The Horrors Of Blood Gulch

-Do you ever wonder why we're here?
-It seems to be one of life's great mysteries.

However,today we are here to talk about Blood Gulch.
Those of you,who are familiar with the Halo-games probably know,that it's the ideal location for a game of Capture The Flag;two bases in a boxed canyon in the middle of nowhere.
But we're not here for a multiplayer-match,instead we'll take a closer look at the dark events of The Blood Gulch Chronicles in Red vs Blue.
For those of you wondering if I just decided to let my crayons fight, Red vs. Blue is a Machinima-webseries,that started in 2003.
The events of season 1-5 took place mostly in Blood Gulch,so this story-arc is known as the aforementioned Blood Gulch Chronicles.
Even though this era of the show was mostly centered on humor,some of the events bring up some real nightmare fuel,when you examine them closer and take into account some information aquired in later seasons.
The first one is the whole premise itself: Two opposing armies fight in a galactic civil war. We first learn that all of this is bogus during the Blood Gulch Chronicles,when the Blood Gulch Crew learns,that red command and blue command are the same. Since the events shift our attention towards different matters by introducing new threads for them,we know there's something wrong, but have no idea,what's really going on. When the Recollection-Saga swings by later, we learn via Agent Washington that the Reds and Blues throughout the galaxy are actually a bunch of soldiers considered to be the worst of the worst,unfit for actual military service due to different reasons, so they got put into different scenarios that may or may not be encountered by the elite Freelancers (the scenarios are stated to be possible in-universe, but some of them are highly unlikely -time travel is concidered 'scenario three'-) for training purposes;basically they are all just cannon fodder.
Then we have the matter of the AI known as OMEGA, or O'Malley,as it calls itself.
In the Halo-verse,AI's are based on actual people, created by cloning their brains and then killing them off,until their brain patterns manifest as an AI. While in Halo the process is only allowed to be done with the brains of dead people, we never hear about such restrictions in Red vs Blue.
When Curch gets team-killed by Caboose in the beginning of the show, he soon returns as a ghost,shortly after the Blues radioed command,requesting a new team-member to even out the numbers. Due to no ble soldier being available on a short notice, command 'hires' a Freelancer named Tex. We soon learn that Tex is Church's girlfriend and that Freelancers have an AI,to help them in the field. Tex arrives in Blood Gulch and dishes out some damage toward the Reds,but quickly gets killed by a grenade. She also returns as a ghost,while her AI OMEGA possesses Caboose,making him more violent. Church and Tex now also have the ability to enter people's minds or to possess them,so they get O'Malley out of Caboose's head. The rogue AI jumps into the medic Doc,turning the pacifist into the main-villain for most of the Blood Gulch Chronicles.

The most horrible thing about this is that we on multiple occasions see Doc swap between himself and the O'Malley-persona instantly,so that actually three people are having a conversation,when there is only one other person around. During those moments, we also learn that Doc is still sentient the whole time,like sitting in the backseat of a car,which means the pacifistic medic has to watch his own hands trying to murder his own associates. 

The Reds and Blues on the other hand can't just decide to make their lifes easier by knocking Doc out and putting him into a cell,since O'Malley -as mentioned before,can easily switch his host.

Let me whip out my imaginary brush and paint you a picture: Just imagine you're having a fun night at a bar with a few friends. Suddenly, your old buddy Steve starts laughing like a maniac and declares he's going to kill you all and drink wine from your skull while conquering the world. You lean in to ask if he's allright, when he suddenly grabs the back of your head and smashes your face into the table. Your friend Diane helps you up,while five other people manage to subdue Steve and tie hhim up. Suddenly,Diane begins to laugh....

I don't know about you,but I would be more than horrified...

Of course,OMEGA isn't the only artifical intelligence we meet, there are also F.I.L.S.S., the Blues' smart-tank -who gets renamed Sheila- and Lopez, the Reds' robot soldier,who's voice module is broken and only allows him to speak spanish,Andy the bomb... and Gary,a computer who sends Church back in time in an attempt to fix things. Or at least that's what Church is made to believe. 

 The problem is,whatever Church tries,he actually ends up causing every problem that happened at Blood Gulch, from the death of the Blue Commander,to his own death and many mory things that went wrong,all seems to be his fault.

When another freelancer by the name Wyoming enters the scene, Church finally recognizes,that something's wrong about Gary and figures out his real identity: GAMMA, Wyoming's AI partner.

Gamma cooked up a bunch of simulated scenarios for Church to make him feel like everything that went wrong was his fault -in the Recollection-Saga and Project Freelancer we'll come back that,when we learn why GAMMA did that. But until he learns figures out the connection between Gary and Wyoming, Church is let to believe, everything that happened to him or his friends was the result of his own actions.

Wyoming himself has another role in this whole mess: he teams up with GAMMA and OMEGA to kidnap an alien baby and use it to enslave a whole alien-species.once he is finally defeated he reveals this plan to the Blues and Tex, stating that -opposite to Church's assumption of the plan being foiled- Tex will happily let OMEGA rejoin her and finish the job,now that she knows about it . Much to Church's horror, he's right and Tex begins broadcasting to lead OMEGA back to her,despite her her earlier eagerness to kill the AI once and for all.

Church's plan to confuse OMEGA by having the whole Blood Gulch-Crew broadcasting on an open channel gets foiled by Tex,who knocks out every single one of them,once OMEGA posses them and have each and every single soldier in Bood Gulch -except for Church,who doesn't really feel any difference- declare an urge for power and conquest. It's mostly played for humor,since every character keeps traces od his original personality, but again, if you think about it,it's incredibly frightening.  Church is once more the interesting case, stating he still feels the same, but for the time being,it was just assumed tha t he's such a mean asshole,that OMEGA didn't make a difference -again,we'll return to this,once we learn more during the Recollection-Saga.

