Al Alcorn about "Everybody thinks they're a historian"

[Marc Oberhäuser]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-02-11-everybody-thinks-theyre-a-historian-alcorn

[+LS650]

Interesting read....

[+Random Terrain]

"He pointed to the recently Kickstarted documentary World 1-1, saying it did an excellent job of interviewing pioneers like himself and Atari founder Nolan Bushnell, but questioned the filmmakers' decision to include their recollections alongside those who were passing along stories second- or third-hand."

 

I blame that on the I love the 80s type of shows that have become a fad that won't go away. The general idea is to grab a handful of sub-D-listers who don't know what they're talking about to vomit up misinformation or make painfully unfunny comments. That fad has infected other types of shows and documentaries.

[Rhomaios]

As an actual historian, this is very depressing. These are the folks who barely passed their history courses in high school/college, who have never so much even taken a historiography course, who have never bothered themselves with historical method, and yet they feel that what they are doing is "common sense". It's only because this is a subject that they like, but it doesn't mean they're qualified to even begin to touch it.

 

Hopefully real historians will come along soon and rectify the situation.

[chuckwalla]

Interesting read....

 

Agreed!

[Pixelboy]

So secrecy is hurting the business from a historical standpoint? Well tough, buddy! Technical/industrial secrecy is a necessary evil in the instantly interconnected world we live in today, where R&D is expensive, hackers have virtual bots working for them 24/7, and greedy people simply cannot be trusted.

 

I can certainly respect Alcorn's contribution, but his vision of today is a bit skewed by the fact that he was around when the gaming business was still in flux and everything was possible, like creating a computer from off-the-shelf parts in your own garage, and then putting it on the market and making an actual buck with it. Not easy to do, prone to total failure, but possible at the time.

 

Today it's hard just to come up with a product (or even a simple idea) that hasn't been done yet, let alone building a business model around it. And if you do make something worthwhile, just watch as cheap copies of your idea come trickling out of China barely six months later...

[bennybingo]

So secrecy is hurting the business from a historical standpoint? Well tough, buddy! Technical/industrial secrecy is a necessary evil in the instantly interconnected world we live in today, where R&D is expensive, hackers have virtual bots working for them 24/7, and greedy people simply cannot be trusted.

 

I can certainly respect Alcorn's contribution, but his vision of today is a bit skewed by the fact that he was around when the gaming business was still in flux and everything was possible, like creating a computer from off-the-shelf parts in your own garage, and then putting it on the market and making an actual buck with it. Not easy to do, prone to total failure, but possible at the time.

 

Today it's hard just to come up with a product (or even a simple idea) that hasn't been done yet, let alone building a business model around it. And if you do make something worthwhile, just watch as cheap copies of your idea come trickling out of China barely six months later...

Amen to that! The business world in general is not even close to what it was in the late 60's & early 70's…and, even then, there was a TON of espionage. Just look at the tumultuous beginnings of Microsoft and Apple…they both poached each others intellectual properties, hardware and software designs and even their staff members. Apple flew a pirate flag for a reason…just sayin.

[karokoenig]

"When you're working on something truly new from an invention standpoint, showing it to other people, somebody might say, 'We tried that before and it didn't work because of this.' But no, you're going to keep it a secret and spend billions of dollars and rediscover the same thing."

 

There's the tiny but far-reaching difference between research in the technology business and research in natural sciences in general. In the natural sciences, you submit your results to peer-review and publish your results. Then they can be tested by the community and failed ideas get weeded out pretty quickly. As soon as technology (i.e. money) is involved: well, Acorn nailed it.

Edited February 15, 2015 by karokoenig

[CatPix]

So secrecy is hurting the business from a historical standpoint? Well tough, buddy! Technical/industrial secrecy is a necessary evil in the instantly interconnected world we live in today, where R&D is expensive, hackers have virtual bots working for them 24/7, and greedy people simply cannot be trusted.

There is a difference however in "hiding technology for future products" and "hiding facts from a 20 years old product".

