Being surrounded by pink makes me feel all ... pink

Special episode today, all the way from an undisclosed location deep in the depths of the East.

Anyway, finally pulled my first all-nighter of the quarter, not a fun experience. Ah well, bound to happen eventually. Ok, what shall I waste my time and yours on today?

Alright, I have a request from a loyal fan, who is desperate to know my opinions on players. The word itself generally calls up images of sportsmen or video game freaks. Very strange, considering that these two categories of people may be considered extreme opposites of the various male stereotypes in the modern Western or Westernised society. One is the classic ideal of primitive competitiveness that recalls the very essence, as many continue to perceive it, of masculinity. The other is the more modern image of the worst excesses of the current technologically advanced age. Despite these two stereotypes being of almost exact opposites, they show up in the same thought and line of reasoning when one attempts to conceptualise a player.

Now, why would this be? The only answer I can provide, for those who are interested, is that both share a link in the modern consciousness to the idea of masculine competition. The sportsman expends his energies in the pursuit of some physical activity that has no practical purpose. The football player is completely unable to employ the skills he is so prized for in any activity that is of any profit in any other context beyond the narrow world of the sport. Sport itself is a curious phenomenon as the focus comes to be on the sustainability of sports in an industrialised world. The spectator becomes an essential part of professional sports. No longer is it possible for a person to sustain himself as a full-time professional sportsman without drawing on the economic resources of the masses. Personal sponsorship of sports is no longer popular or commonplace. The audience is necessary for a sport to continue to be played in any specialised context. So why would an audience participate in this relationship? After all, the audience finds itself paying often exorbitant amounts of money to sustain the professional sportsmen that they support. If sports are an expression of the competitive spirit inherent in many people, and especially the male, as is often assumed, why then would the audience not choose to physically participate in the sport, but rather prefers to sit back and observe others play the sport?

Many argue that it is a social bonding deal, that supporting a team offers a chance for social cohesion not usually openly available to the average member of society in his or her everyday life. Perhaps it is identification with the superior skills of the professionals on the field or court or whatever. The whole narcissistic attachment to the object thingy can be easily employed here, where the supporter is able to identify with a successful club and then claim rights to being recognised as part of that success. Where then would loyalty to a team arise from? If a professional sports team were to find itself in dire straits, whether in sporting, financial or any other terms, it is a common situation for the supporters to declare their loyalty to the team. Perhaps the loyalty to the team is another expression of the self's ability and willingness to display a capability to suppress the natural instinct to follow success, and thereby affirm his or her own suitability to exist as a member of a society that, as all societies do, demands sacrifices of its members.

What video games do is to infuse a sense and illusion of direct control and power over the professional sports team, or in fact any other larger social institution to which the gamer belongs. The obvious example is sports games, where the supporter of the team is able to play a direct role in boosting the fortunes of the team, and in fact allows an even closer identification with the team. Stepping away from the sports video games, it becomes clear that all video games do in fact provide the gamer with some sense of influence and power over the world he sees about himself that he is usually unable to exert a great deal of influence over. Generally, the video game persona is portrayed as someone with whom the player is able to make a primary identification with. That the easily identifiable persona is able to go on and succeed, presumably, at whatever the object of the game is, allows the player to satiate the lust for scompetition that most people do seem to experience but must suppress.

So while the sportsman is directly involved in the expression of the competitive drives of a large wath of the population, the video gamer serchs for an outlet for a more personal expression of the competitie drives experienced on an individual level, amplified by the overarching fabric of the larger group's collective drives.

Ok, I don't think that was quite what the loyal fan wanted from me, but I think that is really just too bad. My fingers hurt, and I'm tired of looking at the screen, so I'm going to stop any time now and look at something more interesting instead.