Video Game Bioshock As a Criticism of Ayn Rand's Objectivism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis No 3577 Literatura i Kultura Popularna XIX, Wrocław 2013 Jakub Krogulec Uniwersytet Wrocławski Popular culture’s take on modern philosophy: Video game Bioshock as a criticism of Ayn Rand’s objectivism Literature and academia have always stood at the forefront of ideological and philosophical debates, but the rise of post-modernism gave birth to new critic- al media that incorporate equally deep and comprehensive studies of values and ideas. After all, post-modernism is a period of freedom of choice that obliterates cultural boundaries.1 It is a cultural phenomenon that thrives on plurality and sub- jectivity, introducing new notions, new views and re-interpreting old traditions. As Jean-François Lyotard defi nes it, it is a state in which you listen to reggae; you watch a western; you eat McDonald’s at midday and local cuisine at night; you wear Paris perfume in Tokyo and dress retro in Hong Kong […]. Together, artist, gallery owner, critic, and public indulge one another in the Anything Goes — it is time to relax.2 It is also a movement that roots itself in the ideals of capitalism and effi ciency. One of the fi rst thinkers to notice this attribute was again Jean-Francois Lyotard. In his Postmodern Condition, he emphasises that at the time of postmodernity the question (overt or implied) now asked by the professionalist student, the State, or institu- tions of higher education is no longer “Is it true?” but “What use is it?” In the context of the mercantilisation of knowledge, more often than not this question is equivalent to: “Is it sale- able?” And in the context of power-growth: “Is it effi cient?”3 To be post-modern is thus to effi ciently incorporate elements of various cul- tures and individually assemble oneself through them. From this perspective there is hardly a more explicit post-modern medium of narration than a video game. 1 P. Malpas, The Postmodern, London-New York 2005, p. 5. 2 J.-F. Lyotard, The Postmodern Explained. Correspondence 1982–1985, Sydney 1992, p. 8. 3 J.-F. Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Manchester 1984, p. 51. Literatura i Kultura Popularna XIX, 2013 © for this edition by CNS LLiKP_19.inddiKP_19.indd 7799 22014-07-30014-07-30 114:15:094:15:09 80 Jakub Krogulec Video games are products that exist beyond cultural conventions adopting a vis- ual, audio, written and, most importantly, interactive mode of communication. They are accessible and entertaining. Being creations of the technological ad- vancements of the second half of the twentieth century, they are a truly post-mod- ern form of popular culture that dares to challenge mainstream literature, plastic arts and fi lm as a new platform for conveying ideological, critical and philosoph- ical discourse. As such, one of the fi rst examples of a video game that fl aunts its post-modern structure is perhaps Bioshock, developed by Irrational Games and written by Ken Levine. The game is a peculiar example of a title that aside from being a product of widely defi ned popular culture is also a “powerful critique of objectivism,”4 as established by Joseph Packer in The Battle for Galt’s Gulch: Bioshock as Critique of Objectivism. However, whereas the text by Packer and also another one by Grant Tavinor — Bioshock and the Art of Rapture — focus on the visuality and procedural rhet- oric of the game, the primary concern of the following paper is to analyse the in- game narrative and character backgrounds, to illustrate how they: paraphrase the major tenets of Randian philosophy, criticise them, and in the process transform Bioshock into a post-modern form of narration that independently of the academic discourse engages in ethical, political and philosophical debate. Objectivist philosophy, the main concern of Bioshock’s criticism, is a cre- ation of Ayn Rand (1905–1982) — full name Alissa Zinovien Rosenbaum — an American novelist who initiated her doctrine in 1957 with the publication of Atlas Shrugged. Ever since its emergence, objectivist philosophy has caused much con- troversy and opposition among members of academia, while at the same time gaining popularity with college students in the United States.5 The outspoken crit- ics of objectivism — such as Michael Huemer, Scott Ryan, Albert Ellis, Noam Chomsky or John Kenneth Galbraith, for example — emphasise its hostility to- wards altruism, socialism and conservatism, arguing that the Randian views on integrity, individuality, independence, selfi shness and the right to self-defi nition intrude upon the freedom of other individuals. Even though the criticism of ob- jectivism outlined in Bioshock starts with observations made earlier by Huemar, Ryan and Ellis, it quickly ventures much deeper, incorporating Rand’s biography and transforming each tenet of her philosophy into a narrative representation, at the same time retaining the video game structure and its incorporation of audible, visual and interactive aspects. Rand’s philosophical doctrine relies on four main principles: reality as a meta- physical foundation, reason as an epistemological base, self-interest as a leading ethical notion and capitalism as the primary political idea. 4 J. Packer, ‘The battle for Galt’s Gulch: Bioshock as critique of Objectivism’, Journal of Gaming and Virtual Worlds 2, 2010, no. 3, p. 209. 