If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
In reality, there is little to no difference between sports fans and Star Trek or Harry Potter fans.
Here is the deal, the difference between being a geeky sports fan and a geeky Star Trek fan is this, sporting events are real. The outcome is not known until the game is played. Real people compete. And while the outcome of athletic contests really have no bearing on the grand scheme of things, they are real.
Star Trek and Harry Potter, on the other hand, are based on pure fantasy. The ending of the books and movies were determined long before the first person read the book or watched the movie. And no noise in any theater could affect the outcome. The readers and viewers are simply pedestrian. If any of this weren't the case, nobody in Wichita would brag about how loud Koch Arena is. Fans at the game can have a profound effect on the outcome of a sporting event. Loud people at a movie theater are nothing more than a distraction and an annoyance.
All that said, I have no problem with people being enthralled in any storyline. I have no problem with people being determined to see a movie or read a book- and to do it soon after the release. I am simply confused about the people that show up at theaters a day before a premiere to be the first in line, and those that attend "conventions" and movies dressed up in Spock ears and magic wands.
To me, all of this is weird. My wife says I'm being judgemental and and ass, I probably am. I just don't get the whole thing.
There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.
...And tailgating has a crap ton of testosterone, whereas there seems to be a profound lack of it at the premier costume parties. But then again, ASM has a point.
People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do. -Isaac Asimov
Originally posted by C0|dB|00ded
Who else posts fake **** all day in order to maintain the acrimony? Wingnuts, that's who.
In reality, there is little to no difference between sports fans and Star Trek or Harry Potter fans.
Here is the deal, the difference between being a geeky sports fan and a geeky Star Trek fan is this, sporting events are real. The outcome is not known until the game is played. Real people compete. And while the outcome of athletic contests really have no bearing on the grand scheme of things, they are real.
Star Trek and Harry Potter, on the other hand, are based on pure fantasy. The ending of the books and movies were determined long before the first person read the book or watched the movie. And no noise in any theater could affect the outcome. The readers and viewers are simply pedestrian. If any of this weren't the case, nobody in Wichita would brag about how loud Koch Arena is. Fans at the game can have a profound effect on the outcome of a sporting event. Loud people at a movie theater are nothing more than a distraction and an annoyance.
All that said, I have no problem with people being enthralled in any storyline. I have no problem with people being determined to see a movie or read a book- and to do it soon after the release. I am simply confused about the people that show up at theaters a day before a premiere to be the first in line, and those that attend "conventions" and movies dressed up in Spock ears and magic wands.
To me, all of this is weird. My wife says I'm being judgemental and and ass, I probably am. I just don't get the whole thing.
But why does being "real" matter? As you admit, it is only real in the sense that the outcome is unknown, not that the stakes are actually real or that the meaning imparted on the contests has any bearing on reality.
If anything, isn't it a sign of inferiority that sports depends so heavily on the thrill of the unknown for its entertainment value? Isn't it more impressive that something can be entertaining when the outcome is already known (although for all practical purposes, the outcome is not known to the reader or watcher the first time around)?
On top of that, if the outcome still being in the balance is of such great importance, why do sports fans watch highlights? How could you possibly appreciate a play that has already happened and where the outcome is known?
The bigger point is this, a great number of forms of entertainment, whether books, or movies, or sports all have a great number of things in common. Those that love them take great joy in them and often do things that are quite silly to those who are not fans of that form of entertainment.
When it comes to the things we are fans of, we make a lot of excuses as to why somehow our silly behavior and obsession is justified, because it is somehow different from someone else's. I know I would rather acknowledge the silliness of what I enjoy and go on enjoying it and feel no compulsion to mock the silliness of others (as I would hope they would have the grace to not mock my own silliness).
At the end of the day, sports fans mocking Star Trek or Harry Potter fans is no different than fans of Classical music mocking sports fans for being unsophisticated. It would be better if we could simply enjoy the form of entertainment we prefer without getting preoccupied about why it is superior to someone else's form of entertainment.
"Cotton scared me - I left him alone." - B4MSU (Bear Nation poster) in reference to heckling players
In reality, there is little to no difference between sports fans and Star Trek or Harry Potter fans.
Here is the deal, the difference between being a geeky sports fan and a geeky Star Trek fan is this, sporting events are real. The outcome is not known until the game is played. Real people compete. And while the outcome of athletic contests really have no bearing on the grand scheme of things, they are real.
Star Trek and Harry Potter, on the other hand, are based on pure fantasy. The ending of the books and movies were determined long before the first person read the book or watched the movie. And no noise in any theater could affect the outcome. The readers and viewers are simply pedestrian. If any of this weren't the case, nobody in Wichita would brag about how loud Koch Arena is. Fans at the game can have a profound effect on the outcome of a sporting event. Loud people at a movie theater are nothing more than a distraction and an annoyance.
All that said, I have no problem with people being enthralled in any storyline. I have no problem with people being determined to see a movie or read a book- and to do it soon after the release. I am simply confused about the people that show up at theaters a day before a premiere to be the first in line, and those that attend "conventions" and movies dressed up in Spock ears and magic wands.
To me, all of this is weird. My wife says I'm being judgemental and and ass, I probably am. I just don't get the whole thing.
But why does being "real" matter? As you admit, it is only real in the sense that the outcome is unknown, not that the stakes are actually real or that the meaning imparted on the contests has any bearing on reality.
If anything, isn't it a sign of inferiority that sports depends so heavily on the thrill of the unknown for its entertainment value? Isn't it more impressive that something can be entertaining when the outcome is already known (although for all practical purposes, the outcome is not known to the reader or watcher the first time around)?
On top of that, if the outcome still being in the balance is of such great importance, why do sports fans watch highlights? How could you possibly appreciate a play that has already happened and where the outcome is known?
The bigger point is this, a great number of forms of entertainment, whether books, or movies, or sports all have a great number of things in common. Those that love them take great joy in them and often do things that are quite silly to those who are not fans of that form of entertainment.
When it comes to the things we are fans of, we make a lot of excuses as to why somehow our silly behavior and obsession is justified, because it is somehow different from someone else's. I know I would rather acknowledge the silliness of what I enjoy and go on enjoying it and feel no compulsion to mock the silliness of others (as I would hope they would have the grace to not mock my own silliness).
At the end of the day, sports fans mocking Star Trek or Harry Potter fans is no different than fans of Classical music mocking sports fans for being unsophisticated. It would be better if we could simply enjoy the form of entertainment we prefer without getting preoccupied about why it is superior to someone else's form of entertainment.
I will concede that I can be a judgemental ass, I think that is a matter of fact more than opinion and both you and my wife have pointed it out nicely.
That said, your comparison between avid sports geeks and Harry Potter geeks, while on the surface could be compelling, in reality, is a stretch at best. To the best of my knowledge, sports geeks do not pretend to be their favorite sports hero. While I have seen people wear player's jerseys, they do not pretend to be the player. Nobody dresses up like Peyton Manning and assumes his persona. There is a huge difference between someone buying and sporting a bunch of team gear and someone buying a costume of a ficticional character, dresssing as that ficticional character and assuming the role of the ficticional character. I wouldn't find it weird to see a bunch of people in line to see a Star Trek movie wearing Ster Trek tee shirts. Seeing those same people dressed and acting as Spok and Klingons (sp) is what I don't understand.
As far as sports geeks go, I don't get two things; wearing a players jersey and facepaint. Wearing a players jersey is just gay* in my humble and closed minded opinion, and face paint is just stupid and makes that person look like a fool.
*Not that there's anything wrong with it.
There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.
Comment