Tuskegee Airmen

A few weeks ago we had a discussion in class that was about what person or group changed a game or culture. The first thing I thought of were the Tuskegee Airmen. The Tuskegee Airmen were the first African-American military aviators in the United States armed forces. During World War II, African Americans in many U.S. states were still subject to the Jim Crow laws The American military was racially segregated, as was much of the federal government. The Tuskegee Airmen were subjected to racial discrimination, both within and outside the army. Despite these adversities, they trained and flew with distinction. Primarily made up of African Americans, there were also five Tuskegee Airmen of Haitian descent.

If the Tuskegee experiment wasn't a success, I honestly do not think African-Americans nor minorities would have the opportunity to be in the Air Force flying planes or being on the ground working as engineers. Also, there is a movie about the Tuskegee Airmen that I highly recommend called Red Tails.

Are James, Bosh, and Wade the Big 3 Killers of Competition?

We all know that Lebron James, Chris Bosh, and Dwayne Wade can tear it up on the basketball court. From their ferocious dunks to silky smooth jumpers, they have definitely made a name for themselves. They are the Big 3. With each earning a whopping $16 million salary, I guess you could say the public supports their pretentious nickname.

However, I must admit and yes, I know I am risking being shunned by all loyal Heat fans by saying this... I am not a fan! With the Big 3 clumped together on one team, they rid the league of a significant amount of competition. I predict that the effects of this will eventually become very evident in the NBA.

First, the Big 3 discourages the other teams in the league. When put face-to-face with James, Bosh, and Wade, who really stands a chance? Well, the Pistons, for one, undoubtedly do not. In last night’s game (April 8^th), the Heat put the Pistons away in Miami, 98-75. The Heat crushed the Pistons, and this was even with Wade sitting on the bench with an ankle injury! The title of an article about the game truly says it all: “Pistons Vs. Heat: LeBron James Too Much For Detroit.”

No one wants to watch the team they root for get crushed. What happens instead? The fans give up! The fans that do attend the home games versus Miami Heat are most likely just going to see the Big 3 in action. They go to see a game. However, it’s not the game of basketball. Instead, the audience basically goes to witness a slaying! They enter the stadium, knowing the end result.

Doesn’t that defeat the whole purpose of professional basketball? Isn’t it supposed to be about the “best of the best” competing against one another, both with an equal chance of winning? When the Miami Heat are involved, the odds are pretty much set from the very beginning, and let’s just say, they’re not in favor of the other team.

In addition to discouraging the other players in the league, the competition aroused by stacking the Heat with the Big 3 also deters the other players on the Heat. James, Bosh, and Wade will ultimately receive the credit for the win anyways, so what’s the point of the others trying?

Yes, the collective effort of the team is necessary to achieve the win. Rationally thinking, each player understands that his efforts are important. However, game after game, when all of the recognition is given to the Big 3, I’m sure the other Heat players start to feel slightly depreciated. This feeling of depreciation will lead to a drop in confidence, which, in turn, will result in poorer performance.

In the article about last night’s game, Jason Walker includes: “James and the Heat had to get things done.” Yes, LeBron James is a superb athlete. However, doesn’t it take the whole team’s efforts to “get things done”? Apparently not in the Heat’s case.

Along with poorer performance, I think that the Heat will soon be dealing with a lot of internal animosity, as well. The Heat appreciates and admires the Big 3; these three powerhouses are a great asset to them. However, I believe that this admiration will soon turn to jealousy and feelings of bitterness.

As a team, the players are looking out for the welfare of the Heat as a whole. Nevertheless, it is still human nature to place emphasis (arguably even greater emphasis) on one’s own wellbeing. I think that the lack of recognition and misattribution of credit will cause the other Heat players to resent the Big 3. Internal hostility will destroy the dynamics of the team and, as a result, hinder their chances of winning a championship.

Furthermore, by placing James, Bosh, and Wade on one team, Heat fans have become prouder than ever. Have they become a little too proud though? Do you think the Heat will continue to give their fans a reason to be proud? Or, will the unbalanced placement of the Big 3 on one team cause the Heat to dwindle into a circle of jealousy and animosity?

Most people steer away from any bashing of the Big 3, especially when it’s about Lebron. He is King James, of course. However, I went there. I opened it up for debate, so here’s your chance to state how you really feel about it.

