Forked Thread: "The Death of the Imagination" re: World of Warcraft

[Fifth Element]

Except you are sharply defining it to mean "visualization" as near as I can tell. Because you refuse to recognize any of the benefits that people say they derive from such games in other areas as imaginitive. Simultaneously you seem to ascribe any ill effects, ranging from being tired after a late night of WoW to simply lacking extra free time due to playing a lot, to being a loss of imagination.

I think that's a fair comment. Mercurius is both defining "imagination" very narrowly (visualization), while at the same time painting it very broadly (all ill effects ascribed to the supposed suppression of "imagination").

 

[Fifth Element]

No, I am emphasizing the visualization aspect of imagination, because it is the easiest to get a hold of and, as I see it, back up with logic ("use it or lose it").

But you're putting the cart before the horse. You first assume that "use it or lose it" applies to "imagination", and then claim that WoW hurts your "imagination" because you don't use it. I don't see how "use it or lose it" is logical, unless you mean to refer to common sense, which is wrong at least 34.875% of the time.

 

[Fifth Element]

As I wrote in a previous post, I see the "ill effects" as largely two-fold: timesink-related and actual impact on imagination due to the "suppressing" effect illustrated by the anecdotes.

If there are more than one type of ill effect, how do you know which ill effect is a result of the "suppression", and which is not?

 

[Mercurius]

I think that's a fair comment. Mercurius is both defining "imagination" very narrowly (visualization), while at the same time painting it very broadly (all ill effects ascribed to the supposed suppression of "imagination").

See previous couple posts. But again, in slightly different words: "Visualization" is one aspect of imagination. I focus on that because it is easiest to talk about and to quantify, but in some sense it is merely the tip of the iceberg.

As for what imagination actually is, my view is somewhat in line with Coleridge's, especially in his differentiation of (secondary) imagination and "fancy." Imagination is vital and creative, while fancy is re-creative and more mechanical, basically just re-assembling parts. Now in my view the two blend in all of us and true imagination is more rare than we think, but certain activities are more likely to inspire it (or suppress it).

On a side note, I have recently switched careers and am entering the field of education in an independent school system. One of the things I hope to integrate in a class at some point is what would effectively be "world creation"--have the students come up with their own creation myths, even worlds, maybe even play D&D with them (jk on the last one). This would basically be an attempt to stimulate imagination, helping the students come up with imagery and ideas from within, rather than merely pulling them in from external sources.

 

[Rel]

What are some benefits of video games that you consider relating to imagination?

As somebody who is tactically minded I first tend to read new and existing abilities of my character and consider how they might be combined into effective combinations. Also I look at my character's craft skills and imagine ways in which I might create certain items that will enhance my effectiveness or that might benefit my fellow guild members.

Then, when presented with a tactically challenging situation, I try to envision the exact series of steps that I need to take in order to to deal with it.

When that plan invariably gets screwed up because of unforeseeable circumstances, I have to quickly adapt on the fly and make quick decisions about what to do next.

I also sometimes imagine what it will be like to see certain new areas of the game that I've never been to before. Hearing about "The Ghostlands" or "Searing Gorge" evokes certain images and gives you some anticipation about what you're likely to encounter there. Also there are lots and lots of instances that I still haven't been in but I've heard bits of stories that make me envision what they will look like when I get to them. (I'll grant that if you've played through every zone and instance in the game that this effect will dissipate but you'd have to have been playing a LOT to do that. Plus, they are always releasing new content and we're on the verge of a new expansion.)

Those are just a few off the top of my head. I'll post more later if I think of them. Meanwhile I'm off to play some D&D!

Note before I part: It occurs to me from reading one of your recent posts that you might discount a couple of the above examples as "creativity" or "analysis" instead of "imagination". My only counter to that is, are these not attributes that area of equal importance and also benefit our shared RPG hobby?

 

[Fifth Element]

This would basically be an attempt to stimulate imagination, helping the students come up with imagery and ideas from within, rather than merely pulling them in from external sources.

But so much of what comes "from within" is simply the synthesis of what is taken in from previous external sources. I'm not sure creating things from whole cloth is entirely possible in this sense. You will always be influenced by what you have seen, read, and heard before.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

But so much of what comes "from within" is simply the synthesis of what is taken in from previous external sources. I'm not sure creating things from whole cloth is entirely possible in this sense. You will always be influenced by what you have seen, read, and heard before.

Aside from the fact that creativity and imagination based on limiations or things already known is pretty important, too.

