sociotechnical - re.public.polimi.it · sociotechnical environments edited by stefano crabu paolo...
TRANSCRIPT
SOCIOTECHNICALENVIRONMENTS
EDITED BYSTEFANO CRABUPAOLO GIARDULLOFRANCESCO MIELE MAURO TURRINI
PR
OC
EE
DIN
GS
OF T
HE
6T
H S
TS
ITA
LIA
CO
NFE
RE
NC
E 2
016
6th STS Italia Conference | Sociotechnical Environments Trento, November 24–26, 2016
Sociotechnical Environments: Proceedings of the 6th STS ITALIA CONFERENCE: An open Access digital publication by STS Italia Publishing Released: November 2017 ISBN: 978–88–940625–1–9
Publishing project: Paolo Magaudda Editing and layout: Sergio Minniti Cover design: Sara Colombo Contact: Sts Italia Publishing, Via Carducci 32, 20123, Milano. Mail: [email protected] A pdf of this publication can be downloaded freely at: http://www.STSItalia.org
The 6th STS Italia conference was organized by STS Italia with the support of the Department of Sociology and Social Research – University of Trento and the Cetcopra of the Université Paris 1 Panthéon–Sorbonne.
This publication is licensed under the Creative Commons: Attribution, Noncommercial, No Derivative Works – 2.5 Italian License (CC BY–NC–ND 2.5 IT).
6th STS Italia Conference | Sociotechnical Environments Trento, November 24–26, 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS EDITORS’ INTRODUCTION Performing Sociotechnical Environments: intersections of bodies, knowledge, artefacts and politics
I
SECTION I Environments in the Making. Politics, Interventions and Creativity
Exploring the Interface of Environmental Activism and Digital Surveillance Diletta Luna Calibeo, Richard Hindmarsh
3
Geo–social Movements by the Inhabitants of Fukushima: ‘Solidarity in Fear’ Vis–à–Vis the Risks after the Nuclear Accident Rina Kojima
19
Activism and Games. Exploring Boundaries Ilaria Mariani, Andréa Poshar
37
The Potential of New and Social Media for Environmental Activism Richard Hindmarsh, Diletta Luna Calibeo
55
Ecology of Technology and the Commodification of Inuit Country Foods Alexander Castleton, Carlos Novas
71
Latte e Lotte. On the Difficulty of Dairy Farmers, Vending Machines, Microbes and Cows of Becoming a Movement Alvise Mattozzi, Tiziana Piccioni
85
Decomposing and Reassembling Energy Grids as Socio–Technical Apparatuses Dario Padovan, Osman Arrobbio
101
A National Law as an Actor–network: How Guatemala’s General Electricity Law of 1996 Shaped the Country’s Environmental Conflicts over Hydroelectricity Renato Ponciano
117
6th STS Italia Conference | Sociotechnical Environments Trento, November 24–26, 2016
Il ruolo della formazione nella messa in opera dell’Efficienza Energetica nel settore edile Francesca Cubeddu
135
Geo–Speculating with a Hyperaccumulator: A Former Mine in North–Rhein Westfalia from the Viewpoint of a Arabidopsis Halleri Gionata Gatto
151
#ViewFromTheOffice: Reconceptualizing the Workplace as a Cross–channel Ecosystem Andrea Resmini, He Tan, Vladimir Tarasov, Anders Adlemo
167
Eco–Art Projects: Semiotic Issues Giacomo Festi
185
The Connexion between Digital Body and the Universe Sana Boukhris, Osman Miguel Almiron
199
Smart City Selling? Business Models and Corporate Approaches on the Smart City Concept Monika Kustra, Jörg Rainer Noennig, Dominika P. Brodowicz
211
Open innovation e tutela giuridica dell’ambiente. Il caso dell’Open Source Seed Initiative Roberto Franco Greco
231
SECTION II Gender, Bodies and Health in Sociotechnical Environments
‘The Hard Hat Problem’: Women Traveling the World of Computing Mariacristina Sciannamblo
249
La (in)differenza di genere nella sociomaterialità della scuola steineriana: un’esperienza di ricerca Camilla Barbanti, Alessandro Ferrante
263
6th STS Italia Conference | Sociotechnical Environments Trento, November 24–26, 2016
La sicurezza come pratica materiale di coordinamento. Il caso dell’introduzione di un sistema per la gestione della terapia oncologica Silvia Fornasini, Enrico Maria Piras, Francesco Miele
277
Assembling Mindfulness: Technologies of the Self, Neurons and Neoliberal Subjectivities António Carvalho
293
Where Are the Girls in STEM? Asrun Matthiasdottir, Jona Palsdottir
309
Le ricercatrici in fisica: primi risultati di un progetto di ricerca Sveva Avveduto, Maria Carolina Brandi, Maria Girolama Caruso, Loredana Cerbara, Ilaria Di Tullio, Daniela Luzi, Lucio Pisacane
323
Developing an Organic Strategy of Change to Challenge Gendered Stereotypes around the Technological (In)Ability of Women in Architecture Maria Silvia D’Avolio
339
Technology and Cultures of (In)Equality: Reflections from Collaborative App Development Athena Maria Enderstein
355
Precision Medicine between Bodies and Environment: A Comparative Analysis Ilaria Galasso, Giuseppe Testa
369
Immagini laparoscopiche. Esplorazione e parcellizzazione del corpo della donna Miriam Ronca
383
6th STS Italia Conference | Sociotechnical Environments Trento, November 24–26, 2016
SECTION III Enacting Objects, Infrastructures, and Innovation