A simple example is the Philips/nintendo partnership for the CD-i based add-on.

Both companies are so secretive about it, you have all kind of speculation and misinformation floating around (the first being that the CD-i was born as a SNES CD add-on). And we're talking big companies that still exit.

 

It seems no one cares about when was the first European cart-based console released.

It seems to be 1976. But no one can confirm, and despite looking, I never found any document, anything, like an ad, a sales document proving that is was 1976. And who are you goign to ask? Radofin closed somewhere in the 80's and no one even bothered to buy the name and assets. Maybe developers and employees in England still have information, hardware and software in their basement or attic, but almost 40 years later, it's certainly almost all gone.

So yeah, I agree, you can't ask Sony to reveal the tricks behind a nex microchip for a video product, but hiding the infos about the Playstation hardware? come on (it's an example. I do'nt know if Sony refuse or not to reveal the tricks of the PS1 hardware).

Edited February 15, 2015 by CatPix

[Oldbitcollector]

I having a hard time agreeing with his insinuation that archiving needs to be done by the experts. (I'm reading a little between the lines here, maybe I'm misreading)

I'm of the thought that anyone who is safe guarding these machines and materials from the landfill is doing a good thing, regardless of their experience, credidentals, etc.

 

I'm more frustrated with the fact that several well published individuals have published revisionist history to slant the details toward one or another company.

[CatPix]

I think he's more talking about facs than hardware.

From what I understood, he is more complaining that people collect facts here and there, and claim them true, without thoroughly checking relaible sources.

And also that many small attemps are made, wasting energy and money in little museum things rather than gathering a largte collection and place with much more money and workforce to build up something serious.

[high voltage]

Nice nod to Nolan at the end

[Jess Ragan]

Sounds like elitism to me. Just because you weren't directly involved in the industry doesn't mean that you have nothing to contribute to its culture and history. And someone like Alcorn will have the devil's own time making me stop.

[Torr]

By his logic, Teachers shouldn't be allowed to teach history such as the founding of America and Canada or World War I because they weren't "around to experience it".

It's great that young people are talking about what happened throughout video game's history, even if it happened years before they were born, its keeping the stories around and alive.

 

I do agree "revisionist history" and people only knowing less than half of what they talk about can be detrimental, but again, many school teachers are unfortunately as guilty of this, but those who WANT to learn will continue to pursue information and eventually come across the facts that correct the incorrect information they've already discovered... happens to me all the time when doing research.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Torr

[+Random Terrain]

. . . but those who WANT to learn will continue to pursue information and eventually come across the facts that correct the incorrect information they've already discovered...

And people will call them History Nazis (similar to Grammar Nazis). The average person doesn't care about being correct. They just want to half-ass everything and bloviate without being corrected. Regurgitating what they heard from another guy who heard something from somebody else who half-heard what some other dude said is good enough for them.

[Rhomaios]

By his logic, Teachers shouldn't be allowed to teach history such as the founding of America and Canada or World War I because they weren't "around to experience it".

It's great that young people are talking about what happened throughout video game's history, even if it happened years before they were born, its keeping the stories around and alive.

 

Did you nay-sayers actually read the article? That's not his logic at all. He's akin to saying history teachers shouldn't teach history as written by some author who doesn't know how to do history. He's not saying only those who were there can write history, but don't interview Joe Schmo for his thoughts on something when he wasn't there, when he's just making stuff up to complement the half-assed detective work he had done. It's clear as crystal this is what he meant.

 

I don't think there's a disagreement about that, is there?

[Torr]

To quote him; "It just really griped me to hear this guy telling about what it was like at Andy Capp's Tavern when we put the first Pong machine in there," Alcorn said. "He wasn't even alive at the time."

 

I've heard people talk about what it was like serving in or living everyday life during WWI. None of those people were involved in or born yet during WWI. So by his logic he's saying that such people should not be telling us about things that happened or what people experienced during said war because of their age. Age shouldn't matter. If it did, we wouldn't be allowed to have any discussion about anything that happened before, say, 1915.

