teach Church history, doctrine, etc.<<

Ah, yes. About those. Actually, the best one I've ever played was a Zelda-style adventure for the NES called "Spiritual Warfare," in which you threw various fruits of the Spirit (pears for meekness, bananas for faith, etc.) at people to convert them, while searching for the pieces of the armor of God. It taught me one important thing, though: once you got the sword of the Spirit, you were an unstoppable killing converting machine!

[Truth Unites...and Divides]

Nick et al,

Thanks for the tips about videogames and children. And thanks for the Christian videogame titles.

[Wonders for Oyarsa]

Has anyone played the Total War series? The Newest one, Medieval II, is fantastic. I've never seen pre-gunpowder battlefield tactics done so convincingly - hundreds of knights charging into thousands of spearmen, and the chaos that ensues. I think this is one that Stuart in particular would enjoy immensely, provided he had a top of the line PC to play it on.

But I do wonder about the moral element to the games. They are done fantastically well - this much is certain. But the moral vision of many games is rather impoverished. I agree with Nick (never thought you'd see the day, did you?) that the ability to play as the bad guys is a disturbing trend.

[Nick]

I've played the first title (the Japanese one) and Medieval II. They're definately interesting games, but they're far from the best. The AI is...well...stupid. Not to mention the pathing in the tactical battles is odd. For example knights charge crossbow men...the crossbow men flee except for ones caught in battle...knights kill those...knights run past nearby targets for the banner of the crossbow (which seems to be created on a center of mass calculation since it warps everywhere)...knights run in circles chasing warping bannermen.

I'd really suggest if your interested in that period trying out the Paradox titles I mentioned. Less bloodthirsty and far more instructive of the period.

[Ethan Cordray]

Sounds like it needs an AI upgrade-something like WETA's "Massive" system sounds like it would do the trick. I'm surprised that no one has efectively applied that sort of agent-based approach of computer wargames yet.Is it just too resource-intensive for real-time?

I'm rather sad that the "Left Behind" RTS got poor reviews. It seemed to have a really original mechanical concept, with troops as contestable resources and two distinct levels of conflict. You wouldn't always want to kill enemies, because you could convert them to your cause. Maybe someone over at a major studio like Relic will take up the concept.

[James A. Altena]

Nick,

Chess played on a computer is still chess. Using a computer to play it does not somehow transform it into a video game instead.

As for video games concerned with history -- do you actually intend to assert that people learn as much or more from these games than from books and articles produced by actual professional historians? Sorry, I prefer *real* history, not games.

[GL]

As for video games concerned with history -- do you actually intend to assert that people learn as much or more from these games than from books and articles produced by actual professional historians? Sorry, I prefer *real* history, not games.

James,

I would assert that a well developed video game based on historic events could convey information which a book could not, for example, in a battle, the lay of the land and a little bit of what it would be like to be a soldier on the battlefield. It obviously is not the same as being at that place at the time of the battle, but that is not possible, so the video game may offer an imperfect substitute.

As with many issues, it is neither either/or, but both/and. I don't know if such a game exists, but I can envision reading about the Battle of Gettysburg and playing a video game based on the battle and then visiting the actual battlefield, with each providing insights which any one of the options alone would not provide and with each adding to my understanding of each of the other options for learning about the battle. Reading about Pickett's charge, then playing a video game in which you are, in turn, a Confederate participating in the charge and a Union soldier defending against it, and then visiting the site of the event might, in combination, be an overall better learning experience than just reading about it and visiting the battlefield.

If you believe video games are weak in content now, just remember that it is a very new medium, no more than 50 to 60 years old back to its earliest forms. With time, its content may improve. I, however, believe myself to ill-informed to judge whether there may not in fact be some very high quality content available.

[Wonders for Oyarsa]

Battlefield tactics is an example of something video games can teach far better than books in many respects.

[Ethan Cordray]

>>As for video games concerned with history -- do you actually intend to assert that people learn as much or more from these games than from books and articles produced by actual professional historians?<<

I assert no such thing. However, two points still must be made:

1. Just because they teach less doesn't mean they teach not at all.

2. Because the experience of playing a game is so vastly different from the experience of reading discursive history, it possible that one can learn *different* things through games than through reading (or learn the same things, but in a different way that is additionally helpful to understanding, if we want to be technical).

