لطفا منتظر باشید ...
When Players Won't Be "Nice"
In the cutthroat social ecosystem of the playground, games are often contexts for asserting and challenging social power. In the following extended excerpt from Hughes' research, Foursquare becomes an arena of conflict for boy players and girl players. The tension between the ideal and real rules comes to the fore, with both sides brokering social authority to define the game in a particular way. As might be predicted among boys and girls of this age, the boys almost immediately drove the girls crazy by very overtly using "rough stuff" ("slams" and "wings") to get the girls out of the game. This does not mean the girls were also not using such moves. What enraged them was the boys' failure to disguise "purpose stuff"in the kinds of "I couldn't help it" performances demanded by "nice" play. The boys would, for example, call, "Rough square. Getting out on serves," and then slam the ball high over one of the girls' heads on the serve. Totally outraged, the girls would counter, when one of their number was "king," with a call of "Rooie Rules." But, as we might expect, calling "nice" rules had little effect. The boys blatantly continued to "slam" and "wing" the ball past them. Since the girls were still bound by their "nice" rules, which prohibited direct confrontation over such actions, there was little they could do. As play proceeded, however, the girls gradually abandoned some of the trappings of "nice" play. They began handling violations quite differently. The following are excerpts from field notes.We begin with three girls and one boy on the court. Angie (the "king") [the player that makes the call]: "Rooie Rules. Rooie Rules."
Angie pauses, looks around, and then walks over to the players waiting in line to get into the game. Angie (to Rooie, who is waiting in line): "Rooie, tell them your rules." As Angie returns to her square, she glares rather pointedly at Andy, the boy who just entered the game, while Rooie lists her rules. (It should be noted that another understanding among these gamers is that players are only responsible for violating a rule they know about. Only if they know, and then violate, a rule can they be denied a takeover of the last round. This attempt to list very explicitly the rules in effect is highly unusual. It functions as a kind of warning to the offending players.)
A little later, Cindy (who is now "king") calls: "Rooie Rules." But Andy continues to "wing" and "slam" the ball consistently. After several such hits, Rooie, who is waiting in line, walks over to Andy's square. Rooie (to Andy): "You're out! Wings are out!" Cindy steps forward to back Rooie up. Cindy (to Andy): "I called Rooie Rules and there's no wings! You're out!" As Andy leaves the court he mumbles something about being a "fish." The term "fish" refers to a scapegoated player. In over six months of observing this game, this was the first time the author had observed anyone being called out for "wings."The exchange above is a very significant departure from the usual patterns of play. Andy is well aware of this. He knows he's been had. The girls' revenge was short-lived, however. In reacting to the boys' refusal to play "nice" by becoming more explicit in their calls of the rules, and by applying direct sanctions for violations, the girls began digging themselves into a rather deep hole. They expanded a call of "Rooie Rules," for example, to "Rooie rules. No slams. No wings. No rough stuff." They tried explicitly to prohibit each of the boys' offending actions. Naturally, the boys could always find actions the girls had not specifically prohibited. One particularly exasperated "king" recognized the problem when she tagged her call of the rules with, "And nothing you guys do!" Of course, on the other side, the girls could not completely avoid violating their own rules, now differently defined.The boys were not only too happy to point this out.[18]
The Foursquare players are not just playing Foursquare. They are playing with the rules of Foursquare, strategically bending and tweaking the real rules to their advantage. Significantly, the goal of each group is not just to win, but to play the game in a way that embodies the proper spirit of play, to play the game in a way that expresses their social being. These players are not merely playing a game; they are gaming the game itself, manipulating real rules within the boundaries established by the ideal rules and the larger social context in which they are playing. Framing play as gaming the game echoes some of the play styles we visited in Breaking the Rules—and it also foreshadows many of the phenomena to come in CULTURE. Rooie Rules offers an excellent example of transformative play within the social realm. Like Piaget's study of children and the rules of Marbles, Hughes exposes the underlying social mechanisms that direct the actions and motivations of a play community. Clearly, the experience of play must be understood as a highly complex system of interaction that is influenced by formal, social, and cultural factors. These factors shape the play of a game in wonderful and often unexpected ways. [18]Ibid., p. 192–194.
