In this article, Boldt considers decisions teachers must make about the value of children's writing as a form of play in primary classrooms. She offers a brief history of the framing of this question at 1966 Dartmouth Conference on English, focusing particularly on the perspective of Jimmy Britton. She highlights the relationship between Britton's work on play and fantasy and that of his brother-in-law, the child psychoanalyst D. W. Winnicott. Reading across their publications on play and fantasy, she has drawn out the argument that their work was motivated by a mutual concern about the dangers of orthodoxy, compliance, and what Winnicott referred to as a "fascist state of mind." She highlights that what they advocated for was a set of playful practices, including Britton's understanding of children's writing as a form of play, that were grounded in a deep concern that classroom pedagogy could contribute either to children's sense of social responsibility, artistic and creative potential and emotional security, or to fear, rigidity and conformity. She argues that to return to this set of concerns is particularly timely in today's accountability-driven environment.