>reading fiction
How is this any different than watching mind-numbing television or playing fictional video games?
Depending on the quality of the literature, it is no different.
Same with nonfiction.
>>7736366
>playing fictional video games
but i play real video games.
>Living life
How is this any different from watching mind-numbing television or playing fictional video games?
>>7736366
I think because there is a message to be learned. Wisdom, and such. Also I think generally if someone enjoys fiction they also have a curiosity for all types of knowledge. You don't see that as much in people who primarily watch television or play video games.
It's not, but why do care what people do with their free time? People who actually enjoy reading delve into more than just philosophy. Very unlike you autists who love to lie through youe teeth about aristotle and what have you while yalking about your supposed 50th reading of infinite jest.
Readers vs. People who boast about reading
You think fiction can't teach you something? I believe you're thinking about a very specific type of fiction friendo. Genre fiction, probably.
literature is ancient technology.
>>7736378
Fug man. I should get into the SMT series already.
>>7736371
>Depending on the quality of shit you eat, eating a bowl of shit is no different from eating a fine meal prepared by a world renowned chef
>>7736400
Don't listen to people that say that Nocturne is any good, Strange Journey is where is at.
>>7736405
t. someone who does not read
>>7736366
reminder that television has caught up to film and comics have caught up with literature while video games are still the lowest art form
>>7736366
Because the use of the artificial to reflect reality is the only way to attempt to reach God's power.
>>7736366
the fiction/non-fiction dichotomy is purely ideological
The book stands alone and is, at best, enriched by the context underlying it
>>7736393
Is this you anon?
>>7736450
>the interactivity of games is the very thing that inherently and necessarily precludes them from ever being art
lmao
>>7736366
because reading is active and watching tv is, by nature, passive and mind numbing
>>7736447
Ya, my is pretty huge, ISNT IT?
Reading requires more focus; it's not a passive experience like watching TV.
I would guess if you put one twin in front of a TV through his formative yours and had the other twin read, the reading twin would have higher brain function in adulthood.
>>7736463
I read a lot and I'm still dumber than my brother t b h.
>making value judgements at all
>ever
HOW CAN MIRRORS BE REAL IF OUR EYES AREN'T REAL
Short answer: It isn't.
Long answer: Literature is almost exclusively a solitary endeavor, for both reader and writer, and therefore a much personal experience; not to say other artforms aren't personal, but it's much rarer for them to be the vision of a single person, for material reasons, and likewise for a reader, as what's being read is in their individual head and imagination. So literature often tells you a lot more about yourself and them. Reading as an activity is also more active than watching/listening. And again, due to material reasons, an author has a lot more room to be as extense, through or obscure as they want/need. However in the sense of utility, it isn't very different; but then, that's not the point of art (or life).
>>7736427
>>7736450
>>7736458
>>7736470
This board has a serious fucking problem with this "hierarchy" of art. Why the fuck is there a hierarchy in art. Also, why cannot video games be art? Define to me what art is. What someone writes can be art, what someone paints can be art, what someone performs, what someone films, etc., all can be art.
Are you putting this new-age art down because it's "unintellectual?" What kind of fucking argument is that? You sit and watch a film and you can feel emotions as much as you can with a book. Art is already a flawed fucking entity. Art has no meaning until we put meaning into it. What's it matter between you seeing some connection in themes in a novel and what I see in a motion picture? Jesus Christ /lit/, get off your dicks. (And I'm not even a big fan on films)
Literature is the most agreeable way of ignoring life.
>>7736517
1. Art is and has to be useless, w/o purpose.
2. Games are not new.
3. Games inherently are purposeful.
>>7736521
Living is the most agreeable way of ignoring life
>>7736526
Pessoa had it right, the only thing to ask of life is that it pass you by.
>still believing there's anything inherently wrong with sequels, remakes and genre fiction
Hamlet is a remake
Ulysses is a sequel
Thus spoke zarathustra is a low-fantasy novel
>>7736539
You're silly.
>>7736525
>Games inherently are purposeful.
I thought a game was the opposite of that?
>>7736542
I know
>>7736583
A game's purpose is to waste time typically
>>7736583
No. Every game has a defined set of rules and goals.
>>7736539
Sequels are usually hit or miss, but yes, certainly it's not always the case that they're bad. Besides that's usually only the case with commercially produced sequels, and genre fiction is usually typically commercially produced, i.e. written to sell, with not much art to them.
>>7736609
>Every game has a defined set of rules and goals.
And this makes them not art, how?
>>7736635
http://ludix.com/moriarty/apology.html
>>7736609
>No. Every game has a defined set of rules and goals.
So do movies. The rule is that you can't do anything except watch. The goal is to get to the end.
>>7736677
So essentially games aren't Art because they don't incite the specific kind of feeling the author finds most meaningful? That's it?
>>7736366
Fictional works usually explore themes that relate to non-fictional ideas. Even TV shows and video games can make you think or question something that is in the real world.
>>7736874
This implies there exists something beyond this Will, and comtemplation isn't simply a variation of it, that it is even possible to transcend it. Now this sounds like nonsense to me, but given ı haven't read Schopenhauer (but this article has sparked an interest), ı feel incapable of commenting further.
