Theorizing larp : why, for whom and how ?

Remark : this article is a translation of the French article "Pourquoi, pour qui, et comment théoriser le GN" written by The Cell. This article is available in the French part of this website.

Foreword

Here are, in short, the main ideas developed in this article. They answer to « why » and « for whom ». We will also try to determine what are the means to succeed (« How ») and the restraints that are typical to our regions (France, Belgium, Swtizerland).

1. Associate larp to the family of already theorized narrative and entertainment media (close ones : improvisation contest, corporate-aimed role playing game, psychodrama – distant ones : cinema, theatre). Identify the singularities of larp compared to these other media.
• Make larp accessible to people who are unfamiliar with the concept so they can use it for other purposes.
2. Find a collective language between the different international cultures that practise larp.
• Know what we do and say it loud and clear, give to the player the means to explain what he does, all the more larp is not part of the common culture.
• Vulgarise, reassure and make larp known.
3. Improve the current practice of larp and discover new ones (innovate, evolve).

The narrative media family

Larp pulled up

By getting closer to already recognised media, larp will benefit from many positive parallels. Indeed, setting larp next to those media will help to define which tools could be used within the framework of larp events.

It will be a matter of identifying the tools that could be picked up, partially or totally, among media whose theories benefit from unquestionable experience.

• Theatre
• Cinema
• Psychodramas
• Corporate role-playing games
• Improvisation contests
• Reality shows
• ... 

Example:
Many theater techniques make possible the quick creation of strong characters that comply with fundamental factors. Such methods could be applied to larp to improve the creation of characters (or minor characters).

Opening up to the outside

There are more people practising the above-mentioned media than people doing larp (for now). By relating larp to well-known principles, we allow the external actors of this big family to build a bridge to their fields and thus to understand what we do. Showing the similarities between larp and those media will broaden our mutual perspectives and create bridges between these areas. So it is quite probable that the larp community could expand that way.

Exemple:
By appending an academical side to larp, we minimize its mainly entertaining aspect. This idea of seriousness might open new doors and turn theater or cinema communities’ attention to it, as a way to improve their practice. The principles of simulation, of bringing actors together to create bounds, of role play, etc. can be extended to a larp system, in order to improve the pertinency of those methods (e.g. The Lords of the Rings and the actors playing Hobbits).

Professionnalisation

By working this proximity, new concepts can emerge, halfway to larp. Some experiences have already proved them to be viable, and there are places to be taken in several fields.

Example :
One can imagine larp as a basis for the creation of reality shows that would approach historical reconstitution and role playing. La Vie de Château, broadcasted on Arte, is a successful example, while Le Royaume, on TF1, failed to raise interest.

Finding a common language between the different communities

Larp developed mainly by the rule of thumb these past twenty years. The Internet, along with the new information technologies, helped to realise the sometimes strong cultural differences that exists between various larp styles. Even though there is a common basis to each event in each country, the way it is defined and the terms used are mainly local. Everyone tends to grimly defend their own designations, while in the end the concept that underlies them is identical. This diversity of terms confuses the larp-practising people when they leave their local frame.

Larp or GN ?

Theoretics will help to the creation of a common, cross-cultural language that will give the international community its cohesion. This langage will also allow to better define the similarities and differences between the cultures, and to mutually enrich these cultures through the comparisons. Beyond the homogenization of designations, one will have to accept the use of more precise terms defining concepts that exist in larp, which won’t be easily done.

A structured and definite language will also provide the communication with tools. Such a contribution will be much appreciated in all fields :

