The subject of games and play is a very interesting one. Educationist, Brian Sutton-Smith did much research on the role of games as play in the 1970s. Social psychologist, George Herbert Mead wrote the book Mind, Self and Society in 1934, and discussed in detail the function of play and games as role training. While both scholars voiced their beliefs in different decades, the content of their research has validity. Though Sutton-Smith and Mead have different philosophies on games and play, they do share several similarities in the themes of games and play in society, in goal orientation, and in the necessity of rules.
Both Sutton-Smith and Mead see the playing of a game as having a role in society. Sutton-Smith believes that the games of a society reflect how evolved that society is. He states, “The more complex a social system, the more advanced its games” (159). This makes perfect sense. One can imagine primitive societies, where all of the members of the group spend the majority of time focusing on meeting their basic needs, as having very little time for games or play, as even the youngest members of the society are helping their parents. Even with time for play, more primitive people might base their play solely on imitation, and not have formal rules of play. The members of more complex societies, where basic needs are more easily met, have time to engage in play and create games with more structure and rules. George Herbert Mead sees play and games as the building blocks to understanding one’s self and the roles and rules of society. He believes that through “make-believe” play children learn to understand the roles of others and they begin to “understand the symbols that indicate that role” (160). Once a child involves him or herself in organized games with others, such a team sport, they are forced to learn the roles of others in the game and their relationships with them. This prepares them for fitting in with society as they mature.
Both Sutton-Smith and Mead agree that games are goal oriented. Sutton-Smith sees the establishment of “dominance by making the right moves” (159-160) and creating a clear winner or loser as the goal of game playing. This goal can be achieved through one-on-one play or through team play. Mead sees the goal of game playing as a method for the player or players to understand themselves and those around them, and believes that this understanding will later translate to the player’s role in society. If Mead were on a soccer team, he would be focusing on his position and role as a player, and how his role relates to the others on the team. Where it seems that Sutton-Smith would be focusing on his interaction with the others on the team in order to for his team to win the game. Mead seems to focus more on learning about self and others, where Sutton-Smith’s focus seems to be more on winning.
In addition to agreeing that games and play have a role in society, and that games are goal oriented, Sutton-Smith and Mead both see the necessity of rules in game. For Sutton-Smith, rules help to “produce a disequilibrial outcome,” (159) or an outcome with a clear winner or loser. For Mead, rules aid in defining the roles of the players. They allow an individual to go from “play to game” (160).
Play and games are an important part of the development of most individuals. While Brian Sutton-Smith and George Herbert Mead have differing beliefs concerning the functions of play and games, they both recognize that play and games have a role in society and that play and games are both goal oriented and have a clear need for rules.
Works Cited
Egenfeldt-Neilson, S., Smith, Jonas, H., & Tosca, Susana P. “What Is a Game?” A Media Studies Reader. Editor: Williams, Kevin. 2010, University Readers Inc. and Taylor & Francis Group. P. 151-173.
No comments:
Post a Comment