Video Games? An Art?

Before the dawn of the internet age, I adored video games.  I'd spend countless hours in front of the Nintendo or Sega playing classic titles such as Tecmo Bowl or Phantasy Star.  Like most kids my age, passion for video games was met with severe resistence from parents who claimed them to be mindless and counter productive.  After all, it was just another activity to distract us from our homework.

But us creative little youngsters would argue the games enhanced our creative/cognitive skills and, of course my personal favorite, honed our "reflexes."   Well, it appears as though the Smithsonian now agrees.

Game designers can earn grants up to 200,000 dollars if their game can be considered a work of art?  Sure, why not.  The evolution of the video game has taken extraordinary leaps in the past decade; in fact designers have created entire virtual communities that some seem to prefer to live in, while others actually find real financial success in these alternate worlds.  So now that the gaming world is capable of making these multi-layered communities and games that feature indepth alien worlds with enough detail to trick you into thinking that it might be real, why not consider them a legitimate art form?

In fact, game designer Jane McGonigal strongly thinks students aren't playing ENOUGH video games as she firmly believes that simulating crises in an online setting will better prepare us for a real disaster.  She is the designer behind the game World Without Oil which depicts a world with depleted resources, rising prices, and the possibility for social chaos.  Gamers communicate with each other on how to both problem solve and cope with the issue with the hope that, one day, they can use this acquired knowledge for practical purposes.

The merits of this hyopthesis can be, and should be, challenged, but the fact that we are having the argument at all is a testament to the rise of gaming and its expressive qualities.  Though video games always had some sort of creative value, today's games have increased their interactive ability to not only create a new kind of social order, but the ability to build communities that extend beyond the borders of "real life."  So even though the results of this community and creativity do not exist in the "real world," it does serve a useful purpose as it helps stretch the mind and allows users to think in different parameters.

So how could this not be art?

Oh, Sarah. Don't You Have A Turd To Polish?

Ahhh…I’m absolutely enjoying the latest piece of political “advice” (or demand) from America’s favorite phony cunt, Sarah Palin.

From her Twitter feed in response to the White House’s decision not to release the gruesome photos of a dead Osama Bin Laden:

“Show photo as warning to others seeking America's destruction. No pussy-footing around, no politicking, no drama; it's part of the mission”

Poetry, really.  That woman has a real knack for annoying me with only 160 characters.  A true talent. 

Since the announcement, the debate over whether or not to release the pics has heated up, but I can’t understand the benefit of doing so.  As much as some would love to see America hang Osama’s corpse outside of Boston Harbor like he were Captain Kidd, the idea that a gruesome photo might scare off other potential terrorists is…asinine.  Do we honestly believe that they don’t know the dangers of their business?  Do we think they are unaware that they are being hunted by the American military? How exactly would a picture SCARE them? Hell, you can show average Americans tons of pictures of wrecked cars, they are still gonna talk on their cell phones while driving.

We live in a civilized, 21^st century society, we don’t need to plaster a gruesome photo of some dead terrorist on our nation’s newspapers as if it’s some sort of hunting trophy; though perhaps Sarah would be pleased if we stuffed Osama’s head and placed it above the White House mantle.  Not to mention, the photographic evidence will not assuage the “concerns” of the conspiracy theorists who believe Obama announced the news now for political expediency, as if that makes any sense.  What political benefit could Obama get in May of 2011? If this were some planned release, why not make it closer to an election…or even closer to the announcement of new legislation?  On a similar note, even if photos were released, these same people would claim Photoshop fraud and start picking out nonexistent details to prove their erroneous claims.  After all, there are still people who believe we never landed on the moon, the 9/11 truthers still exist, and people will continue to suck in the name of being an asshole for the rest of time. 

But, really, at the end of the day, Palin’s announcement is purely political (shocking I know).  I have no doubt that had the White House released the photos, Palin would spew some bullshit about how we are poking the enemy with our bravado.  The woman is a transparent waste that has little interest in policy, and lots of desire for attention. 

Kids Today

I weep.  I'm not even sure how this is possible. 

Nodding my head like "yeah"...to Smells Like Teen Spirit?

One of the more interesting aspects of humanity is how we are often territorial over art.  Over the past few days, the above video has stormed its way through the intertubes, mostly receiving negative reaction from people in my age bracket, including myself.  When I first watched the clip of Miley Cyrus covering Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit” (the unofficial anthem of my generation), I was immediately appalled and figured Kurt Cobain would be rolling in his grave.  I quickly disseminated the video to friends, expecting similar reaction so we could commiserate in the atrocity.  Hannah Montana is covering Nirvana?  Why not just hang me by my testicles!  And they all agreed. 

But when contemplating it later, I suddenly was struck by how much I cared and, more importantly, why.