 

To re-iterate, I DO agree that it's detrimental for people who know little on a subject to try "teach" it, but does he know "This Guy" and that he's a slackass who heard hearsay and is now repeating it without any real research into the matter? It's a possibility, yes, but it's also just "Old Curmudgeon" reasoning to say that since "This Guy" is young he must know nothing.

 

 

 

don't interview Joe Schmo for his thoughts on something when he wasn't there

 

Wish I could have said that to my teachers in school.

 

Sorry Prof, I'd like to do your assignment but I wasn't there, so any answer I give you will be infallibly incorrect, no matter where I do my research. Why don't you give the assignment to someone older and who experienced the subject first-hand?

Edited February 16, 2015 by Torr

[UberArcade]

I think a lot of people are missing the point he was making in the article. Most of the people from the early video game days are still here and they should be the source not a guy who wasn't there. Sure when they have all gone on to glory you will have to hear the history from somebody else. But no sense in having a guy my age tell you the history of Atari when I didn't actually work there and the people who did are still around. Just get off your ass and interview the people who made the history. That is the point I got from it and I agree. I don't need to see Wil Wheaton or somebody like that tell me what is was like to work for Atari.

[Rhomaios]

To quote him; "It just really griped me to hear this guy telling about what it was like at Andy Capp's Tavern when we put the first Pong machine in there," Alcorn said. "He wasn't even alive at the time."

 

I've heard people talk about what it was like serving in or living everyday life during WWI. None of those people were involved in or born yet during WWI. So by his logic he's saying that such people should not be telling us about things that happened or what people experienced during said war because of their age. Age shouldn't matter. If it did, we wouldn't be allowed to have any discussion about anything that happened before, say, 1915.

 

To re-iterate, I DO agree that it's detrimental for people who know little on a subject to try "teach" it, but does he know "This Guy" and that he's a slackass who heard hearsay and is now repeating it without any real research into the matter? It's a possibility, yes, but it's also just "Old Curmudgeon" reasoning to say that since "This Guy" is young he must know nothing.

 

 

 

 

Wish I could have said that to my teachers in school.

 

Sorry Prof, I'd like to do your assignment but I wasn't there, so any answer I give you will be infallibly incorrect, no matter where I do my research. Why don't you give the assignment to someone older and who experienced the subject first-hand?

 

Once again, he's not saying don't interview people unless you are there... This isn't difficult to understand, and I don't know why you are [deliberately?] misinterpreting what he's saying.

[Lost Dragon]

My humble and personal 'take on it':

As someone who has and continues to pour a lot of time into trying to get answers to Lost Games across numerous formats, it is bloody frustrating when you realise so much has been lost.People's memories are'nt getting better with age, code that was once sat on various storage medium been destroyed etc etc.

But what i find far worse are cases where, when KEY people were interviewed by UK Press, they were'nt asked the questions that could, once and for all put paid to claims/speculation over so many high profile games.Instead likes of myself/Unseen64/GTW etc are spending hours reaching out to people in hope we can clear up what was claimed in Magazine X.

Then you've ahem, 'jurnolists' just creating fabrications of events, person X was spoken to and said....which turns out to be utter rubbish or 'footage' is doctored to make a better case for it appearing on a platform of their choice or sales figures bumped up.

[Lost Dragon]

(Cont) IF your going to write an historical piece and you yourself did'nt live through it, i'd rather the writer made it clear from the start they are only going on information they've collected, name sources and say it was claimed by Magazine X that...person Y was quoted as saying....i spoke to such n such and they can recal....

 

 

There is no shame in being honest-you were there at the time, but it's a period of history your very interested in, keen to share what you've found with others etc, but if your going to present it as 'Factual' and yet you had no personal exp.of it, at the time, you and your editor, cannot, in all reality, get hyper defensive when your paying customers jump up and say WOAH here, that was not how it happened...the UK aspect of the A8 has been re-written enough times, let alone the NES, it's now reached point where if i pick up aUK mag with articles looking back at either, i feel like i've stepped into the Twilight Zone, actual events differ so much from whats been reported as fact.

