The task that I suggested we do, was to lay out the way things were going to go down – in terms of a structure of the game. From beginning to end.
This was what I brought in to talk about:
This is the text:
- Pick a piece of colored paper without being able to see what you’re choosing – one jar for females, one jar for males – how it was in The Hunger Games
- All males will be put in the same team
- These are the teams, play tug of war and may the odds be ever in your favor
- Different conditions for game:
- If game doesn’t look like it is going to end, join a side, and play tug of war
- Remove a player from one team, put them in another, get them to spectate (the people that are refusing to play tug of war)
- If game ends too quickly, then we can force them to play again, by saying that we did not see it
- Victors, you may now claim the prize. (Prize table). Goes to get it, and then it’s instructed, you must give the prize to the losing team of the other game.
Theme: Happiness from others’ misfortune. Reflecting the way, The Hunger Games played out in the book. There is no true happiness from others’ misfortunes – the happiness is brief or not existent (brief for the people that won, brief for the people that got crappy prize). The victors, nor the people that faced death are safe or happy. They all live in taunt.
I went to talk to Law about what was happening in class. I, at this point, was feeling very depressed, anxious, and anything you can say about the concept that we were producing. I was nervous about the idea itself, but also stressed about how group discussions were going.
I felt that the idea could go so very wrong when we conducted it on the day. I felt that it would be confusing. Therefore, I decided that I would have to justify it to myself the most.
I kept thinking about how to best represent happiness through others’ misfortune, in terms of the hunger games.
This gave me a lot of configuration. I justified the act of making all the students unhappy, and only us – the spectators – happy. I wasn’t sure if they would feel that the game made them feel unhappy or ask why would you do that?
It was also interesting, because the idea of the game of tug of war has so many contingencies, it makes me anxious, but this is also what the gamemakers, I expect, would’ve felt about the arena.
Another large part of the conversation with Law, was about groupwork. I was feeling stressed. But I think this conversation really clarified me, and my group members for me in my head. I just decided to think that I wouldn’t judge the work they bring, nor whether they bring it or not, but just extract what I felt was working from them.
I would always ask the members of the group – because clearly I’m a person that needs reassurance, when it’s groupwork, and I dislike being very forceful with my ideas.
Also, I learned that I am without a doubt a high achiever. When Law first asked me, what would you do if you get a B, I said that I would reflect on myself. But, I know I’m not okay with that. That does not feel okay. I guess I always have this belief that if I work hard, then there is no reason for me to do badly in anything. I understand that because I’m the one that wants a good grade, and feels there’s no reason to not try to get the A. This is something I’ve implanted in myself, because my dad says to me that I just need a 2.0, but I’m not okay with going lower than 4.0. I suppose, I was always lying to myself, in saying that I don’t focus on grades.
Because of how I struggled last time, to talk through the previous idea, this time, I talked to each person individually.
- I talked to Ebi at first to confirm the idea of justification of the ending being where everyone is just unhappy, except us. But Ebi didn’t bring in her part of the work, so she tried to make up for it, but to be honest, I was disappointed.
- Then, I talked to Latifa about the same things, whilst she added that she listed down the kind of gifts that were given throughout the book. This was when I began to think the tug of war was perfect, because one of the objects were rope. So then, I suggested we use these as gifts
- Then, I talked to Maha, and we talked about the ways in which the tug of war would be done
- Latifa and Maha both suggested we use a projector for some cheering crowd.
Then, after I collected information from them, I added theirs to the structure I created (the earlier type in the picture), and asked them if this was okay. Discussed aspects of it, if there were better ways, etc. I felt that this worked a lot better, because when you were dealing with one person, it was so much easier to understand what they were thinking, then a group of people.
I didn’t know what it was, but they weren’t really showing me images for the structure, like I had asked each of us to create, but Maha and Latifa had parts that they focused on and thought about.
I think it also helped me create the structure, which I really needed, because it felt like I was looking at the general picture, but the others were looking at more specific parts. So, I decided to accept the ways in which we see importance of work, and worked around it. At least it was a much better, and less stressful experience.
Then, we had a total group discussion, where we discussed as a group. I tried my best to summarise everything each person had said to me during each of our conversations and include them, as well as ask for each persons opinion on the ideas I had or they had.
This was where we somewhat, finalised the procedure.
I think that the group members were on too many different pages in this process, so I think it helped my mind and theirs for me to connect with each of them, and then summarize and give back. I realized it was much easier to talk to each person and realize what they were/weren’t understanding and configure this part then move on.
This was just me learning a different approach to talking to people and what works best for me. I think also this process helped me really learn what my peers were thinking and what they were doing. It helped me understand and appreciate their thinking a lot more, because I was hearing a lot more of their input. It also stirred a lot more useful conversation in my opinion with Maha and Latifa. But then again, I suppose there was also disappointment in seeing a person do no work.
Then I had to go and run around for Isabelle to get the form, write it and submit it. The atrium area on the right was booked, which was kind of annoying, because we wanted the balcony, but either way, the left side would suffice.
Originally, this wasn’t my part, but for several reasons, I ended up doing it, because I felt this was urgent and important.
This is a drawing Maha did, to kind of sketch it out. We all went there to kind of measure and really see how we would use the space.
I learned from this process that I found it easier to rely on myself, more than others, in the end. When I asked someone else to organize the area, there was issues, and that’s when I learnt that I found it easier for me to take care of things.
I was trying to go around the issues we had last time, by doing one on one conversations.
At this point, I told myself that I would just have to rely on myself, don’t expect something from other people, because they have their own thoughts and they will contribute in their own way, so I fill in what I feel is needed. This specifically isn’t criticism on them, though it sounds that way, it was just to tell myself that they are not me, we don’t think the same. I thought to discuss and organize, with me as the “organizer,” because I felt it was less anxious for me to get work this way.