So here's my first stab at actually teaching about games. In this case since it's a class that needs to be in my home department and discipline. I've integrated digital games-related material into a wider history of play and leisure. I actually think that's an interesting grounding for discussion of contemporary games both in terms of thinking about issues like time and "addiction" in virtual worlds and in terms of foregrounding some classically "ludological" questions about formalism.<p>
It's also a course for first-year students so there's a lot of emphasis on skills development that I might otherwise not feature so heavily. I'm still making a few adjustments here and there so suggestions are welcome. (The reading loads may appear very heavy in some weeks but in many weeks. I'll be dividing the students into groups with each group reading something slightly different and then having to present about their assignment as a way to build confidence about discussion participation.)
In this course students will examine both the long-running global history and philosophy of play games and leisure in human societies and the distinctive modern post-industrial construction of leisure time and activities.
Play is a serious question: there are deep questions about why humans do it and how it has changed over time and powerful debates about the economic cultural and social centrality of games and leisure time to modern societies. Do not take this course if you are looking for an easy or casual course: the reading load is often heavy and there are significant writing requirements. Regular attendance and active participation is also required. In some weeks the seminar will be divided into several groups reading different assignments: in those weeks you will be responsible for summarizing and describing your reading assignments to the other groups. History 1L is also a first-year seminar and we will be working on skills development in writing persuasive argument reading and discussion throughout the semester. Deep HistoriesThursday January 24thGordon Burghart.
Exercise: Themes across reading synthesis of information. Verbal summaries of readings. Leisure. Time and the Making of the Modern WorldThursday February 14thCompton Reeves.
selectionPieter Judson. “Every German Visitor Has a Volkisch Obligation He Must Fulfill”Exercise: Primary sources and historical evidenceSource analysis paper due. Gambling. Drink and DrugsThursday March 27thThomas Malaby.
Yeah. I often load up a bit heavy on the first run of a course to see what works. But in this case. I have a plan! In most weeks they'll all be doing one common reading and then everybody will be doing one separate reading that they have to tell the rest of the class about. (It's a small course like all of our first-year seminars capped at 12.) So take the industrialization and time week--everyone is reading some of Veblen and a bit of Hareven but then each student will be reading only one of the additional readings.
Also you're looking at Huizinga and he stresses the performative nature of play. If you want to go down this route a bit more. I can recommend "Warlocks and Warpdrive" (Lancaster).
Anyway looks like a really interesting course. What subject area is this situated in? History? Cultural Studies?
THANK YOU for posting this! Very interesting stuff. I would like to take the class. Where do you teach? In any case. I think I will use your syllabus and keep up with your reading schedule. Maybe you can teach it in-world in Second Life? =)
Maria Teresa Uriarte. “Unity in Duality: The Practice and Symbols of the Mesoamerican Ballgame” in E. Michael Whittington. The Sport of Life and Death: The Mesoamerican Ballgame
I'm thinking about whether to do regular parallel or follow-up sessions in Second Life. It might be too much work for the first iteration of the course this spring but I'm planning to do it semi-regularly.
I thought about Elliot Avedon on game structure. The syllabus is already crowded. Do you think it would make a better early reading in the first two weeks than what I have?
Csikszentmihalyi on flow I think they'll get secondhand from authors in the digital games unit.
Berryman is the "godly play" author? That's an interesting angle. I'm kind of slighting the entire serious games/learning games literature here somewhat intentionally. I am trying to find something good on contemplation-as-leisure but focused on medieval monastic life.
By Lefebvre do you mean Henri Lefebvre? The person who writes on space modernity everyday life and so on?
I think you've got a ton of stuff already and my problem is always cutting down possibilities but just as some additional thoughts:
McKenzie Wark. Gamer TheoryBernard Suits. The GrasshopperChris Crawford. The Art of CGDand as someone said early maybe something about the ancient Greek traditions since they're so foundational to Western thinking about games.
There are plenty of other ideas but it's your class p s. Just one more: Bart Giamatti's "Take Time for Paradise" is short opinionated and would be accessible to students.
He has written extensively on the psychology of leisure and time and the relationship between discretionary time usage and obligatory time as part and parcel of the definitions of leisure.
Gunn has written extensively on play and play behavior again do some google searches one example is her work
I think part of the problem with your lesson plan here is you are trying to cover way too much material in the course of a semester. There is so much here and it seems to be all over the place. To begin with you have completely left out the importance of plato and aristotles discussions on play and leisure which I think is key to the evolution of these concepts. Additionally the relative perspective to time in pre and post industrial societies has such an important impact on our concepts of discretionary time and non discretionary time especially in regard to obligatory restrictions on our time (work) and those that are non obligatory (play). Additionally to try to include animal behavior in this course I think will muddle what is already a very difficult topic to cover. Add to that game theory and you will end up with more of a mess than you care to begin. Focus on the evolution of the concepts of play leisure recreation and within them include games and kinds of play and I think you will provide for a much more enriching learning experience for your students. Having taught both on the grad and undergrad level I know that these concepts are very difficult disect and if you bring to the mix some of the current pet scan studies on neurotransmitters in conjunction with states of "flow" which accompany many play experiences you will at least tease and please your students to thirst for more rather than less on these topics. After all the purpose of pedagogy is not to cram all the information you can into a students head but to stir their imagination and get the wheels in motion. Too much can frequently be not enough!