Enrolling and Translating: Experiences of Using ANT in an Educational Research Setting Victoria M. Gorton
405
Semiotic Machines: Portrait of an Actor–Network as a Pushdown Automaton Francesco Galofaro
419
Engaging with the Concept of the ‘Script’ in Industrial Innovation Studies – or how Retro–Ant is Perfect but not ‘Enough’ Judith Igelsböck
435
Intermateriality and Enunciation: Remarks on The Making of Law Giuditta Bassano
447
Infrastructuring is the New Black: Challenges and Opportunities of a Fascinating Intellectual Tool Teresa Macchia
459
Changing Complex Sociotechnical Infrastructures: The Case of ATM Roberta Cuel, Giusi Orabona, Diego Ponte
473
Il lavoro nella e–Society: polarizzazione della struttura professionale e scomparsa delle professioni esprimibili in termini algoritmici Federico Fiorelli
485
Personal Health Data in Frequent Users Life: From Institutional Design to Self–tracking Alberto Zanutto
499
Accessible Learning Environments: When Care Meets Socio–technological Innovations for Pupils with Disabilities Cristina Popescu
509
6th STS Italia Conference | Sociotechnical Environments Trento, November 24–26, 2016
Al Dente Textiles. Notes on Edible Textiles as Economic and Ecological Intermediality Tincuta Heinzel, Svenja Keune, Sarah Walker, Juste Peciulyte
523
SECTION IV Designing Environments
Emotions behind a Sphere. Experimentations for an Interactive Object Communicating Brand Values and Encouraging Behavioural Changes (or Reactions) Francesco E. Guida, Camilla Ferrari, Serena Liistro, Mauro Vitali, Ernesto Voltaggio
545
Interrelations Between Human Agency and Object Agency within Co–Making Environments Ricardo Saint–Clair
561
Designing Digital Encounters and their Agency on Users. A Case Study Mauro Ceconello, Davide Spallazzo
577
Artist as Science Communicator Michelle Kasprzak
591
The Flow and Use of Knowledge in Networks of Electric Mobility: A Theoretical Development Nuno Boavida
607
Tangible Interaction and Cultural Heritage. An Analysis of the Agency of Smart Objects and Gesture–based Systems Daniele Duranti, Davide Spallazzo, Raffaella Trocchianesi
617
Highlighting Issues in Current Conceptions of User Experience Design through Bringing together Ideas from HCI and Social Practice Theory Ruth Neubauer, Erik Bohemia, Kerry Harman
631
6th STS Italia Conference | Sociotechnical Environments Trento, November 24–26, 2016
LBMGs and Boundary Objects. Negotiation of Meaning between Real and Unreal Davide Spallazzo, Ilaria Mariani
645
When Objects Tell Stories. Children Designing Future Smart Objects Seçil Uğur Yavuz, Roberta Bonetti, Nitzan Cohen
661
Interaction Matters. A Material Agency’s Perspective on Materials Experience Stefano Parisi, Valentina Rognoli
675
What Does Light Do? Reflecting on the Active Social Effects of Lighting Design and Technology Daria Casciani, Fulvio Musante
693
Actualising Agency through Smart Products: Smart Materials and Metaphors in Support of the Ageing Population Massimo Micocci, Gabriella Spinelli, Marco Ajovalasit
711
Smart Digital Solutions and Desirable Human–Machine Interactions: A Contribution in Terms of Design Methodology Margherita Pillan
729
Acts of Use from Gestell to Gelassenheit: Calculative Thinking and Exploratory Doing Giovanni Marmont
743
The Concept of Displacement in Prototypes for Design Research: A Proposal of a Framework for Design Research that Uses Prototypes to Investigate Possible Future Scenarios Juan Alfonso De La Rosa
755
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
37
ActivismandGamesExploringBoundariesIlaria MARIANI*a,Andréa POSHARa aPolitecnicodiMilano,DepartmentofDesign
Activismgamesareartifactsdesignedwiththeintentiontoelicit
experiencesthatinitiatecommentariesandconfrontationsregarding
political,culturalandsocialissues,hopingtoinfluenceplayersascitizens.
Thisarticleobservesgameactivismasathreefoldentitythatincludesgames
asmedia,andplayersastheirusersanddesignersasthosewhomakethe
gamesthemselves,asactivists.Accordingly,itexploresthreeactivismgame
ascasestudiesthatexpandintheurbanspaceandoverlaywithitspractices,
involvingplayersinsituatedactivities.Asaconsequence,ontheonehandwe
discusshowthesegamesimpactonthesocial,politicalandphysicalcontext
wheretheytakeplace;ontheotherweenlightentowhatextentcertain
authoredproceduresrevealedgoalsandpurposesthatcanquestionthereal
essenceofthegame,bypushingplayerstoaskthemselves“isitstillagame”.
Keywords:ActivismGames.EthicalAgents.GameDesign.Player
Experience.WickedProblems.
Challengingperspectives:anintroductiontothetopic(s)Designinggameswithsocialimpact,designerscanpromote
entertainmentandfun,butalsoraiseawarenessontopicsofsocialmatter(Flanagan,2009;Flanaganetal.,2013;FlanaganandNissenbaum,2007;2014).Weaddressherethetopicofgameactivism,namelygamesingeneral–video,board,pervasivegames–discussingsocialjusticeissuesorpoliticalchange,questioningtheboundariesbetweengamesandreallifeitself,andhowthesegameschallengeethicalreasoningaboutactivism
* Correspondingauthor:IlariaMariani|e-mail:[email protected]
MARIANI,I.;POSHAR,A.
