Utilitarian Review 9/20/14

lefty-frizzell

 
On HU

Featured Archive Post: Kinukitty on what’s wrong with Daniel Clowes’ Ghost World.

Me on Colson Whitehead’s Zone One and the dream of zombie assimilation.

Rebecca Field makes a militant homosexual dress and talks about dyke marches.

Ng Suat Tong argues (contra me) that the Morales/Baker Truth, and its take on the black Captain America, really is not very good.

Tracy Q. Loxley argues (contra me) that rock is too dead.

Stacey Donovan, author of the wonderful YA novel Dive, talks about how she became a writer.

Roy T. Cook asks, was Spider-Woman harmed by that Milo Manara cover?

Sean Michael Robinson on the songwriting of Kate Bush.
 
Utilitarans Everywhere

At Pacific Standard I argued that online harassment of women isn’t a gamer problem.

At Splice Today I wrote about

A.O. Scott, children’s lit and how the patriarchy loves stories about dead patriarchs.

— the most influential male country singer of all time.

The folks at the Center for Digital Ethics collected some of their essays (including a few of mine) into a dead tree thing. So if you want to read my prose embedded in dead trees, here’s your chance.

At the Chicago Reader I make some recommendations for things to see at the Chicago art expo.
 
Other Links

Brendan Nyhan on why science journals need to report negative results.

Tressie McMillan Cottom on feminism, class, Lean In, and other matters.

Nice piece evaluating Hauerwas’ theological contributions at First Things.

Darren Chetty on why non-white kids need to see themselves in children’s lit.

Will Wilkinson points out that Tom Frank doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Mary McCarthy on losing her house.

Nicky Smith, on how Steely Dan is still great.
 

Utilitarian Review 9/13/14

On HU

Featured Archive Post: Comics vs. Fashion editorials.

Kim O’Connor with a brief take on Bianca Bangarelli’s brief comic “Fish”.

Conseula Francis and Qiana Whitted on the disappointing ending to the story of the black Captain America in Truth.

Kim O’Connor on R. Crumb’s unpleasant influence on comics criticism.

Ng Suat Tong on crying at the skating drama “Ice Castles.”

Alex Buchet on Sherlock Holmes and the women.

Adrielle Mitchell on science comics and page layout.

Chris Gavaler on Pride and Prejudice and Superman.
 
Utilitarians Everywhere

At the Atlantic:

— I tell Gene Simmons that rock isn’t dead.

—I interviewed Beverly Tatum, the president of Spelman, about race and education.

—I review the documentary “Take Me To the River” and explain why Britney pops up in a film about Memphis soul.

At Pacific Standard I talk about Mike Brown, “no angel”, Harriet Beecher Stowe and stereotypes of black men.

At Splice Today I talk about:

Air Supply, the Beach Boys, and the virtues of musical inauthenticity.

— how I could been a thespian.

At the Reader I have a short review of rapper Lizzie, who is great.

The Gone With the Wind study guide I worked on for Shmoop is online.
 
Other Links

Can’t remember if I posted this before, but I really like this piece by Alice Bolin on Miranda Lambert and Beyonce.

Dee Lockett on FKA Twigs.

Amanda Hess on Taylor Swift.

And Fantagraphics is going to publish Fukitor, if folks want to talk about that.
 

miranda_beyonce_0

 

Zombie Assimilation

10365343

 
How do you turn a zombie story into literary fiction? Make it really boring. At least, that’s Colson Whitehead’s solution in Zone One, and it has a certain, simple brilliance to it, as well as a comic flair. All the zombie-standard beats are there — the gross-out cannibal gore, the sudden bloody shocks, the piles of dead, the foolish hopes bloodily dismembered — but all slowed down and anesthetized with self-consciously arty lit fic prose and meandering stream-of-consciousness flash backs and flash backs within flash backs. What if Henry James had been a pulp writer? the book asks, and then proceeds to spend gobs and gobs of paragraphs on a split second zombie attack, the teeth reaching for the throat with the leisurely upper-crust nonchalance of a Bostonian meaningfully twitching his well-groomed facial hair. Apocalypse takes on the breakneck rhythms of afternoon tea.

I am a fan of horror films and I love Henry James, and watching the two thunked together is pretty enjoyable…for a while. At some point, though, you start to feel that the contrast between style and substance is more a gimmick than a necessity; a mash-up that never quite transcends its initial, “wouldn’t it be funny if..?” joke. Henry James’ novels are slow and byzantine because he sees the world as slow and byzantine; his characters long for and drown in artifice. The best zombie horror is a vision of humans as shambling meat monsters, comic, horrible, visible to the bone. Whitehead tries to merge the two…but they end up undermining each other. The horror in James’ world (like “The Beast in the Jungle”) is that nothing happens, a nothing that is seriously undermined when you’ve got gouts of blood gouting, even if only in slow motion. Similarly, if visceral viscera is what you want, detours into lit-fic’s grab bag of ironized nostaligia (here is a memory of parents having oral sex; here is a memory of a family restaurant) doesn’t take you there. The two modes don’t build on one another or clash in inventive ways; they just take the edge off each other. Instead of one thing or another, you’re left with a mediocre middle.

