The Infinite Play of Life: A Discussion with Margot Jacobs
Emily Lodish
courtesy of the artist
Margot Jacobs is an interaction design researcher who is dedicated to the playful, emotional incorporation of technology in everyday life. She develops innovative design methods and experimental prototypes for social interventions in public space. An American, she now works with the Interactive Institute in Sweden specifically with the former PLAY Studio (recently split and renamed the RE:FORM and GAME studios).
Emily Lodish: Much of your work uses game-based methodologies to engage people experientially, creatively, and personally. Creating conceptual frameworks and using palettes of techniques to support the suspension of disbelief, you allow participants to immerse themselves fully in the possibilities. At what point does imaginative play become aesthetic play? When does play become art?
Margot Jacobs: One does not necessarily precede the other. It may be that it is through the act of exploring aesthetics that one’s imagination is inspired or triggered. Many of the ideas I have for projects are a direct result of playing in some form whether I am playing with some sort of material or an idea. For example, in Front (www.millefiore.com), a project I completed during graduate schools together with Ralph Borland and Jessica Findley, we created a pair of voice activated inflatable conflict suits. The notion behind these suits was to create a disguise or mask that people could step into and release aggression (essentially scream) resulting in rather humorous inflations on both their own suit and the suit of the person that they are contesting. Many of the forms in the suits are animalistic–representing appendages, gills, tails, feathers–that we have lost through the process of evolution. [The creation of] these suits evolved through our process of playing with ideas while simultaneously working with the materials or aesthetic forms — it is hard to say that either the imaginative or aesthetic aspects of playing came before the other — they inspired and influenced one another. I think a lot of creative processes are like that.
EL: Underdogs & Superheroes is a research project exploring design interventions for public places. People are asked to imagine themselves as superheroes with extraordinary powers that allow them to relate to their environment in ways of their choosing. Provided with what resembles a fill-in-the-blank comic strip, participants are instructed to fill out the sheets "when you get a moment free from fighting crime and saving the world."
MJ: Underdogs & Superheroes is a design project. It was never intended to be art–in the sense that it was not meant for exhibition but for use as a tool–a way of understanding the needs and desires of everyday people. Art is such an open word for me. I believe there is an art to several aspects of our lives that may not fall under "art" as defined by contemporary theorists. Mainly though, I see art as the result of any creative process whether it’s mathematics or painting with oils. This is an incredibly inclusive understanding of what art is or can be, but even if the definition of art is confined to artifacts dealing directly with human expression or reflection, I still find that it relates to much of what most of our minds do and feel — any creative process to me is art — it’s magic really.
Although I do not see myself as an artist, a makist perhaps, a designer sometimes, a thinker maybe, but not an artist.
EL: In Man, Play, and Games, Roger Caillois describes a category of play, simulation or mimicry: "All play presupposes the temporary acceptance, if not of an illusion then at least a closed, conventional, and, in certain respects, imaginary universe. Play can consist not only of deploying actions or submitting to one’s fate in an imaginary milieu, but of becoming an illusory character oneself, and of so behaving. He forgets, disguises, or temporarily sheds his personality in order to feign another."
MJ: The games used in Underdogs & Superheroes let people assume different roles and become someone or something else. Making believe or playing gives people the space to imagine different futures then their own–to dream perhaps outside the context of their own lives and maybe reach hidden desires, emotions, subconscious "truths." Games need not only suspend disbelief, but actively create belief, allowing players or people to manipulate objects and engage in enactment.
EL: Though initially referencing a fantastical, imaginary universe, Underdogs & Superheroes departs from this universe, ultimately geared toward enriching one’s everyday reality in a substantial way. Does the game maintain its playful qualities only as it is self-enclosed in that initial, fictional universe? Once it pertains to an everyday reality in a productive way, does it become something other than a game?
MJ: I am heavily inspired by James P Carse’s interpretation of what a game can be. In his book Finite and Infinite Games he defines finite games as perhaps more serious than infinite games, with fixed rules and an outcome. Finite games are played for the purpose of winning, thereby ending the game. On the other hand, infinite games are playful. An infinite game has no fixed rules or boundaries. In an infinite game you play with the boundaries and the purpose is to continue the game.
I’d like to think of our game-based methodology as a rather infinite one. There are outcomes but they are not fixed or predetermined and playing is a key element. It’s the fictional universe we begin with (in Underdogs & Superheroes) that in many ways we are designing for–a possible and unknown future or outcome. In this, the merging of reality or what I like to think of as the ultimate infinite game, life, with another infinite game procedure such as Underdogs & Superheroes does make sense. I don’t think that the productivity associated with the game (in terms of the concepts generated) undermine the playfulness–on the contrary–the ideas are only intended add to the playfulness of the larger infinite game at hand–that which we term reality.
EL: Emotional health emerges as a recurrent theme in your work–whether seeking to integrate technology into our lives in a conscious, emotionally healthy way or more specifically in a project like FARAWAY which, as you describe in "Playing Games in Emotional Space," uses a game-based methodology to explore the difficulties of being separated from one’s home. Through games meant to decrease the perception of distance, loved ones engage with an alternate reality where symbolic objects are surrogates of presence and through gift-giving can relay traces and tokens of affection.
MJ: Technology should only be incorporated into our lives as a means of supporting the positive aspects, the relationships we have with one another and the relationships we have with ourselves, thereby increasing the magic we encounter on a daily basis, the serendipitous moments, the time we have for one another and ourselves to share, to communicate, to love, to reflect, to create and, yes of course to play, which I think is essential element of all of these things.
With FARAWAY we wanted to go beyond the reality of current communication tools or devices in order to envision new ones–we saw a real need, real people missing each other and suffering emotionally as a result. Using playful methods to encourage playful communication at a distance increased the level of happiness thereby increasing the level of wellbeing.
EL: Be it through interaction (an "urban intervention" in the public domain) or reflection (a spontaneous moment of connection within oneself for a loved one faraway), generally speaking, your goal is to create a space where play happens. What is it about play that is so crucial to preserve?
MJ: Play spurs creative thought and creative thought spurs play. Preserving play to me is directly connected to preserving innovative thoughts not to mention preserving ritualistic behavior that affects us on several levels–socially, emotionally, and again intellectually.
Working with technology, it is important for me to work towards the addition of spaces that increase understanding and exchange between people as well as spaces that inspire reflection instead of perhaps spaces that allow us to work more or increase our productivity and efficiency. This is especially important when we are moving towards a society that works more, and communicates with our neighbors, the people we see everyday, less and less.
Play is integral to a happy existence–it intensifies most of our experiences. Interacting with others–collaborating, socializing, listening, loving–all this supports emotional wellbeing…Imagine a world without ritual, without flirtation, competition, chance, inspiration or creation–would this world sustain emotional wellbeing? I don’t think so. Perhaps this all sounds too idealistic but shouldn’t it?
Learn more about projects from the Interactive Institute in Sweden at http://w3.tii.se.
