A significant potion of my entertainment life is and has been devoted to video games. I can't remember a time in my life that didn't involve at least some light gaming. Video games have largely shaped who I am. What I always felt the most were the characters and plotlines; I am still a little boy in many ways, I have never outgrown the desire to be a superhero.
My favorite video games were never of the cash cow ultraviolence variety. My favorite video games always involved saving the princess, and ridding the world of malevolence. Granted, most video games can't operate without some fomr of violence, but in these more heroic escapades, aggression was the means, not the end. I never left feeling that strength, brutality, and superior force were the admirable traits to absorb, but rather the selflessness, courage, and overall goodness of the heroes I worshipped. Reflecting on my 5 favorite video games ever [in no particular order]:
>Zelda II: The Adventure of Link
>Super Mario Brothers 3
>Mega Man 3
>Sonic the Hedgehog 3
>Shining Force
It becomes apparent that all of these games follow the same motivational formula, for not only the characters, but the perceptive player: "Someone or something is causing undue harm to a person, a people, or a world. I should do something about it." I would say that this is an important civic standpoint. Using Zelda II [or any other game in the Zelda series] as an example, The main character is named Link. In each game, Link will wake up one day to find trouble befalling his village, his world, or his Princess Zelda. Link does not hesitate, does not calculate, does not fear, does not consider the benefits to himself. Link sees that people need help, and sets off to do everything he can to help them. Not once does he consider profit, or fame, or any other selfish trappings. He simply does all he can for all others.
I cannot see any quality more deserving of emulation than that kind of compassion. Characters and situations like that are why I play video games; because in such fantasies can I save the world, which in my legitimate life, is a relatively impossible thing. Our society is not set up for such situations or heroes, and perhaps that is for the better.
Either way, mythological hero figures allow me to tap into the mystical, heroic part of my soul, an ancient aspect of our collective unconscious makeups, a common thread in all religion and fable.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Role Models.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I admire what it is you admire about Link, but I've always had a theory...
Legends, (as in the legend of Zelda) are stories told over and over again, and often become distorted versions of the truth. Link has always been a silent protagonist with no lines or dialogue to give him voice, or voice his opinions, conventions or whatever.
Perhaps LoZ isn't an accurate representation of the events that might have actually happened, but the retelling of the same legend. As it gets retold, elements change that can change the meaning of the story.
Until Windwaker, I had a theory that every Zelda game was the same. Not just in formula, but in the source material, that they all told the same story with a different warped truth. One person might claim that Link had the power to transform into a wolf while another claims he had the power to travel through time. The creator says there is a document somewhere with the complete timeline laid out in a way that makes sense.
The glorification and benevolence of Link, as well as his total lack of dialogue and personality can be explained this way as well. Through the ages, it was forgotten what he might have said or done, and so we glorify him based on the ends he helped create: a saved and peaceful world.
Nobody knows the real Link because nobody remembers.
Perhaps he was a goron or zora racist?
Is the story of Link and Zelda one of continual incest? Or are the generations not confined to a single bloodline? Or maybe they didn't have that kind of relationship. Maybe link was homosexual?
I be crushin' your innocence!
It's a good theory, but you forget that the phrase "the legend of Zelda" does not refer to the events in the course of the games, but rather the simple idea that Ganon kidnaps Zelda, and thus hyrule is threatened. The first game displays the whole text with the title screen. Therefore, while your theory that it is a story told over and over again, and therefore the truth is distorted and Link loses his benevolence is clever, there's no evidence to support it, because in this case, "legend" refers to the world's predicament, not the history of how it is solved.
Post a Comment