Explore the vast range of titles available.

Critiquing and expanding Huizinga's theory of play in Homo Ludens, the author argues for play as a means to access what is real and introduces a new model of play he calls the containment play expression (CPE) to challenge traditional notions about the opposition between play and work. This model, he contends, bridges this gap between phenomenological and Marxian perspectives that view both play and work as accomplishments within a capitalist economic and political context. He then applies his new unitary model of play to computer games and discusses how players negotiate their relationships online in massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs). Keywords: alienation; containment play expression; digital games; human expression; play and work; virtual environment

While many books and articles are emerging on the new area of game studies and the application of computer games to learning, therapeutic, military, and entertainment environments, few have attempted to contextualize the importance of virtual play within a broader social, cultural, and political environment that raises the question of the significance of work, play, power, and inequalities in the modern world. Studies tend to concentrate on the content of virtual games, but few have questioned how power is produced or reproduced by publishers, gamers, or even social media; how social exclusion (based on race, class, or gender) in the virtual environment is reproduced from the real world; and how actors are able to use new media to transcend their fears, anxieties, prejudices, and assumptions. The articles presented by the contributors in this volume represent cutting-edge research in the area of critical game play with the hope of drawing attention to the need for more studies that are both sociological and critical.

Computer game play has been criticized for disrupting family life by some who claim digital fantasy play alienates individuals from everyday interactions, even as others hold that such play increases sociability among players and their families. The authors argue that the truth about game play is more complex. They draw on research using participant observations and interviews with players about a well-known massive multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) World of Warcraft and examine the struggle within families about time spent playing, family responsibilities, enhanced family dynamics, and the distances created by game playing. Key words: family play; game play and work; massive multiplayer online games; massive multiplayer online role-playing games; virtual environments

Few books have attempted to contextualize the importance of video game play with a critical social, cultural and political perspective that raises the question of the significance of work, pleasure, fantasy and play in the modern world. The study of why video game play is \"fun\" has often been relegated to psychology, or the disciplines of cultural anthropology, literary and media studies, communications and other assorted humanistic and social science disciplines. In Utopic Dreams and Apocalyptic Fantasies, Talmadge Wright, David Embrick and Andras Lukacs invites us to move further and consider questions on appropriate methods of researching games, understanding the carnival quality of modern life, the role of marketing in altering game narratives, and the role of fantasy and desire in modern video game play. Embracing an approach that combines a cultural and/or critical studies approach with a sociological understanding of this new media moves the debate beyond simple media effects, moral panics, and industry boosterism to one of asking critical questions, what does modern video game play \"mean,\" what questions should we be asking, and what can sociological research contribute to answering these questions. This collection includes works which use textual analysis, audience based research, symbolic interactionism, as well as political economic and psychoanalytic perspectives to illuminate areas of inquiry that preserves the pleasure of modern play while asking tough questions about what such pleasure means in a world divided by political, economic, cultural and social inequalities.

In response to Jerry Lembke’s comments on our article, I respectfully disagree that the problem is one of ‘‘holism’’ and not ‘‘interdisciplinarity.’’ The assumption that social phenomena can be greater than the sum of its individual parts is well established. Durkheim’s ‘‘social facts’’ are well demonstrated in how we use empirical methods to discover new truths about social patterns that remain invisible on the individual level. Indeed, this is the task of sociology—to look for such patterns, and then to recognize how those patterns fit within the larger social issues of power, wealth, and status. It is one of the reasons we call sociology a social science. Of course, individual patterns will vary, but we can still examine how those patterns may reveal something in the aggregate, apart from their individual status. Epidemiological studies do this as a matter of course.

Emile Durkheim's lamentation of the anomic character of overspecialization in the sciences, reflecting Auguste Comte's earlier warning about the loss of unity of the human sciences, is particularly relevant today, with the rapid expansion of technology, capital, and scientific advancements. This aggressive expansion raises serious ethical issues from genetic testing and privacy issues to economic policies and neo-liberal governance. When the reward system for intellectual investigations are broken down into narrow specialties, the broader issues of how such specializations relate to more comprehensive understandings of society and the distribution of power and property are lost. As humanist scholars and academics, we should all be concerned. And it is with this concern in mind that we pose several questions, with particular emphasis to the sociology discipline, for consideration: