美学理论与电子游戏

IF 0.6 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
T. Mortensen
{"title":"美学理论与电子游戏","authors":"T. Mortensen","doi":"10.5860/choice.49-4843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aesthetic Theory and the Video GameGraeme KirkpatrickNew York: Manchester University Press, 2011. Images, bibliography, index. 247 pp. $25.95 cloth. ISBN: 9780719077180 Graeme Kirkpatrick's study of aesthetic theory and video games seeks to apply aesthetic theory to what some view as a garish, popularized, and mass-produced cultural form. What do video games have to do with aesthetics after all? Kirkpatrick takes this question head on and argues that video games are a\"historically specific instance of an aesthetic form,\" and as such they should be viewed through the lens aesthetics to be understood (p. 1). Over the course of six chapters, Kirkpatrick discusses the newness of what games bring to aesthetics. For the author, the newness of games is a specific way of approaching the text through the body, as a participant rather than as an audience.Drawing on the work of Markku Eskelinen (a founder of gamestudies.org), Kirkpatrick demonstrates the difference between games and stories. As Eskelinen notes, when we are thrown a ball, we do not expect it to tell us stories. This example becomes Kirkpatrick's starting point for an exploration of games as texts that expect us to play along, take part in, and initiate the progress of the experience. He pushes Eskelinen's comments further by asserting that the act of playing can be meaningful without being subjected to interpretation. The act is its own meaning and its own goal.Despite Kirkpatrick's initial claim that play does not have to be interpreted, he does commit interesting and thoughtprovoking acts of interpretation. For instance, in chapter 5, \"Meaning in Virtual Worlds,\" he interprets the structure of video games as a constant revisiting of loss, and he points to how it is described as a joyless pleasure (p. 187). In this discussion, he demonstrates through strong and engaging analysis the connections between game criticism and the cultural criticism of Walter Benjamin and Frederic Jameson.In Kirkpatrick's chapter called \"Ludology, Space, and Time,\" he positions the ludology (the study of games) of Espen Aarseth and Jesper Juul in the context of traditional aesthetic theory. He weaves the loose ends of structuralist game studies into the aesthetic traditions and understandings that the ludologists originally rejected, claiming that game scholarship was independent of them. These original ludologists did this to avoid having games reduced and understood only in the image of the previous, more static texts dominating the field of literature and aesthetics. Yet while this chapter performs the necessary task of positioning ludology in relation to aesthetic theory, it also leaves a lot to future discussion. …","PeriodicalId":45727,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Play","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"92","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aesthetic Theory and the Video Game\",\"authors\":\"T. Mortensen\",\"doi\":\"10.5860/choice.49-4843\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aesthetic Theory and the Video GameGraeme KirkpatrickNew York: Manchester University Press, 2011. Images, bibliography, index. 247 pp. $25.95 cloth. ISBN: 9780719077180 Graeme Kirkpatrick's study of aesthetic theory and video games seeks to apply aesthetic theory to what some view as a garish, popularized, and mass-produced cultural form. What do video games have to do with aesthetics after all? Kirkpatrick takes this question head on and argues that video games are a\\\"historically specific instance of an aesthetic form,\\\" and as such they should be viewed through the lens aesthetics to be understood (p. 1). Over the course of six chapters, Kirkpatrick discusses the newness of what games bring to aesthetics. For the author, the newness of games is a specific way of approaching the text through the body, as a participant rather than as an audience.Drawing on the work of Markku Eskelinen (a founder of gamestudies.org), Kirkpatrick demonstrates the difference between games and stories. As Eskelinen notes, when we are thrown a ball, we do not expect it to tell us stories. This example becomes Kirkpatrick's starting point for an exploration of games as texts that expect us to play along, take part in, and initiate the progress of the experience. He pushes Eskelinen's comments further by asserting that the act of playing can be meaningful without being subjected to interpretation. The act is its own meaning and its own goal.Despite Kirkpatrick's initial claim that play does not have to be interpreted, he does commit interesting and thoughtprovoking acts of interpretation. For instance, in chapter 5, \\\"Meaning in Virtual Worlds,\\\" he interprets the structure of video games as a constant revisiting of loss, and he points to how it is described as a joyless pleasure (p. 187). In this discussion, he demonstrates through strong and engaging analysis the connections between game criticism and the cultural criticism of Walter Benjamin and Frederic Jameson.In Kirkpatrick's chapter called \\\"Ludology, Space, and Time,\\\" he positions the ludology (the study of games) of Espen Aarseth and Jesper Juul in the context of traditional aesthetic theory. He weaves the loose ends of structuralist game studies into the aesthetic traditions and understandings that the ludologists originally rejected, claiming that game scholarship was independent of them. These original ludologists did this to avoid having games reduced and understood only in the image of the previous, more static texts dominating the field of literature and aesthetics. Yet while this chapter performs the necessary task of positioning ludology in relation to aesthetic theory, it also leaves a lot to future discussion. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":45727,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Play\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"92\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Play\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.49-4843\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Play","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.49-4843","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 92

摘要

《美学理论与电子游戏》graeme kirkpatrick know York:曼彻斯特大学出版社,2011。图片、参考书目、索引。247页,25.95美元。Graeme Kirkpatrick对美学理论和电子游戏的研究试图将美学理论应用于某些人认为是花哨、普及和大量生产的文化形式。电子游戏与美学到底有什么关系?Kirkpatrick正面回答了这个问题,他认为电子游戏是“一种美学形式的历史特定实例”,因此我们应该从美学的角度来看待它们。在六章的课程中,Kirkpatrick讨论了游戏给美学带来的新鲜感。对于作者来说,游戏的新鲜感是一种通过身体接近文本的特殊方式,即作为参与者而不是观众。通过引用Markku Eskelinen(游戏邦注:gamestudies.org的创始人)的作品,Kirkpatrick展示了游戏和故事之间的区别。正如Eskelinen所指出的,当我们被扔给一个球时,我们并不指望它会给我们讲故事。这个例子成为Kirkpatrick探索游戏作为文本的出发点,希望我们能够参与其中,并开始体验过程。他进一步推动了Eskelinen的评论,声称游戏行为可以不受解释而具有意义。这个行为有它自己的意义和目标。尽管Kirkpatrick最初声称游戏不需要被解释,但他确实做出了有趣且发人深省的解释行为。例如,在第5章“虚拟世界的意义”中,他将电子游戏的结构解释为对损失的不断重访,并指出它是如何被描述为一种无趣的快乐。在这一讨论中,他通过分析游戏批评与Walter Benjamin和Frederic Jameson的文化批评之间的联系。在Kirkpatrick的“游戏学,空间和时间”一章中,他将Espen Aarseth和Jesper Juul的游戏学(游戏研究)置于传统美学理论的背景下。他将结构主义游戏研究的零碎内容融入到美学传统和理解中,这是游戏学家最初所拒绝的,并声称游戏学术是独立于它们的。这些最初的游戏学家这样做是为了避免将游戏简化并仅以先前的图像来理解,即主导文学和美学领域的静态文本。然而,虽然这一章完成了与美学理论相关的定位学的必要任务,但它也留下了许多未来的讨论。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Aesthetic Theory and the Video Game
Aesthetic Theory and the Video GameGraeme KirkpatrickNew York: Manchester University Press, 2011. Images, bibliography, index. 247 pp. $25.95 cloth. ISBN: 9780719077180 Graeme Kirkpatrick's study of aesthetic theory and video games seeks to apply aesthetic theory to what some view as a garish, popularized, and mass-produced cultural form. What do video games have to do with aesthetics after all? Kirkpatrick takes this question head on and argues that video games are a"historically specific instance of an aesthetic form," and as such they should be viewed through the lens aesthetics to be understood (p. 1). Over the course of six chapters, Kirkpatrick discusses the newness of what games bring to aesthetics. For the author, the newness of games is a specific way of approaching the text through the body, as a participant rather than as an audience.Drawing on the work of Markku Eskelinen (a founder of gamestudies.org), Kirkpatrick demonstrates the difference between games and stories. As Eskelinen notes, when we are thrown a ball, we do not expect it to tell us stories. This example becomes Kirkpatrick's starting point for an exploration of games as texts that expect us to play along, take part in, and initiate the progress of the experience. He pushes Eskelinen's comments further by asserting that the act of playing can be meaningful without being subjected to interpretation. The act is its own meaning and its own goal.Despite Kirkpatrick's initial claim that play does not have to be interpreted, he does commit interesting and thoughtprovoking acts of interpretation. For instance, in chapter 5, "Meaning in Virtual Worlds," he interprets the structure of video games as a constant revisiting of loss, and he points to how it is described as a joyless pleasure (p. 187). In this discussion, he demonstrates through strong and engaging analysis the connections between game criticism and the cultural criticism of Walter Benjamin and Frederic Jameson.In Kirkpatrick's chapter called "Ludology, Space, and Time," he positions the ludology (the study of games) of Espen Aarseth and Jesper Juul in the context of traditional aesthetic theory. He weaves the loose ends of structuralist game studies into the aesthetic traditions and understandings that the ludologists originally rejected, claiming that game scholarship was independent of them. These original ludologists did this to avoid having games reduced and understood only in the image of the previous, more static texts dominating the field of literature and aesthetics. Yet while this chapter performs the necessary task of positioning ludology in relation to aesthetic theory, it also leaves a lot to future discussion. …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Play
American Journal of Play SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信