Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

So I am not sure this will resonate with anyone but I am nearly anti-conformist. It is a flaw but I am not so irrational as to believe that doing the opposite that others do is a virtue in it of itself.

The issue I guess I have is that I dislike feeling like I am being told to react to something to such a degree that I will immediately take the opposite stance even when I know that I am going too far with it.

For example I know Shakespeare is overrated and that his influence on modern writing is exagerated. I know I hate several of his plays and I will argue that they weren't very good. At the same time however I know that many of the 'flaws' in his plays are not nessisarily those of the plays but more that they do not have the same effect in contemporary times. For example as much as I hate Titus Andronicus (and boy do I) and actively find it silly and even stupid... I know that it actually is following a formula that those at the time would have found poetic and not silly at all (It, from what I can tell, is the equivilant of a steriotypical action movie except probably better.).

Or George Orwell (of whom I only know for ONE book that being 1984... a book I found rather boring with a main character I didn't care about and a setting that was just dull to me. Which I don't actually hold against the book itself, I just find hopelessness to be boring and the exploration of why everything is hopeless to be fruitless). I actually go waaay to far with my criticism of his work. What I hate is hearing about how prophetic he is and how he had such a deep insight into humanity when a lot of his work is actually derived from the time it was made or just outright untrue guesses on the nature of humanity. I often go to far and argue against this like I am saying "George Orwell is bad" in fact one time I said "George Orwell is overrated and often talks out of his butt".

I'd also say "well also look at almost any of most posts" but that has more to do with the fact that I have developed a bad habit of prefering to describe things by its flaws rather then its assets. A tendency that used to be far worse trust me, where I'd describe something as "Good" by its lack of flaws rather then by any sort of merit.

I have a strong tendency to, in attempting to either be objective or fight against hype, to argue and make points in entirely negative terms. I still believe it is important not to allow myself to be moved by hype and that objectivity is a worthwhile goal, but it is hard to balance trying to push away hype and just creating the exact opposite "Negative backlash". There is a reason why people like hype, even if they dislike it when it backfires. A person likes the feeling they get when they are looking forward to something, they love the idea of something they have in their head, all hype really is, is excitement. I don't even consider "hype" to really be truthful or false, it to me just feels like a imposition or a push towards a certain possitive oppinion.

This has worked against me as well. I have a strong aversion to popular things and have found myself intentionally seeking out the obscure and unpopular often leading to subpar products and stories. I have dropped things because I couldn't stand the idea that what I was watching was very popular. The same time I also know that I have atypical tastes and a tendency to take everything absolutely seriously. I have stake in being serious, if I am not taking something seriously then I am not trying to experience it. I cannot take something as "fun" because fun to me includes what I can squeeze out of it, what I can gleen from it, what ideas form from experiencing it. Everything I watch must be analysed, deconstructed, and thought about no matter how silly or inane.

I don't know if anyone is in the same boat or has any of their own words to share, but go ahead. I am not sure I even stayed on topic, but it was something I wanted to say.

[Shadowlord]

Sounds like you're experiencing way too much Hype Backlash, and so now you're practicing Hype Aversion. You may be missing out on a lot of good stuff by having too high a standard for it, but I'm not going to say that you should force yourself to watch/read/play something that you just don't enjoy, such as what you said about not liking hopelessness. I even have a whole bunch of things I don't like, but I don't deliberately avoid things just because other people like them, I just don't let hype affect my expectation of how something is going to be. Of course, it helps that I frequently don't expect something to be better just because it's by the same people who made something good in the past, too. There have been too many examples of someone making something good and then massively screwing up the next thing, such as Deus Ex and Invisible War (which isn't even that bad when you compare it to other shooters instead of to Deus Ex, it's just not AMAZING like Deus Ex, and at the time (and for a good while after) had insane hardware requirements), or someone else getting to make the sequel and screwing it up, e.g. MoO I and II were great (at the time - but the AI is terribly dumb and easily tricked), and then III where III was awful and by someone else, or someone making something which was hyped as being awesome and even had great reviews, but was an absolutely terrible game when it came right down to it (GalCiv II, awful tech descriptions, annoyingly annoying buildings-on-planets system, annoying space station placement, awful movement system which let you literally capture all of an opponent's planets in one turn while they could not do anything to intercept you, etc), or games coming out broken and unfinished (Sword of the Stars II).

