I’ve read your comments, and I’ve thought about them, and my basic response is that I don’t see the need to apologise for being me. I am a geek. That is an accurate term for the way I see the world, and outside people who associate that with social disfunction are going to have to deal with that, because I know it’s not true. I have geeky hobbies. I have non-geeky hobbies. I’m cool with both of them, and, unlike Mike, I don’t agree with the equation that Geek != Cool. (Although I might use it if recreational drugs were substituted for geek.)
I can see your reasons for not wanting to apply the term to a hobby that you enjoy, but the subtext that’s coming through from your arguments and the people who are supporting you is that you’re embarrassed to talk about something that you love doing. I think that’s an awful shame.
I don’t mind people calling me a geek, I’ll even describe myself as one sometimes.
However I agree with Ryan that it is probably not a good idea to generally label LARP as ‘for geeks’ since many (most?) people out there view the term negatively. Doing so would (in my opinion) have a negative effect on NZLARPS and so, despite all the ‘reclaim the label!’ arguments, I feel it would be best avoided.
The same argument went on over the term ‘hacker’ 15 years ago. The term was never reclaimed (despite many efforts) and people describing themselves as ‘hackers’ were always viewed by outsiders as system crackers, vandals, and criminals rather than as talented coders.
I can understand Ryan’s point if it is “Let’s keep stereotype loaded language to a minimum when dealing with the press in order to not restrict larping to a particular box” but that’s about all I will agree with.
I think “cool” is entirely subjective. Mike’s idea of cool outlined above no way matches mine (not making a judgement on you, Mike, just saying that’s not even vaguely my cup of tea) and if that’s how larping had been pitched to me, I wouldn’t have been interested, no matter how “cool” getting drunk and high were considered. A diehard rugby fan and I will never agree on what is cool - he’ll most likely think my hobby is as lame as I think his is. I think larping is terrifically cool and that rugby is terrifically drole. He’ll think it’s the other way around. There is no definitive “cool.” And “geek” and “cool” are not mutually exclusive by a long shot, unless we’re in an American teen comedy.
I was going to post more but Stephanie summed up all my sentiments very articulately and I won’t be able to do better, so I’m just going to say “What Steph said”
I have been thinking about this a fair amount in the context of my personal experience. I think that accepting that I did things that could be described as ‘geeky’ and that didn’t bother me was a something I am happy I did. The opinions of others could only bother me as much as I allowed them to or attached a sense of shame to what I did. I am not ashamed of being a ‘geek’ if it means I can do something I enjoy.
I don’t really mind that for others the term may mean ‘socially dysfunctional’ to me it implies a sense of community and shared identity based on common interests and even occasional misconceptions. I personally have no problems with the term and in fact am quite proud of the community I am in.
Is being ‘cool’ still the objective? Would it make people happier if we somehow managed to have LARPing labelled ‘cool’ rather than ‘geeky’? I am not sure there is consensus on what ‘cool’ is but it seems to be something everyone wants, whether it is Mike’s NORML parties or my church camps, back when it was underground, no one seems to be able to agree on it. Apparently there is such debate about the term ‘geek’ as Ryan pointed out it is ambiguous. There is a strong argument that the majority of the general public find what we do ‘geeky’ I have been subjected to it quite a lot recently.
I mean to disagree with both Ryan and Mike with the utmost respect, both have been in this community far longer than I have.
I wrote this reply up a while ago and have since thought about it a fair amount. Ryan asked this ‘What exactly is achieved by labelling larp in a way that some larpers object to, that is highly ambiguous, and that many people consider derogatory?’ And all I can think of is some idea of ‘Geek Pride’ and is that worth antagonising people over? Probably not.
Stephanie/Anna et al, I wasn’t asserting that Geek = Uncool, and I apologise if it was taken that way. I was trying to say that what the Skirmishers were up to - in terms of an outsider point of view - was socially functional, and thus not of the (again, outsider perspective) “socially dysfunctional” aspect that is one of the stereotypical, mainstream understandings of the term “geek”. I see what we were doing as being niche, but no more than that, and I don’t think it is fair to assert labels onto what we did. We were who were were, and we did what we did. That’s it. It was larp and it was cool because we decided it was cool. So, please, can we respect each other by not applying unwanted labels ? Again, I apologise if my words did not convey what I meant, I meant no slight against anyone.
One of the problems with this discussion is that geek is a non-discrete term. One the one hand, there is “geek interest”. I wouldn’t even know how to begin to define this, nor would I seek to. Surely the value of a past-time is in the eye of the beholder ? I mean, if you enjoy doing something, does it even need a label ?
On the other is the mainstream stereotype of social dysfunctionality. Like Stephanie, I believe this to be a misrepresentation of our community, especially considering that larp is a specifically social form.
The point I was trying to make was that it is not accurate to characterise larp in Aotearoa as being comprised of a uniformly geek community. It’s not fair on those of us who see what we do as simply niche.
As I’ve said previously, if you want to characterise some of your interests (including larp) as being a “geek interest”, fine. I have no problem with that, nor do I proffer an opinion. Concomittantly, I would be obliged if you would pay me the same respect.
This is not dissimilar to the concept of word reclaiming. However, it is typically implemented in communities that feel sufficiently homogenous to agree that the reclaimed term could be used as in a self-identifying label.
Perhaps we could discuss positive phrases with which to describe our community? To me, the important aspects are:
Fun, challenging, inclusive
There’s likely a better set, anyone got any ideas ?
