Saturday, 23 November 2013

Nazim, Adana

I don't remember much about the little time I spent with my great-uncle Nazim, but what I do recall was his raucous laughter. Not a bad way to be remembered, I think....

I've taken a short trip to Adana with my parents to see Iclal (pronounced Ijlal with a soft j) and related family, and to support my dad as he travels to pay his respects to a man who, in his words, was like his second father.

Thursday morning, after we arrived the previous evening, we took a stroll across the Taskopru (literally meaning stone bridge, it is famous for being 1800 years old), through a park with a statue of the revered physician and metaphysician Ibn-i Sina, and past the Sabanci mosque before returning to the hotel for breakfast.

Over breakfast I investigated Sabanci (pronounced Sabanchi for my anglo-saxon friends) and Ibn-i Sina on my interweb connected phone. Some curious stories emerged. First Sabanci. For one thing I found it interesting that Sabanci holdings, a family business on the Global FTSE 500 list, saw fit to build a mosque beside the park and Hilton which, oh by the way, they also own. One could view this a number of ways: we might be tempted to say that it is a wonderfully generous act (although as my mum pointed out, they could have decided to build a homeless shelter or hospital instead ;-)), or perhaps it's because the Sabanci HQ used to be based in Adana and so maybe there's a family connection to the city, or, looking at it more cynically, one might say that constructing a mosque is excellent PR for a company with fingers in every pie and maybe an ego trip for the owners. In any case I found the multiplicity of reasonable perspectives intriguing.

As for Ibn-i Sina, if you are not familiar with the figure I strongly recommend a quick wiki trip since his work as a physician bridged the gap between 'the enlightenment' and the first medical heroes: Galen & Hippocrates. I glossed over his metaphysics this morning, however, and was intrigued to find that his argument for the existence of god was rooted in the argument of first-cause. This position is curious because it rests on an irrational desire to insist that there is not, and can not be, an infinite regression instead. Certainly the idea of an infinite regression is rather unpalatable, but how can we insist that it cannot be? In fact, the proposition that the universe had a beginning is just as incredible if you stop and think about it, and in such cases that any outcome at all would be remarkable one cannot argue that something is true because its antithesis would be remarkable. Furthermore, it's interesting because if Ibn-i Sina was alive today, he would be obliged to argue that God must be whatever substance preceeded that near infinitessimal  point of plasma which comprised our universe in the first fractions of the first second that ever was; or even (if you agree with Lawrence Krauss) nothing at all. Yet the story which caught my imagination was that it fell to Al-Ghazali, in his work 'The Incoherence of Philosophers', to point out that Ibn-i Sina was not applying logic to his metaphysics in the same way that he was to his other, many disciplines. Al-Ghazali's work has been noted by some as the beginning of the end for the golden era of science in the Islamic Empire (he also argued that Ibn-i Sina's position was heretical which probably didn't help), and I found it a rather amusing irony that, strictly speaking, Al-Ghazali was right: Ibn-i Sina did fail to apply his logic as rigorously in some aspects of his metaphysics. It is a strange feeling to find oneself agreeing on a point of logic with a figure famed (in part) for the end of a scientific era. This story, like most historical stories, is surely a gross simplification of the matter, but I thought the irony worth sharing.

We took a taxi to Nazim and Iclal's house. The apartment block was apparently commisioned by Nazim (it even has his name on the front door) and designed by my uncle Mehmet. I was gladdened to note that the rendezvous with Iclal and family was less sullen than I had imagined it to be although whenever, on greeting a newly arriving family member, my mother produced that most appropriate phrase of mourning "i'm sorry for your loss" the inevitable response, a silence accompanied by a downward look and a saddened shrug of the lower lip, was a heart rending admission of pain. I found that I was deeply moved by contrasting observations this day. The solemnity of the bereaved, as well as the quiet continuings of the ever-present poorer members of society busily eking out an existence outside to gain a fraction of the luxuries I squander daily (Adana has many such residents), were starkly contrasted with the incredible hospitality that my Turkish relatives seem to be naturally endowed with, and the sheer joy and wonder and elation displayed by my adorable 3 and 7 year old cousins who mostly occupied themselves during the meeting by throwing their tiny bodies into sofas only to be chastened by their mother with "yavas!" (slowly).

