The Complexity of Play: A Response to Guyer’s Analysis of Play in Schiller’s Letters on the Aesthetic Education of Man
Abstract
In the Letters on the Aesthetic Education of Man (Aesthetic Letters), Friedrich Schiller
asserts the importance of play for human beings. He claims, “man only plays when he is in
the fullest sense of the word a human being, and he is only fully a human being when he
plays” (Schiller, 2005, 131). Play is so pivotal that it qualifies as the activity resonating
the state of human fullness. So, naturally, one might ask, what does play consist in for
Schiller? While a Kantian approach might see play as the relation that manifests when a
disinterested subject beholds something beautiful, Schiller uses more artistic and embodied
examples of play throughout the Aesthetic Letters. In offering an alternative reading to Paul
Guyer’s analysis of Schillerian play as serious (forgoing creativity and imagination),
intellectual (objective and grounded in the intellect, rather than feeling), and negative (reliant
on constraints) I draw out two important elements of Schillerian play: play force (the
harmonious relation of two types of drives found in nature) and the forms of play (actual
instances of aesthetic play.)