Dorks vs Bookworms

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2006-06-01 02:52pm

Dark Primus wrote:
Darth Servo wrote: I firmly consider myself in the bookworm category, even though I own over 1500 Transformers. ( )
May I touch you?

NO. Last time I checked, you're a GUY

Spacebeard · Post by **Spacebeard** » 2006-06-01 03:24pm

Darth Wong wrote:
That NOS Guy wrote:I'd like to think I'm with Darth Raptor in being some sort of daywalker. I go to cons, build models, and have done the occasional cosplay (though in my defense, it was Halloween).

I will not however, let any of that interfere with taking an outlook based on science and logic when doing something like a versus debate. I'd also like to think I counter-balance that further by trying to be as well-read as possible.

You just have to wonder where that line of forgetting rational thought is and what could push a person to cross it.
That's easy; they were never on this side of the line to begin with. There was always that group in high school that was too dorky to be cool, but too dumb to get good grades or take tough courses.

Then, depending on how wealthy their parents are, they either become philosophy majors or they work forever in a basement comic book store.

It seems to me that there are two variables that describe how you approach fiction: you can either take it casually or seriously, and you can approach it with your brain turned on or turned off. When you watch a movie for a bit mindless fun and forget about it afterwards, you're approaching it casually and without any critical thinking. If you're a film critic who watches a movie and then writes a review, you're approaching it casually but with your brain turned on. If you're Dr. Saxton and you watch a movie and then write a voluminous website quantifying the capabilities of the technology in its universe, you're taking it seriously and with your brain turned on. But if you're Bryan Lambert and you eagerly lap up action figures while arguing vehemently against anyone doing criticism or analysis, you're taking it seriously with your brain still turned off. I really can't understand that point of view at all.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-06-01 03:43pm

I just realised I know heaps of people like this. I recall that many of the emo/goth/sadcase people I know *also* go to movies dressed up, go to cons, buy toys they deem 'okay for grown up people'. They're not actually smart, they've just fallen into the same cracks as the retardedly dedicated nerd-people.

Ironic, really: by becoming a section of highschool who are unpopular, but *undeniably sucessful*, people like the traditional 80s glasses-and-calculator nerd has been joined by all manner of non-academic social rejects. Don't you see? They watch the same cartoons and play the same RPGs as the nerds, so somehow their university acceptance will transfer by osmosis. It's like all the lame emo morons at art school who have *no talent at all*. They're there because that's what emo people do to stave off 'christ you're whole life is a failure', not because they're actually artists.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-06-01 04:17pm

Stark wrote:I just realised I know heaps of people like this. I recall that many of the emo/goth/sadcase people I know *also* go to movies dressed up, go to cons, buy toys they deem 'okay for grown up people'. They're not actually smart, they've just fallen into the same cracks as the retardedly dedicated nerd-people.

Ironic, really: by becoming a section of highschool who are unpopular, but *undeniably sucessful*, people like the traditional 80s glasses-and-calculator nerd has been joined by all manner of non-academic social rejects. Don't you see? They watch the same cartoons and play the same RPGs as the nerds, so somehow their university acceptance will transfer by osmosis. It's like all the lame emo morons at art school who have *no talent at all*. They're there because that's what emo people do to stave off 'christ you're whole life is a failure', not because they're actually artists.

As they say, imitation is the highest form of flattery. I'm (or was, since I'm now a high school graduate

) squarely in the "aloof; not cool, and proud of it" crowd, but I still managed to get good grades, was respected by the jocks/bitches (high school girls are real bitches, you know?), and, in general, made myself useful and helpful, though introverted, to the school population. By contrast, there was a group which was also aloof, not cool, and proud of it; however, they had nothing useful to offer, and had no social skills whatsoever; they were universally despised.

It reminds me of something one of my good friends was recently ranting about: she took Japanese IV at uni this past year, and, apparently, most of the class was in it for the sake of learning something Japanese. She can go on and on about people who think being Japanese or being tied to Japanese culture is sufficient for being "cool"; apparently, most everyone else in her class fit the stereotypical otaku-who-thinks-otaku-is-a-good-thing: greasy hair; can quote anime like the Bible; thinks that because losers get chicks in anime, losers can get chicks in Japan; like anime simply because it's anime; etc., etc.

NoXion · Post by **NoXion** » 2006-06-01 04:17pm

Well, if a dork has no major interests ourside their chosen hobby, then I probably don't count as one, since I have a bookcase full of books on astronomy (Which I also have a GCSE for

), general science and militaria.
The closest I've come to cosplaying is running through the woods dressed in camo and a balaclava, shooting at my friends with a BB gun while trying not to get shot myself. It's fun.
As for models, I once tried to start collecting Warhammer 40,000 models but it got very expensive pretty quickly and I was fairly crap at painting. I do confess that only a couple of days ago I dragged out a load of cheap plastic toy soldiers and arranged them on a coffee table on my room grouping them by different weapon types in neat parade formations, before placing a few model vehicles that I had around them to represent their "armour division". I was bored, OK?

I guess I'm another one of those hybrids, but I've never looked down on any other hobby so I reckon at least I'm not an elitist asshole.

Lex · Post by **Lex** » 2006-06-01 04:25pm

ummm why do you have to be unpopular at school if you are a bookworm?

just asking....

Spacebeard · Post by **Spacebeard** » 2006-06-01 04:30pm

Lex wrote:ummm why do you have to be unpopular at school if you are a bookworm?

just asking....

Because all that time spent reading books is time not spent playing sports, going to band practice, or getting drunk. And many people spent time reading books because they were unpopular, not the other way around.

Sure, it's possible for an athletic and socially active person to also be well-read, but the word "bookworm" generally implies that a person is always buried in a book.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-06-01 04:32pm

Lex wrote:ummm why do you have to be unpopular at school if you are a bookworm?

just asking....

That doesn't necessarily follow; you may be more unpopular at school if you're a bookworm, but, as I said, bookworms can be liked and respected, if not considered close friends.

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2006-06-01 04:54pm

I can't really say I fall into either category, although I certainly do tend towards the "Bookworm" camp. I am a great fan of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Anime, but I don't buy every worthless collectible out there to validate myself, and I very, very rarely ever demonstrate such interests to any excess in public, simply because I don't feel the need to, although I won't deny them if pressed. Then again, at least now, I would say that I'm not really too aloof or "booky". I actively make an effort to fit in (perhaps too much, sometimes), too some extent, with most any social group, excluding the creepy extremes, be they uber-jocks, goth recluses, rednecks, etc., even though I don't really try to hide intellegence.

I think that is the most important part of the main issue; Bookworms can fit in with the rest of society if they want to, even if they sometimes don't. Dorks really cannot.

Sonnenburg · Post by **Sonnenburg** » 2006-06-01 05:30pm

I'm a bookworm with dorkish sympathies, I suppose. I've been known to buy the occassional bit of junk, but rarely do I ever keep it in the package unless it somehow actually looks better in the packaging.

But as I sit and think about this, I wonder if this might explain things like HeroClix and Star Wars Minis; there are some of us who would rarely ever buy a toy, but to have an excuse to play with a toy while simultaneously being engaged in a strategic thinking activity is nice. There can be a chance to indulge in dorkish activities without feeling like a true dork about it.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2006-06-01 05:31pm

One thing about the Dork Camp is that the ones I have seen accuse bookworms of ruining the fan experience when attempts are made to quantify and rationalize, but when bookworms see dorks doing the same thing and make similar accusations the Dorks shrug it off and say that bookworms are "too nerdy". Hypocritical bullshit.

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2006-06-01 05:41pm

I kind of think i would fall into the category of a dork if not for the fact i enjoy the technical aspects and scientific aspects of scifi, that is the attempt at rationalizing it. I do the same with everything, cartoons, comics, video games. I find it fascinating, and more entertaining sometimes than the actual product.

