Is MUSH'ing literature?
Submitted by boris on Thu, 2007-07-05 08:07.
I am curious...do you consider text-based gaming literature? I'm planning on exploring this theme over the next 2 months, and hopeful arrive at an educated and informed answer.
I suspect the answer is "it depends" but what do you think? I'll share my thoughts on the matter later...
»
- boris's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Click 
I think the answer must be a
I think the answer must be a qualified no. If the majority of the time the writing is not very good, the medium doesn't qualify as literature.
You could say this is true as well of 'literary fiction', but I think although people do use the term literature to describe these kinds of books, I think what people really mean when they say literature is that writing which is good.
Eh...
I've read some stuff that's considered literature today that was written long ago and I'd hardly say it was good - but it did capture a sort of storytelling for its age.
Whether it's always high quality or not, I think MUSHes are literature because they provide a framework for evolving, interactive storytelling. Those stories can (and are, in many cases) captured in log form.
It's by no means conventional literature, the sort one would usually associate with the likes of Hemingway or Updike, but I would say that it's an eclectic niche literature in its own right.
Give a million monkeys...
... a million keyboards...
... and eventually they'll write the entire, unabridged works of Shakespeare?
I hope someone logs it when it happens... er... wait...
I seem to recall reading an article about someone working on some sort of Shakespeare RPG.
Here are some links...
* LARP
* D20
... adding a new level of hypothetical to the question.
Maybe
I think MUSHes can produce literature, but MUSHing itself or MUSHes themselves aren't literature per se.
The fundamental feature of literature is not that it is written (diaries are too), but that it is meant to be read for pleasure or edification. The fundamental feature of MUSHes is not that they are meant to be read, but to be played with - to have opportunities to one exert one's will upon the world/game/players in ways that are entertaining and conformat with the formal structure of the game.
IMHO, of course. :)
'Twas brillig..
Twas brillig and the Furry tove did MUCK and mimsy in the wame.
Or, maybe not so much edification.
Diaries are literature too...
Anne Frank, anybody? The letters of Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson?
I'd say the fundamental pleasure of literature *for the author* is that it is written, either for pleasure or edification. MUSHes provide a platform for interactive literature, with multiple authors providing different facets of the story. (The Bible, also literature, was probably also compiled by multiple authors!)
What we do in MUSHes may not always be meant to be read by people who don't MUSH - the dialogue is sometimes out of synch and the spelling isn't always the best - but logs could certainly be read, studied, analyzed like any other work of fiction.
I don't think MUSHing really
I don't think MUSHing really qualifies as literature. I have always found it a useful comparison (an on-going, collaborative book) when trying to explain the concept to complete newbies on RP games, though; even if it doesn't really apply fully, it gets the idea across.
I would disagree with Javelin's statement slightly, though; on RP MUSHes, the enjoyment is as much from reading other people's poses and reactions as it is writing your own. (Well, that's the idea, anyway; Ide makes a good point.)
It's all literature!
Yes, I'd say it's all literature. However I will also note it's not all good literature. But then, it wasn't supposed to be. Anyone can say a conversation written in a book is considered literature, yet the content might not be good either. I see no difference in, say, what's said on Pub. Of course, I'm talking about MU*ing type of text gaming.
If you wanted to be technical in all aspects of text gaming, I'd even say your Infocom ZORK based text gaming is in some form, literature. Even though, adventuring in this type, there a somewhat predictable outcome. It's the same if one is to read a book. Actually with the book, it's even more predictable.
So, I'll stick to my conclusion.
-- Nyssa
If someone wants to define
If someone wants to define literature as fictional writing, OK, but at that point what I call literature and what someone else calls literature doesn't mean the same thing.
fiction
Are you saying fiction is not literature?
For the purposes here, yes,
For the purposes here, yes, fiction is not literature.
I don't think literature technically means one thing. It can be the body of work of a time or place, like the literature of post-WWI or the literature of Shakespearean England. So in that case, sure, fiction, diaries, poetry, are literature.
But I think when Boris asked his question, in essence he asked, 'is a MUSH a body of writing of 'high artistic value'. I think this is what many people mean when they say, 'oh, you like literature'. That's what I responded to.
Well, it's incredible then
Well, it's incredible then the crap that gets published, that's called literature. Perhaps you need to be more explicit Boris. For example, The Bridges Of Madison County is considered literature, yet, my dogs have better bowel movements than the drivel that was written therein. Waller made off like a bandit on sales tho. Go figure.
Yes, Ide, that was my point. Literature wasn't meant to be one thing. And, granted, what's said on Pub isn't top material, it still can be considered literature, if applied in such manner used in a book. When it comes down to it, Literature can be derived from just about anything.
Our Mushing community can be written as it's from a time and place, as you refer to above. I do see your point however, and most scholars would laugh at me thinking MUSHing is literature. But then, I laugh at them thinking that the aformentioned book is literature.
-- Nyssa
You're right Nyssa, people
You're right Nyssa, people throw around the literature word pretty much whenever they feel like it.
I for one don't want to bury in this something that Javelin said about the OP, that the fundamental feature of a mush is that it is meant to be played with. Similar as in the medium of interactive fiction (I mean specifically the contemporary work that followed Zork and Infocom, see the IF newsgroup) it would be doing the medium a disservice to concentrate too closely on the body of work that is produced, and not the experience of its production.