Every growing body spends hours playing games and imaging new worlds. We do it by ourselves or invite others to join in on the fun. We create our own games and constantly change the rules of the ones we are already bored of.
However, games are also reinventing us as well: they alter our perceptions, behaviours and emotions, without us even realising it.
So can humans remain victorious and in control?
A research team, led by ethologist Robert Fagen, spent 15 years sitting in trees, observing and documenting wild bears at play. They concluded that bears who participated in playful activities had much longer and healthier lives, and left behind more offspring. On a similar note, wildlife photographer Norbert Rosing had captured some stunning photos when a hungry polar bear approached huskies in what looked like to be a bloody altercation. Suddenly, the bear shakes off any aggression and starts playing with the dogs, especially the female husky. They hugged, caressed, licked each other, engaged in rough and tumble play.
Play is universally acknowledged to be a purposeless activity. Definitions might slightly differ, but it’s generally considered to be free-willed, lacking responsibility or meaning. Scholars suggest that the difference between ‘play’ and ‘game’ is that games have strict rules, whereas playful activity is rather chaotic. But when you think of it, playful polar bears also follow rules – for example, they can’t hurt each other. However, we can agree that both ‘play’ and ‘games’ is like an alternate universe that contradicts reality. The question is why would a polar bear bother fooling around? Wild animals live in harsh environments where wasteful behaviour can result in dire consequences. The persistence of play throughout nature suggests that such activity might have a purpose. Robert Fagen makes it clear that bears use play as a penalty-free rehearsal for real-life challenges. It’s like a softcore version of boot camp where animals learn trust, limits and social interaction. It’s a pretend game where life and death are not at stake.
We will only learn to behave by the rules if we ignore them at first. Sounds contradictory, doesn’t it? Let Milda Brėdikytė, senior researcher at the Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences Laboratory explain how it works.
Political showmanship is the epitome of play, even though we’re raised to believe that politicians, lawyers, judges are incredibly serious people. In 1938, Dutch ludologist Johan Huizinga presented a hilarious example concerning the judge’s wig, claiming that it’s not just an atavistic relic of a professional uniform. In fact, it has ties with the dancing masks of savages. The wig transforms a regular person into ‘the judge’, putting him in a different mindset, subliminally providing the judge confidence and reassurance. That’s in fact a mimetic form of play. It’s the same as playing dress-up. Brits are notorious for preserving antiquated traditions in both judicial and political environments. Humour is very much present. British Parliament sessions are saturated with dramatic speeches, colorful accents, laughter, sarcastic remarks, humorous comparisons and witty one-liners. MPs start yelling and causing chaos, the Speaker shouts ‘order!”in the most erratic manner, telling them to be ‘good boys’ and ‘practice zen’. However ridiculous these exchanges might look, it is important to point out that MPs are obviously doing it for the sake of playful relief. There’s no malice. Watching legendary speaker John Bercow having an exchange with conservative leader Jacob Rees-Mogg is like watching a Monty Python sketch. Bercow is playing the prankster, the eccentric judge-like leader, whereas Mogg is assuming the role of a fine 19th century gentleman who is self-aware of his old-fashioned demeanor. Why are they doing it? Who knows. For all we know, they could be just wasting taxpayer money and having a good time. On the other hand, play might be an important factor in mobilizing their thinking power.
We can unwrap and enjoy our daily tasks by creating a pleasurable routine, thinks Jonas Dagys, director of the Institute of Philosophy of Vilnius University.
Scientists have found playful activity to cause significant changes in the brain. Dendritic length, complexity and spine density of the medial prefrontal cortex are refined by play. Playfulness also increases neuronal growth promoting BDNF mRNA in the amygdala and dorsolateral frontal cortex. In 2003, American researcher Jakk Panksepp demonstrated how play in rats reduced hyperactivity, making them more self-aware and attentive. In 2010, professor Sergio Pellis also discovered that rats without play had difficulties socializing with other rats due to inappropriate social behaviors, including emotional instability, defensiveness, susceptibility to stress, and decreased social awareness.
