Ryan Stanci has finished his three-part academic exercise critiquing Katamari Damacy on GameCareerGuide. Will critiquing video games instead of reviewing them get you a job in the industry? Possibly. It sure is a great way to be pretentious! And doing it you might become a professor at M.I.T. or the University of Wisconsin.
In part three of the work Stanci continues his critique to "create" Katamari Damacy into a piece of art. Apparently critiques create art, it's all so s-m-r-t. This installment reviews, er, critiques Katamari from the feminist, psychoanalytical and post-colonial schools of criticism. Plebeians will most certainly enjoy the feminist critique for its pedantic nature.
Katamari Damacy is expressed as a "male-centric" game and an offshoot of the "mono myth." It speaks to the oppression of women and of the King of All Cosmos spreading his seed (the stars), while the "phallic" looking Prince continually attempts to impress his father by presenting bigger balls. Is this a feminist critique or repressed homosexuality critique -- or are they one in the same? So kidding, calm down!
Seriously, Stanci gets some fascinating thoughts out on the table and it is certainly an interesting read for an intellectual exercise.
_thumbnail.jpg "i am 8-bit: 2008")
(Page 1) Reader Comments
If it moves somewhere, it is "penetration."
If it is round, it is about "bigger balls."
If it is multiple, it is about "spreading one's seed."
How can a game be more "yonic" (opposite of "phallic") then? A game where you are a giant pit or womb or void?
There's no winning an argument against the feminist perspective. It's better to just offer flowers.
Or a Georgia O'Keefe painting.
Reply
You have to remember, when analyzing media -- feminine and masculine traits don't apply specifically to male or female -- it's just a descriptor of the trait. People get caught up in that all the time. It would be abnormal if males didn't want some feminine traits in their games :P And vice versa, I know a lot of women gamers that like to kick butt.
Reply
This is not critique; it's analyzing for the sake of it.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
What about GAMEPLAY, thats what video games are (mostly) about, thats why people buy games..to play. If you leave out a rational discussion about gameplay, then you have no freakin idea what video games are about and have no business writing anything about video games.
Is there a way to contact that author, i want to tell him how useless this drivel is.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
@ 6, this stuff is what Enlish Majors/Professors spend their lives on, I did it last year in my English 102 class. It was ridiculously boring, and to be honest, I think it should only be applied to literary works. All these forms of criticism work when talking about Shakespeare but when you try to apply it to videogames, it makes you sound like you are doing it just for the hell of it.
With Katamari Damacy I think the developers came up with it just how Will said,- "this is probably a cool idea."
If you really want to critique games then something like Ico or Shadow of the Collossus would be more appropriate, since I still don't know what they mean....
Reply
Honestly, I think the creators of the game just like making wang jokes. Kind of like Penny Arcade. How about someone psychoanalyze the PA comics? That should be fun. :D
Reply
I agree, we need some critique on killer7 - a game with a storyline that cries out to be dissected and analysed.
Reply
...or post pictures. Because holy crap, that's awesome.
Reply
Reply
Movie critics hold much more respect without getting into this gibberish. Sure, maybe it's true (though mostly opinion), but no one cares nor have the time to read this much about one game. If a movie critic wrote this much, he'd be fired for taking so much time to write about one movie in a language that no one understands or cares to read about.
There's a reason why we have game reviewers and not "critics" (in his definition). Let's keep it that way.
He should go buy this shirt. http://www.cafepress.com/palwow.73233742
Reply
Reply
I haven't seen this much overanalysis since I last read "Slate".
Reply
Reply
Let's just get on with the 21 century and abolish all stereotypes. Any takers?
Dan S.: "This is the kind of stupid crap that English majors are forced to repeatedly do and the things that English professors waste their lives on."
Indeed. I had a professor from Oxford come to my art history class and lecture us about the "intent of the artist" for about two hours. Are artists aware of their own genius when they create a remarkable work? Is their intent relevant given that other peoples' interpretations may be quite varied? The professor spent about an hour anyalyzing an encaustic painting of flags ("Three Flags", by Jasper Johns), spewing rediculous BS that made me want to throw up. And, yet, when the artist himself was asked why he drew the flags in such a manner, he responded, "I just like drawing flags."
There you have it. Somebody out there has probably written a 500 page critique on toilet paper. Well, about it, not on it.
Well, then again...
Reply
Besides, overanaylzing things is fun.
-KobayashiMan, stupid Religious Studies/Film Major (ie, worse than a stupid English Major)
Reply