Ah yes, the tired old argument that tries to make arbitrary barriers onto human expression. Tell me, what does the Mona Lisa mean to you? What about it fulfills artistic requirements that Postal lacks (forethought, expression, message, form, craftsmanship, continuity)? Or are you merely buying these simplistic socially enforced walls and the closed-minded prudery promoted through social conditioning simply because you dare not think of it on your own? How is the Postal Dude's nihilism all that different than Hamlet's musings on death during the famous graveyard scene? How are his observations on all that is wrong around him any different than the Danish prince's?
Stop being so up yourself that you tear down a person's work simply because it does not fulfill your own narrow-minded rules. There is more to art than reputation and patronage, and you are being too pig-headed to grasp it.
EDIT: By the way, the ability to offend is an artistic quality just as much as film making you sad or a painting making you uplifted. Again, your narrow-mindedness is telling.
Art is a concentrated form of human expression. Postal is most definitely expressive. Actually learn what art is before you feel able to actually debate on it.
Please enlighten us, how is the Dude comparable to the Bard's Hamlet.Quote:
How is the Postal Dude's nihilism all that different than Hamlet's musings on death during the famous graveyard scene?
How are they the same and why are you jumping through silly hoops to justify your purchase?Quote:
How are his observations on all that is wrong around him any different than the Danish prince's?
How does Postal 2 not fit this description? I do not think anyone can say that RWS is not creative at the very least.Quote:
1. the products of human creativity; works of art collectively
Your problem, I think, is that you believe the term "art" when applied to a work naturally applies a sense of quality or worth. Well, art is in the eye of the beholder, and if you believe one man's work of art is not of quality that is a perfectly fair position for you to take. But even then it is still art, even if you do not think highly of it, even if you do not feel it to be "fine art". It is not necessarily a mark of quality.
I do find Postal 2's message and themes to be of merit, but you can simply see it as a bit of violent escapist fantasy if you wish. But please, do not try and build these arbitrary walls about something as broad as artistic human expression when you have done little to show you have actual comprehensive understanding of it.
I agree with Hamish Wilson
Care to point out where the Dude muses on Death and his place in society? Is this before or after he shoots the porn viewing Islamic gentlemen in the Library? In fact where does he muse on anything in the game?Quote:
Both frequently muse on the subject of death and our place in society, and both have something to say on how their comparative societies treat the people in them.
When he says "I should kill the women and minorities first" how is that a comment on societies treatment of people?
How is the Dude being fired, unfair? How is the attempt to arrest Gary Coleman unfair? How is his wife shooting him for forgetting her rocky road unfair?Quote:
They both have been treated to unfair circumstances and are struggling to discover the best ways in which they can handle them. Both are also rather over the top in depiction but are still rather introspective and prone to musing, even though I must admit that Hamlet is quite a bit more verbose and long winded. Hamlet and the Dude are also rather prone to sarcasm, passive aggressiveness, and you can question the sanity of both.
There is nothing "unfair" about the Dude's circumstances, you should learn to recognize hackneyed plot devices for what they are: an excuse for exploitative game action.
That wasn't a proper artistic analysis, but at least you attempted to explain yourself beyond an appeal to authority.Quote:
That satisfy you, or am I supposed to argue that it is art in some other way than proper artistic analysis?
That's your problem. The only people willing to use that definition for art are the same people that allow Yoko Ono to dump piles of dirt in a room and continually pay Damien Hirst to view a dead cow. Stop allowing con-artists a free pass because you are too much of a coward to say "that's not art."Quote:
Here is a definition of art:
Unless you are incredibly inebriated while playing, Postal 2 does not fit any of these definitions. It is not thought-provoking in the least and no one can seriously call it beautiful, it's graphics were outdated on release.Quote:
1.) creation of beautiful things: the creation of beautiful or thought-provoking works, e.g. in painting, music, or writing
2.) beautiful objects: beautiful or thought-provoking works produced through creative activity
3.) branch of art: a branch or category of art, especially one of the visual arts
A bronzed turd on a neo-classical Greek pedestal fits that description. That is not art, it's a piece of shit. Postal 2 is not art, though I found it an enjoyable time-waster.Quote:
How does Postal 2 not fit this description?
Again, you make a claim without supporting it. Explain the message, the themes, and why you feel they have merit (no, a half-assed comparison to Hamlet is not explaining the merit in the themes in the game).Quote:
I do find Postal 2's message and themes to be of merit
You don't have to think Postal 2 is art--you don't have to think the piles of dirt are, either--but it's not becoming to sit here and declare things to not be art with an appeal to ignorance ("coward," indeed). Perhaps better said: you certainly don't have to _like_ it, but if you didn't understand it, that didn't mean it wasn't art.