Nordic-Russian Larp Dialog

“Nordic Larp: Theatre, Art and Game” by Jaakko Stenros

(Reprinted from Nordic Larp)

Summary: The author considers whether Nordic Larp is theatre, art, or a game, and concludes that while there are areas of commonality it does not fit well into either category. They are not theatre as theatre is primarily performed for an audience. While some may be art, they are not recognised as such in any institutional sense. And while stemming from a gaming tradition, they do not meet the common definitions of games as they lack clear outcomes, winners and losers. But the comparison of larp to these categories can tell us a few things about larp, and theatre, art, and games (or at least the common institutional definitions thereof). Finally, Stenros suggests that attempts to classify larp uniquely as one or other of these things may be driven by a quest for status, legitimacy and acceptance (and the money that may go with those things) rather than any real resemblance.

Comments: This is a good, thoughtful article and a good way of looking at the debate. One obvious point is that rpgs (or sandbox games in general) do not fit well at all into common academic definitions of “game”, which seems to be a fairly major failing on their part. The comparison with theatre, and the discussion on the role of the audience and the need for someone to perform to (versus larp being its own audience, performed for its players, with some of the performance existing only in the players’ heads) is also interesting. And the focus on institutional recognition as vital to being art is telling.

Both Russian commentators seem to think that it is important that larp is regarded as “legitimate” by non-larpers. Andrey Andryushkov wants larp to be recognized “as a comprehensive and authentic form”. Anna Volodina thinks we should take the popularization of larp seriously, aiming to establish it as “an independent cultural phenomenon” which “challenge[s] theatre, games, and modern art in mass consciousness”. As Stanros said, status games. But Volodina’s commentary is useful for highlighting the marketing issue: how larp is described to non-larpers will affect their expectations. If you’re marketing larp to mundanes, that’s something to think about.

“The Psychology of Immersion: Individual Differences and Psychological Phenomena Relating to Immersion” by Lauri Lukka

(Reprinted from The Cutting Edge of Nordic Larp, a 2014 Knutpunkt book)

Summary: The author examines immersion in larps from a psychological perspective. They discuss basic psychological traits, including the CANOE model and empathy. Based on psychological studies of actors, they predict the personality traits likely to be shared by larpers, before discussing immersion as a process. Finally,they speculate on whether immersion is personality-trait or skill based.

Comments: This is a highly theoretical article, and unfortunately not of much practical use. Insofar as it touches on actual larp practice, it states the obvious: the more a larp supports immersion with e.g. costuming, set-dressing and sound, the easier it is for players to immerse. The discussion of the potential psychological traits of larpers is interesting, but I am not sure that actors are a good model, at least in larp communities with a strong connection with tabletop roleplaying.

Alexy Gorodnichev likewise doubts whether actors are a good model for larpers, specifically on the basis of extroversion (I guess the Russian larp community, like New Zealand, has a lot of geeks).

This book is now available in PDF on Google Drive.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5cG42ceWxSHNm1oV2lraW81aUU/view?pref=2&pli=1