Agreed, if you read Slashdot, there’s plenty of people who talk about hacking as about grinding out quality code. But whenever I write a shameful piece of code (due to time or other restrictions, of course ), I always start the associated comment with "HACK: "…
Sorry to interrupt the current discussion, but returning to the 20/20 topic briefly - we’ve got more than half a dozen new people, strange people, in our nzLARPS database when I looked there this evening. I think people are googling and finding the nzLARPS website and registering there.
I’m going to be sending them a welcome email and direct them to the fantastic things we’ve got going on here
[quote=“Anna K”]Sorry to interrupt the current discussion, but returning to the 20/20 topic briefly - we’ve got more than half a dozen new people, strange people, in our nzLARPS database when I looked there this evening. I think people are googling and finding the nzLARPS website and registering there.
I’m going to be sending them a welcome email and direct them to the fantastic things we’ve got going on here [/quote]
Really? I don’t know how you read that into what I’ve written.
Imagine if larp had a lot of people involved who self-identified as “emo”. That’s not such a stretch, given how closely Vampire was associated with “goth” culture in the 90s. You might then have a emo pride movement describing larp as emo, and the general public saying “larp is that emo game, right?” I don’t have a problem with emo culture (I like seeing the look around actually, it’s more interesting than hip-hop streetwear) but I wouldn’t be happy about the whole hobby being described as emo just because some members of the community identify with it. You could make an argument that all the dramatic and emotional aspects of larp play are “emo”, and make a TV article focusing on those “emo” aspects of play and on larpers wearing emo clothes and saying larp is emo. That wouldn’t make it so, and it’s the same with the geek thing.
It’s not a slight against people who self-identify as geeks, emos, or anything else, and it’s certainly not embaressment about larp. I just think that using loaded and ambigious terms to identify larp as synonymous with a single sub-culture is an ineffective and inaccurate way of promoting our hobby, and that it gives some members of the community a label they don’t want, because they don’t view themselves as part of that sub-culture.
[quote=Ryan]Imagine if larp had a lot of people involved who self-identified as “emo”. That’s not such a stretch, given how closely Vampire was associated with “goth” culture in the 90s.[/quote]Then right now we’d be talking about the appearance that members of the hobby are telling people that it’s great, so long as you ignore the emos. That’s what it feels like reading what you have to say. Not “Yes And” but “No Instead Of.”
That may be what it feels like to some readers. But that’s not what I’m actually writing, or how I feel about it.
I’m all for tolerance - I don’t care if larpers identify with any subculture, be it geek, emo, jock, or whatever. Or if people are of any ethnicity or religion or sexual orientation for that matter. I just object to it being called a “geek hobby”, or a “white hobby”, or a “pagan hobby” because I find such terms misleading and exclusionary. If larp is a geek hobby - and I’d argue it’s not - where is the place in it for people who don’t see themselves as geeks? The drama kids, the stick-jocks, the genre fans and the casual costumers? Or people like me, who just enjoy interactive stories as much as other kinds?
I’m so misunderstood! Where is an emo smiley when I need one?
[quote=“Ryan Paddy”]That may be what it feels like to some readers. But that’s not what I’m actually writing, or how I feel about it.
I’m all for tolerance - I don’t care if larpers identify with any subculture, be it geek, emo, jock, or whatever. Or if people are of any ethnicity or religion or sexual orientation for that matter. I just object to it being called a “geek hobby”, or a “white hobby”, or a “pagan hobby” because I find such terms misleading and exclusionary. If larp is a geek hobby - and I’d argue it’s not - where is the place in it for people who don’t see themselves as geeks? The drama kids, the stick-jocks, the genre fans and the casual costumers? Or people like me, who just enjoy interactive stories as much as other kinds?
I’m so misunderstood! Where is an emo smiley when I need one? [/quote]
I don’t think you are misunderstood Ryan, I think what is misunderstood is what you are trying to achieve here?
If you want the club to have a uniform statement on what Larping is or is not possibly it is a discussion to be having with the committee?
Otherwise we understand where you are coming from and some of us respectfully disagree.
Where this pertains to the 20/20 article is that you had a collection of people voicing their personal opinions on their definition of Larping. As neither the club nor the tournament was mentioned by name it is entirely irrelevant what others think of their use of the classification as geek, as the term was used by those who believe larping is a geeky pursuit as is their right to do so.
I believe everyone on this forum has made up their own minds as to whether they agree with the geek thing or not so it seems continuing the argument is a little redundant. However if you wish a “we are not geeks” statement to be part of the clubs mission statement (or whatever equivalent the club has) it might be best to bring it up with the committee.
What I was trying to achieve is to comment that I’d prefer if people don’t describe the hobby as geeky, and why. I’m hopeful that some people may read the reasons and think, “that makes sense,” and perhaps keep it in mind when presenting larp to the public or new larpers.
It’s not anything to do with the society or any organisation or individual. So it’s fair to say that you have me wrong on that count. It’s just a general comment about how I’d prefer larp to be presented in general, especially by larpers, with my reasons.
I agree the discussion has run its course some time ago, I only continued posting to clear up a misinterpretation of my meaning. I didn’t like the idea that you and Steph thought I was being hurtful about people who identify as geeks or with “geekdom”, and wanted to clarify that’s not how I feel.
I think I grok your position: that you assert the right to describe larping in any terms you want.
However, I am interested in how taking a “larp=geek” position enhances the strategic kaupapa of the Society - namely, growing our larping community, a strategic objective that I think can be taken as axiomatic.
How do you see this position contributing to growing the number of active larpers? What are the pros and cons, if any ?
Perhaps your answers will enable us to find ways to attract even more people to take up larping. Growing our participant base is certainly a subtext to this thread that I believe has widespread support and agreement, and I think any and all insight into this is valuable.
), I always start the associated comment with "HACK: "…
[/quote]