You could argue that that’s thematic I suppose; mediocrity is an important theme in the novel. The main character — only known by the nickname Mark Spitz — is defined as a kind of avatar of average; he mystical power of mundanity allowed him to slide through school without either failure or excellence, attaining B’s whether he studied or not, and then going on to nondescript jobs calling for his ideal lack of talent. His averageness stood him in good stead in the apocalypse as well.

He was a mediocre man. He had led a medicore life exceptional only in the magnitude of its unexceptionality. Now the world was mediocre, rendering him perfect. He asked himself: How can I die? I was always like this. Now I am more me.

It’s a cute conceit — though, maybe again a bit too cute. Why exactly are we supposed to see a zombie apocalypse as a triumph of the mediocre, again? Maybe if these zombies were all, every one, the stragglers — infected people who just stand and stare vacantly, pursuing some sort of former moment in their lives — flying a kite, flipping a burger. But the hungry skels, or skeletons, aren’t mediocre; they’re ravening and awful and nightmarish and maybe ridiculous, but not bland unless you toss an awful lot of lit fic tropes at them, and even then not enough. Nor is the skill set of the surviving humans especially mediocre; at least, a talent for killing and surviving seems like it’s still a kind of excellence. Mark Spitz says he’s mediocre, but Whitehead doesn’t sell it. Instead, Spitz doesn’t seem so much average as especially talented at adaptation; he’s good at fitting in. He’s not a master of mediocrity, but of assimilation — as you’d expect, perhaps, from a black man named Mark Spitz.

Spitz’s blackness barely registers through the book; his race is only explicitly revealed towards the end, when he makes a kind of joke about his name and the fact that black people supposedly aren’t able to swim. The reticence here seems especially significant since the modern zombie iteration began with a black protagonist in Night of the Living Dead. Romero’s film plays with the divide between black and white and human and monster; the zombies become in many ways a ravening white horde, while, at the end of the film, the law and order forces cleaning up the dead casually shoot the good guy because they think he’s a zombie, and/or because he’s black. Romero’s apocalypse is bleak/funny/horrible (like Octavia Butler’s) in part because the end of the world actually doesn’t change anything; divisions of gender, of race, of class, still persist. Even at the end of everything, old hates continue to matter. Zombies don’t change us because zombies are us; even in death, people suck.

Whitehead, though, explicitly rejects that vision. For him, and for Mark Spitz, the zombie apocalypse is a new era. Everyone you meet in the book, of whatever class, seems to be pulling together, fighting the good fight; some are incompetent, some are weak, but to the extent that there’s stupid cruelty or violence of humans against humans, it’s all off to the side and bracketed as a kind of inevitable effect of trauma, not to be dwelt on or looked at closely. Even that old staple, lust, barely puts in an appearance. Instead,

There was a single Us now, reviling a single Them. Would the old bigotries be reborn as well, when they cleared out this Zone, and the next,and so on, and they were packed together again tight and suffocating on top of each other?

Spitz goes on to think that yes, old prejudices would be revived if civilization were to get up and running again. But (spoiler!) the whole point of the end of the book is that civilization is not revived; every human effort to return to normality is doomed to failure. The dead take back everything, and in their number “Every race, color, and creed was represented.” The world is not going back to normal, and as long as it doesn’t, equality wins.

Glen Duncan, in a New York Timesreview that is deftly lobotomized by its own condescension, seems to be under the impression that the zombie genre has no literary merit, and that Whitehead’s contribution is to bring the virtues of thematic depth to an otherwise crap pulp form. I’d argue, though, that Whitehead’s evasion of suspense and serious-writer-prose serve to obscure a poignant, but still unsatisfying glibness. Romero’s zombie stories trap you in the binary between self and other; you’re always trying to not be the monster and not being the monster makes you the monster, “the monster” here being, not just zombies, but blacks, whites, men, women — all the familiar, bleak faultlines of identity. Zone One, on the other hand, seems to be a zombie story for Obama’s post-racial America — a dream that at the end of all things, at least, at last, non-white folks will slip into the sea of the dead on equal terms. Henry James and George Romero both, I think, have a bleaker vision, in which, even after the apocalypse, the teeth of caste are not so easy to unlock.

Utilitarian Review 9/6/14

On HU

Featured Archive Post: Emily Thomas on The Nao of Brown and representations of mental illness.

The most covered songs ever, from St. Louis Blues to Sweet Home Chicago.

We had a thread on whether video games can be good art.

