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."

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.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
If you are not talking about evolution then why mention evolution?

It was your example, you tell me.

In any case, if this data is to believed, then by the early 1800's there were only 12% of the population who were literate, so for the four and a half thousand years that humans have been writing, not many of them have been doing it. We did not even break the 50% mark until the 1950s. That is not a very long time to evolve something, especially if there is no environmental pressure to select for it, unlike the pressure on Elephants for example.

In comparision 100% of humans have been seeing and listening for over 300 thousand years. So it is no wonder that we are better at it.
I am not an expert on these things, but it seems to me that the “evolutionary” difference between seeing flora and fauna and seeing text is de minimis. The core issue in both is attaching the correct meaning to what we see. Distinguishing Proust from porn- or choosing an example with environmental pressure behind it- between a “Welcome” sign and a “High Voltage” sign is little different than discerning the differences between a scarlet king snake and a coral snake. Ditto things like the warning labels on various toxic household substances or safe operation instructions on everyday gizmos, gadgets and machines.

Yes, why would there be a decline now when it is easier then ever to watch or listen to something else rather then read?

It’s also easier than ever to read something, especially with mobile devices.

In fact, mobile devices are one reason some peope can continue to read. Variable text size was the #1 reason for getting my Mom her first iPad and reader apps for the various ePub formats. The relative size of a tablet as compared to a large-print hardcover book also makes them immensely easier for her to physically handle. Combined, those two factors mean she hasn’t bought a book or magazine in a decade, but still is able to read daily.

Add in the ability to get free books from the library or from sites providing copies of publications in the public domain...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

5ekyu

Hero
Iirc a story told to me in college was that one of the earliest written essays that has been uncovered was a sumerian rant about how "kids these days" dont know how good they got it and are slackers...
 

Shasarak

Banned
Banned
It was your example, you tell me.


I am not an expert on these things, but it seems to me that the “evolutionary” difference between seeing flora and fauna and seeing text is de minimis. The core issue in both is attaching the correct meaning to what we see. Distinguishing Proust from porn- or choosing an example with environmental pressure behind it- between a “Welcome” sign and a “High Voltage” sign is little different than discerning the differences between a scarlet king snake and a coral snake. Ditto things like the warning labels on various toxic household substances or safe operation instructions on everyday gizmos, gadgets and machines.

Except that there is a specific involuntary reaction built into your brain that detects snakes. Why? Because the people without that reaction got bitten by snakes and died.

And why then do we not have the same evolutionary pressure in regards to high voltage lines? Because we dont evolve ourselves we just evolve the high voltage lines to stop people touching them. If you look at a sign warning about high voltage you will notice that there will also be a picture of electricity for those people to lazy to read the words.

It’s also easier than ever to read something, especially with mobile devices.

In fact, mobile devices are one reason some peope can continue to read. Variable text size was the #1 reason for getting my Mom her first iPad and reader apps for the various ePub formats. The relative size of a tablet as compared to a large-print hardcover book also makes them immensely easier for her to physically handle. Combined, those two factors mean she hasn’t bought a book or magazine in a decade, but still is able to read daily.

Add in the ability to get free books from the library or from sites providing copies of publications in the public domain...

If you told me that your mum only uses her ipad to read books and newspapers then I would believe that.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Except that there is a specific involuntary reaction built into your brain that detects snakes. Why? Because the people without that reaction got bitten by snakes and died.

That’s for snakes in general. We recognize snakes and snake-like fauna as you describe.

But we also distinguish between different kinds of snakes. We’ve figured out there’s some that can kill us (coral snake), and some that can’t (scarlet king snake). That’s not entirely evolutionary, that’s learned. Arguably, that’s education overriding an instinct in a limited way.

And why then do we not have the same evolutionary pressure in regards to high voltage lines? Because we dont evolve ourselves we just evolve the high voltage lines to stop people touching them. If you look at a sign warning about high voltage you will notice that there will also be a picture of electricity for those people to lazy to read the words.

The Darwin Awards beg to differ.

(BTW, you still haven’t clarified- to me, at least- as to why you raised the evolutionary argument in the first place.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Shasarak

Banned
Banned
That’s for snakes in general. We recognize snakes and snake-like fauna as you describe.

But we also distinguish between different kinds of snakes. We’ve figured out there’s some that can kill us (coral snake), and some that can’t (scarlet king snake). That’s not entirely evolutionary, that’s learned. Arguably, that’s education overriding an instinct in a limited way.

Is there many people that can do that by just sight? And if they can tell the difference then does that help the person bitten by the wrong one?

The Darwin Awards beg to differ.

At this stage the Darwin Awards highlight the exception rather then the rule. Accidental electrocution is between 0.2 to 0.6 per million (in 2011) so could be even less by now.

(BTW, you still haven’t clarified- to me, at least- as to why you raised the evolutionary argument in the first place.)

I raised it because you seemed like you wanted to talk about it.
 

5ekyu

Hero
Is there many people that can do that by just sight? And if they can tell the difference then does that help the person bitten by the wrong one?



At this stage the Darwin Awards highlight the exception rather then the rule. Accidental electrocution is between 0.2 to 0.6 per million (in 2011) so could be even less by now.



I raised it because you seemed like you wanted to talk about it.
"Is there many people that can do that by just sight? And if they can tell the difference then does that help the person bitten by the wrong one?"

Was digging nightcrawlers for fishin' next to grandma's fence. Nearly lost fingers when she thought a bigger worm was a sksne and came on seeing a hoe like a mad woman.

That woman hated snakes. But she made the best pancakes I have ever eaten, bar none. Secret was lard!!!

From then on, our "evolution" told us to wait until she was inside before diggin' near her fence.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Is there many people that can do that by just sight? And if they can tell the difference then does that help the person bitten by the wrong one?
Distinction between the species is pretty simple if you know what to look for, namely, which colors border each other on the snake. “Red and yellow, kill a fellow. Red and black, friend of Jack.”

(Once you’re bitten, it’s best to know if you need antivenin...and if you have the right kind.)

I raised it because you seemed like you wanted to talk about it.

How? Why? I wouldn’t have brought it up because AFAIK, there’s no direct link between the last few hundred thousand years of our evolution and literacy rates. It’s just a side effect of our intelligence.

Here’s the thing: it takes a long time for species changes due to evolution to pop up in a noticeable way. 300k years is an eyeblink at that scale. And in that time, we’ve witnessed an increase in the use of symbolic information system literacy- be it hieroglyphs, letters, kanji, computer codes, emojis or what have you- go from zero to the vast majority of members of our species. It’s a nice increasing curve on the scale of humanity’s existence, but it’s like a spike at the evolutionary scale.

Given the shape of its curve on our timescale, wouldn’t that be an argument against it being an effect of evolution?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Forgot to address this:

If you told me that your mum only uses her ipad to read books and newspapers then I would believe that.

Why would you believe that of her? She’s 72, not a technophobe.

FWIW, besides reading, it’s a way for her to shop, keep up with friends & family, get concert tickets, shop, watch videos (mostly music and funny pets- especially border collies), shop, time shift TV shows, accesss online-only programming, and until December 2018, a way for her to do some of the tasks of running my father’s medical practice.

Oh yeah, and shop.
 

Shasarak

Banned
Banned
Forgot to address this:



Why would you believe that of her? She’s 72, not a technophobe.

FWIW, besides reading, it’s a way for her to shop, keep up with friends & family, get concert tickets, shop, watch videos (mostly music and funny pets- especially border collies), shop, time shift TV shows, accesss online-only programming, and until December 2018, a way for her to do some of the tasks of running my father’s medical practice.

Oh yeah, and shop.

You said that you got it for her so she could read, and now she is also using for all the other things that people can use Ipads for?

Called it.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Yes, I do. And it is nonlinear. There will be dips and peaks, sometimes at variance with the overall trend. Dead ends, even.

But I didn’t make the evolutionary assertion. And the obvious counterpoint to your proposal is that a decline in non-mandatory reading would be against the expected trend. Is it a momentary dip? Don’t know.

Humans as a species have been reading for thousands of years. Most of the reasons why literacy was not commonplace were societal- the costs of educating the masses, the belief that certain people should not be educated, the belief that society NEEDS an uneducated underclass, etc.- not limitations of the human animals themselves. Over those centuries, the general trend has been towards marginal increases in readers per capita.

Then Gutenberg dropped the cost of making books exponentially cheaper. Societal and pseudoscientific barriers to literacy have been eroding.

So why a decline now?

What decline?
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top