The nature
of Portal’s plot ties in with the overarching theme of Marcuse’s One
Dimensional Man; that is, we’re consensual slaves within a system of oppression
since we know of no other way to exist. We cannot simply break out of the
system, or as Marcuse puts it in chapter 1, “Non-conformity with the system
itself appears to be socially useless.” If Chell decides to not comply with
GLaDOS’s orders, there’s no benefit to her; she’d either starve to death in an
experimentation room or be executed for being a failed experiment. The only way
to effect change under oppression of the system is to revolt within the system.
The
motivating factor provided to Chell for all the torment of the experiments is
something material—cake. The only way to attain this great reward is through
the suffering of harsh labor, and no absolute, tangible guarantee is provided
that it’s a reward we’ll receive. However, there is one thing that is absolute:
total rejection of the mandated labor will not result in cake or any sort of
reward, but instead simply death. This takes us to an important point f chapter
4: “The prevailing mode of freedom is servitude.” The further you play, the
more you realize you can break outside the system, if just temporarily. As you
go further, you find more and more ways to exploit the system and niggle your
way to liberation from total control of one master. For those who replay the
game multiple times, we find more efficient ways to break free from the system
and attain liberation even faster. We learn to break the system only by being
within the system.
Another
thing we learn through playing is that the rewards are false. Late in the game,
we finds notes scribbled on the walls telling us that the cake is a lie—it
doesn’t exist. As players, did we care about the cake? Probably not, but we can
assume that it may have been a driving force for characters within the
universe. For any other test subject driven by this, we could draw a parallel
to Marcuse’s idea of “false needs” presented in chapter 1. Did we really need
the cake? Should we find the cake, was the cake worth suffering for? What
happens after we consume the cake? Must we undergo more testing in order to
find another? Did the test subjects have any goals beyond simply getting cake?
In the end, however, the player’s path results in finding freedom instead of
cake.
There’s
also an aspect that could be pointed out as ironic: we as players don’t choose
to fight for freedom. Our only choice is whether or not to play the game, and
if we decide to do that, it follows that we do as the developers intended and
break free of the oppression imposed by GLaDOS through the use of strict rules
defined by the game’s developers. The ultimate result of playing is freedom;
there’s no choice to decide to play through new test chambers indefinitely, and
choosing to die only forces you to be reborn and accomplish the task assigned
to you. We thus attain an illusion of freedom and feel like we’re defeating the
system, when we’re merely playing by its rules. It ties back into the earlier
quote: “Thus, the fact that the prevailing mode of freedom is servitude.” We
know we’re “free” because the game tells us we’re free at the end, but are we
really? Aside from the choice of deciding to play the game, did we decide whether
we wanted freedom from GLaDOS in that manner? We defeated one means of
oppression only to uphold the other. However, this is more of a meta-analysis
of the game and not so much analyzing the content within the game, but I still
hold it to be a valid point. “Under the
rule of a repressive whole, liberty can be made into a powerful instrument of
domination.” (Chapter 1) Throughout the course of the game, we’re not
considering that we’re still bound by the laws of the developers, only that
we’re breaking the laws defined by GLaDOS.
In a way, Portal does somewhat
embody the reality of the endless struggle for freedom. The limitations of the
game can be seen to represent a newfound freedom supporting another means of
oppression. Once the character achieves freedom, what are they to do with it?
Must Chell fall into a new cycle of toil in order to build a shelter and find
food? If we play Portal 2, we realize that there is no freedom for her—there’s
just more hard labor and oppression under a new ruler.
1 comment:
Very nice first paragraph.
I like the 2nd paragraph too, with one caveat. The cake as a summation of all material rewards and desires is so over the top and absurd, I'd like you tot think through the comedy of the situation a little bit. Which isn't to say that it can't be both comic and serious at once - but the comedy really should be addressed. In the 3rd paragraph, you say that we learn by playing that the rewards were false - but does anyone ever trust GLaDOS from the beginning?
"However, this is more of a meta-analysis of the game and not so much analyzing the content within the game, but I still hold it to be a valid point. “Under the rule of a repressive whole, liberty can be made into a powerful instrument of domination.” (Chapter 1) " -- This is quite good. I still wish you were addressing the comedy/satire here. I also wonder whether you're really conducting a meta-analysis of this game, of video games in general, or of a genre of video games. It's fine as an analysis of Portal, but I'm not sure you're really only talking about Portal.
The final paragraph is fine on the topic of Portal 2, but I still suspect you are trying to articulate ideas about more than Portal itself. The other flaw/limitation is that you don't really spend that much attention on relevant details of the game. But the devil is in the details, always, in video games just like in novels and poetry, and for the argument to be really convincing, you need to address details, whether of visuals, script, or gameplay. For my part, I still think that some attention to the comedy would be helpful for your argument.
Post a Comment