I also hate it when people say you cant analyse scifi or fantasy or cartoons, yes you can. Or i can anyway. Its fun actually, i think most of those people just never tried it. But then they may just want to be a 'poser nerd'--they spend time on easily done nerd stuff like collecting and chatting about it, but they hate to go deeper and really spend time on their 'hobbie' which to them is more just a way to mak ethemselves 'different' instead of a fun activity.

They're not a nerd because its fun, like most of us here i'd reckon, they're nerds cause its easier than other stuff in some ways. Just buya buncgh of collectibles and bingo, you're a nerd. They never look deeper than that.

So like i said, i like to think of myself as a standard-pattern nerd, no distinct alliances. A merc nerd i guess.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2006-06-01 05:49pm

I was one of the cool kids.

Spacebeard wrote:Because all that time spent reading books is time not spent playing sports, going to band practice, or getting drunk.

Two out of three, how did you know?

And many people spent time reading books because they were unpopular, not the other way around.

Or they had a weakness for smart girls (or at least girls with glasses who looked smart).

Sure, it's possible for an athletic and socially active person to also be well-read, but the word "bookworm" generally implies that a person is always buried in a book.

Which I think is a pity. I hung with jocks and other alpha male types because I was one of them. We were actually fairly friendly to "bookworms", and no it wasn't to get help on tests either. We didn't have much patience for weirdos who brought their multi-sided dice to class (I speak as a gamer, too), brought toys with them everywhere they went, or walked around with lab mice in their pockets.

This bozo who pretends to look down his nose at "bad" science fiction fans is a poser and a phony, as Wayne Poe's photos prove beyond any doubt. He's also a complete coward. The problem isn't so much that he's a dork. We all have faults, real or imagined. It's not so much that he's a self-hating dork. We all have issues. It's the fact that he tries to dump on others as a way of dealing with his hangups. Which is to say, he's a total loser.

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2006-06-01 06:12pm

Elfdart wrote: This bozo who pretends to look down his nose at "bad" science fiction fans is a poser and a phony, as Wayne Poe's photos prove beyond any doubt. He's also a complete coward. The problem isn't so much that he's a dork. We all have faults, real or imagined. It's not so much that he's a self-hating dork. We all have issues. It's the fact that he tries to dump on others as a way of dealing with his hangups. Which is to say, he's a total loser.

Very well put man.

Yes i was thinking that, he's really more of a 'fucking loser' (a common variant of the 'total loser') than a nerd.

Though deep down, i'm sure he stands out side of the Kappa Kappa Phi frathouse with his hands pressed up on the window while they have a kegger, and longingly wishes he was cool. Imagine those old 'A Christmas Carol' cartoons with the little poor boy looking into a store at food and looking all pitiable, but picture the kid wearing a Freakazoid costume and holding a toy range rover.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2006-06-01 06:38pm

This schmuck isn't even worthy of a decent Elfdart Flaming. He doesn't rise to One Dumb Twat status.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-06-01 06:56pm

Sure, it's possible for an athletic and socially active person to also be well-read, but the word "bookworm" generally implies that a person is always buried in a book.

That's not necessarily true and it doesn't need to be true. I'm coming around to the idea that this dumb jocks vs. nerds meme exists more in movies than in real life. My own high school experience doesn't bear this out; the valedictorian of the class behind mine was also the starting quarterback of the football team (he was good enough at academics to go to Penn undergrad and good enough at football to play QB at the college level), and the valedictorian of my class was the head cheerleader. Where I taught my internship, that's not the pattern at all: the athletes as a group tend to be smarter and more motivated than average, because the school didn't coddle athletes and they had to keep their grades up and discipline records clean to play.

