Game World Phenomenology

I defended my dissertation on Friday, and it went great. I was incredibly nervous leading up to it, but once the discussion started, I relaxed and actually had a really good time. I got a lot of kind words, especially for bringing together art history and video games in the way I did. Of course, there was also some critique, and rightly so. While I naturally have my own views on these points, I’ll share a few reflections here. Just a heads-up: these are based on my own memory, and I didn’t take notes during the defense, so others might remember things a bit differently. That said: I passed, and the examining committee was unanimous in their approval. That’s what matters most! 1. The theory chapter is weak Yes, fair enough. A lot of the theory I work with shows up later in the book, rather than being neatly presented in the introductory chapter, as the traditional dissertation format dictates. Typically, you’re expected to lay out the theory first and then “apply” it in the analysis. I ...

  In the last few days I have turned 59 and have spent some time slowly reading my dissertation in the printed version, sitting in my armchair with the book in my hand and a cup of coffee and some cookies nearby. It has been a very rewarding and enjoyable experience; I am very happy with my book and its contents, but I have yet to see how my defense goes and what others have understood from it. Today is Wednesday and I have just finished reading it, tomorrow I have a lot of work to do and on Friday I will see if I pass and become a Doctor of Art History.   There are a few passages I wish I had written more clearly, but not many. There are a few mistakes, especially ones that I should have noticed while proofreading. I have made a list of errors, which follows. Only one item in that list is a real error in my opinion, which is the lack of a proper page reference in a footnote. Most of the other errors I probably would have noticed if I had hired a proofreader. So I’m a little p...