A Serious Subject

Greetings and salutations from Bubbe, who has something serious to say.

Actually, it hearkens back to a great essay by Russell Baker, called “Why Being Serious is Hard.” I put up the link so that you can go back and read it, later, if you're so inclined.

Baker says that the distinction between being solemn and being serious seems to be vanishing and that, all too often, adults consider the two to be synonymous. There is an expectation of solemnity after a certain age, a stuffed-shirtedness to growing up, and the writer wants us to know that it's not what it's cracked up to be. He implies that seriousness is actually the far more valuable, though elusive, trait. It refers to passionate intensity, focus, drive: the being in the moment, if you will.

The article includes a list of things that fall into one, or the other, category. Since the essay is 39 years old this month, quite a few of the cultural references are pretty outdated, but this might help you:

Playboy is solemn. The New Yorker is serious.

Jogging is solemn. Poker is serious.

In this vein, Bubbe would assert that mah jongg is definitely serious. This is a game that should be treated with respect and each player should put in their best effort. They should take it seriously. 

This isn't to say that Bubbe wants to rap your knuckles if you reach for her joker for an exchange. That's the solemn, or perhaps a little overly violent, way to behave. Bubbe doesn't chastise someone for throwing the winning tile because she wants to give the benefit of the doubt that such a throw is a calculated decision.

BUT--a very important question has come up, in emails I've received from several of you: when should a player be expected to know her card? Most specifically, should leniency be given to a person who erroneously exposes three winds, or three dragons (on this year's card, any such exposure makes a hand dead)? Should they be let off with a warning? How long should this grace period last?

Another particularly conscientious player asked whether other players should know that an exposure of three 9's (999) indicates only one possible hand on this year's card. The question had to do with table rules involving hot tiles and/or throwing to multiple exposures. Again, the writer wanted to know whether players should be held accountable in identifying distinct hands.

The bottom line in both questions involves how solemn the environment should be. In my blog entries, I try to identify the rare idiosyncracies on the card, such as illegal exposures and rare appearances. I think it's important to understand the nuances of the game and I try to pass that worldview along to other players. It's a lot of what I write about in Searching for Bubbe Fischer. I want you to learn in order to avoid mistakes, but also to think about the card, and by extension your game, with a more critical eye. I want you to take the game seriously.

I willingly acknowledge that not everyone is as passionately committed to the game as I am. Certainly anyone who only plays once a month or less, and doesn't look at the card in between, could not be expected to have as much focus. Such a person would, no doubt, chalk up my attitude as "too serious"--when really, they mean they think I'm too solemn. I will try hard not to be so severe, but I think that there should be no grace period, especially for illegal exposures. If you are let off the hook, given a "do-over," how will you learn?

So yes, I fully admit that I take this game seriously. However, I don't think mah jongg should be played in a solemn environment. If you can't joke and kvetch, what's the point of playing?

What do YOU think? You can always email me at bubbefischer@gmail.com, I look forward to your emails (seriously!).

Talk to you soon.

Bubbe Fischer