Students in Dr. Nicole Pfannenstiel’s summer Games and Writing class crafted blog posts exploring play theory. Over the next several weeks, we will share their theory posts in this space to offer a variety of perspectives on play, games, and writing, written by current graduate students in the MA and M.Ed. English programs.

_______________________________

What is Play: Falling into abstract rabbit holes

by: Becca Betty

One of the things I often struggle with in grad writing assignments is the information/subject spiral—in other words, the rabbit hole of knowing that there is so much more to know and getting lost in finding more and more related sources or ideas that could shape a project. This means I frequently find myself creating works that attempt to embrace every possibility –which is impossible, impractical, and not really the most useful either as it can get in the way of finding or making meaning that has purpose within a given context. In working through crafting a definition for “play,” I found myself doing headed down a conceptual spiral once again, particularly in attempting to determine the limits of play.

My definition of play is largely connected to my thoughts and feelings towards coming back to humanities research after working in science. In my time at MU, I’ve been trying to determine what significance humanities research can offer outside of normative values in our culture that often center STEM knowledge as more serious than anything the humanities can offer. As such, my definition is a little caught up in a spiral of attempting to capture the abstract possibilities of play as I see this as an area more valued and accessible through humanities research. The trade-off is that I struggle with some of the more rigid aspects of many scholars’ definitions (rules/order, “affinity spaces”).

With these struggles in mind, I’ve come to understand play as a threshold. Play is a mediary of the physical and abstract, the real and unreal. Often play is categorized by behavior that that results at the intersections of physicality seeking to embody or enact abstraction. In play, we are many times seeking mutual abstract understanding though we are limited to sharing this interaction in reality. Play allows us to explore that which we cannot explore physically or give new meaning to physicality. We ourselves can take on an otherness and multiplicity beyond our physical reality in play, but we simultaneously recognize that we remain ourselves. By understanding that play hinges on the perspective that we are playing, we can expand what play is almost infinitely by understanding how an activity may already be playful or how it could become so. Play is chaotic, indeed it is a process in which we can experience the entropic force of the universe moving us gently through unbound creative and destructive possibilities.

Now, translating this understanding of play in the abstract into singular meaty flesh prisons is not entirely practical or even conventionally achievable. So, often play is categorized through our experiences as Huizinga and Sicart show, giving us valuable ways to access the abstract through the recognizable form and perspective of play. In doing so, it is possible to recognize, and assign value to, the products of play. I see the products of play as a critical component to humanities research and play itself, if we work to create wider public understanding of it, as something that could help better convey the value of the humanities to a wider audience.

Keywords: Play, playfulness, humanities research