I also don't see how music is all that much different from games when it comes to a state of "flow", as if there's an artform that incites entrancement it's music (funny that the article reffers to gameflow as the creator of the New Labor class when music has been used in mnemonical learning and rhythmic labor for centuries).
As for choice in videogames: a) not all games are primarily goal oriented, b) choice in games is very much finite and controlled.
>>7736447
"I know you are but what am I"
>>7736366
>reading non-fiction
How is this any different than watching mind-numbing documentaries or playing non-fictional social games?
>>7736906
>b) choice in games is very much finite and controlled
This is a very serious argument I'd use in favour of games as an art medium.
>>7736930
>I'm not sure how a finite and limited amount of choice really affects the argument here.
It does, because choice can become "not choice" by enabling the player to experience and understand all possible choices they can make and their consequences. Hence, the act of decision making can transform from something that you do specifically to gain yourself an advantage, to something which enables forms of contrast and understanding of a whole that otherwise would not be possible.
hey guys this game of checkers i just played against my mom was really good, i think it could win an art prize
>>7736366
IT's different cus ur reading, NUMBNUTS
>>7736427
> television has caught up to film
Maybe in 50 years buddy
>>7736930
>Are they really games if they aren't goal-oriented?
I'd say Yume Nikki, since the primary objective is rather to absorb the interactive audiovisual landscapes presented, and the "goals" only serve as an incentive to explore and get lost.
>that's certainly an interesting response w/r/t music.
I was compelled to bring up dancing and performing, but they would seem not to be sublime art according to Schopenhauer, at least from the performer's point of view; but that does raise the point of whether recorded gameplay footage could be sublime art.
>I'm not sure how a finite and limited amount of choice really affects the argument here.
Choice in videogames doesn't really work at all like in games such as chess most of the time.
To begin with, you will often have a narrative which can be there only to further the gameplay or the other way around, and the player's actions and path will be conditioned by it; then you have the actions themselves, which as said will be pretty finite, and not like in traditional games where they are purely defined by the rules, but they can be limited in whatever way the creators can imagine; now in relation to the narrative, it isn't even necessary to complete all the "goals" of a game to finish it.
And once you have finished the game, that doesn't necessarily mean you are done with it, because you might have much left to do, things to achieve, paths that might have been disabled by a choice, etc. Replaying a videogame is actually much closer to rereading a book because (like >>7736946 says) your experience might put everything into a different context. That is to say, that it's an accumulative experience, even though you can very much have a different experience with the same gamepath; in comparison, playing two identical games of chess doesn't offer anything new, and the pleasure of that game lies in "solving" different possibilities.
Lastly, note that videgames are very heterogeneous, so these things might apply differently and in different degrees to different genres; some games do come a lot closer to things like sports, where the point is to perform an action as perfectly as possible.
Here's a bonus analysis on good game design: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df_ET25Z-EQ
(good*) Literature achieves all of the following (which are not achievable, or are very rare, in other forms of creative entertainment):
>increases the scope of what one understands as the possibilities of language
>expands imaginative
>increases ability to express oneself using words
>expands the reader's grasp of human depth, human characters and psychology [writing allows one to move back and forth between settings, psychology, social behavior etc. in a way that is only as limited as imagination, ie, without the technical limitations of film or video games]
>presents the reader with a vast ocean of analogies, images and metaphors with which to navigate and name the world
>gives the reader the ability to categorize real persons they encounter in terms of characters in books, coming to know them in a new way
>confronts the reader with descriptions common situations (walking through a wet patch of woods, for example) in such a way that causes them to see it for the first time or in a new way
All of these things make being alive, socially and individually, a great deal more interesting, wonderous (to avoid the usual connotations of "wonderful") and beautiful.
This has been my experience, at least, and even as a great fan of (good) film, I can say that writing is so much more capable an art because it has impressed ideas on me in much deeper, slower and lasting ways.
*we might say that literature is as good as it achieves these things
>>7737001
Could you cite examles? I'm not doubting, just curious.
>>7736453
Pretty much.
>>7737034
I had Portrait of the Artist in mind while writing this. It was the last fiction work I finished and one which left a very strong impression, such that all the trees and grass, and people's faces, and a huge building under construction, moved me nearly to tears, for reasons I could not hope to venture.
>>7736999
Ah, ı just realized if they were really games, not if there are any games that aren't goal oriented. But well, like ı said, it's kinda difficult to think about videogames in the same way as normal games, so... who knows.
>>7737001
how about a Malick or an Antonioni film?
There is good fiction.
Fiction that while entertains,also asks questions.
>>7736383
underrated post
>>7736427
i would play a fun game much more likely than watch some boring americunt or weeb tv show
depends on the writing, there's not much difference between reading or watching game of thrones
ive never seen anything come close to great literature like the man without qualities (as an example) in the form of television or video games, maybe something like the decalogue
>>7736427
>television has caught up to film
>comics have caught up with literature
Has to be bait
>>7736408
this. strange journey is the thinking man's smt
>>7736517
Your first mistake was taking a board about vietnamese soup recipes seriously
>>7736391
That's applicable to all forms of media.
Consuming media in general will help broaden your understanding of the world.
