RE: A review of “The Tragedy of GJ237b”: Is it a story? Is it a game?
This is what I had to say elsewhere about the game:
The long form description of how I feel about it, "It is an art piece that uses the language, culture and knowledge of games to make its point." That makes it somewhat more than a short story and what less than a game.
I have no problems with it being nominated as a short story in the absence of some more general category like "Best Sci-Fi Piece Written Form" Or "Best Sci-Fi Work of Artistic Expression" both of which would be weird in their own way.
Going down the path of "Is it a short story?" I have this question to ask, "How does this read to people who have no knowledge of games culture?" If you don't know what character sheets are or d12s or what generally goes on at a table with those things on it, does it still do anything for you?
For the "game" part (which I suspect is the most debated element). Here's what I've got. The text certainly describes an activity. And for something to be a "game" to me that's kind of the absolute minimum requirement. It has to be something you can do, and I can certainly do the thing described.
However, I'm not entirely sure if I would get anything more out of actually doing the activity than I would getting out of just reading it. But I don't know for certain because I haven't done it. So that's the first question, "Is enacting the activity more meaningful than just reading about it?" I don't know but I feel like that's part of what makes something a game. The DOING is required for the full experience.
I also think that there is some quality which separates a game from a recipe. Both are activities where doing results in a more meaningful experience than just reading. But there's "one more thing" that distinguishes a recipe from a game. But I'm not sure I can give voice to that thing. And my gut feeling is that "The Tragedy of GJ 237b," is also missing that thing.
Since having posted the above, I do think actually "playing" the game has value. Particularly, if what you are doing is looking at how long a small area of a given space lies undisturbed. And when it is disturbed examining why it was disturbed.
As much as I love Ben Lehman's work, The Tragedy is the exact literary equivalent of the frat boy occupation of holding a corn hole gesture by your side, waiting for someone to glance down, and then loudly proclaiming "you lost the game!"
It just takes a lot more words to get there.
I'm perfectly willing to accept that this is a piece of art, but I would be willing to accept that the childish occupation of trying to get someone to glance at your fingers in a specific combination is also a piece of art – performance art. That doesn't make it good art, and it doesn't really make it meaningful art.
Is this a story? Part of it's a story. Does it deserve to be nominated for an Nebula?
If that's the best sort of thing they have to be nominated for a Nebula, it's been a rough year.
Maybe my expectations are unreasonably high. I'm willing to accept that.
If I were feeling particularly high-handed, I might point out that the mechanics as described in the document violate every rule of consent. After all, they assume that everyone in the world is party to the game. Any of them who enter the room end the game. The side effect of the Mobius flip so executed is to essentially force everyone into the context of gameplay, no matter whether they consent to it or not. It also means that the only people who cannot reasonably play are those who consent to it, because the action of playing is to not play.
I think the best thing that I can say about this is, "it's cute." That's also the worst thing I can say.