Tuesday 11 April 2023

Pen and Paper Role Playing Games as Revolutionary Praxis


As I sit in the kitchen of a rented cottage somewhere in rural England, listening to tawny owls calling to one another through the twilight, I reflect - as one does - on what it means to be human. 

One doesn't have to be a Marxist to agree with Karl Marx that what separates us from, say, tawny owls, is that we are capable of praxis - a posh word for acting so as to change oneself or society. Tawny owls just do what tawny owls have always done. They are very good at it by now, I'll grant you. But we humans are qualitatively different. We are capable of acting, and later reflecting on why we did it; we are capable of giving our actions purposes beyond the short-term satisfactions of wants; and we are capable of acting so as to give effect to theory. We do not merely act. We act in order to change things - indeed, we act in order to change how we act. We are the only things in the universe to our knowledge that do this.

It should be obvious that this makes us very special, but the advent of so-called 'Artificial Intelligence' has given our self-confidence a bit of a beating. Are we really so unique, or are we each just a souped up natural language model that respond to inputs by spitting out outputs and kids itself that it has free will? Are we just very complicated algorithms?

No. We just have to get our mojo back. And one way we can do this is precisely through praxis itself - and this, you will be glad to hear, involves playing more D&D (though ideally not online). 

What is it that makes playing a P&P RPG a revolutionary form of praxis in 2023? It's because it undercuts three huge tectonic social forces which daily push us inexorably in roughly the same direction. The first of these is the abandonment of reading print, a shift to a post-literary culture in which the great majority of people never really develop the capacity to engage with a long piece of fiction and use it to imagine scenery, people, events and emotions that they have never, and will never, directly see or experience.

The second is virtualisation, by which many aspects of our lives become abstracted from the physical realm, such that almost everything except eating, drinking, sleeping and defecating - the barest aspects of biological life - can, if one chooses, be performed online through technological media (and, concurrently, by which the barriers between what we can imagine and what we can experience give the appearance of gradually being dissolved).

And the third is passivity, by which we become acculturated to constantly being entertained at almost every moment of every day by very cleverly designed devices, kitted out with very cleverly designed software, that keep us always doomscrolling and checking and watching and listening such that our creative gears never really have to engage and we almost never need stand up from the mental sofa to use our imaginations for very much at all. 

Some readers get very bothered about me saying this kind of thing and never fail to let me know about it in the comments on entries like this, but I'll say it again anyway: the place that these forces are pushing us towards (if we haven't arrived there already) is really going to be a bit shit, and we won't at all enjoy it or find it remotely fulfilling. I have faith that this realisation is going to dawn on people ('gradually, and then suddenly', as Hemingway might have said), but we can help that realisation along through our actions. 

In a post-literary, virtualised, passive world, the hobby of playing pen and paper role playing games becomes radically subversive. It requires reading and engaging with lengthy, often very dense, and creatively rich texts. Despite the fact that it requires extensive use of the imagination, it needs proper social interaction with others, preferably all together in a physical space and deploying physical accoutrements like dice, pencils and paper, and beer. And it is active - it needs a DM getting himself off his metaphorical arse to both plan things and imagine, and needs players turning up and engaging positively with each other and the content in order for everybody to have a good time. 

The more people choose to involve themselves in hobbies and communal activities - and especially if they purposefully do so in order to improve themselves and their societies - the less of a grip the antisocial (and, let's face it, antihuman) forces I mentioned earlier will have over us, and the more we will recover our sense of what makes humanity good and special. This may not be revolutionary in the sense Marx understood it, but it will do for our current predicament. 

Pretending to be an elf with some smelly neckbeards and a few d20s can, in other words, actually change matters, if enough people do it - and, even if you find that assertion facile, at they very worst it can change you for the better by making you more well-read, more confident, more grounded, and more socialised. And that in itself is transformative of society when done at scale. What on earth, then, are you waiting for? 

38 comments:

  1. "But we humans are qualitatively different. We are capable of acting, and later reflecting on why we did it; we are capable of giving our actions purposes beyond the short-term satisfactions of wants; and we are capable of acting so as to give effect to theory."

    A more pessimistic view would be that humans are unique in our ability to lie to ourselves and pretend that actions taken to satisfy short-terms wants were actually inspired by coherent theory. Of course, that would also make RPGs incredibly human: after all, most games are just players doing random crap that was fun in the moment and then imposing a plausible narrative after the fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those are the words of somebody who has lost their mojo.

      Delete
    2. I think you may have taken my comment as something negative, which was not the intent (both in regards to humanity in general and RPGs more specificly).

      With RPGs, I don't have any problem with random crap that takes on narrative structure in retrospect -- quite a few definitions of Old-School play boil down to that core structure if you scrape off the cruft. Basically, the DM provides a world with stuff in it, the players choose what to do based on their beliefs about what would be fun, and later you have a ten-year campaign that gives the illusion of having structure and growth upon reflection.