This is the same situation as, for example, the difference between reading a book about Medieval city life and picking up a copy of the Carmina Burana. Different media address the human intellect and imagination in different ways. A history of Medieval warfare might enlighten me in one way. Playing a simulation of a Medieval battle might in another. Whether this simulation comes in the form of, say, a real-life reinactment or a computer game is not particularly important, at least to the general principle (though even those two activities might communicate different things; it's hard to understand how heavy a sword is with a computer, and in real life it can be hard to appreciate the scale of actual battles).

Neither raw imaginative experience nor discursive study reveals the totality of truth about a subject. There is always more than can be learned, and sometimes it requires different ways of learning.

And all this is still overlimiting the original topic, which is whether games constitute art. They need not be accepted as factually instructive to meet the definition of art.

[GL]

Makes sense to me Wonders. I know quite a bit about video games from my research, but as to the quality of the content, I defer to the younger ones here whose actual experience with the games undoubtedly exceeds mine by thousands of hours. It does seem to me that they offer unbefore imagined possibilities for learning and understanding.

[Nick]

And your assertion would be wrong because you don't know about the field. Studies have shown that children who learn things from games pick them up at about the same rate as they do from books, and if its a good game, they're more willing to play it. Note, I did not say better but at about the same rate. One of the reasons that games are interesting is that they are learning experiences.

Then, as GL points out, some games can do thing that books just can't get across very well. For example, in Europa Universalis you get a wonderful view of what the world looks like and how event A effected countries X, Y, Z and how that effect rippled outward.

As for chess still being chess, fair enough. Then why say all video games are bad? Many video games, in fact the earliest ones, were translations of face to face games to a different medium. Many games today could be theoretically played in a face-to-face setting but a computerized moderator makes that less tedious. What's wrong with Myst? Shadows of the Colossus? How are the images derived from the lost highway in Half-Life 2 inferior to paintings? Why can't a game be equally or more engaging than a book? Without even superficially answering these questions I can't take your comments as seriously as I might take you, for example, on the history of the philosophy of science.

You're discounting a medium because you don't like it. Because you don't like it you know little about it. Because you know little about it you're making claims that just don't fly.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

That holographic simulation thing on one of those Star Trek spinoffs was a pretty cool imagination of a futuristic learning environment.

[Michael]

Italics off.

[Nick]

Fixing....

[Katherine Philips]

Electronic media do often seem to be more addictive than many of their traditional counterparts, though I can't say why. For that reason alone, I am quite leery of them.

Do any of you gamers have further thoughts on their apparent tendency to addict?

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

I'm not a gamer. But I think electronic gaming is more addictive for one simple reason: They are more fun.

[Michael]

>>Do any of you gamers have further thoughts on their apparent tendency to addict?<<

Unlike pen-and-paper and board games, video games are inherently immersive. You assume a character role in a larger functioning world. Most addictive games are those of the RPG variety, specifically massively multiplayer online RPG's (MMORPG's), and the tendency to addiction is probably based on a desire for escapism. I wouldn't say someone becomes addicted to the gaming so much as the world in which it takes place, starting to confuse their role in physicality with their place in the digital world. Here, I am a 19-year-old college student; there, I am well-respected, server-renowned warrior prince*...which seems more appealing?

Board games, and even pen-and-paper RPG's like Dungeons and Dragons, do not have this immersive quality because the world in which it takes place is 2-dimensional and only created in the mind's eye of the beholder. A sharp imagination and quick wit creates the immersion, but that takes a conscious effort to do so. Digital media draw the world for you, and all it requires is a few minutes alone in front of the computer without being interrupted to be in that world mentally.

[Ethan Cordray]

I don't find most games half as addictive as Mere Comments. :-)

But in general, I hold with TUAD. Also, the sort that are most addicitive tend to be those that don't break play up into small discreet chunks but instead lay out out large progressing scopes, and those that require a lot of intricate strategic planning. These are the ones that I can lose hours to without noticing. Usually they fall into the genres of RPGs (massively multiplayer online RPGs are reportedly the worst, but I've never played one) and grand-strategic turn-based strategy games (the Civilization series being the paragon of both quality and addictiveness, and I *have played that one for hours on end). Other commonly "addictive" genres are building games, like Sim City, and puzzle games, which don't usually fit my two criteria but instead capivate using intricate repetitive patterns.

