Reflection

This post is a reflection on the process of Guerilla Game Changers.

Guerilla Game Changers: Fear, Poetic Terrorism, Accessibility and Transparency

The Guerilla Game Changers project, while seemingly simple, was quite an adventure. It made me revisit another public history project I was a part of, namely the La Pointe: On the Other Side of the Tracks audiowalk. It was such an interesting and complex project. Creating an audiowalk raises questions of accessibility. What should be the pace of the walk? Where can people walk safely? Will they be able to take breaks? Will the public have access to documentation on the process of building such project? It also raises questions of reception. What if someone is not happy with the result because it does not reflect on them exactly how they thought it would? Any type of public project will have to deal with its own issues. In the case of the Guerilla Game Changers project those issues and concerns were fear on the part of the project lead (myself), accessibility, and access.

There are so many things that could go wrong with any type of public project. Fear of not incorporating enough, of creating something not good enough, or of being poorly received plagued Guerilla Game Changers. Sadly, it feels like going public scares many scholars, myself included. Academia can become for many a comfort zone and stepping outside of it can feel like entering a war zone. I was truly afraid of doing something outside of my comfort zone, even though I was aware that I usually enjoy doing so, at least in after the fact. Still, there are legitimate concerns with going public.

I have heard from several historians that they prefer dealing with dead people because they cannot complain. While I am appalled that some historians believe this, it is no doubt uncomfortable to be attacked by your research subject(s), their descendants, or communities. Nevertheless, I am not immune from such fear. My first idea was to do something at the Canada Science and Technology Museum (CSTM), but I dismissed it almost immediately, fearing that this might endanger potential career prospects. Especially, if I pushed too hard against some of the decisions taken when building the Game Changers exhibit.

These concerns are normal, especially if one is engaging in poetic terrorism or art sabotage. One could remain anonymous, but not receiving credit for a project could hurt their career prospects. To me, such concern appears egotistical in nature; it asks what about me? Then again, our capitalist system is constructed in a way that getting credit is encouraged, but only if it does not upset that system. This is especially true for students or recent graduate with no immediate career options. There is a strong incentive to remain complacent and not challenge the status quo. Art sabotage (see chapter 6), which can be described as the dark side of poetic terrorism, argues for creation-though-destruction. There is something truly poetic about this. Yet, it also involves a good amount of risk.

Perhaps, poetic terrorism (see chapter 2) is a safer option. This tactic feels much less frowned upon by our so-called civil societies, as the destruction of representations of power is not generally accepted by the mainstream. Poetic terrorism gives the option of challenging the established order without destroying. This could lessen the potential for criticism and outright condemnation but might also lessen the potential impact of an action. Taking risks can be worth it, but for Guerilla Game Chargers, I opted to follow a safe route. I wanted to challenge an exhibit without condemning it outright.

There now exists a multitude of ways to carry out acts of poetic terrorism through digital means. For instance, using MapMap and a small projector, it is possible to project images or videos on a building. One could remind the public that there was a neighbourhood where a high-rise, a highway, or an empty field now stands and that the original residents were expropriated. This was not a suitable approach for my project. Projecting something inside a museum would easily get one caught or the projection shut down almost immediately. Therefore, adding a digital layer to a museum exhibit using an augmented reality (AR) application, in this case HP Reveal (previously Aurasma), seemed much more effective, manageable, and safe. All one needs is to take pictures of the trigger for a chosen overlay, which would be either a picture or video.

I was happy to discover this possibility, especially when the people at the CSTM said they were on board. But I felt somewhat uncomfortable. Was I being guerilla enough? After all, the name of the class I was doing this project for was Guerilla Digital Public History. I wanted to push boundaries, but felt my project was not challenging the established order enough. At the same time, I was also asking myself if ranking tactics challenging the established order was elitist. I often critique academia for, in the most part, being elitist. Was I therefore pushing myself too hard simply to fit a “correct” interpretation of disruption? After much thought, I concluded that I would have to stay ideologically consistent. If I believed that every tactic is useful in the struggle against the status quo, then I should not force myself to think otherwise. I would then do what felt the most “guerilla” for me – push visitors to think critically.

There exists a trend, typically espoused by national museums like the CSTM, to impose meaning on objects, people, and historical events. These museums were created to impose a false sense of community, to create and maintain an imagined community. Thus, promoting critical thinking would challenge their authority and practices. Guerilla Game Changers might not be physically disrupting the CSTM, but it tries to destroy problematic ideas and push visitor to create new knowledge.

