So why do we play games? Easy...they're fun! But why are they “fun.” One reason is because they are often, if not always, about the human condition. As children and as adults, when we play games we have the opportunity to race, to go to war, to make the most efficient machines and cities, to fight off monsters, etc. in a safe space. If we win we feel confident in our capability to take on challenges to our survival (gather the most food in Hungry Hippo) or achieve overwhelming success (market domination in Monopoly or global domination in Risk). If we lose we suffer the sting of defeat, but the consequences are safe, it’s ego, versus life and limb.
That being said I think it is worth our time to consider the ideological implications of the games that we engage in. What values do they convey about the human condition? What values do they espouse about historical and contemporaneous beliefs, definitions of success, failure? And by engaging with them what are we saying about our own beliefs.
Before diving in let’s establish a shared definition of ideology, on which I will focus. I’m working of off the dictionary.com definition “the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual, social movement, institution, class, or large group.”
Most of the games that we play in Western society are latent with taken for granted Western “doctrine, myths, and beliefs”: A Eurocentric view of the world and world history, emphasis on individualism, Judeo Christian values, the scientific process, the inherent value in industrial development, free market values, innovation and progress, and world domination. Conversely often absent in these games are an emphasis on the value of cooperation, interdependence, indigenous knowledge and cultural heritage, sustainable and thoughtful steps towards innovation and progress, mysticism, Islamic or other “Eastern” religious values, questions of historical and contemporaneous inequity in Eurocentric history and/or Western values. Let’s take a look at three examples in games that I’ve played, and to be honest, enjoy.
Monopoly: A popular and delightful game with the goal of domination of opponents through landownership. While this is certainly in many ways a game of chance, the key to winning, which I must disclose, I never have, is purchasing the right properties in the proper quantity in order to build houses and hotels and charge others. As a landowner it is in your interest to increase the value of your land and collect monies from others, depleting their overall net worth, in order to win. The goal is to gain power and strength from the losses of your opponents. As in the western world often those with the most money in terms of cash and property have the most flexibility to take losses, and also have the most power to inflict monetary consequences upon their opponents. While values of individual interest at the sacrifice of others in order to win are emphasized questions of the societal consequences of such domination on a micro- or macro- scale are not.
Stone Age: A more obscure game, intellectually challenging, long-term planning game with the goal of resource management. The goal being to develop the most stable and advanced social group through the rolling of dice, selecting cards, and placing pieces. The resources being managed are population, gathered food, crops, housing, tools, wood, clay, stone, and gold, civilization innovations. Groups that teeter on the edge of survival with just enough resources in any one category to maintain their base population struggle to move beyond the subsistence cycle. The emphasis for these groups throughout the game remains on not dying, while those groups that manage to gain a surplus are allowed more flexibility in the choices that they make and ultimately have room to put energy towards growth and advancement. These groups focus on growing their population, growing more crops, which allows them to also develop more housing, make technical advancements, and ultimately take more risks. This game is won by the opponent that builds the most agile social group. Implicitly this game places value on technological advancement and the development of surplus resources while subsistence living or dependence on a cycle of “just enough” is a losing option.
Tag: There are an endless number of ways to play tag, but for the purposes of this blog entry let’s focus on the one in which the last man/woman standing wins. The goal of this game is to not be “it” or the odd one out. In order to not be it you must avoid the touch of this individual through any number of techniques that involve brains and/or brawn: using brains to remain unnoticed or near safe base and generally out of reach for longer than anyone else, using brawn in terms of agility, speed, and/or endurance to become an unattainable and/or unattractive target for the longest period of time. Often times the winner utilizes a combination of these traits. The underlying message being the emphasis on individualism either as the hunter or hunted and focus on survival of the fittest. Even though some may work together in order to initially avoid being tagged in the end only one can survive for the win.
The goal in examining the ideological implications of games is not to suggest that we not ever play those games that highlight beliefs that we don’t agree with. I think we learn more about our beliefs when we are confronted with explaining, defining, and justifying them, than when they remained unquestioned or unchallenged. Also engaging with beliefs other than one’s own can help to develop understanding and empathy, without having to necessarily make the leap to agree.
The reality is looking too hard at things can sometimes suck the fun right out of them. I remember once dancing to a rendition of “Sweet Home Alabama” only to be told that it was a reminiscent song written about the good old confederate, segregationist, down home values of Alabama. That sucked the fun right out of the room, when all I wanted to do was dance. All of the sudden instead of dancing and laughing with friends, I was considering the political implication of every move of my hips to the beat and eventually exited the dance floor to await the next song. The problem with this is we were in a country western bar and any and every song may have been latent with the very same sentiments. The challenge at hand for me was to stand alone in protest and deprive myself of the human exchange with my friends based on who we were and what we believed or make a statement by not dancing, likely impacting my own enjoyment of the evening more than anyone else’s. Even more let’s say I did insist that we depart that bar in protest, if I were to rigidly adhere to my ideological values and we went to a hip hop bar I’d have to sit out some songs in order to protest misogynistic undertones and focus on excess, some pop songs for emphasis on unrealistic love, smooth jazz because it co-ops and dilutes the historical artistic value of jazz, and the list goes on. The reality is that often we make compromises for the sake of living, engaging with others and having fun. The key is not to never compromise, but be mindful and conscious of the compromises that we are making and to draw our own personal lines for where compromise ends. Would I dance to a Prussian Blue Neo-Nazi blue grass tune just to have fun with friends- absolutely not, I have my line, and that goes far beyond it. Might I dance with friends to sweet home Alabama and separate my feelings about the history of the song from the moment - as long as nothing explicitly offended or harmed me or those I’m with in doing so, yes.
So what’s the point? As far as I’m concerned taking a deeper look at the messages reinforced or advanced by games forces us to be more aware of the message that they send, ask ourselves, and others when appropriate, important questions about our opinion on those messages, and helps us define our personal beliefs and boundaries. It forces us to be conscious of our decision to personally choose in the moment to abstain or separate ourselves from our judgment of the political implications of a game, for the sake of something more important: intellectual challenge, escape, human connection-fun. In doing so we may learn something new about ourselves or someone else.
