Oh Hey There

Interpreting Pac-Man

Over the past few days, I’ve come across about four different analyses/re-interpretations of the arcade game Pac-Man. Here they are:

1. The Existential Nightmare
   Courtesy of the videogame poetry collection Blue Wizard Is About To Die!, this interpretation imagines what it must be like to be Pac-Man—i.e. spending your whole existence in a closed maze under constant pursuit by four pernicious ghosts. Here are some sample lines:
   
   They are coming for me:
   THEY ARE COMING FOR ME!
   and I am
   powerless
   to stop them.
   
   The characteristic features of this interpretation are (1) the endowment Pac-Man with full human emotions (not surprising, given that this interpretation is more or less the product of young person’s imaginative identification with their game avatar) and (2) a Sisyphean sense of repetition where progress is not progress at all.
   
   
2. The Evolutionary/Ecological Perspective
   In the faux-essay on Pac-Man in Lucky Wander Boy, the narrator offers three interpretations about Pac-Man, though we will only consider two (the third is a much more metaphysical and incoherent rant on the subjectivity of Pac-Man-ness). The first is passing reference to the parallels between the conflict of Pac-Man and the ghosts and the checks and balances of natural selection. Here, Pac-Man is a creature with an insatiable appetite; he seeks to consume as much as he can from his environment. The ghosts act as the predacious agents of natural selection, keeping the Pac-Man and his continual consumption in check. The focus of this interpretation, then, is not so much the experience of being Pac-Man but rather the repetitive conflict between Pac-Man and the ghosts. Kudos should be given for incorporating Pac-Man’s eating into the interpretation.
   
   
3. The Marxist Interpretation
   The second Lucky Wander Boy interpretation, this analysis recasts Pac-Man as a much more sinister force that devours resources in light of opposition. To quote the book:
   
   We are reminded of Marx’s “need of a constantly expanding market” that “chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe” with the “vocation to approach, by quantitative increase, as near as possible to absolute wealth,” casting the Pac-Man in the role of corporate anti-hero in a utopian fantasy where the agents protesting his unfettered domination of the maze-world actually defeat him in the end.
   
   This metaphor asserts a specific context with a specific conflict unto essentially the same framework as above. It’s essentially the same idea just with different names attached.
   
   
4. Old Wizard’s Interpretation about Unity for a Common Goal or Some Shit
   Drawn from Old Wizard’s recent countdown of the top arcade games, this one is the least cogent interpretation I’ve seen, though it is compelling because it places emphasis solely on the ghosts and it draws most literally from the game’s “text.” I quote it in its entirety:
   
   While there is no background story or disernable plot, woven into the game is a complicated philosophy. The four villanious cast members: Inky, Pinky, Blinky and Clyde share a commonality: They are united kinsmen who have placed a jihad on Pac-man. Aside from the ghost’s differences in naming, they maintain a unified front once they emerge from their crypt to chase Pac-man. Together they stand. Clyde, with his uncharacteristic name is held in the same esteem by the other ghosts. Pinky, questionably a female, is given the same voting rights as the rest. Together they stand, divided they fall. The lesson learned is that you should be accepting of differences when you are united with a common goal, even if you’re named Clyde, who made me wet the bed at night as a child. Pac-man: The most basic arcade game out there, revered by the adults that suckled on its tender joystick in their youth, yet all the while teaching us a lesson that can change the world, if we all just learned to accept Clyde.
   
   This is a playful interpretation. It’s not meant to be taken seriously, but it is remarkable for its faithfulness.

The reasons I draw attention to these interpretations are that (a) I’ve been itching to write something longer about gaming and that (b) it is through the similarities and differences of these analyses that we can draw attention to some of the most salient elements of Pac-Man’s design. Indeed, to cut to the chase, here are the main features of the game Pac-Man, as high-lighted in the above four interpretations:

• The game takes place on a closed, static maze.
• There is a conflict between the player’s avatar and four ghosts. This conflict is asymmetrical: The ghosts exist to destroy Pac-Man; Pac-Man exists to survive.
• This conflict does not end, no matter the stage.
  
• Pac-Man’s survival is task-bound. He must complete the task of dot collection in order to progress to the next stage.

As we can see, it’s a pretty simple template. All you really need for a Pac-Man interpretation is an unending conflict on a closed unchanging playing field, some element of collection or arbitrary labor, and an imagination. And given this simplicity, it’s not hard to see how Pac-Man has been a favorite choice for reanalysis.

Previously:
Pac-Man Light Grafitti
A Pac-Man Mural