Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKaczmarski, Paweł
dc.description.abstractThe article revisits and examines in detail the so-called Ebert debate: an exchange of polemic voices between Roger Ebert, his opponents and supporters, on the issue of the relationship – both actual and potential – between games and works of art. Initiated by Ebert’s famous remarks that games can never be art, the debate offers a variety of views on the nature of art, the role of experience in art and games, the possibility of artistic expression in games, and the autonomy of art. The main point of the article is not so much to compare these views as to explain the contradiction at the heart of Ebert’s own argument: the critic seems to be constantly torn between the idea that games cannot be art in principle and the more practical view that it is impossible to know for certain that no games will ever become art. This contradiction seems to stem directly from Ebert’s inconsistent views as to the source of meaning in games, and it allows us to shed new light both on the nature of games as a medium, and on fundamental issues with contemporary games studies/criticism.en
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl
dc.relation.ispartofseriesReplay. The Polish Journal of Game Studies;1en
dc.subjectRoger Eberten
dc.subjectgames criticismen
dc.titleA tale of two Eberts: Videogames and the arbitrariness of meaningen
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationUniversity of Wrocławen
dc.referencesAshton, J. (2011). Two Problems with a Neuroaesthetic Theory of Interpretation. Nonsite, issue 2 (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesBegy, J. (2013). Experiential Metaphors in Abstract Games. Transactions of the Digital Games Research Association, 1(1) (accessed on January 10, 2018).
dc.referencesBogost, I. (2007). Persuasive Games. The Expressive Power of Videogames. Cambridge, London: MIT Press
dc.referencesBogost, I. (2011). How to Do Things With Videogames. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
dc.referencesBourgonjon, J., Vandermeersche, G., Rutten, K., & Quinten, N. (2017). Perspectives on Video Games as Art. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture, 19(4)
dc.referencesBrown, N. (2019). Autonomy: The Social Ontology of Art under Capitalism. Durham: Duke University Press
dc.referencesCavell, S. (1976). Must We Mean What We Say? A Book of Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesChayka, K. (2010, May 5). Why Video Games Are Works of Art. The Atlantic (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesCronan, T. (2013). Against Affective Formalism: Matisse, Bergson, Modernism. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press.en
dc.referencesDuchamp, M. (1975). Salt Seller: The Essential Writings of Marcel Duchamp. Edited by M. Sanouillet & E. Peterson. London: Thames and Hudson.en
dc.referencesEbert, R. (2005, November 27). Why did the chicken cross the genders? (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesEbert, R. (2007, July 21). Games vs. Art: Ebert vs. Barker. (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesEbert, R. (2010, April 16). Video Games Can Never Be Art. (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesEbert, R. (2010, July 1). Okay, Kids, Play on My Lawn. (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesFried, M. (1967/1998). Art and Objecthood. In M. Fried, Art and Objecthood: Essays and Reviews. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.en
dc.referencesGoldsworthy, J. (2005). Moderate versus Strong Intentionalism: Knapp and Michaels Revisited. San Diego Law Review, 42(2), 669–684.en
dc.referencesHirsch, E.D. (1992). In Defense of the Author. In G. Iseminger (ed.), Intention & Interpretation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.en
dc.referencesKnapp, S., & Michaels, W.B. (1982). Against Theory. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 723–742
dc.referencesKnapp, S., & Michaels, W.B. (1983). A Reply to Our Critics. Critical Inquiry, 9(4), 790–800
dc.referencesLeys, R. (2017). The Ascent of Affect. Genealogy and Critique. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press
dc.referencesMichaels, W.B. (2004). The Shape of the Signifier: 1967 to the End of History. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.en
dc.referencesMichaels, W.B. (2018). Grimstad on Experience, Flatley on Affect: A Response.en
dc.referencesNonsite, issue 22 (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesMichaels, W.B. (2019). Blind Time (Drawing with Anscombe). REAL, 35, 49–60.en
dc.referencesMoriarty, B. (2011, March 14). Opinion: Brian Moriarty’s Apology For Roger Ebert. Game Developer (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesMurray, J.H. (1997). Hamlet on the Holodeck. The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. Cambridge, London: MIT Press.en
dc.referencesPreston, J. (2008, February 11). The Arty Party. Game Developer (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesRomero, B. (2016, February 16). Are Games Art? Youtube (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesRough, B. (2017) The Incompatibility of Games and Artworks. Journal of the Philosophy of Games 1(1)
dc.referencesSantiago, K. (2009, August 17). An Argument for Game Artistry. Youtube (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesSantiago, K. (2010, April 19). My Response To Roger Ebert, Video Game Skeptic. Kotaku (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesSharp, J. (2015). Works of Game. On the Aesthetics of Games and Art. Cambridge, London: MIT Press.en
dc.referencesSmuts, A. (2005). Are Video Games Art? Contemporary Aesthetics, 3(3) (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesStenros, J. (2017). The Game Definition Game: A Review. Games and Culture, 12(6), 1–22
dc.referencesStrunk, T.A. (2017). Alone In A World of Objects: Videogames, Interaction, and Late Capitalist Alienation. Nonsite, issue 22 (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesTavinor, G. (2009). The Art of Videogames. New Directions in Aesthetics. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell
dc.referencesThomsen, M. (2012, June 14). Dad is Dead: Rebutting Roger Ebert. IGN (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesTreanor, M. (2016). Finding Meaning in Abstract Games: A Deep Reading of Sage Solitaire. In Proceedings of 1st International Joint Conference of DiGRA and FDG, Dundee, Scotland, 2016. Digital Games Research Association (accessed on June 20, 2022).en
dc.referencesTreanor, M., Schweizer, B., Bogost, I., & Mateas, M. (2011) Proceduralist Readings: How to Find Meaning in Games with Graphical Logics. In FDG ‘11: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Foundations of Digital Games (pp. 115–122). ACM Press
dc.referencesZimmerman, E. (2014, September 10). Games, Stay Away from Art. Please. Polygon (accessed on June 20, 2022).en

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as