Church tasks the Reds to disable Tex' ship,so she can't get away,in case he fails to stop her, but he quickly regrets the decision to put Sarge on the job, when Andy the bomb blows up aboard the leaving shuttle,leaving Church behind in the knowledge that -since didn't specify his order or find someone more competent for the job, he basically gave the order to kill the woman he loves.This mistake seems to break his spirit for the moment,so when Tucker asks him,what they're going to do now, he replies that he doesn't care and leaves,stating that he's going home.

While he's actually just returning to the blue base,this shock to him end the Blood Gulch-Chronicles after five years of humor disguising some pretty horrible themes.

Return next time,when we move on to the Recollection-Saga,when we learn more about Church,AI's and freelancers and realise that Blood Gulch was only the beginning. 

~Kirby Out

Anouncement: Upcoming theme-month

Since I feel like being less lazy and turn more active instead,I decided to turn November into a theme-month.

Let's see if that helps :3

And since Red vs Blue recently finished it's 13th seaon, I hereby declare November 2015 to be RvB-Month.

 Cooming soon.

~Kirby Out 

No More Unnecessary Deaths,Please

A recent  Facebook-post by my pal The Amazing Abdi got me thinking.

Sometimes, people die. It's not nice,it's not pleasing,but it's a fact.

And sometimes, our favourite fictional characters die,too. But do they have to?

Yes,sometimes they do. We may not like it, ut a constant plot-armor for everyone would make their story unsatisfying.

Hold on,I'm not trying to say,I enjoy to see the hero failing. 

But why do characters in escapist fiction have flaws? It's so we can relate to them. Could you relate to an immortal, unfailing demi-god? Well,maybe if you're an incredibly arrogant prick,but then you wouldn't need escapist fiction begin with, now would you? After all,YOU DA MAN,right? 

Why do need (or prefer ) heroes or characters,we can relate to? Because they still save worlds,defeat villains,find love or whatever the story is about - or if it's supporting character, they can help the hero in their chrisis to overcome a big obstacle preventing them from reaching their goal. Even if they don't save the world themselves, they are an important part of it and it wouldn't have been possible without them.

But they still are far from perfect, sometimes they lose and sometimes they die.

I'm a fan of superhero-stories,so I'll mostly look at them for now. There was a time,when superheroes didn't die and normally didn't fail to save their loved ones. After all,they were the hero.

But in 70's Marvel-Comics did the unthinkable: Spider-Man's longtime girlfriend Gwen Stacey died. The villain Green Goblin threw her of a bridge,Spider-Man used his web to catch her,whiplash broke her neck. She was dead.

This was a game changer,suddenly no one was save anymore. It marked the end of the silver age and made even important characters mortal ,even out of origin stories. Editorial motives aside (rumors are,part of the reason for killing Gwen off was to prevent the relationship to go to the next level, namely marriage or at least Spider-Man revealing his identity to her), this was a big shock,since it just hadn't happened before  but now since the plot-armor was off,super-villains got more menacing,more deadly,more dangerous. Other characters followed,but over the years,stories kept getting darker and sometimes characters got wasted.

During DC's Infinite Chrisis,Superboy-Prime alone kills a whole bunch of Titans,just to establish him as a villain.

Countdown killed a complete universe by a misterous plague,that mostly occured to have reason to bring Ray Palmer back (who vanished after another story gone wrong,but I'm not gonna talk about Identity Crisis today, though it will eventually get it's time).

Over the years,characters died,but every now and then,they were brought back to life by one way or another. 

And as much as I love some of them,that kind of bugs me.

Remember how I mentioned the importance of relatability in the beginning? 

How many people do you know,who came back from the dead (I'm nottalking about CPR after a short moment,but actual return long after their burial)?

Sure,I can believe,that in a world filled with super-human beings there might a magical way to raise someone from death (Like the Lazarus-Pit brought back Jason Todd), but if every other dead person is brought back,it starts feeling cheap and death start becoming just an inconvenience;sacrifices become meaningless. 

So dear writers,please think if you really told all stories you wanted to tell with a character before you let him die.

Also:please no more needless killing jusst for shock-moments. If a character dies,it should be a huge impact on everybody involved.

Spider-Man almost broke is code and came dangerously close to pounding Green Goblin to death after he lost Gwen.

Batman considered to finally take out Joker for Good after Jason died.

All of New York mourned Peter Parker's death in the Ultimate Universe (which -even though Miles Morales became his successor also got undone recently,in my opinion demeaning his sacrifice).

Another important point: if it's a hero who dies,make it important,let them go out swinging.

When The Flash perished in Crisis on Infinite Earths, he gave his life to destroy the Anti-Monitors weapon threatening all of reality.

When Supergirl died (also in Crisis On Infinite Earths) she probably did more damage to the Anti-Monitor than the whole Justice League combined up to this point,pounding him into the ground and just got taken out by one lucky antimatter blast.

In the animated show Young Justice Flash (Barry Allen) and Impulse  (Bart Allen) are circling a device to syphon off it's energy,so it won't reach critical mass and destroy the earth's magnetic field. When they are not generating enough kinetic energy to do the job,Kid Flash  (Wally West) teleports in to add his share of kinetic energy,even though his top speed is way slower than Flash's and Impulse's.This in turn makes him a catalyst for the energy,leading to him get hit by it multiple times,causing him to vanish.

Damian Wayne ignored his father's orders to stay in the Batcave,when his mother attacked Gotham City and rushed into action to help the Bat-Family and Batman Inc.,saved many lives, and finally fought a fully grown, genetically enhanced clone of himself,while his mother's troops kept shooting Arrow's at him,before he got impaled on a sword.