There's going to be overlap between dumb bullies and jocks and outcast dorks and bookworms, because in athletics there's a role for sadistic meatheads and books are a common escape for lonely people, but smart and athletic aren't mutually exclusive.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-06-01 07:06pm

I reject both definitions; I'm a starwars geek.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-06-01 07:17pm

I noticed as my high school experience continued that the distinction between geek and jock for males slowly melted away, but the bitchy and cliquey girls stayed bitchy and in a clique all the way through.

Star-Blighter · Post by **Star-Blighter** » 2006-06-01 07:23pm

Does being a "fairly" well read gun-nut make me a bookworm? If so then I proudly wear the title for all others who love learning about projectile weapons and their history. Not that I know a whole shitload about the subject, but I can easily call bullshit when some poser tries to talk about my ass-cappers as if they know something about them when they really haven't even got a clue.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2006-06-01 07:31pm

Star-Blighter wrote:Does being a "fairly" well read gun-nut make me a bookworm? If so then I proudly wear the title for all others who love learning about projectile weapons and their history. Not that I know a whole shitload about the subject, but I can easily call bullshit when some poser tries to talk about my ass-cappers as if they know something about them when they really haven't even got a clue.

Yes it does *points at self*

So what guns do you want to own?

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2006-06-01 07:33pm

Definitely bookworm. My big thing is I'm also a collector, so I've still got old stuff (Gen 1 Transformers, Lego, K'nex), but seeing as how I have three bookshelves in my room, plus three containers with magazines and RPG stuff (half of which is settings I like the flavor for but have never played), I'm definitely into the "intelligentsia" camp.

Besides, Lego and K'nex are useful for creating models of stuff when I'm writing so I can describe it better

.

Spacebeard · Post by **Spacebeard** » 2006-06-01 07:53pm

RedImperator wrote:
Sure, it's possible for an athletic and socially active person to also be well-read, but the word "bookworm" generally implies that a person is always buried in a book.
That's not necessarily true and it doesn't need to be true. I'm coming around to the idea that this dumb jocks vs. nerds meme exists more in movies than in real life. My own high school experience doesn't bear this out; the valedictorian of the class behind mine was also the starting quarterback of the football team (he was good enough at academics to go to Penn undergrad and good enough at football to play QB at the college level), and the valedictorian of my class was the head cheerleader. Where I taught my internship, that's not the pattern at all: the athletes as a group tend to be smarter and more motivated than average, because the school didn't coddle athletes and they had to keep their grades up and discipline records clean to play.

There's going to be overlap between dumb bullies and jocks and outcast dorks and bookworms, because in athletics there's a role for sadistic meatheads and books are a common escape for lonely people, but smart and athletic aren't mutually exclusive.

As I said in the sentence you quoted, I'm not denying that people can be both well-read and athletic; that would be absurd and it would contradict my own high school experience as well: many of the smartest students were also on the track or swim teams. I was referring to the label "bookworm", which I tend to think is at least partly pejorative and implies that the person reads books at the expense of other activities. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I don't think too many of the smart, well-read, athletic people I knew in high school would have chosen to call themselves "bookworms".

Elfdart wrote: Which I think is a pity. I hung with jocks and other alpha male types because I was one of them. We were actually fairly friendly to "bookworms", and no it wasn't to get help on tests either.

Out of curiosity, were you only friendly with them inside school, or did they also get invited to your parties? That's what I'd consider the litmus test for popularity. On another note, it always seemed to me that certain groups of dork-types were far more insular and openly scornful of outsiders than the "popular" set ever was. As we can see, some of them grow up and carry scorn for anyone outside their little clique onto the Internet.

Elfdart wrote: This bozo who pretends to look down his nose at "bad" science fiction fans is a poser and a phony, as Wayne Poe's photos prove beyond any doubt. He's also a complete coward. The problem isn't so much that he's a dork. We all have faults, real or imagined. It's not so much that he's a self-hating dork. We all have issues. It's the fact that he tries to dump on others as a way of dealing with his hangups. Which is to say, he's a total loser.

The way he immediately shouted "Latent Swirlie Issues!" at anyone who challenged his "cooler than thou" bullshit spoke volumes, I thought.

By the way, going back to the more on-topic post I made earlier about people who take entertainment seriously without ever allowing any intellectual analysis of it: are there any examples of this outside of SF fandom? Sports fans, in my experience, are always conducting analysis; I imagine that they would find the notion that it's okay to dress up in a replica uniform but "taking it too far" to do a play-by-play analysis of the last game totally alien.

starfury · Post by **starfury** » 2006-06-01 08:09pm

As I said in the sentence you quoted, I'm not denying that people can be both well-read and athletic; that would be absurd and it would contradict my own high school experience as well: many of the smartest students were also on the track or swim teams. I was referring to the label "bookworm", which I tend to think is at least partly pejorative and implies that the person reads books at the expense of other activities. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I don't think too many of the smart, well-read, athletic people I knew in high school would have chosen to call themselves "bookworms".

Defintely, indeed as I recall from my High school days, the very best students were also on the sport teams, many of whom were to able excel at both and I was able to get along fairly well with them.

Star-Blighter · Post by **Star-Blighter** » 2006-06-01 08:13pm

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:
Star-Blighter wrote:Does being a "fairly" well read gun-nut make me a bookworm? If so then I proudly wear the title for all others who love learning about projectile weapons and their history. Not that I know a whole shitload about the subject, but I can easily call bullshit when some poser tries to talk about my ass-cappers as if they know something about them when they really haven't even got a clue.
Yes it does *points at self*

So what guns do you want to own?

Authentic AKs, MP 40, Mauser broomhandle... The list goes on but I do have few of my own:

12 gauge Ithica break-barrel, two Remington Express pumps (12 gauge also), Remington 700 .308, three .22 LRs for light target shooting and pest control.

Pistols include: Colt .44 WCF Sheriff's Model, a .22 maxi mag (can't remember what its called but thats the ammo it takes), and a Browing .25 automatic I keep in a croutch holster for when I go to the can away from home (I love this little fucker, so easy to reach in and pull it, then POP-POP-POP-POP-POP. Five rounds in the gut of the poor bastard who thought I'd be easy pickings on the john...).

I've shown you mine, would you due me the honor of showing me yours (no pressure, lots of gun enthusiest don't own much, its the passion that counts)?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-06-01 08:45pm

Spacebeard wrote:As I said in the sentence you quoted, I'm not denying that people can be both well-read and athletic; that would be absurd and it would contradict my own high school experience as well: many of the smartest students were also on the track or swim teams. I was referring to the label "bookworm", which I tend to think is at least partly pejorative and implies that the person reads books at the expense of other activities. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I don't think too many of the smart, well-read, athletic people I knew in high school would have chosen to call themselves "bookworms".

Maybe this is just a regional thing, but I don't have any pejorative association in my mind with "bookworm"; it's just someone who likes to read (usually as opposed to watching TV or playing computer games or some other sedentary, solitary hobby).

By the way, going back to the more on-topic post I made earlier about people who take entertainment seriously without ever allowing any intellectual analysis of it: are there any examples of this outside of SF fandom? Sports fans, in my experience, are always conducting analysis; I imagine that they would find the notion that it's okay to dress up in a replica uniform but "taking it too far" to do a play-by-play analysis of the last game totally alien.

Indeed, the most fanatical sports fans have committed reams of numbers to memory and obscessively watch analysis shows which break down film of games frame by frame. Ever watch Ron Jaworski on NFL Countdown? His segment involves him literally looking at a few plays frame by frame, stopping at critical moments to highlight the position of the players on the field. How that's any less dorky that freezing a Star Wars DVD to measure a ship is beyond me. It's curious that certain kinds of nerd snobs have less respect for careful analysis of entertainment as a hobby than the supposed enemy, sports fans.