Kailyn Kent on the low-key use of wine in Obvious Child.

Chris Gavaler‘s play “Crisis on Infinite Earths”, on superheroes, saints and dinosaurs.

Michael Arthur on the feminine fabulousness of Scar and other furry matters.

Brian Cremins on density of page layout in Carol Swain’s Gast. (That completes PencilPanelPage’s Thierry Groensteen and page layout roundtable.

Me on Zoe Quinn’s Depression Quest and video games as art.
 
Utilitarians Everywhere

At the Atlantic I talked about Dana Goldstein’s The Teacher Wars and why Americans hate teachers.

At the Morning News I wrote about Nicki Minaj and our centuries long obsession with black women’s rear ends.

At the Awl I interviewed Linda Williams about The Wire and the realism canard.

At Splice Today I wrote about

— how Anita Sarkeesian’s videos are really low key.

— how ticklish my son is.
 
Other Links

R. Sikoryak Wonder Woman/de Sade mash-up.

Cathy Young question whether harassment online is gender based. Don’t agree with most of it, but raises some interesting points.

Sara Benincasa on why you shouldn’t look at Jennifer Lawrence’s nude pics.
 

7566574_nickiminaj2

Too Many Choices

After this weekend’s post on whether video games can be art (and/or good art), I thought I’d check out Depression Quest. The game is somewhat infamous because designer Zoe Quinn’s ex publicly attacked her on some message board or other, and then other folks joined in because (as far as I can tell) they hate women and possibly because the idea of a video game in which you don’t shoot people frightens them? I am unafraid of video games in which you don’t shoot people, though, so I went ahead and played it.

Depression Quest has an ambitious concept, especially for a video game; it’s intended to give you a sense of what it’s like to live with depression. It’s a text adventure, which positions you as a middle-class, college-educated alterna-sort, of indeterminate gender, working a minimum-wage job and struggling to get through the day. You have a more outgoing girlfriend, a loving if not especially sympathetic mom, a more successful and friendly brother, some online friends and some actual physical friends. The game wends along, describing your anxiety, neurosis, and general inability to cope. This is a typical passage.

“A couple hours later the two of you find yourselves in a familiar position: on the couch, watching comedy shows on Netflix, a box of pizza open on the coffee table in front of you. As you look across the couch at her, you start to feel anxious. You feel bad about effectively forcing the two of you to stay in tonight, again. While you are always appreciative of your partner’s efforts to take your feelings into account and help make sure you’re socially comfortable, you sincerely worry that you’re holding her back from enjoying a more fulfilling relationship.

So…is it art?

I would say that yes, absolutely, Depression Quest is art. It’s true that its goals are more social and educational than purely aesthetic — but lots of art works towards social and educational goals (The Jungle; The Handmaid’s Tale; James Baldwin’s essays, and on and on.) The game works to create empathy and understanding, and to create and examine emotional states. Those are all recognizable aesthetic goals. It’s definitely art. The question, though, is whether it’s good art.

Here the answer is a lot less certain. Again, I’m impressed by the concept; the idea of using a game to explore mental illness is exciting, and using interactive fiction seems like an intuitively promising way to do so. Mental illness is difficult for people to sympathize with because for folks who aren’t mentally ill it’s hard to put yourself in the brain of somebody who is. Using a game to force that identification, to put you in the place of someone making those choices, seems like it has the potential to create empathy and understanding in a way that less immersive art forms, from novels to film, do not.

Again, that’s the theory. The practice doesn’t exactly hold up though. In part this is because, as it turns out, games are not as immersive as fiction — or at least this one isn’t. Quinn deliberately leaves a lot of the game details open-ended. Your minimum wage job isn’t specified; the project you’re working pursuing on your own time isn’t specified; even your girlfriend is vague around the edges — she offers sympathy, or retreats, or wants sex, but there’s never a descriptive passage which makes her come to life as a separate, individual character, the way there would be in a good novel. This lack of detail is undoubtedly deliberate, it’s meant (like your own non-specified gender) to make the story resonate as widely as possible.

For me, at least, though, it just made the scenario seem schematic and uninvolving. Why do I care what my girlfriend thinks when she isn’t a person? How can I feel how numbing my job is if I don’t even know what I’m doing for a living? The world is too indistinct for me to care about engaging with it. The character I’m supposed to be simply isn’t vivid enough for me to care about him or her, even if he or she is supposed to be me. (The moody anonymous Somber Piano Music is perhaps meant to bridge this gap. It does not.)

The problems only get worse when you have to make choices. At each turning point, Quinn gives you a number of alternatives, as in Choose-Your-Own Adventure books — but in some cases, the choices are crossed out, because, when you’re depressed, you often can’t do the thing you know you should, whether it’s loosening up and sleeping with your girlfriend or telling your mom you’re really sad and need help.
 
