Good Grasshopping and the Avoidance of Game-Spoiling

Abstract

Highlighting the distinction between theory and ideology, Morgan (28) portrays the importance of an ultimate model of games to serve as a critical “standard of legitimation” (p. 60). His point is that an ideal is necessary to avoid confusing social description with normative justification. Without an ideal to which actual games can be compared, social values equate with ethical standards and “all critical and normative judgments . . . represent a defense of the status quo” (28: p. 60). Taking my lead from Morgan, and the various theorists (1,9,12,18,20,33,35) who suggest that ethical theory within games ought to be firmly grounded in metaphysics, I suggest that principles for game conduct1 should flow directly from the “internal logic of the game” (28: p. 60). So, questions relevant to the legitimacy of an action occurring in a real game ought to be settled via considerations of conformance with the ideal game. But what counts as the ideal game? The answer to this question was established 30 years ago by Bernard Suits in The Grasshopper: Games, Life and Utopia (36). Surprising, however, is the fact that there has been little effort to ground principles of game conduct specifically within this widely recognized theory. It is here that I take my point of departure with the suggestion that because it is the most commonly accepted definition of games contained within the literature, the Grasshopper’s ideal of a game-playing Utopia represents the most logical vantage point from which to derive a practical ethic of game participation. Clearly intriguing, the extent of this endeavor is much too ambitious for this particular paper. Instead, I narrow my scope of inquiry to the concept of “good sportspersonship”2, 3 and address the issue of whether or not actions traditionally praised as sportspersonlike are worthy of high regard. I begin with a brief discussion of the traditional meanings of good sportspersonship. From this analysis, I propose four actions categories that, together, are intended to sum up all connotations directed by the literature. The main contribution of this paper involves an evaluation of the identified action categories from a Grasshopperian4 point of view. This assessment demonstrates that most acts traditionally praised as good sportspersonship are more appropriately categorized as “game-spoiling.” Moreover, as actions inconsistent with the internal (Grasshopperian) logic of the game, the majority of these actions are worthy of disapproval rather than honor.5