A song is an expressive form of art that provides identity, even to someone who did not write or sing it.  And this particular Nirvana tune defined a generation of angry youths who yearned to separate themselves from the ones above.  The song is loud, the song is powerful, it’s unique for the time, and managed to capture a collective feeling that other generations could not understand. In fact, the song still has emotional effect all these years later.  I still can remember the first time I ever saw the video for “Smells Like Teen Spirit” and immediately thought, “fuck…yeah!”

But Miley Cyrus (who I really have nothing against, I think there’s actually a song of hers on my iPod) was not a part of this movement, and was incredibly young when the song was released.  Her brand of pop music may be the voice of another generation, and will probably be a relic of this younger generation’s childhood, but her music is nothing more than a novelty to ours; causing her to seem like an insignificant footnote.  We subconsciously assume she’s unworthy of our battle cry and would prefer she find her own (even if this is batshit crazy).  Not to mention, Miley sings a certain brand of pop that caters to the lowest common denominator, which is at odds with Nirvana’s rebellious attitude.

So why is disgust my visceral reaction when I see she has performed it at her concert?  Simply put, because it’s not hers.  For her to perform it and own it, it feels like she’s speaking on behalf of my generation, making her a representative of an entire group of people she is actually not a part of.  And though it’s unfair and even a bit nonsensical, her version of it is disingenuous because of this, even if it were an awesome cover (which it’s not, but that’s beside the point).

I’m truly am not sure what Kurt Cobain would think of this, I think he’d actually appreciate the fact that his art has lived on and younger generations have taken to it.  I’m sure he’d enjoy that it’s still relevant.  But to the rest of us, we still wear it like a badge of honor, and we want that to remain unique to us.

Well, that’s all I can come up with anyway.

America: Fuck Yeah? Thoughts From The Morning After

When I first heard the news about the killing of Bin Laden, I actually texted a friend asking “Do you think anyone will care?”  I figured enough time had passed and, with our current problems being much greater, the news would be met with a healthy, but somber feeling of justice and piece of mind. 

Boy was I wrong. 

If you’ve been watching the news, you’ve been bombarded with images of parties in the streets and exclamations from American citizens regarding their American pride.  And though I may sound like a complete asshole for saying this, and fully admit I may be downplaying the event, I think its sad that a murder of a terrorist who got lucky ten years ago and hasn’t been relevant since is what makes someone “proud to be an American.”

9/11 was no doubt a horrific tragedy, one that accounted for a tremendous loss of life and one that changed the landscape of America both socially and politically.  But, as mentioned in my previous post, the murder of Osama doesn’t change any of that.  Not even a little.  In fact, I doubt anyone went to bed last week fearing the wrath of Osama Bin Laden.  After the 9/11 attacks occurred, he went off to hide in Pakistan while Al Qaeda was given for too much credit as a legitimate threat.  Now, ten years later, we found the apparent mastermind of the attacks and American citizens are parading through the streets as if he was the sole reason for all that ails us. 

But he’s not.  I’m honestly surprised that public reaction was not more reserved.  It’s great that justice was served, but I’m not sure why death is ever celebrated.  I’m glad it brings piece of mind to families that lost loved ones, but the death of Osama certainly will never bring them back.  It serves as another building block towards the recovery of the American psyche, but the public outcries of “don’t mess with America” into TV cameras comes off as bullyish (for lack of a better term) and proves our priorities are entirely out of whack. 

I think it’s telling that the Osama murder happened the same weekend as the royal wedding in England.  British citizens took to the streets to celebrate their British heritage through a symbol of family, love, and companionship.  While the event to cause Americans to do the same is the murder of an inept terrorist leader that has barely been heard from in a decade.

Excuse me if this strikes me as disappointing. 

Thoughts On Our Views Of The Osama Killing

I don’t have anything all that earth shattering to say about the Bin Laden murder itself, but I have found the reaction to the news by both the media and the public (at least through Facebook and Twitter) to be quite interesting. 

Obviously, after 9/11, Osama bin Laden became the face behind the tragedy and the image we as America focused our anger on (for good reason).  The man, the image, and his action easily changed the course of US history.  Without 9/11, we certainly never go into Afghanistan and probably never revisit Iraq.  9/11 obviously changed the course of our foreign policy and easily affected our domestic culture as well (today’s economy/state of mind/cultural zeitgeist, etc)

But whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?  After watching a few different news stations, I heard them all say something to the effect of “everyone will remember where they were today” and I’m not sure why.  Though Osama was the architect of the most devastating attack on American soil, there hasn’t really been any relevant Al Queda attack since.  And from everything we know, he was essentially marginalized as a leader while hiding out, while other sects gained power.  Not to mention, Osama was hardly the leader of an army, he headed a group that, more or less, got lucky on September 11^th, 2001.  Had hijacking protocol been different (and it changed by that afternoon), we’d all remember that day much differently.   He never posed a Soviet/German like threat against America, even if we were led to believe otherwise.

