fira-pi

[fira-pi]

The Last of Us

Unlike the other games we played in this class, in The Last of Us the plot is important. But, moreover, it is interesting, you get attached to characters and you are invested in their story. That is why this is one of not that many games that is pleasurable to watch, it is almost as if watching a movie.

Just like with previous games, as a watcher when it comes to the moment of actively playing and you can’t it is kind of boring. In moments when the player can’t figure out what to do, it gets boring. And, honestly, as much as I love the plot, sometimes characters talk and walk too slowly.

I feel that with video games where the plot line players an important role, you pay much more attention to cinematic elements. Mostly because you start to feel like the main character, but also because they are important for finishing the game successfully. It is different from watching a movie because you actually can do something , you feel like you are not playing the game but in the game.

I see The Last of Us as a story of potential “what if”. With technologies getting smarter and us as a society pushing the boundaries of nature, there is no way of knowing what will happen. I feel that in a way The Last of Us is a reminder that we have to be aware of what we are doing, it is almost a warning. But also it shows true colors of people. It makes you think what would you actually do in situation like that. It is easy to assume you are going to stay strong but in reality who knows. It is almost like on social media we are one person but in real life we can be totally different.

[fira-pi]

Slaughterhouse-five

I picked this movement specifically because that was the first time he “came unstuck in time”. He jumps from the moment he meets Weary and “The Three Musketeers” to his conversation with his mom in the hospital, where she complains about getting old. It is interesting because when Billy describes Weary, he says that he has a baby face, and then he jumps to the idea of getting old. And after that moment, he jumps to him, getting extremely drunk on New Year’s Eve. In the moment with Weary and his mother, he is still not in the darkest moments of his life, but kind of right before that. His mom is in bad condition but still alive, and so as is his wife. Weary is bragging about not dying in war. Some people have already died; they are in Dresden, but Weary is still alive. However, those are the moments when he realizes that the war is real and that his mom is actually dying. Those are the moments he felt the weight of adulthood on himself.

In this moment, it’s his daughter’s wedding and he goes to the basement to get something, sees the champagne that he wants to drink, and then notices a TV with a war movie. This part is particularly interesting because he talks about airplanes and holes, and then the story switches to his time with Traflamadores. The movie triggered his memory, and it seems like the moment he thinks about war or the plane crash, his mind tries to protect him by sending him to aliens. And it is especially interesting that in that moment, champagne was “talking to him,” referring to his issues with drinking. I feel like this switch is a good example of how messed up everything in his brain is, how confused he is. 

[fira-pi]

Undertale

There is a nostalgic feeling to he game since it is designed to mimic older arcade games. It is also quite weird, therefore, it is fun to try to figure out what is going on.

But as a watcher, you can be interested in others playing only for so long. After you get the general idea of the game, and unless something crazy happens, there is kind of no reason to keep following the game. 

 Honestly, I feel it is just a reflection of our world. The game is not that old, when it came it became more common to talk about mental problems and all that stuff. So, from my perspective, the game just allows you to go into the space where you can find something you can relate to and get treated with kindness. 

With the game, the idea is not always that clear, because to begin with games are seen as easy entertainment. When books are a symbol of intellect. Therefore, I don’t think trying to find a deeper meaning behind a video game is even that common. A lot of people don’t even care about the storyline in a game, some games don’t even really have a plot. But I feel that now I pay more attention to the mechanics of games. I haven’t really done that before.

[fira-pi]

Katamari

It is funny to see how people react to things the King says because they are so out of pocket. The game itself is not that complicated, and it is very unhinged and unserious. That is why it is pleasurable to see people’s emotions on the spot.

When players start the process of growing Katamari by rolling it around, it is pretty boring to observe since there is almost nothing unexpected that can happen.

The whole book was about consumerism taking over the world, and the “footage” being something very different and exciting. And I feel that, in a way, this game is similar to that “footage” in its grotesqueness and uniqueness. Most of the games at that time had similar ideas and color pallets but Katamari feels very different, almost as an answer to the seriousness of other games.