Screen Shot 2014-09-04 at 3.28.21 PM
 
It’s a clever conceit…but again, not clever enough. The limited choices are supposed to give you a sense of what it is to be depressed — but the problem is,you still have choices, and it’s easy to figure out what your best remaining options are. Adopt the cat, see the therapist, take your meds, try to be as outgoing and honest and open as you can. Pick the right options, and things turn out more or less okay. That isn’t what it feels like to be depressed, I’m pretty sure — and it’s also misleading, insofar as (from everything I’ve heard from friends with mental illness) not all therapists are good thereapists and getting a bad one can be miserable, and meds are unpredictable and can make things worse in various ways if you’re just a little bit unlucky with your body chemistry. Despite those crossed-out choices, Depression Quest makes depression seem like something you can choose your way out of. It makes depression look easy.

The very things that seem like they might make Depression Quest especially effective — the open-endedness, the interactivity — instead make it banal and emotionally unaffecting. In contrast, art which is more specific and more controlled — like, say, Charlotte Perkins Gillman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper,” or the brutal suicide scene in Sooyeon Won’s Korean comic “Let Dai” — are a lot more engaging, and a lot more harrowing. Even the infamous depression sequence in Twilight, where Bella just mopes and mopes and mopes, seems like it works better — it feels tedious and frustrating and you just want her to get over it and she doesn’t and it goes on and you want her to get over it and it goes on — you’re trapped with her, this person you don’t really like who is behaving irrationally and won’t stop and there’s nothing you can do. You can’t make the best choice, or the second best choice, or any choice. You’re in a particular consciousness that isn’t working right, and there’s no way out. In Kafka, say, time slows down and expands, till you’re dragging on interminably, pulling an ugly insect body behind you. The specificity of the experience and the lack of options are precisely the point; as a reader, you’re nailed to this particular self and its decisions, or lack of decisions — your own interaction with the story can be seen or read as a metaphor for the experience of mental illness.

This makes it sound like books, or comics, have an innate formal advantage over games in the depiction of, or examination of, depression. I doubt that’s really the case; there are plenty of crappy depictions of mental illness in non-games, after all. I do think that Depression Quest’s aesthetic goals and its formal choices end up being at odds with one another. The game is a good idea, and it points in some interesting directions, but on its own terms, as art, I think it’s mostly a failure.
____
Edit: Please note that this thread is not an invitation to talk about Quinn personally, or Gamergate, or etc. The post is about Depression Quest and video games as art; comments that are off topic will be deleted.

Can Video Games Be Art?

PaPo-Yo-5

 
The internet’s been aflame and atwitter and afacebook with Anita Sarkeesian’s latest video about sexism in video games. She’s depressingly but inevitably gotten death threats and heaps of abuse, and that’s what most of the discussion has focused on.

One of the things she’s saying that has somewhat gotten lost, though, seems to be that video games can be art, or should be thought of as art. She talks about a game called “Papo and Yo” in particular as an example of a game with more aesthetic ambitions than the general shoot em up. I’m not very versed in video games, alas, but I’d be curious to hear people talk about what games they see as (good) art, if any.

We’re had a couple posts on this topic; Isaac Butler wrote about the virtues of the Walking Dead and Emily Thomas wrote about new text adventure games. So…what do folks think? Any other contenders for video games as art?

Utilitarian Review 8/29/14

bessy-smith1

HU

Featured Archive Post: Kailyn Kent on Lyonel Feininger’s retrospective at the Whitney.

Anne Lorimer expresses skepticism about the Gay Utopia project.

Is there any good literary fiction?

Ng Suat Tong on myth and the Encyclopedia of Early Earth.

Sean Michael Robinson on the one thing that’s not awful about Grease 2.

Chris Gavaler on the French Batman.

Michael A. Johnson on Guido Crepax and the erotics of page layout.

Me on Morales and Kirby’s Truth and the bitterness of the black Captain America.
 
Utilitarians Everywhere

My son helped me out with the Black Girl Dangerous bucket challenge to support queer and trans people of color in the media. No bucket, but I do get bashed in the head.

At the Pacific Standard I wrote about

—Patricia McGinley’s great book Staging the Blues and why Beyoncé isn’t a terrorist.

—Curtis Johnson’s book on Darwin and chance and why life is all about uncertainty.

At the Center for Digital Ethics I wrote about why Facebook is like Stanley Milgram.

At Splice Today I wrote about the Manara Spider-Woman and the difference between sexy superheroines and sexy superheroes.
 
Other Links

Conor Friedersdorf on yet another case of police racism and incompetence.

G. Anne Bassett on interviews for the long-term unemployed.

Dani Paradis on the problems with anti-rape nail polish.

Avital Andrews on the virtues of being a couch potato.

Monika Bartyzel on why the Big Chill still matters.