?To and Fro?: Deepening the Soul Life of Women's Studies Through Play

Abstract

This article explores the relationship between play and the development of a deeper “soul life” of the organization by examining ways to build stronger women’s studies programs. Our analytical method draws on Jungian psychoanalytic theory with its emphasis on the individual’s integration of polarities, and poststructuralism with its examination of power dynamics in cultural practices. To examine how play can serve the feminist political goals of fostering meaningful connections among members, we analyze three stories to illuminate the political possibilities and liabilities of play. We then propose five levels of play to show how each one can be used to support the intellectual, political, and emotional dimensions of women’s studies work within the academy: (1) critical play; (2) creative play; (3) healing play; (4) transcendent play; and (5) oppositional play. Each type of play provides a different dimension to the soul life of an organization and so can serve a different purpose in building the community necessary to sustain organizational activity. While play has been of interest to philosophers as an approach to analysis, the word can be dangerous, especially to feminists in academic settings, because it is more often associated with leisure time and children. “Play” is the opposite of serious work, but we consider play so vital to maintaining the critical edge necessary for Women’s Studies that we will argue that play is essential for women’s studies programs, and it may well be necessary for other organizations as well. As women’s studies scholars, we are often involved in a struggle for legitimacy. In this struggle, it sometimes seems that we dare not play or we will not be taken seriously by others. On the other hand, it seems that many other academic units envy us for the level of community they perceive us as having. Nevertheless, we realize both men and women struggle with the desire to play as part of their work. Building on the work of Maria Lugones who argues that play facilitates feminist philosophy (1987), we imagine play as a back-and-forth process among individuals that takes place in ways that fully engage the players and in this process changes them (Gadamer 1998, 109). This happens in a ball game where the ball moves back and forth, but more important, it happens in a conversation where each player responds to what is said by the previous player. Not only do the Platonic dialogues work this way, but also the everyday conversations when they become self-reflective (Freydberg 1997; Gadamer 1998; Locke 1989; Lugones 1987; Schorsch 1942). This sort of play goes beyond the rules of a game that enable players to