38
itself.Basedonqualitativedataderivedfromwebandsocialmediaethnographyanddocumentanalysis,thisarticlegoesthroughthreecasestudies–(1)ConspiracyforGood,(2)KillCapand(3)CamOver–exploringtheroleofdesignersasactivistswhoactivateindividual’sperspectivesandchallengetheordinaryperceptionofthesurroundingenvironment.
Dealingwithactivismmeansputtingsomeeffortstomakeimprovementsinsocietybypromoting,obstructing,orrunningsocial,political,economic,and/orenvironmentalactivities.Asacounterpartofmainstreameverydaypractices(deCerteau,2010),thedesignerwhoisactiveonthetopiccanpinpointstrugglesofsocialmovements(Stokes,2014;Macklin,2010),coveringcontemporarysocietalwickedproblems(RittelandWebber,1974;Sicart,2010;2013).Bydesigningactivismgames,thedesignerdigsintoproblemswhicharecurrentlyinneedofthoughtfulreflection,thattakeintoaccountgreyareasinspiteofyes-or-noanswers.Becauseoftheirsubjects,communicativeaimandprocedures,activismgamescanbeconsideredpartofthebroadercategorythatBogost(2007)namedPersuasiveGames–theyproposeanestablishedwayofdoingsomethingemployingthegamerulestoaffectin-gameplayers’behaviours(Bogost,2007).Indoingso,greatemphasisisplacedonthemediumexpressivecapacitytoinviteplayerstoexperiencespecificperspectivesofhowcertainprocessesorsystemsworkandconsequentlydevelopanattitudetowardstheissue.Thisconsideringthatawealthofsocialissuescanbetransposedandexposedintogamesthatarecommentaries,and/orinviteplayerstocommentandexpresstheiropinions.Activismgamesbecomeawaytointerrogateexistingknowledgeandperspectives,makingvisibletheiractors,processes,andconsequences.Albeitthesphereofinfluenceofproceduralityisrecognisedandwell-known,weconsidercrucialtorehearsethecentralroleplayedbysubjectivityandindividuality(Sicart,2011;Mariani,2016)thatturnactivismgamesintoethicalsystemsabletoproblematizetheplayer’sethicsormorals.Asingularityofthesegamesisthattheyempowerplayerswithrealagencythatimpelsthemtotakeactionsmeanttoimpactonthesurroundingspace.Thesegamespushthelineforwardthefactofhavinggamesystemsrespondingtoplayers’actions:themeaningfulchoices(SalenandZimmerman,2004,p.157)thatplayerstakehaveabroaderimpactthancontributingtothenarrative.Asamatteroffact,thesegamesgenerateimmersiveexperiences,makingplayersfeelasenseofcontributingontheonehandtothenarrativeofthein-gameworldandstories,ontheotherofimpactingonthesocial,culturaland/orenvironmentalcontext.Inthelight
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
39
ofthesereasonings,whatisratherinterestingtodiscussistowhatextentthesegamesaffecttherealworld.
Games,designersandactivismHowever,beforeexploringhowgames,designersandactivismare
related,itisnecessarytoanswerasimplebutcomplexquestion:whatdowemeanwithactivism?
Inabroadsense,activismisapoliticalactintendedtopromote
knowledgeand/orspreadpolitical,economic,culturalorenvironmentalissuesand/orbeliefsofaspecificgroupofsociety.AccordingtoThorpe(2011),activismseekstoputforwardavisionfor/ofabettersocietybyclaimingforachangeonbehalfofminoritygroups–whicharegenerallydrivenbytheidentificationofawrongdoingorproblemthatneedschanging.
AndrewX(2009)introducesanotherperspectivethatacquiresafurtherinterestingmeaningonceconfrontedwithgames,sayingthatactivismhasitsbasisinthedivisionbetweenmentalandmanuallabourwheretheactivistidentifiesher/hisroleinlife,likeajoborcareer.Characterizinggamesonthesameway,Suits(1978,p.41)definesplayinggamesas‘thevoluntaryefforttoovercomeunnecessaryobstacles’;aconceptechoedbyMcGonigal(2011,pp.22-24)whostressesthegameabilitytomakecertainobstaclessocompellingthatplayersneedtoworkhardertoovercomethem.Anothercommonpointregardsnotseeinganyresultsintheverynextfuture,butlookingatsomethingbigger,inthelongterm.Suchatendencyhasaspecificterminthegameculture,whereitisoneofthemostimportantconcepts:epic.AccordingtoMcGonigal(2011,p.98),epic‘ishowplayersdescribetheirmostmemorable,gratifyinggameexperiences’.Gamesandactivismfurthersimilarinthissense:takingpartintheseactivities,youknowthatyoubelongtoanetworkthatisyourcommunity.
Analysingtherelationshipbetweenactivismanddesign,Thorpe(2011)affirmsithasasitslinchpintheconceptsofprotestandresistanceonbehalfofexcludedorneglectedgroups.Theyrelyonacallforchangebymeansofunconventionalmethods,especiallythedisruptionofregular“dominant”practices.Asaresult,she(ibid,p.6)extractsfourbasiccriteriathatdefinedesignasapracticeofactivismthat:
•publiclyrevealsorframesaproblemorchallengingissue,•makesacontentiousclaimforchangebasedonthatproblemorissue,
MARIANI,I.;POSHAR,A.
40
•worksonbehalfofdisadvantagedgroups,•disruptsroutinepractices.
Designers’practices:exploringboundariesExpandingthereasoningofGray(2016)togamesingeneral,game
activismisidentifiedasathreefoldentitythatincludesgamesasmedia,andplayersastheirusers,butalsothosewhomakegames,thegamedesigners(fig.1).Designerswho,referringtoFlanagan(2007;2009)andWhite(2013),areactiveagents/actorsabletoencouragethedevelopmentofsocialawarenessbymergingorbreakingspheresandboundaries(Calabrese,1999)betweenwhatisgameandwhatisreallife,namelyblurringtheconceptofmagiccircle(Huizinga,1938;Montola,2005;Consalvo,2009).