Honestly, I feel that the whole “meaning” of the game is to be as ridiculous as possible and as simple as possible. It is a reminder that not everything is serious. But also when you roll Katamari, you play on “Earth” among very common objects that we don’t usually pay attention to, and I believe it is also an important part of it. It makes us look at those objects again and think about regular things as something potentially special. 

[fira-pi]

The Witness

The most pleasurable thing about The Witness, especially in comparison to Pac-Man, is how much freedom you have playing that game. And because there is no time limit as a viewer, you can have more involvement in the process, you can give suggestions on how to solve a puzzle on the screen.

As a player, I find it not that boring, but it is confusing sometimes. Because there is no linear way about that game, it is easy to get lost. Also, in a way it is a bit too quiet. There is no one else in the game, and there are no actions. 

When I try to remember what was happening in the States at that time, it’s hard. Especially after COVID, 2008, and even now, nothing seems too bad. But realistically that is when Trump became a president. People could just watch, observe how the new president was getting power. People started to get separated. Just like in the game, there are a bunch of quests that you have to solve, some of them are connected, some of them are not.

4. PS4 is very alienating, it seems like something that doesn’t belong to our world. It is very manufactured, artificial. But also, it makes us be more disconnected from the reality or the people around us. It looks almost like a protection car for presidents. It isolates you similar to how separated people are now.

5.  I feel it is a commentary on how isolating politics are now, how separated we as a society are. All we can do is to observe. In the game, you have to solve puzzles, but you do it on your own, there is no sense of community, and it feels like the game is not leading anywhere. One of the best parts about games is the ability to play with others online, but in this game you are all alone.

[fira-pi]

The most pleasurable part about playing Pacman is the feeling of being in another decade. That game lets you escape newer roleplay games and convince yourself that you are in 80s. It is fun to see how people believe they can outsmart little ghosts and then get eaten almost immediately. When I see others play I envy how dissociated they are but when I play I don’t care. 

The most boring thing is how limited you are. If you play for a long time it all seems the same. Quiet honestly it is the same with observing someone else playing. The motions and reactions are the same. You know for sure they will die and you know what they will even say about that.

The United States at that time was interested in seeing other words, there was a cultural exchange. And I think this is why the game was so popular, it was from a different place. Americans had a chance to try and see what people in Japan played at. Pacman doesn’t require an understanding of the language, however, it allows everyone to talk. You don’t need to be able to read to understand that someone dies in Pacman and how frustrated the player is. The game brings people together.

However, something I have been thinking about is how simple the game is and how much it limits the player. You believe you have so many ways to escape destiny but in reality, those ghosts will find you either way. Yes, you can in any direction but only in directions that were set there for you. I feel it is similar to how censorship in media works. You can say whatever you want but on very specific topics.

[fira-pi]

Herland 2.0

 In this passage I want to concentrate not on hats or the decorative aspect of them, but specifically on feathers. The men from our land suggest women of Herland put feathers in their hats and the question women ask is if men do the same thing. The answer is obviously no, besides native americans. Feathers come from birds and their wings, both represent the ability to fly and therefore freedom. Putting feathers in your hat to make it “pretty” is the same as cutting off birds wings and wearing them as a necklace. It represents neglecting your freedom, it appears like you have it, you “wear” it but in reality it is just an accessoar, something you cannot use. From my perspective, in this little moment Gilman talks about the issue of women having their freedom from men. Men don’t wear feathers, it is “too feminine”, of course, it is. Unlike women in our reality men have more liberties than women. And that is also why I find it interesting that Gilman mentions Native Americans and even refers to them as “Indians” or “savages”. It represents how colonizers saw Indigenous people as someone who didn’t deserve freedom, they can only “technically” have it in the form of feathers but not really. And I feel this was one of the first times citizens of Herland started to notice how women in the rest of the world get treated. Men see them as birds in cages, the cages men build. 

