The Ambiguity of Play by Brian Sutton-Smith

by Brian Sutton-Smith

Every child knows what it means to play, but the rest of us can merely speculate. Is it a kind of adaptation, teaching us skills, inducting us into certain communities? Is it power, pursued in games of prowess? Fate, deployed in games of chance? Daydreaming, enacted in art? Or is it just frivolity? Brian Sutton-Smith, a leading proponent of play theory, considers each possibility as it has been proposed, elaborated, and debated in disciplines from biology, psychology, and education to metaphysics, mathematics, and sociology.

Sutton-Smith focuses on play theories rooted in seven distinct “rhetorics”―the ancient discourses of Fate, Power, Communal Identity, and Frivolity and the modern discourses of Progress, the Imaginary, and the Self. In a sweeping analysis that moves from the question of play in child development to the implications of play for the Western work ethic, he explores the values, historical sources, and interests that have dictated the terms and forms of play put forth in each discourse’s “objective” theory.

This work reveals more distinctions and disjunctions than affinities, with one striking however different their descriptions and interpretations of play, each rhetoric reveals a quirkiness, redundancy, and flexibility. In light of this, Sutton-Smith suggests that play might provide a model of the variability that allows for “natural” selection. As a form of mental feedback, play might nullify the rigidity that sets in after successful adaption, thus reinforcing animal and human variability. Further, he shows how these discourses, despite their differences, might offer the components for a new social science of play.

Genres: Games, Plays, Nonfiction, Game Design, Philosophy, Psychology, Education

Paperback

First published February 27, 1998

Reviews

[Victoria Hawco · Rating 3 out of 5]

Still feels pretty ambiguous to me! Solid read though.

[Kars · Rating 5 out of 5]

A classic, and deservedly so. Can't think of a more comprehensive discussion of the many perspectives on the nature of play. It's quite dense in places, but remains readable thanks largely to Sutton-Smith wit. Ultimately, the author stays on the fence with regards to the fundamental character of play. But as will be clear to anyone who has followed the thread of heteroglossia throughout the book, that is largely the point.

[John Carter McKnight · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent analysis of a range of ancient and modern rhetorics surrounding play. Sutton-Smith introduces the concept of "ambiguity," but falls short of really using it in a theoretical construct along the lines of Pickering's "mangle" or Law's "mess." That's one example of a general timidity that mars an otherwise strong work.

Most useful for me was an empirical look at chidren's own rhetorics of play and the ways in which parents, educators and cultural critics sanitize or silence them: this is the one area where Sutton-Smith really lets it rip, and it's fascinating.

Overall, readable, teachable, and useful.

[Hiknbean · Rating 2 out of 5]

Way toooooo academic. Wanted more into the history and philosophy of play and really did not see the answer as to why we play. Book looked too analytical and took away the fun of play.

[Alexander Kipkov]

unsatisfying.. nomalist

[Alper Yılmaz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sutton-Smith cannot in any way be claimed to have underresearched his subject, nor misinterpreted his sources. The deficiency with this work lies in his ability to create something worthwhile in the end: Despite being useful overall for at least getting one to approach its subject from many different angles, on the whole this is a remarkably unhelpful and unenlightening study. This is because its grand revelation--that play is a driver for evolutionary progress--has been made so redundantly obvious by the past near-century's worth of scholarly works on the subject that it ends up constituting a massive anticlimax, adding very little to the preexisting discourse.

This book tries to answer so many questions that surround the concept of play, and while Sutton-Smith's "rhetorics" may be superior to Caillois's categories in some ways (diversity, specificity, disciplinary identification), they're not as practically useful as they could be, and in the end they don't manage to bring any more clarity to the issue of play than Huizinga did almost 60 years before. The emphasis he puts on the evolutionary functions of play is certainly appreciated but, again, largely redundant and ironically reductive.

With this work, once again, the relatively recent tendency in academia to break things down to different aspects of ideology and perspective seems to have taken us too far from the core of the matter.

[Nancy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Skimmed and skipped through, but wanted to note it here because so many sources cite it and I can see why (a gallant gallop through the concept at hand: PLAY).

This text lives in the universe I want to know more about (What is Play??) but alas (for me) is mostly about rhetoric and not the thing. Also: the 90s were (alas) so long ago. I sense the few pages about children and play on playgrounds already so dated. I don't even know if foursquare and jump rope happens on playgrounds. (?) (To be fair, this book wasn't focused on playground design, but play. I just hoped it might talk about the intersection of those.) Also: hiding thimbles in our bodies? Do tell. (This text seems full of such easter eggs.)

[Frouke · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eigenlijk heb ik dit zeer snel doorgenomen en heb ik het wat schuin gelezen maar ik heb er genoeg tijd in gestoken om te kunnen zeggen dat ik het heb 'gelezen'. (Dit was voor de BAP).

[Christopher Rutenber · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great reference source for further exploration.

[Brandon Gray · Rating 4 out of 5]

Absolute fire but also maybe a bit too academic for its own good

[Francis Barton · Rating 5 out of 5]

A classic, one of the greatest books ever written.

[Jordan Magnuson]

A fascinating and highly readable (dare I say "playful"?) survey of historic and contemporary rhetorics of play.