text:
At Hamline you'll benefit from being a part of not just the only university in the U.S. with three fine arts programs in creative writing and an award-winning national literary magazine, but also the cultural and literary bounty of the Minneapolis/St. Paul area.
Hamline students experience a world-class education in the process and craft of writing taught by award-winning practicing writers.
Our faculty have published more than 250 books and won the highest awards given for excellence in writing for children, young adults, and adults, and our alumni go on to publish, teach, and work in the literary publishing industry.
Get started on developing your craft as a writer and find out more about how Hamline's MFA programs will transform your writing and your life.


text:
Parking Deals in Tampa St Petersburg
When neglected for long periods of time, cars may act out by sleeping in the street and consorting with motorcycles. Give your car attention while you're away with this Groupon. Choose Between Three Options $7 for two days of airport parking (a $13.98 value) $14 for four days of airport parking (a $27.96 value) $24 for seven days of airport parking (a $48.93 value) The satellite parking lot provides shuttle service to Tampa International Airport 24 hours a day at 15 and 45 past the hour.
If the game Monopoly taught us anything, it's that owning a car is a responsibility equal to that of owning a dog and that free parking is something that happens to other people. Land on the space you've been eyeing with this Groupon. Choose from Three Options $10 for 4 consecutive days of airport parking (a $19.96 value) $15 for 7 consecutive days of airport parking (a $34.93 value) $24 for a 10-day airport-parking punch card, valid on nonconsecutive days (a $49.99 value) Though Continental Parking Orlando sometimes features a discounted price online, this Groupon still offers the best deal ...
Contrary to popular belief, boats are actually much safer than cars, which inexplicably sink every time you drive them on water. Avoid gambling on water safety with this Groupon. $10 for Casino Cruise ($28 Value) Ship Admission ($8 value) $5 slot match play $10 table match play $5 food voucher Players try their luck at various games such as roulette ($3 inside; $5 outside minimum bet), slots ($0.05–$5) in the form of Wheel of Fortune and Double Diamond Deluxe, or Let It Ride ($5 minimum bet). Groupon holders also receive free parking and complimentary drinks while gambling.
Why You Should Go:The U.S. Women's Open is the national championship of women's golf and is also the largest women's golf event. This year, the field will consist of 156 professionals and amateurs competing for the prestigious title. Don't miss out on history as the 2013 U.S. Women's Open makes its way to Long Island for the first time ever. What To Choose: A four-pack of tickets provides grounds access to practice and championship rounds, with tickets that are good for any one-day. You can upgrade with Nicklaus Pavilion tickets, providing additional entry to the Nicklaus Pavilion between the 1st and 2nd fairways. What You Should Know: The pavilion is climate-controlled with indoor and outdoor seating, TV monitors, computer scoring terminals and a place to order upscale food and drinks. Both packages include complimentary parking, and the Nicklaus Pavilion ticket come with an official championship program.
The Fine Print
REFUND POLICY: This event is nonrefundable. No full or partial refunds are given to customers who miss an event. In the event of a cancellation, your voucher will be fully refunded. • Each voucher is good for 1 person • The deal is valid only for tickets on the date[s] of the event as listed and may not be exchanged or redeemed for any other dates • Groups wishing to sit together must redeem their vouchers together; seating is fulfilled with no specific priority • Entire value must be used in a single visit
After a wildly successful trek last year, Everclear's Art Alexakis announced he's bringing Summerland back for 2013. For $40, score a ticket package to the concert on Thursday, May 30 at The Mahaffey Theater for the Performing Arts. This time out, Everclear will share the stage with fellow rock bands Live, Filter, and Sponge, for a decidedly edgier Summerland trek, one that features smash hits "Father of Mine," "Santa Monica," "Lightning Crashes," "I Alone," "Hey Man, Nice Shot," "Take a Picture," "Plowed," and "Molly" that rock as hard as the first time you heard them. $40 ($84 value) for a ticket package, including: • One Orchestra ticket • Parking • Pre-show party in LivingSocial lounge with hors d'oeuvres & Bud Light Platinum
Every deal, one place.
Best deals from Groupon, LivingSocial and more.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Volunteer and Student Policy
Download a copy of the Volunteer and Students Policy 2012
Volunteers at our school bring with them a range of skills and experience that can enhance the learning opportunities of children at our school. We welcome and encourage volunteers from the local community.
Our Volunteers include:
- Members of the Governing Body
- Parents of pupils
- Ex-pupils
- Students on work experience
- University students referred to us by Student Volunteer Services
- Local residents
- Friends of the school
The types of activities that Volunteers are engaged include:
- Hearing children read
- Working with small groups of children
- Working alongside individual children
- Undertaking art & craft activities with children
- Running after-school clubs e.g. dancing
- Working with children on the computers
- Accompanying school visits
- Addressing areas of development highlighted in the School Improvement Plan,
- Supporting pupils who have been identified by the Inclusion Team as needing additional support
- Providing positive role models and one to one support
Becoming a Volunteer
Anyone wishing to become a volunteer, either for a one off event such as a school visit or on a more regular basis, e.g. hearing children read, usually approaches the Headteacher or Deputy Headteacher directly.