Figure1 Gameactivismasasystemwiththreeinterwowenelements.
Thorpe(2011)statesthatactivismcanmakedesignersmoreconsciousofpoliticsandprovidethemwithtoolsfor“takingaction”.Forexample,designerscandevelopgameswiththeintenttoraiseandsupportsocialmovements,takingadvantageoftheirpotentialitiestotriggersocialempowermentandenactment(Flanagan,2007).Withthis,wecanbroadlyaffirmthatcraftinggamesrelatedtoactivismdesignerstaketheroleofactivistswhoaskplayersto“be”activistsinturn,and,toacertainextent,putintopracticesomeeverydaylife’sactivismactivity(deCerteau,2010).ThisispossiblebyapplyingBogost’sproceduralrhetorics(Mariani,2016),asaway‘tomakeclaimsabouthowthingswork’(Bogost,2007,p.29,emphasisinoriginal).Hence,likeinanAristoteliantrianglewherethespeaker,thereaderandtheaudiencemeet,takingtheroleoftheactivist,
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
41
thedesignerisnotonlychangingher/hismainrole,buts/heisalsoreinventingherself/himselftowardaminoritygroupofthesociety–audience.Thus,thegamedesignerbecomesanactiveactor(Flanagan,2007;2009)ofsocialandculturalchange.
Hence,weproposethreecasestudiestoexplorehowcertainauthoredprocedurescanquestiontherealessenceofthegame,pushingplayerstoaskthemselves“isitstillagame”?
Atthispoint,weneedtoquestionthemainstream’sandactivist’severydaylifepractices(deCerteau,2010),sayingthatthedesignerassumestheroleofactivistbyturningstrategiesofthehegemoniccultureintotacticsusedforcommunicateactivistmovements(AndrewX,2009).Designingactivismgamesbecomesawayofsocialexpression,awayto“share”activismandmakingitexperience-abletosomeoneelse.Activismgameslocatethemselvesamongcontemporaryformsofnetworkedactionsthatdealwithprotestsandinvestigation,beinginthemeanwhilealternativeandcomplementarytoexistingcommunication,abletotakeadvantagefromthewaysocialmediafacilitateexplorationanddiffusionofperspectives(Gerbaudo,2012).Throughactivismgames,designerscanchallengesomeeveryday-lifeboundary,puttingtheplayerintheconditiontoquestionthelinebetweenwhatisrightandwrong,whatiscivicandethical,andwhatisnot.Aconditionthathasaremarkablepotentialinopeningpublicdiscoursesandthatstronglyemergesfromthesecondandthirdcasestudywediscussinthefollowing.Particularattentionintheincomingdiscussionregardsthefactthatboundariescanbenegotiated,beingpartofwickedproblemswhichlackofbinarysolutions.
Accordingly,wediscusshow,developinggamesas(1)ConspiracyforGood,(2)KillCapand(3)CamOver,designerscancreatenotonlyconsciousnessthataltersindividual’sperceptionoftheircommunityandenvironment,butalsosparklesquestionsregardingtheirordinaryorin-gamebehaviors.Theresearchhasbeenconductedaswebandsocialmediaethnography,investigatingstatementsthatdesignersandplayerssharedonlineintheshapeofarticlesandposts,interviewswithkeyactorsinvestigatingmotivations,valuesandstrategiesbeyondthesegames.
TheInternet,affirmedCastells(2009),hasraisednewreflectionsaroundcollectiveactionsanditsinterfacewithpolicymaking.Asatoolofcollectiveaction,theInternetisapowerfulfacilitatorbecauseitsimplifiestherapidorganizationofprotestsaroundissuesofpublicconcern.AccordingtoCalderaro(2013),onlinemobilizationsarenowbreakingtheexistingformalhierarchyinplaceoftraditionalmobilizationsandtheyareeasilyspreading
MARIANI,I.;POSHAR,A.
42
asonlinenetworking.Thishappensbecauseoftherapidwayinwhichinformationaboutprotestsandactionscandiffusethroughonlineinterpersonalnetworksandcapturetheattentionofmainstreamnewsoutlets.Inaddition,affirmstheauthor(ibid),theInternethasexpandedthe“repertoireofcontention”ofcurrentmovements.StartingtheirmobilizationsontheInternetandthenbecoming“real”,inaction,theactivistgamesdiscussedinthefollowingdonotonlybreaktheboundariesofeveryday-lifeasweareabouttoshow,buttheyalsobreakalltraditionalhierarchyofformalcollectiveprotestmobilizations.Thus,itisforthesereasonsthatweneedtopointouttheroleofthegamedesignerassocialandculturalchanger.
ConspiracyforGood(CFG)
ConspiracyforGoodisalong,distributedandcomplextransmediaproject.ItstartedasacommercialpilotprojectinapotentialseriesofARGscreatedincollaborationwithTimKring.Itincludedaviralteasercampaignwithcelebritiesclaimingofbeing“notmembers”,andthesponsorshipofNokiathatfinancedtheeventpromotingNokiaPoint&Findtechnology.
CFGaimstocreateawarenessanddriveareal-worldchange.Toengageandinspirepeopletojointheconspiracy,theprojectreliesonactivelyparticipatinginthenarrative.Thegameisbasedonastorytellingsystemthatispervasiveandstronglyparticipatory,beinginclusiveofanimportantliveplaycomponent(StenrosandMontola,2011).ThedesignersthemselvesdefinedindeedCFGaparticipationdrama(Whittock,2010),stressingthenodalroleofplayer’sactionsinacomplexstoryline.