      A human life is just that same process writ large -- eighty years instead of a decade, but otherwise identical. People take their very simple wants and then construct (or more likely, adopt since we're often intellectually lazy) philosophies/religions/whatnot that justify the things done to satisfy those desires or excuse the failure to find satisfaction.

      And that's perfectly fine! A good life is the examined life because the opportunity to craft our comforting self-mythology only comes during that examination.

      Delete
    3. I suppose that means my use of "pessimistic" was inaccurate in my original comment -- or, rather, it's not the uniquely self-deceptive nature of humans that I elicits my pessimism, but the harm done when people confuse their post hoc narratives with some immutable truth that justifies the ill treatment of those whose narratives don't jive with their adopted philosophy/religion/whatnot.

      Delete
    4. Fair enough! I was being a bit defensive because of the nature of other comments on the piece. Sorry about that.

      You are almost entirely right in your observation that people are very skilled at constructing narratives and unearthing evidence after the fact to justify what they have done/thought. And the more intelligent people are, the better they tend to be at doing this.

      I say almost, becauses ultimately I simply refuse to believe, Sam Harris-like, that this is all there is to it.

      Delete
  2. Once again, I agree, and I will go further:

    The little glowing rectangles are the opposite of advancement and futurity. Computers are dead ends and will become ever more similar to drugs as the years pass, and I predict that (before the end of the 21st century) computers will almost completely replace drugs in producing mind-dead morons who stare blankly into space.

    Our science fictional future belongs to old-fashioned family-men with books, paper, pencils, and slide rules. They and their descendants will mount to the heavens and inherit the stars.

    Frank Herbert was more right than he knew.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whoops, finger trouble and I mis-posted.

      I agree that we seem to be drifting into a dystopian future with devices. The two times that I've been confident that this is the case was when I watched Ready Player One in the cinema and as I watched the 2016 US Presidential Election unfold. We are increasingly being marketed to all the time with nearly every situation being one that tries to extract money from us. We are being turned into one-dimensional consumers.

      The solution is to stop consuming as much as we can manage, find a green open space, sit down and listen to the birds.

      Delete
    2. Yes, definitely.

      I'm very interested in cybernetic theory and the 'end stage' of capitalism being the interoperability of human beings and machines (or, perhaps, the reduction of all of existence to information that is processable by machines). This is a hideous dystopia for me, but Silicon Valley types love it and call it 'transhumanism'.

      Your solution is a good one but I would also add getting married and having kids.

      Delete
  3. It's always so embarrassing when conservatives try to engage with marxist theory

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I imagine that would be embarrassing for Marxists.

      Delete
    2. I think Maggie means that secondhand embarrassment one feels when they watch someone else make an ass of themselves.

      I find your ideas relating to fantasy really interesting, but maybe you shouldn’t bring your politics home from your job as a Libertarian ideologue.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, I'd picked up on that, but thanks for the explanation, Einstein. Perhaps you've now gained some insight into the whole 'making an ass of oneself' phenomenon.

      Delete
    4. Worse than making an ass of themself - they seem to be making a bot of themself.

      "It's always so embarrassing when conservatives try to engage with marxist theory" - this sentence could have been output by any old Markov chain. Nothing really pertinent, nothing that implies they read & understood the post, no argument at all, just keyword: [conservative] detected, output: [contentless expression attempting to shame target]. If they were a true DIALECTICAL MATERIAL SCIENTIST they would further the development of theory & praxis in this post instead of outing themself as a mere "marxism fan" unworthy of chewing the boils on Marx's ass.

      Personally, I'm more optimistic about computer technology, the internet, etc. A lot of it is stupid, and stupefying, pornography or stimuli that might as well be pornography - I've also got just about every translation of the Bible, an annotated copy of Finnegan's Wake, Herman Melville's notes on the Divine Comedy, countless collegiate lectures by Northrop Frye, Boris Groys, and so on and so on, all at my fingertips - an inexhaustible universal library. I've also had the privilege of encountering people from all over the world I'd never have a chance to meet in my own little corner - and to the benefit, not the detriment, of my relationships in that corner.

      I think what follows "the place that these forces are pushing us towards" is a rebound, as that place, so divorced from the physical, from the thoughtful, is incapable of sustaining itself in the long term. Then we'll see what the real potential of this technology is, separate from over-financialization and the attention economy.

      Delete
    5. I am also optimistic in the long term, for similar reasons, but I think in the short-medium term we are in for an awful lot of pain as the whole 'incapable of sustaining itself' thing plays out. Which it will. 'What can't go on, won't.' And it will get messy when that happens.