I know what I don't like and where it conflicts with other folks' likes, and that guides my decisions. For example, I don't like puzzle games (Portal was okay. Portal 2 got VERY ANNOYING eventually and I never got more than halfway through), platforming annoys the heck out of me, most comedy shows are grating as hell (often, it's the laugh tracks, if the humor isn't bad - yet I like the Daily Show and Colbert Report, and even liked both Dr. Strangelove and the Marx Brothers' Duck Soup (which is from the 30s)). I quit most MMOs that I try in much less than 20 hours, and almost every 'adventure game' I have tried has frustrated me to the point that I quit forever (I'm of the opinion that if I have to look for a walkthrough, the game is terrible and the developers are terrible and they should be ashamed of themselves regardless of how glowing the reviews were). The reason I hate most MMOs tends to be either the skinner boxes, or how combat or leveling is handled. I'm absolutely bored with anything with zombies and if a game has zombies I simply ignore it, and I'm also bored with the Civ franchise. (Actually, the zombie thing kept me from looking at Space Pirates and Zombies until it showed up in whatever recent Humble Bundle; It had zombies in the name, so I ignored it. Oh well! I consider that more of a problem for whoever named the game, than for me.)

[Snowblind]

I'm also somewhat adverse to popular things. I don't own a smartphone and buy nothing but generic products. I dunno if this is my inner hipster or something, but it's basically how I've always approached things. Hyped products are rarely worth the price mark up.

1984 was probably one of my favorite books though, it's unique in that it is nothing but misery and defeat all around. It doesn't follow the 'hero always wins' standard of mainstream literature. I dunno how prophetic it is, although it is a pretty accurate idea of totalitarian societies of the era it was written in. I have never liked Shakespeare though.

Zombies are stupid and overhyped. I'm absolutely sick of movies based off children's toys or comic books. They need to stop that shit.

[Knirisk]

Yep. I'm almost the exact same way. Almost, but not quite.

At a certain point, I was like you, pretty much anti-everything-popular, but then I realized that it doesn't matter what everyone else likes, but what I like. Sometime after I left high school and started going off on my own, I started finding things that I like, rather than rejecting stuff that felt like it was being forced on me. If you feel like you're being pressured by hype, know that it's just people being excited, not that people are trying to get you to partake in the hype, although some might try.

Seriously, man, just disregard it and go do stuff you like to do. Honestly, I'm not sure if you're in the same boat, but looking back, it feels like it was just a defense mechanism for the preservation of my own...well, I'm not sure what to call it...ideas? Ego? Something of that sort. Have enough confidence in yourself to sort out the bad from the good and just let it all in. I thought The Dark Knight Rises was a fine movie, though I heard a bit of criticism about it.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Personally, I think Miranda could just be completely removed from the plot and it would've been much better off. Has anyone else thought that there would be like literally nothing changed in the movie if she were not included?

(Also, for that matter, once I got out of high school, I started realizing that 1984 really wasn't all it was cracked up to be. Like the nonconformist that I am, I still enjoy Fahrenheit 451, but partly because everyone else in my class hated it for some reason that I never understood.)

Hyped products are rarely worth the price mark up.

This is a valid reason to be anti-conformist, but there are a lot of alternatives like GoG and stuff. Plus, some games aren't even marked up that much and yet they're still pretty darn good. (The Portal games, for example.)

[Shadowlord]

I like it when it's not guaranteed that all the heroes are going to survive, when there actually is some danger and some may not survive.

This is why I love the A Song of Ice and Fire novels (the first one being A Game of Thrones). (Not so much the tv show)

[Starver]

Interestingly enough, OP, I don't think you're going all anti-hype at all.

It's very popular to not like Shakespeare, for example.  "I was forced to read Shakespeare in school, and I couldn't understand it" is perhaps one of the more conventional views to express, although at least you don't fall into this trap (a trap set by unimaginative teaching of his works, but I'm not here to argue for Shakespeare[1], nor the works of Eric Arthur Blair).

It also seems very popular to express one's opinion that one is useless at maths, and other pursuits, in a way that reminds me of the non-conformity of style in becoming a goth (in which you conform to the goth style, in the stead of a normal (some might say) 'healthy' mix of fashion and style).  Whether there's a foundation in that approach, or a fad, is often an eye-of-the-beholder issue.