When Ultimate Peter Parker died, he had been previously shot when he pushed Captain America out of the way of a bullet (who then left the unconscious, bleeding teenager behind, because he's a jerk like that), and still took on the remaining five of the Sinister Six (Goblin had recently murdered Octavius,because he wanted out and just return to being a scientist),taken down Vulture,Electro,Kraven and Sandman and finally faced off against a Green Goblin,who had just absorbed The Human Torch's powers in addition to his own,was barely able to stand,but got a second wind,when Goblin threatened to kill everyone he knew and loved and beat Goblin up with a truck,before he finally succumbed to his injuries,dying peacefully with the knowledge that he saved his aunt.

THAT is how you let a hero die.

But does a death really count,if whoever died just comes back?

I'm fine with DC's Brightest Day,since there was a complete storyline dealing with a dozen heroes and villains returning from the grave after the Blackest Night,so there was actually some thought put into it -plus,not everyone stayed revived,be it due to failing their mission or by their own choice-;Barry Allen literally outrunning death to the end of time and back seems somewhat acceptable,especially since it took about two decades till us readers got reunited with him;but Ultimate Peter Parker being declared immortal due to the OZ seems cheap to me,it reduces his heroic death to a shock moment with little more consequences than a couple of broken bones -aside from traumatizing those close to him.

And here we are at the final issue:DON'T KILL JUST FOR SHOCK!

The probably biggest offender of this is -once more - DC Comics.

In their incredibly bad miniseries Cry For Justice (which also will get it's own criticism sooner or later), some JLA-members decide to get proactive due to some of them having been killed lately. Without telling much more now,I jump directly to one of the worst moments of comicbook-history (aside from Peter Parker selling his marriage to the devil...NO,I will never let that one go): A couple of bombs need to be defused,the JLA does their best to stop them,but one of the devices goes off,causing an earthquake. One of the destroyed buildings was home to Red Arrow Roy Harper. 

Like him or not,you can't deny,that Green Arrow's former sidekick had a pretty unique status in the superhero-community. Not only was he a former drug addict,who overcame his addiction with the help of his mentor (even though this fact gives a bitter irony to his original alias 'Speedy'), he also fathered a child with the assassin Cheshire, and raised the little Lee-Ann Harper as a single dad (you probably see where this is going).

When DC misinterpreted the meaning of 'character development ', they decided to turn Roy's life into a misery,not only having him lose an arm during Cry For Justice, but also his daughter.

To make it clear:in order to have Roy Harper become an addict again and give him a 'reason' to irrationally leash out at his friends,who tried to support him -and he wasn't acting like a mourning father,but like an irrational asshole-,DC decided to kill of the innocent, walking,talking ball of adorable that was Lee-Ann; just so they could throw Roy into Rise Of Arsenal,where he would get high and talk to a zombie-ghost hallucination of her.

I might sound biased,praising mortality as part of what makes characters relatable,but condemning the death of a child, since they sadly happen,too.

But this different. This is wrong. This is killing of a unique supporting character, just for shock. This is the equivalent of me pushing someone in front of a train,just to remind people to be careful at the station.

Even to someone with my lax morals,that's just wrong.

So,dear publishers,PLEASE give the idea some thought,before you kill off a character. If you do,let them go out swinging. If they do,honour their legacy,don't bring them back about a year later.

AND PLEASE -

please don't kill children just for shock value.

~Kirby Out

New Stuff Is New

There have been some changes lately. 
1. I got two new jobs -one with kids (they are ok, and so are most of the parents this time), one in a cinema (which reinforced my theory,that the only way to work with people and not starting to hate them is hating already to begin with).
2. I've got a new place. Now living in a shared flat, I finally moved away from this smalltown hell tainted by memories, that kept eating away my sanity. In the near future, another room-mate will move in - my ex's boyfriend (yeah, I know... a kinda weird combo^^).
3.I've slightly redesigned the blog (too lazy for bigger changes, I know, nobody's surprised by this.) I also brought up a new category called 'Kirby sees the world', where I will keep track about ... well, me seing the world. I'm not going to travel a lot all of a sudden, but since I used to hole up a lot in my room of the last years, going out equals seeing the world,too ;-)


Kirby out.

The Retcon, Continuity's biggest enemy

Do you remember the Internet in the late 90's? Beeping Modems,slow connections, family members forcing you to get offline so they could use the phone,AOL-CDs... And how is it today? About one third of the worlds population uses it, porn everywhere, we're connected all time,new social networks popping up all the time,porn, MMOs are feasting on people's souls, there are thousands of blogs where people nobody knows talk about stuff nobody cares fo...wait,never mind...Did I mention there's a lot of porn? But I'm not here to discuss the high amount of porn on the Internet... In fact, I just wanted to use the Internet-part as a small Introduction to reach the social networks. There are a lot of them and -luke may others- I use some of them to inform my -probably not caring - followers about the absurd things that may occure,when a social Network tries lead your attention toward something particular. Facebook,for example recently checked the stuff I like and follow,discovered some Marvel- and Spiderman-Stuff and decided to suggest me to like Joe Quesada. NO. JUST NO. I wont like Joe Quesada. I'm not saying everything he did is bad or stupid. BUT he also made One More Day. And to make things worse,he also made One Moment In Time.

And that finally leads to today's topic: Retcons.

You see, ongoing series tend to develop a continuity - some more then others, but still.

Continuity is an important part of ongoin story-telling. It puts events in order and establishes them as part of the overall background-story. When you have long-running stories like Batman, Spider-Man, Grenn Lantern, Flash, Doctor Eho or many many more, which are around for for decades, it can get confusing for new people joining the story, which is why sometimes reboots are happening. 

Reboots can be okay, since they are meant to make things more comprehensible for newcomers by ignoring establising a new Origin or a sometimes a new status quo.

