Roger Ebert and Clive Barker throw down on Games as Art


Roger Ebert has posted a rebuttal to Clive Barker’s comments regarding him being an ignorant old man.

Barker: “We can debate what art is, we can debate it forever. If the experience moves you in some way or another … even if it moves your bowels … I think it is worthy of some serious study.”
Ebert: Perhaps if the experience moves your bowels, it is worthy of some serious medical study. 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.

…I think Brodie said it best, “Here’s the pulse, alright. And here’s your finger…far from the pulse, jammed straight up your ass.”

Get some Echochrome into you, Rodge.

via Gaming Today

2 Responses to “Roger Ebert and Clive Barker throw down on Games as Art”

  1. ME Says:

    Good for you, Roger.

    You know what opinions are like…

    I recall when I was in art class in high school way back in the stone age. Our teacher, with whom I was at odds on what constitutes art, wanted the class to paint. I don’t recall the exact instructions, but I do remember we had to paint something…pretty much whatever we wanted I believe. My friend and I, who do not subscribe to the notion that art is what many in the self-congratulating art society think it is, decided to conduct a little test. We grabbed up a few colors and just slapped and slathered the brush around, basically making a mess on the canvas. The whole thing took us perhaps 2 minutes or less. We presented the “art” to the teacher. He found it quite good and complimented us on our creativity which just went to prove our point. The true God given talented artists out there are the ones who can create realism in their work be it fantasy based or reality based, not the ones who create drug inspired slop.

    As for video games being art…I believe they, like movies should be in a class by themselves. There’s a difference between art and creativity. Just because someone created something doesn’t make it art.

  2. DeZwart Says:

    Ultimately it’s irrelevant whether you took two minutes to paint it or two years, it’s the effect it has on the viewer that is really important. A work that is of huge scale, high ambition and infintesimal nuance, but leaves us emotionally and mentally blank, that is not art. Art is a concept, an emotional tripwire. It is not a simple mechanical process.

Leave a Reply