5 Ayn Rand, [entry in:] Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. E. Craig, London-New York 1998. Literatura i Kultura Popularna XIX, 2013 © for this edition by CNS LLiKP_19.inddiKP_19.indd 8800 22014-07-30014-07-30 114:15:104:15:10 Popular culture’s take on modern philosophy 81 In Rand’s words, “nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed” thus “reality exists as an objective absolute — facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.”6 The metaphysical foundations of the objectivist philoso- phy rely on the notion that “something exists which one perceives and that one exists possessing consciousness, consciousness being the faculty of perceiving that which exists. If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness: a conscious- ness with nothing to be conscious of is a contradiction in terms.”7 Reality in the objectivist doctrine is thus the most basic unit governing our existence; as Rand writes, “a leaf cannot be a stone at the same time, it cannot be all red and all green at the same time, it cannot freeze and burn at the same time.”8 The metaphysics of objectivism hence dismisses, as Rand and her students claim, spirituality, ideals or any other kind of non-material factor that may infl uence human reality; A is A and that always remains as a solid, undeniable fact.9 The ontological base, set on the ground of reality rejecting the infl uence of abstract concepts not rooted in the physical dimension, connects with the second principle of the objectivist philosophy, the notion of reason. Reason, as Rand says, “is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.”10 Reason is “the faculty which identifi es and integrates the material provided by man’s senses,”11 synthesizing it to create a coherent image of the world. As Leonard Peikoff, one of the most prominent of Rand’s students, explains, reason is man’s only source of know- ledge; it exists in contrast to feelings and emotions that are not part of logic.12 The process of reasoning is rooted in the sensory data acquired from the surrounding world; thus, a valid and objective image of reality can be created. Emotions and feelings, on the other hand, distort the sensory data, thus creating an interference that may result in a non-objective reality. “The conclusion is clear,” as Peikoff claims, “there is no alternative or supplement to reason as a means of knowledge. If one attempts to give emotions such a role, then he has ceased to engage in the activity of cognition. Instead, he is subverting the integrity of his mental processes and invalidating them — by introducing as their guide nonobjective elements.”13 Reason is thus the sole epistemological faculty of the objectivist philosophy. The elevation of reason as the only means of understanding reality indicates the third objectivist principle, that of man, the entity possessing and utilizing rea- 6 A. Rand, Introducing Objectivism, http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ob- jectivism_intro (access: 13.05.2013). 7 A. Rand, Atlas Shrugged, New York 1999, p. 981. 8 Ibid. 9 L. Peikoff, Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, Meridian 1993, p. 23. 10 A. Rand, Introducing Objectivism. 11 A. Rand, The Objectivist Ethics, http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServerpagename=ari_ ayn_rand_the_objectivist_ethics (access: 13.05.2013). 12 L. Peikoff, op. cit., p. 159. 13 Ibid., p. 161. Literatura i Kultura Popularna XIX, 2013 © for this edition by CNS LLiKP_19.inddiKP_19.indd 8811 22014-07-30014-07-30 114:15:104:15:10 82 Jakub Krogulec soning. Rand considers that “man is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others.”14 She believes that a human being “must exist for his own sake, neither sacrifi cing himself to others nor sacrifi cing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.”15 In the eyes of the objectivists, man is an organism of a “distinctive kind” that lives in the “universe which has a defi nite nature.”16 He utilizes the faculty of reason to survive and learn but the crucial fact here is that the faculty be- longs to man only. Man is the thinker; as Peikoff claims, he is not a part of the col- lective mind or brain.17 Objectivist philosophy considers man as an individual that chooses his own ends and methods of learning and fulfi lling his goals.