… 그 가운데서도 압권은 진도의 다시래기 놀이가 아닐까 한다. 이 놀이는 장례식 때 발인 전날 하는 빈 상여 놀이의 일종인데, 놀이 전체가 파격적인 익살로 가득 차 있는 것으로 유명하다. 이 놀이는 상가에서 벌어지니 매우 경건하고 근엄해야 할 터인데 그 시작부터가 영 ‘삐딱’ 하다. 놀이 패거리들이 상가를 휘젓고 다니면서 제상에 차려 놓은 음식을 마구 집어 먹는가 하면, 상주에게 “방안에서 밥만 축내고 있던 당신 아버지가 죽었으니 얼마나 얼씨구 절씨구 할일이요”라고 하는 따위의, 그야말로 블랙 코미디를 연출한다. 그런가 하면 다른 패거리들은 승려와 장님 거사와 거사의 부인 등으로 분하여 남녀의 삼각 관계를 연출하고 부정하게 임신한 아이를 낳는 모습을 재연한다. 그리고 그 아이를 자기 것이라고 서로 우기면서 매우 원색적인 사설을 주고받는데, 사정이 이쯤 되면 부모의 상을 당해 침울했던 상주도 웃음을 터뜨리게 된다. 여흥 때가 되면 잡가나 민요를 부르고 병신춤 같은 것을 추어 비탄에 잠긴 상가 분위기를 즐거운 놀이판으로 바꾸어 버린다.
— 최준식, 한국인은 왜 틀을 거부하는가? 난장과 파격의 미학을 찾아서

… of those the best one is probably Jindo’s Dashiregi. This is an ‘empty bier’ play that takes place a night before the coffin gets carried out from the house, known for its extreme shock humour. Naturally one would expect it to be holy and serious - it’s part of the funeral - but right from the beginning it brings some really holyshitness rather than holyness into the scene. The crew (of Jindo Dshiregi) roam around the house like gate crashers, randomly picking up food from jesang (sacrificial table) and even go further to say to sangju (usually the first son or the father of the dead - chief mourner) things like “you must be la la elated now that your useless father who’s just been eating away all holed up in your house’s finally gone” bringing in spices of black humour. It doesn’t stop there - another group casually put on a performance about a love triangle involving a Buddhist monk, a blind devotee, and his wife who later gives birth to an illegitimate child. Then these three start having a loud and lewd fight over the child, instantly replacing sangju’s sadness with laughter. Another moment of entertainment brings in vulga and folk songs as well as Byungshinchoom (dance of the handicapped), turning the funeral into a fun-filled playground.

– Junshik Choi, Why Koreans Deny Teul (mold/frame/formality): In Search of the Aesthetics of Chaos and Irregularity

i’m going to the mp3 experiment in seoul this weekend.

one of the improv everywhere events - this time in seoul.

come along if you’re around!

when: 9pm, sat, nov 17, 2007

where: @ the slide in hongdae park

how much: free :D

see you there. should be A LOT of FUN

just read an article about the recent seminar by justin hall on his concept of “passively multi-play online games.” interesting concept.

Justin has fun online, works online, studies and loves and plays online — and on his phone and his Playstation. Why can’t the whole thing be a game — a social game and a knowledge game? … all calls the notion “Passively Multiplayer Online Games,” and describes it as ” a system for turning user data into ongoing play. Using computer and mobile phone surveillance, a user and their unique history. These resulting avatars can be viewed online, and they interact with other avatars online. Examples of data: web sites visited, email addresses, chat handles, contents of email or messaging, contents of word processed documents, digital images, digital video, video game moves.”
– original post here

when i had a very quick glance at his ideas, i thought we were talking about the same thing. the crucial role of the element of “play” in our lives, amplified particularly by network technologies. we’re living in the “entiretainment” age.

then i had a better read of it and realised that we were actually talking about the opposite ideas within the framework of network play. we’ve got pretty much the same elements of investigation - play, network, mobile etc - but in the simplest sense, he’s looking at ludus while i’m looking at paidia, the opposite end of the continuum (as suggested by caillois) by means of measuring your passive (turned into active) participation - some people might disagree with this idea since strictly speaking, measuring alone wouldn’t make a paidic experience into a ludic one; i suppose here i’m thinking more in lines of (sub)conscious/unconscious accordance to rules. i consider “games” as rule-binding therefore ludic, and subcategorical to the concept of “play”) - i don’t know if i want to be “in game” all the time. the idea just doesn’t appeal to me. i believe in play but i’m not sure if i believe in games.

anyway, it was fascinating to see “the other side” of what i’m trying to do within what “we’re trying to do.”