Comment on Cory Arcangel - Super Mario Clouds - 2002

The features of Cory Arcangel - Super Mario Clouds - 2002:

 

 It is a copy of the original game - Mario Brothers cartridge while the inventor earse everything except the clouds . Through the video, it is obvious that the main character - Mario Brothers are missing in the clip, except for the clouds. The inventor does some experiment on the cartridge (the process is as below) and finally create the video.

Whether i consider it to be art or not?

I do not consider this gmae as art.

First of all , although the creator of this video earse the everything except the clouds and it sounds very funny, the video indeed lost the meaningful message. As a viewer, we may ask ,"What is the purpose of this video? it seems do not contain any message in the video."Compared to the oringinal video game, at least it has an interaction between the player and the game, or even the creator, through playing the game, players may express their feelings and enjoy the moment. While the Super Mario Clouds is just a video ,player cannot even play the game but just watch the clouds moving. It losts the meaning of interaction.

Opinions about whether "Digital games can be defined as Art"

In our opinions...

Key features:

Question One:
1. Inspire people to think
2. Visual enjoyment
3. Beauty (harmonious arrangement of  formal element: color, forms, style)
4. Meaning or artist's expression
5. Creativity
6.Education value

Question Two:
1. Arts last: People preserve arts as they are aesthetically interesting.
2. Arts conveys message.
3. Art has content.
4. Art has an Aesthetic.
5.Arts contains ideas.
6. Art Makes you feel somethings.
7. Art is not formulaic.

Our own opinion and Question:

For example, the famous artwork Fountain by Duchamp which is ugly and vulgar. However, it challenged the traditional value of art. It raised a question that whether everything can be art. Then, it becomes an ironic example to criticize the conservative value of arts in 19 century. Can the Fountain be an artwork even if it lack of attractive appearance but contains a message? On the other hand, the luxurious golden toilet cannot be classified as an artwork. In spite of attractive visual effect, it does not have any useful message. So, if the artwork conveys significant or important messages but against the common standard of arts, can that artwork still be claimed as Arts? Or Arts have to include a message and attractive visual effect at the same time? 

Sooben, Echo, Helen, Kayo, Rona , Jane talk about Eric Siu's "Touchy"

 

 
Eric Siu