Being woken up early in the morning, with pajamas trailing past my toes, and hands eager to rip through presents wrapped neatly under the Christmas tree, little did I know I would be unboxing a book. While this “book” took the material form of a Nintendo Wii, the medium adhered to the aspects of books we recognize today. Taking thoughts from Scott Rettberg’s “Electronic Literature,” and personal anecdotes involving my gaming/reading history, the book will be compared to the console, displaying that both mediums carry a similar purpose.
Since I first got a Wii, if I had known I’d be able to excuse my screentime as reading time, I would be in a much different position than I am now. To back this statement, I draw a quotation from Rettberg’s work stating, “According to Bolter and Joyce, ‘all electronic literature takes the form of a game, a contest between author and reader.’” While they don’t outright state that Lego Indiana Jones is a form of electronic literature, the interaction between author and reader remains similar. A story is presented, then contested by the reader through their action of playing, and eventually leads to new thoughts or ideas emerging, such as the author’s intake of critical reviews or me saying, “Dad, can you please get me Lego Indiana Jones 2?”
This idea of a collaborative narrative, which relates to most games, is explored as one of the examples of electronic literature that Rettberg presents. In the description of the lengthy examples, Rettberg notes the list could be endless, and specifically cites that as the point of the list–to be endless. So, the question of if a game is a form of electronic literature becomes obvious, ensured by the limitless possibilities. Instead, as Rettberg notes, the question becomes, “How precisely do computer art installations ask viewers to read them?’”
In the case of the intermedia example, Lego Indiana Jones, it then relies on the author’s intention. Did the developers directly ask people to treat it as such–a story told through a game, or was it just a “mere game,” which is the risk of many intermedia examples? I don’t have a direct answer for that, though I do believe it relies on another factor–the reader’s perception.
At that age, did I understand I was reading in a visual format, or did I just see it as gaming? Though even if I didn’t understand that, am I still a reader, or simply a gamer? As the lines have blurred, and will continue to blur, I believe it shows how intermedia redefines our idea of “reading” and our conception of what is book material. Sure, I was just playing a game, but at its core I was engaging with a long line of authors producing material to be read. With that said, maybe my brother reads more than I.
Hi Samuel! Funnily enough, I also played Lego Indiana Jones when I was younger, and when I did I always saw it as an extension of the story from the movies. The people who make the games (the devs, artist, etc) are authors and like you mentioned we are the readers. I think it is less about intentions and more about if the outcome of the game itself becomes a story. I think of Dead by Daylight where the gameplay itself might not be a story, but the characters have stories and lores, and as you gain more experience in the game more stories and lores are unlocked within the archives/tomes. The gameplay itself might not completely have a story, but still within the interworkings of the game there is a story.
Hey Samuel, I liked how you compared gaming and reading, it’s such a fun way to look at it. I also really liked your question about whether you were a reader or a gamer. It shows how much the definition of reading has stretched in the digital age and how the lines between stories and games are a lot blurrier than we usually think.