Volunteers should complete the Volunteer Information Sheet (Appendix 1) with their contact details, type of activities they would like to help with, and the times they are available to help.
Before starting to help in school, volunteers should complete the Volunteer Agreement (Appendix 2), which sets out the school's expectations of volunteers and asks Volunteers to confirm they have received a copy of this policy.
Our School Vision
All adults who work in our school, whether a paid member of staff or a volunteer are expected to work and behave in such as way as to actively promote our school vision.
Grazebrook Primary School is a special place full of learning, laughter and friendship and where all children are happy, feel safe and are valued.
At Grazebrook Primary School, we provide the best possible primary education in a stimulating and creative environment. The school develops a love of learning inspired by high quality teaching, developing and building upon individual strengths and talents. We expect all children in our school to reach age related levels, in line with national expectations, as a minimum and ensure that the barriers to learning are removed so that every pupil reaches their full potential.
Children educated at Grazebrook are open minded, committed and confident. We encourage a positive partnership between pupils, home, school and the wider community. The school values and has a strong relationship with its community, which develops individuals who will lead happy and rewarding lives.
This vision is underpinned by the following aims and values.
- To enhance the quality of children's learning through highly effective teaching.
- To promote and sustain a challenging, stimulating and caring learning environment.
- To maintain high standards of behaviour through self-discipline, tolerance and mutual respect.
- To work closely and openly with parents/carers and the wider community to maximise children's development.
- To continually seek ways to improve every aspect of the school's work and life.
- We will respect our children's individuality, encourage creativity and assist them to make the most of their abilities.
- We want our pupils to leave us well educated, self-confident and caring members of society.
- We will endeavour to promote equality of opportunity for all of our children irrespective of gender, race, creed, ability or disability.
Volunteers in school are bound by a code of confidentiality. Any concerns that Volunteers have about the children they work with / come into contact with should be voiced with the Class Teacher and NOT with the parents of the child / persons outside school. Comments regarding children's behaviour or learning can be highly sensitive, and if taken out of context, can cause distress to the parents of a child if they hear about such issues through a third party rather than directly from the school. Volunteers who are concerned about anything another adult in the school does or says should raise the matter with the Headteacher or Deputy Headteacher.
All volunteers work under the supervision of the Class Teacher of the class to which they are assigned. Teachers retain responsibility for children at all times, including the children's behaviour and the activity they are undertaking.
Volunteers should have clear guidance from the Teacher as to how an activity is carried out / what the expected outcome of an activity is. Volunteers are encouraged to seek further advice / guidance from the Teacher in the event of any query / problem regarding children's understanding of a task or behaviour.
Health & Safety
The school has a Health & Safety Policy and this is made available on request to Volunteers working in the school. Class Teachers ensure that Volunteers are clear about emergency procedures (e.g. fire alarm evacuation) and about any safety aspects associated with a particular task (e.g. using DT equipment / accompanying children on visits). Volunteers need to exercise due care and attention and report any obvious hazards or concerns to the Class Teacher / Headteacher.
Child Protection
The welfare of our children is paramount. To ensure the safety of our children, we adopt the following procedures:
- All Volunteers are given a copy of the Volunteer Policy and asked to sign a Volunteer Agreement (Appendix 2)
- To ensure the safety of our pupils at all times, all of our Volunteers must have been cleared by the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB). A certificate is issued to the individual to produce in school.
- Where a Volunteer is engaged in a 'one-off' activity e.g. helping supervise a group of children as part of a class visit, a LIST 99 police check is carried out on these volunteers. These volunteers, who are under constant supervision of school staff and must read and sign our Off-site visit agreement (Appendix 3).
Complaints Procedure
Any complaints made about a Volunteer will be referred to the Headteacher / Deputy Headteacher for investigation. Any complaints made by a Volunteer will be referred to the Headteacher / Deputy Headteacher.
The Headteacher reserves the right to take the following action:
- To speak with a Volunteer about a breach of the Volunteer Agreement and seek reassurance that this will not happen again;
- Offer an alternative placement for a Volunteer, e.g. helping with another activity or in another Class;
- Inform the Volunteer that the school no longer wishes to use them. The full Complaints Procedure is set out in the School Handbook (available from the School Office).
Monitoring and Review
This Policy has been approved by the Governing Body and will be reviewed annually and updated in the light of new guidance from either the DCSF or LEA.