As for me, well, you can tell I have a non-dislike for the bard (but I'm not here to convert you), but I also rail against popular culture.  I don't twitter and have never facebooked, for a start, although I have read twitter from afar (and tried to help others use it, to varying success).  I also (as I've just read from an intermediate poster) don't have a smartphone, despite (or because of?) being technically-minded, and my phone that I do have doesn't even have a camera on it (I have a camera for taking pictures, instead... novel idea, eh?).  I've no idea who is the latest Pop Idol/American Idol/X-Factor/whatever person (although I did watch the Strictly Come Dancing show (US equiv: Dancing With The Stars, I believe) on TV last night, because I was at my parents and they were watching it (maybe in lieu of anything else), while I was visiting.

I'm not saying that I'm more non-conformist than you, nor claiming that my non-conformity (by dint of not being a clone of a whole lot of other so-called non-conformists, that I know of!) is of any better a quality.  I just don't think that disliking the things that you indicate you dislike sets you up in this camp at all.

Also, all the stuff in the As For Me paragraph from Facebook onwards could be equally well read as me being welded quite firmly to the ideals of the "intellectual elite" who pooh pooh trends...  Is that as bad/as good/whatever as your anti-"intellectual elite" stance?  Oooh, I don't know.  I suppose it depends on who is listening to us bicker/discuss/extemporise.



[1] Though Titus Andronicus is very much a classic Three Stooges film, when compared to the... oh, let's say Wizard Of Oz of The Tempest[2] or... well, I was going to say Gone With The Wind for Hamlet[3], but I realise how that looks.  Ok, bad equivalents, but you have to realise that TA is essentially light slapstick compared with the others (political propaganda as a lot of them tend to be, as well).  But I wasn't going to try to defend Mr S's works.

[2] Ignoring the most obvious analogy or two for The Tempest.

[3] Again, in an effort to avoid the many, many films that were more obviously inspired by/adapted from that one.

[Neonivek]

I'm not saying that I'm more non-conformist than you, nor claiming that my non-conformity (by dint of not being a clone of a whole lot of other so-called non-conformists, that I know of!) is of any better a quality.

What? are we going to have an anti-conformist off?

but no I am not saying I am anti-conformist but that in attempting to be objective I delve into it unintentionally. Also Shakespeare, that particular brand of Shakespeare dislike, isn't my own. I perfectly understand shakespeare and his themes. I just don't think he is on to a god like most english profs will sell him as.

[Mimidormi]

It's perfectly understandable to dislike being told what to think and what to enjoy, and to loathe hype crammed down one's throat.
Your literary analysis is well thought-out, unlike what would come from a contrarian for the sake of being contrarian.

You're also aware and wary of hype aversion to the point of realizing it's a something that could prevent you from trying out things you may enjoy, unlike hipsters.

I cannot take something as "fun" because fun to me includes what I can squeeze out of it, what I can gleen from it, what ideas form from experiencing it. Everything I watch must be analysed, deconstructed, and thought about no matter how silly or inane.

How does this works against you? Unless you deem it guilty pleasure, of course.

[Neonivek]

How does this works against you? Unless you deem it guilty pleasure, of course

It sort of makes it harder to relate to others. When you watch something, lets say, stupid and you suddenly are brimming with ideas and analysis but most everyone around you would go "Look, it is just a stupid movie calm down" then you kinda feel isolated.

It is a barrier to experiencing things fully with others.

It is in its most basic form the inability not to think and analyse. When that happens nothing is "Just because", nothing is "Just funny", and little "doesn't matter". Which is great for class but poor for watching light movies and shows with friends. I once had a friend actually avoid seeing a movie because he thought I disliked action movies. Which definately was not the case.

[GlyphGryph]

So this issue is that you've got a more narrow range of enjoyment methodology than most people. (Well, most people I associate with - let's be honest, there's probably many people who can't enjoy things the way you described ever)

That's fine and all - but obviously, if someone's playing checkers, they won't want you talking about all the possible moves they could be making if it had the same rules as chess.

