HOMO LUDENS
(Source: www.amazon.com.tr)
Johan Huizinga (1872-1945) was a Dutch historian/cultural historian and author. He studied Indo-European languages and comparative philology, writing his doctoral thesis on the role of the jester in Indian drama. He taught as a history professor most of his life. Later in his life, his protest of the Nazi occupation of his country led him to be detained, and he was prevented from going back to his country. He died in exile a few weeks before the Nazi rule ended. This edition of the book was prepared from the 1944 German edition of the book, as well as the author’s own English translation of the text. Huizinga shares the same birthday with Tom Waits, a sagittarius.
Huizinga defines play firstly as a voluntary activity- soon contradicting himself, saying that unless it is part of a rite, ceremony, cultural or religious function, where it becomes obligation or duty. However, he distinguishes play from obligation/duty as play having no material gain/profit as its goal.
The second characteristic of play is that it is not ‘ordinary’ life, it has its own rules. When the rules are transgressed, we find ourselves in real life.
(Source: www.en.wikipedia.org)
Third characteristic is its limitedness- it is played within certain limits of time and place. From there Huizinga delves into play and contest as civilizing functions, arguing that contest is an important function of play. Winning at play is winning esteem, honor and it is also transferrable to a group. ‘[Play] may be deadly, yet still remain play- which is all the more reason for not separating play and contest as concepts’. He says seriousness excludes play, but play can include seriousness. The competitive instinct is primarily about the desire to excel others, and be esteemed for that. For Huizinga this benign motivation for esteem and honor later degenerates into the malicious desires of power and domination.
‘[Culture] arises in the form of play, that it is played from the very beginning’. Yet, he says, as culture has proceeded, the play-element has receded in the background, being mostly absorbed in the sacred sphere, folklore, poetry, philosophy as well as in parts of the judicial and social life. ‘[In] the absence of the play-spirit civilization is impossible’. With ample examples Huizinga argues that law and war’s beginnings were embedded in such spirits, until politics and greed polluted the air.
With modern sports, the professional has lost the play spirit, material gain has become the main focus; and the amateur with the better play spirit is not given much value and praise. Propaganda promoting the competitive spirit has made business parade as ‘play’, but business is not really play, for it is done for profit.
A point he makes briefly which I thought needed more emphasis was about how society separates into groups, e.g. as opposing tribes or female and male to form dualities, and how their competition/play creates the dynamics of the society. ‘All these samples of early philosophizing are pervaded by a strong sense of the agonistic structure of the universe. The processes in life and the cosmos are seen as the eternal conflict of opposites which is the root-principle of existence, like the Chinese yin and yang’. He sees the interaction of the parts forever in competition, which may be largely true, but for me, not the only way to exist- for example, a metaphor for a verbal argument could be battle or dance, and this would have an effect on the dynamics. Interestingly, Huizinga says ‘dancing is a particular and particularly perfect form of playing’. And why must there be one winner- as R.D.Laing would ask, where is your brotherhood? If one of the reasons for play is entertainment, then all should win- and this does not need to exclude tension or competitiveness- qualities Huizinga finds vital in play.
In his explorations about the play element in art, he is hesitant about architecture and the plastic arts having a play quality- mainly because they have a practical purpose, there is creation of an object to be used, and there is no performance with spectators. How a person can see the play element in the sacred and the war, but is unable to see it as clearly in the arts and sciences could be explained by the author’s lack of knowledge and research in those fields is my conclusion.
Also there is no explanation as to how play preceeded culture, but somehow some arts and architecture managed to escape it- except for this awkward conclusion: ‘The origin of art is not explained by a reference to a play-instinct, however innate’. He says there are traces of play in art, but that is the long and short of it. An important point he makes is about play and humor easing the tensions between groups that can otherwise escalate and become dangerous. And the agonistic factor has become a friend-foe principle, thus losing its benign quality. This is not a thoroughly researched and coherently put together book, however a very interesting read on the play spirit in cultural history.
‘Play only becomes possible, thinkable and understandable when an influx of mind breaks down the absolute determinism of the cosmos. The very existence of play continually confirms the supra-logical nature of the human situation. Animals play, so they must be more than merely mechanical things. We play and know that we play, so we must be more than merely rational beings, for play is irrational’.’
‘Inside the play-ground an absolute and peculiar order reigns. Here we come across another, very positive feature of play: it creates order, is order. Into an imperfect world and into the confusion of life it brings a temporary, a limited perfection.’
‘All these samples of early philosophizing are pervaded by a strong sense of the agonistic structure of the universe. The processes in life and the cosmos are seen as the eternal conflict of opposites which is the root-principle of existence, like the Chinese yin and yang.’
‘The elasticity of human relationships underlying the political machinery permits it to ’play’, thus easing tensions which would otherwise be unendurable or dangerous- for it is the decay of humor that kills.’
Author: Johan Huizinga
Title: Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture
Published: 2016, by Angelico Press
First published: 1949
Pages: 220
