SUPPPPAAA MARRRRRRRIIIIIIIIOOOOOOOOO

Blog #7

Starting out with Mario, his body type is a short, fatter character with fewer hops than say Luigi. Luigi is taller and slender, which allows him to jump higher and float longer in the air compared to Mario. Both these brothers have altering body types and it’s apparent based on their physical attributes that they are different skills. After playing the three different men in the game, Toad has a faster pace style. If gender were to come into play it seems as though Mario and Luigi are the “male” versions, hence having the male Italian names and body build to support that. (minus the suspenders..haha) Toad is presumably a male, although his vest and shroom head could be a resemblance of a young male or homosexual. Since Princess is the only “female” in the game, she has a very generous style game play with smoother motions and light weight (when you jump). Her dress is a little excessive, considering it’s a pink dress with a puffy bottom to it. “Monstrous off-spring of science: an idealized, eternally young female automaton, a malleable, well-trained techno-puppet created by and for the male gaze” (MIT  12). This is an example in the readings where obvious display of a female, by clothes, hair, etc. must be apparent to display attributes of a woman.

Differences are obviously less than desirable, but im sure it would be quite difficult back then to make a custom character, or change appearances. Showing the difference in times, since this game was originated in 1988, I’m sure many more men played video games rather than women, so that would explain the gender placement. Understandably, the apparel of the characters is going to be hard to give detail to, since technology was so limited in 1988. This game will always be a hit to the gaming world because it shaped our culture to love Italian bro’s and delve into a new world, Super Mario World.

Schleiner, Anne-Marie. "Does Lara Croft Wear Fake Polygons? Gender and Gender-Role Subversion in Computer Adventure Games." MIT Press. 34.3 (2001): 221-226. Print.