Violence, Cynicism, and False Maturity

Several times in my life I’ve encountered people who seemed honestly stunned or dismissive of the idea of avoiding violent confrontation in political, military, and even personal spheres.  There seemed to be something that didn’t register to them that the best solution was not always the one with the highest body count, the most blood, and the greatest number of smoking craters.  The idea that a less or no-violent solution may produce better results seemed alien to them, weak, or even laughable.

Of course most of the people I knew like this grew up.  When I look at our “3Ps” (politicians, preachers, and pundists) that are most popular, I’m seeing a lot of people who didn’t grow up.  Oddly, they posture themselves as the mature ones.

Similarly, in politics, in media, in punditry, it seems that nothing is too cynical, too dark, too nihilistic not to propose.  The more cynical the view the better, is the rule it seems, and thus we have people who denounce many if not a majority of their own countrypeople as evil, or contemptable.   We see it in media that vies to be the bloodiest, darkest view of people imaginable because it’s “true” – in short, it’s what we want to think.  Cynicism is seen as maturity.

Violence and cynicism (often mixed with sarcasm, which drags down sarcasm’s good name) are postulated as being mature.

Stepping back for a moment, these are two traits that very much are not mature.  To engage in violence for no good reason is a mark of pathology.  To be in a race to hate the most things is insanity.  Yet, it is considered mature.

It is considered, in short, realistic.  Upon reflection it’s certainly not realistic since it’s basically having highly predetermined and unchangable worldviews.  But it’s pitched as “realism.”

Realism is about cause and effect, true maturity and understanding, goals and achieving them, people and working with them.  We’ve traded real maturity for a kind of regressed adolescence of violent fantasies (of course those having the fantasies assume they’ll be untouched) and dark speculations (which of course justify the dark fantasies).

Next time you look at Congress, or our media, ask yourself how much is maturity and how much is faux maturity.

Then at that point, you may need to drink.  But do so in a mature manner.

– Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers at http://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at https://www.stevensavage.com/.

Adeptus Mechanicus Panicus Returnicus

Awhile ago I made a semi-humorous point that I was worried that people in technical fields (well, us) would end up a bit like the Adeptus Mechanicus in the Warhammer 40K universe.  The Adeptus of this somewhat-over-the-top dark future story are both technicians and a religious order, secretive, at times dogmatic, and culturally stagnant.  I think you can see the comparison and the concern.

It is some time later, and I wanted to repeat my observation and note . . . I think we’re closer than I thought.

Read more

Deep Speculation on Gaming. Kind of

Monday, I’ll have an analysis up at Fan To Pro on CES and disruption of gaming.  Well a rant and analysis.  With bullet points.  Anyway its 1200 words of painful insight and sarcasm.

With all the changes in gaming going on, I’ve asked myself what part it plays in my life.  I enjoy it, I grow from it, etc.  But as so many options come before me, I find myself asking what is it for.

This is actually a question many people are going to have to ask with so many options and so many changing options.  Consumer or producer, what gaming is for is going to have to be asked to spend time, money, insight, and throwing birds at pigs appropriately.

The thing is what gaming is for has changed as the scope has expanded.  There are many “non-gamers” who game.  The DS, the Wii, Facebook games, mobile games, etc. have brought in legions of non-gamers into the gamer space – and these people are gamers.  The sphere has expanded.

But what people want and need out of gaming differs along many axes.  We just don’t think about it very much because we treat gaming as all-too-often monolithic.  Sure, it’s not monolithic, but it’s far less of what it’s not now – if you’ll excuse my terrible contortions of language.

So for myself, with options, I have to ask what I get out of gaming and how, out of many options, to pursue it.

Developers, hardware makers, publishers, are going to have to ask what people want and need, and how to deliver it.  They will be unlikely to cover all markets.

Then of course there’s the question of what happens as the omnipresence of games expands . . . but we’ll see how that goes in the next few years.

What is gaming for?

– Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers at http://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at https://www.stevensavage.com/.