 “Ladyland” and “Feminisia” are the two names that stood out the most to me as they show how Terry objectifies women in general, as a group. “Lady” in “Ladyland” gives the idea of softness, “lady” is something close to a title, something that belongs to long cake-like dresses and ballrooms. As a woman I feel that when we get addressed as "lady” people put a lot of softness in that word, as if we are something fragile. And that is how Terry sees women, almost as a decor, something nice to look at. And we can see that throughout the story how he was excited about seeing younger women because they are “more attractive”. Similar to that, “Feminisia” implies that the land belongs to something “feminine”, but a woman doesn’t equal feminine necessarily. Women of herland are more masculine, according to the narrator. “Feminisia” reminds me of the old Disney cartoon “Fantasia”, something from the imagination, how good it is. And it corresponds to Terry’s thought process, women equals feminine, equals soft and delicate, equals easy to concur. “Woman Country” appears to be more like a simple fact, it is a country that belongs to women. However, it is interesting that they use “country” specifically. A country is something systematic, it is something familiar to those men. It feels almost as if they don’t understand how Herland works but yet they try to fit them into their system. Where there is always a country, it is pretty close to taking away from Herland its uniqueness and grandness. “Herland” is similar to “Woman Country” but it adds some ambiguity to it. And, to be honest, when I read the title first I didn’t put two and two together, I didn’t make the connection to “her” at first. In my opinion, it gives that name more power, the women of Herland understand they are different but they also don’t care about that too much. Besides that they talk a lot about their Goddess and motherhood in general. I feel that when they say “Herland” they don’t use “her” to represent the women or feminine aspect of their country, they almost literally say it is the land that belongs to her, the Goddess.

[fira-pi]

Herland

A traveller 

A local

A not-local

I feel the main difference between “a traveller” and “a not-local” in relation to myself is the perspective. A traveller is someone who chooses to go to different places, however, someone who is not local is a role that others assign you. It is someone who no matter how many years they live in one place, they will never be “local” no matter how hard they try. And that’s how I feel sometimes. I like to call myself a traveller, however, I also have been living in the same place for quite a while now and yet I’m not local, that’s the first thing people notice me and that’s how they see me. 

Honestly, this passage is quite simply funny, the way those women see dogs. But also, I think it is curious how much time in the book was dedicated to their conversation about cats and dogs. That’s a pretty common comparison, men to women, just like dogs to cats. I feel that the whole conversation was about that, how different they are. And how women from Herland obviously are more civilized than men from the US. 

I think that Terry would concentrate on the word “prisoner” and would try to sarcastically remark how he is a prisoner in their country. He would compare himself to a dog and women to themselves, trying to make them feel guilty. 

He probably would also concentrate on women from Herland bringing up the point of dogs being prisoners. However, he would be more curious about that point of you and would try to see whether they have a point and if maybe that needs to be changed. 

Herlanders would most likely ignore Terry and his snarky comments, they don’t see this kind of behavior as important to respond to. They would be more curious at Jeff’s reaction, trying to figure out why he feels guilty. 

Just like dogs in the US, I am just who I am. However, who I am changes depending on who the viewer is. Some people would see me as someone who doesn’t belong to their place, but others would see me as simply someone who is interested in different perspectives as well as they would see me as someone who has knowledge to offer. It’s all the matter of perspective,

5.

[fira-pi]

Liberation Day

In Liberation Day, we see how Jeremy and Mrs. U have some sort of romantic relationship, however, she technically enslaves him. It almost seems like Stockholm Syndrome, when the victim falls in love with the person who captured them. He talks about how he feels comfort when he is around her and how she loves being around him because he is “pinionated”, not like everyone else. In reality, however, he is barely different from anyone else. It shows the relationship of power. Mrs. U enjoys seeing someone who is so deep in the system that they think they are out of it. 

Their relationship represents how people tend to glorify the very system that restrains them. We believe that we are different because we have our original thoughts, but is that actually true? When we rebel, where do we show our opposition? Social media. Because we are the ones who post things there, we think we are in charge, and we think we can do whatever we want. But in reality, it is still a business, a platform that is usually, in one way or another, censored and sponsored by the government. Any social media platform collects our data, and then they profit from our engagement on those platforms. And we romanticize using them because we say whatever we want. Because finding a different way would be too hard. It is good for everyone; we feel satisfaction from thinking we are in control, and people above can relax because we take off our anger through videos and posts online instead of actions in real life. 