Some people like it,some people don't.  I think, it depends on the matter at hand: rebooting the Spider? Man movies seemed good; DC's New52...not so much.

A problem with reboots is, that they sometimes really just want to establish a new Status Quo, but they apparently didn't really think through what to change and what to keep. Look at the New 52, for instance: some characters were completely reinvented, others -like the Bat-Family- just had a few changes. Nothing wrong with that so far. But why on earth give Nightwing a new costume without telling why?(plus I think the blue was more his style. .. black and red looks so dark and gritty, that's not really Grayson's thing.)

Aaaanyway, time to get back to the real problem at hand: Retcons.

What is a retcon?

Sometimes, writers decide that they can't work with the conclusion of old events anymore and decide those events need to be changed. Often this is achieved by time travel, magic or some other super-natural way. Sometimes, things are retold out of another perspective, which reveals things that were unknown up to this point, which causes things to change.

The latter can be an acceptable way to change established facts (I said CAN), the first... not so much.

My favorite (read: most despised) example for a bad retcon would the aaforementioned One More Day.

In One More Day, Marvel Chief-Editor Joe Quesada decided to retcon Peter Parker's marriage to Mary-Jane Watson out of existence. 

Now, the normal approach would be a divorce,  or -as a more extreme measure- kill one of the characters involved in the marriage. 

Quesada however decided to flush the promise, he gave Spidey-fans that 'there would be no magical retcon to fix the marriage' doen the toilet when brought Mephisto into this. Yup, THAT Mephisto.

At the time, Marvel was just dealing it's civil war and Peter decided to give away his secret identity and get registered.  Since we all know that superheroes not only have fans, but also one or two enemies, nobody should be surprised to learn, that this was a bad idea.

When Spidey held a speech about this whole registration-act business,  an assassin hired by the Kingpin tried to deliver a 50.kal-present right into Pete's skull. Naturally, his spider-sense allowed him to dodge the bullet, but since dodging things doesn't just make them go away, Aunt May took the bullet. Hey, no big deal. We're in a comic-universe and it's a simple bullet wound,right? WRONG! We have lots and lots of doctors, geniuses like Tony Stark or Reed Richards, former surgeon and sorcerer surpreme Dr. Strange, who's magical power is pretty close to bending reality at his will... and nobody can do anything. And no, it wasn't an instant death for aunt May. She was brought in a hospital,where she even told Pete to let her go, since she had a good life. Naturally, Peter Parker ignored that whish and decided to go and find a cure, so he doesn't have to face the consequences of his actions. Good thing that Spider-Man was never about responsibility. ..oh, wait.

Anyway, Mephisto pops up and offers to save her life, of course for a price. Since souls get boring, he wanted something different: Pete's marriage. 

He wanted to retro-actively undo the wedding while leaving both Parker and Watson with the feeling that there is something missing in their lives.

Again, since spider-man was never connected to responsibility,  Peter Parker agrees.

So much for 'no magical retcon.'

Eventually,  the writers realised how stupid that was and it was retconned in One Moment In Time in a way that was even more stupid. (Please, don't ask)

Long story short: I hate retcons, no matter if they were done good or bad. When something was established, deal with it. If you can't,  find a way to change things WITHOUT pissing on the past. Yes, I'm also looking at you, Day Of The Doctor. I mostly liked you, but bringing back the Timelords was bull-crap. Yes, it was necessary, due to the regeneration-limit, but I'm pretty sure there would have been other ways around.

No matter who you are, no matter what you do: if it haplened, don't change it. Continuity is there for a reason.

Kirby out (oh by the by, I changed my alias -it's shorter... and easier to make people call me 'Kirby' than 'RestlessEntity' :3)

Stuff I need to say

Awesome Weekends are awesome.

I'm pretty sure, nobody's surprised by that statement, but I felt like pointing it out.
A little background:

Some time ago, me and my best friend slightly drifted away from each other, caused by some stupid stuff, that didn't even concern any of us directly.
Sad, but it happens.
So when I visited her over the weekend, we talked everything through (plus everything else that felt wrong or might could have caused this) and not even worked it out, but also realized again, that every fear of loosing the other, getting less important or replaced is complete and utter bullshit.

It may sound weird, but I'm feeling whole again. Whatever was missing, it's back where it belongs.
We've been taking care of each other for years, loosing that would be devastating.
Then I received a call last night. My wonderful soon-to-be room-mate and my amazing ex-girlfriend were having some fun, but realized they were missing me and felt the urge to tell me about it.
This made me pretty happy, but it also made me think:

Since my best friend moved to another town, I was restless and uneasy. I kept getting into trouble because I had nobody to calm me down. Then I was introduced to my now soon-to-be room-mate, who took it upon her to look out for me and keep me steady. I've been told multiple times now, that I made some remarkable, positive developments over the course of the last year, which is basically thanks to her.

My ex was the first person who actually was able to give me the feeling of being loved. She also forgave me for not being able to treat her the way she'd deserved it and is still working on making me stop tormenting myself out of guilt and shame. She not only forgave me my mistakes, but is still convinced that I'm a far better person then I'd ever imagine.

I thought about those three wonderful women and how much they're having a positive impact on my life.
I thought about their significant others and how cool they are with the fact how much space I take in the lives of the women they love (and with the fact that I threatend to skin them with a rusty blade,if they ever hurt those women).
Special Kudos to my Ex's man for that, from what I've been told, most guys would turn into stupid, jealous idiots, if their woman would still hang out with her ex on a regular base.

I thought about my internet-friends,who take their time to cheer up a guy on the other end of the world, even though they never met him (or only once). A bunch of amazing people who were either originally crusading... wait... that's not how it's called anymore,is it?
Anyway, that's when we met and I've grown very fond of her and she's always able to cheer me up, even if I sometimes think, she's trying to sneak-preach to me. And I love even that.
For the others... Well, I guess it started with me being a random guy who kept randomly commenting on thoughts they shared on Twitter. But again, These guys and gals turned into what I'd actually consider pretty good friends, even though I normally discuss less serious business with the guys. That's something that was always easier with women (and even then it's hard enough).

