Article Review On Video Games Can Never Be Art (Essay Sample)

Name:
Professor:
Course:
Date:
Rhetorical analysis
Roger Ebert’s article “Video Games Can Never Be Art” was published in April 16, 2010 on Roger Eberts Journal. In this article Ebert attempts to expound on why he believes that video games can never be art. He does this by critiquing a Ted video of Kellee Santiago. He refuses to believe that as much as games can be fun and extremely rewarding on the side of the player, it is so unfair that they will be put in parallel position with great art work. Smuts, reiterates this position in his article ‘are video Games Art?’ “Games can be fun but they do offer the intricacy that evokes emotions in the same way art does, (2005). Ebert shows in the article,his skepticism towards video evolving. Through the article Ebert aims to strengthen his position by using arguments brought forward by those who oppose his view on video games will never be art..
His credibility in the article stems from him using a number of sources that can be considered reliable and dependable. To start with, Ebert is a renowned critique of many works such as cinemas and movies. He was also the first movie critic to win a Pulitzer Prize. He has chosen a TED video to be the foundation for his argument. TED Talks provide a large pool of accurate resources that individuals can retrieve and use for their personal endeavors. He also uses the works of Plato and Aristotle in bringing his perception alive. These two philosophers are influential because of the contribution they made to ancient Greek and thus are reliable sources to cited.
To begin his argument, Ebert starts by narrating a brief background of why he is writing the article. He reveals how hesitant he was in clarifying and giving more information on his position about “Video Games Should Never be Art”. After persuasion from one gentleman, he decides to watch a Ted Video talk which he has used in this article to present his arguments.
To further elaborate on his argument, Ebert introduces the concept of defining art as a great determinant that can influence a person to categorize video as an art. He quotes the definition as given by two great Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle. Plato and Aristotle define art as “ art is the imitation of nature”. Other writers define art as “work that is designed to elicit emotions” (Folkerts, pp2, 2011). Ebert himself ascribes to a different definition of art, he also cites other definitions like Seneca and Cicero agree with the Wikipedia definition that works and games are two distinct things. The reader can therefore easily deduce that definition of art or Video is subjective and can give a wrong impression of whether to compare art with video or not. Based on this, Ebert disqualifies Santiago use of definition to liken video with art.
His first argument for “video games can never be art” is based on Kellee Santiago’s presentation. First, Satiago has assented to the view of Ebert, where he stated that he his yet to find evidence that suggests videos can be likened to art. “No one in or out of the field has ever been able to cite a game worthy of comparison with the great poets, filmmakers, novelists and poets." (Ebert). Santiago also seems to acknowledge that indeed even chess, baseball are not art even though she seems to incorporate them to her argument. “Chess, football, baseball and mah-jong cannot be art, however elegant their rules”
Contrary to the opinion of Santiago, Ebert does not believe that videos will gradually evolve and finally be celebrated as an art. Ebert uses the support of Werner Herzog, who is an accomplished screenwriter and film director to argue on this point.
Santiago uses a number of benefits to persuade her audience of how Video games are crucial in promoting good interpersonal relationships, she also indicated how one can reflect on their personal mistakes and possibly remedy them by just playing video games. “There is a social benefit associated with playing games since most games require a partner...