| ||||||||||||||||||
Product Details
|
“A writer with a sharp and powerful intelligence, helped by a gift of expression and exposition which is very rare, Huizinga assembles and interprets one of the most fundamental elements of human culture: the instinct for play. Reading this volume, one suddenly discovers how profoundly the achievements in law, science, poverty, war, philosophy, and in the arts, are nourished by the instinct of play.” —Roger Caillois, editor of Diogenes
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most helpful customer reviews
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars
Horrible translation!,
By
This review is from: Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture (Paperback)
Please be aware that this book really is a horrible translation of Huizinga's original and insightful attempts to make sense of 'play'. Huizinga's contribution of the new word 'ludiek', introduced through his translations in almost every language but English, is simply left out of the introduction and does not occur in the book. This means that the logic Huizinga has set up, pointing out how cultural practices are characterized by 'ludieke' features (i.e. features of their game-like quality) gets reduced to a book on 'game elements'. The entire logic of play creating culture therefore never comes across, but stays obscured behind game elements in culture. This translation should really be immediately taken from the market or redone by someone who actually tries his best to translate with integrity. An indication of the complete lack thereof is the note of the editor that he changed the subtitle from 'play element of culture' (which Huizinga in his introduction clarifies he fought for on several occassions to be maintained) into 'play element in culture', because "English prepositions are not governed by logic". The English-centricity complete overrules at least 90% of what Huizinga actually expresses. Horrible.
3.0 out of 5 stars
Original but not essential.,
By
This review is from: Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture (Paperback)
Huizinga illustrates with numerous examples out of all sort of civilizations that culture first appears under the form of play. The first forms of culture are played. He finds his examples in as different fields as jurisdiction, art, poetry, battle ...I agree that play was certainly influential or important for certain aspects of cultural life, but not for essential points like politics, exercise of power or distribution of wealth within a society. This book is not in the same class as his other more known book 'The Autumn of the Middle Ages'. He makes an important remark in his diatribe against Carl Schmitt, whom he reproaches his wrong point of view. Schmitt founds his jurisdictional work on the principle of 'friend-foe', in other words on war not on peace.
5.0 out of 5 stars
A masterpiece,
By Jasper Milvain (Bath, United Kingdom) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture (Paperback)
Huizinga's genius is to find the idea of play hiding like a spider in the most unlikely places. The medieval "judicial duel", where justice was done by fighting? Clearly a development of ancient forms of combat - and that combat itself was always highly stylised and ritualised, which show, according to Huizinga, that they themselves were "play" forms. He demonstrates with convincing scholarship that Greek tragic drama and religion were also born from play. The important thing for the reader to understand is that Huizinga does not think that play is in any way trivial or less than serious. In fact, he argues that play is a wider, more all-embracing concept than seriousness. Because the idea of seriousness excludes play, whereas the idea of play can very well be taken seriously. In the latter portion of his book, he laments the fact that play has been ripped from its organic place at the heart of communities and transferred to commercialized spheres of sport. Contrary to what another reviewer says here, Huizinga was not writing in the 1950s but in 1938. A time when the old ideals of nobility and chivalry even in war had been exploded. A time when the very idea of play was something worth cherishing, something to attempt to preserve for a more fortunate future. This is a masterpiece of deeply humanist historical and cultural analysis. If it annoys poststructuralists, well, its the poststructuralists who have the problems. Steven Poole, author, Trigger Happy: Videogames and the Entertainment Revolution
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
Want to see more reviews on this item?
|
Most recent customer reviews |
|