Gilles Brougère

A Study of the Make-up of Children's Toy Collections

This paper is a summary of research into the make-up of toy collections for children under the age of six. The research was conducted by GREC (Group for Research into Educational and Cultural Resources) at the University of Paris-Nord under the direction of Gilles Brougère, and financed by the "Fisher Price Observatoire"

This research combines an analysis of data on toy consumption together with a qualitative study. The data are derived from a panel of consumers assembled by NPD in 1997. The qualitative study was carried out in the spring of 1998, and based on 40 in-depth interviews with mothers of children aged nine months to five years and seven months.

The research is pure and is intended to provide information for French journalists. However, both NPD's data and the interviews' findings contain information about toy consumption among the under-six-yearolds in France that could be used to develop a marketing strategy.

The aim of the research is to understand how a toy collection -ie all the toys available in the child's home -is assembled. Our main findings combine the quantitative data provided by NPD with the qualitative data derived from our in-depth interviews.

The toy -an essential object of pleasure in a child's life

Generally parents, and mothers in particular, make a significant investment in their child's toy collection. They see toys as forming an innate part of the life of children under the age of six. This investment, though considerable, varies according to the child's age.

Table I : Breakdown of spending on toys by age of user

While toy purchases during the first year are important, they rise dramatically by the fourth year. The child's active participation in the assembling of their own toy collection stimulates toy purchases. Qualitative data shows that some parents of children aged under three do not know what to buy for a very young child, while others ask themselves whether toys hold any interest to children of that age. When older children are involved in selecting toys, the doubts and difficulties over what to choose disappear.

In our interviews toys come across essentially as a positive force. Certain reservations were expressed concerning their number (considered excessive by some), and their function (certain types of toys judged inappropriate or useless). For some it was educational toys, for others, monsters or characters from cartoon strips, sometimes even electronic games. The general feeling was that toys embody the very characteristics of childhood and are, therefore parts of the child's life as are eating and sleeping, " A childhood is for playing".

Even those mothers with the strongest reservations acknowledged that toys are necessary, if only because they represent an inexorable social norm -"of being like the others". Before performing a psychological function, the toy operates as a social necessity governed by social constraints. It is clear that parents cannot and will not prevent toys being offered to a child. They may have mixed feelings about toy consumption, but they cannot double-check it.

For the vast majority of interviewees toys are not some obligation thrust on them, but an absolutely vital feature of their children's lives. There are two reasons for this: entertainment (pleasure, amusement, sentiment, escape) and education (learning, toys serve a purpose and develop the imagination). The former is the more predominant reason. For some mothers it is the only reason, accompanied at times by a rejection of the toy's educational purpose on ground that learning should be confined to school or certain objects (books). Toys are primarily for entertainment. While the pleasure and amusement aspect may prevail over the educational aspect, it does not eliminate the latter. In some families, grandmothers emphasise the educational aspect while the mother fights it. Whether this is due to a generation gap -with the generation brought up on the educational value of toys distancing itself from this belief and emphasising of enjoyment -is a question only more research can answer.

Where the educational aspect dominates, it rarely does so alone. It is usually accompanied by entertainment. Cases of the absolute utility of the toy (of the mother who also recognises a toy in terms of its educational purpose) are rare; and even then utility is defined in its wider and not strictly educational sense.

In addition to the toy's dual purpose (primarily entertainment and secondarily education), we found a less informed, more "popular" view of the toy's occupational value. This view, while not opposing the idea of entertainment, is somewhat cynical, because it assumes that without toys parents would not know what to do with their children. "It keeps them occupied. We are busy and cannot always attend to them."

The child's tastes, interests, desires and demands strongly influence the make-up of a toy collection.

The panel's data (made up of buyers of toys) presented in Table II shows how the child's demands influence buyers' opinions.

Table II -Spending on toys demanded by the child.

For children aged six and under, child-driven spending accounts for 32% of purchases and varies sharply according to age. Child-driven purchases appear around the age of two (21.4%) and thereafter climb sharply to peak at 50% of all toy purchases. From the age of five, the child demands half the toys bought. The child's involvement is in fact significant (between a fifth and a quarter of all toys) from the age of two. Roughly half the demand is name-driven and half type-driven, with type being preferred by the very youngest and name by the six-year-olds.

