{"id":1099,"date":"2010-09-06T12:34:44","date_gmt":"2010-09-06T16:34:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.jesperjuul.net\/ludologist\/?p=1099"},"modified":"2023-10-10T09:04:49","modified_gmt":"2023-10-10T07:04:49","slug":"the-art-history-of-games-video-online","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jesperjuul.net\/ludologist\/2010\/09\/06\/the-art-history-of-games-video-online\/","title":{"rendered":"The Art History of Games Video Online"},"content":{"rendered":"

The videos have been posted<\/a> from the very exciting Art History of Games Conference<\/a> in Atlanta earlier this year.<\/p>\n

Lots of interesting presentations by Bogost, Bolter, Brathwaite, Kluetsch, Lantz, Lowood, Nitsche, Paul, Pearce, Pozzi & Zimmerman, Rohrer, Romero, Schrank, Sharp, Harvey & Samyn.<\/p>\n

A few notes on my talk, “The Pure Game: A Short History of Video Game Aesthetics”, viewable below.<\/p>\n

I did the very academic thing of talking about history, about how in art history, the idea of identifying the pure essence of a medium and protecting it from alien influences has been common in the 20th century (painting, cinema), and how in video games we have often made similar claims about identifying a pure game that we wanted to protect from, say, narrative, or from undue emphasis on graphics.<\/p>\n

I think some people were hoping for more of a manifesto-style talk, since many other speakers were doing just that. My talk is more of a meta-manifesto, where I say that although we are faced with the weight of history, and although history warns us against making sweeping statements about the properties of an art form, and although there is a current of thought that warns us against definitions and media essentialism, we nevertheless have to continue to make strong claims about our art form of choice, video games. The bold claims, though often proven wrong, drive us forward. We must dare to be wrong. <\/em>We must continue making bold statements about video games, knowing that they can be wrong, and we must try to make statements that are so strong that they can<\/em> be wrong.
\n<\/em><\/p>\n