Two of my relatives, Ertos and Nilgun, busied themselves in the kitchen preparing a traditional mourning sweet similar to Halva. After browning a mixture of pine nuts, semolina, and butter, boiling water and sugar were mixed in. We shared the sweet and tin-foiled portions were delivered to the neighbours. Iclal explained that it is traditional for this sweet to be cooked and eaten 3 days after the passing, and that it was also traditional for family to gather on the seventh day for a feast prepared by the widow. Some elements of prayer were mixed into this tradition (in that manner which typically blurs the division between culture and religion) although I am informed that Nazim himself was not a religious man (further attested to by the bar in his living room with shelf adorned with many spirits as well as photos of my brother and cousins). I imagine that the preparation of food for others is probably a good way to keep ones mind occupied when the blackest thoughts lurk nearby, and I've no doubt that the sharing of that food with family promotes the function of the family as a social support mechanism. Tradition can be comforting in difficult times.

A little later we went to visit the grave. The site was rather beautiful: a valley backdropped with a pine forest and cooled by a constant gentle breeze running down it's slopes. On arriving we were greeted by a stray dog whom I quickly befriended (my mother chastening me to leave the 'fleabag' alone, though I have now outgrown such years as I must oblige). The dog enjoyed the shade produced by Mehmet's car while we paid our respects at the grave.

After our visit, Mehmet generously took us to dinner at a restaurant named Elem (meaning sorrow) which I am only just now realising is a particularly apt name.

I recently stumbled upon a pleasing turn of phrase by Salman Rushdie: "We strive for the heights but our natures betray us... ...[we are] clowns in search of crowns". Well if we be clowns, let us be remembered with laughter.

Sunday, 27 October 2013

Zombie Evac

I recently finished a 5k obstacle course with a friend of mine, except there was a twist. This was a zombie evacuation course. I'd heard, from my friend Ankur (whose excellent blog is well worth checking out), that it is an exciting glorified game of tag. This is essentially true: you have three lives, which are taken whenever a zombie snatches away a cord from your belt. But this was also such an under-sell! It was fantastic, really, and I think it was so good because of they got some critical elements of game design right, which I'll try to outline here:

Actors

The zombies did just the most brilliant job acting their parts. With gory make up and loose, ripped clothing, they shuffled, moaning, aimlessly. When approached they would usually scream and chase the runner, but sometimes they just sniffed, as if smelling the fresh meat available and were roused only to chase the second or third to pass them. This element of unpredictability kept the adrenaline high.

Beyond this, though, what is truly wonderful about having real, human actors, in any activity like this, is the ability to interact with them in unstructured ways. Actual skirmishes, with people actually responding to your attempts to dodge by them, make the experience dynamic and thrilling, but on some level they also produce more complex opportunities than a game of tag. The first such opportunity was presented to us when a soldier suggested we smear ourselves with zombie blood. Slopping the rich, red goo over my arms, face, and chest I continued onwards to find three zombies in a densely wooded grove. Changing tactic I groaned an shuffled forwards towards them. The first ignored me. The second ambled towards me without much interest. The third seemed suspicious and I chose this moment to break forward and speed clear. In my zeal I didn't see the fourth member of their party lying prone (with an injured leg) in the leaves ahead, and he snatched up at me removing my first tag and lifeline. Damn, it so nearly worked! This set-up gave me a sense of agency - it was up to me to decide how to play this game, and after playing it one way you might wonder what would have happened if you made a different choice. Even now, I wonder if maybe I should have kept up the pretense all the way.

But this was a structured plan, essentially handed to the player by the organiser. That's fine, but it doesn't necessarily make it feel like it's your story. Later on, though, I found another opportunity. I had dashed through a medical camp, over a fallen tree, and around a zombie in a tight space. My friend and team-mate, running just behind me now found himself alone trapped between the fallen tree and the zombie; in these one-on-one encounters it's very difficult to get past. Seeing Spencer (my friend) in peril, the zombie playing a cat-and-mouse game, Spencer trying to spot an opening, I turned back, clapped my hands loudly and yelled "HEY. HEY!!!". My diversion worked, the zombie spun to look at me, and Spencer found the instant he needed to dash past. Responding to my loud noises, though, both this zombie, and the three ahead made a bee-line for me, and I found myself with no option but to just sprint and hope. Eventually sliding way of course through the wet mud I got away, and the tactic had paid off. What a rush! I had had a genuine, dynamic, evolving interaction with the other actors in the game. This is unstructured play.