CFGtellsthestoryofanevilcorporation,BlackwellBriggs,andabenevolentconspiracyorganizationthatstandsuptoopposeitsmalevolentactions.BlackwellBriggsisthreateningtheZambianvillageofChataikawiththeconstructionofanoilpipeline.Todefeatthethreatplayersneedtofightforthecauseanduncovertheongoingcriminalactivities.Thegameranforfourmonthsonline,andculminatedinfourliveevents(ofabout6hourseachonthestreetsofLondoninJulyandAugust2010),whereplayerswereaskedtocompletesometasksandthengoonthestreets,takingpartinrealinteractionswithotherplayersandactors.
Throughitsgameplaythisgameclaimsto(1)providesomecontributionstoLondon-basedvolunteerorganisations,(2)andcreateanexperiencewhereplayersaretakingpartinabiggercause,andtheyareunderstandingsomeofitprocesses.Albeitanimportantnumberofparticipant,CFGcollectedseveralcritiques;themostimportantisthatthegamepartlyfailed
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
43
inalteringindividual’sperceptionofthetopic.Players’statedthattheawarenessofbeingactinginafictionalspacenegativelyimpactedontheexperience(Stenrosetal.,2011).
Figure2.TheviolinistAnnMarieontheirYoutubeChannel
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=546izBhscYE)
Crucialinthistermsisthe“non-members”pagewhereplayersareasked
totakeastand(fig.2):bydeclaring“not”tobemember,playersdenythehegemonicsystemandbecome“conspirators”.Assumingthisrole,playersacknowledgetheirparticipationinthegameasactivists.Assuchtheycouldengageandevenbelievetheycancontributetobringingsocial/culturalchangeandmaketheworld“abetterplacetobe”.Nevertheless,itisimportanttostressthatevenifthepositionandimmersionofplayersinsidethegamecanbecomparedtothepositionofanactivist–inthiscase,agamethatdriveschangeforasocialcause–itislimitedtoafictionalworld.Meaning,itbringsawarenessbutnotthesocialchangeexpected(Stenrosetal.,2011).
KillCap
KillCap–shortforKillCapitalism–isagamecreatedbythefounderofthenon-profitcanadianmagazineAdbusterstofightagainsttheongoinghostiletakeoverofourenvironmentsbycommercialforces.White,co-
MARIANI,I.;POSHAR,A.
44
founderofAdbustermagazine,saysthatKillCapstartedasanattempttocreateoffensivesallaroundtheworld,aspartofalargersystemofbeliefsandpositions,promotedinthemagazineitselfwithanarticleentitled‘Howtorebootcapitalism’(fig.3).
Talkingaboutthegame,Lasn(Liacas,2013)saidthathebelieved‘allthepeoplethathavewokenuptothefactthattheirfuturedoesn’tcompute[…]wouldstandupandplaythisKillCapgame,tokillthecurrentmodeofcapitalismandtrytocomeupwithakindofCapitalism2.0’(http://socialdisruptions.com/kalle-lasn-grandfather-of-occupywallstreet).
Figure3.FragmentoftheannouncementofAdbusters’pointsandbeliefsof‘Howto
rebootcapitalism’.
Thisgameintendstoalterone’sperceptionofthecity,accordingtoa
perspectiveofre-appropriationofthepublicspace,andgivesanewideaofwhatitisapoliticalactinourdailylife.Inthisgameplayersgainin-gameexperiencepoints(blackpogs)fordoingthingsaswalkingawayfrommultinationalchains(10),defacingtheMcDonald's’GoldenArches(15),orsubvertingquestionableadvertising(25)(White,2013).AccordingtoWhite(2013)KillCapworksbyappropriatingthegamespaceofconsumerismforradicalplay,whereallmultinationalcorporationsbecomeopportunitytolevelup.Thegameplacesinsidethefieldofindiestorytellingandroleplayinggames,basedonanalternativerealitythatisacounter-narrativethatre-imagineslife.
Althoughthisgameisnolongeronline,weconsiderthecasestudyparticularlypertinenttothisreasoningbecauseofthewayitexpandsinand
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
45
overlapstotherealworld.KillCaptakesplaceinrealspacewhereplayersbecomeactorsinanunfoldingstorywhosefinalsceneisglobalrevolution.Withthisgame,anentireeconomic,culturalandsocialsystemisputintoquestion.Goingbeyondsharingideas,itallowstoputactivisminpractice,creatingonlineandofflineactionsthatdrivesocialandculturalchanges.
Thisreasoningispartlyalignedwiththenon-offensiveconceptofcritical
playintroducedbyFlanagan(2009)todescribethatplayactivitiesthatenquireorcritiqueastatusquo.AccordingtoFlanagan(2009,p.6),‘criticalplaymeanstocreateoroccupyplayenvironmentsandactivitiesthatrepresentoneormorequestionsaboutaspectsofhumanlife[...]thegoalintheorizingacriticalgame-designparadigmisasmuchaboutthecreativeperson’sinterestincritiquingthestatusquoasitisaboutusingplayforsuchaphasechange’.Theconceptisintroducedasadifferentandcriticalapproachtoplayanddesigngames,andisbasedontheobservationofgamesaswaystoaffectplayers.Thisargumentationopenssomecrucialdiscourses,enlighteningthepowerofgamesthatincorporatefundamentalhumanvaluesandpsychologicalprinciplestopromotelearning,attitudeandbehaviourchange(Flanagan,2009;etal.,2013).Inthisregard,KillCapincludeschallengingactsthatrangefromboycottingabrandtotheactofreallydamagingcorporateproperties,meaning,toaltertheorderofpublicspaceandsocietyitself.Insodoing,thegamerulesallowplayerstoactwithinthelimitsofthelaw,butitrewardsmoreunlawfulacts.Thus,thediscussiongoesbeyondgamedesign,enteringthefieldofengagementandactivism:whatistobea“good”activistandhowfarcananactivistgowithhis/herengagementtowardsamovement?
