1.) Define art: Well, to me, art is just something that is beautiful, or
not. It is something that communicates an important message, or not.
Everything that man creates (as the Greeks apparently said :) is art.
Art is about opening yourself up to other people. It's about working
through your own feelings, getting rid of guilt, sorrow, anger. Art is a
lot of things, at the very lowest level of which might be definable, but
not in the overall schema of things. (Computer Science Pun alert.)
2.) Define IF: Fiction, Interactive. Fiction that you interact with.
Fiction that interacts with you. Interacting fiction.
3.) Is 2.) a subcategory of 1.)?: Certainly. If you finnagle your
definition too far, the answer might be no. But you have to have a
narrow definition of art, one that explicitly or implicitly excludes
interacting with a work of fiction. I do not see this as an option.
-=-=-=-=-
Now, that part of the argument seemed straightforward enough to me, so
let me move on to what I find artistic about IF.
It is important to note that much of what can be considered art
in static fiction can be considered art in interactive fiction.
Symbolism, imagery, these things are important. In writing, thematic
ideas are important. Why am I writing this? is always a good question to
begin with. What do I have to say? is another.
Then, there is that in IF that doesn't exist in F, the I. How
can you make Interactivity serve an artistic goal, though? You can
portray characters more completely than in F if you so desire, and put in
the effort. We probably need a few more ways to interact with
characters, but as of now, an Interactive Hamlet written by a resurrected
Shakespeare would tell you far more about Hamlet than the static play.
Fiction can be excruiciatingly good. Interactive fiction can be better.
To substantiate this claim, one merely has to compare the two
mediums. IF can do anything that fiction can do. You can write a
program in TADS that just prints out a Hemingway novel and then ends the
program, there's nothing to stop you (except perhaps copyright.) Now,
whether this is as valid as having a paperback book in front of you, that
has been debated for quite awhile. I believe the consensus is that no,
paper is better. Fine, turn on your printer, and print it out. It's the
same thing, physical properties notwithstanding. IF can do these
things, I assure you. It can also allow the reader/player to hold a
dialogue with the author of the work. If
>kick cat
produces
Kick the cat? KICK THE CAT?! Get 'im Klaus!
* * You have died. * *
[paraphrased w/o permission. :) Here's where I tie Avalon into this,
the faint of heart may wish to turn away.]
Then you know a bit more about the author. I have, in Avalon, attempted
to explore my feelings on religion. I will leave it up to you whether I
did so in the persona of Merlin, Galahad, oer Launcelot. I have also
discussed issues of mortality, and the nature of the self. Assuredly, I
did so in a GAME, but I did so. Is a philosophic dialogue any less
philosophic when clothed in a game? Perhaps. I do not feel this to be
the case.
Another topic I find interesting, and have brought to bear in
Avalon, is the concept off the hero. Who is the hero in Avalon? Is it
Galahad, Launcelot, the security guard? Is it the player's persona, or
the old man? Admittedly, as I am tardy with the game, these things don't
mean much to you all, but save the message, play the game, and look at
the message again. For those of you unwilling to get the game, I will
elucidate a bit here.
[What lies ahead might be considered mild spoilers. I don't feel
they give any real information away. Well, maybe a little. But not much.]
Launcelot is a brawny hero, the height of medieval masculinity
and might. However else you may look at him, he is a simple man, driving
by love and self-hate, but his flaw is a fear of himself (in the guise of
the dragon.) He cannot bear to face himself.
Galahad is a holy hero. He is good of heart, pure of thought,
and true of word. He is also a bit overbearing and arrogant at times.
This is a result of his faith, but not neccessarily a flaw in it. We do
not see much of Galahad in this part of Avalon. He figures more
prominently into the sequel. (A short, free sequel, don't worry.)
Merlin is the bumbling hero. His good-natured attempts at help
are usually bound to end in failure. This is a consequence of his
magical abilities, however. He sees more than he wants to. He knows
aspects of the future. He knows when those he meets are going to die.
However, this at the same time distances him from humanity. When he
offers help, it may be what he considers help, and not you.
The player inhabits the persona of Frank Leandro. Frank is an
everyman hero. He puts his pants on one leg at a time, suffers from
lust, anger, greed, and impatience, just like the rest of us. Sometimes
his fears inhibit him from accomplishing his goals. Sometimes he's just
not up to snuff. Yet, he is heroic in his eternal struggle. He rails
against the unkindness of life, and strives to improve his fellow man's lot.
The old man is a tragic hero. He has striven hard in the past,
and accomplished mighty deeds. He has won a family, and peace. But that
was taken away from him. He has nothing left. He has struggled and
fought, but life has caught up with him and worn him down. I find him
heroic, but at the same time, he has given up, and withdrawn from the
world, and the state of his world can perhaps be laid at his feet,
through his inactivity.
The security guard...well, he's an aspect of Frank, in that Frank
is the embodiment of the everyman, and the guard is an instance of
everyman. He feels a certain kinship and admiration towards Frank, who
lives a fantastic life, in his eyes. But the guard is essentially noble
in bearing and deed, perhaps more so than anyone else in the story. He
has no special advantages, no magical items. He is perhaps closest to my
ideal of a hero. Not a new idea, I understand, but mine nonetheless.
In Avalon, there are no villains, just undeveloped characters.
Every being in Avalon is really not evil. There are beings whose
overweaning pride brings about their downfall. The Master of the Hunt is
wracked by an eternity of memories, without the balm of forgetfulness.
Other creatures are merely constrained by their own limitations, either
as a victim of another creature's actions, or as a result of their own
foolishness. Regardless, they are all heroes of some form or another.
-=-=-=-=-
So why do I drone on and on about this? Why do I so love to cite
my game as an example of art? Well, ego, for one. I like to feel that I
have created a consistant work that pushes forward the frontiers of my
medium. I could be wrong, assuredly. I attempted no new technical
achievements. I used nothing new to literature. But I feel that I have
used these things in a manner in which they had not been used before.
That, to me, is the essence of art. Looking at the world in a new way.
Looking at the world through someone else's eyes. What better way to do
so, than become that person for awhile.
I thank you for listening to my ideas, and apologize for the
longwindedness of this post. I just find the topic fascinating, that's all.
-- <~~~~~~~S~W~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AVALON~~~~~~~DUE~XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~> < ERT O A In the midst of the Vietnam War, one man dies, and is | ~~\ > < V IGO F R charged with a quest from King Arthur. Live the quest! | /~\ | > <_______T_E_____________________________whizzard@uclink.berkeley.edu__|_\__/__>