Play in the City 2013

In my mind, playing is a very important thing, although most of the Chinese parents usually think that playing wastes times and is never as neccessary as studying hard, because all my family members are so enlightened to consider playing is a good way to make children become more creative and imaginative. Sometimes, I just think about the reason of playing. What are we playing for? Just for fun? Undoubtedly not. As far as I concerned, when we play, we can explore new things or even achieve "windfall". We play, not for reasons or goals, but to enjoy the process of continuously meeting the surprise. Moreover, "playing" should not be defined narrowly. If you like, working can be a kind of playing, because you may get a sense of achievement; studing can be a kind of playing, because you may enrich your knowledge; reading can be a kind of playing, because you may widen your horizon; and, even sleeping can be a kind of playing, because you may have an amzing dream! Therefore, playing is everywhere in our lives, and that is why our lives colorful and cheerful.

According to Henig’s essay, many scholars tried to figure out what effect does play have on human or animals, but ended up with no clear answers. Play is somehow dangerous, and those abilities that we can get from play can also be gained from other alternative ways. Then I got confused. Why do we play, if play is so meaningless and so dangerous? My two year old sister likes playing. In her class, her teacher taught them by playing different games. She was apparently less distracted when playing games. I like playing too. One of the reasons I chose “play in the city” is because I saw a word “play” which is very attracted to. I think play just makes me happy and is a mental need. Just like Stuart Brown said, “Look at life without play, and it’s not much of life.” 

I’ve spent most of my life at a politically and socially liberal school, but until my senior year the politics of the majority of my peers never really factored into my personal life.  It was then that I both enrolled in a political theory class with a socialist teacher and increased my presence on the internet.  Surrounded by liberal people in a left-leaning discussion-based class, I found my opinions shifting ever more to adjust to my friends’ perspectives, and I didn’t have any explanation other than ‘they just made a lot of sense’.  Sunstein, however, explains the concept beautifully.  It’s not that people lose their own free will in favor of the will of the majority, and it’s not as if a person will suddenly abandon long-held beliefs, rather the homogeneity of the group incites agreement in individuals.  The Internet and a lot of social media sites are tangible examples of this process in action.  One person might advocate for increased marriage equality, and, as the original message spreads and others take it up, so often they act as if anyone who disagrees is wrong and unworthy of inclusion in the conversation.   All other opinions fade into the background as a single opinion becomes dominant and “create[s] echo chambers” which encourage even more radical thinking along the same vein.

(just to be clear, I’m not condemning the example I used [I support marriage equality], but it illustrates my personal experience with the concept in Sunstein’s article)

I think that Sunstein presents a very interesting issue in the disappearance of serendipity in favor of filtered control over what we read and hear. I, personally, enjoy the ability to wander and discover new things and opinions. I think, in terms of issues like amazon stores tracking browsing history to offer a more personal shopping approach, the filtration of information isn’t necessarily as bad as, say, filtering the news to only hear stories that agree on certain problems. One is trying to help you stumble upon another book or DVD you may like, while the other is trying to potentially warp your opinion. Growing up the daughter of a conservative journalist and liberal graphic designer, I have understood the values of listening to and understanding both sides of an argument from a very young age. By cutting people off from the opinions of others, especially in hot button issues like politics, people on both sides are deprived of the essential understanding of opposing viewpoints. I would much rather talk to people whose views differ from my own, especially on issues I don’t understand, in order to form an opinion, than blindly pick a side based on my existing bias. This, more than any other reason, is why I think the sacrifice of serendipity for careful management is tragic. 

       Play, like nearly every other person, was a giant part of my childhood.  Playing simple games like “house”, “tag”, and “hide and seek” did not just help to keep me active and alert but it taught me social skills and how to interact with my peers.  “House”, where my friends and I imitated a stereotypical family scenario in a house, added to my knowledge of how a “proper” husband and wife, son and daughter, or uncle and aunt should behave.  

       Now that loss of play is becoming more and more common, parents are rightfully worried with how their children will learn to be sociable especially when they are spending a large chunk of their time online. A friend of mine obsessed over World of Warcraft, a popular online game, during his sophomore year of high school.  When recalling his high school experience he used to always say that it was almost as if there was a gap in it because he couldn’t remember any of that year.  In my opinion, online games are not only a waste of time but they also are not memorable or rewarding in any way. 

While reading Henig, I kept being struck by the fact that they were only examining play in children. Of course, psychologically I suppose it makes sense, because of the relationship between brain growth and play. But play does not stop once you reach puberty. For many people I know (including myself), play is still a huge part of our lives. We get together to play (informal or formal) sports, board games (which are in fact often made specifically for mature people, not just children), video games... The list goes on. It just seemed astonishing to me that the article did not mention that play does not stop when the brain is developed.

Bloomberg's article on the other hand reminded me of the Statistics class I took last year, when we learned about the algorithms used to personalize things like Amazon suggestions and Facebook ads. I thought then, and still do, that it's a good idea, at least for ads. Companies are more likely to sell things if, for example, they advertise shoes instead of football gear to me. But doing the same thing for newspapers? I'm not quite sure I like that idea. One of my favorite things about newspapers is that you get a combination of all the news that's happening, not just one narrow field that you already happen to be interested in. I would never learn new things about the world if the newspaper only showed me articles on feminism or fashion, because I already keep up with those on websites made specifically for those topics. Newspapers should stay generalized, just to keep the world informed. It's what they're made for, after all.

I love playing. Playing makes me happy, relaxed and imaginative. Even if the playing is too dangerous, it still owns advantages. But, different kind of games maybe can lead to various results. I really can’t recall some experience about playing time when I was little but I know the playing is completely different now. Like it said in “Taking play seriously”, many kids nowadays are addicted to computer games and other games only needed the fingers to move. I never liked playing the video games. It is exhausting for me to sit on the chair and stare at the screen whole time. I think it’s true that video game is not a playing benefited to people. People are not evolved in the game by just moving their fingers. Also, playing the video games is more dangerous, for it’s unrealistic and violent sometimes. Playing is a natural process, no matter it’s beneficial to the brain development or not, it is people’s right to follow their instinct and explore the real world during participating.

Like Henig, I am uncertain of the benefits of play. However, when I worked at a summer camp this year, I was assured that there are benefits. Having a variety of campers with mental and emotional disorders, the campers in my group were very sensitive to each other's energies. If even one person got rambunctious, the whole group would start screaming and tossing pieces of clay in the air. To avoid this, we began to have dance parties in classrooms, incorporate songs into work time, and take breaks to play "Big Booty." This playtime greatly improved my campers' attitudes. They would have more fun and be more productive because they weren't affected by or creating a group-wide temper tantrum. My happiest memory from this past summer is when my campers were building robots and laughing in between every song lyric that was blasted out of the radio.

It was interesting to hear what struck other people about my writing; I heard several comments on the vividness of my imagery, and the transition from general to personal. I was very pleased and amused to hear that “extravaganza” was among the most noticeable words in the paper; it seems fitting that “extravaganza” was the center of attention. The feedback I got made me feel pleased with my work; nothing quite so active as happy, but well contented, which was a marvelous change from immediately after I originally submitted my paper, by which point I was tired, stressed, and worried about other things. I hope to take from this exercise a renewed appreciation of the vividness of words, and the confidence to use them artfully.