[Torr]

 

Once again, he's not saying don't interview people unless you are there... This isn't difficult to understand, and I don't know why you are [deliberately?] misinterpreting what he's saying.

 

I'm not "misinterpreting" anything. I quoted him directly. *Okay, he didn't say exactly that person X SHOULDN'T talk about that day at Andy Capps' Tavern, however only a handful of people were actually there and, logically, by his statement he is saying that only those people can give an accurate statement about how it happened. Where are they now? If we can't find any of them to describe it first-hand we HAVE to go by records of that day, and to produce a "Show", someone must recount these stories verbally. If they're not allowed to do that, all they are left with being able to say is the date and address it happened. Period.

 

Inversely, you are taking what he said and "interpreting" it your own way in a "What he means is" manner which is the definition of "revisionism".

 

 

As for the idea of having people who were there at the time giving info as opposed to the younger generation, these people are 50+ years old now and increasingly difficult to get a hold of. Many people, even on this site, that do research by getting first hand info from the people "who were there" have trouble contacting said people and when contacted they sometimes just don't want to talk about it or can't recall the information. Also, unfortunately, some of these older folks are just so full of themselves (I'm thinking of HSW here) they glorify themselves and IF they decide to bend facts (or just honestly recall them incorrectly because memory can be fuzzy) there's is no one else to correct them, and their new bent takes on how it happened leave the information forever skewed. More revisionism.

 

*I think the "Pac-Man 1982 Review" thread is a good example of this. Many "Facts" are being thrown around, but Retro Rogue is the one of the only guys doing so who has done any major research into the Facts he is stating. But (just from my point of view) it seems that the programmer himself has given a few contradicting statements on how the programming process for that game went down, so he's either purposely, or accidentally, recalling history incorrectly. Maybe it's just all the hearsay thrown around that thread that has me thinking that though.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Torr

[Lost Dragon]

As someone with a good few 'informal chats' under my belt now (i cannot really call them interviews, can i? :-) ), personal experience has taught me that in a lot of cases people simply are'nt going to recal in vivid detail events of 25+ years ago, which is understandable, but you have to be careful not to 'suggest' too much in your questions as otherwise you might find people simply agree with claim you make or suggest.

I've seen freelancer for RG be told Myth did indeed come out on the Atari ST (it did'nt). seen a suggested sales figure for units sold, Atari Lynx be agreed with, then bumped up even further for the article quote appeared in.In cases where Atari UK never seemed to have specific sales figures, i think it's important to make 100% clear a figure is just speculation and why...

Also getting hold of contacts-i know a lot use Facebook/Twitter, niether are tools i personally use, but i've had personal emails of likes of Jeremy Heath Smith, Bill Rehbock, etc.

[jhd]

I having a hard time agreeing with his insinuation that archiving needs to be done by the experts. (I'm reading a little between the lines here, maybe I'm misreading)

I'm of the thought that anyone who is safe guarding these machines and materials from the landfill is doing a good thing, regardless of their experience, credidentals, etc.

 

As I see it, the problem lies not in indivduals presering the historical record, but in the lack of (public) access thereto.

 

Someone may hold a very significant collection of material relating to a historically important company or product, but if it remains in their attic/basement/storage locker, than it is of little value to someone who wishes to undertake research upon the topic unless they are willing to provide access thereto.

[Lost Dragon]

(Cont) Just been given a further 3 Personal emails (all Ex-Atari staff as well) and explained who gave them to me and why (so a degree of credibilty i hope).Yet all i can do is approach them, hope they might have the time to spare and some answers to give.

I'm not trying to be a historian, i just would like to save (and share) what little info uis left, get fresh insights into various stories etc.It's got to be better than making stuff up, just to raise your profile and hope you'll land a deal as a result.