The Battle Continues Over "Childish Things"

The recent kerfuffle between Bill Maher and comic fans mourning Stan Lee's passing has illustrated an ugly truth that geeks everywhere continue to face: geekdom is still viewed by some as a sign that society has failed to "grow up."

View attachment 104454
Picture courtesy of Pixabay.​

[h=3]It Started with Stan[/h]The death of comics legend Stan Lee prompted an outpouring of grief and comedian Bill Maher took his passing as an opportunity to take a shot at fandom with an essay titled "Adulting":

"...the assumption everyone had back then, both the adults and the kids, was that comics were for kids, and when you grew up you moved on to big-boy books without the pictures. But then twenty years or so ago, something happened – adults decided they didn’t have to give up kid stuff. And so they pretended comic books were actually sophisticated literature."
​

The response was swift. Maher admitted the lost 40,000 Twitter followers after his post and that he's still followed by paparazzi asking him about "the Stan Lee thing." In response, Maher doubled down in a scathing attack on geekdom everywhere with a video titled, "New Rule: Grow Up":

"...the point of my blog is that I'm not glad Stan Lee is dead I'm sad you're alive...my shot wasn't at Stan Lee it was at, you know, grown men who still dress like kids...I'm sorry but if you are an adult playing with superhero dolls--I'm sorry, I mean collectible action figures!--why not go all the way and drive to work on a big wheel? Grown-ups these days, they cling so desperately to their childhood that when they do attempt to act their age they have a special word for it now, 'adulting'."
​

If those statements make your blood boil, you're not alone. The comic book industry's condemnation of Maher's comments were swift and wide-reaching. Stan Lee's estate responded directly to Maher:

Mr. Maher: Comic books, like all literature, are storytelling devices. When written well by great creators such as Stan Lee, they make us feel, make us think and teach us lessons that hopefully make us better human beings. One lesson Stan taught so many of us was tolerance and respect, and thanks to that message, we are grateful that we can say you have a right to your opinion that comics are childish and unsophisticated. Many said the same about Dickens, Steinbeck, Melville and even Shakespeare. But to say that Stan merely inspired people to “watch a movie” is in our opinion frankly disgusting. Countless people can attest to how Stan inspired them to read, taught them that the world is not made up of absolutes, that heroes can have flaws and even villains can show humanity within their souls.
​

The same criticism has been leveled at all things geeky, including role-playing games.
[h=3]Are Role-Playing Games Childish?[/h]Maher's attack on comics is essentially an attack on geekdom itself; the defense from Stan Lee's estate is an argument for the kind of imaginative storytelling that is at the heart of role-playing games.

In a lengthy response to a Quora question if D&D is "too immature and childish," Jake Harris explained:

D&D is a great game that brings people of all kinds together, for those willing to actually try and enjoy it. It's far from childish. Same with other forms of science fiction and fantasy. I strongly believe that these are lowkey pillars of society, which endure when pop culture constantly waxes and wanes with new trends and interpretations of “pop”. Dungeons & Dragons might have 6 Editions (I'm counting 3rd and 3.5 Editions) and Pathfinder, but its playerbase and rules remain largely the same: sit around a table, and travel to far-off lands, doing what no one else in the world is able to. Maybe you think that's childish. Maybe you could even argue that it is. Fine. I submit that maybe our world needs a little childishness. Maybe if we learn to fight less and play more we might actually get somewhere. If we choose to let the children inside of us inspire ourselves and those around us, we might not be stuck with all the problems we have.
​

Comedian and actor Patton Oswalt doesn't see a difference between pop culture and geek culture:

...I've got news for you—pop culture is nerd culture. The fans of Real Housewives of Hoboken watch, discuss, and absorb their show the same way a geek watched Dark Shadows or obsessed over his eighth-level half-elf ranger character in Dungeons & Dragons. It's the method of consumption, not what's on the plate.
​

That times have changed is perhaps best exemplified by the Collins online dictionary, which signified a shift away from Maher's perspective:

Once a slur reserved for eggheads and an insult aimed at lovers of computer programming, geek has been deemed the word of the year by the Collins online dictionary. Less brazen than selfie – which topped the Oxford Dictionaries poll last month – geek was chosen as a reminder of how an insult can be transformed into a badge of honour, according to Collins. In September the dictionary changed the main definition of geek from someone preoccupied with computing to "a person who is very knowledgeable and enthusiastic about a specific subject'', adding geekery, geek chic and geekdom to the fold.
​

Part of geekdom is maintaining the passion for things we enjoyed as children into adulthood, but it does not necessarily mean that we aren't effectively "adulting." Although geekdom seems to have taken over popular culture, comedians like Maher are there to remind us that not everyone is okay with the takeover.

Mike "Talien" Tresca is a freelance game columnist, author, communicator, and a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to http://amazon.com. You can follow him at Patreon.

 

[Shasarak]

I didn't suggest we should stop assigning those sorts of books to teenagers. I was countering a suggestion that we should consider Shakespeare YA material because school curriculums mean most of the people who read Shakespeare are 15 years old.

Sorry, my mistake.

 

[billd91]

No I dont think so. People will spend the whole day going to a sports event so time pressure does not affect what you prioritise.

