In 1992, while I was staying in Cochabamba, Bolivia, there was a cholera epidemic. The radio was dominated by news reports in Spanish and Quechua about the epidemic and what people should do to avoid contracting cholera. The Río Roche, which flows through the center of Cochabamba, was responsible for carrying the cholera microbes. On its banks, in the water filled with sewage, there were women washing clothes, men washing cars, cows wading in the water, homeless boys called poillas (moths) bathing, and a woman washing her face. I was horrified as I learned that the reason it was challenging to diagnose Cholera was because about 90% of the cases of diarrhea were just typical malnutrition. The reason for Cholera was unsanitary drinking water; the cure for Cholera is salt water, with a little bit of sugar and an injection of long-acting antibiotic. Over three hundred people died of Cholera in Cochabamba, the second-largest city in Bolivia.
The game Cholera arose out of my anger and frustration. I wasn’t thinking about creating a social game; I was horrified and created a dark and ironic arcade game.
The six targets include someone defecating in the river, a cholera microbe, etc. Instead of a gun with crosshairs, I used a syringe to shoot the targets. The act of shooting the syringe at the targets is fundamentally different than reading a static text or visual representation. The message is presented in an action with consequences. Mary Flanagan, in her essay “Next Level: Women’s Digital Activism through Gaming,” best describes “Cholera 92” and intended viewer outcomes: ”The play between such text and image is ironic and disturbing; as players we begin to realize how simple education and resources could have changed the trajectory of a whole town’s history. Then, after the informative moment, on to the next level, it displays a different cartoon image. Here, a hybrid of game and interactive art techniques is used to subvert computer gaming tropes with political messages.”
