Advertisement

Constant beyond Gamification: Deep Play in Political Activism

Chapter
Part of the Gaming Media and Social Effects book series (GMSE)

Abstract

Playful practices in historic and contemporary forms of political “activism” had a traceable impact in the formation of political consciousness and identity in everyday life. The following analysis reflects the social implications of such political ideas about play as principle and follows trajectories of political agency through a close look at the author’s work as game artist in her project Ludic Society and the play with identity (mimicry), performance, and creative practice in social and arts avant-garde experiments. It compares the ethnographic concept of Deep Play (Geertz, The interpretation of cultures, theory of culture 1973) with current concepts of activist role play, social intervention, and public protest against certain conditions of work, society, and urbanity. The chapter finds its creative and intellectual leitmotif in “ludic” activist arts connected to contemporary forms of game arts and political role play. Its claim for the efficacy of such ludic practices is informed by the theoretical concept of Deep Play .

References

  1. Bogost, I. (2011). How to do things with videogames. University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  2. Blissett, L., & Brünzels, S. (1997). Handbuch der Kommunikationsguerilla. Hamburg, Berlin: Rote Risse.Google Scholar
  3. Caillois, R. (1961). Man, play and games. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
  4. Cantsin, M. (Ed.). (1984). First manifesto of neoist performance and the performance of neoism. New York: SMILE.Google Scholar
  5. Geertz, C. (1973). Deep play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight. In The interpretation of cultures, theory of culture. Cambridge, New York: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Jahrmann, M. (2006). Ludics, a Nascent Art Research. In M. Santorineos (Ed.), Gaming realities: A challenge for digital culture (pp. 253–259). Fournos Athens.Google Scholar
  7. Jahrmann, M. (2007). Ludic Society Manifesto. In A. Sudmann (Ed.), Eludamos. 01/01. European Journal for Computer Game Culture. Cambridge: MIT Gamebit Lab.Google Scholar
  8. Jahrmann, M. (2008). Ludics. A new discipline in games studies. In FROG. Future and Reality of Gaming, Conference Proceedings, Vienna.Google Scholar
  9. Jahrmann, M., & Moswitzer, M. (2006–2016).Google Scholar
  10. Ludic Society, issue #1. (2005). Ludics. New Bachelor Machines, Graz, Madrid.Google Scholar
  11. Ludic Society, issue #2. (2006). Real Players. Ludic Interfaces, Vienna, Zurich.Google Scholar
  12. Ludic Society, issue #5. (2008). Objects of Desire, Bari/Vienna.Google Scholar
  13. Ludic Society, VOID book. (2016). 10 year os Ludic Society—100 Years of Dada, Zürich.Google Scholar
  14. Ludovico, A. (2008). Neural Issue #30, Dangerous Games, Bari Italy.Google Scholar
  15. Salen, K. (1999). The achievements of General Ludd. A brief history of the Luddites. In The Ecologist (Vol. 29), Ecosystems Ltd., London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Game DesignZürcher Hochschule der KünsteZürichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Digitale KunstUniversität für angewandte Kunst WienViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations