My mother almost always brags that I beat her at Chess when I was 9. My father never spoke about when I beat him at chess that same month. In fact, he and I never played after that. But what I remember most about chess at that age is learning it and its effects.

My friends and I used to play checkers all the time. When my parents decided I should learn chess (poor them), I became very focused on chess and no longer wanted to play checkers - checkers was not a challenge. Chess was. I spent many hours alone, playing against myself, switching between perspectives of black and white and sincerely trying to beat myself. Whenever a chess set was available, I played - there was no Atari 2600 yet, no Nintendo... and while chess required 2 people to play, I pretended to be 2 different people. And this, to me, was all 'play'. It came naturally. No books to study.

Over the years, people asked me which piece was the most powerful. I used to say that it was the Queen, which of course has broad and sweeping powers. Later, I said the Knight, since it was capable of wreaking havoc at a distance when strategically placed. Ultimately, I ended up saying that the King was the most powerful piece on the board - something most people don't agree with. Still, the entire game hinges on the King. Protecting the King is how you keep from losing, trapping the King is how you win. Sure, its a slow moving piece with little offensive ability, but without the King there can be no game. { Read more }

As I mentioned here, and as you may clearly see on the right side of the page now, I am presently reading 'Homo Ludens' by Johan Huizinga. A recent comment by friend 'jesbacon' - someone I actually know and who knows me - got me thinking about something. He and I worked at the same place for about 6 months, and we drank lots of coffee during office hours (and lime vodka after hours). But we played games.

At the time, I was knee deep in Asheron's Call with some people from other departments. Another guy in our department was playing Everquest (he later got hired to work on it). 'jesbacon' was playing Diablo, as I recall... was it a necromancer? I don't remember that well, I was busy shoveling pizza at lunch and talking about the Asheron's Call guild that I had somehow become a... king of. Tar-un, as I recall. { Read more }

I got my copy of Homo Ludens yesterday, and have started reading it (thanks to Benjamin Duranske's post). I got up to the Foreword, at which point I had to put it down - something I will probably explain briefly when I add it to the stack of book reviews. But it deserves more than a brief explanation.

Play is an important part of my world, though my definition varies. Maybe it is my personality type (INTJ), maybe it is the way that I grew up - mainly alone - or maybe I'm just not quite right in the head. Likely, it is all of those and more. But 'play' means something very different to me.

Physiology

In some ways, I see it as a physiological aspect of development for the young, which is something Homo Ludens doesn't cover. Fair enough, but when a child is still forming myelium sheaths around its nerves, it wiggles its appendages alot. This makes them look somewhat cute to people, which of course serves the interest of the child - but it also causes spastic movement that exercises muscles and creates muscle mass. It does serve a purpose, if even accidentally so. An active baby is a good sign. As their nerves become insulated, they begin motor control refinement and movement. Movement requires the muscles built up in the prior stage. Welcome to the next level. { Read more }