Compelling reasons
Nov. 17th, 2008 11:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kyrasantae
I really hate it when people say, "you should come to _____; it'll be fun!" It's problematic in a couple of ways: the assumption of the extrovert's value system; and that the phrase is really ubiquitous, like a set expression that must be, without exception, applied to any description of a social event.
Even the word fun is problematic -- I seem to hold no understanding of what it means to other people. It is very much an intuitive attribute. What is fun? Is it something that is enjoyable? What, then, is enjoyability? Or maybe it's what makes you cheerful and happy. Then what does happiness feel like? What is cheerfulness made of?
Fun is also a word that is thrown around to lighten the description of a bad experience. You could have had a horribly boring time somewhere, "but, yeah, it was fun." Or some challenge was really tough, "but it was fun." But let's assume that it's not just a turn of phrase. Then fun things don't necessarily have to be positive experiences, do they?
Brianna suggested that something is fun if, after you have done it, you would consider doing it again. I think that that works best, but it doesn't solve any problems with the common generalized usage of the word. But it also encompasses what could be considered a masochistic tendency -- for example, long long nights, which are no doubt difficult to get through and not at all enjoyable (even painful and agonizing), which I would gladly do again.
==
I cannot push aside the feeling of being subtly pushed around by the community. I can understand encouraging a sense of community, but the effort really has to be made out of free will. Oh, of course it is all voluntary, but you still have to make an effort to assert your free will and that you choose not to partake in whatever particular activity. The way that the event/activity is presented/promoted is such that your participation is assumed and therefore expected.
I think that it was more subtle last year, for example, with the "Assassins" game. There was a bit of "you should play; you can get to know a lot of your housemates" peer pressure, but if you wanted to play you had to sign up so the organizers could put together lists of the specific people you were supposed to try to tag1.
This was replaced by the "animal" game this year, where we just woke up to find mysterious signs taped to everyone's doors. If you wanted to play or if you just wanted to find out WTF was going on, you had to go to a briefing. But if you didn't want to play, then you'd better take that sign off your door or people might be stalking you, waiting for an opportunity to tag you in a game you're not even playing.
Or the strange list of everybody's names in an elimination tournament tree (randomly seeded) by the front door. What the Hell is that and why is it there? I estimate that only about a quarter of the people here know what it is, because that quarter goes to hall council meetings. The Powers-That-Be decided that we're all going to play in a chess tournament2, and if you don't want to be part of it, you must talk to your assigned opponent and concede your game. I understand that there's something about the champion competing against other house champions in other countries, but I don't quite accept how we're being compelled to participate (even having to make a concession is participation, is it not?).
Even hall council is one of those "you have to attend, or you will have no freaking clue what these random things we're pulling out on you are" functions (as illustrated by the chess tournament above). Peer pressure is one thing, but "you are a participant unless you choose not to be one" is another. I'm not sure that it's such a good trend.
__________
1 And there was no lack of participants, either.
2 Couldn't we play Carcassonne, instead?
Even the word fun is problematic -- I seem to hold no understanding of what it means to other people. It is very much an intuitive attribute. What is fun? Is it something that is enjoyable? What, then, is enjoyability? Or maybe it's what makes you cheerful and happy. Then what does happiness feel like? What is cheerfulness made of?
Fun is also a word that is thrown around to lighten the description of a bad experience. You could have had a horribly boring time somewhere, "but, yeah, it was fun." Or some challenge was really tough, "but it was fun." But let's assume that it's not just a turn of phrase. Then fun things don't necessarily have to be positive experiences, do they?
Brianna suggested that something is fun if, after you have done it, you would consider doing it again. I think that that works best, but it doesn't solve any problems with the common generalized usage of the word. But it also encompasses what could be considered a masochistic tendency -- for example, long long nights, which are no doubt difficult to get through and not at all enjoyable (even painful and agonizing), which I would gladly do again.
==
I cannot push aside the feeling of being subtly pushed around by the community. I can understand encouraging a sense of community, but the effort really has to be made out of free will. Oh, of course it is all voluntary, but you still have to make an effort to assert your free will and that you choose not to partake in whatever particular activity. The way that the event/activity is presented/promoted is such that your participation is assumed and therefore expected.
I think that it was more subtle last year, for example, with the "Assassins" game. There was a bit of "you should play; you can get to know a lot of your housemates" peer pressure, but if you wanted to play you had to sign up so the organizers could put together lists of the specific people you were supposed to try to tag1.
This was replaced by the "animal" game this year, where we just woke up to find mysterious signs taped to everyone's doors. If you wanted to play or if you just wanted to find out WTF was going on, you had to go to a briefing. But if you didn't want to play, then you'd better take that sign off your door or people might be stalking you, waiting for an opportunity to tag you in a game you're not even playing.
Or the strange list of everybody's names in an elimination tournament tree (randomly seeded) by the front door. What the Hell is that and why is it there? I estimate that only about a quarter of the people here know what it is, because that quarter goes to hall council meetings. The Powers-That-Be decided that we're all going to play in a chess tournament2, and if you don't want to be part of it, you must talk to your assigned opponent and concede your game. I understand that there's something about the champion competing against other house champions in other countries, but I don't quite accept how we're being compelled to participate (even having to make a concession is participation, is it not?).
Even hall council is one of those "you have to attend, or you will have no freaking clue what these random things we're pulling out on you are" functions (as illustrated by the chess tournament above). Peer pressure is one thing, but "you are a participant unless you choose not to be one" is another. I'm not sure that it's such a good trend.
__________
1 And there was no lack of participants, either.
2 Couldn't we play Carcassonne, instead?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-11-19 04:32 pm (UTC)I think what they are doing isn't the right way to go about it, but I also don't think they have the experience/knowledge/intelligence(?) to properly engage the maximum amount of residents in their "reindeer games."
I personally loathe stalking games. I tried one, once - the first time "assassin" went around, and it was an awful experience in paranoia and general unpleasantness.
I should think that simply not showing up to your scheduled tournament would be enough to opt out of the chess thing - a bit inconsiderate for your opponent, but scheduling you to play someone else without your knowledge or consent is even more inconsiderate, and in many circumstances would be considered downright rude.
College is something that basically has to be endured for many of us. It was for me (for other reasons), and I suspect that I'm not alone in that feeling.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-19 04:50 pm (UTC)In my opinion the mandate that they're *more* desperate about than this one is the one I wrote about in the 'multicultural food fair' post, and unexpectedly (or not) those events are the better-attended ones that get the most effective publicity. And also because that's what makes iHouse different from the other residences. After all, EVERY OTHER hall is mandated to provide activities and they do it relatively well also.
I'm a little tired of the arrogance, really. The "global citizenship" movement might make a lot of us feel guilty if we don't assist in social justice activism, but isn't going to cause world peace or anything by itself, ya know.
The chess games aren't so much "scheduled", but they're given a soft deadline like "by December, you should have played your first round". Which I think is an attempt to "you have no excuses to not do it" you into doing it.
Gah, too much guilt-tripping!