[Neonivek]

So this issue is that you've got a more narrow range of enjoyment methodology than most people. (Well, most people I associate with - let's be honest, there's probably many people who can't enjoy things the way you described ever)

That's fine and all - but obviously, if someone's playing checkers, they won't want you talking about all the possible moves they could be making if it had the same rules as chess.

Ohh no in games my problem is that to enjoy them I have to take them entirely seriously.

[Vattic]

I've been having something similar happen with me lately.

I stopped watching most of the blockbuster Hollywood films because I wasn't enjoying them greatly and have things to do that I enjoy better. I've noticed that when people get hyped and tell me what films they are excited about I voice my negative expectation by default. It's alienating me from some people I know.

I got used to deliberately over analysing films with a couple of friends. It was always mainly because we found it funny but not many of the people I know right now seem to enjoy it. I get accused of not taking things seriously enough because of this as much as I do for taking things too seriously.

[Starver]

I'm not saying that I'm more non-conformist than you, nor claiming that my non-conformity (by dint of not being a clone of a whole lot of other so-called non-conformists, that I know of!) is of any better a quality.

What? are we going to have an anti-conformist off?

No.  Definitely not.  I don't want to have to actually conform to the typical anti-conformist behaviour of trying to be more anti-conformist than someone else.

Spoiler: Oh boy, long bit of waffle (click to show/hide)

(And I'm still not going to try to dissuade you about Shakespeare.  I think you're wrong, but understandably so, given how school education tends to put people off him for life.  'Luckily', I already knew about him from a young age (not through being born into privilege of any kind, but quite accidentally.  My Shakespearean experience in school was as off-putting as yours doubtless was, but didn't actually poison the already germinated bud of appreciation.  Later on I was even an extra in a film adaptation of a Shakespeare play, which was a pretty good success in its own right.  (It was purely accidental that I was where they came to grab some extra bods from, I've never been an actual actor of any kind, they just wanted people to fill uniforms and not fall over, and others did it who had no interest in the bard anyway; and, no, I don't get residuals, worse luck, it was a flat fee at the time.)  I tell you this only so that you can point at me and say "Biased!" over and over again in a series of increasingly silly voices, if you should so desire.   But, seriously, that's just a fairly full disclosure of my situation, not an argument for everyone else thinking he's any good.  Can't speak about those guys you say raise him to godhood.  He was a man who just happens to have been remembered in history.  I'm sure there's a good reason for that, but if it hadn't been him I'm sure it would have been the next guy over, scribbling away a few crowd-pleasing plays.  Or, if you believe some, the other guy who would have been mis-attributed as the author of the plays written by whoever really wrote the plays that in our universe we ascribe to old Willy-Boy...  <Sef>)

[Neonivek]

I am confused as to what you wrote

Also you didn't have to be Shakespear to essentially write his plays. It is one thing that always makes me sort of laugh when I watch movies about Shakespeare where his first working draft happens to be the complete play as we read it now.

Also by all means I am not trying to diminish him. Only so much that he is glorified until he is onto a god (Also that I REALLY dislike Titus Andronicus and that I was sure that all my problems I had with it, wouldn't have been problems the time it was finished. In otherwords I was claiming outright bias) especially without any real teaching as to why.

You are just taugh that he is great and that he is great because his plays have "These elements" and "Twists" and that no writer will ever be able to touch his greatness and that Hamlet has the most "Human" character ever.

Starver if I were to take everything I was taught about Shakespeare to heart, I really might as well stop reading, watching plays, or watching movies. The existance of perfect english writing already exists and no one can get close.

It is interesting how a lot of things are transitory, for example Edgar Allen Poe is no longer considered the king of horror even though he once was, but when you have enough people willing to push your books as the king for all time... you get issues. In fact I am surprised Edgar Allen Poe isn't pushed onto people as the "Perfect horror writer".

[MagmaMcFry]

The issue I guess I have is that I dislike feeling like I am being told to react to something to such a degree that I will immediately take the opposite stance even when I know that I am going too far with it.

I do this myself and I find this incredibly useful. By starting a discussion, you can get your 'opponent' to give you more background information on why he thinks such-and-such, and at the same time, you get the chance to express your own views. If people were perfectly rational, then you'd even agree at the end of your discussion, but that is slightly too much to expect from most of the population. Still, you taught somebody something, and/or you learned something yourself. People like you make the world smarter.