As long as a game continues to provide enjoyment even after lots of play, players will tend to return to it. Pretty simple, really.

[Nick]

From the original Civ IV ad campaign...if you haven't played it you won't get most of the jokes:
http://www.civanon.org/

[Anne]

Ok, most of the good comments have been taken, but: what are you slamming Ogden Nash for? ;)

[Ethan Cordray]

Slamming? Who's slamming? He's written my favorite poem, and I love him immensely. Or was that a joke that I didn't get?

[Ethan Cordray]

That's pretty funny, Nick. :-)

[Homer Simpson]

Now that Stuart has my attention yet again....
I affirm the statement by Mr. Altena that history is best served by study of BOOKS. This is the best course as BOOKS were generally WRITTEN on PAPER by people who have studied the events, people and artifacts of the history.
It is with great sadness that Video Game addiction has created the side effect of fear of books.
Video Game addiction is very real and causes great disconnects between those effected and the community surrounding the effected. I have seen friends disappear from the face of the earth because they MUST play games like "Everquest".
I submit for review that the eagerness of Video Game addicts to frequent alternate universes where they are the center is simply another form of Idolatry.

Some worthy information on video game addiction;

http://www.mediafamily.org/facts/facts_gameaddiction.shtml
http://www.videogameaddiction.net/

And may I return to the original statement of those who, "suffer shimmying choirs". I've never seen a shimmying choir at Mass, though I think it would be nice.

[GL]

Homer,

Yeah, I've noticed that Ethan and Michael (whom I take to be gamers) seem to have a complete lack of knowledge of books. :-, Of course, some gamers are airheads, but others are very intelligent and can balance their lives while still playing (and dare I say, learning from) video games.

What a bunch of poppycock!

[GL]

I should add, my older two children play a variety of educational video games which are designed for their age level. I'm amazed at the knowledge they have at their ages, some of which they learned playing video games that awards them for getting the right answer to questions about letters, words, numbers, math and science and doing it in a fun way so that they thinking they are just playing. They know far more about some subjects than I did at their ages.

Not all that is new is bad. "Video games" is a medium. Like any other medium, it can be used to convey useful or harmful content. The medium is not inherently evil or bad. Get over it!

[GL]

Make that "rewards" instead of "awards" -- I intended to type "awards them points." You get the idea. ;-)

[Homer Simpson]

To the esteemed and righteous GL:
I did not, nor do I allude to any lack of knowledge by Ethan or Michael. Books are on of the best steps to study history.
Would you allude that a videogame that put the gamer in the role Porcius Festus as he attempted to legislate his way out of dealing with the apostle Paul was a good way to study the early church? Or would you instead believe that one should read the book of Acts?

[Homer Simpson]

To the honorable GL
I think Ronald Reagan said it best when he said, "There you go again.."
Of course your children are intelligent, the tree is known by the fruit.
I add that I've never seen reports about "reading addiction"
Have you seen reports about, "Reading addiction" and how clinics exist in the Netherlands to rehabilitate "reading addicts"?

[GL]

Both/and, Homer, not either/or. How many times do I read posts where false dichotomies are given?

Read Acts and then play a game or vis-a-versa (though I'm not sure that a game could add much in the example you cite, but that might just be lack of imagination on my part).

My kids watched a lot of the much maligned VeggieTales series of video -- and have played a few VeggieTales games. Now, as we read the Bible stories, my daughter and son recall the stories very well and even comment of the parts that are real as opposed to the parts that were made up on the videos. Even at their young ages, they understand that they were learning Bible stories while having fun. I can't tell you the people who have commented on their knowledge of the Bible at such young ages. They gained it through a combination of media and they gained it while having fun. Some new tools are actually useful.

[Katherine Philips]

"Would you allude that a videogame that put the gamer in the role [of] Porcius Festus as he attempted to legislate his way out of dealing with the apostle Paul was a good way to study the early church? Or would you instead believe that one should read the book of Acts?"

Why not both? As a child, I learned a good deal about the Bible and church history from listening to Christian radio broadcasts (of both inferior and fine quality), as well as from reading the Bible itself together with books and magazine articles. Learning similar pieces of information in different media often reinforces knowledge.