• In the commercial sector : using the same references will help to make supply and demand match (e.g. “I want a pirate suit.” – “For which style of play ? Realistic and immersionist ? Blazing dramatist  or minimaxing gamist ?).
• In the information media : by providing a clear definition of what we do, we wipe out the vagueness that lets one relate larp to events that have nothing to do with it. Thus we can more easily dissociate ourselves from tempting amalgams fancied by sensationalism lovers (e.g. the Carpentras case , the Mireille Dumas case ).
• In the private environment : we will provide the larp-practising people with a way to describe to their relatives what they do precisely. It is indeed very difficult today to define larp to non initiate people. The parallels brought by theory will help to use concepts that already exisit in our cultures to explain what we do in a better way.
• In the larp environment :
• Furthermore, it is symptomatic to observe that the ignorance of larpers on larp leads to an alteration of larp basic principles (e.g. being named after one’s character in the everyday life, stop talking about one’s character as a third party and merge one’s aspirations with one’s character’s, taking care of one’s looks rather than one’s role, etc. A good example is the Arte broadcast “Tracks”, that failed to understand the nature of the role because such a notion was not essential to the interviewed larpers).
• To tag a larp game, along with its style of play, will make it more appealing to potential players.

Example :
- Singular fortress of spicy analogies, France, and, to a lesser extent, French-speaking countries, stay a good example of the eclecticism that defines larp. Semi-réel [half-real], GN [from Grandeur Nature, meaning life-size], théâtre-aventure [theater-adventure], jeu d’aventure [adventure game], huis-clos [in camera]… For many years, all these designations have been brought together and recognised worldwide under the acronym larp, which is, de facto, the standard term when discussing about live role playing games everywhere in the world.
- The word “Bourrin” [nag], as poetic as it is, does not define the same thing in France and in Belgium, for the reference differs.
- The word “diégèse ” [diegesis] is not used very often, when it defines a major concept of larp. To discuss over the “time-in”, the “game world,” the “in-game reality”, etc. is nothing less than to discuss over the diegesis, or one of its aspects. To use that word, to understand it and to see how it defines other narrative medias is very enriching for the larp organizer, and facilitates the understanding of larp for those already familiar with that notion.

Training

At present, the only way of learning to build an event is to “engage in business”. The only marks one can refer to are mainly of practical nature, being either advice or direct help. One can only by trained to the practice of larp by practising. Theory will make possible to train future larp organizers without forcing them to use every effort – and run a risk -  to create on their own. Theory stands as a basis for training, and training opens the doors of larp to social environments, to young people, etc. Becoming an actual course of study that would stand next to other culture-, entertainment- or social field-focused trainings, is not an utopy. It first requires a theoretical basis. Larp can become a relevant educational tool in our regions; it has been for several years already in Scandinavia.

Example :
“Les GNiales” [from génial, meaning brilliant] is a French convention dedicated to larp. Most subjects, workshops or conferences that can be seen there are focused on the practice of larp, not on its understanding (theory). This is normal because the knowledge is far more practical than theoretical.

Furthermore, with such a corpus, we could see larp events emerge in places where larp was never heard of before (e.g. countries in Africa) for the understanding of the larp creation mechanisms would be available to most people. We could witness a self-induced larp generation instead of of the traditional knowledge transmission that has underlain larp creation until now.

Improve the current practice

Taking a stronger step

The main argument that should convince the most hostile people to larp theorization is its very contribution to practice. Theory could be helpful to any larp genre. Nowadays, the basis on which organizational decisions are taken is mainly experience and assessment. Evidently, this way of doing can suffer from errors of judgement.

Thanks to a better comprehension of the mechanisms that rule our activities, we will be able to build models out of them. Not only will these models help us to point out our mistakes, but they will help us to prevent them, through a better understanding of the consequences our choices can lead to. Thus we will be able to avoid effects that would differ from initial expectations.

Many examples can ground this :

• Through the diegesis, we can learn how important it is to define a common context, in order to facilitate the player’s interpretation by easing the effort of abstraction that the immersion requires.
• Modelling the way in which simulation, rules and game world affect each other will help to avoid making mistakes throughout the creation process (e.g. create the simulation rules before the universe, or create the universe without having defined a style of play beforehand).
• Considerations on very specific concepts will allow people to choose a style of play while being conscious of the implications (e.g. in Belgium, the hit location based or hit point based system).
• The critical mass principle will allow people to anticipate the main avoidable, and often stumbled upon issues resulting from the difference between the players’ style of play and the one wanted by the organizers. Besides, theory will bring tools to avoid issues by clearly describing an event to the players, in order to keep only the ones that fit to the wanted style.
• Even if it is already possible today to evaluate an event with objective criteria (e.g. : the organizers’ responsibility, working methods, foresight, principle of caution, etc.), the taboo of “there are neither good nor bad larp styles, they are all different” could be dropped in order to make room for new objective, game-based criteria to rate an event (e.g. an organisation  wanting a specific style of play but making contradictory choices will be depreciated).