Since the purpose of purchasing toys is to create a world where children can amuse themselves and use their imagination children's tastes, interests and demands must be taken into account. Giving a toy means giving pleasure. This can be done even if the purpose is educational. Parents, therefore, seek to know a child's interests according to its age. They do so by observing, seeing what interests, what the play with and by asking what they would like. The aim is to offer toys that will be used.

This demand is sought and triggered by parents at a very early age, (around two years, in line with the quantitative data). The child is asked what kind of toys they like. Parents listen to the child, observe how they react to advertising, and even draw up a list (or ask the child to tick off toys in catalogues). The child is encouraged to participate in the selection.

The only requests likely to cause friction at this age are those for the « instant toy purchases » expressed in a shop. Some parents accept them, others refuse them, and some put them off. Parents often talk about not yielding to a child's "whim", but attitudes vary. Not all children accompany their parents when shopping. Some parents take their young children along so that they can choose the toys for themselves, but can be difficult for the very youngest.

These different attitudes allow the child to influence, directly or indirectly, the make-up of their toy collection. The greater the emphasis on pleasure, the greater the child's contribution. Some parents regard the child's demands as the absolute.

Parents were found to react in various ways, yet not one believed the child's requests were unjustified as such. Some feared that TV advertising might have influenced the child and thus their choice might not correspond to their real interests. However, as soon as a child can demonstrate, through play, that their interest is real, most parents will accept toys that they otherwise might not like or would not have bought on their own.

The process of showing consideration for a child's needs includes:

-Watching the child live and play -Showing them a toy to get their reaction -Taking them to a shop to find out what they want -Listening to their demands, whether or not verbally expressed -Choosing from a list it draws up -Responding to its specific and precise requests.

Diversity of donors

Parents are not the only ones who contribute to a child's toy collection. Our study shows that their gifts account for only part of a child's toy collection.

Table III -Breakdown of spending on toys by relationship

Parents account for less than 45% of total spending on toys for the under-six-year-olds. A child's relatives, other than the father or mother, account for more. Grandparents alone account for almost a quarter of toys bought for this age group. The contribution of non-relatives is small (around 10%), although it is higher during the year of the child's birth and sometimes even in their second year. By contrast, the parents' contribution is the smallest during the first year. The family's role grows as the child gets older.

The data given in the table was borne out by the interviews. Grandparents are one of the most active donor groups. They are the main donors after the parents, and sometimes even surpass them. The fewer the grandchildren, the greater the contribution. They may have their own ideas as to what sort of toy they should buy or let themselves be guided by the mother. Aunts and uncles, godparents and friends give toys too. They add diversity to toy collections, and are responsible for the abundance of toys between birth and the first few Christmases and birthdays. External donors enrich the child's toy collection and give it the variety sought by the mothers.

The toy is a present offered on ritual occasions

A toy is characterised by its function as a present ("As a toy is a present, you do not buy it every day"). This function is primarily reflected in the offering of ritual gifts on occasions such as Christmas and birthdays.

Table IV -Breakdown of spending on toys by occasion

Christmas leads the way with over 60% of toy sales, followed by birthdays (20%). Other occasion or no occasions at all account for the remaining 20%. The child's first year is the only exception to this rule. By the child's third year, the Christmas-and birthday-dominated system is already in place, eroding the role played by other occasions or the absence of occasion. Nevertheless, Christmas still accounts for 48.3% of sales in the child's first year, reflecting the child's early initiation to this ritual.

Table IV shows that Christmas toys are usually an expression of what the child wants. The data show too the importance of family, other than the parents, during Christmas. In fact, the contribution of parents and grandparents is smaller than that of the rest of the family. Christmas is an occasion at which the whole family, and not just the child's parents, is united. The parents' contribution is strongest during other occasions, or no occasions. Christmas and birthdays are so important for mothers that some even consider that toys not bought for a special occasion do not really count as gifts. Rituals are associated with an abundance of toys. A gift is relative to the pleasure it gives the child. It is defined by the pleasure felt, by the feelings conveyed and by the strength of the relationship between the giver and the recipient. Birthdays lend themselves more easily to gifts of clothing, though toys are also important at that age.

