Network now...NEWS
Artist Pulls Controversial 9/11 Game Exhibit
By Kris Graft
August 22, 2008
See also:
Related Articles:
"The American response to this work has been, frankly, immature, and lacking the sophistication and consideration that other parts of the world have so far shown the work."
After a negative reaction, generally from U.S. citizens, French-American artist Douglas Edric Stanley on Friday decided to turn off his Space Invaders-inspired interactive art piece Invaders!, which featured an extra-terrestrial attack on the Twin Towers.
Stanley, who was born and raised in Silicon Valley before moving to France, said in his personal blog, "After three days of a steady downward spiral in public discussion of the piece, I have just given my agreement to the organizers of the Leipzig Games Convention to simply turn off the installation Invaders!"
After finding its way onto the Internet via reports out of the Leipzig Games Convention in Germany, message board posters, as well as posters on Douglas' blog, have called his work insensitive and accused him of cheap attention-grabbing tactics.
"While I take full responsibility for the uncomfortable ambiguity of certain aspects of this work, it was never created to merely provoke controversy for controversy’s sake, and unfortunately, this is what the piece has now become," he said.
The interactive exhibit features the pixelated World Trade Center towers, with aliens descending upon the buildings, which fall no matter how gamers play. Occupants are also shown jumping from the buildings.
Stanley added, "The American response to this work has been, frankly, immature, and lacking the sophistication and consideration that other parts of the world have so far shown the work.
"Contrary to previous reports, I am an American, and it saddens me that we as a people remain so profoundly unable to process this event outside of some obscure, but tacitly understood, criteria of purely anesthetized artistic representation."
He said that event organizers at Leipziger-Messe did not force him out, and instead have offered him support.
In a Twitter entry, he said, "I've just given permission to turn off the piece. This will undoubtedly fuel a whole new cycle."
Space Invaders developer Taito also said Friday that it is exploring the possibility of suing for copyright infringement.
Although the exhibit has caused controversy this week from Leipzig GC, it originally debuted in 2001 shortly after the World Trade Center tragedy.
I did not see as much furor over the recent game "Muslim Massacre"....which has players trying to kill as many Muslims as they can. I see this game crossing the line into "hate games". I do find this game in extremely bad taste and yes, it should get some backlash....but certainly not as much over other "hate games" that exist out on the market.
"Disappointing" is really the only word I can use to label this piece of work.
At it's best, Stanley's work is poorly thought-out, totally oblivious to his source material and just flat-out LAZY. Maybe I am missing a message that exists on a higher level that Stanley has either concealed beyond recognition or simply is not equipped to express, but this is a missed opportunity to have connected the mechanics expressed by Space Invaders with the reality and nature of the events of September 11, 2001 along with the nature of the war on "terror".
At it's worst, it's a cheap, amateur piece that shamelessly rides the rising popularity of videogames while exploiting a still open-wound in the psyche of the American and international community. This piece does little to put a spotlight on what could have potentially been a powerful comparison between the futility of Space Invades and the international efforts to combat terror with conventional tactics. Instead, it is a muddled, chimerical, clumsy almagam of pop culture and recent events.
If Stanley has an ounce of videogame history and vocabulary, he certainly doesn't express it. There is so much great material to work with, and it's almost as if he just cut the tongue out of the buffallo and threw the rest away. Making this material work as a critical success to both high art and the general populace would have been EASY, but somehow, Stanley has appeared to let sensationalism and his own ignorance prevail.
I know very little about Stanley, but this piece has pretty much made me lump him into the annoying and vacuous community of artsy bullshitters who do nothing but wave their hands in front of games they've never played while calling themselves pioneers of some new, imaginary medium.
Controversy for controversy's sake is a sheer sign of vanity, caprice and artistic shalowness.
Found by MTV Multiplayer, a text file in the press materials for the exhibit noting the “Space Invaders” publisher had never signed off.
“”The artwork “invaders!” is not approved by Square Enix/ Taito,” read the short note.
Whether Computer Game Museum Berlin or artist Douglas Edric Stanley [or the GC for misrepresenting the installation] will face any of the legal challenges threatened this morning remains to be seen.
This statement is incredibly telling - regarding the availability of the code, the artists web site had ran a comment "making available" the content, but as with all things on that site it has been removed. I am now told that GC, the Museum and artist are not answering any questions and awaiting legal action from Taito... och!
what your saying is that you are basing your accusation on hear say. Glad to find out I can disregard everything you say.
Well, let's face it. He thought it was cute or somehow clever to combine Space Invaders and 9/11. There's no deeper message here. 9/11 is a tragedy, no matter who was involved or the cause of it.
I'm glad, though, that event organizers found it tasteful enough to offer support. Maybe they're upset that they're government says they can't play Gears of War? I don't know.
Art can be controversial, but it can also be intellectual. Although, illegally using an intellectual property may not be the way to go, Mr. Stanley.
Can we all avoid repeating the lie from the 'artist' that he pulled the installation because of adverse American comments.
He pulled the work after Taito sent a legal letter to the GC and museum in Berlin and released a press statement that they were not happy and evaluating a suit.
Now we find out that he had planned to dupe copies of the 'game' and sell them at the museum and GC - and all of a sudden everyone is very quiet!
Please show some proof that he planned on selling copies of this game. No where I have read say that. You are the first to accuse him of it.
Most Americans yet again set a good example of freedom for Iraq and show their intolerance and hate for any art that isn't Elvis on a velvet canvas or a bald eagle with an offensive amount of red white and blue..
German - if you think that Taito should sue purely for IP infringement why even add "specially (sic) for such a sensitive subject" and then follow this up with such a nonsensical paragraph?
What I meant is that if you take someone IP without permission is bad, but lets say you use it to show a metaphor on education or whatever. The company who owns the IP will come out with a cease and desist order and no harm done but here the 9/11 topic is sure to bring besides controversy, bad publicity and association with the Taito brand.
I think art is...ART and sometimes needs to be controversial in order to start conversations. We must take care to not make the tragedy of Sept 11th be deified as something above commentary or interpretation. (I don't think humor will ever be an issue because, even years later...how many jokes about Pearl Harbor were there?) Art doesn't have to be "sensitive" or even "rational" because it's a creative form of expression. Everyone has the right to be outraged and complain...just as the artist has a right to create whatever he wants...even if it offends some. The artist DOES has to accept the consequences. I think he should NOT have turned it off, but rather, let those who learn about it observe and judge for themselves. The thing about censorship is, it cannot be selective. If it is, then you must change the word to "hypocrisy."
I hope Taito sues this guy for a ton of money, not because the controversy part but for the use of their intellectual property with out their consent specially for such a sensitive subject.
If I want to make a statement I will do it subjecting myself liable but no one else, Taito is a company that created this game to provide fun and nothing else, he should have asked them first, and since its pretty obvious that he was going to get a negative answer he should put his so called creativity to work and create a game that will fit his purpose. If you are copying a game that is more than 20 years old it shouldn't be that hard to program.