Withthis,wewonder:whathappenswhenthecritiqueagainstconsumerismturnsintoactsofdestruction?
CamOver
Incomparisonwiththepreviouscases,CamOver–shortforCameraOver–isthemostradicalone.MainlyactiveacrossBerlin’ssubwaysandstreets,thisgamewasdesignedin2013toteardownclosed-circuittelevisioncameras(CCTV)inpublicspaces,takingtheshapeofa(destructive)game-competition,astheauthordefinedit(https://camover.noblogs.org/spielidee/idea-of-the-game).Itliesonthecomplainedmotivationthat‘Thegazeofthecamerasdoesnotfallequallyonallusersofthestreet’(https://camover.noblogs.org/faq/faq-in-english),
MARIANI,I.;POSHAR,A.
46
butisselective,sinceCCTVsdiscriminateagainstcertaingroupsofpeoplethatarestereotypedascriminals.
Figure4.Websiteheaderwithiconssuggestinghowto“takecare”ofCCTV
https://camover.noblogs.org
CamOverdevelopersanddesignersareunknown,butinthegamewebpagetheyexplainanddefendtheirbeliefs.FromFAQswecanseesomeoftheirmotivationalreasons:e.g.‘Videosurveillanceisusedtomonitorourlives,tocontrolouractions,andtosuppressourresistance–aboveall,it’sagainstourpeacefulcoexistence[…]wecandefendourselvesagainstthestateandagainstcorporationsandtakeawaytheirsight!CAMOVER!’.Onthewebsitetheyalsopresentsomemethodsplayerscanusetoassaultcameras,rangingfromusingplasticbagstostickersandtapes.Beyondstimulatingtoputsuchactionsinpractice,CamOverplainlycallsitsplayersforcommunicatingtheirperformancesbysharingthemwithposts,videos,imagesandreports.Thisprovidesfurthergame-points.However,becauseoftheverynatureofthisgame,authorswarnplayersthatconcealingtheiridentity,whilenotessential,isrecommended.
Asaresultofitsatypicalgameplayandreal-worldconsequences,Cam
Overhasbeenmatterofdiscussionondifferentmedia.
Writingaboutthegame,TheGuardianemphasisesthatpointsaregiven
withbonusscoresforthemostinnovativemodesofdestruction(https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/shortcuts/2013/jan/25/game-destroy-cctv-cameras-berlin).Ontheotherhand,TheObserverdenouncesthepracticeoftearingcamerasapartinsuchaviolentandoftenalarmingwayasacounter-productiveactofactivism,asvandalismwithdestructiveandaggressive“players”inbalaclavas(fig.5)(http://observers.france24.com/en/20130111-security-cameras-german-activists-camover-hanover-vandalism-european-police-congress-berlin-blog-surveillance).MichaelEbeling,memberoftheanti-CCTVgroupsAKVorratandFreedomnotFear,sustainsinthesamearticlethatabetterpracticeis
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
47
makingpeopleawareofhowintrusiveandinfestingurbansurveillanceis,bypersonifyingcamerasthatconstantlyinvadeourprivacy,following,lookingandlisteningpeoplewithoutanypermission.
MARIANI,I.;POSHAR,A.
48
Figure5.AnassaultinBerlin’sSubway,uploadedonJanuary9th2013.Fullvideo:
https://youtu.be/2yXddUNgouM?list=PLLWWwP1Ombs1sS6Hf2kt81TyGK-
4RuAcO
Takingintoconsiderationsocialnormsandmorality,wecanquestionCamOverbothasactivismandasgame.‘Theactivistisaspecialistoranexpertinsocialchange’(AndrewX,2009),andactivismgamesinviteandempowertheplayertobeanactivepersona,atleastduringthegamesession(Flanagan,2007).Thus,accordingtoAndrewX,thinkingofoneselfasanactivistmeansconsideringoneselfasbelongingtoawidercommunityengagedinasocialcauseorstruggle,thinkingofbeingmoreadvancedthanothersintheappreciationoftheneedforsocialchangeandintheknowledgeofhowtoachieveit.‘Theactivistidentifieswithwhattheydoandthinksofitastheirroleinlife’(AndrewX,2009,p.3).
Ontheotherhand,wecanstressthatCamOverdoesnotfitintothedefinitionsofgamepresentedintheGameStudiesliterature(SalenandZimmerman,2004),beingmoresimilartoagamifiedsystem.Ifthisgamewouldhavebeendesignedasanonlinegame,itwouldbeintothecategoryofmindlessdestructiongames,onlinegamesdesignedfortheplayertomovearoundinavirtualcityanddestroyingallitssurrounding.ThepointisthatCamOverwascreatedtobeplayedoffline,havingthepublicspace,andobjectsofprivateandpublicdomaindeliberatelydestroyedordamaged.Hence,CamOvermasksrealviolentactsofvandalism;aperspective
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
49
reinforcedbyitscreatoritself,whoonceaffirmd‘Althoughwecallitagame[…]ouraimistodestroyasmanycamerasaspossibleandtohaveaninfluenceonvideosurveillanceinourcities’(https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/shortcuts/2013/jan/25/game-destroy-cctv-cameras-berlin).
Figure6.Thesignatureofsome“players”onBerlin’ssubway.