While toys have a role outside these two occasions, the interviews show a marked bias towards rituals. The purchase of toys outside these occasions is justifiable only for the youngest children on the grounds that ritual has no meaning for them.

Behind this emphasis on the occasion lies a refusal to undertake unwarranted purchases, except for articles of small value. The buying of toys is a social act and is justifiable from the moment the mother recognises the importance of this act for the child. Mothers see no justification for toys for no reason because they want their children to realise that things do not arrive gratuitously. Thus social imperatives (Christmas or birthdays) are preferred rather than the child's needs, probably because these needs are associated usually with entertainment and pleasure and only marginally with education.

Special occasions provide donors with an opportunity to offer gifts. The concept of a child celebration is important and is in line with the toy's pleasure image. Be it Christmas -a celebration for all children -or a birthday -a particular child's celebration -toys serve to celebrate the child and introduce them to pleasure. In our society enjoyment is related to consumption.

There is an economic rationale for using occasions to assemble a toy collection. Parents believe that since Christmas implies presents, it may as well be used to build the child's toy collection. A collection is not assembled as and when it is needed, but by piecemeal, as occasions arise. This helps to control desire, demand and consumption, and to postpone the satisfaction of the child's demands to the next occasion.

Occasions, because of their pleasure-gift connotations, stimulate the child's participation in gift selection. They also allow parents to limit toy purchases to specific periods and to control and manage the child's toy demands. Parents give way to their children with an easy conscience if the gifts are for legitimate children's celebrations. Our study shows that mothers are afraid of being swamped by demands. Society offers them the means of managing these demands.

Parents use social rituals, to which they seem very attached, to build a world of play for the child.

Uncertain outcome

A toy -or gift offered for the child's pleasure -is a complex object, which may well not perform the entertainment role assigned to it. Parents are disappointed at times with the child's lack of interest in certain purchases, which they see as having symbolic or fundamental importance. This is the toy's basic paradox. That is why parents pay so much attention to ensuring the toy's assimilation by the child. Parents do not believe in the accumulation of objects for its own sake but in the provision of an active toy collection in which the child has what they want to play with.

Key relationship to consumption (quantity, variety)

As a consequence to the above the « toy » is a consumer product. In fact, many mothers believe that abundance is a defining characteristic of a toy collection. Children are seen to have many, and in some cases too many, toys. The adjectives cited most often are "enough" "sufficient" "a lot" or "too many", but rarely "too few". When " few" is used, it denotes the choice of parents who consider that there are already too many toys for a child under eighteen months.

"Too many" refers not to some objective threshold but to toys that are not, or no longer, used. If the child does not play with all their toys, they are said to have " too many ". Likewise they are seen to have "the right number "because "they play with all of them". The notion of "too many" is usually applied to "others", as if the nurseries of other people's children contained more toys than one's own, and therefore "too many". Consequently, the number of toys possessed by one's own child always conforms to the "average": "Our child gets as many toys as the others".

The ideal solution is the medium between "too many" and "too few": "Too many toys and the child is lost and cannot settle down; not enough toys and they are in danger of getting bored". To meet uncertain needs, some parents feel the only solution is to get lots of toys.

Abundance is ultimately seen as a means of ensuring diversity, while variety is regarded as a justification for abundance. Diversity becomes something of a watchword, but its scope is restricted by the child's tastes, as it is the child who, in the end, decides.

The principle of diversity is perhaps the most visible element in designing a toy collection. It is the element, which truly guarantees that the collection is not skewed towards one direction alone.

Technical difficulties in assembling a toy collection

The assembling of a toy collection is beset with a number of technical difficulties, including the age factor -the main criteria in the case of the youngest children. If a toy is not used, it usually means that proper account has not been taken of the child's age.

-Age reflects the dichotomy between the pleasure and educational functions.

