Work, play and boredom - Ephemera

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the author © 2011 ephemera 11(4): 450-465 Poker phases articles Ole Bjerg LiPuma, E and B. Lee (2004) Financial derivatives and the globalization of risk. Durham: Duke University Press. Lubet, S. (2006) Lawyers’ poker. New York: Oxford University Press. Lukacs, J. (1963) ‘Poker and American character’, Horizon, V(8): 56-62. Lyotard, J.-F. (1979) The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Pres. Marx, K. (1867/1990) Capital - volume I. London: Penguin Books. McCloskey, M. (2005) Poker in Europe [www.pokerineurope.com]. McDonald, J. (1950) Strategy in poker, business and war. New York: W.W. Norton & Company 1996. Parlett, D. (1991) A history of card games. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Schwartz, D.G. (2006) Roll the bones - the history of gambling. New York: Gotham Books. Taleb, N. (2007) The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House. Wilson, D. (2007) Ghosts at the table - the amazing story of poker ... the world’s most popular game. London: Mainstream Publishing. Yardley, H.O. (1957/1980) The education of a poker player. Glasgow: William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. !i"ek, S. (2006) How to read Lacan. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Ole Bjerg (b. 1974) is a sociologist and Associate Professor at the Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy at Copenhagen Business School. He is the author of several books on ethics, capitalism, addiction and gambling. His most recent book is Poker: The parody of capitalism (University of Michigan Press, 2011). E-mail: ob.lpf@cbs.dk 465
abstract ephemera articles theory & politics in organization Work = work ! work: In defence of play Sophie-Thérèse Krempl and Timon Beyes the author(s) 2011 ISSN 1473-2866 www.ephemeraweb.org volume 11(4): 466-481 Our paper adopts a paradoxical mode of analysis in order to reconstruct the inherently paradoxical constitution and conceptualisation of work as function and/or meaning in itself. The effects of this dichotomisation of work also underlie the current debate on so-called social and artistic critiques of capitalism, to echo Boltanski and Chiapello’s distinction in The New Spirit of Capitalism, and the diagnosis of how artistic practices and claims are subsumed under the logic of capitalist organization. It is here that we situate the thesis of play’s incorporation into capitalist development. Unfolding an understanding of work that acknowledges and keeps open the play of paradoxes that produces ‘work’, we problematize the diagnosis of the unavoidable incorporation of play. The insolubility of paradox and the paradoxical constitution of work reopen rather than foreclose the question of play and thus the possibilities and capacities of artistic critique. From my close contact with artists and chess players I have come to the personal conclusion that while not all artists are chess players, all chess players are artists. (Marcel Duchamp, handwritten note, reprinted in Fuchs and Strouhal, 2010: 144) Introduction In contemporary organizational life, it seems that play can no longer be seen as an other to work. As Höpfl succinctly sums it up in a blurb on the back cover of The Management of Everyday Life (Hancock and Tyler, 2009), ‘[f]or the past thirty years the distinction between work and non-work has been blurring and has now all but dissolved’. According to Boltanski and Chiapello (2005: 155), a focus on activity tends to replace the conventional work ethic, making ‘personal or even leisure activity’ indistinguishable from ‘professional activity’. What appears to disappear, then, is the boundary between work and play: ‘[D]ue to radical changes in organizational conditions’ (...) play has exploded (...) in private, public and voluntary organizations’ (Andersen, 2009: 9). From a critical perspective, it seems there is nothing to celebrate here. If play is swallowed up by current mechanisms and modalities of workplace control, if ‘the ‘unreality of games’ is fully incorporated within the reality of organizations’, then ‘play no longer holds the promise of life after capitalism’, as the editorial for this special issue mournfully proclaims (329). As Fleming (2005: 288) has indicated with regard to ‘fun programmes’ in organizations, however, enlisting humour for ‘sober corporate motives’ appears 466
Page 2 and 3:
@ the authors 2011 ISSN 1473-2866 w
Page 4 and 5:
ephemera editorial theory & politic
Page 6 and 7:
ephemera 11(4): 329-335 Work, play
Page 8 and 9:
ephemera 11(4): 329-335 Work, play
Page 10 and 11:
eferences the editors ephemera 11(4
Page 12 and 13:
ephemera 11(4): 336-356 Work and pl
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
eferences ephemera 11(4): 336-356 W
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
abstract ephemera articles theory &
Page 34 and 35:
ephemera 11(4): 357-368 Playbour, f
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
eferences ephemera 11(4): 357-368 P
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 369-386 ‘
Page 48 and 49:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 369-386 ‘
Page 50 and 51:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 369-386 ‘
Page 52 and 53:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 369-386 ‘
Page 54 and 55:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 369-386 ‘
Page 56 and 57:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 369-386 ‘
Page 58 and 59:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 369-386 ‘
Page 60 and 61:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 369-386 ‘
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 387-405 In
Page 66 and 67:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 387-405 In
Page 68 and 69:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 387-405 In
Page 70 and 71:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 387-405 In
Page 72 and 73:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 387-405 In
Page 74 and 75:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 387-405 In
Page 76 and 77:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 387-405 In
Page 78 and 79:
eferences © 2011 ephemera 11(4): 3
Page 80 and 81:
the authors © 2011 ephemera 11(4):
Page 82 and 83:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 406-432 Who
Page 84 and 85:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 406-432 Who
Page 86 and 87:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 406-432 Who
Page 88 and 89:
© 2011 ephemera 11(4): 406-432 Who
Page 90 and 91: © 2011 ephemera 11(4): 406-432 Who
Page 108 and 109: abstract ephemera articles theory &
Page 110 and 111: © 2011 ephemera 11(4): 433-449 The
Page 122 and 123: eferences © 2011 ephemera 11(4): 4
Page 124 and 125: the author © 2011 ephemera 11(4):
Page 126 and 127: © 2011 ephemera 11(4): 450-465 Pok
Page 142 and 143: ephemera 11(4): 466-481 Work = work
Page 154 and 155: eferences ephemera 11(4): 466-481 W
Page 156 and 157: the authors ephemera 11(4): 466-481
Page 158 and 159: ephemera 11(4): 482-489 On boredom
Page 164 and 165: eferences the author ephemera 11(4)
Page 166 and 167: ephemera 11(4): 490-494 The work of
Page 168 and 169: ephemera 11(4): 490-494 The work of
Page 170 and 171: eview of: ephemera reviews theory &
Page 172 and 173: ephemera 11(4): 495-500 The playing
Page 174 and 175: ephemera 11(4): 495-500 The playing
Page 176: www.ephemeraweb.org editorial colle
show all

Work, play and boredom - Ephemera

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?