They do, but much of that time is spent in multiple modes - they’re tailgating so they’re eating and socializing, they’re watching the game and still socializing. The guy staying at home to read The Unbearable Lightness of Being is probably spending a lot more time concentrating on just that activity... and will spend more time at it unless he rents the movie.

 

[Immortal Sun]

Have people forgotten what it was like to be a 15 year old?

How the heck would a 15 year old know what was worth while reading if no one told them what to read? Do we expect it to randomly fall off the shelf into their lap or hope that one of their other 15 year old friends tells them about that cool book that they read?

Incredibly, people are capable of discovering art and literature as interesting without being ordered to consume it! Further, being forced to read something and then graded not on your appreciation of the material but your memorization of it more often than not turns people away from that material.

You know how many times I was instructed to read Lord of the Flies? A book generally regarded as a modern classic? 4 times. Sequentially from 8th grade through 11th. The Outsiders? 3 times. Romeo and Juliet? 3 times. They didn't even teach the interesting Shakespeare until 11th when we got Hamlet (boring AF but good). And A Mid-Summers Nights Dream? That was considered "too adult" for our childish 12th grade minds (we were 16-18 by this grade). Read the Great Gatsby twice, hated it both times. Read the Grapes of Wrath once where the teacher praised Steinbeck's "wordiness" and subsequently got graded down on a report on the book for "being too wordy" and that I "needed to keep things brief".

You know what I never read in school? HG Wells. Jules Verne. George Orwell. You know what I read at home? HG Wells, Jules Verne and George Orwell.

And if I am ever handed another copy of Lord of the Flies I'm likely to use it as a hockey puck.

Rant aside, being forced to read something doesn't make you appreciate it.

 

[Shasarak]

D'oh

 

[Immortal Sun]

Is this some kind of reverse psychology where the English teacher does not ask you to read Lord of the Flies and then all of a sudden children just spontaneously start reading it?

Without digging up the studies on the subject, yes.

Children perform better when doing things that interest them (and really, so does everyone). Which is why we've seen many attempts to push the education system in a more "open" direction. It's why many schools employ "reading lists" where students can pick one of many books at their expected reading level and read those, instead of everyone being expected to read the same book.

I mean, reading Lord of the Flies really isn't the point is it? It's the reading that matters. It's the understanding that matters. And the latter happens better when children read things that interest them.

Look if you're not familiar with the ins-and-outs of education that's understandable. But acting like 15-year-olds are a bunch of snot-nosed kids with no appreciation for "higher art" really does a disservice to them, and to you.

 

[Shasarak]

D'oh

 

[Immortal Sun]

If you are a kid that does not want to read, do you know what is worse then being told to read a book?

Its being given a list of books.

Are you going to even pretend to respond honestly?

I haven't used my block button since joining this site and I really don't want to, but you are trolling. And no, it's not because I disagree with you. It's the way in which you're responding that makes it clear you're only here for your own personal laughs, which basically defines trolling. The moderation either doesn't see it or isn't interested in doing anything about it, so I'm not really left with many options.

So I'll leave it up to you, would you like me to block you?

 

[Hussar]

Uh, no.

Shakespeare is an example of work whose primary demographic has shifted over time. This is not uncommon with media as changing views begin see the work as higher or lower quality than it was at some point in the past. It's actually partly the subject of this thread, comics are being more widely seen as acceptable to read when older than 14 and people like Maher are struggling against the inexorable tide of changing culture to maintain their own biased and jaded views.

Anyway...

The YA section of a store (a section in which you will not find Shakespeare unless it's the YA rewrite, seriously, go to your local book store or library and look) includes books that were written for a modern YA audience, usually "tweens". These books aren't necessarily harder or easier to read, but they contain material aimed at a certain demographic based on cultural norms. They range from essentially being "comic books without pictures" to "well written books with themes society considers childish" (like supers). They will often be populated with YA romance novels (translation: fade-to-black romance) or pretty much anything you'd see in a daytime soap in text format.

Keep in mind that for all this threads last few pages of talk about "kids reading Shakespeare" they're doing it because they're ordered to do it, not because they want to do it. Even the young adults that read it in college are more likely to be doing so because their Classical Lit 102 professor told them to go buy a copy, not because they actually thought "Hey, Shakespeare! I want to read that!"

TLDR: the YA section is not based on what YAs read but literature written at a certain level, in a certain style, containing certain themes and intended to be purchased by persons ages 12-22.

I would point out that the YA section of a bookstore (well, of the ones that are left anyway) contains material that is very, very mature. You want books about drug use, gender issues, politics, history, etc? Look at your YA section. The notion that YA books are "daytime soap intent format" hasn't been true since the 80's.

What primarily drives a book to be put in YA genre is the age of the protagonist. Thankfully, the days of treating young adults as "children" who aren't capable of understanding things has long gone away.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

No I dont think so. People will spend the whole day going to a sports event so time pressure does not affect what you prioritise.

A movie and a typical sporting event take about the same amount of time.

If you’re talking about tailgating, then add in the “dinner and a...” to going to the movie.

If you’re talking about people who are taking family members to participate in sporting events, and thus must attend practices and get to performance early for getting into uniform, that’s not a passive but active participant. And the closest analogue to that is not a movie watcher or even a reader, but someone taking heir kids to theater practice & perfomances.

 

[Lanefan]

The only problem with all of this is 'childish' is being taken as a negative.

Spin that around and voila: problem solved.