[Katherine Philips]

Well said, GL. :-)

[Homer Simpson]

To the fair and balanced GL:
I agree with your analysis of "Veggie Tales" 100 percent and without exception. It is an excellent example of how new mediums can be used favorably.

[GL]

Great minds think alike, Katherine.

[Homer Simpson]

To the esteemed Katherine.
I notice you did not mention videogames as part of your childhood education.
And to GL and Katherine:
Could you pontificate on how videogames are similar to scripture, since your are both great minds and think alike.
I'm sure inquiring minds would like to know.

[Homer Simpson]

As a final addendum:
I agree that a video game could be a useful educational tool when it uses facts to teach.
Unfortunately, many video games exist to excite the gamer, and do not offer facts.
This is why books are superior when studying history.

[Katherine Philips]

I've tried videogames, and my sheer ineptitude has kept me from getting any fun out of them, but I'm not firmly set against them in principle - although you may have noticed my earlier comment about being concerned about their power to addict.

Now, one of my favorite childhood radio programs did address just this topic (in a very didactic manner), but I digress. I'm happy to leave the videogame defense up to the gamers here.

[GL]

Homer and Katherine,

I agree that video games can be addictive and one should certainly limit a child's time playing them, just as he should with TV and videos. If signs of addiction appear, then that should be dealt with. That does not mean that the games are inherently evil. This is not meth we are talking about here. Like many things, it can be good if used in moderation.

[GL]

Could you pontificate on how videogames are similar to scripture, since your are both great minds and think alike.

. . .

This is why books are superior when studying history.

I agree that video games are not substitutes for books and I would choose books over games, but, again, it is not a case of either/or and I do think some things might be learned easier, more rapidly, and, even sometimes, better playing a video game. Reading about a work by Mozart, even reading the music, is not the same as listening to it. Watching the movie version of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe can enhance one's understanding of the book. And playing a game about the Battle of Gettysburg can add to one's understanding of the battle in a way that reading about it never could.

[Katherine Philips]

"And playing a game about the Battle of Gettysburg can add to one's understanding of the battle in a way that reading about it never could."

And reenacting key points of the battle at the battlefield can be even better, if one's so lucky as to be in the area. If one isn't, the right books and games can both give good insights into tactical maneuvers and strategy.

[Nick]

Homer,

I can't take you seriously. If you can honestly believe that there aren't addicted readers in the same way that there are "addicted" video gamers you haven't seen readers. I, all on my own, have finished a novel in the closet in one night because my mother told me to go to bed and I wasn't putting the book down; the closet was the only covert light available. You'd also have to discount all those stories of lonely people with newspapers and books piled in every corner.

That said, the "addiction" word is waaaaaaaay overused.

Also, why would most here, whom I'm guessing are older than both Ethan and me (I'm 31 and I believe Ethan is mid-twenties) recount stories of learning from video games? It would be the equivalent of expecting my grand-parents to have learned from TV. The technology to mass produce video games didn't exist until the early 80's. They didn't *really* take off until the 90's. Katherine, James, and the like, bless their hearts in the best southern fashion are probably a bit older than that. Everyone here who has reproached video games has shown a paucity of knowledge in the subject. Its own vibrant defenders here are a lot better read than the stereo-type would lead you to believe.

Repeat after me...its just another media.

Also repeat...the artists are bigger and better than ever...they've just moved to (in order of revenue and salaries) industrial design, gaming, movies.

[Homer Simpson]

To the equitable Nick.
Video games began mass production in the 1970's headed by the efforts of the Sears and Bally Midway and Magnavox companies.

As a whippersnapper I'm sure you think the world began with Nintendo, this is not the case.

Also, educational video games have existed since the 1970's as well.

I repeat my earlier statement that I've not read of any rehabilitation clinics coming into existence to treat the side effects of, "reading addiction"

Even films have been made on the destructive side effects of video games, as can be seen here...

http://www.edchange.org/multicultural/reviews/f-gameover.html

I would bet the farm that esteemed and seasoned individuals like Katherine and GL are far better read than you. Had you read the actual historical evolution of video games that is readily available in both book and electronic format, your facts may have been more accurate.