Parents are divided on the issue of age. Some refuse to take the child's age into account, or at any rate do not always take it into account, being only interested in the child's taste. Others -the majority (28/40) -regard age as important criteria. The former may not take safety into account when dealing with children under 36 months ("they're careful", "they do not put anything in their mouth", "I'm watching"). The majority of parents, however, take the child's age into account. Of these, some follow the age recommendations on the box, while others buy toys suitable for children who are a few months older (the general rule, except for parlour games where some adjust in the opposite direction, buying games intended for children a year younger). Age is often seen as the best way to target or adapt the toy to the child, and thus avoid its non-utilisation.

There are several reasons for buying toys intended for children who are several months older: the toy lasts longer (the same strategy as for buying clothes, which is perhaps the model here); pride (it shows the child is advanced for their age and would be bored with toys suitable for their own age group). Some parents push their children to select toys meant for an older age group. However, not all parents see the point in taking short cuts and rather rely on the child's capabilities at the moment of purchases as well as on their own knowledge of the child.

The child-driven demand factor rapidly overtakes the age factor, although some parents refuse to buy toys intended for a younger child.

-Donors' gift selection reflects the dichotomy between the child's choice and parental control.

We observe two extremes: one where parents give donors complete freedom of choice in recognition of the fact that the making of gifts is an intensely personal matter; the other where parents influence the choice of gift in order to avoid duplication. The majority of parents lie somewhere in the middle. Some answer specific requests from donors comprehensively, others give general recommendations designed to avoid getting the same toy. One way is to use long lists drawn up by the children themselves. Donors seek to give the child pleasure. They therefore seek to understand their tastes, through direct knowledge, through the mother, or through their general experience of children.

We can summarise our main findings as follows:

• a toy is an object of pleasure firstly and an educational tool second • a toy collection represents a sizeable investment, for toys are an essential part of a child's life

• the child participates, directly or indirectly, in assembling their toy collection. This task is not left to the parents alone.

• the offering of gifts and the ritual associated with this is a social act • a toy collection owes its diversity to a multiplicity of donors.

If we were asked to shortlist two elements, we would place as paramount the child's enjoyment and the mutually reinforcing relationship between the social ritual and the occasion. Although gifts perform an educational function, it is their pleasure and social functions that determine the shape of a toy collection. This does not mean that a collection is based on irrational choices. The rationality of a collection is defined not in psychological or educational terms but in emotional and social terms (the relationship of parents to children, the child's assimilation into a social network). The variety factor undoubtedly enables the majority of children to find diverse sources of amusement in their toy collection without the parents having necessarily intended it. To understand toys we should place them within the social and emotional relationships between parents and children. These close-knit family relationships are themselves situated within a wider social context and are expressed in child-centred social rituals.

We will verify these hypotheses and examine the differences related to the child's age and the socio-cultural background of the parents in a new quantitative study. In this way we hope to gain new insights into what

mothers expect from the toys or collection of toys making up the material world of their children.


1

Magic, a postmodern plaything and the community meaning

Guillaume Fontaine & Gilles Brougère What are our playthings today and what do they reveal of our society? It is to this question that we would like to provide some elements of an answer. Playthings, whether games or toys, are experiencing major developments. The most obvious ones concern the technological aspect and the growing role of computer technology in play activities. But there are other developments that seem to us to be more general and fundamental which are related to the status of the object of leisure or entertainment in which the toy and the game participate in our society. We consider a game as a mean of socialization in so far as it offers to players the exercise of their own sociability through cultural figures and senses that belong to there. Magic is an American collectible trading and playing cards game which is played all over the world since 1993. It combines the modernity that we are seeking for with aspects, which could not be more traditional. Above all, it is card game. Our analysis can focus on the novelty and originality of this phenomenon without referring it to technological innovations. We will try to show that all characteristics of Magic are in connection with that we call "postmodern".