Planning this project was more challenging than I first envisaged. Having people within the museum on board was a great way to have access to material, but there was too much. As a result, I needed to make choices. For example, one of the topics I chose to focus on was the absence of discussions on gender. The person who designed it, then-assistant curator Sean Tudor, said that they did not have the space to discuss such a complex issue in an 80-word panel. Instead, they held conferences to counter balance this, leaving more time and space to give justice to this topic. Their decision was logical, but I still felt that something should be put in. Having recently visited the Strong Museum of Play and delved in personal papers of Danielle Bunten Berry, I felt like this would be a relevant story to tell. The fact that she was a Trans woman who transitioned in the early 1990s and that her games influenced generations of players and developers deserved to be told. Plus, this might cause visitors to think about how gender is discussed within the context of the videogame industry.

I decided to give some facts about the panels I wanted to add to and then ask questions. Bunten Berry created very influential games, such as M.U.L.E and Seven Cities of Gold. Why was she not a well-known figure outside of the industry, while Sid Meier has his name in the title of his games? I made these questions more general, as not to impose meaning or answers. If my questions lead to a specific answer, I felt like I would be imposing meaning and doing the very thing I was reacting against. This tactic seemed to be the best approach as, I too, was limited in what I could include in the overlays I created.

Another issue with this type of project is technology. HP Reveal works relatively well, but its simplicity also limits possibilities. It would be possible to create an AR project using Unity but learning to use that platform is challenging. It is not the most accessible software for neophytes. Which leads to the final issue of this project – accessibility. While all it takes to use HP Reveal is a smartphone, one needs such a device. There is a certain class issue associated with project like these, cue to the high cost of smartphones. Furthermore, AR apps require to put the smartphone in front of the trigger. How would someone with physical disabilities be able to use it? Finally, what about language? The CSTM, since it is a national institution, is bilingual. But due to time constraints, I was not able to create a bilingual project. These are all issues that could be fixed if the project had been conceived during the initial conception of the Game Changer exhibit. Ideally, if museums want to start using this type of technology, they would have to consider AR before an exhibit is built.

There is a strong link between accessibility and doing guerilla history, digital or not. One of the main criticism many activists have of large institutions and those in power is the secrecy of their methods and actions. A good example of this is WikiLeaks. The entire goal of this organisation is to shine light on what governments have hidden to their populations. Indeed, their website claims that “WikiLeaks specializes in the analysis and publication of large datasets of censored or otherwise restricted official materials involving war, spying and corruption.” Also, one should not forget Anonymous or anarchist activists. Keeping in mind that deciding to be transparent is a political act, Guerilla Game Changers opted to publicly post its paradata and devlogs. Other projects have taken similar approaches. For instance, La Pointe’s process is archived at the Center for Oral History and Digital Storytelling (COHDS) and is open to everyone, though not online. Guerilla Game Changers pushes slightly further in terms of transparency; one does not need to travel to Carleton to access those documents. Also, most of the information I was given was not easily decipherable. As a result, I opted to find websites containing this same information and use those in my public devlogs. Can one claim to be truly transparent when the information they give access to is not written in accessible language?

This project had the advantage of not pushing against power as hard as La Pointe or some of the organisations and loose groups of individuals mentioned previously. Guerilla Game Changers does even approach the impact of Chelsey Manning’s whistleblowing, for instance. Nevertheless, I have to admit that I was inspired by this form of activism. Guerilla Game Changers plays safe, but it tries to push people to question. In a way, this is similar to what activists and hacktivists promote. I wanted people to ask themselves are very simple but important question: why?

Guerilla Game Changers started as a struggle. The ideological struggle of a graduate student trying to live up to his ideals, while still attempting not to alienate a potential employer. I was pushed to rethink my positions on activism and realise that, while I am not the type of person who is in the front line at protests, I can support causes in my own way. Moreover, this project concretised my point of view that activism should as an assemblage of tactics. There is no one way to support a given struggle. Yet, whatever the tactics, projects, or actions, they should be accessible and transparent. I am reminded of the saying fighting fire with fire. How is that saying even logical? What if it was fighting violence with violence, fighting secrecy with secrecy, or even fighting austerity with austerity? To be ethical, Guerilla Game Changers could not impose meaning or hide its process. There might still be some validity to that saying, but I am not here to impose an answer. I am simply trying to encourage people to step out of their comfort zone and think critically.

Bibliography

“What is WikiLeaks.” About. WikiLeaks. Last modified November 3, 2015. https://wikileaks.org/What-is-Wikileaks.html.

Anderson, Benedict R. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. New York: Verso, 2006.

Bey, Hakim. T.A.Z.: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism. The Anarchist Library, 1985. https://ia800208.us.archive.org/14/items/al_Hakim_Bey_T.A.Z._The_Temporary_Autonomous_Zone_Ontological_Anarchy_Poetic_Terror/Hakim_Bey__T.A.Z.__The_Temporary_Autonomous_Zone__Ontological_Anarchy__Poetic_Terrorism_a4.pdf.