Just think of that movie that was based on a basic idea of Larry Cohen and Alfred Hitchcook:
A movie playing entirely in a phone booth. A strong limitation, most of the elements are basically predefined. And yet, it required a lot of imagination to come up with a story that could use just these tools. In fact, the idea how to fill out the details to cover a 90 minute story came only 30 years after Cohen had the original idea, and it took 12 more years for him to get it filmed.
So, tell me again if being limited to a predefined setting means you're less creative or require less imagination...

 

[Fifth Element]

Aside from the fact that creativity and imagination based on limiations or things already known is pretty important, too.

Yes. In some sense, working within constraints requires greater imagination than working without them.

 

[Mercurius]

As somebody who is tactically minded I first tend to read new and existing abilities of my character and consider how they might be combined into effective combinations. Also I look at my character's craft skills and imagine ways in which I might create certain items that will enhance my effectiveness or that might benefit my fellow guild members.

Then, when presented with a tactically challenging situation, I try to envision the exact series of steps that I need to take in order to to deal with it.

When that plan invariably gets screwed up because of unforeseeable circumstances, I have to quickly adapt on the fly and make quick decisions about what to do next.

I also sometimes imagine what it will be like to see certain new areas of the game that I've never been to before. Hearing about "The Ghostlands" or "Searing Gorge" evokes certain images and gives you some anticipation about what you're likely to encounter there. Also there are lots and lots of instances that I still haven't been in but I've heard bits of stories that make me envision what they will look like when I get to them. (I'll grant that if you've played through every zone and instance in the game that this effect will dissipate but you'd have to have been playing a LOT to do that. Plus, they are always releasing new content and we're on the verge of a new expansion.)

Those are just a few off the top of my head. I'll post more later if I think of them. Meanwhile I'm off to play some D&D!

Note before I part: It occurs to me from reading one of your recent posts that you might discount a couple of the above examples as "creativity" or "analysis" instead of "imagination". My only counter to that is, are these not attributes that area of equal importance and also benefit our shared RPG hobby?

Now you're making things more complicated . To answer the "note": yes and no. The first couple paragraphs are more tactical and seem to fit in with "analysis" or "creative problem solving" and not "imagination" in the admittedly nebulous sense I am using the word. But the latter part...hmmm, that is very interesting because it relates to one of my very favorite aspects of fantasy and something that I feel is very imaginative: the mysterious name that evokes an unknown place or person or time. So I will grant you that you are talking about a use of imagination that I had not anticipated in the WoW (congrats!). My one hesitation is that I wonder to what degree your imaginings are cobbled together from other WoW images, or whether you are seeing something more self-generated. You tell me?

I will address that topic more in a forthcoming reply to Fifth Element.

 

[Mercurius]

But so much of what comes "from within" is simply the synthesis of what is taken in from previous external sources. I'm not sure creating things from whole cloth is entirely possible in this sense. You will always be influenced by what you have seen, read, and heard before.

Yes, I agree, which is how Coleridge differentiates "fancy" and true "imagination" (which he further differentiated into Primary and Secondary, but only Secondary really has relevance to this conversation, while Primary relates to what the Gnostics meant by "Logos"). Coleridge would hold that it is (sort of!) possible to create things "from whole cloth," but that it is still more of a re-imagining, a particular echo of the universal archetype. In other words, it has relation and precedence in something archetypal and universal, but takes on a new form.

So I agree with your comment to Mustrum, which I think relates to the idea that creativity is not defined by novelty; when it is it can spin out into weirdness-for-the-sake-of-weirdness (which I find particularly irking) and tends to favor quantity to quality, superficial novelty to depth ala Andy Warhol. Rather, true creativity--and I would say imagination in the Coleridgian sense--must have some sense of archetypal, universal meaning and resonance (e.g. Campbell's Hero's Journey). This, of course, gets dangerously close to metaphysics (to say the least!) which I don't have a problem with, but some might.

This also might at least somewhat explain why D&D holds such lasting popularity (aside from the more obvious and mundane reasons such as market strangehold and name brand): It stays close to some core fantasy archetypes. Elves, Dwarves, and Dragons are lasting because they are mythic archetypes that have a kind of meaning that runs deep into our subconsciousness, into "mythic mind" so to speak.

So in a sense I am also talking about the difference between archetypes and stereotypes. This is not an easy topic, but I would say in short that the latter is a watered down and superficial version of the former, one that is lacking in a kind of creative juicyness that is hard to quantify, but relates to my usage of imagination. Imagination taps into archetypes, perhaps weaving them into a new pattern or even something never seen before, or even something that doesn't look all that different, but deeply captures something universal; fancy re-arranges stereotypes, going for quantity over quality.