Rock the Casa

On April 4th, Kappa Alpha Theta put on event called Rock the Casa. During Rock The Casa, various campus acapella groups, dance groups and individual performers participated in this event to support CASA of Washtenaw County. These performers put on a “second personality” while performing. They are in what I believe is the equivalent to what athletes call “competition mode”. While on stage, these performers must put on an act: forget their friends who are watching in the audience, forget the whispers going on around them and zone into their performance. They become the actors, the center of attention. They must forget everything else going on in their lives for the brief time they are on stage and become immersed in this new character of a performer. It is remarkable how these performers are able to completely disengage themselves from the events of their separate, daily lives, as well as their surroundings to devote themselves to a collaborative, dramatic performance where they act as if they have no other worries.


Erwing Goffman, in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, claims that “[w]hen an individual enters the presence of others, they commonly seek to acquire information about him…” (Goffman,1). Goffman goes on to talk about how knowing about the individual “actor” helps the audience develop expectations and hypothesize the actor’s expectations of them. In the case of Rock the Casa, the various performers had stop thinking about how the audience was solely focused on them. They were thinking about many different aspects of the actors’ lives and the actors had to ignore this and perform as if they are alone in their bedroom, in front of a mirror, with no audience. They must stop thinking about how audience members may be analyzing each and every action they make, and focus solely on performing. Further, Goffman talks about how there are two different aspects of actors’ activities: “the expression that he gives, and the expression that he gives off,” (Goffman, 2). The Rock the Casa performers, or “actors”, have expressions on their face while performing. They all appeared to be smiling and enthusiastic to be performing, yet focused and poised. I, as a member of the audience, perceived the expressions that they gave off in a certain way. I perceived their smiles and giddiness as their happiness and their focus and seriousness as their confidence. Whether of not these were their true emotions, this was the expressions that they gave, and how I, as a member of the audience, perceived them. The actors had to break away from their everyday lives to give these expressions. No matter what their true emotions were, they had to perform as this new happy and confident character to put on an engaging performance and appear in unison with their co-performers.


In Nina Bandelj’s article, How Method Actors Create Character Roles, she argues that “[t]he portrayals of characters in film and on stage, conveying distinct images of human identity, motivation and action, are among the most pervasive popular cultural objects” (Bandelj, 388). With this, during Rock the Casa, the performers portrayed an image of themselves and their performance that is distinct from all other aspects of their world. No matter what their true identity is, they put on a performance where they appear engaged, dedicated and confident. They are the center of attention for the time they are on stage—the center of the world for everyone in the room for those few minutes. They performed as entertainment, but also to benefit the CASA charity, making their motivation two fold, or at least appear to be. Whether or not this was their performance motivation, they were able to dedicate themselves to the performance, in coordination with the other performers, to appear to have this motivation and act as if the performance was their sole focus. The performers were in “competition mode”, acting with the other performers to create an engaging, dramatic performance.


References 

Bandelj, N. (Sept., 2003). How Method Actors Create Character Roles. Sociological Forum, 18, 387-416. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3648889

Goffman, Erving. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books.

Social Psychology Adds to the Debate Over Free Will

In the reading for April 4th, Alfred Mele argues the claim that free will does not exist. To further explore his ideas, he performed various studies. In one study, he invited participants to imagine a scenario in which a man sees a $20 bill fall from a stranger's pocket. The man considers returning it but decides to keep it instead. Mele asked the participants whether or not they think that the man had free will when he decided to keep the money. Seventy-three percent responded that the man did in fact have free will. This sparked curiosity for me, however, because I disagree with the majority.

In my social psychology class, we have been discussing how the influence of others can significantly affect our behavior and choices. People are constantly influenced by others, even if others aren't physically present at the moment. Similarly, people are affected by social norms. Social norms are the explicit and implicit rules that specify what behaviors are acceptable in a particular group or society. When a person is deciding how to behave or act, he or she will go with what they think is acceptable. What that person deems "acceptable" is typically denoted by the social norms of his or her given society or group.

Now, let's take the scenario in Mele's study in which a sees a $20 bill fall from a stranger's pocket. He is forced to make a decision - return it or not. According to social psychology, when the man is making his decision, he is influenced by the opinions of others and by social norms. The social norm in most societies is that stealing is bad. The right thing to do would be to return the money. In addition to that, people have a desire to look good. They want others to approve of them. If the man who found the money was surrounded by a huge crowd, he will feel very pressured to return the money. If he doesn't, the people around him might make insulting remarks or reveal disappointing expressions. No one wants to be disapproved of. Moreover, even if the crowd wasn't there, the man might think back to a time when his parents gave him a lecture on stealing. Even though his parents are not physically present, the mere exposure to what they think is right and wrong can affect his decision. In Mele's scenario, the man does not decide to return the money. One could argue that he was having major financial troubles. He noticed that the man in front of him seemed very well-off. In this case, the man's environment leads him to keep the money.

