07-03-2019:: The tree game                                      .moji   
=====================================================================

Soundtrack to this phlog post:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAGvQDoL5s4
             ~ Naruto - Afternoon of Konoha

Okay - this game may sound kinda strange, but it's fun, I assure you:
the Tree Game ^_^

A friend introduced me to the Tree Game during a camping trip last
year. It's simple to play. Fun in a small group or just with a couple
of you. What you'll need: 

- Some trees (preferably some nice woodland or forest, away from
  everything; peaceful)
- 2+ people
- A blindfold
- Daylight (this is a daytime game)
- (that's it)

How to play: 

(i) One person (the 'player') is blindfolded somewhere in or nearby a
preferably peaceful and not too terrain-difficult woodland or forest.
Preferably the starting point is within the forest. One other person
acts as the 'guide' and leads the player on a meandering wander
through the forest for a little while (no more than 10-mins). The goal
is to somewhat disorient the blindfolded person and make them lose the
sense of their original starting point in relation to where they end
up. After some weaving, wandering and back-tracking through the
forest, the guide should identify one individual tree (that is: a
particular 'instance' of a tree, not just a certain 'type' of tree)
and lead the player to the tree. Still with the blindfold on (and no
peeking) the player is allowed to spend a bit of time doing everything
they wish to get a feel for the tree short of taking the blindfold
off: touch, smell, get a sense of the nearby foliage, the particular
texture of the bark, the width and height (or age) of the tree,
distinguishing features, the slope or gradient of the ground, any
nearby distinguishing sounds, etc. Once the player then decides they
are ready, the guide then leads the player on the second part of a
meandering travel throughout the forest, still blindfolded - heading
back to the original starting point, but not necessarily the same
route taken the first time around. Again, disorientation and getting
lost is the aim of the game here. [Guides take note: you will also
very much have to remember the exact tree, so make a good mental note
of the tree and how to get back there].

(ii) Once back at the starting point, the player removes the blindfold
and then begins the search for their tree. The guide follows and gives
no hints (this isn't a game of 'getting warmer, getting colder' - the
guide plays no additional role to influence, unless they wish to be
generous if this second part of the game proves to be a challenge).
The player has to find their tree - simple as that. But not so simple:
this is definitely as difficult as I imagine this sounds, and all the
more interesting for being so difficult. The player will have in mind
a few key points about the tree they were guided to: most likely
foremostly the size of the tree and the angle of it's growth out
of the ground, the particular shape or feel of any branches within
reach or other distinguishing features, etc. So the player will wander
the forest, with the guide following, searching for their tree with
the sense of it from their limited sense-data from earlier.

Two possible outcomes: either the player finds their tree(!) or
perhaps not. If not, and if the player is at the point of giving up,
the guide can give a few hints or at least help return the search
closer to the area of the tree and state as such, to give the player a
second opportunity to find it within a more more defined locale.
Though don't play this in the form of the 'getting warmer'/'getting
colder' variety - just a few hints towards the location of the tree.
In the very end, if the player doesn't end up finding their tree after
the first attempt and/or after any gentle help from the guide after
the first attempt, the guide should always take the player to their
tree to reacquaint them with it.

(iii) After playing with one player, the routine is then to swap
places and have the former guide(s) then take the role of player for a
round each.

That's it. That's the game ^_^

It sounds simple, right? Perhaps possibly even too simple a 'game'.
But if you're that way inclined that you enjoy the outdoors in this
way, from time to time, I'd definitely recommend giving it a shot with
some trusted companions. The game is fun for a good few reasons. Not
least of all, in my own experience, the first part is a trust
exercise, and it's about a calm and considered approach to the forest,
blindfolded and trusting the guide to lead you safely. One good way to
play the guide is also not to hold the hand of the player but walk
ahead, with the player following the sounds of your feet or a few
words from your voice. It's also a great way to experience the forest,
wandering as such in the darkness. Secondly, when searching for your
tree, with so little to go on, the player is forced into a really
child-like, playful and animal state of intuition and at an
interesting pace, and also often a kind-of meditative silence; you
wander the forest in a considered way, taking scope of all the trees
around, the gradient of the ground, the feeling of the sun through
broader patches of the tree and your memories of this. You're
navigating vague memory, limited sense-data, and maybe even some sense
of will or 'searching outwards' in your mind. It's a moment where all
the grown-up ways of thinking or relating to many things in the world,
including other games and puzzles, no longer apply so much; you're
lost. And free as such.

			    *  *  *

A couple of things from gopherspace I want to nod to: I really
appreciate solderpunk's most recent phlog post: Pondering what's
inbetween Gopher and the web [1]. More to say on this later, but I do
like the direction this thinking is going. It also got me thinking
about 'content', and how much of our networked systems (both the Web
and Gopher) are about content and communication, perhaps more-so than
other kinds of information forms that we might look to extract from
their underlying materials; computational devices, tools. I'm spacing
out, pondering different kinds of ways of relating through networked
systems than what falls under the conventional forms of the
'communicative', instead a broader sense of outputs, e.g. data around
production, localised geographic concerns/factors (e.g. resource
extraction datum), industrial supply-chain information*, resource
information*, as well as weather patterns, and other reports, etc.
Sure, all of this stuff could be considered 'communication' in some
sense, but what I'm trying to emphasise here is a drawing away of the
focus from 'content' and the digital position of the 'social actor'
within these communication networks, to a degree, and the emphasis
instead on other outputs of the tools of computational technologies.
Perhaps I'll try and write more on this when I gather my thoughts a
bit here and speak less vaguely.

*I'm imagining these points of data in a non-commercial sense

Also: emar's post on brevity[2]: I really love this re-figuring of
solderpunk's[3] & KatolaZ's[4] zen of pubnix in the form of a
meditation as such:

  re(duce|use|pair|cycle)+

[1] gopher://zaibatsu.circumlunar.space:70/0/~solderpunk/phlog/pondering-whats-inbetween-gopher-and-the-web.txt
[2] gopher://republic.circumlunar.space:70/0/~emar/phlog/on-brevity.txt
[3] gopher://zaibatsu.circumlunar.space/0/~solderpunk/phlog/the-zen-of-pubnix.txt
[4] gopher://republic.circumlunar.space/0/%7ekatolaz/phlog/20190205_distilled_zen.txt