•This article explores the contributions of Roger Caillois to the study of human play. The initial portion of the essay focuses on Caillois’s scholarly career as a response to the public events and intellectual movements of his time. The author shows how Caillois’s responses influenced the portraits of play that he developed in such important books as Man and the Sacred and Man, Play, and Games. The article then analyzes the themes Caillois developed in these writings and compares them to Johan Huizinga’s interpretation of play in Homo Ludens. In a final section, the article shows the continued pertinence of Caillois’s approach to contemporary scholarship and offers author’s own evaluation of this theory. A half century has passed since Roger Caillois’s classic study of play, culture, and the human condition. First published in 1958 as Les Jeux et Les Hommes and then with an English translation in 1961, the book spans the concerns of many disciplines and fits neatly into none. Most prominently, perhaps, Man, Play, and Games is a kind of sociological or anthropological study, an attempt to categorize certain forms of play and to describe how these forms operate in societies. But traditional themes of history, religion, and art—of the changing character of civilization and the possibilities for human expression within that setting—abound. Even at the time of its publication, Caillois’s account was what Everett Hughes describes as “an old-fashioned book, one in which a fugue is played upon a few simple themes elaborated by material from a great variety of cultures” (1962, 254). In this sense, the work is, as Hughes continues, a “speculation about gradual, universal evolution,” a look at how play forms have both responded to the qualities of societies and made possible their development. Classic books sometimes occupy curious positions within the disciplines that honor them. Ideally, of course, the classics maintain this status because they are so filled with rich and complicated meanings that each generation profits from consulting them, and individuals learn something new at every
[1]
Katie Salen,et al.
Rules of play: game design fundamentals
,
2003
.
[2]
Jacques Ehrmann,et al.
Homo Ludens Revisited
,
1968
.
[3]
Thomas S. Henricks.
Play Reconsidered: Sociological Perspectives on Human Expression
,
2006
.
[4]
R. Caillois.
Man and the Sacred
,
2001
.
[5]
E. Durkheim.
Suicide: A Study in Sociology
,
1897
.
[6]
Bruce F Michelson.
Mark Twain the Tourist: The Form of The Innocents Abroad
,
1977
.
[7]
E. Durkheim.
FROM THE ELEMENTARY FORMS OF THE RELIGIOUS LIFE
,
1996,
The New Economic Sociology.
[8]
R. Caillois,et al.
Man, Play and Games
,
1958
.
[9]
Jesper Juul,et al.
The game, the player, the world: looking for a heart of gameness
,
2010,
DiGRA Conference.
[10]
Thomas S. Henricks.
Orderly and Disorderly Play: A Comparison.
,
2009
.
[11]
Talcott Parsons,et al.
Book Reviews : SOCIETIES : EVOLUTIONARY AND COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES. By Talcott Parsons. London: Prentice Hall, 1967. Pp. 120. Price 12s. 6d
,
1968
.
[12]
F. Nietzsche.
The Birth of Tragedy and The Genealogy of Morals
,
1956
.
[13]
S. Freud.
Beyond the Pleasure Principle
,
1925
.
[14]
W. Iser.
The Fictive and the Imaginary: Charting Literary Anthropology
,
1993
.
[15]
R. Benedict.
Patterns of Culture
,
2019
.
[16]
V. Turner.
Body, Brain and Culture
,
1983
.
[17]
The Politics of Play: The Social Implications of Iser's Aesthetic Theory
,
2000
.
[18]
R. R. Bush,et al.
Games in Culture
,
1959
.
[19]
J. Milam.
Playful Constructions and Fragonard's Swinging Scenes
,
2000
.
[20]
W. Motte.
Playing in Earnest
,
2009
.
[21]
Victor Turner,et al.
Body, Brain and Culture
,
1983
.
[22]
M. Rowe.
The Definition of ‘Game’
,
1992,
Philosophy.
[23]
B. Sutton-Smith,et al.
The Ambiguity of Play
,
2000
.
[24]
L. Taylor.
The Word of God
,
2003,
Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (1992-2007).
[25]
J. Huizinga.
Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture
,
1938
.