Ultimately the key concepts I'm working with are time in pre- and post-industrial contexts contrasted against the question of whether "play" and "games" have structural or formal characters which stand outside of the history of how human societies allocate time.
I'm pretty happy with how the syllabus deals with that contrast and structurally it's very similar to other classes I've taught in cultural history that cover "soup to nuts" (the history of reading the history of 'the future'). I feel good about that structure in relationship to my students here who are generally very strong students in terms of their skills and abilities.
I think throwing in the question of whether play is determined by something broader than human culture at the beginning is a "taster" that helps. I'm not really dealing with game theory. (If by that we mean game theory as it comes up in economics etc.) Otherwise. I do think the course focuses on pretty much what you describe.
(I'm a bit curious about who you are actually--partly just so I know what kind of institutional contexts you've taught your courses in. This is a small seminar at a very selective institution; if I were doing it as an undergraduate lecture course it would be a much slimmer and tighter focus.)
". structural or formal characters which stand outside of the history of how human societies allocate time."
The other thing I am a bit confused about is the interchange you keep applying to the terms leisure recreation play and games. Are these all the same in your way of thinking or are they different aspects of non work activities.
Certainly there are many ways to go about viewing this. Let me explore a few here for you with some examples. Lets say we define the term leisure as those activites which bring about a kind of internal satisfaction which transcends ones need to "earn" an income. (that is a job in its simple form). Now with that notion in mind where do we classify something such as bedroom sex romps are they play? leisure? recreation or if you want to look at maslow's hierarchy of human needs just biological behavior?
Now let me put a bit of a twist on this. What if play is a human need as well? Is Maslow flawed in his hierarchy or is play a social non biological need and if so can we find examples of cultures that do not contain play behavior or where play is something other than a social need? (excluding rituals or are they too to be considered play)
Certainly we have to conside the way time is viewed by societies as to discretionary vs non discretionary. Do rewards for the play behavior effect it being either play or work? Ultimately all the criteria we choose to apply here will have a great deal of impact on the construct we provide for our definitions.
So as I posed as the beginning here how do you intend to define the terms play leisure recreation games and let me add another free time?
structural or formal characteristics which stand outside of the history of how human societies allocate time.
Either way does anythhing ever stand outside history? I would have to contend that everything stands within history except the future which is non historic until it is no longer future! As to how human societies allocate time. I dont think anyone allocates time time just is what people do is fill time which is a bit different in my mind. What humans do is make meaning and in reference to time they make meaning of the ways they define their time.
Nothing stands outside of history but I want the students to consider whether play or games are forms which have formal relatively stable characteristics that are independent of the history of leisure as a social and cultural practice. This is a kind of tension I introduce in my topical courses on cultural history (on reading the idea of the future progress and 'development' consumption and commodities environmental history.)
So for example. I want to throw out as a possibility that "play" among humans is mostly just an elaborated form of something that many mammal species do or that "games" can be defined in fairly fixed or formal ways so that they are strongly distinct from other cultural forms. These aren't positions I myself take--as you say. I think it's all about how people make meaning within history. But I do want my students to understand the particular place that historical thought occupies within a larger disciplinary landscape and to understand at what point they may be predisposed to another or different kind of intellectual toolkit.
can things be weakly distinct? Isn't that sort of like saying a round circle are there other forms of circles which are not round?
I would think that all cultural forms that can be identified have to be distinct or they would not be able to be identified. Play behaviours do seem to exist with many mammals at least but its function in lower level animals seems to be a prelude to mating rather than a way to define time between biological functioning. Then again work may well be considered necessary for biological functioning that is it has transformed from gathering and hunting to income earning to do gathering and hunting but none the less it may well be part and parcel of biological functioning for this very reason. Whereas what to me at least in part defines leisure is activity that is indulged in purely for the rewards received from the indulgance. Nothing external no secondary needs just "fun" for the sake of fun. When it transforms to sports and games which have as their secondary rewards financial such as a pro baseball player it is work it is part of survival for that individual and moves out of the realm of play. Likewise a company softball team that is obligatory for all members of that workplace is not really a form of play but rather a part of work. Whereas a pickup game of softball at the local park amongst a bunch of people there who decide to divide up and play softball is play in one of its many diverse forms.
So how does this relate to societies. Well it seems to me that as humanity moved from a work based society for primary survival from cave deweling to fudal estates the division of labor and the collective survival took less parts than the whole required and so there was more discretionary time available although to the few rather than the many and the evolution of the notion of "leisure" evolved in conjunction with that new found time. Likewise the advent of electricity and night time illumination just as it had extended the "work" day so too did it extend the "play" time available. What would be particularly interesting would be to examine the differences between cultures that closer to primary with those that are further away and examine the kinds of differences in their play behavior. This would support or refute the notion that the more time is spent on survival the less time is spent on leisure. There are studies though especially those from Csikszentmihalyi that indicate that human manage to make play activity no matter what they are doing even within the context of "work" and that this may support the notion that "play" is indeed a socialization process that is necessary for humans in much the same way touching is.
I have always wondered if it were possible to extend to the microcosm the same principles such that do cells play? Is there some very simplistic notion of play that even single cells have that drives the macrocosm of the individual to also seek out play?
On that issue (that play is a disposition toward the world that we find in lots of contexts). I think that Csikszentmihalyi got it right and it helps us get past this work/play dichotomy which is so readily at hand but yet runs so obviously into trouble when we look at things cross-culturally. To me the most convincing direction to take when trying to account for the disposition of play is to look at the work of Piaget and others who stressed that our coming to act in a world that is always a mixture of pattern and the unexpected is accomplished not by developing a "true" picture of the world but instead through the development of a reliable disposition -- one that is ready to encounter and act amidst this combination of order and indeterminacy. Then play becomes something truly important (and its connection to learning all the more obvious) not simply the echo of the modernist obsession with productivity in the material sense.
Oh and Tim there's a nice piece for teaching Csikszentmihalyi's ideas in this vein if you're interested in touching on this:"An Exploratory Model of Play." Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi; Stith Bennett. American Anthropologist. New Series. Vol. 73. No. 1. (Feb.. 1971) pp. 45-58.
speaking as a lazy college student that's a lot of reading. I'd be surprised if 1/2 of it got done.
My suggestion would be to pare down that list so it looks less intimidating. I know the expectation is to compare multiple secondary sources and draw conclusions and argument from the differing takes but seeing a reading list of 4-5 journal articles makes me leery.
i always hated group work i never found it very productive for learning. I think it is better to reduce the reading list have an additional list for those motivated and cover material that you choose to use in depth rather than skirt over a bunch of stuff just to have a large reading list.
Another thing that I thought of was how much of the assigned reading will get covered in that class? If they are covered in the depth that the syllabus suggests then it may be difficult to give 3-4 articles their proper due in the alloted class time.
But I have more experience passively observing the process of syllabus creation rather than actively generating one.
This looks to be the start of a very nice course. One thing i would like to see introduced to folks aspiring to entertainment professions is the fact (in my mind) play need not be a game nor a game need be play. Providing insight into play as cultural (and given your syllabus sub-species) universal as a first year course is spot on i think! Awesome!
To our blank poster i respectfully submit group activities teach far more than simply the subject material. As just a start even those of Einstein caliber intellect benefit from learning to work with others.
Yup they'll be dividing the readings. It's my way to get them to work on summarizing material for others (and thus doing disciplined preparation). I probably will pare down some.
Some of these questions will also potentially be opened up more in the research papers that they'll be working on in the last third of the semester.
I agree by the way that some kinds of group work can be frustrating. But sometimes that frustration mirrors the kinds of professional frustrations that await later so best to start thinking about how to do it "right" earlier in life. I also think that some of the students who are frustrated by certain kinds of group or collective projects are those who have mastered worked on their own in isolation. Which is fine but collaborative work is an important practical and intellectual skill to develop to some degree.
I would hope that once one had achieved the level of attending college they would have learned appropriate group skills to work with others and that this lesson no longer needs to be taught. Group projects are all nice and sweet for high school at best. If anything they reduce the work load for the instructor more than anything else.
Timothy!I wish I could participate in your course! It shoul be very interesting. But I have one important comment connecting with its shedule. At Moscow State University my scientific adviser has a course about simulation and games. And its main picularity is gaming!I can`t imaging learning about games without trying it (without gaming). Why don`t you add any simple or popular games like Fishbanks Ltd by D. Meadows or Beer game?
Its actually a pretty good point Andrii. I remember some of the pioneering Cyberculture units we where doing in the 90s with a couple of Awesome but non gamer academics. Much of the topics where on Gaming and I often found myself in the position of having to perform a few shall we say interventions in the classes when the lessons went WAY out of whack simply beauause said Academics really didn't 'get it'.
Much of fixing it was having a series of nights with some of the 'old beers' around a nintendo drinking beer and going nuts on Mario. Ended up with a bunch of academics with crazy Mario fixations. Mission accomplished :)
My big cringe now is SLers claiming to be 'gamers' . Yeah I suppose so but it aint gunna wash with your average l70 night-elf.
Note regarding HTML: Allowable HTML tags are "a href" (link). "b" (bold). "br" (break). "p" (para). "strong," "em" (ital). "ul" and "li" (both for lists) and "blockquote." The tagging format for a link is <a href="http://URL">link text</a>. Please remember to close your tags as markup surgeons are on short supply! :-)
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://terranova.blogs.com/terra_nova/2007/12/the-history-of.html#c93415462
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
