I guess this links in slightly with my first post, about humans still being biologically tribal. Regardless that how I viewed the group of 5 boys that came down to the junk playground "The Land" yesterday (that's where I work by the way).
Initially their behaviour seemed erratic and destructive to me, it didn't seem to have any purpose other than causing anger and frustration in others. That was until I began to observe their behaviour as though they were a tribe, or a troop of baboons. Not that I think they're baboons, but that mind set helped me understand and interpret their behaviour.
Of most interest to me was the youngest of the 5, he's nine or ten and we'll call him Bradley. He was of interest to me as he usually come to the playground with a different group of lads, and within that group he is very much at the top of the hierarchy, or near enough. Whereas in this group he is certainly at the bottom, not to mention the fact that the other lads were much older than him compare to him usual group.
As I watched it seemed that although Bradley had a place in this hierarchy, he had no authority or status at all over the other older lads; he was almost just along for the ride. And that's when it got interesting for me, as Bradley had found a stick. Quite a good stick as well, and I remember from my childhood that wielding a stick was an empowering feeling. Clearly the other lads in the group agreed and one tried to seize the stick from Bradley. To me this was not an attack on his status within the group as he had little, but more an attack on his actual membership of it. Being much younger I guess it is a constant struggle to prove yourself to the older lads and in being with them at all I think it gives him much more status and authority and maybe acceptance with children his own age. But that's just a guess.
Anyway, Bradley didn't roll over and die, he fought for the stick, he retaliated against this challenge of his position in the troop. And they pulled and pushed and twisted for a while but being bigger and stronger the other boy won and Bradley was left unhappy and without a stick and firmly at the bottom of the hierarchy. But Bradley isn't one to give up and in a stroke of genius he sawed off the end of a brush, giving himself bigger and better stick. Although this was even more short lived than the first stick as the leader of the troop was watching.
The commotion over the first stick had not gone unnoticed by him and seeing as how he couldn't get the stick from the boy who wrestled it off of Bradley he too sought his own. He went over and took the new stick off of Bradley but this time there was no struggle, this boy is undoubtedly the leader of their pack so Bradley conceded and the leaders place was secure at the top. I could say more on him but we'll go back to Bradley.
He was fuming now and fairly so, despite his best efforts he had been repeatedly pushed to the bottom of the troop, it was almost a caste system. So he went into the office of the playworkers and took another brush, this time it was a metal one and took the end of that with a couple of whacks against a pallet. The other two in the group weren't bothered about having sticks or pole or brushes so Bradley got to keep this one. Although now there were unhappy playworkers who didn't have any brushes left and were having to intervene in this troop of defiant males.
The playworkers had just cause to be annoyed and gave a reasoned argument but the task was futile as far as I could see it as this was Bradley's chance to solidify his position in the troop and remind the older lads why he was with them. The playworkers intervened and Bradley bit back with swearing and aggression, the older lads laughed and Bradley didn't seem so low on the hierarchy any more and for that moment it was more a meritocracy than a caste system.
Interestingly when they left and we had to tell them to put the sticks down and to leave them on the playground Bradley was the first one to do so.
And that's my pondering for today
Sunday 16 June 2013
Friday 14 June 2013
Hierarchy's and the 2nd Playwork Principle
This being my first post I'm not sure where to start writing. I've all of play to ponder; where begin?
I guess I'll write about what's been on my mind lately, that being hierarchy's. Not so much what they are or why they exist but more so what they mean for the second playwork principle. Here it is for reference "Play is a process that is freely chosen, personally directed and intrinsically motivated".
That's right it's that one, the one people regurgitate all the time, the one I'm sick of hearing to be honest.
But hierarchy's are my focus hear and throughout my blog I'm going to resist ranting as much as possible; unless it's really necessary. Google defined hierarchy's as: "A system or organization in which people or groups are ranked one above the other according to status or authority." and that'll do nicely to get the ball rolling. I'm not arguing how natural they are, that's irrelevant for now, i'm thinking about the effect they have on play. I'm thinking about the concept of having more authority, status and/or power over one's friends could influence peoples actions. And in the adult world it is naïve to argue that it doesn't; I won't list examples but look anywhere and its easy to see adult striving to be higher and higher on the "greasy pole" (Benjamin Disraeli) to be better than other people, or more likely to be seen to be better than other people, even if it's just a ruse. Having a giant plasma screen T.V may mean you're wealthy thus have more status than those who don't have a giant plasma screen T.V. But chances are it just means you have a giant plasma screen T.V.; the product doesn't truly reflect status but can have the effect of falsely portraying it.
But adults and T.V. aren't the reason I'm writing, I'm writing thinking about children's actions, about child hierarchies and how the potential or possibility to be higher on that hierarchy can influence their play.
My favourite book at the moment is The Human Zoo by Desmond Morris, he is a zoologist who turned his expertise onto the human race, it is a follow up from The Naked Ape which I have yet to read. It chiefly concerns human sociobiology and how we are biologically still hunter gathers yet have build around us a world we are not designed for.