Magic is a game of cards with abstract rules, which may be considered as relatively complex, involving tactical and strategic possibilities. This game has been developed over a long period by its designers, with a number of tests and modifications to obtain the best balance guaranteeing its playability. It is a game, which supposes the commercial act of purchasing the material and the rules prior to all games. When you play Magic, you have to buy cards, so many cards. Basic game includes 350 different cards. Since 1993, Wizards of the Coast have edited more than 3500 cards. Each year two or three limited editions of 300 cards can be purchased. So the main difficulty for Magic players is to master the quantity. A large amount of cards means both a money problem and a cognitive problem. A cognitive problem because of the learning process we explained above: how can a human brain control 3500 units and the potential links between them? Magic is not a plaything in the used meaning of the term. It is not a totality. The play material is moving and changes every year. The editor sells a potential environment and probabilities of play; a Magic player reveals potentials and probabilities of play by building decks. We are near of a quanta perception of the world. One aspect of the postmodern reflection is to throw an orderly reality away. There no global rationality, no feeling of a unique truth. We can't seize Magic in its totality. If someone does it, it would be less a player than a collector.

There is a close relationship between the principle of the personalized packet and the marketing, which encourages the purchase. The cards can also be exchanged or sold on a parallel market in relation to their popularity. We can't think Magic without its marketing dimension. A double symmetrical error must be avoided in the analysis. Only seeing in it a marketing process, a means of selling cards, would be to ignore the interest and value of the game including in the logic of the personalized packet. Or to ignore the commercial dimension to only analyze the game principle and the reference universe. What I think is interesting in such a product is the connection of the two things. The game is only possible through the commercial distribution but the commercial diffusion is only done in relation to the cultural and play significance of the game. We might say that contemporary marketing conditions generate new game possibilities, which may only exist in this framework.

The second aspect, which is going to give a new dimension to the game, is that before the abstract structure of the game, the author uses a strong symbolic dimension. The cards bear representations and the actions are decipherable in the metaphorical language of the world of magic created around the game. We rediscover here the imaginary reference world of role-playing games. But if we observe players playing, we see that the players play like classic card players and do not use the imaginary world contrary to role-play where it is omnipresent in the episodes of the game and the verbal exchange between players. But this symbolic world is underlying and emerges through the illustrations. The world of magic takes roots from multi racial and cultural references. Greek, Nordic, Japanese, Indian myths are mixed with fantasy figures. Players play Magic in Asia, Europe, and America. It is a baroque melting pot of signs and images. Magic has an international dimension.

These illustrations contribute to a story line that appears and becomes more explicit through evolutions of Magic. The world is more and more precise, legendary characters make a link between the last expansions of the game, new cards represents new steps of their quests. Those events and figures belong to the universe of fantasy, where monsters and magic exist. Role playing games, video games, movies, and science fiction literature show and set symbolic elements of these imaginary worlds inspired by medieval folklore. A community of players shares cultural signs, strong values that emerge through virtual worlds. A plaything therefore contributes to gather people around images it creates. We have to consider now a game as a media: it is a way of communication and socialization between human beings. A hobby makes sense and I share this sense with my peers. I stay with them because we confer to the game the same meaning; in return the game reflects signification that I want to share. We have here the basic structure of the game not only in its play logic, but also in its cultural logic of an object bearing several dimensions.

This narrative dimension of the game, the marketing process, the great number of cards and the links between players contribute to create the metagame. The company does not sell cards; it is selling a universe, which enables cards to be played. For this it proposes the game and an environment, the metagame, including the value-enhancement of the symbolic universe (books and tee shirt), a means of meeting and dialogue (Internet server, review), a game system through tournaments. Richard [START_REF] Garfield | Lost in the Shufle[END_REF], the author himself develops the concept of metagame, […] Each of these deck-construction restrictions is a different metarule in a metagame.

Trading
[…] On top of this natural tendency toward the metagame, we often add new levels by playing in tournaments or leagues. Through the sanctioning and support of different events, the Duelist's Convocation helps create the metagame of Magic tournaments, from the regional level to international competition.

Mike Rosewater (1998), chief editor of The Duelist makes a synthesis of the metagame in the following board:

Metagame appears clearly through the building of the rules. There are three levels of rules. We have first principles. Principles evoke the playing dynamic, the way of playing Magic: two sorcerers build decks and confront each other according to specific phases and basic rules. These principles haven't changed any more since the first Magic edition.

Each edition worked as a rationalization and simplification of the rules.

