"LARP is limited to a rather small sector of the population: nerdy, educated, literate, with money and free time. I'm not just saying that it lacks the wide net of other media: I'm saying that it is, by its nature, a narrow medium for a narrow pool of people."
The attempt here is to make a non-nerdy game, potentially expanding the audience. As to "educated, literate, with money and free time", that applies to theatre at least as much. Goodness knows, plenty of people do theatre that deals with violence and tragedy in a serious, not-"fun" way.
"In that sense, your particular story smacks to me of a sort of nerd-voyeurism, a desire to create and share a lightweight window into other people's real trauma. An arm-chair disaster tourism of the tragedy of others."
If artwork is allowed to talk about these topics, as we seem to agree it does, what makes nerds, in particular, less appropriate as an audience? Nerds are hardly immune to violence or tragedy. What makes this any more "tourism" than a play or a novel?
"The very thing that makes LARP different (experiential role-playing which produce a close simulacra of real emotion), well: that's the heart of my unhappiness. It's a small audience of insulated people, using the real tragedy that others have experienced for the benefit of having a fun weekend"
Wow, you hit an astonishing number of my buttons for such a short paragraph. * You assume that emotion produced by art, especially experiential art, is not "real", but a "simulacra". * You seem to think that a "small" audience is a criticism. All art starts with a small audience. Some grows, some doesn't. Being small is a value-neutral descriptor. * You assume that the participants are insulated. * You assume that the only point of the weekend is "fun" (which is, among certain segments of the game design community, a word reviled for its meaninglessness.) Is "One Day In The Life Of Ivan Denisovitch" "fun"? Art serves many emotional needs; "fun" is not a useful word to tar medium with.
"the trivialization of other people's tragedy"
Again, as throughout, I think your use of such negative characterizations says far more about your own prejudices against certain art-forms and communities than it says about what Justin is trying to accomplish here.
no subject
The attempt here is to make a non-nerdy game, potentially expanding the audience. As to "educated, literate, with money and free time", that applies to theatre at least as much. Goodness knows, plenty of people do theatre that deals with violence and tragedy in a serious, not-"fun" way.
"In that sense, your particular story smacks to me of a sort of nerd-voyeurism, a desire to create and share a lightweight window into other people's real trauma. An arm-chair disaster tourism of the tragedy of others."
If artwork is allowed to talk about these topics, as we seem to agree it does, what makes nerds, in particular, less appropriate as an audience? Nerds are hardly immune to violence or tragedy. What makes this any more "tourism" than a play or a novel?
"The very thing that makes LARP different (experiential role-playing which produce a close simulacra of real emotion), well: that's the heart of my unhappiness. It's a small audience of insulated people, using the real tragedy that others have experienced for the benefit of having a fun weekend"
Wow, you hit an astonishing number of my buttons for such a short paragraph.
* You assume that emotion produced by art, especially experiential art, is not "real", but a "simulacra".
* You seem to think that a "small" audience is a criticism. All art starts with a small audience. Some grows, some doesn't. Being small is a value-neutral descriptor.
* You assume that the participants are insulated.
* You assume that the only point of the weekend is "fun" (which is, among certain segments of the game design community, a word reviled for its meaninglessness.) Is "One Day In The Life Of Ivan Denisovitch" "fun"? Art serves many emotional needs; "fun" is not a useful word to tar medium with.
"the trivialization of other people's tragedy"
Again, as throughout, I think your use of such negative characterizations says far more about your own prejudices against certain art-forms and communities than it says about what Justin is trying to accomplish here.