Conclusions:morethanamatterofempowermentWeintroducedthispaperstatingthatbydesigninggameswithsocial
impact,designerscanpromotenotonlyentertainmentandfun,butalsoraiseawarenessontopicsofsocialmatter(Flanagan,2009;etal.,2013;andNissenbaum,2007).Nevertheless,bringingornotsocialchangewasnotthematterofdiscussionweintendedtocoverwiththecasesstudiesproposed.Ouraimwastodebateontheroleofthegamedesignerincraftingsuchactivistgamesandontheconsequencesthatgameimmersionandmotivationcanraiseamongplayers.Ouranalysisconfirmsthattheexperiencesinitiatedcommentariesandconfrontationsbetweenplayersregardingpolitical,culturalandsocialissues,feedinginparallelseveraldiscussionsamongdifferentmediaregardingthesocialimpactofthesegames,meaninghowsuchgamesactuallyinfluenced/changedplayersascitizens.Webelieveactivismgamedesignershavethedutytocreateinnovationactivatingplayers’imaginariesbyimmersingthemintoextra-ordinaryexperiences(Murray,1997;Frasca,2001;Ryan,2001)thatcaninfluencemindsetshowinginteractiverepresentationsandsimulationofhowcertainsystemsandprocesseswork(Frasca,2003).However,thesegamesgobeyonddevelopingawarenessofsocialstruggles;bycreatingnotonlyconsciousnessthataltersindividual’sperception,but(ideally)realfirst-
MARIANI,I.;POSHAR,A.
50
handexperience.Playingsuchgamestendstohavepoliticalbutalsoethicalimpactbecausetheyaskplayerstoembodypoliticalpositionsandengageinpoliticalactions;actionsfrequentlyfraughtwithsystematicprovocationandrevolutionaryintents,thatoftenmanyofthemwouldnothavespontaneouslytaken.
Nevertheless,designerscanencourageviolentactsinthenameofsocialcause,makingsuchintentmoreorlessexplicittoplayers.Therefore,especiallymovingthroughsocietalspacesperformingactivistplay,itiscrucialthatplayerstakeintohighconsiderationwhattheyareallowedandinvitedtodowithinasystemthatisoverlappedtotheeverydayspacesandlife.Aconsiderationparticularlysignificantwhenplayersarerealagentsofactionandchange,“empowered”tosomehowinfluencethesurroundingspacesandactivities.
Beingawareoftheirdiversities,wecanhencetranslatethisreasoningaccordingtothethreecasestudiespresentedandtheiroutcomes:
• EventoughtCFGhasaveryattractiveidealandbenevolentpurpose,thegamewasnotsuccessfullyabletomaintaintheinitialexpectations,intermsofempoweringplayerstoberealactivists,whosedecisionsandactionsactuallyimpactsontherealworld.Moreover,makingacleardistinctionbetweengameandreality(Stenrosetal.,2011),itnegativelyimpactedonthechancetohavereal,situatedagency.
• KillCapresultedmorebalancedonallowingplayerstotakepositionsandaction,boycottingshadybrandsandexpressingtheirperspective.Indoingso,thegameallowsplayerstodecidetheirlevelofactionaccordingtotheirprinciplesandwill,butbyin-game-rulesitencouragesclearactsofvandalismasdamagingtheMcDonald'sgoldenarches.
• CamOverbyitsownrulesplainlysuggestsplayerstobevandalic,usingpointsasrewardsfordestructingCCTV.
Thesegamesweredesignedwiththemainpurposeofactivatingplayers
asactivists,eveniftoadifferentextent.Thus,theboundariesweexploredsofarshowusapanoramathatisacomplexwickedproblemitself.Alongthisenquirywehavebeenpushedoverandovertoaskourselveswhatistheboundarybetweengameandreallifeitself.Apointofcontroversyfurthernurturedbytheanalysisofthecasestudiesproposedabovethatincreaseditsbeingdenseandwicked.Startingfromobservinghowthese
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
51
casestudiesaredesignedtochallengethecontemporaryandveryblurreddefinitionsofthewordsthatcomposethepractice,activism+games,wereachedouttoargumentationsandreasoningsthatopenedambiguousandchallengingperspectives.Weputsomeofthetasks,activitiesandperspectivesthesegameproposedintoquestion,solicitedbythewaytheyresultedintophysicaloutcomes.Mainlybecauseoftheverytypologyandoutcomesofthesegames,wecansaythatbyengagingwithcertainactivismgames,playersareempoweredtoeffectivelyparticipateinactivitieswithreal,moreorlessimmediate(seecasesstudiespresentation),consequences.Activitiesthatraiseethicalandmoralquestionsabouttheroleoftheplayerinsuchexperiences.
Thatbeingsaid,weconcludebyacknowledgingandstressingtheethical
andsocietalroleofdesignerswithinactivismgamesdesignasthosewhohavethe“power”to“empower”andcreatenotonlyaconsciousnessthataltersindividual’sperceptionoftheircommunityandtheirenvironment,butalsosparklequestionsregardingordinaryaswellasin-gamebehaviors.
ReferencingBogost,I.(2007)PersuasiveGames:TheExpressivePowerofVideogames.
