Why I'm skipping the Keynote at PAX East and why Art can't cure Cancer

Jane McGonigal is slated to be the keynote speaker this year and I think I would actually rather see the Kingdom's of Amalur live demo. Granted last year Wil Wheaton was absolutely amazing and his speech definitely was tear jerking-ly amazing to listen to live, but Jane is crazy and not all that smart (and also wasn't on Star Trek TNG, the best iteration of the show by far). For full disclosure I have not followed her career very closely and my opinion is solely based on her performance on Colbert not too long ago, but still she definitely seems to paint a picture of her views and her mission. It seems to me that she see's videogames as some sort of super-media capable of solving world hunger and curing cancer at which I have to laugh. Her goal is to get more people playing videogames because it would better society. I definitely think she is denser then a steel cheesecake encased in Paris Hilton for one reason; games are art.

Art, in any form, is at it's core entertainment; but art is also much more than that. Art is designed to evoke an emotion, any emotion in us for better or for worse. For example I would argue that the jackass movies are art. At their core they are just a bunch of very stupid dudes hurting themselves and each other, but ultimately I believe it is more than the sum of it's parts. Watching a dude get his junk bitten by a snake conjures up feelings of whimsy and escapism; surely I don't envy the poor sod but it makes me feel something I wouldn't normally feel. It pushes my comfort zone and personal boundaries. That is, by my own personal definition, art.

As I have mentioned in almost every post since I started this blog a monthish ago I believe that videogames are an interactive form of art. I think of the feeling when I **spoiler alert** first interacted with Sovereign in Mass Effect or when I beat my freind's high score in Tetris; it evokes an emotional response. When I am beating a hooker to death in GTA it also evokes an emotional response, albeit a completely different one. Bottom line is that is what art in general does; whether it be a book, movie, painting, ballet, or just a really hot chick in a slinky dress.

Not everyone is privy to the immersiveness of good videogames as artistic experiences. Not everyone will be able to play through Portal and enjoy what I consider to be the best artistic acheivement an artist can hope to strive for; leaving the consumer of their art in such a state where they don't know whether to laugh or cry. We as gamers know what is possible and, like religious zealots, some like Ms. McGonigal believe that everyone can and should be privy to the same experiences we are.

Another very important thing about art is that art is subjective. I believe that everyone ever born appreciates art in some form, but for everyone it is different. I loved the movie Fight Club. I made my mom watch it and she hated it. Does that make it bad art? No of course not; it makes our tastes different. Just because I love videogames and I firmly believe they have made a profoundly large and positive impact in my life doesn't mean videogames, in any form, will have the same impact for everyone. Not everyone wants to play games and not everyone should.

Back to my original point; spreading videogames as a way to cure society's woes is really akin to spreading religion to cure society's woes and if it were going to work it would have by now. Ultimately playing games isn't going to change any society, a general desire to change will (see Egypt, Lybia, or Tunisia). Now Ms. McGonigal may mean very well with her crusade, but to me she may as well have a Bible or Koran under her arm instead of a controler. I'm surely a believer, but not everyone will be or should be.

Regardless God of War meets Oblivion sounds way more awesome! Here's hoping I'm wrong about Schil and 38 Studios. Now if only Charlie Sheen were giving the keynote this would be a much different post!