In his historical overview of how play has shaped societies, Huizinga covered a lot of ground. Despite getting lost in the avalanche of references to legends, folk tales, riddles, and stories I’ve never encountered, a few parts did stand out and provoked some thoughts relevant to composition. The part that stood out most for me, however, was on page 197. Huizinga said the following about play in modern times:

“Now, with the increasing systematization and regimentation of sport, something of the pure play-quality is inevitably lost. We see this very clearly in the official distinction between amateurs and professionals (or ‘gentlemen [sic] and players’ as used pointedly to be said). It means that the play-group marks out those for whom playing is no longer play, ranking them inferior to the true players in standing but superior in capacity. The spirit of the professional is no longer the true play-spirit; it is lacking in spontaneity and carelessness. This affects the amateur too, who begins to suffer from an inferiority complex. Between them they push sport further and further away from the play-sphere proper until it becomes a thing _sui generis_: neither play nor earnest” (197).

On the one hand, I’m not sure I agree with Huizinga’s critique here. Not exactly anyone would have been able to participate in Medieval tournaments (or even wear armor or ride a horse), and poetry isn’t known for being commonplace among all populations, in much the same way that I won’t be on an NHL team anytime soon.

On the other hand, I can empathize with Huizinga in that playing games with someone who is far more skilled (or professional) usually isn’t fun. But part of me also wonders if play doesn’t transform, rather than becoming “impure*.” Reading this, I thought of the role of play in writing processes within Composition classrooms, and it seems–at least in my experience–that play tends to take place during the invention process or playtesting. But I’ve encountered it far less during revision, editing, peer review, and proofreading. I wonder if this follows similar lines of reasoning as to why companies often solicit feedback early on in a design cycle, but they’re hesitant to reveal too many secrets once the market is saturated? That is, is there simply too much risk involved at later stages for play to be productive, or am I missing out on playful revision and editing activities?

*This also makes me think of Miguel Sicart’s concept of dark play from Play Matters and how that fits into the idea of professionals playing in different ways than amateurs.