If Mrs. U is social media then who is Mr. U. In the story, the majority of times we don’t see his full name, only “U”. And it makes the reader uncomfortable because it sounds like “you”. Is the author trying to talk to us directly or just holding up a mirror? 

Mr. U is the man behind the curtains; he is the one who orchestrates everything and everyone, and he decides what is entertaining and what is not. It is up to him which stories get told and which ones get silenced and forgotten. If not for this “U,” it would be so easy to say that it is the government or people with money and power or literally anyone but us. However, maybe he is us. He is the algorithm that decides what we see and value. In a way, our actions and online searches create the algorithm. We talk about culture, art, and even historical events online at the expense of other stories being forgotten. Instead of discussing something actually important, we talk about Grammys and Super Bowl, how different we are from Mr. U actually? 

[fira-pi]

Documentary Realism and Fictional Realism

I picked this picture because it, in a way, reminded me of Maggie and her brother. The brother tries to protect his sister in his own way. And even though the girl's robe is so bright, she obviously still has some light saved in her despite the depressing and grey environment around her. 

There is always a difference between reading fiction and something that actually happened. The story we encountered in“Maggie” was brutal and dark, however, it was not far from what actually could have happened. People tend to downsize real historical events because they can be too hard to process, or if we read about something that actually has happened, we don’t keep it in our minds for too long unless it was utterly unique. And I feel that is why Crane preferred fiction; it has more freedom. You can add details to a story to make it more memorable and hide away the ones that would steal attention from the main idea. Maggie feels so strongly surreal that it leaves a mark on the reader. Even when we read fiction, we still relate to the characters and the plot. Fiction, most of the time, is still based on real events and one particular idea, a moral of a story; however, using fiction writing techniques helps readers to feel safer because they can pretend it is not real.

[fira-pi]

Maggie

[...unfit to hold his dignity, the attribute of a supreme warrior]

…unfit to hold his dignity, the attribute of a supreme fighter

Crane chooses the word “warrior” to describe how Maggie sees Pete, by switching it to “fighter” we are shifting that perspective. These words are very similar and almost always carry the same meaning, but not in this case. Fighter, especially in this case, is someone who belongs to the streets. It has a more informal and aggressive meaning hidden in it. In the world of the story everyone fights, it is nothing special. Warrior is something from fantasy books, almost like a knight, someone honest. Anyone can be a fighter, but to be a warrior you have to deserve that right. 

Considering that here we see Maggie’s perspective, it is a crucial distinction between a fighter and a warrior. She despises her brother for fighting; she hates it. But she calls Pete a “warrior”; there is a difference. She sees him as someone honorable and special; she would never compare him to her brother. All his violence she considers justified in her head, well reasoned. It is a small change in wording that makes a huge difference for her. 

[fira-pi]

Offloading for Mrs. Schwartz

[Then I’m a paunchy guy in a room, with a note pinned to his sleeve]

Then I’m a paunchy guy in a room, with a letter pinned to his sleeve

A letter is a form of communication that we usually get from someone else, most of times it is an update on current events in life that we want to share with someone else. Or sometimes we leave letters for someone to explain certain things, either way a letter requires an addresser and a sender. When you change the word “note” to “letter” it makes you think that someone left a letter to the narrator, he got someone in his life who would send him a letter when if you leave the word “note” in the original sentence, it is clear he left for himself. He doesn’t have anyone in his life caring enough about him to send him a whole letter. 

