[-empyre-] Game Art & The End Of The Gallery

[Corrado Morgana]

My tuppence worth..

Having visited both London iterations of the Game On show, Barbican and
Science Museum, I feel that the sheer fun of the first iteration was lost at
the Science Museum. Probably because somewhere in between the exhibitions I
fell into qamestudies/research. It's games art crossover was poor, indie
games being represented by warning forever and GamesArt by a barely
funtioning (through poor gallery maintenance I think) work by scanner, just
wasn't enough..at the Barbican, I forget, there seemed to be a better
representation of games related arts practice. It would be interesting to
know what the curatorial decision behind this was.

....and now

some perspectives on the gallery's role

I have recently co-curated 2 games shows, GamePlay and Zero Gamer with HTTP,
the gallery arm of Furtherfield.org

Gameplay posssibly being the most significant in reponse to Christians post.
The exhibition focussed on playfull practice and featured media art works
from amongst others Paul Granjon, Simon Poulter and Mary Flanagan...and also
several indie games and Games art works that showed a sensibility that is
subversive and transgression of typical game norms (visual
language/transgressive play and gameplay inversions-Julian Oliver's 2nd
person shooter f'rinstance) alongside netart pieces like visitors studio and
tale of tales' artgame/MUVE endless forest. The gallery functioning as 'way
in' to a particular practice. Most of the works are freely available online
but our usual audience might not normally be exposed to these works 

yup, there was a politicised agenda to the show, mainly the exhibition had
to happen as little game art (in my experience ) had actually been presented
at the time in quantity; playfull media art sure, but specifically games
related stuff...not so sure. GamesArt very definitely links the arenas but
only when the curatorial sensibility comes from such arenas, otherwise we
get the commercial world being used as a way in (a hook) to the critical
gaming rather than the media art world being used as a hook to the critical
gaming

scenario 1
a microsoft sponsored Halo 3 exhibition with some artists machinima thrown
in. 

scenario 2
an arts council sponsored event of media art (whatever that is!  ;-) ) with
some gamesart that fits the curatorial remit

Scenario 3
an arts council sponsored event of games art

I guess it depends which bums you want to get on which seats! They will all
attract differing audiences

a sidenote... It's practically impossible to ignore commerce as much modding
technology, even though some of it has been open sourced, comes from
commerce...probably best not to get bogged down here..

Zero gamer was produced as a counterpoint to the hands-on industry and
design events at the London games festival...the working strapline 'taking
the action out of interaction' addressing some of my frustrations that much
games art ends up as machinima(machinimart?)

Both exhibitions were presented as part of the London games festival fringe,
game-play being presented at the world series of videogames and zero gamer
as part of the lgff festival lounge

There did seem to be some sense that the shows were perceived as a kind of
sideshow to the real design/educational events by some punters, whilst
others, to paraphrase co-curators Marc Garrett/Ruth Catlow, moved seamlessly
between events. The shows were also presented at HTTP and other galleries
-their natural habitat perhaps?

Corrado Morgana 







-----Original Message-----
From: empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
[mailto:empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] On Behalf Of Christian McCrea
Sent: 08 March 2008 11:15 AM
To: soft_skinned_space
Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Game Art & The End Of The Gallery

Thanks Daphne and Melinda,

On the question of the gallery... its hard to imagine game art
exhibitions ten years from now being organised without reference to
commerce because so much of the aesthetic of seriality is
commerce-driven. Nor would I want it to be the driving narrative...
but for example, Game On's display of indepedent games was on slightly
older monitors (it seems, anyway) than the new commercial games. The
effect was perfect.


>  for me the main question is always around
>  - what role is game art asked to play?

I think it is very very localised; especially considering how global
games is assumed to be. A lot of hand-made, craft-based work that
references game culture appears in Sydney; Melbourne has a
painterly/drawn influence. What surprises me is the late 90s/early
2000s connection to music has not developed a great deal more in
Australia while so much happens in Europe.

If there is a general way of answering, game art is asked to position
itself between a whole range of forces and bodies, to offer rules for
others to play in. Its asked to bring in all these other types of
micro production, while infecting their practitioners with art,
thought, etc. I feel like sometimes this is a role forced upon any
serious treatment of games.

Some short answers to questions which deserve to be taken up on their
own rather than lumped together:

>  Almost a decade later, is the scene still parasitic or it has gained
>  an autonomous role?

I believe a lot has changed for the better. There are critical masses
at points, enough that the question shifts from ontology to practice.
A very small show in Melbourne last year by artist Nirmala Shome
involving a hand-made model of a Sim City which the audience destroyed
struck me as one influenced by earlier game art, and that in itself
was a opening up of dialogues.
http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2007/03/nirmala-shome-w.php

>  Can we - the ones working on this field - encourage critical thinking?

Yes; most games people entering the world of games now are going
through University degree programs which are (I hope, believe)
naturally attracted to art as a way to communicate the critical method
in action, as a way of presenting game production itself as well.

>  There are millions of gamers around the world but are they conscious
>  about the new dimensions of play ?

Somewhat; the existence of blogs and sites that pick up the
occassional story about game art add to a chatter about productive
activity appealing to the geek sensibility. So you have hacks, indy
games, game art popping up all the time on even hardcore gaming blogs
precisely because it is seen as more hardcore (we need a Linda
Williams analysis of the gamer use of the word!).

>  Vaneigem, referring to Dada, wrote that it was from art that play broke
free .
>  How free is play today? what can art do about it?

Thats wonderful... is art trying to rein play back in after all?

-Christian McCrea
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre