Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Conversation >

Geeks=social retards

No star here laces

13:28 / 17.04.04

So a lot of barbelithers self-identify as geeks owing to interests like comics, fanfic, internet, buffy etc.

But what is a geek really?

Is a geek someone with obsessive interests?

Or do you become a geek because your social faculties are basically just retarded? That, basically, you're not good at empathising and connecting with others.

OR, is geekdom simply another way of approaching the world, and geeks are perfectly adequate at connecting with humans, so long as they are other geeks?

OR is it just "sensitivity"

(cf "weirdo revulsion" thread, which the anti-psych one just reminded me of...)

Views please.

14:30 / 17.04.04

Isn't it just somebody who has interests (not necessarily obsessive interest) in less mainstream leisure activities? Whatever mainstream is.

That's when it's used as a self-indentifier. Used to identify somebody else, there's obviously a much more negative tinge to it.

No star here laces

14:54 / 17.04.04

I don't think so, because like windsurfing isn't a particularly popular hobby, especially compared to comic books, but nobody calls windsurfers geeks...

If we take it as read for purposes of thread, that geek implies a certain degree of social isolation...

02:21 / 18.04.04

Actually, I think some windsurfers DO call themselves geeks. They may mean it slightly ironically, but will also easily fess up to "geeking out" over equipment/weather conditions.

I think geekness happens when obsessive interests become the foundation for social interaction -- moreso than, say, being in the same row in the classroom or working in the same office.

That and biting the heads off live chickens.

(Actually, maybe that's it -- geeks don't care if their obsession makes them seem ridiculous to others.)

04:30 / 18.04.04

grant said:

Actually, I think some windsurfers DO call themselves geeks. They may mean it slightly ironically, but will also easily fess up to "geeking out" over equipment/weather conditions

maybe the geek is someone that knows more than most people know of a subject that is particularly interesting to them. the kinds of things the person knows about a subject may tend to be aspects of the subject that the general public is unaware of.

example:

interest: photography
general knowledge: point and shoot camera 35mm or digital
geek knowledge: yashica 124-G medium format waisthigh camera aka TLR or twin lens reflex manufactured somewhere for so long and how many different ways

camera geek? i can talk to other camera geeks about this, but not just anyone, although i feel i can explain it well... and i can connect socially just fine. i'm also a geek with other subjects.

some geeks may be socially off, but i think that came about when it became cool to be stupid.

06:19 / 18.04.04

Not only is one of the criteria of geekdom is above average knowledge of a field, but also the love of it. True, these two are rarely separate, but it is possible. Example: a janitor may know a LOT about ways to clean floors and have a dozen "tricks of the trade" but that doesn't make him a sanitation geek (if there even is such a thing)

09:43 / 18.04.04

I think Grant is close with his closing remarks - I think it isn't so much not so much the love of something particular thatis geeky its the willingness to talk about it and pursue it openly. It seems like geekyness is a trangression against the social contract that 'normalizes' the broadest areas of mass culture.

10:05 / 18.04.04

maybeeee...

the word and idea 'geek' - as something thinkable of only in post-industrial capitalist societies - have something to do with the general mistrust against

(a) specialists, wich is a pre-conscious form of the mistrust against specialised society and work-conditions(fed also by a feelig of 'SHe behaves as if he was working...)
(b) the consuption-driven way we spend our free time

while the reason for identifiying oneself as 'geek' may be related to a unconscious desire of regainig a 'whole life' (search for a life not seperated into work- and freetime, whereas in both periods you can't have full knowledge about the basic contexts you're in and you reproduce: use the strategies of special knowledge for the objects of your free-time-consumption: fail, because there is a big fat misunderstanding in this strategy)

xcuse my bad english.
may the force guide & protect you!

14:27 / 18.04.04

Geek, to me, is a state of liking computers and other fun toys and hating people like Victoria Beckham. It includes a healthy dose of cynicism and the desire to do cool things with complicated technology. Definitely something worth being.

14:31 / 18.04.04

This is an interesting discussion, but I'm not convinced it's a Head Shop discussion. I'm proposing a move into the Conversation.

No star here laces

14:34 / 18.04.04

Fair enough. I'd hoped for a bit of a talk about borderline autism etc. but if it ain't happening...

14:38 / 18.04.04

Discussions about borderline autism / Asperger's syndrome would probably do better over in the Laboratory anyway.

miss wonderstarr

14:55 / 18.04.04

Isn't it just somebody who has interests (not necessarily obsessive interest) in less mainstream leisure activities? Whatever mainstream is.

How is being interested in Buffy non-mainstream?

I understood "geek" to mean, basically, someone with

i) an expertise in and love of computer-related technology
eg. website coders, network administrators, game programmers... I would suggest the guys at MIT in the 1960s-70s as a prime example

ii) a related interest in and love of science fiction / fantasy
because, I presume, of sf's basis in technology and depiction of technology -- also the importance of technological developments in representing sf in the cinema, eg. Star Wars... I bend "sf" to include space opera here. With "fantasy" and also with sf I suppose it could be proposed (more problematically) that the genres' traditionally stereotypical depiction of male heroes and gorgeous women might have a wish-fulfillment appeal because of...

iii) a related lack of confidence and natural ability to talk to people outside their immediate social community
I would say that working with computers could either lead to antisocial hours and behaviour, or could be an ideal occupation for someone who already tends to antisocial hours and behaviour...all-night, obsessive engagement with an ongoing challenge, irregular eating and hygiene habits, social interaction only with others involved in the same project (if that)...the obsessive interest could also edge out any broader social skills or knowledge of more general topics.

iv) a related form of jargon and subcultural slang/injokes within their immediate community.
because of the nature of the work or hobby, and as a result of feeling uncomfortable with people "outside" this group, the "geek" is going to bond more securely within a subculture of people who share his specific interests.

I could just be talking subjective bollocks but that's my top of head impression of what geek means.

16:00 / 18.04.04

I was going to say that the term geek was initially specifically aimed at people with a certain level of knowledge of computers/technology before, as others here have said, devolving to encompass anyone with an in-depth knowledge of anything. But, then I thought of all your American high-school films with their traditional "geeks versus jocks" plots so maybe it was always a general term with computer geeks just being the most prevalent kind? Either that or the devolution came before the advent of the kind of films I mentioned. Either way, the word has shifted meaning a lot in recent years I'd say and been reclaimed to a certain extent by the kind of people it would previously have been thrown at as an insult and 'geekery' is a badge now worn with a certain amount of pride. It implies an in-depth knowledge of something (mostly technology still) and it's hard to think of that as being a bad thing plus the negative things it once embodied (social retardation for instance) no longer seem to be as much a part of it's meaning. Mind you, I'd easily qualify as a geek so possibly I'm biased.

miss wonderstarr

16:59 / 18.04.04

Yeah, what's happened is that expertise with technology started leading to big salaries, Bill Gates being the most extreme example, and hence "geek" became at least semi-cool and desirable. Maybe because of that, the geek also became more confident and attractive to the opposite sex, and geekdom is less "pure", less rigid and hard an identity than it once was: that is, geekdom may well now overlap with other more mainstream circles and the geek identity may be less well defined than it was.

17:01 / 18.04.04

How is being interested in Buffy non-mainstream?

This is coming from someone who's seen every episode of both Buffy and Angel. I think Buffy is almost inherently a geeky show, due to its serial nature. I'd imagine most people who watch Buffy aren't just tuning in to random episodes, they're watching each one, without fail. This is what separates a Buffy fan from, say, a fan of Everybody Loves Raymond. You may watch every episode of Raymond, but you wouldn't feel the need to watch the next episode, like you do with Buffy. Whedon has actually said he designed the show to be a much more immersive and addictive experience than your average TV show, and that shows.

As for what makes a geek, I think it's a level of knowledge, and interest in an art that is outside the mainstream. Quentin Tarantino is a film geek, he clearly loves films and it shows in everything he does, it's all he seems to talk about. I'm a comics and film geek, and if you talk to me for long enough, I'll surely drop a reference to either a film or a comic.

The thing that separates the geek from the average person is the level of knowledge. I think the surest test of whether someone is a film geek is if they talk about a film as directed by someone, whereas your average person will say it's a film starring someone. That level of interest in who made the film isn't the social norm.

Sports are a more acceptable pursuit, and hence, knowledge that would be geeky if it were held by film and comics fans, ceases to be geeky when you're talking about sports statistics.

18:13 / 18.04.04

I think this is interesting - one can be geekily interested in something, even to the exclusion of large chunks of their life, but the question is: is it the elements of a certain interest that make something 'geeky' or the societal reaction to those elements? What of the selfless geek who does something simply because they enjoy doing something? I remember, as an amateur webmaster, when somebody learnt I ran a website the first question I got asked was usually "Do you make any money from it?". It was rather difficult to explain "No, but it's all about the love" or "Yes, but the fact that I get 'pocket money prizes' from it is irrelevant".

With computer geekiness, is it the technology or the implication that one will be antisocial because of it, that makes one a geek?

Also, what of the difference between a 'geek' (which has been described by some as someone who is highly skilled or interested in something essentially practical, but that often requires a fair amount of intelligence to be good at - such as computing or, I don't know, astronomy) and 'nerd' (knowledge for knowledges' sake)?

The Tower Always Falls

18:19 / 18.04.04

See, I'm very glad you brought up the nerd question.

"Geek" has been expounded upon rather adequately. "Nerd" however, implies to me an even lesser social sense. Geeks tend to have a community that they can share obsessions over. And many geeks are still capable of interacting with the real world. Nerds, however, tend to be further down the social abilities scale.

I've always thought that the Asperger's Syndrome might be more accurately classified as a Nerd's disease, rather than a Geek's disease.

Best Onion Headline ever was "Sports Geek derides Star Trek Geek".

18:23 / 18.04.04

Yeah, what's happened is that expertise with technology started leading to big salaries, Bill Gates being the most extreme example, and hence "geek" became at least semi-cool and desirable.

There is that but there's also the rising profile of technology itself in everyday lives. Possessing and seeking out knowledge that doesn't seem useful, just wanting to know about something for the sake of it, is pretty much what defines someone having a 'geeky' interest in a subject. Years ago knowing about technology would have fit this criteria mostly so would have got you labelled as a geek. Nowadays, with so many people using the internet, DVD players, digital cameras, etc that same knowledge appears useful and is stuff that your 'man in the street' is likely to want to know himself hence you would have to go much further to qualify for the label than previously and even then it's unlikely to have the same negative connotations as it once did because people are much less likely to write off an interest in technology as simply geekiness in action.

21:13 / 18.04.04

In Microserfs, Coupland hit upon a reflexive idea of a Geek. Basically, a telephone geek likes using telephones to talk about telephones. It's OK to like things; Geeking is liking things too far.

But... obviously, it's not too far. It's informed, it's knowledgable. It's just to non-geeks you seem to know too much and always need to shut up. Geeks talk too much because they're just trying to be correct. Some people call this pedantry.

Basically, it's all about tolerance of knowledge - how much you feel you need to know about things. Geeks are not comfortable in ignorance; they need to know more. Most of my best friends, even if they don't know it, are geeks - some are music geeks, some are film geeks, some are sports geeks, god bless them. It's not what they care about. It's just the fact they care; that's what makes them a geek. That's what makes me like them.

Us geeks tend to flock together...

21:43 / 18.04.04

If you find yourself talking and talking about the same subject in the pub and everyone else is looking at you oddly and has long since stopped talking, then you're probably being a geek about whatever your subject matter is at that particular time.

I mean even in a roomful of geeks I bet someone could bring up a subject which stopped even the geeks from joining in.

It's inherently the same as being in love - you get really quite dull about it sometimes.