In a second time we have cards: each cards brings a specific effect in the game. Therefore we can say that one card brings one rule. Cards make combinations with other cards to produce new effects. Rules and game effects emerge from the practice of play and from strategies found by the players. So we have a third level of rules called regulation. Editor and creators conceived a corpus of tournament regulations, cards power limitations and playing advice in order to balance the game and to regulate Magic playing activity. For example there are laws of building decks according to the type of tournament a player compete. We can easily understand why players need time to learn how to play Magic.

The last aspect of what makes Magic a postmodern thing is its links with the scientific and cybernetic worlds.

The links with a scientific problematic appears through the editorial process. So Wizards of the Coast publish regularly stand-alone editions of Magic. A player can play in a new environment without referring to the basic game and to the previous expansions. These expansions describe a part of a fantastic world, which is a particular thematic region or time. So we have a cold and frozen world with Ice Age, the first standalone edition of Magic. We find snow, ice people, white and hairy monsters. Mirage, the second stand-alone edition, drives players through a warm and wet jungle. Then Tempest brings a celestial atmosphere through winds and storms. From ground and fixed water to the warm vapor and up to the liquid water of the rain the game explores an ascensional way through the different states of water physic. Fluids, meteors and climatic changes are strong themes in Magic. This homogeneity of figures contributes to make a link with science.

Climatology is a part of modern scientific research. Theories of chaos and researches about complex phenomenon stimulate modern scientific investigation. If we consider Magic as a moving environment of play better than a classical game, if we remember its complexity, we can say that Magic is near to be a chaotic phenomenon. It is a tool with which players manage chaos and world complexity.

How players can master the chaotic aspect of the game? Through its rules and principles I tried to found cognitive ways of managing the game. Players revealed me they were familiarized with video games and computers. It drove me on the way of a cybernetic approach of Magic. When a player builds his deck, he reads cards. But his mind makes necessary links with other cards. He puts together few cards, makes choice to find combinations. There are symbols, icons, images, texts printed on the cards. The reading process is not linear but works as a hypermedia or hypertext. Building a deck means choose one way through thousand possibilities of creation. Video games drive players into virtual worlds. A video game is a media designed by a creator for players. It's a communication medium between them. Through virtual words human beings find a way of communication, a way to share cultural meanings. Magic works as a media. It is a game, which allows players to build a unique packet. A deck is a personal construction.

Postmodernity emphasizes about the existence of a variety of built rationality. Magic manages thousand of interpretations, points of view on the game. There is no essence of Magic. Without assembling, collecting and building decks, the game would not exist.

After analyzing the game, it would be interesting to analyze the players and what they have to say about their hobby. I discover that players had reflexive thoughts on Magic, on their practice, on the market… The following results proceed from ten interviews in three different places. Two of these places consist of a sale space (games shop) where players have opportunities to play and communicate. The other one is a club where players come every week in order to play role playing, strategic and cards games. I applied methods of literary analyzes on the speeches I picked up and tried to find specific vocabularies or language reiterations out. Interviews therefore will confirm each other and could paint a portrait of what is a Magic player and which meanings this player gives to the game.

Players I met were all males from 16 to 24. It seems it is a representative sample of motivate players. There are a lot of younger people. They are few girls but I didn't meet them in places where I investigated. If we take an average of interviewed players, we find a 21 old male student. All of them have been playing for a long time and know a lot of games. They play or played role playing games, board games and video games. They are in majority familiarized with computers. The two shops offer moreover opportunities to play with net linked computers. They have been playing Magic for a long time. Average are three years and half of play. We note certain fidelity. When a player tells he left playing Magic off, he says he continues to buy cards and when a player stops to buy cards, he continues to play. Players gather themselves for tournaments, for meetings, for exchange, for playing. Groups and communities take shape around nomadic places. We can compare these groups with communities on the Internet, where people have choice to meet others in affinity with their cultural interests. The concept of territory don't work anymore and the fact of building decks is mimetic of the fact of create communities. Magic is a world in perpetual construction.

All players are agreeing to note that Magic is a very complex game. All players speak about the difficulty they had to learn Magic. They spent one year in order to understand concepts of game and to practice them.

