Monday, September 7, 2009
And Your Bird Can Sing
"So I ask: must we appreciate The Beatles? Must we reminisce with the newly aged about their privileged lives as naive youthful radicals, and then later as greedy yuppie centrists, and then finally as truculent conservative majority? Must we give them their final thrill in the medium we popularized, and which they spent decades not only failing to understand, but also deriding as useless and insolent? Must we allow them to celebrate not through change, not through novelty, but through utter sameness?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
Or, you know, I can just be in my young 20s and a huge Beatles fan because their music is awesome and in line with my tastes.
Talk about reading too much into this. I think that trying to turn this into a weird ageist argument reveals some fundamental insecurities on the part of the speaker, not a fault in the audience.
Well yeah, but they wrote some cracking tunes though.
I'm definitely in the camp of the 20-somethings who just love Beatles music. Still, I think Ian's point is interesting -- ask me to talk about Cobain in Guitar Hero and I might be just as touchy.
... and yet
Video games is both art and business:
As art it only try to add significant meaning
As business it only discard meaning
At least this one is clearly business with the disguise of art
I'm confused. Since when did The Beatles become conservative? Less radical and more greedy, yes, but not conservative.
Or is he talking about something else? Help me out here, I'm tired.
the generation, not the band.
Ah, that makes since. The use of "their" threw me off, but now I see that it refers to the "newly aged."
As a Beatles fan I might want a Rock Band game dedicated to their music.
As a business: Rock Band + The Beatles = profit.
They made some great music, and a lot of people are going to really enjoy the game, so I don't see the problem.
I find it difficult to consider, even for one moment, that The Beatles: Rock Band "may be the most important video game yet made." (Hyperbole much?) To me, it's just Rock Band with Beatles songs, and that sounds pretty cool, and why not indeed?
Imo, both writers – Bogost and Schiesel – are looking way too much into this. Whilst I disagree with both in general, I enjoy their opinions nonetheless.
I hate the beatles, it's pretty irrational, I can't stand the sight of their little bobbing heads. Don't like rockband/guitar hero much either, I can't get the hang of it.
Nirvana was the reason I picked up a guitar, well that and pulling. Are there guitar hero groupies? I liked that I could improvise to Endless Nameless when I wasn't good enough to keep up. Unfortunately for me, the game doesn't offer that flexibility.
If they made a game where you plugged a real guitar in, I'd buy it. Dunno why they haven't, a $10 guitar tuner recognises notes, surely a peripheral similar could plug into your console and you be given scores as to how near your note matches the actual note in the song. Then you could play against people on real or computer instruments
If Activision was making it, sure, but Harmonix is made up of people who clearly love music. The Beatles are still one of the biggest bands of the century, and influenced the course of pop music, so it's natural that music lovers would dig their stuff.
He's right, though, that it's a damned shame that older folk aren't celebrating the potential for the medium, but rather how the medium is allowing them to wallow in nostalgia.
I'll take issue with one point of that quote, and make an assumption that the writer is of a post-Baby Boomer generation.
We did not invent the medium of computer games (I'm an X'er myself) that honor does belong the Boomers. Perhaps game genres like Rock Band are an X/Y conception, but they're still logical extensions of ideas that existed before. These ideas would have been realised long before if the technology existed.
Nothing personal against Bogost, but reviews like this seem like a parlor trick, using misdirection to turn negativity into broad social theory.
I think I'd be more swayed by his point if it didn't strike me as so contradictory. "It is a pat on the back and a knowing smile to those who gave the finger to the back-patters and knowing-smilers." So we should buck tradition by embracing their methods? They never appreciated us, or the medium we "popularized" so we should snub them, as they have for so long snubbed us? But if bucking tradition is their tradition then...
Damn. I made my head hurt.
I think I basically agree with Mr. Bogost.
But then, I was never a huge Beatles devotee or anything.
I mean, they're great and everything...
@Stropp
I agree with you, and I had actually changed "invented" to "popularized" just before Leigh pulled this quote.
I edited my extract accordingly.
This was a very interesting article for me. Part of me constantly wants to spew fire against the Beatles; not because I dislike them, but because whenever I tell anyone I'm not a fan I end up on the pointy end of a nasty "WTF is wrong with you?" tirade...but I can hardly blame the Beatles for that, though it has left me understandably sore.
There's also the gamer side of me, which welcomes the opportunity this presents to birth new gamers and acceptance of gaming; there is also the industry side of me that is happy to induct new sheep into our flock, to bring new sources of revenue into our market.
