The Aesthetics of Flow: Positive Psychology and Videogames
I sound like a broken record: Is flow and repetition the same thing? Bolter defines flow as “the most enjoyable and meaningful”(7) experience. And Csikszentmihalyi describes flow as hyper-focused creativity in which personal subjectivity is lost in moment of creation. Yet, how is intense creativity also, as Bolter claims, “emotionally monochromatic” (10)?
So, while I truly enjoy (addictive) monotony, and playing computer Solitaire for hours, I do not describe that experience as flow. It’s certainly an experience, and certainly a phenomenon that these authors are embracing and noticing is a trend in modern media. But what purpose does adopting the language of positive psychology serve, and for what ends? Seemingly, it is to legitimize the videogame experience and videogame analysis. Within the humanities the trend now is to adopt the discourse of cognitive science for textual analysis. What is being legitimized and what are the implications of that “legitimacy”? What are the politics behind the maneuver at that time (2012) when videogames are pretty legitimate academically?
Moreover, who wants to play a game described as an “endless crescendo”? Seriously. That sounds awful.