Kellee Santiago Explains Why Games Are Not Art: Draw Your Own Conclusion Edition
I am a huge fan of Flower and enjoyed Flow, so I was really looking forward to this talk. I was in the audience when it was given and she did not fail in her attempt to be provocative. While she did not give him credit, she drew from Clive Barker's defense of games as art in his on line debate with Roger Ebert to argue game are not yet art. I was not really sure whether she meant to say
there was no art yet, so I asked her, and she confirmed that in her opinion no one has created art. If I agreed with her, I probably would not post it here. It is a bold statement and I invite you to consider it.
there was no art yet, so I asked her, and she confirmed that in her opinion no one has created art. If I agreed with her, I probably would not post it here. It is a bold statement and I invite you to consider it.
Comments
Are we really ready to allow these works to be socially deligitimized because they happened to be released at a time when the majority of the mainstream didn't really understand how interactivity can be used expressively? They didn't realizes interaction was a medium, and not just a toy? Ebert's wrong. And Santiago is, I think, quite behind the times on this point.
I'd rather play Prime than watch Citizen Kane. Would rather play Electroplankton than watch Chien Andalou. Would sooner wallow Kane & Lynch than watch M.
It's not that there hasn't been a game that can compete against the significant works of other media, it's that the audience is still afraid to make the comparison.