In a time when we, as a public, need good news, I suppose this can pass for some.  After all, this death will bring some kind of closure for everyone who lost a love one during 9/11, even if it’s bittersweet.  But the media is making this moment bigger than it really is.  We aren’t leaving Afghanistan tomorrow.  Iraq is still going to be a shit hole.  Our airports won’t be free and easy by the end of the week.  This won’t fix the economy. The black cloud over America isn’t dissipating. And, most of all, terrorism isn’t going away any time soon. This doesn’t compare to Hitler killing himself at the end of World War 2.  His action, unfortunately, remains and our reaction to his action will not erase or change. 

So, yes, this is a historical moment of some sort and if it provides a boost in morale, then it’s a good thing.  (I certainly don’t weep for Osama Bin Laden, even if I do find the celebration of death to be a little odd).  But I’d love for someone to explain why this is a huge deal beyond symbolic measures.

I’d like to be convinced otherwise.  What are people celebrating exactly beyond chasing a ghost? I don't write this post from the point of view of a contrarian, I actually would just love to hear some thoughts because my gut reaction to the news was, it seems, much different from most.

Would They Go To Islands? Subject One: Kate Middleton

I want to introduce a fun (hopefully), new recurring subject for the blog.  Actually, an incredibly important subject that explores whether or not certain people would like to join my friend Jenn and I for a weekday lunch at our favorite Hawaiian themed neighborhood chain eatery, Islands. 

For those who do not live in CA, NV, CO, AZ, or HI, or are unfamiliar with the restaurant, ISLANDS is a typical kitsch chain similar in quality to TGI Fridays or Applebee’s.  Actually, I’ll just copy and paste their carefully worded description from their website:

Who Needs Hawaii?

“Islands Restaurants was founded in 1982 with a basic philosophy – serve great, fresh food with friendly service in a fun atmosphere. Entrepreneur Tony DeGrazier had a vision of a restaurant that would offer a simple, original menu featuring gourmet hamburgers, specialty drinks and a fun, tropical theme. In fact, he wanted to recreate the dining experiences he had in the 1960s while stationed in Oahu with his Navy buddies.”

Oh, and does it ever.  Each time I go to Islands and someone later asks me where I went to lunch, they respond: “ugh … why?” like I personally offended them.  Then follow it up by squinching their face and saying “Islands” in such a way that suggests just the word itself produces gas pains and nausea. Regardless of its apparent uninspiring menu, Jenn and I eat there once a week as one is conveniently located near work, and we enjoy the simple food underneath the “cabana” while watching surfers on the few HD screens nearby. 

And sometimes during these visits, we wonder who might enjoy accompanying us.

So, hmmm, how about the world’s newest princess, Kate Middleton?

"The highlight of my trip to LA," she'd no doubt say

Kate just enjoyed the wedding of a lifetime.  In fact, over two billion people watched her get married (either in person or on television) in what has to have been one of the most, if not most, lavish weddings of all time.  I can’t even imagine what its like date high royalty for eight years, but I figure in that time she grew accustom to opulent restaurants, first rate cuisine, and a certain expectation.

Having said that, Kate Middleton was not groomed for this lifestyle.  In fact, from what I understand, prior to her family’s financial success, she was raised solidly middle class.  Considering this, I’m sure she was treated to a number of home-cooked meals, but also special nights out at neighborhood chain restaurants where the family could split burgers, fries (or fish and chips), and perhaps a laugh or two. And maybe Princess Kate is nostalgic.  I can imagine her eating a burger, slumping back in her chair, and mumbling “ahh, this reminds me of my childhood” in between chews.  Plus, I’m confident she’d admire the fake palm trees and beach décor on the walls considering England is far from tropical. 

But why would a princess waste her time with people like me and Jenn?  I mean, really, who are we? Well a princess is supposed to treat her subjects with respect, and even though we do not live in England, I do not believe she’d scoff at our offer considering it would be a genuine one.  Plus, we could inform her that Jenn is actually the FourSquare mayor of that Islands, therefore making her royalty in her own right.  I’m not saying it’s comparable, but really both have equal power, which is to say nothing more than bragging rights.  Plus, Jenn and I enjoy discussing world events (mixed in with a discussion about poop or two), so perhaps we could entertain Kate with mostly intelligent conversation.  

Regardless, I strongly feel her highness would enjoy the homey feel of Islands as it may remind her of simpler days, days when she strolled the streets without notoriety, days when she dined with just her family.  Though if she required privacy, I’m sure we could reserve the booth in the back that’s out of view of most patrons.

VERDICT:  SHE’D JOIN US AT ISLANDS

HER PREDICTED ORDER:  The Greek Salad.  But I think she’d politely ask Jenn if she could have a fry or two.  And hopefully she wouldn’t find a screw in the fry basket (sadly, this has happened.)