Download a copy of the Volunteer and Students Policy 2012


text: The Gold's Gym 12-Week Challenge ChecklistAs you start on this 12-week journey, it's essential to have a good plan of attack, so we consulted Gold's Gym Fitness Institute experts Adam Friedman and Robert Reames to develop a road map that can be your trusty guide (along with your trainer). PLUS: Six inspiring stories to motivate you! » read moreNew Year's Survival GuideWhether this January marks your first time at Gold's or your 400th, learn to gracefully handle the New Year's gym crunch with this handy guide. » read moreCould it be something you ate? Not enough sleep? What could be causing your headache? Health.com's comprehensive list might help you out.Your weightIn a recent study, researchers found that women with mild obesity (a body mass index of 30) had a 35% greater risk of headaches than those with a lower BMI. Severe obesity (BMI of 40) upped the chances to 80%. Your personalityCertain traits, including rigidity, reserve and obsessivity may make you headache-prone. If that sounds like you, it could be time to sign up for relaxation training. That three-day vacayWeekend or "let-down" headaches can happen when you take a break from your routine, says Alexander Mauskop, M.D., founder and director of the New York Headache Center and co-author of What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Migraines. Ease into the change by keeping your sleep time as normal as possible—you'll end up feeling more rested than if you stay in bed until noon. Your bathroom paint jobIt's not just arguing over paint colors that can give you a headache; fumes from traditional paints can trigger pain. Many companies now make nearly odorless, low-VOC (volatile organic compound) formulas, like Benjamin Moore's Natura line or Devoe's Wonder Pure. DehydrationYou don't have to drink gallons of water to stay hydrated, says John La Puma, M.D., author of Chef MD's Big Book of Culinary Medicine. "I'd love it if people got more water from eating fruits and vegetables because then they'd get all the other good things that come with them," he says. Skipping mealsWe know you're busy, but hunger is a common headache trigger. Too much caffeineA little can help headaches but too much can trigger them, New York City neurologist Audrey Halpern, M.D., says. If caffeine is causing your pain, gradually cut back until you have caffeine no more than two days a week. InactivityA recent Swedish study showed that those who were inactive were more likely to get headaches than those who worked out. Aim for 20 to 30 minutes of cardio a day, five days a week, to relieve stress, send blood to the brain, and get feel-good endorphins flowing. Exercise may be a trigger for some people, so consult your doc first. Sleep deprivationOne large study says those who slept an average of six hours a night tended to have significantly more severe and more frequent headaches than those who got more z's. Don't feed your headacheEveryone reacts differently, but some foods are known to trigger headaches for many people—and others (especially those rich in magnesium) seem to help prevent them. |


text:
To the Reader
Video games are culturally relevant. Their production and play affects us, and we should pay attention to them. But it is important not to react to their varied content with dogma.
The Church of England's General Synod met in London on the 11th to pass a bill on violent computer games. If you are a UK resident, you can watch BBC Parliament's broadcast of the procedings here.
The bill's contents are the Church of England's business; I have no affiliation with the Church and only care about its theological and ethical "laws" insofar as they are accepted as dogma by any of the Church's followers. That said, I found the rhetoric of many of the representatives who discussed this bill disturbing.
Consider the language and tone of one Thomas Benyon, former Conservative MP for Abingdon, and now a representative of the Diocese of Oxford, who speaks a number of times throughout the debate. Benyon paints a picture for us, of
a bubbling sewer of gratuitously violent and sexual pornography DVD games [which] are washing all - er - around us. (01.29)
Benyon "know[s] that the Devil [...] has the monopoly of violent and pornographic video games." The most important deficiency in Benyon's argument is his characteristic creation of a connection between violence and pornography. It is convenient for Benyon and his intellectual peers to combine the two into a single, coherent, pervasive force determined to destroy "society." I propose a different narrative: one in which we worry about the media's depiction of violence as potentially harmful, and recognise that no representation of sex has ever harmed a responsible adult.
But the debate isn't really about adults. Even when they are not mentioned, it is obvious that the debaters are thinking about children. They are concerned that children are getting their hands on inappropriate material. Their response, given that regulation is unenforceable (and meaningless, as Philip French adds, given that online games cannot be regulated) is to encourage government and the BBFC to increase the quantity of games they censor or ban. (Benyon is outraged that "the [BBFC] see their role as advisory only [...] and are cutting only 3% of material.") French seems to believe, as I do, that this discussion is mostly posturing, and that the only satisfactory solution is to inform parents about the contents of these games.
If parents are concerned about the depictions of violence in video games, then they should play some of the video games their children want to buy. They should be encouraged that, by far, the best-selling games tend to have compulsive collecting, puzzle solving, or human relationships, rather than killing, as their core mechanic. And they should help their children make informed decisions about the kind of games which they want to play.
