cw (06/07/82)
As the author of the comment that books were often my playmates, I'd like to speak about the supposed flatness of computer games. First, you probably read some of the same books: Tom Swift and his Electric Grandmother, The Hardy Boys Solve The Mystery of the Iron Pancake, Roger Rooster Lays An Egg, and ..... By no means all of these classics were loaded with round, rich characters and imaginative emotional human situations. Indeed, the science fiction that is so beloved of computer addicts is notoriously flat literature(?!) with often little concern for even a reasonable plot. All the series books have been criticized by educators (whom, I admit, often are not the most perceptive of our professionals) as so flat and mechanical as to be possibly damaging to children. Even now, I read mystery stories whose writing quality is enough to make "Donald Duck Comics" a Nobel candidate in comparison. What makes the difference? I think it was that I invested (and still do) characters I liked with my own imagination. And I notice the same thing when I play rogue. The little @ character is not a dot on the screen. It is a little person, with some human hopes, fears, and skills. For example, in the early levels, I just bang away on the beasties, not using much skill to get out of tough situations. Not because I couldn't, but because only half-consciously, I don't want to be championed by a hero who isn't a little lucky as well as strong and smart. All this commentary about children's imagination has an old ring to it. Yes, computers can alienate a child from society, but motorcycles, pool halls, TV, poverty, and all sorts of other influences can too. I was going to point a moral, but let's just leave it this way. Charles
bsg (06/07/82)
yes, we've got trouble, right here in River City with a capital "t" and that rhymes with "c" and that stands for .....................computers ?