I'm thankful to my US-ladiesfor constantly cheering me up, no matter what's bothering them or how much they're fighting their own downs.

And..
I also thought about my best and oldest friend, who's been keeping m in line for 18 years now, even when he could't be physically present, because he moved to France.
See, I met this guy back in second grade and we got along pretty well (Back then, I wasn't that hard to be around). He always had to talent to act as calm anchor to troublesome old me. It was only when he left, that I realized how important this friendship was to me. Long story short: My grades dropped in an alarming rate and I alienated myself moreand more from other and basically became an asshole.Luckily, I soon met my female best friend, who managed to regulate the process very well, together with the previously mentioned ex.
But whenever I reflect my life, I have to realize that everything good that happened, everybody wonderful person I met or was introduced to, all that was made possible by him. I pick anything that makes me happy and look back on the chain of events that led me there -things I've done, that caught my interest in something or that made people introduce me to somebody who later took an important role in my life- and it is always somehow linked to him. I wonder if he is actually aware of that. I also wonder, if he even has the slightest idea what it meant to me, when he said he wants me to be his best man in a few years.
Eh, he probably does. After all, he knows me like nobody else does.

Anyway, right now, I have no idea how I sometimes feel lonely. I have such amazing friends to back me up.

And god help everyone who dares hurting them. It's true, I tend to be a little overprotective when it comes to my lady-friends, but I don't care. Hurting those who a close to me is a berserk-button, that should actually be listed on TV-Tropes, because the level of blind rage that gets triggered by doing so, even scares those who are listed above.

Another sad part about friendship is how fragile they can be sometimes. Looking back, I realize that there are a lot of people, who I just don't talk to anymore. Some left, sometimes we just got different interests over the years and some - not many, but a few- just didn't fit in my life anymore.
Speaking honestly, I have to say that sometimes I miss them, but most of the time I don't really think of them anymore.

So, what is the message I'm trying to carry out here?
I think it is, that good friends, who are always there for you, no matter what's going on or what you did, should be treasured. When I look at those I listed, they seem to be many. But when I compare them to those, I've lost over the years or to the sheer mass of people, I couldn't get along to begin with, I realize how lucky I actually am to have that many amazing friends.

If you got people like that, keep them close, cherish them and do whatever it takes to protect them.

RestlessEntity Out.

What's a Geek?

Yup, I'm still alive. I know, I became pretty lazy when it comes to writing, but in my defense: I had to fight off an evil writer's blockade. Now it's gone , but I stumbled upon a new problem: I don't like my writing style anymore.

And that was when I decided to revive the blog. After all, if I keep working, I should be able to regain my drive, right?

 

Anyway, I'll try to get on a regular schedule (bwahahaha),at least until I'm ready to get back some other projects which might steal some more time so that I'll have change my schedule here again and... well, at least I'll make sue not to make one-year-break or some crap like that again.

 

Anyway, today's topic are some thoughts on geekery.

See, there was this little discussion in a facebook-group if geek-culture should stay exclusive or if it should be more included in the mainstream-community.

Even though generally think classification to be stupid, I actually got curious: what exactly defines a geek?

If somebody would ask me if I'm a geek, I'd probably say yes, but if I”m completely honest, I never though about what actually makes me a geek. My love for comics or games? Some would say that makes me a nerd. Hell, I'm sure there are people who thinks, geeks and nerds are the same.

Let's face it, terms like 'Geek', 'Nerd' or 'Dork' got pretty mixed up during the last years. That means research-time (and maybe two future topics). 

'Dear Internet, would you please tell me what exactly defines a geek?'

Ok,opening Google, insert 'geek', hit search aaand... well, fuck me sideways, that's a lot of hits.

New search, this time adding 'definition' to the search-parameter. 

Ah, that's better. A definition right on the head of the page, then some dictionaries. So let's check out the first five hits: The Google-definition, Wikipedia,Urban Dictionary, The Merriam-Webster Dictionary and the Thesaurus.

 

Since I love my definitions plain and simple, let's start with Google's page-header. By the look of it, I'd say it's also taken from a dictionary, but I don't know which one.

 

 

 

Huh. I have to say, I'm not happy about this.

 

“unfaishonable or socially inept”. Does that mean, if you feel confident around other people, you'e not a geek? That sounds stupid. And don't make me even start about 'unfashionable'. What does even make someone fashionable (And here's another possible future topic)?

 

“eccentric devotion to a particular interest” seems like something I can accept, but the example computer-geek seems to narrowing it down to a fringe group, which make it dissatisfying. But then again, a proper research never contains only one source, so let's check out what Wikipedia has to say about it.

 

Of course I'm aware that Wikipedia isn't the most credible source since basically everyone can fool around with it. But let's give it a chance.

Oh that's nice, the page informs me,that the entry has some issues.

Anyway, according to Wikipedia, geek is “a slang term originally used to describe odd or non-mainstream-people”, ranging from “expert or enthusiast” to someone “heavily interested in a hobby” but is mostly used pejorative for a “peculiar or otherwise dislikable person, especially one who is perceived to be overly intelectual.”

So.. it's basically description for someone with special interests and a great knowledge about it, but it gets also disgraced as an insult for people who are jealous about others being more

being more intelligent?

Wait,the article goes on. Let's see.

The Term is also used in a proud way as a self-reference, so it gained the additional meaning of “someone who is interested in a subject for its own sake.”

What else do we have?

The definition-section basically tells us that there is no clear defintion and that there are many categories of geeks, poviding us with the most commonly know categories: science, math, history, computer, gaming.

