AuthorTopic: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima  (Read 33018 times)

Offline Akzidenz

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 185
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Grotesk Bold
    • View Profile

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #30 on: December 31, 2006, 11:34:08 pm
I'm not trying to be a shit, here, but if you trust a short Dictionary description of what does and does not constitute art, then you're starting at the wrong place.

Also, wanted to respond to this:

Quote
My definition of Art: Something that isn't useful and rich people will pay alot for to show off their 'taste'.

If that's meant as a broad statement on the sad state of contemporary art in Western culture, then it's a little too broad. But I get the impression that it's just an opinion based on ignorance of art history and art theory - i.e. "I don't understand it so it must be worthless."
« Last Edit: December 31, 2006, 11:39:27 pm by Akzidenz »
que faire quand on a tout fait, tout lu, tout bu, tout mangé
tout donné en vrac et en détail
quand on a crié sur tous les toîts pleuré et ris dans les villes et en campagne

Offline Souly

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 957
  • Karma: +0/-1
  • Killer of threads.
    • View Profile
    • Punkys Portfolio

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #31 on: December 31, 2006, 11:37:15 pm
How is video game art, not art?  :huh:

I mean, the artist drew it.
That makes it art.
Regardless of the medium.

Just because all the art is put into a real time activity doesn't stop the fact that what you're looking at is art.

Offline Akzidenz

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 185
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Grotesk Bold
    • View Profile

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #32 on: December 31, 2006, 11:47:35 pm
I agree, but to take it further.. Art doesn't need to exist on paper or screen. Art isn't necessarily a physical thing, and it's never what's on the surface. Art is a method of expressing philosophy, ideology, a method of exploring and experimenting, through any means. Art is born out of discontent as a means to right a wrong, or to fix something that's broken. It's the apex of that which makes us human and a curiousity beyond that which we already know.

So, like I said before - video games may be commercial art, and because of their nature most of them are doomed to camp, but they're art. If you look at a great game and you don't see the art in it, then you're looking at the wrong things.
que faire quand on a tout fait, tout lu, tout bu, tout mangé
tout donné en vrac et en détail
quand on a crié sur tous les toîts pleuré et ris dans les villes et en campagne

Offline sharprm

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 660
  • Karma: +0/-3
  • INTP/INTJ
    • View Profile

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #33 on: January 01, 2007, 12:03:09 am
Art is a method of expressing philosophy, ideology, a method of exploring and experimenting, through any means. Art is born out of discontent as a means to right a wrong, or to fix something that's broken. It's the apex of that which makes us human and a curiousity beyond that which we already know.

I was just thinking that the nazis experimenting on people in concentration camps fits into this definition of art. They were expressing
their philosophy and idealology, that certain people were worthless and exploring (eg. limits humans can survive in low pressure) and experimenting, and they were willing to kill so its 'by any means'. Nazis were discontent people i would think, i think mein kampf or whatever is a big old bitch, and they believed the german society with jews was broken. So youre wishywashy definition is sh*t becuase it can include anything.

My definition is simple and clear cut. Think about it, the really good artists like Leonardo da Vinci and Vermeer all had patrons. My definition
excludes things like cars and buildings which makes it simpler. Also I never said anything about abstract pieces in my definition. And yes,
abstract art is sh*t because it doesn't look like anything, so i guess i am ignorant.
Modern artists are told that they must create something totally original-or risk being called "derivative".They've been indoctrinated with the concept that bad=good.The effect is always the same: Meaningless primitivism
http://www.artrenewal.org/articles/Philosophy/phi

Offline Akzidenz

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 185
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Grotesk Bold
    • View Profile

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #34 on: January 01, 2007, 12:15:21 am
I was just thinking that the nazis experimenting on people in concentration camps fits into this definition of art. They were expressing
their philosophy and idealology, that certain people were worthless and exploring (eg. limits humans can survive in low pressure) and experimenting, and they were willing to kill so its 'by any means'. Nazis were discontent people i would think, i think mein kampf or whatever is a big old bitch, and they believed the german society with jews was broken. So youre wishywashy definition is sh*t becuase it can include anything.

My definition is simple and clear cut. Think about it, the really good artists like Leonardo da Vinci and Vermeer all had patrons. My definition
excludes things like cars and buildings which makes it simpler. Also I never said anything about abstract pieces in my definition. And yes,
abstract art is sh*t because it doesn't look like anything, so i guess i am ignorant.

I'm a broken record, here, but your "simple, clear-cut definition" of art is born out of ignorance of history and theory. You're making broad generalizations and assumptions about something that you know very very little about. The fact that you dismiss all abstract art as "shit" because it "doesn't look like anything" is evidence of that - what's worse is that you're knowingly ignorant and stubborn about it.

The attitude of "what I already know is good enough" is ridiculous. You know that there's more to modern art than what you're seeing, but instead of exploring that and learning about it and growing from it, you automatically dismiss it, taking no time to attempt to understand it.

If you want to do that? If you want to remain willfully ignorant? Then it's your choice, and I'm not going to take any more time trying to convince you otherwise. But don't expect any of your opinions on the subject to be taken seriously if you have nothing to back them up with and you're acknowledging them as broad, uninformed opinions. That's just trolling, straight up.