Mr. Altena presented that reading books are the best way to study history. This remains the case.
I further represent that one of the most attractive aspects of video gaming(and part of its addiction)is the focus on the individual. This is idolatry.

[Homer Simpson]

Again to the truculent Nick:
A google search of, "Video Game Addiction" returns 497000 hits.

A google search of, "Reading addiction"
returns 9560 hits.

I would submit that your opinion that Video Game Addicition isn't an issue is, " like, your opinion man"

[Wonders for Oyarsa]

I further represent that one of the most attractive aspects of video gaming is the focus on the individual. This is idolatry.

Oh good grief...

[Homer Simpson]

To the marvelous Wonders for Oyarsa who also has an excellent website.

Am I wrong? Please illuminate me.

[Wonders for Oyarsa]

Heh - a gentle answer turns away wrath. Complement my website, and I'll do anything. ;-)

The most attractive aspect of video gaming for me is that it is a lot of fun. But as fun as it might be alone, it is always more fun in multiplayer - especially if the folks are in the room with you. My two-year old son and I played Zelda together for 20 minutes just last night (ok, so he's a little young and just watched, but he sure participated with flurries of questions). Video games can be horribly addictive, and making sure you always play WITH people can help combat the addiction.

I don't think you can make the charge of idolatry being the chief attraction stick at all.

[Homer Simpson]

the focus on the individual is one of the attractions, I'm void of the quality of arrogance that would allow me to say it is the chief attraction.
Example, your website serves god. and in a fine fashion.

I would argue individuals who spend hours upon hours daily immersed in an alternate video game universe do not serve god.

I use this example as I have lost friends due to this addiction(they didn't die, they just dropped off the face of the earth)

they serve themselves.

[Ethan Cordray]

Since when did we come to focus on whether video games can be educational? The original question was whether they could be art.

Anyhow, I have made my opinion clear on both points and don't see a purpose to bandying further words with a cartoon character.

[Wonders for Oyarsa]

I agree that addiction is a concern, largely because games are so immersive. We can be very poor stewards of our time with games if we are not quite careful.

But the attraction I wouldn't label as "a focus on the individual". It's being caught up in the world of the game. You largely are not focused on yourself at all - you can lose yourself in it.

[Homer Simpson]

To Ethan:
The questions was the adverse effects of videogames on the individual. I'm reminded of an excellent statement which summarizes some of these effects

"The distinction between social and asocial virtual worlds is worth brief mention. Social virtual worlds afford new options for interpersonal play, such as the formation of parties and guilds"

all of these new worlds are within the video game and away from the communities surrounding the individual.

The virtual world has the danger of becoming more important to the gamer than where the gamer lives and breathes.

[Homer Simpson]

Ethan:
it is ironic that you attempt to dismiss a discussion based on a "cartoon character" as so many video games use cartoon characters for gameplay.
In fact, there is a cartoon character at the top of the page where I found my presented statement.

[Homer Simpson]

I concede the point Wonders for Oyarsa.

[GL]

Per Homer,

Video games have a fascinating history. The following is from an article I wrote on the free speech clause issues surrounding restricting minors' access to extremely graphically violent video games (which restrictions I favor):

Video games were first conceived in 1949 by Ralph Baer, then a young engineer employed by Loral. His assignment was to design a home television set. Baer suggested that the company should “include some novel features, like adding some form of TV game.” The idea was rejected. Three years later, in 1952, A.S. Douglas, working on his Ph.D. at the University of Cambridge in the area of Human-Computer interaction, created a tic-tac-toe game, which is considered the first graphical computer game. In 1958, William Higinbotham created Tennis for Two, which was played on the oscilloscope at Brookhaven National Laboratory. In 1962, Stephen Russell of MIT created what many ac-knowledge as the first computer video game, Spacewar! The game was essentially a crude (by today’s standards) two-player game involving a battle between two spaceships firing photon torpedoes. Within a few years, Spacewar! had spread to nearly every research computer in America.

Meanwhile, seventeen years after he had first conceived of the video game and while Chief Engineer and Manager of the Equipment Design Division at Sanders Associates, Ralph Baer revisited the idea of using television to play games. On September 1, 1966, he drew up a handwritten outline of his thoughts, including some possible categories of games. These categories included action games, board skill games, artistic games, instructional games, board chance games, card games, game monitoring, and sports games. On October 20, 1966, Baer and a colleague played a “Chase Game.” With a team of others, Baer continued to develop the concept, eventually reaching an agreement with Magnavox, who turned his design into the first Odyssey (ILT-200) game in 1972. Magnavox demonstrated Odyssey to its dealers and the press in March 1972.