The Impact of geeks on society isn't exactly what I'm looking for, and I'm not interested in fashion,so the “geek-chic'-section isn't that helpful either (except if you want to know more about geek-glasses and hipster-glasses and that proud self-proclaimed geeks dislike geek-chic fashion.) NEXT.

 

The Urban Dictionary says ...A LOT. Like always, there are a lot of definitions, so I just take a look at the first page and sum it up.

 

 

 

This one made me smile.

 

 

One of the entries notes that Geek should not be confused with Nerd. And points out that only a geek would waste on the internet, defining geek on urbandictionary.com.

Another one goes back to the historical meaning of circus freaks and states that it know describes someone getting paid to do work that's 'consodered odd or bizarre by mainstream society'.

There's also a note that -unlike 'nerd' which is always used devaluating – it often carries a positive connotation when it's used by someone who's part of the group and is only used in an insulting manner by outsiders (uhm... isn't that almost everytime how it works?)

Another Entry tries to compare normies,geeks,nerds and dorks. Interestingly, this is the first time that it's actually stated that geeks are what's considered 'socially normal' and just are experts on certain topics.

 

I really like the next entry: It clearifies, that geeks aren't computer people, but simply posses a very dep understanding about of certain topics, because they are basically obsessed with it. It also points out, that beeing a geek isn't restricted to certain topics, but open for everything (and lists music and cars to make this point). I like that.

Then we go back to the usual judgemental crap like lack of participation in sports, interest in computers, crude sense of humor and negative attitude toward common society. BLAH.

 

Time for a cross-reference with some more serious dicitionaries.

 

Merriam-Webster gives us the usual historical definition with the carnival performers, follows up with 'a person often of an intellectual bent who is disliked and finishes with an enthusiast or expert, but takes again the the clichee-route, using computers as example.

 

Thesaurus actually dissappoints me by simply saying 'odd person' and 'computer expert' and adding some judging synonyms.

 

Since the definitions are not really clear, I decided to ask someone for help, who gets often connected with the term geek and actually owns his fame to that connection. So I wrote an email to the Internet-celibrity Brentalfloss to ask him for his definition of a geek.

 

A few hours later, I got an email with the following definition:

“Geek= someone who's enthusiastic and analytical about a certain topic. You can be a sci-fi geek or a flamingo geek or a muscle car geek (as opposed to a nerd, who is called a nerd because he or she is into something nerdy).”

 

 

There are a two things I really like about this definition:

 

1. it's plain and simple.
2. It offers examples, that prove the general clichees to be narrow-minded.

Of course, If we think of the apparently brain-damaged sportsfanatics who kept picking on us -well, on some of us- back in school, calling us geeks in the process, I doubt they would have been happy, if we'd told them, that they are too geeks in their own way.

So maybe not everyone who qualifies for being a geek wants to bee a geek.

But I suppose that's the same for every subculture: In order to be part of it, you have to match certain criteria and one of them is feeling like you're part of it.

In Order to be a geek, you need to be passionate about whatever you like, but also need to admit, that you're a geek.

And why not? Being a geek is a fantastical thing: It's your permission to be utterly obssessed with something, know everything regarding it, freak out at the most trivial news about it -and enjoy all this. And do you know, what's even better? You don't even need the permission – you're a geek,that's what you do.

 

So, back to the original question: Should geekdom be included in mainstream-society or should it be an exclusive thing: I don't really think that we can influence that directly. As long, as society keeps it judgemental ways, we'll always be exclusive. As long as an adult getting excited about a kids-show gets looked down on, we're something special. As long as people even care about a difference between a comic-book and a graphic novel, as long as people think, there is something wrong about obsessing about a topic, 'outing' yourself as a geek will make you different.

And You know what? That's perfectly fine. I don't care what others think about it, I love being a geek.

Sure, I'm not that good at science and anything technically more advanced then a string telephone might confuse me just by doing what it does, but there are topics I know a lot about, actually enough to annoy everyone around me without repeating myself. And I'm proud of it. I like it. And I love meeting people who are as obsessed about it as I am.

What some people consider geekdom getting assimilated by mainstream-culture is the so called 'geek-chic' I tried ignoring earlier. People try to pose as geeks by wearing certain clothes or accesoires. Does wearing a Metal Gear-Shirt or using a TARDIS-bag to carry my things make me a geek? Does Having A Sonic-Screwdriver, A Pipboy-Bobblehead or an Assassins Creed-Statue make me a geek? No, it just shows that I'm a fan.

 

 

Bottom-line: Geekdom should stay exclusive, because that's not actually a proof of torlerance within society. But geek-purists can relax, because it's all about the attitude.

 

 

RestlessEntity out.

 

 

Thanks to BrentalFloss for providing me with a proper, acceptable definition.

Follow him on Youtube ( www.youtube.com/user/brentalfloss ) and on Twitter ( @brentalfloss ).

 