Pellis’ team found first direct evidence of a neurological effect on play deprivation. The rats raised in a play-deprived setting had a more immature pattern of neuronal connections in the medial prefrontal cortex. Rats, like other mammals, are born with too many cortical brain cells – but as the animal grows, feedback from the environment leads to the pruning and selective elimination of these excess cells, branchings and connections. Play is thought to be one of the environmental factors that help in the pruning, and Pellis’ research showed that play deprivation interferes with it.
There’s an abundance of evidence showing that play is a crucial element in developing a creative-oriented personality. Mastery of skill is something most humans strive for. Everybody takes pride in being good at their craft, whether it’s carpentry, cobblery, programming, stocks or…spycraft. Everybody likes an expert in their field. But our society teaches us that in order to achieve a level of excellence, one must become serious, and that usually means skipping on things that are considered fun. However, there is numerous evidence of how play helped achieve mastery, and even helped achieve much greater results. Anybody who’s done business or science knows that work doesn’t always go as planned. As Isaac Asimov once said, “The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one the heralds new discoveries, is not ‘Eureka!’ but ‘That’s funny…’ ”
This appreciation for something being possibly ‘funny’ serves as an intellectual catalizer. It’s the ability to find possibility in areas of failure. In 1856, William Henry Perkin tried making an antimalarial drug quinine from a petroleum derivative. The 18 year-old failed, leaving him with a tarry black mess. It’s a good thing Perkin also liked art and photography. He noticed that once diluted with alcohol, the mess would turn bright purple. At that time, all cloth dyes were natural and expensive, with purple being the rarest and most expensive of all. Perkins made the first purple chemical dye, which eventually turned out to be a popular color in the 1890s, the so-called “mauve decade”. The question is whether Perkins’ discovery would have been possible if he’d been sceptical or overly serious about his work. Let’s look at this way – if he hadn’t been playful around his work, purple clothing wouldn’t have defined the 1890s. Not that it’s a life-changing discovery. The point is that Perkins’ achievement was a direct result of play in full motion!
Where do we draw the line between overbearing restrictions and indispensable discipline? Associate professor in Sociology at the Vilnius University Sigita Girdzijauskienė shares her thoughts.
The link between creativity and play is undeniable. Some of history’s most creative, smartest people were joyful, eccentric individuals that embraced their inner playfulness well into their old age. Artists such as Leonardo da Vinci, Pablo Picasso and Salvador Dali have participated in play throughout their lives: this included jokes, pranking, public stunts and daring experiments. Some of their behaviour might sound too erratic, not suitable for a serious person. Salvador Dali might have shocked a few people when he decided to take his anteater for a walk in downtown Paris, 1969. Leonardo da Vinci might have scared quite a few people in the Vatican when dressing up lizards in fake horns and wings. Though it’s difficult to draw any rational conclusions concerning the conception of fake dragons, it does suggest that Leonardo might have just explored his surroundings, looking for inspiration, even if it’s as vain as just scaring the hell out of priests and nuns. In the 16th century, Italian painter Michelangelo was a bit displeased when Biagio da Cesena, the Papal Master of Ceremonies, criticized his Sistine Chapel frescoes, claiming that they’re more suitable “for public baths or taverns” than a chapel. Michelangelo responded by making Minos, judge of the underworld, resemble Cesena, portraying him as an old man with donkey ears. Devilish? Despicable? Maybe. But it’s also an incredible example of non-violent childish humour at play.
To eat or not to eat: there are strict rules if you want to survive in this online swamp game created by artists Nomeda and Gediminas Urbonai.
Think about what kind of games best represent your cultural traditions and national heritage. What games would you present to your friends from abroad? What differences and similarities are there compared to games from other countries in your region?
Grades 5-8
Imagine, that you’re a video game designer, who has received a task from the European Commission to create a game explaining the European Parliament election process to encourage youth voting. What kind of game would that be?
Grades 9-12
The project is sponsored by Nordplus
© 2024 The School of Creativity.