However, the reason why I believe that the choice of putting “note” in that sentence was crucial is because it gives us a sense of how little he cared about his own memories. A note is always something small, relatively urgent but yet you cannot go descriptive in a note, you barely can fit a full compound sentence there, obviously not a recollection of everything that happened to someone in a few decades. A note is something we leave for ourselves as a reminder to do something. And essentially the narrator did that, he left himself a reminder of what he should be doing. But you cannot leave a note to remember what happened in the past. That specific word in that passage only highlights how the narrator was eager to forget everything and as much as he valued the loss of memories in other people, he didn’t value his own loss. 

[fira-pi]

THE DREADED FIRST POST

Utopian. I chose one of my new sketchbook. When I was reading the definition of “utopian” I came across with the origin of the word which is coming from two Greek words topos and ou, that literally mean “place” and “no”. The idea is that utopia is not a real place, not existing, something so pure it is unachivable. And I thought how when you look at the clean piece of paper you see possibilities, as an artist I imagine how the final work will be amazing, however, it is not on paper yet. The whole beauty of the blank canvas is that it is not ruined at the beginning, it is perfect, you even afraid to touch it. Most of times I am terrified to start working in a new sketchbook because I don’t want to mess it up. But it is still my place of comfort, the idea of starting everything from the beginning but differently. 

Realistic. For that term I chose a mechanical pencil, it is practical, you need to do extra manuvares to make it work. It is something I need daily to be able to create anything, I need to consider what it can do, how long it will last and so on. It reminds me of all the work I need to do and it is something I can convey what I see or feel with. But also it reminds of one part of the definition of “realistic”: “ “rendered to appear natural”. Mechanical pencil looks like a pen, it blends in, however, it is a pencil. It is convenient because it doesn’t break like regular pencils but it still tries to take a form of something familiar to us, a pen. 

When it comes to looking at those objects outside of my space and in the context of the topic of the relationship between “utopian” and “realistic”, they make a perfect example of how our society works. Imagine you give a piece of paper and a mechanical pencil to someone, what will be the first thing they do? They will scribble something on the piece pf paper. They will “ruin” the perfectly clean canvas without even looking at it. Believe when I say, it is not possible to keep a piece of paper blank forever, the moment you take it out. You will always accidentally leave a mark on it or fold it in a wrong place. That is how I see the idea of “utopia”. Every utopian idea is perfect when it is an idea but sooner or later it has to meet reality, people. The piece of paper will not mean anything unless you add something to it. And that’s the risk we take, we put things to the paper, hoping, it will turn out fine, the negative and positive spaces will work together. We cannot keep something pure forever but we can hope to mess it up in a beautiful way or at least not to make it ugly.

[fira-pi]

THE DREADED FIRST POST

Culture. As it was described in one of definitions of “culture”, it is “the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterize an institution or organization”. I believe that the best thing in my room that fits that is my student ID. It represents how I belong to a specific group of people, intellectuals one might say, that share the goal to get a higher education. I picked this university because I liked its aesthetics and values. Simply by having it, I am already a part of a group of the society, we are different, yet we belong to one group. It gives others the understanding whether I belong to them or not. 

Media. It took me a long time to pick the perfect object in my room to represent “media” until I came across with the definition of that word based on Modern Latin “the middle coat”. In the context, it meant literally the middle coat, but in my head, it gave an idea of how media is simply something that takes your information and keeps it sorted out. We think it is protected because we are the ones who add things to it and we put a lot of precious stuff like our information. However, realistically it easily can be “stolen” and used against us. I think that just like social media gives people a bit of understanding of who I am and where I come from, my wallet functions similarly, people see it, they see my credit card with the logo of my favorite hockey team on it or a polaroid picture of me and my family. It has a lot of random things in it, however, it makes it look organized. 

If I put those objects out of my space, they still withhold my information. Out of context, my student ID still will give others an idea of who I am, however, it is always in my wallet, and people will look at it through the prism of everything else it is surrounded by. Having a wallet and keeping important objects there makes us put everything into categories similar to how nowadays we are forced to put ourselves and our identities into groups because the media told us. Culture is still culture without media, just like my student ID still has my information without it being in the wallet, but take everything out of my wallet and it gives you nothing, similar to media that will not function unless we provide it with culture, context, something to work from.