Besides the tactics of these skirmishes, however, the designers had used the actors to communicate with the runners in a very different way. The screaming, the unpredictability, the chasing, these are all aspects of the thrill, but there was also an effort to communicate horror. About half way through the course we found ourselves evading zombies dressed as doctors and police officers. These are people that represent the support-system, the foundation, of our society and the community in which we seek shelter. This choice of dress is a hint that maybe the community to which we flee is no longer there - perhaps there is no salvation to be had. These are the creeping thoughts of horror. Further on, we found ourselves confronted with a zombie-child. A child is not difficult to evade, and so adds no special thrill or fear. But the child doesn't serve that purpose. There can be, I suspect, no horror deeper in the mind of a parent, than the thought of losing one's own child. For other, the idea of an evil-child is somehow intrinsically creepy (for example the exorcist).

Live actors make a huge contribution to this kind of game, but to establish the mechanics of the game, the thrill, the chase, and the tactics, they needed the help of some mischievously designed obstacles...

Obstacles

While there were plenty of the standard fare (climb over this wall, crawl under this netting, etc.) the obstacles were so well executed because the designers had noticed that it is not the obstacles themselves that are important, per se, but the scenarios that are created by the interaction between the zombies and the obstacles.

This was made dramatically clear to me when at a pathway, walled with high metal fences, we encountered a zombie ambling ahead. The path split ahead and the zombie, having not yet noticed us, was shuffling away from us down the left tine of the fork. Spotting the opportunity I beckoned the nearby runners and we, five of us, all sprinted easily past to the right. Finding a fenced off dead-end I realised the peril I had caused for all of us. So it hit me, here, that the designers had likely instructed the zombie-actor to lay this trap, but it didn't jar with the authenticity of the moment which seemed just as if a zombie had been wandering aimlessly.

Another trap laid by the designers used a clearly visible zombie to focus our attention so that we found we were easily ambushed by another hiding zombie before we got there. On other occasions we saw the zombie and, before charging in, carefully survey the landscape and obstacles, prudently planning our path. After settling on a route we spring forward, dash past the zombie, over the obstacle, and, thinking ourselves free-and-clear find that we are charging head first into more zombies with too much momentum to stop.

Even when we could see the zombies  hiding in coffins and behind trees before we were spotted, the designer had now posed to us a question: do we sneak or do we run? In other words, the designer had presented a meaningful choice and thereby given us a sense of agency. This is so important in the design of any game, the guys over at extra credits produce a whole episode on it.

But even actors and obstacles, carefully collaborating can produce only a series of well-crafted skirmishes. Exciting though these may be in isolation they do not, alone, complete the picture...

Pacing

Ostensibly being evacuated to a safe zone, the designers also got right this critical, yet easily overlooked, piece of the puzzle: pacing. The course is not just a series of skirmishes with zombies and obstacles to overcome. The course represents a narrative of exodus from a horror which threatens to trap you, the runner, and this cannot be achieved with tightly packed cheap thrills. A zombie-girl in onesie pajamas screaming into your face might well get the heart racing, but it needs to happen at the right time. Much of the course was in the forest, so when not traversing an obstacle we  found ourselves attentively scanning our surroundings for any zombies hiding behind trees or in ditches. This meant that the intensity of the experience tended to fluctuate over short periods of time.

As the course progressed the obstacles got more challenging (The penultimate obstacle required dashing through a small building with multiple rooms full of zombies, with no way around, and runners funneled through the doorways). The obstacles were also closer together towards the end, so while you tried to conserve your sprinting legs you had to sprint more while also making calculated decisions about how far to run past each zombie before slowing down to catch your breath. This meant that as the course progressed the frequency and intensity of the thrills increased, climaxing in a mad dash past six or seven zombies to crawl under a metal grill and into the safety of the quarantine zone.

This pacing feels very close to that described, again, by extra credits.

In Summary

The course was great. While the torrential rain of the previous night helped intensify the experience by robbing us of even our physical stability, what made the experience such an incredible success was that the designers got both the short-term and the long-term design feeling right. The tactical skirmishes were well thought-out, the actors were convincing, and the course got more intense as we found ourselves beginning to get tired and weaken. So the course was exciting and thrilling, but it also believably placed us into a narrative of an increasingly desperate exodus. If you think you might like to try it for yourself, why don't you check out their website.