|
There is a degree of uncertainty that exists today, even after years of discussion whereby distinctions between play recreation and sport cannot be identified. It is understood that characteristics of each activity are interlinked, however, these characteristics are expressed differently depending on the type of activity in this case play, recreation and sport.
Play is fragile and not something that can be easily legislated or regulated. ... When first thought about, play is associated with small children, which if given choice for illustration, would lead to the developing of skills and learning. But “play appears bedevilled by confusions about its very nature, due to contradictions between fact and ideal, and between plays qualities and the functions often ascribed to it”(Haywood et al, 1990,p10). Johan Huizinga (cited in Haywood et al, 1990) states “perhaps the foremost play theorist, goes as far as identifying play as basic to culture and the development of civilisation”. Today on the other hand we look at play “as incorporating free choice, freedom from compulsion, often spontaneity” (Torkildsden, 1999, p16). Many theorists have based the idea of play upon the same characteristics. Roger Caillois is one of these who theorises play as “free, separate, uncertain, unproductive, governed by rules or make believe”(Caillois cited in Torkildsen, 1999, p22). Caillois built his theory upon Huizinga who states that “play is free”(cited in Haywood et al, 1990, p11). From this it is assumed that play is voluntary and is freely participated in. ... “Play is self contained” (cited in Haywood et al, 1990, p11), because of play and its non-serious, play-like activity play is an end itself. Play does not have an outcome.
Approximate Word count = 1356
Approximate Pages = 5.4
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
