Because there is so far not a single work of IF that deserves to be treated as serious literature. If I’ve missed something, please do correct me.
Here’s a somewhat less specious analogy. A guy at a KKK rally politely raises his arm and says “Yeah, I totally hate Jews and papists, but don’t you guys know that ‘clan’ is spelled with a C? Don’t you guys wan’t to break the stereotype of the Clan being perceived as a bunch of illiterate hillbillies?”
When they’re twelve, no. When they’re 40, yes.
Not very safe, surely. There are many online communities which are far more interested in giving mutual support and far less interested in criticism than the IF community.
Will a work of IF be subject to far less scrutiny than a novel, and will it be judged by lower standards than a (serious) novel? Of course. That immediately follows from the fact that the community of IF readers is so much smaller than the community of novel readers. I don’t think this fact is particularly interesting, or revealing, or that anyone is under any delusions about it. Nobody has claimed that IF has already been proved to be one of the great branches of literature.
Does that mean IF should not be taken seriously? Well, if people were saying things like “this is Adam Cadre, and he is as important as Tolstoy”, they would be taking the medium far more seriously than is currently warranted. On the other hand, if they were saying “there is interesting work being done in this medium, and it something we should keep exploring”, they are taking the medium seriously in a way that it surely deserves.
I, too, find some truth in this, though I don’t agree with the attitude (or it doesn’¨t agree with me).
Of course, writing IF* for the mere fun of it is less competitive and less serious than trying to get a job (or getting a novel published (or making a living out of writing IF)), because else you’ll go hungry or lose your home. Indeed, THAT IS PART OF WHAT MAKES IT FUN. If your aim in life is to make a success out of yourself, go become a dentist or a rock star or a senator; don’t write IF for the fun of it. If your aim in life is to show great courage, go join the dissidents in Syria or do some other worthwhile thing.
If you still choose to write IF for the fun it, remember that things freely done although they serve no further purpose at all are surely the best of things (as they are done because they are perceived to be valuable in their own right not just as means to an end) and those most worthy of a good human life.
While I can’t address the whole issue directly - indeed, I have no interest in doing so, because I lack the discursive and argumentative skills of most people involved - I can’t help but think of “Exhibition” every time someone says how far from maturity IF is.
(and no, the fact that it’s not “normal IF” isn’t lost in me. I could also mention Anchorhead and All Alone, but I don’t think people arguing against the maturity of IF will recognise horror as a mature genre. Their loss.)
I know exactly what you’re talking about, but I don’t see the critics and/or the resisters as ‘haters’. They merely feel very strongly about their own theories about what is the best way to go: so do I. I can understand them on that level. Plus there is a macho culture that infected (and in my opinion, ruined) all of USENET, where most of this community originated. I feel that in this webforum (and in other places, like on Twitter) that put-down-the-noobs culture is waning and losing its grip on the IF crowd; people are starting to see other fans as the great throbbing opportunities they are. Specific people who I recall used to not be so friendly, on USENET where the prevailing 'tude I felt was always of knee-jerk dismissal of new ideas, seem to have mellowed. So there is hope; people are giving more thought to the consequences to the medium of their individual behaviour toward new interested parties – i.e. the culture has been adultificating. And anyway, they were never truly against you in any personal way: they only felt as passionately about their ideas as you do about yours.
Paul.
P.S. As to the question of this thread; it’s a pointless question. If you are doing something in order to be ‘taken seriously’ then you are doing it wrong and will likely fail, regardless. Only the things that you would definitely do regardless of whether people take them seriously, will you ever truly master. This goes for IF as well as film, novels, etc. If your motivation is to be taken seriously, then you will probably stop soon after you achieve that (and BTW it is trivially easy to achieve people taking you seriously compared to actually creating a sophisticated work of art) – which means you likely won’t go very far.
Paul.
Distilled truth.
There is something in that. People whose only exposure to IF has been TAs may think that’s all there is to it - and unfortunately there are many like that. Someones first work of IF will likely be a TA (often set in a setting known to them), and people’s exposure to IF may be limited to knowing someone who dabbles in TAs, or to a school assignment.
And of course TAs are a good entry point to writing IF. One learns the basics of the programming system one uses, and one can discover whether one has what it takes to advance. And I agree that, barring philosophical/theological interpretations (did one choose/God ordain you/the deterministic universe made it unavoidable for you to be born in the West, without Down’s syndrom, …), that is a case of chance. Ten people try, one succeeds, because (s)he has the right combination of will power, zeal, talent, health, environment, et cetera. TAs are a great and rather safe way to try.
But those who do advance often move way beyond TAs (Galatea, Shade), but it is up to the IF community to make this fact known, if it wants public acclaim. Make known that (1) there are many genres of IF besides TA, and (2) as with any art form, the material with artistic merit is only a part of the total production.
Within story writing there is the subclass “literature”, and a body of works generally accepted as belonging to that class. IF could profit from having such a body recognised, and distinguished, from the mass of IF works, I think. A newcomer who knows the work (s)he plays is outside that body will not disparage the art form based on that work, and those who are so inclined can get accustomed with the “great artistic IF” the way people may want to have read some of the great literature.
You need to define the difference between IF and TA (which I assume means Text Adventure), otherwise your post is rather hard to follow. For most people the terms are synonymous.
All right. I thought I followed bukayeva’s use of the terms, but maybe I am wrong. For me, TA (text adventure indeed) signifies a certain type of game, whereas IF (interactive fiction, for completeness’ sake) is a medium that can be used to write TAs, but also many other kinds of works, many of which are not games at all. The paradigm TA is of course ADVENT/Adventure/Colossal cave, and is about earning points by discovering elements/gathering treasures, passing doors by finding the appropriate keys, getting through mazes, solving puzzles, et cetera.
IF can be used to express many kinds of art: tragedy/comedy, advertisement, [word-]painting (Jacqueline’s walk, what’s its name), literature, theatre, you name it. Dance and music might be hard, though. Pointing people to quality works spanning the width of the spectrum may positively change their perception of the medium.
Does that help?