Wait, so video games aren't art?

[Sylveria]

I wouldn't say she's insane as much as she's an ignorant luddite. Really you should take this to her superiors because the fact she immediately dismissed this and laughed in your face questions her objectivity as a teacher. It would make me question what else she doesn't consider art and if it's influencing what I, as a student, am being taught.

Also

They are not art. Why gamers are so adamant about calling games art will always be beyond me. As a matter of fact, given what passes as art these days, I would rather them not be.

We're so concerned about calling games art for a few reason but BY FAR the most important is Art is protected. The government can't censor the crap out of games if they officially and legally recognized as an art form.

 

[Marsell]

Neophobic, yes.
Insane, most likely.
Primitive, Without a doubt.

 

[Ashcrexl]

she actually used the words, "worthless technology?" a new twist has appeared in the tale of video games as art. dont worry about it man. just write about something else. once all the older people are dead, there will be only us.

 

[Doive]

I wouldn't say she's insane as much as she's an ignorant luddite. Really you should take this to her superiors because the fact she immediately dismissed this and laughed in your face questions her objectivity as a teacher. It would make me question what else she doesn't consider art and if it's influencing what I, as a student, am being taught.

Also

They are not art. Why gamers are so adamant about calling games art will always be beyond me. As a matter of fact, given what passes as art these days, I would rather them not be.

We're so concerned about calling games art for a few reason but BY FAR the most important is Art is protected. The government can't censor the crap out of games if they officially and legally recognized as an art form.

Games wouldn't need to be censored if parents weren't such idiots and payed attention to age restrictions. Films are censored and age restricted just as much as games are. Saying "games shouldn't be censored" is not an argument for saying they are an art form.

 

[kinggamecat]

Just today in middle school English, we got a writing prompt about means of communication (art, music, literature) affecting peoples lives. After my teacher started to take questions I asked if video games were a form of art, and what do I get? She almost burst out laughing then said "Of course video games aren't art, thats solely a worthless technology!" I later asked if movies were considered art and she said they were. Now how aren't they art, compared to movies of course. They both have actors, plot twists, romances in some of them. That seems pretty art like to me. Is my English teacher as insane as I think she is?

Yer teacher's an psycho *****! Video-games are the most artistic form of art there is! I say this because it takes ALL other mediums of art, puts them together and makes them interactive, tell yer teacher she can go fornicate with a rusty tire iron.

 

[The Ambrosian]

You guys need to remember how inexperienced the general public still are with video games.

A hell of a lot of the older generation haven't played video games, or haven't deeply, and don't understand them so they just view it as mindless.

For all we know she could be thinking of pac-man and tetris.

EDIT: Thinking about it, the 'worthless technology' thing is quite ignorant >.>
Also, yes, I do realise how prejudice this is and that she is in the wrong. I've just realised how the above sounds like i'm defending her, well I'm not.

If I was you I would have argued with her or at least tried to push my point a bit.

EDIT 2: Also, she's not wrong because she says video games aren't art, thats subjective, she's stupid because she laughs at the though, and the whole 'worthless technology' thing mentioned above.

Has the stupid Nazi ever even PLAYED a video-game?

Having an uneducated, prejudice opinion does not make you a Nazi, it makes you uninformed.

 

[warm slurm]

Video games are art, but I think gamers need to widen their mind on what games are. Okami, Shadow of the Colossus and Ico are the only ones I hear people mention all the time. SotC and Ico are fantastic, but Okami can fuck right off. A nauseous art-style /=/ (good) art.

 

[gl1koz3]

I guess she thinks Tetris and all that stuff, because that is hardly a form of art (yet still might reconsider, as art can be pretty much anything; it's the personal feeling that makes it count anyway). If you put in plots and whatnot, it's more like interactive media rather than games (or a blend) then.

 

[Something Amyss]

Why are you arguing this with us and not your teacher for?

Also.. Why does it matter so much to you?

My guess: validation. Especially given it's a post on a video game magazine's website/forum.

We're going to favour our media as art. Not universally, but we are quite a biased group.

 

[theriddlen]

I never understood how someone can think that games are not art (if one has ever played them, that is). Games are a friggin work of art, tons of work by hundreds of artists, whether they are designers, writers or programmers.

 

[Sylveria]

To be art something has to have some kind of artistic merit or meaning, which is why most films are not considered art and why a school child drawing their pet cat in crayon isn't art either.
Of course some games could be considered art, but on the whole they are overshadowed by games meant solely to be be played by mindless child drones, not appreciated as art.

That is a totally unfair statement. You may not consider that crayon drawing art but to that kid it is. Who's to say that kid didn't draw that stick figure cat with as much love and concern as a "real" piece of art? What sets that scribble apart from some of the masterpieces that are just a few abstract lines? Or that neo-expressionist sculpting that is just a bunch of junk (literally) welded together?

Just because it's done poorly or not done in the fashion you dislike doesn't rob it of it's status. I don't find that hidden cryptic beauty that the Mona Lisa is said to hold but if I went to the curator and said it wasn't art he'd probably smack me in the face. Yeah for every Metal Gear there's a dozen Call of Duties that some hack studio whipped out in 3 months and dunked in coffee, but that doesn't mean they should be held to a lesser standard or drag the rest of the medium down. I can smear crap on a canvas and I'd still be totally justified in calling it art.

 

[Ray De Ation]

Your most salient argument would be to prove her wrong. Pick a really great game- one you feel strongely about- and write on it. My personal suggestion would be something like Bioshock.

