Musings from Bristol
“Art is the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions. It encompasses a diverse range of human activities, creations, and modes of expression, including music and literature. . . .
An object may be characterized by the intentions, or lack thereof, of its creator, regardless of its apparent purpose. A cup, which ostensibly can be used as a container, may be considered art if intended solely as an ornament, while a painting may be deemed craft if mass-produced.”
Under this definition, much of larp would appear to be art. Elements including both physical items and information are arranged by the organizer to appeal to the senses or emotions. The crucial point seems to be if the intent is to create a particular emotional or sensory response. Setting up a situation with the intent of the player characters finding a solution to it isn't art. Setting up a situation with the intent of the players through/as their characters feeling emotions is art.
Suppose at a fantasy larp the organizer arranges for a dozen orcs to charge at the players. If the organizer is setting them a tactical puzzle to solve - can they evade or defeat the orcs? – it is not art. If the organizer is trying to create an emotional response - their fear at the orc horde or their bloodlust and anger against the orcs, etc. - then it is art.
The defining point then is what the organizer’s intentions / motives are. That actually make a lot of sense - you can't create art unless you try to. Some larp is art, but not all larp is art. However, larp is a shared act of creation. In this context, the players could also be considered organizers. If they are treat it as a tactical problem, they turn the larp into a game. If they immerse in the emotion, they turn it into art.
“A game is a structured activity, usually undertaken for enjoyment and sometimes used as an educational tool. Games are distinct from work, which is usually carried out for remuneration, and from art, which is more concerned with the expression of ideas. However, the distinction is not clear-cut, and many games are also considered to be work (such as professional players of spectator sports/games) or art (such as jigsaw puzzles or games involving an artistic layout such as Mah-jongg solitaire).
Key components of games are goals, rules, challenge, and interaction. Games generally involve mental or physical stimulation, and often both. Many games help develop practical skills, serve as a form of exercise, or otherwise perform an educational, simulational or psychological role. The requirement for player interaction puts activities such as jigsaw puzzles and solitaire “games” into the category of puzzles rather than games.”
Consider the key components it lists – “rules, challenge, and interaction”. That would apply to a lot of larps, but perhaps not to some of the more extreme / surreal examples. The Stanford prison experiment which I consider a proto-larp didn't have rules for the players. A turkuist larp with a player locked in a wardrobe IC doesn't have goals, challenge or interaction unless you consider 'remain IC' as a goal, but that's rather like arguing 'keep playing' is a goal when playing chess.
Nonetheless, it seems clear that most mainstream larps do fulfill the requirements to be games.
In conclusion then:
- Some but not all larp is art
- Some but not all larp is game
That does raise the obvious question, is it possible for a larp to be neither? Possibly some larps may come under the term “puzzle” rather than “game.”
This also brings me back to a concept I’ve discussed in my earlier writings - 'emotion-orientated' (i.e. art) vs. 'goal-orientated' (i.e. game). It is the motive of the organizer that is the defining factor.
A final question then: Is it possible for a larp to be both art and game? Can it have “goals, rules, challenge, and interaction” and at the same time seek to be the “product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions.'' I think it can. A separate question however, is there a benefit to trying to be both? Will having rules to make it a game get in the way of causing an emotion response?