But this is not the narrative Benyon wishes to construct. He criticises the government's 2008 Byron report, claiming that it
relied on the proposition that parents have a liability or are interested in controlling what their children do. We think, sadly, that that is optimistic and a pious hope. (01.48)
Benyon's ambition in the debate goes beyond undoing the possible influence video games may have on children. He proves himself a windbag with his headfake final revelation:
I suspect one of the problems at the root of all this is our difficulty in our society which now rely on relative values for us to come out firmly and say what is right and what is wrong. (07.45)
Sic, by the way. I suspect that Benyon is referring to the liberalization of laws on marriage, sexual behaviour, etc which began in the UK under the government of Harold Wilson. He seems to be confusing the modern liberal doctrine that the personal lives of citizens are not political issues with kamikaze moral relativism. He even seems to believe that pornography is somehow less than healthy, sexy and fun, when he decries "the degeneracy of this sort of material and Internet porn[.]" It is clear that Benyon does not understand, and has no interest in understanding, video games, young people, or modern British culture.
Benyon makes it very easy to call him an irrelevant reactionary. He struggles with the simplest and most ubiquitous technological jargon, and refers to the curate's egg, "the exotic" Mandy Rice-Davies, and "King Canute's performance with his waves," as though purposefully trying to look out of touch.
Thankfully, it seems that some members of the Synod are less jaded and Mesozoic.
I wish to clarify my position. I do not answer as most "gamers" seem to, by claiming that video games are "just games." Art has a profound influence on the human psyche, which should be respected. I agree with the words of John Pritchard.
[It is claimed by video game manufacturers that] these games don't affect people[...] Of course our minds are changed.
Stimuli literally change the physical make-up of our brains. As you read this article, I am rewiring your neural circuitry. And so violent video games are worth worrying about. But let's get a few things straight: pornography is not violence, censorship solves nothing, Pokemon and The Sims massively outsell their more violent competitors, and the overwhelming majority of children are not being desensitized to violence by a postmodernist plot to separate us from family values.
To the Church of England: you are just theologically liberal enough to still matter. If you wish to attract young people, then you need to cull your crusty, reactionary windbags. Aping Bill O'Reilly will only make them hate you.
A Concerned Citizen.
P.S. I don't know what kind of footage there was on Benyon's DVD, but when he claimed that it contained in-game footage of "football with severed heads," I was reminded of this cheerful victory scene from Banjo-Tooie.
I have no idea if this is the scene to which he was referring. I just wanted to add some context. N
On Ace Attorney
The Ace Attorney series says a lot about video games. For all its insipid mechanics and plot twists, it comments coherently on the medium, and on life.
At their most satisfying, Ace Attorney's mechanics rely on syllogisms. The player is invited to recognize conflicting pieces of information, invent a scenario which reconciles them, and then support their whole cloth with evidence. Unfortunately, these sequences only involve interactivity insofar as they punish the player for pressing the wrong button; they provide no environment for play in a legal setting. As satisfying as it is to present the right evidence at the apposite time, the player is never allowed to formulate their own arguments, or assemble their own cases, discouraging lateral thinking and inviting guesswork. Furthermore, the series necessarily disregards international law to lubricate plot development and provide a stage for complex character plays.
Here, Ace Attorney lets itself down. It could comment on international criminal proceedings, or simulate the trials of real criminals yet to be tried, but it elects to lose itself in teen dramas and heteronormative puns. Why not indict Bush, or condemn conventional jurisprudence? I expect the game to invite me to try contemporary war criminals, or revise the role of the state in reacting to crime. This series has the opportunity to make radical claims about the role of courts, what constitutes a crime, and who the true criminals are in settled cases, even if only allegorically, but the legal setting is merely a backdrop. The series conforms more closely to the traditions of the Japanese teen character drama; in place of empirical data and legal frameworks, the player interacts mostly with spirit mediums and colossal breasts.
Even as a character drama, Ace Attorney is disappointing. Many of the series' characters are disturbing stereotypes. Manfred von Karma is a Social Darwinist; his daughter, Franziska, is tiresomely reminiscent of a thousand 'ball-busting feminist' stereotypes from other media. Dahlia Hawthorne even appears to be a straightforwardly evil human being. I can only interpret Jean Armstrong's presence in the third game as an attempt to encapsulate and condemn male homosexuality. The inclusion of such characters suggests an insulting flippancy on the part of the writers.
Yet there are other forces at work here. Some of the generalizations subvert social norms, and criticize parties in almost culturally relevant ways. Spark Bruschel is an insincere self-publicist constantly spouting catchy headlines, and a pertinent criticism of tabloid journalism. At times, the incompetence of the Los Angeles police force stops being slapstick and becomes inherent failure based on confused values and institutionalized corruption. Patriarchy and traditional family structures become frameworks of manipulation and scandal.
The series refines its mantra over time. Romantically, the first game declares that all parties work together in a court of law only to uncover the truth. The second eventually denounces the circumstantially Good in favour of the morally Right, with the protagonist deciding to argue the truth, even if it endangers his career, and a character's life. The third, somewhat hamfistedly, insists that defence attorneys believe in their clients on faith. In its understated finale, the fourth reconciles all of these messages.
It is not until Apollo Justice's denouement that the series plays its hand. The player spends the better half of the game building a case against a mastermind, only to arrive at an impasse without decisive evidence. In the previous three games, this situation would be resolved by re-examining some previously overlooked data, but in Apollo Justice, with every avenue explored, the player must make their case without concrete proof. For the first time, in a new, experimental system, the verdict is left to a jury. Outraged, the accused - an attorney himself - demands a showdown with the law. The player becomes a juror and makes a free, subjective decision, in order to demonstrate the game's message that such choices should come down to interpretation.
Phoenix Wright's ignorance of the law, first a gag, becomes intrinsic to his message. In Apollo Justice, Wright, stripped of his attorney's badge, is depicted as a vagabond. But it's not true. After all, he was never practicing law to begin with. Not really. The law, admits the series, is incidental. Wright, and by extension, the player, was in the courtroom to believe in the defendant.
Ultimately, it is Wright's conviction in the virtues of most people that makes the series interesting. Beneath the tired, decades-old Japanese caricatures, the frustratingly Onanistic logic, and the occasional disregard for the game world's own rules, the series has the stones to make a simple, political point: people are worth believing in. N
Video Games Is Art
Video games is art. The conversation may be tiresome, but it must be had, and we must qualify our claims.
The term high art is prescriptive and insulting. In my previous article, The Art of Assumption, I attempted to castrate its power by defining it into a corner, causing much consternation. Now, I prefer to abandon it altogether, because I have no conception of it as a useful term.
I previously used a straw man. I am not alone in this; it is easy to erect a Roger Ebert as a phantom opponent for video game critics to bash with eschatological rhetoric whenever they have an opinion. I apologize. I want to move away from this kind of lazy writing.
I use the term art to describe anything created by a conscious being. Individual video games are art, because they are created by humans, which are conscious beings. So, too, are soap operas and turds art.
Now let us stop using jargon as a shortcut to legitimacy and just talk about the things we care about. N
The Art of Assumption
Last year, on the Gamasutra podcast (presented by Tom Kim), Iain Simons declared that it was "just obvious" that games are interesting.
He asserted what others have intimated - that we don't need to justify the statement that "games are art." His comment seemed to be part of a wider argument that we don't need to justify calling games art, interesting, or worthy of study. For the sake of the podcast, that was fine. Simons has done a lot for the public profile of games (at least in the UK), and he and Kim were hardly recording a podcast to discuss whether or not games were art. They could assume, for the sake of their conversation, that games were all of these things.
But the conversation has ended now, and we no longer have that luxury. We have to justify what we're doing here, even if it seems obvious to us. You can't just call the game an art form and hope to get away with it.
So when Roger Ebert claims that games aren't high art, we shouldn't react negatively. We should think about what that means. When he made the now-famous claim, months ago, bloggers rolled their eyes and angry gamers flamed. This was the wrong response for a number of reasons. Firstly, that's not how we do things around here. Secondly, he had a point. From his own blog:
Anything can be art. Even a can of Campbell's soup. What I should have said is that games could not be high art, as I understand it.
The term "high art" may engender elitism, but I feel that - at least, as I define it - it is elitism of a linguistic nature and not a broader one. The concept, I suggest, is a valid one, even if the wording of its name embodies snobbery. (NB: high art, by my definition, is not the same as high culture. I would probably condemn the idea of there being a "high culture.")
High art, as I understand it, is art (art here being "a created thing") which exists for no purpose other than the immediate; the aesthetic. That is, high art is invention without utility. Can we say that games have no purpose? Compare the game to the painting. The painting exists for its own sake more obviously than the game does. After all, games, by their nature, have utility. By the very fact of their involving interactive mechanics, they necessitate internal utility. Externally, we're already talking about what games can teach us, or where they can take us, or what they can do for us: they could teach us about a past war or civilization, simulate flying a plane, or even - somehow - visualise the development of a scientific theory. What do paintings do for us? Some of them look nice, but that's rarely the purpose for the best paintings. It is in the nature of paintings to be; their utility as an ornament is usually peripheral. Games have obvious utilities. These utilities can be just as expressive and educational as anything else, but they are not representative of a medium which can call itself fine art. (Both of these media, by the way, are open to the criticism my father makes when he claims that games are not art: that they are designed for a very explicit purpose, and that that is to make money.)
I want to clarify my position, a little. I do disagree with what I understand Ebert to be saying when he asks,
If you can go through "every emotional journey available," doesn't that devalue each and every one of them? Art seeks to lead you to an inevitable conclusion, not a smorgasbord of choices.
