Is D&D Art?

[Janx]

you've got intent and emotion in there, so I was good with it until dinner arrived. There was like cauliflower on the plate. It was put there deliberately and got an emotional response - but didn't come across as art

It does, however, seem like art when you make toast stars to dip in the top of boiled eggs and kids wave them around. So, maybe art's something that takes you outside of yourself?

There's truth in that. if you watch any cooking shows (like iron chef), they make a point that Plating, the layout of the food on the plate, even the selection of the dishware is important. Because it is an artistic expression of the meal, before it is consumed.

 

[nedjer]

There's truth in that. if you watch any cooking shows (like iron chef), they make a point that Plating, the layout of the food on the plate, even the selection of the dishware is important. Because it is an artistic expression of the meal, before it is consumed.

That's good news. Been sticking pictures in the family's food for years. They thought I was as mad as a hatter - little did they know I was mastering a ninja culinary skill

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

What about performance art?

I actually answered that upthread somewhat, but to repeat and elaborate: even in performance art- whether it is theater or busking as a mime on the streetcorner or what have you- there is the conscious and specific effort to create art.

D&D is a game: a highly-structured, rules-defined game of pretend.

For a session of D&D to become performance art, the participants must transcend the rules of the game in a conscious effort to deliver an artistic statement. This is different from merely pretending to do something.

Yes, but I think the intent is commonly there.

In light of what I just wrote above, I can't agree. In 34 years of gaming, I've never seen a group sit down and say, "Let us create a work of art using the rules of D&D and this adventure."

The intent is simply to play the game, and play it well. Maybe make your interpretation of an Elven Bard simply awesome. There is some acting involved, and an abundance of creativity, to be sure, but the actual intent to create art in particular has never been present IME.

I certainly won't say it of even my own best efforts as a role-player, take from that what you will. To me, I was simply playing a game.

The Satch noodling on stage in front of an audience. Is that art?

If Joe is performing on stage, he is probably intending to deliver an artistic performance.

If you look on some of his earliest recordings, you'll find he frequently used simple arpeggios as the backbones of many of his solos...the same arpeggios he probably practiced hundreds of thousands of times before, both for his benefit and the benefits to his students. But in mere practice, those arpeggios are not art. They are lessons. When transformed into a guitar solo, they become art.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

There's truth in that. if you watch any cooking shows (like iron chef), they make a point that Plating, the layout of the food on the plate, even the selection of the dishware is important. Because it is an artistic expression of the meal, before it is consumed.

And plating- along with the quality of the ingredients, the recipes, environment- all combine to raise dining at Gordon Ramsay's At the London in West Hollywood to the level of art (at least to some) as compared to merely making hot-dog octopi at Denny's presumably wouldn't be.

 

[Janx]

I actually answered that upthread somewhat, but to repeat and elaborate: even in performance art- whether it is theater or busking as a mime on the streetcorner or what have you- there is the conscious and specific effort to create art.

D&D is a game: a highly-structured, rules-defined game of pretend.

For a session of D&D to become performance art, the participants must transcend the rules of the game in a conscious effort to deliver an artistic statement. This is different from merely pretending to do something.


In light of what I just wrote above, I can't agree. In 34 years of gaming, I've never seen a group sit down and say, "Let us create a work of art using the rules of D&D and this adventure."

The intent is simply to play the game, and play it well. Maybe make your interpretation of an Elven Bard simply awesome. There is some acting involved, and an abundance of creativity, to be sure, but the actual intent to create art in particular has never been present IME.
QUOTE]

Pointilism has specific rules, too. So having rules to its approach doesn't deny something being art.

When i create traditional pieces of art, I don't openly declare "I shall create a work of art using in the style of pointilism."

I mostly just start working. And if somebody calls and asks what I'm doing, I probably say, "I'm working on a painting."

In the case of AdventurePath DMs or worse RailRoad DMs, they have a very specific idea in mind of the experience they want the players to have. One could say they have sub-conciously declared that they have made "art" in their mind.

In a game of let's pretend (using the term game to mean "activity"), the intent is to produce a work of fiction in your mind. And I consider fiction to be "art".

Is a video game art? Aside from the fact that the guys who did the graphics and sound consider their individual contributions to be art, is the product as a whole Art?

Is a work of fiction art? A movie? A TV show? A segment of Robot Chicken? Is a short story, poem or novel considered Art?

If all it takes is for me to declare "Let us create a work of art using the rules of D&D and this adventure." for DA to agree its art, I posit that because that the act is so superfluous that it should be assumed implicit in the act of planning and running the session.

It might be worth considering gaming styles. If you played a board game revolving around dungeon crawling (ex. Dungeon!), I probably would agree that the session is not Art. if your D&D session was nothing more than a complex resolution system for map and encounter generation (a really badly run sandbox), I would probably say that's just like a board game session, and isn't Art.

So, there is something above that baseline happening, that I think MIGHT be Art. I suspect the boundary revolves around when it is more than just a Game (Game=competition with Winners and Losers).

given the fact that until I write is as a story hour or bore you with tales of my game, does it mattter if MY session is Art and yours is not?

