The Legend of Zelda and Philosophy_ I Link Therefore I Am - Luke Cuddy [8]
But these explanations may strike some as empty. When we vividly visualize being killed, emotion is created because we are consciously constructing a vivid image in our minds. Without that type of visualization, we don’t have a strong emotional response to the scenario. But if our thoughts only cause emotional response when we visualize them, then this doesn’t explain your response to Wind Waker, because you don’t visualize the world of the game while you play. You don’t have to—you see it onscreen. In fact, it’s very hard to play a videogame and simultaneously visualize something else. Also, some events that spur emotions, such as a monster suddenly popping up in front of you, happen too quickly to form conscious thoughts. The thought theory doesn’t explain why actually seeing these fictional images without consciously reflecting on the game’s situations can create emotion.
Let’s Pretend We Want to Kill Ganondorf
A third theory that attempts to dissolve the paradox of fiction is the pretend theory, which has been championed by the philosopher Kendall Walton.6 Walton’s theory is a general theory of how we interact with artworks, but it is as applicable to videogames as to paintings or films. The pretend theory is an approach that is more plausible than it may first appear and is a primary framework through which philosophers discuss works of art. Walton argues that interacting with representational art is analogous to playing children’s games of make-believe. He says that in games of make-believe, children use props to imagine fictional scenarios. For example, Tom and Jane might play a game of make-believe in which they pretend to be Link and Tetra. Tom grabs a yardstick and swings it as if it were a sword. Jane grabs a cardboard tube and looks through it as if it were a telescope. The yardstick and the tube are props they use to play the game of pretend. On Walton’s account, Tom and Jane’s actions authorize them to imagine certain events in their game. Jane might hand the tube to Tom, point to a house, and say “we’re approaching Windfall Island!” Her actions suggest to Tom that he is supposed to pretend that the house is a place called Windfall Island.
Walton claims that the process of using props in pretend play is analogous to the process of engaging with artworks. In fact, Walton thinks that the analogy is so strong that we should actually think of engagement with representational fictions as a form of pretend play. When we play a videogame, the images and sounds of the game are props like the yardstick and tube in the children’s game. The game player is authorized by these images and sounds to imagine features of the fictional world of the game in the same way children might use props to imagine certain features of the fictional world of their pretend play.
When you play Wind Waker and see the image of The King of Red Lions talking to Link, you’re authorized to pretend that a magical talking boat really exists. These images authorize you to pretend that this boat exists in the same way that Jane’s actions authorize Tom to pretend that they’re approaching Windfall Island. Or imagine that you walk into a room where your friend is playing Wind Waker and you see Link sailing in the ocean. You say, “Oh, you finally figured out how to get the sail.” You don’t believe that you are looking at an actual sail; you understand that what you are seeing is a flicker of light on a screen. Nonetheless, you refer to it as a sail. According to the pretend theory, your comment indicates that you are pretending that what you see is a sail, even though you know it isn’t.
Walton uses this theory to explain how artworks generate emotional responses. Walton describes Charles, who watches a horror movie about a deadly slime.7 During the film, when the slime approaches the camera, Charles