Perhaps Ebert means to say that art forms may only express themselves along a linear plane. If he does, then I feel that he might have the makings of a coherent argument which excluded games from being considered high art. As it stands, he seems to be claiming that nothing which is open to different interpretations can be called art. I really hope that he's not claiming that, because Roger Ebert is very articulate, and a pre-eminent film critic. I would hate him to be a madman.
He writes:
I might suggest that gamers have a prejudiced view of their medium, and particularly what it can be. Games may not be Shakespeare quite yet, but I have the prejudice that they never will be, and some gamers are prejudiced that they will.
If we take "prejudiced" to mean "subjective," then I wouldn't want to put myself in the camp which claims that games cannot be Shakespeare. I'm not really sure what to do with that particular phrase, but I wouldn't want to say that games aren't worthy of study, or that they aren't moving. My purpose in starting this blog in September was to attempt to study games, and to explain why I found them moving. At the same time, though, I'm not sure that we can responsibly call them high art.
A lot of the trouble here stems from our definition of high art. Ebert has this to say:
Many experiences that move me in some way or another are not art. A year ago I lost the ability (temporarily, I hope) to speak. I was deeply moved by the experience. It was not art.
High art is not "what moves us." Even art does not mean that. I think that we've proven that games can move us, and Shakespeare's work has moved a few hearts by now, but that does not make either of these things art.
I'm not so sure that this matters. When I first declared that I planned to write this post, Michael Abbott responded, asking why we'd want games to be high art anyway. Would it make us play our games any differently, or make us enjoy them any more? No. Would it make them less worthy of study? Of course not. So what does it matter? It's like arguing over whether pineapple is a fruit. (It's not.) We might be interested in the answer, but it shouldn't keep us up at night. When, as I brushed my teeth one morning, I came up with the idea for this post, I didn't think "and that'll be my last post, because if games aren't high art, then why write about them?"
Furthermore, "high art," as many of my Twitleagues appear to have noted, is a problematic term. No-one seems to be able to agree on what it means. In order to avoid the vagaries my blog has been accused of in the past, I have given it a definition I could refer back to. Perhaps this strikes you as artificial, but I had no choice. In any case, my definition of "high art" is certainly different from Roger Ebert's. Make of that what you will.
What's important to note is that being art isn't the same thing as being worthy of study, or relevant. I can't agree with Chris Hyde when he comments that "if games aren't high art or don't aim for that, then I'm spending a lot of time on something with a low return on investment." Why should games have to be high art for us to enjoy them? N
So tell me how GTA IV is social commentary, precisely.
Well, Mr. Elrod, that's not exactly a simple task.
It illustrates parts of Western society which make many of us uncomfortable, and, in a lot of ways, it seems to celebrate them, or at least tolerate them. I know that many of my friends and contacts are disgusted by the game's treatment of prostitution, organised crime and racial and sexual stereotypes. While I'm wary of both flogging a dead horse and digging up a freshly buried hatchet in talking about this game at the year's end, I believe that GTA IV is laudable enough to merit abusing a few more metaphors.
All things considered, the non-specialist mechanics bring us closer to Niko's identity. He's not quite the everyman, but there's a great sense of there but for the grace of God with Niko. He isn't a Mafia member, and he isn't CJ. He's an immigrant who's fallen on hard times, and if it wasn't for Rockstar's dubious attempt at providing an engaging backstory for Niko, then his story would be a wonderfully nauseating antidote to the hubris inherent in modern American patriotism. He can drive a car, but not like your Burnout avatar. He can shoot a gun, but he's no Master Chief. He's no fitness fanatic, either. On an early mission, when Niko is forced to climb a lot of ladders and run a great distance, he can be heard to shout "fuck!" repeatedly. He is not as otherworldly as past GTA protagonists.
The game is at its strongest when discussing the American dream. In that sense, Niko's interactions with his cousin Roman are among the best moments in the game, and much of the rest of the narrative and play seems incongruent with these crucial points. Roman is a true believer. If nothing else, the titties have made him fall in love with The Land of Opportunity. Niko, on the other hand, is more skeptical:
Everything is just advertising with nothing to back it up!
It's an attitude which pervades Liberty City. Packie, who quickly develops a rapport with Niko, has this to say:
Tell you what, I'm going to do a ton of lines, bang a lot of college girls, then die young leaving a bloated corpse. That sound like the kind of life worth saving?
When Niko responds, you can hear the venom in his voice. When, as the player guns down a rival gang, Niko can be heard to shout, "I LOVE THIS COUNTRY," this is not a celebration of violence or the ease with which it is possible to buy a gun in New York City. It is Rockstar accusing the American dream of "leaving a bloated corpse." When Niko pays a prostitute to have sex with him and then runs her over to collect his cash, it is not without context. Has Manifest Destiny been reduced to measuring a person's worth by the relative size of their titties? Is this what society has come to?