Cambridge:MITPress.Bourdieu,P.(1984)Distinction:ASocialCritiqueOfTheJudgementOfTaste
(R.Nice,Trans.).Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress.Calabrese,O.(1999)Laeraneobarroca.(A.Giordano,Trans.).Madrid:
EdicionesCátedraS.A.(Originalworkpublished1987)
Calderaro,A.(2013)ChallengesandOpportunitiesofOnlineCollectiveActionforPolicyChange.PolicyStudies.Oxford:WileyPeriodicals,5,1-5.Castells,M.(2009)CommunicationPower.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Consalvo,M.(2009)ThereisNoMagicCircle.GamesandCulture,4(4),408–
417.DeCerteau,M.(2010)L’invenzionedelquotidiano.Roma:EdizioniLavoro.Gerbaudo,P.(2012)Tweetsandthestreets:Socialmediaandcontemporary
activism.London:PlutoPress.Gray,K.(2016,January11)ActivisminGamingCulture:MobilizingGames,
Gamers,&GamingCultureforChange[Onlinearticle].Retrievedfromhttp://www.nymgamer.com/?p=12584
Flanagan,M.(2007)LocatingPlayandPolitics:RealWorldGames&Activism.LeonardoElectronicAlmanac,16(2-3),1–13.
MARIANI,I.;POSHAR,A.
52
Flanagan,M.(2009)CriticalPlay:RadicalGameDesign.Cambridge:MITPress.
Flanagan,M.,andNissenbaum,H.(2007)AGameDesignMethodologytoIncorporateSocialActivistThemes.ProceedingsoftheSIGCHIConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems,181–190.
Flanagan,M.,andNissenbaum,H.(2014)ValuesatPlayinDigitalGames.Cambridge:MITPress.
Flanagan,M.,Punjasthitkul,S.,Seidman,M.,Kaufman,G.,andCarini,P.(2013)CitizenArchivistsatPlay:GameDesignforGatheringMetadataforCulturalHeritageInstitutions.DiGRAConferenceProceedings2013.
Frasca,G.(2003)SimulationVersusNarrative.InWolf,M.J.andPerronB.,TheVideoGameTheoryReader,pp.221-235.NewYork/London:Routledge.
Hall,S.(1993)Encoding,Decoding.TheCulturalStudiesReader,4,90–103.Hall,S.(1980)Culture,Media,Language.London:Routledge.Hall,S.(1997)Representation:CulturalRepresentationsandSignifying
Practices.London:Sage.Hall,S.,andDuGay,P.(eds.)(1996)QuestionsofCulturalIdentity,126.
London:Sage.Huizinga,J.(1938).HomoLudens.TheHague:Mouton.Latour,B.(2005).ReassemblingtheSocial.AnIntroductiontoActor-
Network-Theory.London:OxfordUniversityPress.Liacas,T.(2013).KalleLasn,grandfatherof#OccupyWallStreet.Retrieved
fromhttp://socialdisruptions.com/kalle-lasn-grandfather-of-occupywallstreet/
Macklin,C.(2010)ReactingtoRe:Activism:ACaseStudyintheEthicsof
Design.InSchrier,K.andGibson,D.(eds.),EthicsandGameDesign:
TeachingValuesThroughPlay,pp.274-290.Hershey:IGIGlobal.Mariani,I.(2016)MeaningfulNegativeExperienceswithinGamesforSocial
Change(Doctoraldissertation,PolitecnicodiMilano).Milan,S.,andHintz,A.(2013)NetworkedCollectiveActionandthe
InstitutionalizedPolicyDebate:BringingCyberactivismtothePolicyArena?Policy&Internet,5(1),7-26.
Montola,M.(2005)ExploringtheEdgeoftheMagicCircle:DefiningPervasiveGames.ProceedingsofDAC,103.
Murray,J.H.(1997)HamletontheHolodeck:TheFutureofNarrativein
Cyberspace.Cambridge:MITPress.McGonigal,J.(2011)RealityisBroken.NewYork:Penguin.
ACTIVISMANDGAMES.EXPLORINGBOUNDARIES.
53
Rittel,H.,andWebber,M.(1974)WickedProblems.Man-MadeFutures,
26(1),272–280.Ryan,M.(2001)NarrativeasVirtualReality:ImmersionandInteractivityin
LiteratureandElectronicMedia.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.
Salen,K.,andZimmerman,E.(2004)RulesofPlay.Cambridge:MITPress.Sicart,M.(2010)WickedGames:OntheDesignofEthicalGameplay.
Proceedingsofthe1stDESIRENetworkConferenceonCreativityand
InnovationinDesign,101–111.Sicart,M.(2011)AgainstProcedurality.GameStudies,11(3).Sicart,M.(2013)BeyondChoices:TheDesignofEthicalGameplay.
Cambridge:MITPress.Stenros,J.,Holopainen,J.,Waern,A.,Montola,M.,andOllila,E.(2011)
NarrativeFrictioninAlternateRealityGames:DesignInsightsfromConspiracyforGood.ProceedingsofDiGRA2011Conference.
Stenros,J.,andMontola,M.(2011)TheMakingofNordicLarp:DocumentingaTraditionofEphemeralCo-CreativePlay.ProceedingsofDiGRA2011.
Stokes,B.(2014)CivicGameswith‘LocalFit’:EmbeddingwithReal-World
NeighborhoodsandPlace-BasedNetworks.(Doctoraldissertation,UniversityofSouthernCalifornia).
Suits,B.(1978)TheGrasshopper.Games,LifeandUtopia.Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress.
Thorpe,A.(2011)DefiningDesignasActivism.TheJournalofArchitecturalEducation.Retrievedfromhttp://designactivism.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Thorpe-definingdesignactivism.pdf
White,M.(2013,July24).GameActivism[Webpost].Retrievedfromhttps://www.micahmwhite.com/adbusters-articles/gaming-activism
X,A.(2009)GiveUpActivism.DoorDie,9,160–166.Retrievedfromhttp://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/andrew-x-give-up-activism
ISB
N: 9
78-8
8-94
0625
-1-9
SUPPORTED BY