 

[Janx]

And plating- along with the quality of the ingredients, the recipes, environment- all combine to raise dining at Gordon Ramsay's At the London in West Hollywood to the level of art (at least to some) as compared to merely making hot-dog octopi at Denny's presumably wouldn't be.

Hot Dog Octopi ain't art!? darn!

i'm actually enjoying this discussion, DA...

Something you and I might relate to via our musical interests:

If a band makes an album that is guitar wankery and crap because it's "what they like" that in reality, nobody else likes, is it Art?

From a busines perspective, making music that nobody likes is bad practice. thinking that it is good that nobody likes your music because "they're too stupid to appreciate it" is pretentious and also stupid.

So if a work has no appeal to anyone, is it Art?

If nobody sees it, is it Art? (A D&D session limited to 5 people, is kind of like that)

I don't think "commercial" appeal has to be tied to it, but I suspect somebody other than the creator and his mom should also like it.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Pointilism has specific rules, too. So having rules to its approach doesn't deny something being art.

Certainly pointillism (and almost all art forms) have rules...all pointed at creating a piece of art in a particular way. The rules of the art form help to distinguish one form from another.

But the rules of an RPG are not designed to create art. They are designed to formalize the game of pretend. To use those rules to create art, you must use those rules in a way that goes beyond the mere playing of the game.

When i create traditional pieces of art, I don't openly declare "I shall create a work of art using in the style of pointilism."

I mostly just start working. And if somebody calls and asks what I'm doing, I probably say, "I'm working on a painting."

As might a photorealist, a pop artist or what have you- but they are still in the mindset of creating a piece of art using the rules of the style they prefer. There is no question in the artist's mind that he is doing anything else but trying to create a piece of art.

Which distinguishes his actions from the actions of the guys who were in my house last week, who if asked what THEY were doing, would say "I'm painting."

If all it takes is for me to declare "Let us create a work of art using the rules of D&D and this adventure." for DA to agree its art, I posit that because that the act is so superfluous that it should be assumed implicit in the act of planning and running the session.

It is not the declaration in and of itself that makes not-art into art. It is the conscious decision to make art that makes the change. What I was describing with that sentence was the state of making that conscious decision to go beyond the rules to create art, not merely saying that statement out loud.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If a band makes an album that is guitar wankery and crap because it's "what they like" that in reality, nobody else likes, is it Art?

Art, even bad art, is art.

If nobody sees it, is it Art? (A D&D session limited to 5 people, is kind of like that)

Yes. The only audience art needs is the mind that created it.

I don't think "commercial" appeal has to be tied to it, but I suspect somebody other than the creator and his mom should also like it.

Look at Van Gogh. Even though he is recognized as a genius today, he sold only 1 painting in his entire life.

If, instead of cutting off his ear, he destroyed his garret and all the paintings inside, would he still have been an artist?

Certainly. Even though we may not have recognized his genius- I can't tell you which was the painting that he sold and where it fit within the constellation of his work- he would still be such in the objective point of view.

 

[wrecan]

I think roleplaying game absolutely involve a conscious effort to create art. While the primary effort is to have fun, a secondary effort of any roleplaying is to entertain the other members at the table. You play a character to get a positive reaction from the other players and the DM. You are trying to evoke an emotional response, whether it's kudos on a clever solution to an obstacle, laughs from a particularly funny antic, or even expressions of sympathy when something tragic occurs.

The DM, particularly, is attempting to evoke an emotional response from the players because that's how a DM involves players in the story. The players are being induced to feel concern for their own characters or the NPCs, fear of what may happen next, surprise when it happens, tension as the conflict is resolved, and release when it is over. These are the classic elements of art according to Aristotle, and I think it applies to D&D and any other role-playing game.

Art does not need to endure. I don't think anybody thinks that drama is not an artform. Yet, I have no remnant of a show after the curtain closes.

Art does not need an audience outside the artists. Improvisational theater often involves a type of theater in which everybody attending the performance participates in the performance. It is art.

Art does not need to be exclusively about making art. Artists are artists even if they are primarily interested in making money. (We call such people "commercial artists" or "professionals".) So the fact that the primary goal of RPGs is gaming does not render it ineligible to be art.

Role-Playing is an artform, a subset of drama. Games are not. But a role-playing game is both drama and game. Like theater games, it is an artform, and, likewise, produces art. Art of questionable quality to be sure, but art nonetheless.

 

[Croesus]

Some of the things being defined as art seem to have stretched the definition so much that almost everything we do falls within the definition.

If I write a fictional story, most people seem to consider that art. If I write the exact same story, but tell you it is non-fiction, is the story art?

If I perform acrobatic maneuvers in a plane, is that art? If I do so in combat, is it art?

If I lay down in the snow and make snow angels, is that art? If I fall into the snow and leave the impression of a snow angel, is that art?

If any of the above prompt answers of "yes to the first, no to the second", what's the difference? Or asked a different way, for those who believe D&D is art, what are examples of human activities that clearly are not art?