I was disappointed to learn that Niko's skepticism ultimately comes from a very sociopathic place, and not an intelligent and concerned one. I really can't understand how or why Rockstar slipped up on this one. When the game starts, Niko worries to no end over every crime he's committing. It doesn't slowly ease him into a freer conscience. It just decides at a certain point that Niko no longer cares about his actions. It's alienating.
If Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas made us part of the American dream RockStar so loves to mock, then GTA IV has us take on the role of an outsider looking in. This makes the satire that much more potent. When we drive Manny's corpse to a streetside "doctor," we are left with a sour taste in our mouths. A similar scene with CJ at the wheel would seem comical, or even pimpin'. Niko's commentary is vital to the message of GTA IV, as it gives us a perspective we might otherwise lack. In previous GTA titles, it was possible to turn off the radio, avoid RockStar's parody of American culture and focus on the bloodthirsty descent into crime the games offered the player. In GTA IV, it is impossible to turn off Niko. His bitter critique of the society he has been thrust into incontrovertibly affects the player's perception of Liberty City. Grand Theft Auto is no longer all a big joke. It's a comment on crime. We're no longer going to bust a cap in someone's ass in order to get revenge for some trivial gang slight. Instead, we're forced into the criminal underworld by adverse circumstances. Niko wants nothing more than to move on with his life and start afresh, but, unlike Roman, he's also a man who does what needs doing. When it becomes obvious that what needs doing involves criminal activity, he comes to terms with that fact very quickly.
There is a sense in which Niko's feelings and the game's narrative come into conflict. I've argued against the conventional wisdom on this point, but I'm coming round to the accepted view. In fact, in the last few weeks, I have become disillusioned with GTA IV. Like many games this year (Braid, Fallout 3, Mirror's Edge and Fable II included), it is not everything I wanted it to be, or even everything it told me it was when I first started playing it. Once, I would have attempted to rebut Elrod utterly when he said this:
I'm seeing it bandied about that you can play through GTA IV without ever once being a criminal thug. Seriously? Not a single core mission needed to complete the narrative of GTA IV requires you to kill? Steal? Maim?
And it's not true. I had been playing Niko as a highly intelligent (if uneducated), slightly cynical but not overly cold or violent man of mildly conservative values (as I believed I was being prompted to play by the game's narrative), and that worked well for the first twenty hours of play, but, as Niko became more involved with more hardcore gangsters, he started wearing balaclavas and shooting down cops by the bucketload. Slowly, I felt my heart break. Niko wasn't the honest man pulled down I so wanted Rockstar to make him. He was a killer. Worse: he was reckless. In one mission, when working with a group of others, Niko insists on more unnecessary violence while his peers recommend running. His bloodlust was very disappointing to me.
So, in more ways than one, this is the game which, to my mind, best captures the spirit of 2008 for the video games industry. It showed us just where we can go, and how beautiful that can be - how transcendent, how moving, how illustrative, how engaging, how involving, how visceral, how hands-on - and it promised to be all of these things. And, yes, in the end, it failed to deliver. But in a year wherein the issue of games - and game writing - "growing up" seems to have been at the forefront of everyone's minds and on the tip of everyone's tongues, just showing that we have the guts to stick a flag in the ground and proclaim that we can be this emotional and thought-changing medium is a huge achievement. N
Calm Down Dear, It's Just a Video Game
Braid is a curious game. It has divided critics, it's difficult to read, and playing it is something of a conflicting experience. It perhaps shouldn't come as a surprise to me, then, that it has met with both opprobrium and acclaim from my friends.
Taking advantage of the spirit of the season, I recently forced four of my friends to play Braid. I did this for a number of reasons. Part of me wanted Braid to be some kind of ultra-accessible, artsy wunderkind. Mostly, though, I think it's just the most interesting game of 2008. It's short, too, meaning that I could watch over my friends' progress without tiring. Whatever my reasons were, I'm glad I engaged in this little experiment, because my friends' reactions have been very interesting. I want to talk to you about the reactions of three of them to the game, and then give some thoughts on why they are important.
Of these four friends, only one regularly plays games. This friend skipped the written exposition of every chapter and seemed determined to play the game as though it was a conventional platforming game. Presented with puzzle pieces which he couldn't jump to, he would ask me when he could expect to get the double-jump power up. He didn't look at the game in terms of expanding his mind. In fact, he didn't give deep thought a single thought. Perhaps unsurprisingly, he was not charmed by Braid. He seemed to feel that playing was an unrewarding experience.
The second friend owns a Wii, but doesn't really take games seriously. I'd shown her Beautiful Katamari, and she'd liked it, so she was open to playing Braid if it was going to be as colourful and anywhere near as enjoyable. I was shocked to find how much she enjoyed Braid and how she stuck with it. She, too, skipped the exposition in every chapter, but she worked hard at the puzzles and seemed to come to recognise the hints Braid flashes the player, which none of my other friends did. For all of the others, I had to point out that some objects flashed green or pink. This girl methodically worked out the limits of the mechanics which had been granted her. I was pleased. It seemed that Braid was managing to communicate its system of rules effectively, by promoting trial and error.
