i take somewhat offence that the "life of the mind" must include the next three chapters of "Song of Solomon."

There's nothing inherently
"dumb" about video games, and video games are about as divorced from reality as many forms of literature. They're all reprensations and/or distortion of the same reality.

I completely agree David. The author is so proud of himself (herself?) for not being able to enjoy games, and shows a lot of distain for them. As anyone in this class knows, the interactive narratives that the author speaks of in some far future tense have been here for years. Also, there are many games that come closer to high art than a lot of literature that I’ve read, but its a oversimplification to judge them by the same criteria as All the Pretty Horses.

Anyway, I disagreed with the essay. “If the author doesn’t like it after a solid effort, so be it. I won't argue over questions of taste.
But I will be royally bothered if they’ve been cheated out of a chance to experience the beauty and power of the videogame genre because a marathon of adhering to the status quo and intellectual elitism dissipated their time and blunted their sensibilities."

"The beauty and power of the videogame genre..."

Why do we even bother with books anymore? Forget Shakespeare, lets have a Department of Mario Studies.

Please, in all seriousness, enlighten me to these video games that speak profoundly to the human condition.

One of the prerequisites to enlightenment is an open mind, but your witty sarcasm aside...

Is it because the word "game" is included that you cannot take the medium seriously? What is a video game but an interactive combination of both book and movie?

There's nothing inherent in video games that prevent "shakespeare" level dialogue on the human condition.

The fact that most video games do not do so is similar to the fact that most books released today address the human condition about as much as my physics lab report.

I didn't disagree with him that Halo 2 lacks something fundamental to make it "great" literature. But disagreed with labeling the entire video game medium as a whole as nothing but divorced reality, and potato chips for the brain.

On a side note, the only reason that I used that particular language was for an (obviously failed) attempt at humor. The author ends by saying this: "There are some great boys in that class, and I hope they've been able to take the time and find the solitude to give themselves a chance to get into the novel. If they don't like it after a solid effort, so be it. I won't argue over questions of taste.

But I will be royally bothered if they've been cheated out of a chance to experience the beauty and power of the book because a marathon of video game-playing dissipated their time and blunted their sensibilities." Basically I think he sounds a little pretentious and smug, and was responding in kind as a joke. Although I do like video games and could show you some great ones... =)

I don't know if I'd use the word "disdain" to describe the author's attitude towards games. He's played the games himself (which is more than many critics of the medium have), and admits to a liking for the older generation of arcade classics (Pac-Man, etc.) He's aware of the potential of "interactive narrative." But look here:

"Literature, however, demands that we enter into an imaginative world slowly, through the written word. It forces us to re-create this world in our minds, through the power of our imaginations."

I disagree with what's implicit, the assumption that games *don't* unleash "the power of our imaginations." But I think the much more important point in what he writes above is lodged in that one word "slow." Stimulus, feedback, response: all of these things happen on a different cogntive level when one is engaging the written word. That's not just me talking: in the article he cites some of the neuroscience behind it, and there's a lot more where that came from.

As I hope it's clear after a semester with me, I don't think the solution lies in unplugging the video games. Not gonna happen in any case, no matter what us English teachers think. But I sure would like to see that masterpiece of "interactive narrative" some time soon, and I'll do what I can to help it along.

Out of curiousity, in today's fast pace world, does "Literature, however, demands that we enter into an imaginative world slowly, through the written word. It forces us to re-create this world in our minds, through the power of our imaginations." equal "boring"?

Well gosh, I hope not. But what is boredom, anyway? Here's a book that attempts to answer that question. By an English professor.

Spacks, Patricia Meyer Boredom: The Literary History of a State of Mind. 304 p. 6 x 9 1995

"This book offers a witty explanation of why boredom both haunts and motivates the literary imagination. Moving from Samuel Johnson to Donald Barthelme, from Jane Austen to Anita Brookner, Spacks shows us at last how we arrived in a postmodern world where boredom is the all-encompassing name we give our discontent. Her book, anything but boring, gives us new insight into the cultural usefulness--and deep interest--of boredom as a state of mind."

well, i know i come off like a jerk up there. i guess all i have to say is that im still resentful of the fact that life is only a game, and id prefer my art to be anything else.