Grant said: geeks don't care if their obsession makes them seem ridiculous to others and that essentially the point. You can be a geek in any subject I think, and I don't even think it's about obsessive knowledge - it's about an obsessive desire, i.e. people who feel the need to continuously do a thing, or repetitively discuss a thing. You can be a geek and not know everything there is to know about that subject, it's just intrinsically part of you to care about that thing.

I guess that maybe Geekdom is a place where a person cares about something so much that it doesn't matter if other people find it boring, the potential geek person will still continue to discuss or do the geeky thing because it's the subject that matters over and above anything else.

There was a lovely example of the epitome of Geekdom which I heard in a film about Stephen Hawking on TV the other day:

In the film there is a mathematician standing at the bar. The barwoman asks him if he'd like another drink and he ignores her, so she asks him again, and then again. Finally he hears her and he says, "I am sorry, I was thinking about Maths. I was thinking in several dimensions and when you think in several dimensions it's very difficult to come back into the one dimension and understand questions about beer."

22:10 / 18.04.04

it's no wonder his missus tried to whack some sense into him then.

beelzebub jones

05:28 / 19.04.04

to me, a geek is, and always will be someone who bites the heads off chickens in the sideshow. which i think pretty much sums up the whole thing. chickens being the metaphor for particular subject, which a geek is not content with just "looking", they need to get to the meat of the matter and of course the sideshow is life. it doesn't hurt to sharpen your teeth to points either.

06:27 / 19.04.04

Actually, leftylopez, the quotation from the film is spoken by Roger Penrose. But hey, thanks for your trite support of domestic violence. Always nice to have!

18:35 / 19.04.04

Historically, I think the use of the term goes something like this:

1930s-1940s = the "wild man" in the sideshow, lowest rung on the carny ladder, neither particularly skilled or anatomically unusual -- just willing to bite the heads off chickens. Key factor: would communicate, during the act, in a made-up language or just animalistic grunts.

1950s-60s = the socially outcast kids who were a little gross & unrefined, but who were devoted readers of mags like Amazing Stories... AND Popular Mechanics. Today, PM is all about reviews and overviews of tech, but back then, it was heavy on kits and making stuff yourself. Geek subculture was defined by love of jargon & non-mainstream genre fiction/self-defining myths.

1970s-80s = Basically, the rise of computer tech as a determining social force (along with the rise of RPGs and films Speilberg & Lucas). All of a sudden, the social outliers became recast as pioneers, science fiction became big business (remember -- in the mid-60s, Star Trek flunked after three seasons, but came into its own in reruns in the early 70s).

So by the 1990s, general technology got sort of subsumed into computer tech (although I knew a few BBS sysops then who either worked at the local science museum or else were active in HAM radio clubs and the local automotive tweaking scene, messing with engines and tubes and stuff). Bill Gates got a haircut and started behaving like a philanthropist instead of a socially retarded savant.

But I like to think of geeks, at heart, as being the guy in the pit, sloshed out of his head on Sterno, dripping fresh chicken blood over his chin.

18:40 / 19.04.04

Ha! Merriam-Webster says it's from Low German for "fool."

And here's a lovely essay exploring the same stuff as this thread.

20:52 / 19.04.04

Actaully, Webster says it originated from the low German for fool, but that is not the way it is used currently. Here's the whole definition:

Main Entry: geek
Pronunciation: 'gEk
Function: noun
Etymology: probably from English dialect geek, geck fool, from Low German geck, from Middle Low German
1 : a carnival performer often billed as a wild man whose act usually includes biting the head off a live chicken or snake
2 : a person often of an intellectual bent who is disapproved of
- geeky /'gE-kE/ adjective

I think in the current context, the 2nd definition fits the closest - a person who is "shunned" socially for their intellectual bent; whatever it might be.

And, we all have to remember that words do not have a finite definition; they mean something different to each person that utters them and also to each person that hears them. That is the joy of a living language!

(Sounds of creaking as retracdet steps off his soapbox.)