      Delete
    6. I wasn’t sure you did pick it up considering you can’t pick up on your own ideological biases from where you sit above it all as the True Individual.

      semiurge- you share a Facebook Nana’s/Whole Foods shopper’s predilection for thinking that anyone who doesn’t share your beliefs must be the Lawnmower Man. You, specifically, should be afraid of the internet. It’s turned your brain into pudding.

      Delete
    7. Ah yes, Libertarians, famous for their anti-technology polemics.

      Delete
    8. Keep digging, Anonymous. :)

      Delete
  4. Agreed. I've never found contentment in anything other than small-scale, homespun creative endeavors and close personal relationships. I worry about losing them, and my loved ones losing them, a great deal. That's what roleplaying means to me.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Re: “the abandonment of reading print”. An aspect I find simultaneously 'realistic' and terrifying* of the Star Wars universe is how people never seem to be reading. Whenever they send someone a message, they make a small hologram of them speaking, or they send a vocal message via a kind of talkie walkie. Only in Andor do they seem to be using some kind of tablets with text.

    *because what it means for our own future.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting observation. Very few people seem to be thinking abotu the consequences of this, But there is a big difference, it seems to me, between a world in which people primarily visually observe their entertainment and one in which they digest it through reading. A big subject for a short blog post comment, though.

      Delete
    2. In Star Trek, OTOH, people usually reads A LOT in tablets. Just a funny detail, nothing else.

      Delete
    3. I think that says a lot about the distinction between George Lucas and Gene Rodenberry, which (surprisingly) is a comparison I've not often seen/heard being made.

      Delete
  6. Souless machines indeed. I've been programming them nearly full-time since 1979 and no longer believe they are being used (if ever) to improve our lives. Today, more than ever, technology is being used to create new serf-doms that leave us unfulfilled. It was the damn phones in 2007 that screwed the pooch. Computers for technical tasks only---not commerce, monitoring, or entertainment.

    Says the man typing on a RPG blog...

    Irony aside. It would be best if we collectively recognized the dead-end, and put value on the elements of our lives that make us feel whole and sane. Tech as a drug addiction is the best analogy. You think it makes you feel good, until you see it's actually isolating you and destroying your life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, although I also sometimes think a good analogy is refined sugar. For our ancestors, refined sugar was like manna from heaven because they encountered it so rarely. We've inherited that mentality despite it being entirely inappropriate for our times. The same is true of social atomisation. For hunter-gatheres living all their lives in small clan-like bands, having a little alone time was probably very precious. Again, we've inherited a desire for it that meshes really, really badly with our level of technological development.

      Delete
  7. Humans are complex beings. Part of what makes them complex is their ability to disconnect from the "real" world and tap into an imaginary (or illusionary) space. This capability and need for dissolution is an important aspect of what sets us apart from other living, breathing organisms...for a number of reasons.

    I think the great problem with technological innovations (the ones that push us towards the non-literate, virtual, passive stance you rightfully deride in your post) is that it has substituted and subsumed the active ways in which we once engaged with the dissolution process...with the noted results (becoming more ignorant, more passive, etc.). Religious activity once provided a means of active engagement, but the decline of such practices (in most parts of the world) has left a void needing to be filled...and technological innovation coupled with capitalism (generally a negative force in the world) has led to that void being filled, opportunistically, by those with no interest or knowledge of what might be a "better way." Not necessarily because such opportunists are "evil" or nefarious...they suffer from the same ignorance and passivity that affects the consumers/suckers being drawn into their vortex.

    I don't really think of D&D (or RPGs) as a revolutionary activity. But for those who are unwilling or unable to preach a more spiritual awakening, I believe it serves as a subversive method (under the guise of "fun") of keeping the light alive. And anything that does THAT is a "good thing" in my mind.

    I'd also add that this is PERHAPS one of the reasons I am drawn to the crunchier forms of old D&D (specifically 1st edition)...it requires much more reading, much more analysis, much more outside research...and thus ACTIVE ENGAGEMENT then many of the more laissez-faire editions of the game.

    Good post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JB, I could kiss you. Great comment. I have actually recently been thinking the very same thing - running an AD&D 1st edition campaign 'out of the box' with every rule followed to the letter - for similar reasons.

      More MacIntyre than Marx, then - we're just in our D&D monastery behind locked gates, waiting for the barbarian tide to wash around us and dissipate and keeping the light of civilisation alive.

      Delete
  8. Ha! Welcome to the Order of St. Leibowitz!
    ; )

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hm, okay couple of thoughts regarding this:

    I’m down with the idea of roleplaying as a revolutionary act.
    I actually think that the exchange and the computing of information is a really important process for life in its entirety. And creative acts, especially gaming in its many various forms, may be an elemental part in this process. Vilém Flusser wrote a lot of fitting thoughts about that in his texts about “Kommunikologie”.
    And i do agree that there are certain mechanisms in a society shaped by capitalism that do actively disrupt the creative processes. To name just one: the capitalisation of creativity. As soon as a society agrees upon the fact, that creativity has to be linked to money, you’re bound to end up in a ever self repeating mainstream that hinders the creative communication more then it helps. Mark Fisher wrote some fitting thoughts about it.

