|
Before trying to determine whether desensitization to violence
and video games are correlated in any way, we should mention
first what is usually meant by ‘desensitization to violence’.
Young people becoming desensitized to violence means that "they
gradually come to not be aroused by violent scenes and to not be
bothered by violence in general". The dominant argument in this
respect is that because children perceive screen violence as
play or spectacle, they somehow become "immune to the horror of
violence, which makes them as a result less sensitive to the
pain and suffering of others, or even aggressive towards
others".
It seems that there is no
controversy concerning the effects of violence
viewing on young people. Most scientists agree
that there are negative effects from exposure to
media violence and one such effect is
desensitizing to violence. However nobody ever
distinguishes between actual violence and
fictional or simulated one, as is the case with
video games. Do those scientists really believe that the
teenager, who laughs while seeing a game
character being relentlessly beaten, is equally
insensitive when he sees his mother, for example,
being beaten by his father? Is there some kind of
selective insensitivity then?
There is also a tendency for oversimplification of a very
complex issue: the building of personality. In my view,
sensitivity is an integral part of an individual’s character and
not something that can be added to their character by means of
an external influence. It cannot be removed either. Being or not
being sensitive depends on the same numerous factors that
condition the building of personality. It takes therefore more
than exposing oneself to violent material in order to become
insensitive to anything or even aggressive and violent. After
all, the kind of violence we are talking about, fictional or
simulated, is everywhere and has always been. Literature,
poetry, films, tv movies, games, every form of art, all are full
of violent content. From Homer who was a master in depicting
violent scenes to Shakespeare and to contemporary film makers we
have been exposed to such a vast amount of violence viewing that
we should all be completely desensitized to it by now. Are we?
As for aggressiveness and violent behavior related to media
violence, there couldn’t be a funnier argument, in my opinion.
Aggressiveness is not a learned thing. It is an instinctive
response to dangers (real or feared) that threaten an
individual’s life and happiness. People never become aggressive
because they saw similar behavior on screen. They are aggressive
if and when they have a reason to be. If, for instance, they
feel threatened, or are actually attacked or insulted, and if
they have enemies or rivals or competitors whom they hate and
want to harm or to defeat. Also if they are cheated or betrayed.
If aggression is not normal reaction in all these cases, then
what is. Of course, aggressiveness is not expressed in the same
way by all individuals. The way it is expressed depends mainly
on the individual’s cultural level. The more lower their
culture, the more likely to express aggressiveness by exercising
physical force. In this case media may be useful to them in
providing new fighting tricks and techniques. However these
people would look for this kind of information anyway, even if
it wasn’t offered by the media so abundantly. Still, imitating
violent actions is not the cause of their aggressiveness. People
of a higher culture, on the other hand, are more likely to cope
with conflict situations using reason. They have less reasons to
be aggressive, but when they are, they express their
aggressiveness by means of verbal violence which, of course, is
never to be found in video games. A civilized person would never
resolve conflict using his fists even if he had previously
killed some thousand little men in Streetfighter or Mortal
Combat or whatever fighting game. To those who might argue that
these views do not apply to children or teenagers because
children develop value systems from what they see, I would say
that being primitive or civilized has nothing to do with age.
After all, in some parts of the world (where children do not
have computers and do not play video games), engaging in real
fighting, throwing stones at each other, and getting
injured on a daily basis is children’s play. There, the
sight of real blood, which would make even the most game-holic
American faint, is not a shocking experience at all.
I have explained so far why, in
my opinion, media cannot desensitize young people
to violence or teach them violent behavior. Now I
will refer specifically to video games and I will
explain why I think that they not only are
harmless, but also that they may have some
positive effects on young people.
Video games are considered a part of low culture but, as I
see it, they are here to serve a need; the need for a substitute
for the lost physical activity in modern society. Video games
are actually simulated physical activity, where the player is
not doing the muscles part of action but only the brain part of
it. Every kind of action can be found there but, our discussion
being about violence, I will refer to fighting games in
particular. Titles like: Streetfighter, Medal of Honor: Allied
Assault, Grand Theft Auto, Doom, Blade of Darkness, Alien vs
Predator are indicative of their content. In all these games the
player is required to fight, outsmart, and defeat an enemy. The
enemy is usually human (soldiers, spies, gangsters, knights,
evil people) but there are also aliens, ghosts, creatures and
other things. Every possible form of fighting is used; martial
arts, gun fighting, air fighting, submarine fighting, spacecraft
fighting, anything we can imagine. Yet all this mayhem has
nothing to do with violence. Violence means harm, pain,
suffering. There are no such elements in video games. The pain
is never shown and the victim can be completely run over and
then pop back up without harm. The characters do not look
realistic either by technical or by artistic standards. They are
not given a substantial personality and they lack real life
motivations and emotions. They remind more of toys than of
living creatures. The player cannot get emotionally involved
(nobody cries when playing Max Payne, although the game’s story
is supposed to be very tragic). The whole thing is a juggling
experience rather than one of watching a movie. After all, the
game is there to be played, not to be watched, and fighting is
just an excuse for practicing quick response, accuracy,
strategy, and other skills. But if it was to be watched, one
would see in it images, colors, motion, speed, sounds, special
effects and music; definitely not violence and pain. In the few
instances were gore is shown, an imitation of the unrealistic
choreography like violent scenes of action films is obvious (in
real life, people do not explode screaming when shot). In any
case, the result of all this “violent” experience is a happy
player who has had a
very good time testing his reflexes and
practicing various skills, while at the same
time, nobody got hurt, nobody got sad, nobody
lost anything.
By this, I don’t mean that simulated violence is a good or even
acceptable subject for games or films, but this is a completely
different matter having to do with the poverty of original ideas
and the inadequacy of dominant value systems, characteristic of
our society, not with the mechanisms behind insensitive or
violent behavior.
|
