"Juvenile, Silly and Intellectually Lazy" - Jonathan Blow (Designer of Braid)

I don't know much about hip-hop, but I know what I like...and hip-hop isn't it. I've given rap music a fair shot over the years. I've listened to American artists from both coasts, everything from NWA to Kanye and a little of what came in between - Dre and Snoop's solo work, Wu-Tang, Cypress Hill. I've dabbled in punk derivatives The Beastie Boys, the reggae-influenced Fugees and UK trip-hop acts like Tricky. 

Some I've loved, but when it comes to hip-hop - rap's main-stream arm - I just hit a wall. I can't get passed the posturing and misogyny that permeate the culture. So what's this got to do with videogames, right?

Well there are parallels. Hip-hop and gaming are both marketed squarely at a young, adult (often male) demographic. Much like rap, games’ mainstream arm overshadows its more thought provoking offerings. Apart from a few notable indie exceptions, gaming’s best titles struggle to provide context for their violent mechanics. 

I recently read The Atlantic's article 'American Mozart' (David Samuels May 2012). It challenged me to rethink my take on hip-hop. And that's a good thing, right? That’s good writing. Hell, I was tempted to pick up tickets for last week's 'Watch the Throne' gig at The O2 right there on the spot. The article profiled Kanye West - his past, his successes and failures, his strengths and weaknesses. Samuels understands his subject. He wrote convincingly, spinning a narrative interwoven with impressions of West's ongoing tour with Jay-Z. It's worth reading for the sense of perspective alone - it's a window into another world.

Watch Taylor Clark's thoughts on modern gaming, and Jonathan Blow's work, here.

Something else popped up in The Atlantic last month – a piece on another self-made, independently wealthy, social pariah. 'The Most Dangerous Gamer' (Taylor Clark May 2012) is a scathing attack on mainstream gaming from the perspective of indie-game developer Jonathan Blow. Clarke's take is overly simplistic perhaps. To paraphrase - modern mainstream games are 'dumb', no one is doing anything about it and Jonathan Blow will single-handedly change the world's opinion of the medium. But at its core, there's more than a grain of truth to the article. 

If good writing challenges perceptions and provokes responses then Clarke’s article is just as successful as the Kanye West piece. He received an icy reception from many gamers. It’s the same reaction we saw from the fighting game community when the misogyny rife in that scene came to light earlier this year. For me, Clarke's writing was a shot in the arm. It’s OK to call bullshit if that’s what you see – to point out puerile art direction or a lowest-common-denominator marketing approach. But it’s just as important to highlight gaming’s strengths. Clarke may have failed in that regard but he is a gamer and it’s encouraging to see his writing in the mainstream media. I'd recommend reading his response to his detractors on Kotaku.

Why is that I'm willing to give gaming a pass, one that I won’t extend to hip-hop? Games are greater than the sum of their parts, but in a way I can't yet quantify. Ultimately it has something to do with the design process - a good designer’s intent is expressed in the mechanics and will shine through an uninspired art style or weak story. 


While it can be difficult to focus on gaming’s strengths, it’s even more difficult to explain those strengths to others. There's something to games that even the most ill-conceived marketing message can’t touch. It's up to writers in the field to find that 'something' and to focus on it while not being afraid to call out the "juvenile, sill and intellectually lazy" aspects that so often dominate. And then maybe someday we wont have people cheering every violent death during stage presentations at E3.


Sources:
theatlantic.com
giantbomb.com
image via Steam