Huizinga: Nature & Significance

The reading of Nature & Significance from Huizinga has a deeper meaning to what “play” actually stands for on a more human level than how the dictionary defines it as “engaging in activity for enjoyment and recreation rather than a serious or practical purpose.” Huizinga states that it is more of an instinct with a “biological purpose” (98) and that play is based more on the player itself than just the act of play.

For instance, I have a new puppy in the house that enjoys playing with my cats; while the cats are not wanting to play with her she still has that instinct for wanting to play with them. So from person to person play can mean different things

One interesting idea that Huizinga noted was that play is common to both humans and animals, the inclination to laugh is exclusive to man. While that note is common sense, to me it never crossed my mind – even thinking more into it some birds laugh as an imitation of man.

Another note that is heavier is that “every child knows perfectly well that he is “only pretending”” (103). I note on this because of what we see in the media far too often with concerned parents and violent video games. Take GTA for example: a violent video game that has qualities of real life. People use the game as an example saying that it makes kids think more violently and act on those inclinations. While the media uses these as examples they should look further into it as Huizinga even notes that its pretty clear that it is strictly pretend.

Then to sum it all up, Huizinga notes that “one of the most important characteristics of play is its spatial separation from ordinary life” (113). This ties into the same idea of violent video games are not the same as ordinary life and should be viewed as such as well. Which most make the connection that it is simply a game to be played for enjoyment purposes and has the separation from what real life is.