In the next three chapters of Play Matters, Sicart discusses playgrounds, beauty, and politics. I like the idea that playgrounds are meant to be places of play, but not meant to imply any specific game or type of play. This is what makes a playground different from a basketball court or soccer field. To quote Sicart, “a play space is a location specifically created to accommodate play but does not impose any particular type of play, set of activities, purpose, or goal or reward structure.” Thinking about playgrounds this way makes me think of other places that aren’t designed for play, but that still allow for play to take place without necessarily confining play to certain parameters. I like to think of the world as my playground and people and things my props. Like the playgrounds designed from real things that are mentioned in the book, things like this in real life can be turned into playgrounds. It is kind of like how free runners and parkour enthusiasts use abandoned industrial buildings and the architecture of the city to play around on like a jungle gym, as Sicart describes briefly in his book. I look at the world in that same sort of light, and more often than not I have the desire to climb things like a kid would a tree with low hanging branches.
Next is beauty. Sicart went into three different descriptions about why play might be considered beautiful, although I only really understood one of them. That was the part that described beauty as the feeling you get when you watch a skilled athlete or gamer. The feeling is similar to the feeling one gets when looking at an incredible view in nature, I think. It’s a feeling of being both impressed and in awe. Specifically, when he goes into detail about the game GIRP, it helps you understand a little bit how an abusive game such as this can bring an appreciation to the act of rock climbing, as the game is almost as difficult as the sport itself. (I played the game myself and got up to 16.7m before quitting. The bird was particularly annoying.) And if I may add, I believe that the beauty in play can also come from the game itself, especially in video games which incorporate music and art; things that on their own can also be described as beautiful.
Lastly is politics. Going into this chapter I was expecting it to discuss the games and play that have political themes; for instance, a game that informs the player of some political movement or raises awareness for some cause. This is on the right track to what he is talking about, but it’s not quite there. In order for it to be play, it needs to be on the edge between autotelic and purposeful. The play must be able to stand on its own without the political context, but also have political meaning when played in the correct context. The “political effect, the expression of political action through play, happens only when [it] is played while” in the political context. “Political meaning emerges from the play community and from the ways in which play threads together context, form, and situation.” I understand where he’s coming from, that it’s only really meaningful when the play has double meaning, but I find that games and forms of play can have political meaning by addressing things that are controversial or relevant to the news. Like what I thought originally before reading this chapter can still apply. Raising awareness through play can still be an effective political movement if done the right way because it can encourage people to make political statements that they otherwise would not have made.
(This is late because I left class early and didn’t learn about what the assignment was until after it was already due and then I had strep for two days.)