  The following board is a synthesis of what they are.Magic is a friend's story. A player plays with peers and in majority learned Magic from a friend of him. The feeling of taking a part in a close community is strong. A player is someone who looks for a group. Magic works as a focus object where players come around to meet each other. Teams appear, in order to be more competitive in tournaments. Friendship, faithfulness and solidarity are Magic players' values. We see here a type of community without referring to the traditional values of family or country. Players meet other players through values and practices, which the game contains.All players note that Magic is an expensive hobby and they must spend a lot of money to build a competitive deck by purchasing cards starters and boosters. They are aware of this economic dimension and they master trading concepts such as budget, purchasing, selling in a second hand at better price, parallel market, trading, the Stock Exchange where cards values decrease or raise because of cards rarity or cards game effects… We can't consider the plaything without its consumption aspect. We can't separate the game from the market that gives it life. It's surprising to see young people so familiarized with consumption uses.Playing Magic contributes to have a very strong consumption activity. A player who knows how to find game strategies knows financial strategies to obtain his cards. Game and money are coextensive.Two « social classes » appear when we listen to the Magic players. Few « good players » distinguish themselves from a large mass of « little players » or « bad players ». A feeling of elite emerges. Good players become models for others and tend to play together. They don't have to spend time with other players if they don't have any opportunities to improve their practice. The good players are competitive in tournaments and have money capabilities to travel through France or Europe in order to compete. The best players are decks builders too. They create strategies and combinations throughout the myriad of possibilities of Magic. "Bad" players just make a copy of best builder's deck. A deck must me constructed to be effective. A player said me that "bad" players could win in tournaments because they can't be an ultimate game. No one can affirm that he has found the Deck, there is no verity. Therefore Magic can be considered as a postmodern plaything.

	N°	Age Play	Learn	Playing	Studies	Players	Place
		from	Magic	activities
	N° 1 3 Average 21 3 years Age Play from 24 4 years friends Learn Magic from 10 from 17 2 years friend 21 4 years 2 friends	Playing Role playing activities games Strategic games Diplomacy Warhammer Board games Murder party Strategic games Card games Battle Video games Video games Warhammer	Studies Master comm. 1 ère S BTS bio friends Players Brother friends friends	Place Club friends University Shop Game Center Game
					Battle		Brother	center
					Role playing			Convention
					games
					Video games
		24 4 years shop		Role playing	Master	friends	Game
	4				games	psycho	Any	Center
					Card games	Jobs	player	Province
					Board games
		24 8 month friend		Diplomacy	Master	friends	friends
	5				Tarot, belote,	History		Paris
					Chess
		20 4 years friend		Role playing	Army	friends	Club
	6				games	Service		friends
					Board games
					Murder party
					Strategic games
	Card games We saw that we can't separate Magic from the editor marketing process.
	Video games Role playing games Board games Players are aware of being a part of a market and they developed a real 7 17 3 years promoter 1 ère ES friends reflection about money. When we analyze the vocabulary, we note a great variety of economic terms such as	Club friends School
		"Buy low cost" "Sell high cost"			Murder party Strategic games Card games
		"Fluctuation"			Video games
		25 4 years Professiona "Speculate"	Role playing	Postman friends	Club
	8	"Budget" "Exchange" "Commercial" "Purchase"	l activity		games Board games Murder party Strategic games Card games
		"Bargain"			Video games
		17 4 years Camping "Parallel market"		Role playing	1 ère	Alone	friends
	9		1 adult		games		Little	Club
					Board games		sister	School
					Strategic games		friends

  They spent time (hours, nights) to read cards, to create combos, to build a deck. Then they spent time to test their deck with other players. After playtime they think again about what was good and what was bad to improve the strategy. Playing Magic is a double learning process: playing means a solitary activity of reading cards and finding strategy. So the player gets an individual knowledge of Magic. Playing means also a collective activity through which the player learns new cards, new combos in a communication process with peers. So the player get a collective and practical knowledge of Magic. A Magic player can stay alone: it is a mark of postmodern activity. Solitary play of children, occidental reading culture, video games… It is a trait of an individuation process in our society.Magic is a teen-ager and adult game. But if we analyze the plaything through the mediation of its social and cultural components, we could operate a synthesis with results of others researches like toys or younger children plaything. So we hope a global study of play and games will emerge from cross-checking. We think this postmodern symposium should contribute to it.