I see what Ian is saying, but at the same time that sort of attitude doesn't help anyone. Many of us are hardcore gamers, and only in recent years have casual gamers become so noticeable that we frequently talk about them and companies need to target them.
Is that a bad thing? I think not. Shouldn't we be celebrating the fact that games are expanding their territory, rather than making a grumpy face at the new locals visiting our favorite coffee house hang-out?
Is it wrong that neither I, nor my parents were ever interested in The Beatles? Is it more wrong that I don't play Guitar Heror or Rock Band because I don't listen to rock music?
I am fully of the opinion that old music needs to die, not be celebrated... but nostalgia is simply too powerful a force for folks to overcome.
Yet another anachronistic Rock Band rehash..... sigh :-)
I'm all for inclusion and bringing new people into the gamer fold. It's a great business decision for all concerned. I hope that this game acts as a gateway to other titles in the RB series and the multiple harmony mechanic continues to RB3.
I only objected to how Beatles Rock Band can't talk to other Rock Bands other than instrument compatibility. I'm not talking making the Beatles avatars play RB DLC, for that would be in bad taste a la GH5. I would have liked to see exportability so my Rock Band avatars could play Beatles songs. I figure that not allowing exporting the music was probably Apple Corps' conditions for allowing this game to go on in the first place, but I still objected to having the Beatles music cordoned off from the rest of my library. It's all still just music.
"Must we appreciate The Beatles?"
Well, no, but those who want to in a fun way now can - is that really such a bad thing?
I appreciate Ian's irritation at the sudden embracing of a format which had previously not been given the time of day, but that's the way it goes, unfortunately. Videogames are released mainly to make money, and there'd be a lot less of them about if profit were not a possibility for those involved.
I'm not a huge Beatles fan, nor have I played a Rock Band game before (I have Guitar Hero 3), but I'm looking forward to interacting with some good music in an interesting way. My dad's a fan of the Fab Four, but not so much of games, and I'm hoping this might show him some of the possibilities of gaming.
I just want to play "8 Days a Week" on drums.
To turn the argument on its head:
The very idea of rock music as a political statement, a single band becoming the archetype of a generation of young rebels and posthumously acquiring the whiff of their later years as old conservatives, is a creation of the 1960s. If you really wanted to free yourself from the pressure of hagiography towards a generation's reminiscence, you would stop making a big deal out of What This Game Means.
The same could be said of Rock Band: Aerosmith
@Tom: I mostly listen to music that was made at least 10 years before I was born. Nostalgia has nothing to do with it, I just prefer older music. And this extends not only to classic rock but also to genres like bluegrass.
@Branden Bean: WTF is wrong with you?
...Yeah, because Aerosmith & Metallica and the dead ghost of Kurt Cobain are all in good taste.
If you had showed me this game when I was 16 & really into the Beatles, I would have jumped at this. Now, not so much, even though I like the music. Though, I am intrigued by the new “vocal harmony system” (whatever it is, it looks interesting) idea.
Ahhh the Beatles the New Kids On The Block of their day. Their only saving grace is the music which is a lot different from what the"kids" are playing on the Guitar Hero. I think the makers of hero were just glad to get permission to use the songs and not caring if it would sell well.
Hey Tom, I don't know how this is anachronistic. It uses only Beatles songs, in venues the Beatles played. I mean, one could say it was anachronistic because one is playing it today, but in that case all people are anachronistic for using old genes.
And Nebethetpet, Aerosmith wasn't Rock Band. That was Guitar Hero, and they're very different.
I really don't feel older beatles fans (people my parents' age) can be painted with such a broad brush (privileged faux-hippy snobs who are now on the gaming bandwagon). Anyway it's special game... and while I think Ian's point has some merit, I don't feel inclined to take an ethical stance against this one.
"So I ask you: must we care about World War II? Must we reminisce with the increasingly few and decrepit about their lives two generations ago first as eager militants, then as the conservative middle class, and then finally as truculent conservative majority? Must we give them their final thrill in the medium we popularized, and which they spent decades not only failing to understand, but actively campaigning against? Must we allow them to celebrate not through change, not through a lasting peace, but through an endless celebration of a brutal and violent conflict?"
History is history, significance is significance, and the real crime is to allow our personal feelings about the people involved to prevent us from making our own rational, informed decisions about what we do and do not care about.
Post a Comment