 

[AngelOfBlueRoses]

I'd like for you all to take the time to listen to The GameOverthinker: http://gameoverthinker.blogspot.com/2010/05/episode-35-response-to-roger-ebert.html

I agree with MovieBob. All games are art. It's just that most games are bad art. Art is not about quality, and is instead a neutral definition. Well, at least for me.

For example: The Mona Lisa. Yes. It's art. Pretty much everyone in the world can tell you that the Mona Lisa is a work of art. Is it a good work of art, though? In my opinion, I don't think so. Does that make my opinion invalid? No. Art is neutral, but the thought process going into it is subjective. We are emotional creatures, after all.

 

[Mattismen]

I would say she is someone i would like to give a lecture about art.

 

[Verlander]

Best article Ive read on the subject

http://clicknothing.typepad.com/click_nothing/2007/08/on-authorship-i.html

If it doesn't convince her, it will completely go over her head, confusing her and makjing her look like a fool.

I was very sad to read that article, as I have great respect for Roger Ebert.

OP If you believe videogames are art, work out why you believe that. Do some research, and find legitimate sources that clarify and confirm your opinions, and put it to her in an intellectual way. Then you'll be taken seriously

 

[Sylveria]

We're so concerned about calling games art for a few reason but BY FAR the most important is Art is protected. The government can't censor the crap out of games if they officially and legally recognized as an art form.

Games wouldn't need to be censored if parents weren't such idiots and payed attention to age restrictions. Films are censored and age restricted just as much as games are. Saying "games shouldn't be censored" is not an argument for saying they are an art form.

Where did I say this? He asked why we are concerned that games are given this status, I gave a reason why. I didn't give a reason as to why they should be. Also, films are globally considered an art form. But a film is still a film. The studio (the people making it) may choose to censor it, but that's their choice. It is not the government getting in there and saying "cut this, this, and this or it doesn't get released." As it is, games are the same way. The creator chooses what to cut and what to leave, they just typically cut out enough to get the rating they want from the ESRB. It isn't the government intervening, yet.

If you want me to get into the extremely long debate of why games are and should be regarded as art beyond "If they're art they can't be censored" which I never said is the reason they are or should be art, I'm not going to. There's plenty of people who have already done so. I suggest reading one of those innumerable pieces of work. I also suggest reading the posts you reply to and understand their point before commenting.

 

[Doive]

To be art something has to have some kind of artistic merit or meaning, which is why most films are not considered art and why a school child drawing their pet cat in crayon isn't art either.
Of course some games could be considered art, but on the whole they are overshadowed by games meant solely to be be played by mindless child drones, not appreciated as art.

That is a totally unfair statement. You may not consider that crayon drawing art but to that kid it is. Who's to say that kid didn't draw that stick figure cat with as much love and concern as a "real" piece of art? What sets that scribble apart from some of the masterpieces that are just a few abstract lines? Or that neo-expressionist sculpting that is just a bunch of junk (literally) welded together?

Just because it's done poorly or not done in the fashion you dislike doesn't rob it of it's status. I don't find that hidden cryptic beauty that the Mona Lisa is said to hold but if I went to the curator and said it wasn't art he'd probably smack me in the face. Yeah for every Metal Gear there's a dozen Call of Duties that some hack studio whipped out in 3 months and dunked in coffee, but that doesn't mean they should be held to a lesser standard or drag the rest of the medium down. I can smear crap on a canvas and I'd still be totally justified in calling it art.

I disagree. I said I child because I meant it to mean that a child has no concept of what art is and that their drawing was to entertain themself and not to create something with any meaning. They didn't finish and and think, "look, I just made art". I struggle to view things like dogs cut in half and piles of wood as art but at least they have a meaning to the artist.
You cite metal gear solid as an example but do you really believe that the designers of that game saw themselves as making art?

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

Sadly, I think this person would consider Andy Warhol's work as art and wouldn't have the foresight to see the irony...

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

To be art something has to have some kind of artistic merit or meaning, which is why most films are not considered art and why a school child drawing their pet cat in crayon isn't art either.
Of course some games could be considered art, but on the whole they are overshadowed by games meant solely to be be played by mindless child drones, not appreciated as art.

That is a totally unfair statement. You may not consider that crayon drawing art but to that kid it is. Who's to say that kid didn't draw that stick figure cat with as much love and concern as a "real" piece of art? What sets that scribble apart from some of the masterpieces that are just a few abstract lines? Or that neo-expressionist sculpting that is just a bunch of junk (literally) welded together?

Just because it's done poorly or not done in the fashion you dislike doesn't rob it of it's status. I don't find that hidden cryptic beauty that the Mona Lisa is said to hold but if I went to the curator and said it wasn't art he'd probably smack me in the face. Yeah for every Metal Gear there's a dozen Call of Duties that some hack studio whipped out in 3 months and dunked in coffee, but that doesn't mean they should be held to a lesser standard or drag the rest of the medium down. I can smear crap on a canvas and I'd still be totally justified in calling it art.

I disagree. I said I child because I meant it to mean that a child has no concept of what art is and that their drawing was to entertain themself and not to create something with any meaning. They didn't finish and and think, "look, I just made art". I struggle to view things like dogs cut in half and piles of wood as art but at least they have a meaning to the artist.
You cite metal gear solid as an example but do you really believe that the designers of that game saw themselves as making art?

Um, I'm pretty sure that a group of artists and designers considered a years long project as an expression and art...

Also, a child does have a concept of art. They might not have a definition but they know that what they are doing is an expression of an idea, which is really all art is. That picture has depth and meaning to them. Soooo your own argument disproves your thesis.

Whether or not it is "high" art, a purely vogue and subjective term, is debatable.