Present at one of these demonstrations was Nolan Bushnell. Stephen Russell, the creator of Spacewar!, had introduced Bushnell to computer games while Bushnell was an engineering student at Stanford University. The Odyssey demonstration inspired Bushnell to create PONG. PONG was the first successful arcade game. The game was essentially a video form of table tennis. That same year, Bushnell and Ted Dabney started Atari Computers. Three years later, Atari released PONG as a home video game. With the commercialization of video games by Atari, the industry was born. Fifty-seven video games were introduced to the market in the years 1974 and 1975. The next year saw that number nearly double. Yet, it was not until 1980 that any video game was registered with the Copyright Office. In that year, Atari registered two of its games, Asteroids and Lunar Lander. That same year, Midway acquired a license to market Pacman.

So, Homer is correct.

But Nick is also correct in one very important respect. Comparing those early video games to today's games is really an apples-to-oranges comparison. It is the same medium, but the gap in the sophistication of the content is like the gap between a Stanley Steamer and a 1955 Chevy Bel Air. What is exciting about their future potential is that video games are just now at the 1955 Bel Air stage.

[Nick]

Homer,

Since I've been involved in the industry and have actually made this stuff, read trade journals on it, participated in it, I'll have to ask you to really reconsider what your saying. Sure we had Pong in the 70's. The first versions of Pong were hardly transportable. It was also expensive. Even the 2600, which I at one time owned, was a fancy piece of machinery that few could afford. The last and best expression of this was the Neo Geo, which was a beautiful system with $150 games (not in today's money in 80's money). Nintendo, whiper-snappers aside, introduced the first really affordable and reliable system with a shockingly wide array of games. If you look at Nintendo prices as a function of inflation all the way down to the current wildly popular Wii the graph is almost perfectly flat. So, hopefully that ones dead.

As far as Google searches for hits, its useful to consider what the public at large is thinking about, porn for example, but not useful for structuring an argument beyond that. The most popular books out right now are about how all religious people are irrational jihadists in disguise. Are you an irrational jihadist in disguise? I'd also argue that far more lives have been lost to reading The Communist Manifesto than by playing Super Mario Brothers.

Video games are a new media and still working its way into acceptance. TV's were supposed to destroy the evening stroll (that was a Ray Bradbury story right?), phonograph's were going to destroy the appreciation of live music, etc. Video game addiction is the current fad panic. Its about as real, in the popular sense, as global warming.

As for video games being for loners, this is addressed in a new essay by the former head of Star Wars Galaxies(its burning up the net right now in gamer circles):
http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/02/10/are-single-player-games-doomed/

His insight into what has always been the "crowded couch" is well worth the price of admission.

In parting, I'm afraid your own beer addiction may have affected you're ability to reason on this topic Homer.

[Homer Simpson]

To the humble GL:
An excellent point.

[Homer Simpson]

To comrade Nick:
I recall my fascination with the Neo Geo System. And you are most accurate on the price of the games.

Sears manufactured and excellent take home video game system during the 1970's for less than $100 that ran on 8 D cell batteries.

Atari was not much more than this. The Atari Catalog for its 2600,5200, 7800 and 400 computer was extra shocking.

It was the cartridges that were expensive, as you are aware.

I am a slave to Jesus Christ. nothing more, nothing less.

My point of discussion is that virtual existence provided by modern video games takes the focus of the gamer from God and places that focus on the gamer.

making that gamer, a defacto Idolator.

[Wonders for Oyarsa]

Idolatry is always a danger to us humans. No question about that. That games can be a means of idolatry, and that sin can use the beauty and immersive qualities of gaming as a snare towards idolatry is very apparent. Yet I am inspired by the many contributers who see ways in which games might be used to nurture virtue. Many games do not, and the notion of using the incredible creative power of gaming for the glory of God is intriguing.

Hey Nick, why don't you pop over to my site and send me an email. I know we've had our spats in the past, but I'm curious what you do. I actually work for a middleware company.