Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fast Learner" data-source="post: 5163155" data-attributes="member: 649">Not that I really have anything to add, but I completely agree with this.I disagree with this. I really do think that Roger is on the wrong side of history here. That's not condescending: I, too, am undoubtedly on the wrong side of history on a whole variety of opinions and perspectives. In fact, I suspect that it's completely impossible not to be on the wrong side of history in a whole bunch of ways during your time. We see what came before and what's around us now; it's nearly impossible to see how that's all going to fit in down the road.But the definition -- or perhaps more importantly, the understanding -- of what is and is not art has evolved again and again. It's gone through slow changes and big upheavals. In the end the new kid has almost always been understood as art, despite there being giant communities of people who were sure it would end up otherwise. I cannot fathom these interactive media -- be they games or other forms of interactive artistic effort -- not being eventually embraced as art by the bulk of our culture. Where are the examples of creative non-literary things not being eventually accepted as art? (And for that matter, literature of all forms is commonly considered to be of the Arts, even if we sub-categorize into art and literature after that.)</blockquote>