My social psychology class has basically taught me that our surroundings influence almost every move we make. In this sense, we really don't have a choice when we are making our decisions - unless one wants to argue that our choice is to look favorable to others. We go with the choice that we think others would approve of. However, let's be real, that's just a way to convince ourselves that free will exists in those scenarios. Having free will would be able to make the decision to keep the money without it resulting in the betrayal of your society. Overall, I just think that social psychology can add an interesting twist to the debate about the existence of free will.

The Ultimate in Cooperative Games

As you maybe saw in my previous post, my major quest is becoming a better handler in ultimate frisbee. Ever since I started college, ultimate frisbee has been a big part of my life. I learned it when I was younger at a summer camp I went to. One of my favorite things is the "spirit" of the game. There are no referees (only observers in some games--not the same) and the game goes on with this ultimate "spirit".

Ultimate is a pretty hard game to police. There are a lot of different fouls, violations, calls, and rules. It'd be a hard game for a referee to judge, let alone biased players in the heat of the moment. It's funny how varying teams have or don't have this "spirit". It's easy to tell after just a few minutes whether teams have spirit. They will argue every call and have a lack of sportsmanship and respect on the field. Those games are awful; the teams are constantly bickering and making everyone mad at each other.

By being difficult and ignoring general sportsmanlike customs of Ultimate, I think of it as a form of cheating. Some teams have a definite edge by disregarding complaints and continue to act in that way. There are rules for a reason; to level the playing field. Which leads me to another point. There's a bit of game theory behind the "spirit" in Ultimate. I gauge every team I play at the beginning to see how they act. If they're contesting every call and being too physical, I'll act more similarly. You just can't be pushed around all game. If you let the other team do that, they're not only going to have an unfair advantage, but will get in your head.

On April 2, Professor Mitani spoke of cooperation between non-human animals (primates) and the game theory behind it (pre-class reading). We all adapt to our environment based on the other actors. There are a variety of variables that go into primates cooperating, including rapport and mutual benefits. It is to everyone's benefit to play clean and fair, determining the winner on skill, luck, and athleticism. But when one team/individual decides to cheat the system, the other team has no choice to follow suit. This creates a less desirable game, which is dominated by slowing down the game and general disruption.

If a team is cooperative and the competition is fair and fun, I won't be as physical or picky about game-hindering rules. The game flows better, and it's more enjoyable to play and watch. I think this happens in every sport; I just use ultimate as an example. Ultimate is one of the better examples because it is self-officiated. Does anyone else have examples of this type of phenomenon in sports they played or watched?

Are the Hunger Games really a game?

(WARNING: spoiler for those who have not completed the book!)

After finishing the book The Hunger Games, I was astonished that the competition of the Hunger Games could be considered a game. The ruthless fighting and quest for survival between the 24 tributes seemed more like a war than a game. But as I reflected on this course, I realized that the games, in fact, did fit many criteria to be considered a game despite how it seemed trivial for me to call a fight to death a “game”.

Throughout the semester, we have discussed many of the different characteristics of games. One of the main characteristics is that participation is voluntary. However, participation in this game is far from voluntary. The 24 tributes are selected by a lottery to participate.  When Prim was the girl selected from District 12, her older sister, Katniss, volunteers herself as tribute, knowing that she has a better chance at survival than her younger sister. While in this sense, Katniss’s participation was voluntary; it was only as sacrifice for her sister. She would rather die than watch her younger sister get killed in the competition. She did not want to participate. Simply, it was the only alternative she had if she did not want to watch her sister die.

Another characteristic of games is that they involve strategy. The Hunger Games indeed required strategy by the participants. Haymitch told Katniss and Peeta to use their talents to their advantage and carefully observe the other tributes’ talents, so they know what to expect. Katniss uses her hunting and outdoor skills, and Peeta uses his tremendous strength. Further, during the competition Katniss and Peeta act like star-crossed lovers in order to gain favor with the audience, another strategy. By gaining audience support, they have a better chance of obtaining gifts, like water, food, medicine and tools, necessary for their survival. During the Hunger Games, each participant allies with various people, as a strategy to avoid the other tributes teaming up. When there was a twist in the rules of the game, and a team of tributes was allowed to win, Peeta and Katniss use the star-crossed lover ploy even more to their advantage. They use this strategy to obtain audience support through the love-scheme, but also to aide each other, in hopes of helping the other survive. Whether or not Katniss and Peeta are truly in love is not fully clear; yet, it is clear that the two District 12 tributes strategize and work together to win the Hunger Games. However, these individual strategic tactics employed by Katniss and Peeta do not necessarily mean that the game is all strategy. The game is controlled by the Capitol, and represents governmental control over the 12 districts. The Gamemakers force tributes to participate and can change rules at any time, adding twists and turns, leaving only so much room for individual strategy.