Anyway the point being that in it he talks about how in a tribe (which we still are biologically) there is on leader, and everyone else is below him, each with their own rank and status; such behaviour can be equated to baboons or wolves. Yet he says how in the super-tribe of our modern world there have opened and infinite amount of new opportunities to be the leader, to be at the top of your own pseudo-tribe. And where no opportunities exist, a new pseudo-tribe emerges in which a new leader can be established. Sorry I didn't describe that very well. Nowadays for instance you can be a manager of an adventure playground, the owner of a shop, one of the cool kids, the leading professional in your field, the fastest runner in your town etc. Each of these open up new opportunities for people to gain status and authority where otherwise (in our biological tribal state) these opportunities would not exist. And say for instance you weren't one of the cool kid and they wouldn't have anything to do with you, splinter cell groups can split off and a new gang can be formed. Where status is denied new opportunities can be created.
Sorry if it's still hard to follow.
I always struggle getting to the point, but what I'm trying to say is that all children nowadays have the ability and opportunity to try and gain status and authority over their peers. They can each be the leader of their own gang. Although of course not everyone can be a leader and this is what has been on my mind; that children (consciously or unconsciously) trying to climb higher on the status ladder are not acting in a way that is freely chosen nor personally directed. They are acting in a way that is highly influenced by the people that are around them at all times.
Following on from that; this includes playworkers. I'm not saying that children are trying to have higher status or authority over us, but I am saying that our presence influences play more than we can imagine and is often detrimental to the play process.
Nor am I saying that hierarchies are bad in the lives of children; personally I think, they are inevitable. And nor am I saying that the second playwork principle needs to change; it's just an observation, just a thought.
And that's my pondering for today
I guess I'll write about what's been on my mind lately, that being hierarchy's. Not so much what they are or why they exist but more so what they mean for the second playwork principle. Here it is for reference "Play is a process that is freely chosen, personally directed and intrinsically motivated".
That's right it's that one, the one people regurgitate all the time, the one I'm sick of hearing to be honest.
But hierarchy's are my focus hear and throughout my blog I'm going to resist ranting as much as possible; unless it's really necessary. Google defined hierarchy's as: "A system or organization in which people or groups are ranked one above the other according to status or authority." and that'll do nicely to get the ball rolling. I'm not arguing how natural they are, that's irrelevant for now, i'm thinking about the effect they have on play. I'm thinking about the concept of having more authority, status and/or power over one's friends could influence peoples actions. And in the adult world it is naïve to argue that it doesn't; I won't list examples but look anywhere and its easy to see adult striving to be higher and higher on the "greasy pole" (Benjamin Disraeli) to be better than other people, or more likely to be seen to be better than other people, even if it's just a ruse. Having a giant plasma screen T.V may mean you're wealthy thus have more status than those who don't have a giant plasma screen T.V. But chances are it just means you have a giant plasma screen T.V.; the product doesn't truly reflect status but can have the effect of falsely portraying it.
But adults and T.V. aren't the reason I'm writing, I'm writing thinking about children's actions, about child hierarchies and how the potential or possibility to be higher on that hierarchy can influence their play.
My favourite book at the moment is The Human Zoo by Desmond Morris, he is a zoologist who turned his expertise onto the human race, it is a follow up from The Naked Ape which I have yet to read. It chiefly concerns human sociobiology and how we are biologically still hunter gathers yet have build around us a world we are not designed for.
Anyway the point being that in it he talks about how in a tribe (which we still are biologically) there is on leader, and everyone else is below him, each with their own rank and status; such behaviour can be equated to baboons or wolves. Yet he says how in the super-tribe of our modern world there have opened and infinite amount of new opportunities to be the leader, to be at the top of your own pseudo-tribe. And where no opportunities exist, a new pseudo-tribe emerges in which a new leader can be established. Sorry I didn't describe that very well. Nowadays for instance you can be a manager of an adventure playground, the owner of a shop, one of the cool kids, the leading professional in your field, the fastest runner in your town etc. Each of these open up new opportunities for people to gain status and authority where otherwise (in our biological tribal state) these opportunities would not exist. And say for instance you weren't one of the cool kid and they wouldn't have anything to do with you, splinter cell groups can split off and a new gang can be formed. Where status is denied new opportunities can be created.
Sorry if it's still hard to follow.
I always struggle getting to the point, but what I'm trying to say is that all children nowadays have the ability and opportunity to try and gain status and authority over their peers. They can each be the leader of their own gang. Although of course not everyone can be a leader and this is what has been on my mind; that children (consciously or unconsciously) trying to climb higher on the status ladder are not acting in a way that is freely chosen nor personally directed. They are acting in a way that is highly influenced by the people that are around them at all times.
Following on from that; this includes playworkers. I'm not saying that children are trying to have higher status or authority over us, but I am saying that our presence influences play more than we can imagine and is often detrimental to the play process.
Nor am I saying that hierarchies are bad in the lives of children; personally I think, they are inevitable. And nor am I saying that the second playwork principle needs to change; it's just an observation, just a thought.
And that's my pondering for today
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)