    Open source and the use of the internet as a free way to communicate ideas (for an example the blogosphere) may be tools to free us from this destructive process. Roleplaying also is such a tool in my opinion.

    So i agree with that.

    But i do not agree with the separation between humans and other biological entities based on “we have a choice and they do not”.
    Don’t get me wrong, this is not a hippie -esque ideology rant. There are some striking differences between the behaviour of humans and other species on this planet and it wouldn’t be constructive to ignore these differences in favour of some pseudo-romantic perspective on nature. But i think that the idea of humans being more creative or more prone to what we call “free will” than the entirety of other lifeforms on this planet is a problematic one. And it may be one of the reasons that we ended up in this more depressing state of things the world is in now.

    Sure, other animals don’t develop technical devices, they don’t fly to the moon or modify their surroundings in the same way we do. But many a species have developed complex ways of life, complex social structures, the ability to play. Heck recent study even suggest that spiders are possibly capable of dreaming.
    I don’t want to go to much into rant-mode here and i think there’s nothing wrong with focusing on humans in this post and topic. But i think the act of hasty declaring one specific group to be capable of things the others are not is one of the main problems that brought us here. Because it disrupts the possibility to learn from your surroundings, to gather information out of the ecological coenosis and compute it into something new. And that leads to a negative form of virtuality. The self reciprocal circle we’re in now.

    Oh locusts, sorry for the rant! I’m a biologist and this topic always triggers me.
    But still, thank you very much for your post! There is a lot I’ll be taking with me from this to further think about it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I love animals and I am fascinated by the natural world, but one shouldn't let that blind one to the fact that human beings are the only species with a concept of history, let alone a notion that history has a trajectory the course of which can be changed.

      Delete
    2. Hmh, i think this is only to some extend true.
      You’re right the concept of history is an incredible tool that enables a fast way to reflect and adapt behaviour. And human history is full of moments and achievements, some good some bad, that changed our life in profound ways.
      But i think in this retrospective we tend to ignore that the majority of hours in the entire human existence were and are spend for merely acting according to the surroundings in order to survive. Something that we see as animalistic behaviour.
      And i think it’s a problem that we fail to address this properly as a society. Because next to the concept of history and the ability to develop technical devices, merely acting is still a big part of our behaviour. And that makes us highly susceptible for feedback loops. Such as the practice of passive consumerism you identified in your post here. The reasons why we end up in this unproductive state are complex and to break free from this problem we need to understand them better.
      All my ramblings are surely just a tiny part of the bigger picture, but i think this is something we must keep in mind or else the great mission to get our mojo back is bound to fail.

      Anyway thanks again for the post!

      Delete
  10. The funny thing about all the comments ranting at how its 'Capitalism's fault for sucking creativity rings all a little bit hollow when the last ten or so years have been the same increasingly Diversity Equity Inclusion pablum sludge everywhere. Every single one of these corporate mind slaves are repeating Marxist talking points and sucking the life out of entire genre by demanding works self censor. Creativity died in part because nobody has the guts to create because everything which is true to life, true to humanity and true to actual human cultural diversity is offensive.

    Everything must be melted down and recast into the mold and image of city dwelling people with no sense of purpose, meaning or culture. The very same 'tablet people' noism decried.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think it is a more reactionary practice (jacobite?!) than a revolutionary (whig) one. Which is fine, given where we're going with AI and PC usage.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm late to the party here, but I'm really digging your blog!

    I just started a B/X game with my neighbors. They'd never played D&D before this. Skyrim, sure. One of them still dabbles in Magic: The Gathering, but never sit down with dice and characters and play. It was great, they loved it. There were no phones, or tablets or virtual tabletops. I used some Dwarven Forge terrain on a vinyl battlemat and got out my fancy minis that I lovingly painted. Glorious. We'll play again in a week or so and if things work out, I'll get most of the folks on my street playing -- grown-ups with kids for the most part.

    So yeah. Play. Build a game, invite people you know over to your house or wherever (libraries are great) and play. With all the world communicating digitally and through screens, the novelty of getting together with people you know and playing what is at it's core a game based on social interaction (like Apples to Apples, or Cards Against Humanity) is almost irresistible to a human being.

    Thanks for this, Noisms. I'm going to go back through your archive now. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great to hear and exactly my sentiments. Deep down inside we crave real connections with the people around us, and that's what nourishes us psychologically and spiritually.

      Delete