As much as I love all the comments about remembering playing the game, I thought that the Bigelow article was far too interesting to pass up commenting on. I think that he brought up a lot of really good and valid points, even if he did go a little far from time to time.
As I hope we all realize, racism and sexism is something that is inexplicitly taught throughout our elementary and high school careers. For example: first we are taught that Christopher Columbus discovered America. Then, a little later, we find out, whoops, actually Lief Erikson actually discovered it a couple centuries before. But what about all the people who had already been there centuries before Lief, i.e. the Sioux, Cherokee, Cheyenne, etc? They must be very talented to not have “discovered” the land they had lived on for so many years.
I think this point is mostly what Bigelow is talking about. He is saying that even if school children are not taught racism and sexism outright, the higher educational means such as books and video games are still harmful in that way. Did anyone else notice that you couldn’t be a woman? Or an African-American? How could teachers not baulk at the fact that we are encouraged to avoid all contact with the Native Americans?
How was the issue of slavery just smoothed over? I wonder if teachers go through the game and explain such points. Having a game that takes place in slave states without acknowledging the terrible practices of the times is like setting a game in WWII Germany and saying, “Oh, that man with the swastika on his arm is just… the postman! Yeah, the postman, nothing unusual about him.” Perhaps the wagons weren’t sponsored if they included African Americans, but does that mean that no black man or woman ever made the trip?
The points where I think he went too far was when he was talking about how the women were underrepresented and that they, too should have a part in the game, and then went on to describe how they should be shown making flags for the Independence Day celebrations. I think I would be happy just to be the main character doing what Bigelow describes as “problems that historically fell within the male domain.” (313) Also, I don’t need a game that gives me the option to engage in violent activities with Native Americans, we don’t need to be that historically explicit, do we? Perhaps put in some dialogue about the warfare between Native and emigrant, or perhaps encourage the players to find out more about the relationships between peoples.
So what do you think? Was Bigelow too radical? Or was he just right and I am being too conservative? Or do you think that maybe racism and sexism to this extent is somewhat unavoidable and we are reading too much into what is supposed to be just an educational video game? What would you like changed in the game?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
A couple of responses to your interesting post...first, I can see your issue with the roles that Bigelow suggests for female characters...but I can also see his point that by not offering those male roles to a female character a player might feel a bit jarred in terms of their relation to the character...in that case, their dissatisfaction might encourage them to think about how they as a modern girl might relate to roles imposed on women in the past...that might only happen if such roles in a simulation are historically accurate...
The second thing I wanted to say was that I found the suggestion mentioning of the possibility of violence towards Native Americans interesting...because if done without turning it into the worst case scenario violent video game it might offer a touchstone for further comment or thought by those using the simulation...I do agree with you though that it's a touchy subject to try to directly incorporate...and I also agree that there would be ways to expose it without directly implicating the player in the violence...
Post a Comment