The friend I had over yesterday is particularly receptive to the idea of games as art. More literary than any of the others, he was eager to stop and think about each chapter's exposition. He thought carefully about the puzzles, and tried to stay on top of the games' mechanics. Even after all of this, though, Braid remained a struggle for him. He needed some help identifying the game's highlighted objects, and stumbled with the game's requirement that the player plan ahead. He quickly made the connection between the game's philosophical treatise and its introduction of new mechanics, but, for all that he enjoyed playing it, Braid remained very frustrating for him.
There are a few thoughts which I want to take away from the experience of my friends playing Braid:
Written text should be seen as a last-resort method of communication in games. No-one wants to sit and read a text about what they're about to play. They want to play! Isn't that the point of these games? To dive in, to test the waters and maybe look for some fish?
Braid, in general, is just not a user-friendly experience. I understand that thinking hard is important, and that it's central in Braid, but the game just isn't intuitive. The game doesn't speed the player on their way. Instead, it blindfolds them and locks them in a room with a key in the corner. They're forced to stumble around either until they throw in the towel or found out what they're meant to do by simply brute forcing the solution. In my mind, this inaccessibility is a stain on Braid's record.
The problem is, I feel, that Braid takes itself too seriously. I believe that it was Iroquois Pliskin who called Blow truly avant-garde, in that he was doing something entirely different to everyone else in the industry. I think that there's some truth in that, and, personally and intellectually, I have a lot of time for Blow's ideas. The problem is that Braid really seems to rub them in your face. Braid knows that players start with all of these expectations for a game, and it belittles you for trying to apply them to it. It doesn't ease the player into a new way of thinking. Instead, it shows the player their goal, and laughs sarcastically when they fail to reach it by conventional means.
I think that this last point is why my first player lost interest. The game did not respond well to the way he was used to playing, but neither did it stop and say, "that's not how we do it here." When Richard Dawkins compares creationism to evolution, he frequently compares the idea of leaping up to the top of a sheer cliff and that of crawling up a much easier incline in order to reach the summit more slowly and deliberately. Braid makes a lot of challenging claims about games, and that's wonderful. But it demeans the player for not having thought of them themselves, and ritually humiliates them in order to initiate them into a new mindset. N


text:
About Chaplin Public Relations
Based in Singapore, Chaplin Public Relations is a boutique PR agency delivering exceptional service and creative solutions to discriminating upscale clients with communications needs in Singapore and Southeast Asia.
Comprising skilled and dedicated PR professionals who are familiar with various industries and different facets of external communications, our versatile approach gives us the flexibility to deploy precisely the right admixture of skills and knowledge required by our clients, from corporate brand-building and media relations, to product launches, issues management and special events. Our particular strength and specialty lies in media relations.
During a business-come-vacation trip to New York, Chaplin PR's director Grace Zhou recently met with Chris Forbes, Vice-Chairman of Forbes magazine in New York. Chaplin PR wishes to take this opportunity to thank Mr. Forbes on his gracious hospitality and warmth. We wish you all the best!
Chaplin PR Helps Kingfisher Marine Sell Luxury Yachts and Enables Qatar Airway's CEO To Address The Singapore Media
Since engaging Chaplin Public Relations following a highly successful Boat Asia 2005, Phuket-based Kingfisher Marine have sold four luxury yachts - a phenomenal result for a new boat dealer in Singapore! The company has concluded orders for two Horizon 53's and another two Horizon 73's, together with a Horizon 82 ordered by a Malaysia buyer.
Meanwhile, Chaplin PR recently assisted Qatar Airways in organising a 500 guest banquet at the Shangri-La Hotel officiated by their CEO, Mr. Akbar Al Baker. The day before, Mr. Al Baker addressed a packed lunchtime crowd of the Foreign Correspondents Association, who were eager to find out the airline's plans for Singapore and the Asia region. Chaplin PR continues to build its roster of quality, high end clients!
Chaplin PR Completes Exhibition PR for Asia Pacific Maritime 2006
Chaplin Public Relations added another nautical feather to the company's cap when it completed PR and media relations earlier this year for Asia Pacific Maritime 2006, the Southeast Asia region's leading shipping, maritime and ports exhibition, held biannually at SingExpo. Said Danny Chaplin, Managing Dircetor of Chaplin PR, "I can honestly say that the guys at Reed Exhibitions impressed us as the MOST professional team of any exhibition company we have ever represented!"
Jamie Jackson, founder of Singsale.com, Singapore's latest online shopping sensation interviewed by The Business Times! Chaplin PR and GraceZhou PR collaborate on PR for www.singsale.com throughout 2011