Taking a step further

The other point is the discovery of new larp styles and new ways of practice. Experimenting new theories will bring new tools, models or systems in the present game. Even though the choices currently made in the field of simulation seem obvious, many other yet unexplored methods might prove themselves of superior interest. Only theoretics will allow to reach undiscovered corners of larp, for they will (re)define its very limits.

Example :
The system of narrative participation, coming from theoretics, is a new style of play that still has to be tested, but it brings a whole new approach to larp, to the place of the organizers, to the players’ responsibilities, etc. In short, new, interesting possibilities are opening to the community.

How to theorize larp ?

The diffusion (in our regions of France and Belgium)

By diffusing theoretical ideas on larp on the largest possible scale, we can try to create a more international community. The contact between the different larp federations, although very hearty, is often restricted to practical aspects, because theory is a neglected field in our regions. By showing the result of theoretical work (preliminary from other places or recently created here) to these federations, the information will be relayed in each country. This will also bring a very useful knowledge to the people in charge of these federations. Therefore, their contribution, even their support, is needed for the emergence of a theory that will prove its value by being put into practice.

For a few years, internet websites have been offering information over different theoretical larp schools. Manifestos, models or dogmas have defined sometimes very distinct views of larp. Academical attemps have been made with the coming of the Interactive Drama, in order to theorize larp in a more general way, by relating it to the theatrical art.

Although many websites currently talk about theoretics and larp, they are often slanted by the school they defend, or inaccessible due to the language barrier. Scandinavia and the United States are well ahead in the field of reflexion over the interactive drama ; it is therefore very enriching to take cognisance of the ideas they already produced.

Larp.eu

Such a partition of the available information is a restraint to the birth and growth of ideas. Consequently, we decided to create a generic web portal, international and centralizing, over theoretical knowledge. Named Larp.eu, it will be open to the public and oriented towards interactivity through the writing, the confrontation of ideas, debates, the emergence of an international community, the different languages used, the repository of works and resources, etc. The portal will be mainly in English and will offer international sections in any requested language. Everyone’s contribution will be supported with responsibilities over the portal, so that the interested actors can involve themselves to an extent that suits them.

What are the restraints to theorization in our regions ?

Some actors in the larp community do not necessarily want everybody to be able to understand what larp is and how it works. This comes from a certain pride to practise a still hermetical activity.

More generally, the very notions of tribalism and elistism restrain the diffusion of larp knowledge. On the whole, the community is very conservative and reluctant to evolution. Once settled down, keeping one’s place is good enough. It is indeed quite hard to build up an image, even a reputation in that environment. It is mainly accomplished through other people’s (re)cognition of one’s own activities. A thorough change of activities means that one has to go through an arduous work process again and risk to lose one’s image because of the renewal. Not to mention that some just whish to keep their habits as well.

All these positions, though honorable, are not likely to make new theories all the rage.

On the other hand, a few emblematic characters (local potentates) depreciate the evolution that could come with reflexion, because they fear to lose their influence on a still closed environment. What we mean is that there are some weighty people in the larp community who are ready to maintain their circle of acquaintances in a convenient obscurantism, just to keep their ego in good shape.

The difference

Larp is still, and above all, a game in our countries, and thus it stays entertainment. Therefore, many people see its theorization as a useless intellectual endeavour compared to the goals of its practice : amusement.

On top of that, theoretics could restrain the practice of some people, in a way that it would consume time otherwise allocated to the realisation of larp events.

The history

About twenty years of existence without having approached theoretics should prove that it possible to refrain from it. This, if we pass over the fact that what was done decades ago is still repeated today with the same assumptions.

Comments (0)

Show/Hide comments

Write comment Show/Hide comment form

Name

Title

Comment

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment