Fun Language: Sharing the “Fun” to Invite People to Do Daily
Activities
TAKASHI IBA, Faculty of Policy Management, Keio University
AYAKA YOSHIKAWA, Faculty of Environment and Information Studies, Keio University
HITOMI SHIMIZU, Faculty of Policy Management, Keio University

This paper proposes a method to organize and share elements of enjoyment in activities, the Fun Language. It is a language in which theelements of enjoyment within a targeted field of activities are organized into small units, and are named. Compared to a pattern language,
which aims to generate quality in a design, the purpose of a Fun Language is to invite more people to do the activity. Its central purpose is
not to define/formalize a certain element of enjoyment, but rather to open up the “ways of enjoying” that are internal to certain individuals
and allow others to learn/talk about them. In other words, the aim is to share the know-hows on enjoying various activities to ultimately
increase the quality of people’s lives in society. This paper discusses the similarities and differences between Fun Languages and patternlanguages and presents an example in the topics of programming, reading, home farming, and cooking. Furthermore, the purpose of the
Fun Language is discussed by examining psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s Flow theory for lively and creative activities.
Categories and Subject Descriptors: [Social and professional topics]: Management of computing and information systems—Project andpeople management
General Terms: Human Factors
Additional Key Words and Phrases: Motivation, activity, pattern language, fun language, flow, psychology
ACM Reference Format:
Iba, T., Yoshikawa, A. and Shimizu, H. 2017. Fun Language: Sharing the “Fun” to Invite People to Do Daily Activities. HILLSIDE Proc. of Conf.
on Pattern Lang. of Prog. 24 (October 2017), 11 pages.

1. INTRODUCTION
When one is engaged in the act of creating or doing something, there can be a gap in how the act is perceived
from the outside and the inside (what the act really means to the person who is doing it). For instance, whensomeone is cooking, the purpose of that act may solely be to prepare food in order to get nutrition or enjoy theact of cooking as a hobby. Similarly, one may engage in the activity of shoemaking because it is their job, whileothers may enjoy shoemaking as an art form. Hence, the purpose or the meaning of any activity will differ
depending on how and who is doing it.
Let’s say someone enjoys programming. That person (most likely) likes programming because he/she has
discovered a certain “enjoyment” behind creating a program; it is not that they simply enjoy the act of typing
commands and variables onto the keyboard. This is at least the case with Linus Torvalds, the creator of theLinux OS, who states that, “to the outside, it (programming) looks like the most boring thing on Earth,” but that“to somebody who does it, it’s the most interesting thing in the world.” He also describes programming as, “agame much more involved than chess, a game where you can make up your own rules and where the end result
is whatever you can make of it” (Torvalds & Diamond, 2001, p.73). Torvalds states the reason behind his love
for programming in the following statement.
“What makes programming so engaging is that, while you can make the computer do what
you want, you have to figure out how. I’m personally convinced that computer science has a
lot in common with physics. Both are about how the world works at a rather fundamental
level. The difference, of course, is that while in physics you’re supposed to figure out how theworld is made up, in computer science you create the world. Within the confines of thecomputer, you’re the creator. You get to ultimately control everything that happens. If you’regood enough, you can be God. On a small scale” (Torvalds & Diamond, 2001, p.73).
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that
copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page.
To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission. A preliminary version ofthis paper was presented in a writers' workshop at the 24th Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (PLoP). PLoP'17, OCTOBER 2225, Vancouver, Canada. Copyright 2017 is held by the author(s). HILLSIDE 978-1-941652-06-0

Of course, what is stated above is not the only enjoyment of programming. There are people who have theirown ways of enjoying it. However, there are also many people who would agree with Torvalds’s description
and feel the same, including Iba, one of the authors of this paper, who has enjoyed programming from a youngage.
However, for people who are completely unfamiliar with the enjoyment of programming, this way of thinking
is extremely surprising and new. For instance, the other two authors of this paper (who do not like
programming and have never done it outside of introductory courses) were surprised to learn that somepeople enjoy programming for this reason, with reactions such as, “I didn’t know programming could bethought of that way” and “I might have enjoyed programming classes more if I had this perspective.” Indeed,
the feelings of the people who engage in a certain activity are invisible to those who have little or no experienceof it.
The fact that there can be various meanings/motivation for the same activity indicates that it is possible forpeople to change their own meaning/motivation for the activity as well. Therefore, if the ways to enjoy acertain activity is shared such that people can access them, many people will have the chance to enjoy that
activity for themselves. This can be said about various activities in various fields. This paper proposes amethod to share the elements of enjoyment in a certain activity, which we call, the Fun Language.
A Fun Language contains the “ways of enjoying” within a targeted field of activities, which are organized into
small units, and are named. This structure is similar to that of a pattern language (Alexander, 1977; Iba, 2016).
We believe that in any domain, a pattern language and Fun Language can be created together as a set, in orderto support both the quality of the design itself, as well as the quality of experience for the people engaging in
the process of creating/doing the design.1
The central purpose of creating Fun Languages is not to define/formalize a certain element of enjoyment, butrather to open up the “ways of enjoying” that are internal to certain individuals, and allow others to learn/talkabout them. In other words, the aim is to share the know-hows on enjoying various activities to ultimately
increase the quality of people’s lives in society (Figure 1).
In what follows, the concept of the Fun Language is proposed, first of all, by examining its differences with thepattern language. As an example of a Fun Language, the fun languages for reading, home farming, and cooking
are introduced. Further, the implication and future direction of the Fun Language are discussed using
psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s Flow theory.

Fig. 1. Difference in Forms of Pattern Language and Fun Language.

The term “Creative Language” is used to refer to the various languages including Pattern Language, Fun Language, and Future Language(Iba, 2016). In other words, both Fun Language and Pattern Language are different types of Creative Languages.
1

Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 2

2. FUN LANGUAGE
Fun Language is a collection of perspectives and actions that allows one to “enjoy” a certain activity. The term
Fun Language, like pattern language, points to both the methodology and the languages themselves.
In practice, a Fun Language will be created for a certain target domain (Fun Language for …) that the authorchooses to focus on. A Fun Language comprises of ways to enjoy a certain activity, organized into small units,
which we call “Fun.” Each “Fun” unit contains information about when and how to enjoy that activity, and isnamed with a “Fun Word.” This structure is much similar to that of the pattern language, which is composed ofvarious patterns and each has a pattern name (Alexander, 1979).
If the structure of the Fun Language and the pattern language is so similar, is it necessary to differentiate themas two different types of languages? The answer is, despite their similarities, the two have distinct differencesthat indicate they should be considered as two separate languages. Fun Language and pattern language havethree main differences: their target, format, and purpose.
2.1 Fun Language targets the state of mind of the people
The first difference between the Fun Language and pattern language is in their target. A pattern language iscreated to function as a common language to enable a good design. In other words, the pattern is targeted tochange the product itself that is being constructed/created. In contrast, a Fun Language focuses on the feelingsof the people who are doing the constructing/creating.
Interestingly, Christopher Alexander, who created the pattern language method and emphasized theimportance of creating “quality without a name” in towns and buildings, does not mention anything about the“feelings of the people” that create the towns and buildings. To be more specific, Alexander does talk about
how the people who participate in the construction process put in their feelings into the buildings, and thatpeople’s comfort in living spaces is important (Alexander, 1979; Alexander, et al., 1985; Alexander, 2002), but
he makes no statements about the people during the construction process itself. This fact is not surprising,
however, since Alexander is an architect, not a psychologist. The same can be said about patterns in thesoftware field (Beck and Cunningham, 1987; Gamma, et al., 1995).
For Fun Language, however, the target is on the feelings of the people who engage in an activity. That is, thefocus is on “how to make a certain activity enjoyable.” As a result, a Fun Language does not deal with the
product of the activity. The underlying intention is that enjoying the process of creating/doing something
increases the person’s effort and motivation for the activity, which should naturally create better results. This
is why the Fun Language focuses on the psychological side of the creating/doing process.
2.2 There is no “Problem” to be solved in a Fun Language
The second difference between a Fun Language and a pattern language lies in its format. A pattern in a patternlanguage consists of a Context in which a certain Problem occurs, and presents a Solution to solve that situation
as well as the resulting Consequence. However, in a Fun Language, there is no Problem to solve. Instead, it
simply describes a Context in which a Solution is enacted, which leads to a certain Consequence. More precisely,
the term “solution” implies that there is a problematic situation to begin with, so it should be more suitable touse the terms Context, Action, and Consequence.
The importance of having a Problem statement in a pattern language has been discussed by Alexander and his
definition of design. According to his definition, design is an act in which one creates a form that fits a certain
situation (Alexander 1964). More specifically, every environment has various forces that exist within them,which work together to create a conflict, and a design is something that should solve that conflict and create
harmony (Alexander, 1979).
On the other hand, each unit of Fun in a Fun Language does not have any problem to be solved. This is because
each Fun suggests a certain way to enjoy something, not a solution to solve a problematic situation; even if one
fails to take that action, no problem will occur. Of course, if there is no Fun at all in an activity, there will be theproblem that the act has no excitement or entertainment, which may cause the person to feel unmotivatedabout engaging in that activity. However, this problem (that there is no motivation) is a psychological one andis not a result of conflicting forces, which suggests that it is completely different from the Problem statementsin pattern languages.
Our current proposal of the form of Fun Language is as follows: Context, Perform, Resulting Forces, andConsequence. In other words, when a person performs what is described in a fun, new forces will be added to
Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 3

the context, which then results in a different consequence. Performing a Fun Word results in different forces isa key characteristic and should be emphasized. Figure 2 compares it with the form of Pattern Language:
Context, (Forces), Problem, Solution, and Consequence.

Fig. 2. Difference in Forms of Pattern Language and Fun Language.

2.3 Fun Language enhances the “quality of experience” of the people
The third difference between Fun Language and pattern language is the purpose of the languages. The purposeof pattern language is to generate quality in an object that is produced through a process ofconstructing/creating. Alexander calls this a “quality without a name,” and he created a pattern language togenerate this quality (Alexander, 1979). On the contrary, the purpose of the Fun Language is to enhance the“quality of experience” of the people who are engaging in a certain activity (including constructing and creating
a design).
In a pattern language, the people involved are merely components; it is by creating an output with the “quality
without a name” that the people involved can gain enjoyment. The motivation of those who are involved in thedesigning/constructing process is born through the desire to achieve the “quality without a name” in their final
output. This approach, though effective for achieving quality results, is not directly effective in motivating
people’s participation in the process.
On the other hand, Fun Language directly contributes to raising people’s motivation to participate in an activity.
It helps even those who are inexperienced to grasp the fun and enjoyment of the certain activity. Once a person
is able to experience the enjoyment and develop his/her own motivation, he/she will be more likely to commit
to that activity with more passion. Hence, the purpose of the Fun Language is to enhance people’s “quality ofexperience” by suggesting ways to find enjoyment in an activity. When one discovers an element of “fun” in an
activity, it gradually leads to “enjoyment,” which then develops into a more long-term feeling of “joy.”
To summarize, Fun Language is similar to pattern language, in that it contributes to the generation of “quality”
by using a common language to promote communication and thinking, but differs in terms of its target, format,
and purpose. The following section will introduce examples of Fun Language, the Fun Language for reading,home farming, and cooking.
3. EXAMPLES OF FUN LANGUAGE
We here present several examples of fun languages: one regarding programming (mentioned earlier in thepaper), as well as three more examples from other topics.
First, the enjoyment of programming described in Linus’s quote can be expressed as the following “fun.”Creator of a WorldAt first glance, programming may seem like a simple task of putting in commands to a computer. However, in
reality, it is about creating a world of your own, where you get to decide the rules. In other words, you are the“god” in charge of running that world. What the users of the program will experience is totally up to you! Thisfeeling of control is unlike anything else.
Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 4

3.1

Fun Language for Reading
The next example is from the fun language for reading.
Book the Date

It’s difficult to find time for reading in daily life, so I sometimes reserve the whole day for the book andspend the day in luxury. I block the day by actually writing “Reading Day” in my schedule book, turning downother plans by saying, “Sorry, I already have plans with Hemingway,” as a matter-of-factly.

Brain Workout Rush
Some days when I'm feeling ambitious, I read as many books as I can, packing in the maximum amount of
information that my brain can handle, and think on and on about everything I took in. After I’ve organized it,
absorbed it, and have got an understanding in my head, I get a rush similar to the boost in confidence after an
intense work out: tired but refreshed. It’s super effective when I have something on my mind, or when reaching
to a dead end.

Bookstore Supporter
I make it my personal rule that when I come across a really great book at a bookstore, I buy it on the spot.
Even if it’s a little heavy or a tad bit pricier than the one sold online, I buy it there as a “thanks for letting memeet my new beloved book.” Oh, how good it feels to be a bookstore patron!

Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 5

3.2

Fun Language for Home Farming
The second example is a fun language for home farming:
A Bit of Everything

Planting a little bit of many kinds of vegetables and fruits (one pot a plant, two pots for seeds) makes
watering a pleasure, with changes like budding, blooming, and bearing fruit coming up every day. Since harvest
times differ for each plant, you have the treat of harvesting something every day.

Mindful Watering Time
Watering time (when it gets hot or in the evening) is the time when you can clear your head and relax inyour busy life. You can obtain the time by thinking that watering is essential for the plants to keep growing orfrom not withering, so you must have enough time to water the plants and empty your mind. Just watching theplants and soil without anything in mind will be a precious time to spend the day in a cheerful mood.

Rain Day Treat
Rain usually dampens the day, but with plants on your mind, it turns into a welcoming surprise. The rain
enables you to get a break from watering your plants, which can be a treat sometimes when you are busy. Even
though rain is regarded as bothersome, it can seem like a gift from nature when you have plants in your garden.
How wonderful is it to feel yourself as part of nature on rainy mornings?

Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 6

3.3

Fun Language for Cooking
The third example is a fun language for cooking (Shimizu et al., 2017):
Chef’s Privilege

When cooking for everyone, you, a “chef,” could appreciate having a little treat. Tricks and privileges thatyou have because you are in the kitchen fill you with giggles, making you want to be in the kitchen and makefood for people. Now, which plate should I put the “bingo”/prize in today? For example, on weekends, drink
wine from a glass while making pasta; sneak in one lucky egg roll filled with cheese; when cooking with friends,
take sneak-peak bites of the food before it gets to the table.

Motivation Switch
Even if you want to cook, you tend to become lazy without a trigger. In situations like that, use your own
little spell to tune yourself into the cooking mode. If you can get your mind ready before standing in the kitchen,
you know you can be motivated and have a good time. For example, actually do warm ups to pump up yourblood flow before cooking; put on your favorite apron and switch to your “cooking mode;” wash your face
before going into the kitchen to freshen up your mind.

Kitchen Fantasy
When cooking curry, the spices lead you to want to go to India. You hesitated for a while, but you followed
and turned the Indian music on. Your body is dancing without control. You are stirring and throwing in the
spices rhythmically. You are starting to feel like you are in India. Music, clothes, the entrance can be anything. It
counts on you to enjoy the world, or hesitate and not get absorbed in it. Other examples are make Chinese food
while wearing a china dress; listen to the soundtracks of “The Nutcracker” as you make a Yule log cake.

Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 7

4. FUN AND FLOW
We now examine how a Fun Language functions in making an activity enjoyable. To start by stating theconclusion, Fun Language provides not the enjoyments you gain from the activity itself, but those that enablepeople to keep engaging in the activity until he/she reaches the point of enjoying it (Figure 3). Taking theexample from the Fun Language for cooking, listening to Indian music while cooking motivates the person to
cook, and leads to eventually discovering the enjoyment in the cooking process. In this sense, Fun Language is atool to invite people to do a certain activity. This section looks at the theory of flow to examine the relation
between the enjoyment gained from engaging in an activity and flow.

Figure 3. Fun Language supports the person to continue engaging in an activity until he/she reaches the state of flow in which enjoyment isgained from the activity itself.

To discuss the goal of the Fun Language, this section examines theories by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, a
psychologist who engaged in research about enjoyment and creativity. Csikszentmihalyi conducted interviews
with people who engaged in creative activities in various fields to find out what their mental states were likeand found the following commonality.
What is extraordinary in this case is that we talked to engineers and chemists, writers andmusicians, businesspersons, and social reformers, historians and architects, sociologists andphysicians—and they all agree that they do what they do primarily because it’s fun. Yet manyothers in the same occupations don’t enjoy what they do. So, we have to assume that it is notwhat these people do that counts but how they do it. Being an engineer or a carpenter is not in
itself enjoyable. But if one does these things a certain way, then they become intrinsicallyrewarding, worth doing for their own sake. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996, p.107–108)
As Csikszentmihalyi states, what sets apart people who enthusiastically engage in activities from those who
don’t is that they are able to make what is originally not enjoyable into something that they enjoy.
Csikszentmihalyi also conducted research on chess players, rock climbers, dancers, and composers, who workfor joy rather than just for money or fame. Through his research, he found that the state of being completely
engaged in an activity brings satisfaction and motivation, and he called that condition a state of “flow.”
After examining our interview and questionnaire results, we concluded that people who enjoy
what they are doing enter a state of “flow”: they concentrate their attention on a limited
stimulus field, forget personal problems, lose their sense of time and of themselves, feelcompetent and in control, and have a sense of harmony and union with their surroundings. To
Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 8the extent that these elements of experience are present, a person enjoys what he or she isdoing and ceases to worry about whether the activity will be productive and whether it will be
rewarded. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, p.182)“Flow” experience “is the term many of the people we interviewed had used in their descriptions of how it
felt to be in top form: ‘It was like floating,’ ‘I was carried on by the flow’” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p.40). Oncea person enters this “holistic sensation that people feel when they act with total involvement”(Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, p.36), one would feel more enjoyment in that activity, which gives them moresatisfaction and motivation to engage in it. In other words, the activity will become more intrinsicallyrewarding and autotelic. The term “autotelic” is composed of the Greek word “auto,” which means “self,” andthe Greek word “telos,” which means “purpose,” and together means “self-fulfilling.”
When one is in a state of “flow,” the person goes through growth and change. During a state of “flow,” one
may feel that he/she is “designing or discovering something new” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996, p.108), but in fact at
the same time, there is a “loss of the self” that occurs, which allows one to transcend their boundaries. In otherwords, as one’s concentration and engagement heightens, the sense of “self” becomes lost from the mind.
In one of his works, Csikszentmihalyi describes the following words of a climber: “It’s a Zen feeling, like
meditation or concentration. One thing you’re after is the one-pointedness of mind. You can get your ego mixed
up with climbing in all sorts of ways and it isn’t necessarily enlightening. But when things become automatic,
it’s like an egoless thing, in a way” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p.63). Furthermore, he states, “when notpreoccupied with ourselves, we actually have a chance to expand the concept of who we are. Loss of selfconsciousness can lead to self-transcendence, to a feeling that the boundaries of our being have been pushedforward” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p.64).
As a result, “after an enjoyable event we know that we have changed, that our self has grown: in somerespect, we have become more complex as a result of it” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p.46). Similar things havebeen said by writers Haruki Murakami (Murakami, 2010) and Michael Ende (Ende 2009) about their creative
processes, and the following passage from Jiro Kawakita is closely related as well.
A creative act involves the creation of the “object” itself, but also generates change within theindividual who is engaging in the creation. In other words, the “‘subject” is also being created.
A creation that is done one-sidedly is not truly a creative act. The more creative the act is, themore remarkable the change within the subject will be” (Kawakita, 2010)
Therefore, when one engages in activities and enters a state of flow, they are able to feelenjoyment in the process itself, which leads to the feeling of joy in their lives.
In this sense, being in a state of flow is highly appealing, but this is not something that everyone
can easily accomplish. According to Csikszentmihalyi, “most people need some inducement toparticipate in flow activities, at least at the beginning, before they learn to be sensitive to intrinsic
rewards” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, p.14). This is because “enjoyment happens only as a result of
unusual investments of attention” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p.46).
Many of the things we find interesting are not so by nature, but because we took the troubleof paying attention to them. Until one starts to collect them, insects and minerals are not very
appealing. Nor are most people until we find out about their lives and thoughts. Running
marathons or climbing mountains, the game of bridge or Racine’s dramas are rather boring
except to those who have invested enough attention to realize their intricate complexity.
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1997, p.128)
Hence, we have not found the enjoyment of every activity that we take part in. We enjoy certain activities that
we find enjoyment in, while we do not for many other activities throughout our lives.
Without enjoyment life can be endured, and it can even be pleasant. But it can be so only
precariously, depending on luck and the cooperation of the external environment. To gain
personal control over the quality of experience, however, one needs to learn how to build
enjoyment into what happens day in, day out. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p.48)

Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 9

This is exactly where the Fun Language comes into play. Csikszentmihalyi says that even “Mowing the lawn or
waiting in a dentist’s office can become enjoyable provided one restructures the activity by providing goals,
rules, and the other elements of enjoyment to be reviewed below” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p.51). Such“elements of enjoyment” are what each fun in a Fun Language describes. By defining various Fun (elements ofenjoyment) in various fields, we have more potential of enjoying many activities in our lives. Csikszentmihalyi
proposes an approach to practice getting into the state of flow in what follows.
How can you get more enjoyment from brushing your teeth? Taking a shower? Dressing?
Eating breakfast? Getting to work? Take the simplest of these routines and experiment withengineering its flow potential. … If you take this question seriously and try to answer by
testing various alternatives, you will be surprised at how much fun brushing teeth can be.
(Csikszentmihalyi,1996, p.350)
While Csikszentmihalyi suggests taking this approach to practice discovering the enjoyment in everyday life,
the Fun Language takes a more direct approach. In other words, to collect various elements of enjoyment fromvarious people and organize them into a language that can be shared. Of course, not all Fun will be agreeable byeveryone, but there should be a few out of each collection that readers will find interesting and worth
practicing. When one learns about a new Fun in a domain that they are not familiar with, it can become asignificant hint that allows them to find enjoyment in that activity. Furthermore, when one finds an overlap
with what they already practice and what is written in a Fun Language, it will be easier for them tocommunicate about that concept with other people and to find people with common interests.
In this way, as one takes in more and more elements of enjoyment using a Fun Language, that person will growto find the activity more appealing and motivating. That in itself is remarkable, but an additional effect that canbe expected is that using a Fun Language in one domain leads the reader to enjoy other activities as well.
Therefore, Fun Language is a tool that enables people to gain enjoyment from the activity itself, which makes it
more likely that he/she will continue engaging in that activity.
After you have practiced improving the quality of experience in a few everyday activities, you
might feel ready to tackle something more difficult—such as a hobby or a new interest.
Eventually you will master the most important skill of all, the metaskill that consists in being
able to turn any activity into an occasion of flow. If the autotelic metaskill is developed
enough, you should be able to enjoy any new challenge and be on the way to the selfsustaining chain reaction of creativity. (Csikszentmihalyi,1996, p.350)
Hence, developing the ability to enjoy a daily life activity leads to a more enjoyable, fulfilling life.
Csikszentmihalyi adds, “to control attention means to control experience, and therefore the quality of life”(Csikszentmihalyi, 1997, p.128). A Fun Language, therefore, is a media to make a certain activity an enjoyable
experience and to enhance people’s quality of life.
5. CONCLUSION
This paper proposed the concept of the Fun Language and presented three examples. The purpose and aimof the Fun Language was discussed, using theories by Csikszentmihalyi. Whether the “elements of enjoyment”
discussed in this paper really has an effect on motivation remains a question. The authors of this paper alongwith the people around them have experienced a definite change in their mindset, but the question ofeffectiveness is something to be tested in future studies.
To conclude this paper, let us talk about an episode from Linus Torvalds once again. Torvalds describes hischildhood, long before he began creating the Linux in the following: “It probably won’t surprise anyone thatsome of my earliest and happiest memories involve playing with my grandfather’s old electronic calculator”(Torvalds & Diamond, 2001, p.6). Influenced by his grandfather who was a professor of statistics, Torvalds
enjoyed calculation from a young age.
I remember having tons of fun calculating the sine of various random numbers. Not because I
actually cared all that much for the answer (after all, not many people do), but because thiswas long time ago, and calculators didn’t just give you the answer. They calculated it. And they
Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 10blinked a lot while doing so, mainly in order to give you some feedback that “Yes, I’m still alive,
and it takes me ten seconds to do show how much work I do.” That was fascinating. Much
more exciting than a modern calculator that won’t even break into a sweat when doing
something as simple as calculating a plain sine of a number. With those early devices you knewthat what they did was hard. They made it very clear indeed. (Torvalds & Diamond, 2001, p.6)
His fascination for computers began with his fascination over the simple fact that “they blinked a lot while
doing so.” He later developed passion for programming by realizing that it is like creating your own world, andeventually brought about a significant worldwide movement. What this example shows us is that a sense of“fun,” even if seemingly insignificant, can be a starting point that triggers something significant.
Torvalds states that what we are headed toward is “Past the information society, the entertainment society”(Torvalds & Diamond, 2001, p.246). That transformation is fueled by the three driving factors that motivate
people: first “survival,” second “social relations,” and third “entertainment.” The book in which he reflects on
his life is entitled Just For Fun; what a fitting title, indeed, to represent a world where “entertainment” is wealthin itself.
Just For Fun—It is simply through having Fun that we develop Enjoyment, and furthermore, Joy in our lives.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Fun Language for Cooking mentioned in this paper was originally created in a collaborative
research between Iba Laboratory, Keio University, and Cookpad, Inc. We thank Shiori Shibata as amember of our project and Takuji Ikeda and Ryo Katsuma as our research partners, as well as
Akimitsu Sano for giving us the opportunity to conduct this collaborative research. We would also liketo thank Konomi Munakata for drawing wonderfully funny illustrations for fun words and allinterviewees for sharing their “seeds of fun” for this project. Lastly, we thank our shepherd Christian
Kohls, the writers’ workshop moderator Jenny Quillien, and all participants: Meryem Dural, Aimi
Burgoyne, Joao Dias, Tatsuaki Kanai, HiromitsuU Fujiwara, Miho Tsutui, and Mary Tedeschi.
REFERENCES
Alexander, C. (1964) Notes on the Synthesis of Form, Harvard University Press.
Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I. and Angel, S. (1977), A Pattern Language: Towns,
Buildings, Construction, Oxford University Press, New York.
Alexander, C. (1979), The Timeless Way of Building, Oxford University Press, New York.
Alexander, C., Davis, H., Martinez, J. and Corner, D. (1985), The Production of Houses, Oxford University Press, New York.
Alexander, C. (2002) The Nature of Order: An Essay of the Art of Building and the Nature of the Universe, Book 1: The
Phenomenon of Life, Center for Environmental Structure.
Beck, K. and Cunningham, W. (1987), “Using pattern languages for object-oriented programs,” OOPSLA-87 Workshop on theSpecification and Design for Object-Oriented Programming, Florida.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975) Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: Experiencing Flow in Work and Play, Jossey-Bass.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990) Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, Harper & Row.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996) Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, Harper Perennial.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997) Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life. Basic BooksEnde, M. (2009) Monogatari no yohaku: ende ga saigo ni hanashita koto [Margins in a Story: Ende’s Last Words], in Japanese,
Iwanami Shoten, Publishers.
Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R. and Vlissides, J. (1995), Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software,
Addison-Wesley, Boston.
Murakami, H. (2011) Yume wo miru tameni maiasa boku wa mezameru no desu [I Wake up in Order to Dream: Interview series
with Haruki Murakami 1997-2011], in Japanese, Bungeishunju Ltd.
Iba, T. (2016) “Pattern Language 3.0 and Fundamental Behavioral Properties,” Peter Baumgartner, Tina Gruber-Muecke,
Richard Sickinger (Eds.), Pursuit of Pattern Languages for Societal Change. Designing Lively Scenarios in Various Fields.
Berlin: epubli, pp.152-176 pp.200-233
Kawakita, J. (2010) Souzousei towa nanika [The Definition of Creativity], in Japanese, Shodensha Co., Ltd.
Shimizu, H., Ayaka, Y., and Iba, T. (2017) “Cooking Fun Language: Sharing the hidden Fun of cooking,” in the Conference on
Pursuit of Pattern Languages for Societal Change (PURPLSOC2017).
Torvalds, L. & Diamond, D. (2001) Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary, Harper Collins.
Winograd, Terry (eds) (1996), Bringing design to software, Addison-Wesley Professional.
Received May 2017; revised September 2017; accepted January 2018

Neural Modeling of Flow Rendering Effectiveness: Page - 11