[-empyre-] playing vs productivity (and what does it has to do with videogames?)

[Simon Biggs]

It is easy to consider play as essentially gratuitous and aimless. However,
is it? From a Darwinian point of view play would seem to offer advantages to
those who do it. For young animals play is often the means by which they
learn how to fight, hunt, mate and survive. It is a rehearsal. Well
rehearsed animals will have a better chance of surviving and reproducing.
When people play the same dynamics could be at work. In this sense play is
not gratuitous but fulfils an important function.

However, to sustain this argument it needs to be accepted that high level
social behaviour is genetically inherited. Darwinian theory can't be applied
without this being the case. It is debatable whether such behaviour can be
inherited.

Best

Simon


Simon Biggs
s.biggs at eca.ac.uk  simon at littlepig.org.uk
Skype: simonbiggsuk
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/

Research Professor  edinburgh college of art
http://www.eca.ac.uk/
Creative Interdisciplinary Research in CoLlaborative Environments
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
Electronic Literature as a Model of Creativity and Innovation in Practice
http://www.elmcip.net/
Centre for Film, Performance and Media Arts
http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/film-performance-media-arts


> From: Gabriel Menotti <gabriel.menotti at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:46:46 +0000
> To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> Subject: [-empyre-] playing vs productivity (and what does it has to do with
> videogames?)
> 
>> [Simon Biggs]
>> All interesting. No mention though of Huizinga's work, or that of numerous
>> related theorists, on the role of play in the formation, practice and value
>> of cultural activities.
> 
> Thanks, Simon! Huizinga is a very good reference, which had completely
> escaped me ­ probably because I was not really taking into account how
> the dynamics of play drive general cultural activities and structures.
> Moving away from the ludologistic perspective, I wondered instead how
> these other activities are in fact enmeshed within what we call
> ³playing.²
> 
> Although generally suspicious of cultural analytics, I admit it does a
> good job demonstrating that the interaction with some modern
> videogames is mostly constituted by watching CGs and making otherwise
> dull system management and navigation. [1]
> 
> On the other hand, it is true that the all-pervasiveness of play is
> one door through which videogames are being re-functionalized and
> incorporated into larger productive systems ­ in that sense, one might
> recall ³games² such as EpicWin [2] and the somewhat controversial
> Google Image Labeler [3]. I¹m sure Daniel Cook can give much better
> examples.
> 
> However, doesn¹t that defeats the idea that ³play² should be a
> gratuitous and aimless activity, an end-in-itself? Given the
> complexities at hand and the way playing can be easily appropriated as
> labour, where should we trace the line that defines this concept?
> 
> Do videogames have essentially anything to do with ³playing² anymore?
> 
> And with ³videos²?
> 
> And with ³games²?
> 
> Best!
> Menotti
> 
> [1] 
> 
http://lab.softwarestudies.com/2008/06/videogameplayviz-analyzing-temporal.htm>
l
> [2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmKwF_Si734
> [3] http://images.google.com/imagelabeler
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre



Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201