[-empyre-] TEZ, the Temporary Entertainment Zones verisimilitudes

[Christian McCrea]

>  BUT TODAY: Without telling any details, I was clearly told - by one of
>  the "reality constituting" institutions, that the thing that we are
>  doing, is no theory at all. It might be accepted as decoration, it is a
>  "artificial fictional text" but- not theory- with the right to claim
>  reputation or serious power of discourse - a dispositive.,
>  do You think this is less worth than a discourse in the canonised
>  methodologies of media studies and history or game studies?
>  roller ball shoot one
>  please shoot back in friendly fire

If we are honest and take stock, soberly, of what ideas are of value
because they build up on the history of other good ideas and propose
them anew in our time (that is the game of research!) then there is a
good deal more research going on in the pages of Ludic Society or in
SwanQuake user manual or in the 'thinking ephemera'. Game studies has
wasted a lot of institutional time developing a discourse to
differentiate itself from media studies, film studies - which was
necessary to a point - but also to a point game research closely
mirrors the waste of games themselves. Different operating systems,
different workflows.. which has been pointed out to me many times is
how the academy works, but then maybe we can look at the whole
ludology episode as a toll that games had to pay, the ogre under the
bridge demanding his goin coin.  Lots of competition, not enough
cooperation, certainly very little chance and only occasionally a sign
of vertigo! One method is to tell your reality constituting
institution that Ludic Society is perfect for teaching through
'pataphysics to game development students. Because, you are right,
game studies is an empire - it sells courses and books and people.
Like any empire it will expand until there is an intellectual heat
death - but when precisely that will be is the question.

So... the three golden prongs as far as The Empire is concerned: game
research, development and design - are all learning the hard way that
media studies, history, game studies, computer programming are all
individually inadequate for the task of producing knowledge and craft
in Universities.. and that synthetic, plastic, fast, collaborative,
iterative, anarchic, exploiting (but not exploitative), humane,
social, rapid, atypical .... is the only way games are going to be
produced in the future. So, if that is how games are made, and at
least how excellence in recognised.. there is a critical opportunity
where that could teach the academy (a thing or two!). Such as, how to
weave politics, theory and practice, etc.

The commercial world of games (which is naturally enough not discussed
much in spaces like this) has pockets of productive madness which are
worth bearing in mind, the Game Developer's Conference has a
Experimental Game Workshop, etc. The capitalism of games is in deep
atrophy, the (ad)venture capital is drying up and labour situations of
even five years ago are now completely different. Gold farmers are now
become more managerial-exploitative that youth-labour. I don't meant
to suggest that a giant game corporation using Guy Debord's Theory of
the Derive as design inspiration (this happened!) and still producing
rubbish storylines and boring games is some massive shift - but good
theory, good art and good practice are all required where good games
are made (art or not.)



>  Does The Right to make theory exists?

I don't know.. but I have just recently read lots of excellent writing
on the right to think, and this is too perfect not to share:

"We may seize the creative capacity within human history, under the
names of 'praxis' or 'poeisis', but we have no right to construct an
ontology using that as cover. We must not ontologise history."
Henri Bergson , Prolegomenas


>  Intersection2 ad archiving: TAZ, the Temporary Autonomous Zone as
>  introduced by Hakim Bey, http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/taz.htm
>  is very suitable as conception for art as games - and games, which are
>  quickly outdated technologically in highest verisimilitude. On purpose
>  one can exploit the subversive power of the temporary, which stems in
>  contrast to the old arts conception of "Ewigkeit", permanence and bears
>  more possibilities for experiment and resistance- to what ever elements
>  are inherent to each technology applied!

>  Suggestion: Lets apply the TEZ, the Temporary Entertainment Zones, as
>  programme and motto for art games, which must not necessarily be
>  archived forever. BUT precisely for that reason, we have o claim for the
>  power of the game art meta-discourse as ours! To be capable to speak
>  elaborate about and with the work slowly vanishing!!

I can only type 'yes' so many times before being redundant, but I will
add that when you look at what productive, passionate game culture
does which steps on the toes of art - hacks, directed piracy projects,
mods, etc - permanence is never an issue because the next level, the
next game is coming up quick.

For discussion: Just to intersect the art and archive issues a bit
more, its worth asking why game art pokes outward so much at tactile
media. Why is projection important to some artist for some works and
not others. Are the questions of site-specificity, of the space and
what it does - are those questions any different when a game is
involved? What affordances are given?

-Christian McCrea