People, And Why They Suck - Leute, Und Warum Sie Ätzend Sind

Meh.
Just meh.
I don't know why, but I feel pretty annoyed these days.
Well, that doesn't mean,I don't know what's annoying me, hell no.
I just can't decide what's the worst of it.
People, for starters. People are pretty annoying and they are everywhere. Why are are there so many people, no matter where I go? Is there a conspiracy? Who need so much people? And why are they all talking? Can't they just shut up? And maybe stop being so many? All those people  everywhere... It's dusgusting.
Oh,and you know what's worse?
The People you know. Normally,there is a reason you know them and that makes it worse, because some of them, you see on a regular base. And regarding the fact,that most people are idiots, this could be a pain in the ass. Who wants to hear the stupidity of some really dumb people over and over again?
And even that can be cranked up to eleven: Enter People you actually like.
I've been busy keeping those few in numbers.
But still some of them manage to annoy the hell out of me.
As soon as I start to act -what they think to be- out of character,they keep annoying me.
Seriously, just because I try to hold back most of the time,that doesn't mean I'm not going to tell people they're stupid, right in their faces.
It also doesn't mean, I won't let go off a slightly part of my inner rage, when I feel like doing it.
And it defenetly doesn't mean, I'm completely heartbroken or anything stupid like that, just because a relationship just ended.
Sure, I won't do a happy dance about it, but stop blaming my - in your opinion irrational- behavior on this little event, for fuck's sake.
Maybe you just don't know me as much as you thought?
After all,I'm still just a sociopath who keeps lying about himself.
The best thing about these last few days?
The even lesser amount of people, about who's opinion I care (You didn't really think, just because I like someone,I automatically care about what he's thinking about me,did you?)proved me again, that at least they are reliable and didn't annoy me about this stuff. They accepted it,when i said "I'm fine", because they know I'll talk about stuff,when and if I feel like doing it, instead pissing me off by not accepting "I don't want to talk about it"...
Seriously, People have a strong tendency to suck.


Basically, it's like Mycroft Holmes said in "Scandal in Belgravia": "All lives end. All hearts are broken. Caring is not an advantage."

Bah.
Einfach bah.
Ich weiß nicht wieso, aber ich bin in letzter Zeit ziemlich genervt.
Naja, das heißt nicht,dass ich nicht weiß, was mich nervt, Himmel bewahre.
Ich kann mich einfach nur nicht entscheiden,was am schlimmsten ist.
Leute zum Beispiel. Leute sind ziemlich nervig und sie sind überall. Warum sind überall so viele Leute, egal wohin ich gehe? Ist das eine Verschwörung? Wer braucht so viele Leute? Und warum müssen sie alle reden? Warum können sie nicht einfach die Klappe halten? Und vielleicht damit aufhören, so viele zu sein? All diese Leute überall... das ist ja widerlich.
Und wisst ihr,was noch schlimmer ist?
Die Leute die man kennt. Normalerweise gibt es einen Grund, warum man sie kennt und das macht es noch schlimmer, denn einige von ihnen sieht man regelmäßig. Und wenn man bedenkt,dass die meisten Leute Idioten sind, kann das echt ätzend sein. Wer will die Dummheit einiger wirklich dämlicher Leute immer und immer wieder hören?
Und selbst das lässt sich noch steigern: Auftritt der Leute,die man mag.
Ich bin stehts bemüht, ihre Anzahl möglichst gering zu halten.
Und trotzdem schaffen es einige von ihnen, mich zu Tode zu nerven.
Kaum fange ich an,mich - ihrer Meinung nach - ungewöhnlich zu verhalten, hören sie nicht auf,mich zu nerven.
Ernsthaft,nur weil ich mich meistens zurückhalte - primär,da ich sonst nur noch mehr genervt würde- , heisst das nicht,dass ich ich Leuten nicht direkt ins Gesicht sage,dass sie dumm sind.
Es heisst auch nicht, dass ich nicht in geringen Maßen Dampf ablasse, wenn mir danach ist.
Und es heisst verdammt nochmal auch nicht, dass ich komplett von einem gebrochenen Herzen verzehrt werde, nur weil gerade eine Beziehung endete.
Klar, ich werde darüber nicht gerade einen Freudentanz veranstalten, aber hört auf mein -eurer Meinung nach irrationales - Verhalten auf diesen kleinen Vorfall abzuwälzen, verdammt nochmal.
Vielleicht kennt ihr mich einfach doch nur nicht so gut,wie ihr dachtet?
Schliesslich bin ich trotz allem nur ein Soziopath ,der über sich selbst unehrlich ist.
Das beste an den vergangenen Tagen?
Der noch weitaus geringere Anteil an Leuten, deren Meinung mich tatsächlich interessiert 8Ihr dachtet doch nicht ernsthaft, nur weil ich Jemanden leiden kann, interessiert es mich automatisch,was er von mir denkt,oder?) hat mal wieder bewiesen,dass ich mich auf sie verlassen kann, und sie mich nicht wegen irgendwelchem Quatsch nerven.  Sie akzeptieren es,wenn ich sage "mir geht es gut", denn sie wissen dass ich , sollte ich Bedarf haben, über irgendwas zu reden, es auch tun werde, anstatt mich mich zu nerven und es nicht zu akzeptieren,wenn ich sage "Ich habe keine lust drüber zu reden".
Irgendwie haben Leute die Tendenz, einfach zum kotzen zu sein.


Im Prinzip ist es,wie Mycroft Holmes  es in "Ein Skandal in Belgravia" sagte: "Alles Leben endet.Alle Herzen werden gebrochen. Mitgefühl bringt keinen Vorteil."

Distractions and Stuff - Ablenkungen und Krams

It's been a long time. Why has it been such a long time since my last post? Well,there are actually two reasons:

1.I was busy
2. I'ma lazy fuck.


Yes, I know. Everybody,who ever knew me, might be totally surprised by this,but I'm really able to be busy.
Seriously, I tried to get some motivation to learn for my practical exam (which I passed,by the way), I'm writing on three different projects -four, if you count that thing for school and even five, if you count this blog-, and there is a lot of roleplaying going on these days.
Well, of course I'm still abandoning my writing projects,when I'm stuck, but I intend to finish them one day. ALL OF THEM.
seriously, the statistic is a real downer...
The Fanfiction? Stuck on chapter 2.
The Novel? Stuck on chapter 4.
The Screenplay? Way to slow progress in Scene 2.
The Poem/Children's book? Need to be finished in five days.
The Blog? Oh hey,there's a squirrel...


But the roleplaying keeps me up. I still make some mistakes as a DM, but I don't think I suck as hard as I did when I started.
And now that I've got a second group for Shadowrun, I'll be playing on more regular base.
Yes,I know. In fact, we all know... More roleplaying means, I'll  be distracted even more.


Oh,now that I mention distractions, I finally started watching Doctor Who.
I know, it's a shame I'm not already watching the Show for years,but...
I've been distracted, I'm sure you got it by now.
But what shall I say? That's the way my mind works and I'm pretty sure, everything else is boring. Just like breathing.

Lange ist's her. Warum ist's so lang her,seit ich zuletzt einen Post verfasste? Tja, hierfür gibt es 2 Gründe:
1. Ich war beschäftigt.
2. Ich bin eine faule Sau.


Ja, ich weiss. Jeder,der mich jemals kannte wird komplett überrascht von dieser Neuigkeit sein,aber ich bin tatsächlich in der Lage, beschäftigt zu sein.
Ernsthaft, ich habe versucht,ein wenig Motivation zu finden,um für die praktische Prüfung zu lernen (die ich übrigens bestanden habe), Ich schreibe an drei verschiedenen Projekten -vier,wenn man das Ding für die Schule mitzählt und fünf,wenn man auch noch diesen Blog einrechnet- und dann ist da momentan noch einiges an Rollenspiel im Gange.
Natürlich breche ich meine Schreibprojekte nach wie vor ab,wenn ich festhänge,aber ich plane, sie eines Tage zu vollenden. ALLE.
Ernsthaft,die Statistik ist irgendwie deprimierend:
Die Fanfiction? Hängt in Kapitel 2.
Der Roman? Hängt in Kapitel 4.
Das Stück? Kommt viel zu langsam in Szene 2 voran.
Das Gedicht/Kinderbuch? Muss in 5 Tagen fertig sein.
Der Blog? Oh,hey ein Eichhörnchen...


Aber die Rollenspiele muntern auf. Ich mache zwar als Spielleiter immer noch einige Fehler, aber ich bin nicht mehr ganz so mies wie am Anfang.
Und jetzt, wo ich noch eine zweite Gruppe für Shadowrun habe, werde ich auch regelmäßiger spielen.
Ja,ich weiß. Wir alle wissen es.... Mehr Rollenspiele bedeutet, dass ich noch mehr abgelenkt sein werde.


Oh,wo ich gerade von Ablenkungen rede, ich habe endlich angefangen, Doctor Who zu schauen.
Ich weiss, es ist eine Schande, dass ich die Serie nicht schon seit Jahren schaue, aber...
Ich war abgelenkt,ich denke mal, das hat jetzt jeder verstanden.
Aber was soll ich sagen? So arbeitet mein Verstand nunmal und ich bin mir ziemlich sicher, dass alles andere auch langweilig ist. Ungefähr so wie atmen.

Buses and Behavior - Busse und Benehmen

Why seems every public transit to be at least in parts an asylum? Seriously, at first glance you may find many different types of insanity. School kids with monkey-like behavior, People who keep staring in a way, you'd think theyr minds are as empty as a bottle of water in the desert, people who are talking to themselves all the time (no headset, I checked) from time t time a woman who's laughinh like a subtile version of the Joker (keep in mind,that it's the subtile part, that's really freaking me out) and finally those weirdos who still have the balls to take a nap between all those strange behaving people (guilty as charged).But what's bothering me the most,is the fact, that social manners seems to be disabled the second people are getting on the bus and „Every man for himself“ kicks in again (respectively the hypocrisy gets disabled and the typical egomania gets fully in charge...I'm a dreamer,not an idiot. Of course I don't think,people are good [please don't kill me for genralization]). Seriously, why do the kiddos need an extra-seat for their bags while old granny with an ill foot need to fight for their balance? And why am I the bad guy, if throw said bag out of the bus, the next time the door opens or alternatively drag the kid from the seat? Sure it might be a bit harsh, but when the bus keeps on moving,the old lady is thankful... at least one person in this roadster of madness.

Warum sind öffentliche Verkehrsmittel eigentlich gleichzusetzen mit Irrenhäusern?Es scheint,als würde man dort diverse Variationen des Irrsinns finden,zumindest auf den ersten Blick:Schulkinder,die sich wie Affen benehmen,Leute,die leer vor sich hin starren, Leute die energische Selbstgespräche führen (Ich hab drauf geachtet,da war kein Headset) ab und zu mal eine Frau,deren lachen wie eine subtile Joker-Variante klingt wobei gerade das subtile dran beängstigend ist - und schließlich diejenigen,die tatsächlich den Schneid haben,in dieser Konstellation auch noch gelegentlich zu schlafen (ja,ich weiß,dass letzteres ich selbst bin).Doch vor allem ist es entnervend,dass scheinbar sämtliche sozialen Strukturen und Verhaltensweisen beim einsteigen abgegeben werden und sich plötzlich wieder jeder selbst der nächste ist (bzw. die Heuchelei abgegeben wird und die Egomanie noch deutlicher zutage tritt.... ich bin ein Träumer,kein Idiot,natürlich weiß ich,dass jeder zuerst an sich denkt [für diese Verallgemeinerung bitte nicht lynchen]) Ernsthaft,warum brauchen die Kiddies heutzutage einen Extraplatz für ihre Tasche,während die Oma mit ihrem kaputten Bein stehen muss? Und warum ist man plötzlich selbst der böse,wenn man nach mehreren erfolglosen bitten besagte Tasche schließlich kurzerhand an der nächsten halte stelle aus dem Bus wirft oder wahlweise besagtes Kind vom Sitz reißt? Zugegeben, das mag zuerst etwas drastisch sein,aber spätestens beim Ruck des nächsten Anfahrens ist die alte Dame dankbar.... wenigstens eine in diesem Mobil des Wahnsinns.