Indeed, in literary studies, we always discuss works in the present tense because they communicate presently and are not finsihed doing so. In fact, we usually even do the same when talking about a piece of literature in relationship to its author. Something along the lines of “In Macbeth, Shakespeare suggests that…” or even “Shakespeare says…” would not be uncommon. As I often say to my students, “Shakespeare might be dead, but he is still speaking.” This tends to make historians crazy, but what are you gonna do? Buncha literalists.

A couple years ago, I published an essay in a collection of essays on The Passion of the Christ. The editors of the collection found my use of the present tense to discuss the film’s events in present tense very odd. Likewise, I found it odd that they would find this practice unusual (film studies specialists generally follow the same tense conventions as lit specialists) until I realized that one of the editors was a psych specialist and the other was a religious studies expert (though, one would think that if discussing a religious text that one would follow this convention–we hear people say “the Bible says…” not “the Bible said…” right?).

Denis is quite right, though, that there are definitely some instances where one appropriately shifts tenses when discussing particularly time bound events even in literary studies. If I was discussing Shakespeare’s life in relationship to his work, I would certainly say, “Shakespeare married Anne Hathaway,” not “Shakespeare marries Anne Hathaway…” That event is most certainly a done deal. Likewise, Denis’ example is an apt one. A particular experience that a player had in a game refers to an event in time that has ended. Again, one would do the same in literary studies, “While reading the second act of Macbeth recently, I felt that…” not “While reading the second act of Macbeth recently, I feel that…”

I’m glad that you bring this up, though, since it made me realize that Mario may well forever declare to players, “Itsa me, Mario!!”–a fairly charming thought.

The same goes for videogames. The princess is always in another castle for Mario while also always rescuing her at last. When referring to your own experiences, past tense makes sense. But unless referring to a past moment in a videogame in regards to another moment that happen later chronologically, present tense makes sense. It’s good way to garner respect for videogames on par with literature anyway.

Which is different with certain arcade games, performance art, theater productions, et cetera. Perhaps when describing a specific instance of player reaction to the game, past sense seems to make much more sense, whereas if it is something purely within the frame of the game itself, that can be reproduced–reactions can’t necessarily.

For instance, “When I was playing (such and such) game and the narrator provided (such and such plot point), it struck me that (insert overblown rhetoric here).” As opposed to, “As the protagonist learns of his new quest to save the princess while summarily lead an uprising of mutant mushrooms, his facial expression is such that it invokes…”

It is something I had not considered before, but something I will probably now look at in my future posts and discussions.