[MUD-Dev] wherefor in-game artists?

David Kennerly kennerly at finegamedesign.com
Wed Sep 8 06:53:40 CEST 2004


Adam Martin wrote:
> David Kennerly wrote:

>> All that was a long-winding road to get to an answer of the
>> question "wherefor in-game artists?": Therefore, a player could
>> create art to entertain, dominate, trade, or provoke.

>> but haven't encountered evidence to prove it either.  In editing
>> a library of player art and literature
>> (http://www.darkages.com/community/body_library.html), I felt
>> that various artists were doing it for different reasons and that
>> their art, or literature, was intended to have these different
>> effects: entertainment, domination, trade, provoke.

> In my experience, a vast number of artists [1] create art simply
> for the sheer enjoyment of creation, which - assuming
> "entertainment" means "entertainment of the spectator/user" - is
> none of those things.

...

> [1] NB: one point worth noting in particular here is that most of
> the artists I know are first-and-foremost artists - i.e. it is a
> profession, dominant talent, or dominant hobby of theirs.

We're considering two different stages of the piece of art's life.
For maximal simplicity, let us only divide the life of a piece of
art into two stages: creation and public display.  By definition,
your sample of professionals /display/ art for trade.  Oh!--it's so
much more than a trade... blah blah blah ... but displaying art is
also a trade.  Of course, it helps to find your trade intriniscally
satisfying.  :)

Publicly displaying art implies the existence of a motivation beyond
creation.  If creation is its own reward, then to maximize reward:
destroy the art before it's finished and start anew immediately.

I appreciate your comment on /creation/, which reminds me of other
artists, such as Scott McCloud, who described drawing as deep-rooted
in the human psyche.  The motivation to appreciate and create visual
art is so deep that it might depend on the cognitive architecture.
The ability to recognize a non-photorealistic image is nothing short
of the ability to rewire one's own senses, to metaprogram the
primeval brain.  For viewing marks on a cave wall to invoke a memory
of hunting a beast means firing some of the same neural patterns as
if one were actually hunting a beast.  (And to a much lesser extent,
so, too, with reading!)

That's just my guess.  I'd love to listen to the neuroscientific or
evolutionary insights into drawing, painting, design, musical
performance or composition!

David
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev



More information about the mud-dev-archive mailing list