A Visit to the Human Resources Administration

by Jesse


Go to the game's main page

Review

Visit to the HRA review, November 18, 2025
by EJ
Related reviews: IFComp 2025

I was on SNAP (colloquially known as “food stamps”) for a number of years. That I’m not anymore is a matter of luck and not bootstraps, but I do still receive some government services related to disability. In my state applications/renewals can mostly be done online and/or by phone these days, which is relatively painless compared to the days when I had to get up at 4 AM and take the first bus to the HRA equivalent’s nearest location because they wouldn’t let you make an appointment for SNAP applications/renewals, it was first come first served, so if you didn’t get there right when the office opened there was no guarantee you’d be seen that day at all. But it's still not really a model of efficiency or devoid of red tape.

A Visit to the Human Resources Administration gives a clear-eyed and damning look at this system through the eyes of an alien researcher trying to understand humans through everyday experiences. Through defamiliarizing the trappings of the SNAP process, its absurdity and cruelty are exposed, but at the same time it’s clear that we are not meant to think the alien’s conclusions are correct when it decides that humans must enjoy being uncomfortable. It is obvious that viewing the humans going through the process as specimens has made it impossible for the alien to really understand the problems involved.

And then everything literally grinds to a halt so that a character can spell out everything we just read. I’m sure the rant was cathartic for the author to write, but it wasn’t really cathartic for me to read. I don’t know if it’s because the author is coming at it from the perspective of a social worker and not a benefits recipient, because I felt like I was being lectured about things I already knew by someone who assumed their audience couldn’t possibly have personal experience, or just because I don’t like when authors don’t trust their audiences to draw their own conclusions. But I thought the piece was weaker for restating its message twice, once in the most grindingly obvious way.

You can log in to rate this review, mute this user, or add a comment.