It's unfortunate that the asininely named 'Generation Y', of which I believe I'm a part of, has come at a time where most of the great creative juices of any given medium have been spent. Literature seems to have peaked, in most informed people's opinion, around the 19th Century, perhaps, and popular music had its day in the '60s, while unpopular music peaked alternatively in the 18th and 19th Century – though, as with everything, it depends who you ask. Film, a newer medium, peaked anytime before the '80s and gallery art killed itself completely midway through the 20th Century. So what does that leave? Video games. Hurrah. We actually got to see those peak around the early '90s.
It is a simple matter of logistics that any given medium hits its peak at a certain point. You can’t keep having fresh and innovative ideas forever. Usually, this peak is nearer to the start of the creation of a medium then anything else, because, put simply, there isn’t an enormous back catalogue of ideas to take into consideration when you’re starting out. You are free to innovate and do what has not been done. There isn’t an enormous pressure on your shoulders, or fierce nostalgia from the critics suggesting that the medium has seen better days.
If I was, for instance, to write a novel, I would have to take into account centuries of literature and wonder if I’m saying anything that no one has thought of, or if I’m writing in a way that no one has done before me. I would also be expected to push the medium further. It's gets harder and harder with each passing year to create a great work of, dare I say it, fiction. We can still make films and write books and record music – and we should – but we'll always be in the shadows of the glory days. But what we can't do under any circumstances is attempt gallery art.
Suspend your disbelief a moment and imagine that I wrote a book in a 19th century style that was, all things considered, a masterpiece. Published today, people would accuse me of being derivative and not progressing the medium; but was I to publish it in the 19th century, I would be lavishly praised for my work. The same would happen if I sent back Bucket Men's magnificent album Blind Men [sic] into the early 1950s (though the '60s could work too). We would be heralded as geniuses who created Rock 'n' Roll. Now, of course, we wouldn't get so much as grimace of appreciation. It's funny how context works. The album itself would never change, and yet you'd get such different reactions – even from the same people who dismissed it early in 2005 – depending on when it was released.
Maybe Anh Tu's right; maybe I should give up on making any more music or films or books and begin working on a time machine.
Duck, Duck, Cockatiel
-
The move is officially complete, though I'm still living with a few islands
of stuff—the main one located in what agents like to call the "meals area".
Rea...
7 years ago
3 comments:
Yes, Mother Nature seems to keep powering on undeterred, as much as we're doing our best to stop her. But it seems to be a whole different kettle of distilled water then art. There is room for new art, that's true. And I encourage it. It is still possible for some masterpiece to come along that makes us re-think everything, but the chances diminish with every year. But I hope we never stop trying. Anyway, thanks for the comment.
Originality is unimportant? Nice viewpoint. I wasn't limiting this to the plot, that would be idiotic. As we know, there are only seven possible plots – supposedly, as least – so that is unimportant. I'm talking about everything: themes, style, characters. What if the telling has been done before? Because, you see, the way you tell the story could have been lifted from some 18th Century toff. Not to mention the sub-text, metaphors et al.
Anyway, that wasn't really my whole point. I was trying to convey that mediums become stale at some point. Originality is only a part of that. But, nevertheless, there are a heck of a lot of things that writer's have dabbled with over the years – playing with all sorts of narrative devices etc. So what can you do? Well, as you imply, you can just knuckle down and write something. But then what do you do if some erudite sonofabitch comes along and says: "the humour is very much in the style of so-and-so and the plot is a reworking of this or that and the themes are nothing new. Overall, it's a pleasant but slight read."? Well, you could stubbornly convince yourself that the critics have missed the point and that you only write for the 'people' and you'd like to see the critics do better. Or, alternatively, you could ruffle your duck feathers and let their words roll off you into the shimmering lake and say "I enjoyed writing it, and that's all that matters. My only goal in releasing this was to see if I could make other people happy too and perhaps make a few dollars on the side."
Theoretically, you could still make an unoriginal masterpiece. The point is that the bigger the back-catalogue, the harder it gets. Of course, you could try to ignore all of literature and never read another author in case they 'influence' you, but that would be an ignorant thing to do. You'd either end up with some barely-literate drivel or a recycled, inferior version of something else. You'd have to be an all-out genius to thrive there – and even then you could have written a better book had you delved into the archives.
As for video games, I'm not necessarily writing them off, but they're definitely not up there with most of the other mediums. Because, you see, there's a big problem. Either you have a profound story, well-told, with little opportunity for gameplay – ala adventure games – or you have an innovative play system that ruins the story element. You could say that RPGs combined them both, but, as we know, RPGs are all the same up to a point. And with the story ones, you always have to ask yourself: "Is this a great story, or a great overall game?". Nevertheless, I have/had great respect for the medium. And you could also say that the innovative gameplay ones are as a good as a story in their own rights. But with the story ones, you seem to have to think: "Sure, it's a great story – for a game – but this novel uses the same ideas in a much superior fashion – and I didn't have to strain my mind thinking up illogical solutions to annoying puzzles."
That said, I would rank Monkey Island 1 and 2 and a handful of other adventure games among my favourite things this in this world. Oh and also Chrono Trigger and some other more gameplay oriented distractions.
Roundin' it up, I will say that when you have so much to contend with in an artform nowadays, originality aside, your work suffers a tad – more often then not, at least. You become self-conscious, for starters. Anyway, medium's do stale, and there's not much you can do about that. So you may as well just do it for its own sake – and yours.
By the way, I completely disown most of this post. It's boorish and ignorant and, more importantly, wrong.
Post a Comment