While the prior aspects are controversial as to whether the Hunger Games should actually be considered a game, this competition does fit one game criterion flawlessly. If anything, the arena in which the members of each district fight to win is the perfect representation of the “magic circle”.  The Hunger Games is set in a specific place for a specific date and duration. The Game takes place in a computer-made outdoor arena beginning on a set day each year and lasts until there is only one survivor. In this light, the Hunger Games is its own “magic circle”, and in this way can be considered a game.

In another sense, the Hunger Games are a form of entertainment for the citizens of Panem, particularly the Capitol. Although family and friends of the tributes do not find it entertaining to watch their loved ones struggle, many of the citizens do find the games quite entertaining. It is broadcast to all 12 districts 24 hours a day. The Capitol finds the struggle amusing to watch. While the original intent of the games is to remind the districts not to rebel, it does provide a source of entertainment. In fact, one reason Katniss and Peeta continued their love during the competition was because it provided entertainment for the audience, as the “love story” could indeed help them win over the audience’s support. Further, the Capitol reverted to the old rules, at the end, so there could only be one winner because it would be more entertaining for the audience to see these star-crossed lovers fight for survival. However, when the two of them were about to commit suicide, the Capitol changed the rules yet again since it would be more entertaining to have two winners than none.

Hunger Games as a “game” summary:

Participation is voluntary: NO (well, in Katniss’s case yes—but not really!)

Involves strategy: YES to an extent, but also NO (the Capitol can alter the rules at any time, to create an outcome that they desire)

Is played in a “magic circle”: YES

Is a form of entertainment: YES, but NO (in terms of for family and friends of tributes, who must watch their loved ones struggle in what is essentially a death sentence)

With this, it is clear that the Hunger Games does not perfectly fit the definition of a game. The Hunger Games fit some criteria, and not others. This leaves it up to the discretion of each reader to determine whether or not they believe these games fit the definition of a game. Since the word game is in the title of the competition, readers may have the false belief that the competition is a game. But as previously discussed, I believe it is trivial for the Hunger Games competition to be considered a game, especially since there is not one specific definition for a game. 

Do you think the Hunger Games are a game?

Games of the Imagination- Brooke Rubinstein

In my Spanish 277, we read a story called, "Continuidad de los Parques" (Continuity of the Parks). In this story, the protagonist is sitting in a green velvet chair, opening up his fiction book to where he left off the other day. The author explains that as the man turns the page, he is becoming increasingly engrossed in the novel and absorbed by the characters. The characters in the man's book are two lovers. They are planning the execution of the woman's husband. At the end of the story, the male lover storms into the house of the woman's husband to find a man sitting in a green velvet chair reading a book.

The author leaves the story open-ended -- We are unsure if the man in the green chair at the end of the novel is indeed the protagonist. Is he really going to be killed by his wife's lover? Or, did the protagonist become so engrossed in the novel that he just pictured himself as that character? We, as readers, do not know if the protagonist occurs in the same world where the lovers exist, or if they are two worlds apart. The line between what is fiction and what is reality is blurred. The novel is playing a game with our imaginations because the plot creates open-ended possibilities and meanings for the ending.

In addition to playing with our imaginations as readers, the story also plays with the imagination of the protagonist himself. The novel that the man is reading takes over his imagination so much that he thinks he is a participant in the lovers' world. Fiction plays with his head and imagination. As a result, the protagonist is unable to separate his life from the life of the lovers' in his fictional story. He is unable to distinguish between reality and fiction.

Overall, this story exemplifies how fictional writing can result in mind games. I know that for myself, when I read a book, I envision the characters and the scene in my head. The details in the story allow me to paint my own picture. I become extremely engrossed in novels and actually feel the emotions that the characters in my novel experience. In this sense, the books are playing with my head, as they are dictating my emotions to some extent. Moreover, when the novel includes an element of surprise and portrays a twist in the plot, my imagination starts to wander. I begin to come up with my own reasons for a character's actions. Before taking this course on games and that lecture in my Spanish class, I never really thought about this concept of books playing games with our imaginations. I never realized that painting that picture in my head and coming up with plausible explanations was the book playing games with me. This class has truly expanded my definition of a "game."