- - - - -

Also, you're spelling Shakespeare wrong in your sig.
que faire quand on a tout fait, tout lu, tout bu, tout mangé
tout donné en vrac et en détail
quand on a crié sur tous les toîts pleuré et ris dans les villes et en campagne

Offline sharprm

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 660
  • Karma: +0/-3
  • INTP/INTJ
    • View Profile

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #35 on: January 01, 2007, 12:26:30 am
You're the one who brought up abstract art. The definition I gave actually didn't exclude it. I figured a simple definition is a good one.
For example, if you pick a ming vase, will rich people pay alot of money for it? yes. Does it show off their taste? Yes. Is it useful? No.
So its art. If you take computer games, people don't buy them to show off their 'taste' so they are not art.
Modern artists are told that they must create something totally original-or risk being called "derivative".They've been indoctrinated with the concept that bad=good.The effect is always the same: Meaningless primitivism
http://www.artrenewal.org/articles/Philosophy/phi

Offline Conzeit

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1448
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • Camus
    • conzeit
    • View Profile
    • CONZEIT

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #36 on: January 01, 2007, 12:29:07 am
I've done a little re-reading of a text that impacted me a while ago and I've come back with a personal definition for what makes a medium expression an art medium, which I belive is more relevant in this discussion than a definition of art. Anything can be art, so that makes the definition meaningless, so you have to look at it from the perspective of what role art has in society.

belive an art medium is a medium of expression which has achieved a substatial change in the accepted universal truths of its society. As such, I do not belive videogames have yet achieved that status.

however, I belive it is a matter of oportunity and with time they may come to achieve this, in my opinion it's the lack of a stronger independent (non-comercial) movement is what holds it back.

Offline Helm

  • Moderator
  • 0110
  • *
  • Posts: 5159
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Asides-Bsides

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #37 on: January 01, 2007, 10:05:25 am
Art is whatproclaims itself to be art.

What would you call a person who perceives a piece of non-art to be art, then?

A person with an opinion.

Quote
I'd been responding to Helm's post above mine - my interpretation of his comment was "art is defined by the artist," whereas I don't believe that to be true.

Not only. Anything anyone says is art is art, be it artist, bystander or theoretical third party. I do not have the... epistemological fortitude to even consider the possibility that when two different people say "art" they might mean the same thing. So it`s just a word, and I won`t get my extremely masculine panties in a bunch when someone basically says "what you consider x, I don`t consider y" where x and y deceptively both share the same sound effect.

On a less personal note, it is a benefit to the video game to have a widely accepted artistic merit, however nebulous it may be, yes.



I find myself echoing much of what Camus\Conceit is saying in this thread.

Quote
How is video game art, not art? 

I mean, the artist drew it.

It might be of interest to you to draw the parallel to advertisements you see on TV. They certainly use stuff we consider arty, like music and digital or real media drawings, cinematography, whatnot, but are they THE ADS art themselves? Kojima makes a very old and tired question, is the container of art art because it contains art, and is it art regardless of wanting to be art or not?

It`s a tired question, but it`s still open.

Some people consider football an art form. Some consider sleep an art form. Some consider solitude an art form. a lot of people impact a lot of social significance to what they consider important by connecting it to a word which carries universal connotations of goodness and importance.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2007, 10:17:46 am by Helm »

Offline Akzidenz

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 185
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Grotesk Bold
    • View Profile

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #38 on: January 01, 2007, 10:12:00 am
A person with an opinion.

Do believe they're wrong, then? Do you believe that what they perceive as art is something other than art? Is it just an experience worthy of inspiration? Where do you draw the line between art and non-art? I'm curious to hear your definition (not to say that it's a definable thing).

Some of this sounds unforgivably cheesy, on account of me being drunk right now. But try to take the questions as seriously as you can. Maybe I'll revise later.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2007, 10:14:19 am by Akzidenz »
que faire quand on a tout fait, tout lu, tout bu, tout mangé
tout donné en vrac et en détail
quand on a crié sur tous les toîts pleuré et ris dans les villes et en campagne

Offline Dusty

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1107
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Video game is not art - Hideo Kojima

Reply #39 on: January 01, 2007, 10:15:35 am
Sitting here trying to define what is and is not art is pretty dumb, I think.
A lot of people don't see some things as art, while another does. I think there is art, and mainstream art. The art I define for myself, and the art everyone else seems to have the same idea on.
But what really matters is what you consider art, not anyone else. What's it matter if this guy doesn't consider video games art? Why does it anger you so much? It's his opinion, and I'm pretty sure all art is opinion. If he doesn't, then fine. But if you do, then keep on believing it is. I probably look at a lot of stuff and think of it as pure beauty and art, that many others don't. Art is what you see it as, and it's too broad, and subjective a catagory to ever try to narrow it down to one set of things, or views. If that were to happen, you'd kill what art really is, perspective, and thought of your own.

A person with an opinion.

Do believe they're wrong, then? Do you believe that what they perceive as art is something other than art? Is it just an experience worthy of inspiration? Where do you draw the line between art and non-art? I'm curious to hear your definition (not to say that it's a definable thing).

Some of this sounds unforgivably cheesy, on account of me being drunk right now. But try to take the questions as seriously as you can. Maybe I'll revise later.
There is no wrong when it comes to opinions, only fact. With opinion, there are only clashes of opinions.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2007, 10:19:08 am by Dusty »