Um, you are aware that "geek" "dweeb" and so on aren't just synonyms. They all have
thoroughly specified meanings developed from decades of use in our culture, and were you to regularly to have conversations with, you know, human beings rather than your "girlfriend" on The Sims, you'd know that. There's a reason I didn't just stick to the one word.
Also, there is no such thing as a "philosophy geek". You will never ever hear the term, and it's for the very simple reason that philosophy is not the sort of subject that falls into the aforementioned field. Same with music. They're culturally ascribed terms, dude, if you don't hear them used in that context more than once or twice by some retard they're not common currency and aren't proper usage. You can't make up your own definition just because it makes sense to you, personally, just like I can't ride an elephant down a major highway just because I feel like calling it a car. How clueless of you.
As for the rest, I think this
some reason, none of my relationships tends to last over three months, which is rather interesting, because the female friends, who are just friends, I've had for some 5-6 years or so
rests my case pretty thoroughly. Aside from the fact that, you know, you've so far completely failed to offer up a coherent alternate explanation, which is noteworthy in itself.
World War II allegory? You're grasping at straws, dude,
reeeeealy grasping.
Any epic battle between absolute good and absolute evil could be claimed to be about WWII, if the author doesn't say anything more worth bothering with than that one would
hope he's not trying to write about WWII.
Venom: Definition of "geek" aside, since neither your nor my definition properly fits, say, the techs who make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year and still remain thorough geeks...
1. Yeah. Most of his mythology was far from original, but his usage was. Trendsetting doesn't necessitate mindlessness, and neither do dwarves and elves. If you can't say something meaningful in as complete a universe as he set the foundations for, you're just plain a ****ty writer.
2. And manages to make it thoroughly escapist. I refer you to Dune, dull as it was, which is
at least as thorough and contains rampant allegories to the reason the mideast is so ****ed up, etc. It's not the only one, either. Most "universes" as thorough as Tolkein's have massive redeeming value and will leave you at least a little bit more intelligent or knowledgeable after having read it. After reading Lord of the Rings? You learn to speak Elvish, and maybe pretend to be a Level 3 Mage of Loud Trumping. Talk about a wasted investment. I'd say this is precisely why you don't see any Dune fans dressing up like Atreides and running around shouting about using a Stone Burner on you- it's
relevant to reality, in exactly the same way LOTR and TV aren't.
3. Dude, have you ever read a good book in your
life? Having a point doesn't necessitate droning on in some pretentious tone about the meaning of life. In fact, they're very nearly mutually exclusive. Read some Vonnegut, Kingsolver, Rubin, Remarque, Wilde, even Adams- hell, just glancing at my bookshelf, it's hard to find books other than Gibson's that are readable in the slightest and don't have a point somewhere. And they're all infinitely more readable than Tolkein's encyclopedic droning. Check out any random book in the library, even if it's in the children's section, and I can guarantee it'll have more relevance and be more gripping than Tolkein's literature. Ever read Orwell? Go ahead, try and say he's boring- guess what, every single ****ing word in most all of his work means something, and something absolutely important to this very day.
Tolkein's stuff has its place, but defending it as anything other than a possibly pleasant waste of time is to delude oneself. Once again, TV, but without all the frantic action that makes TV passably interesting. I happen to not like it on top of recognizing that it has no redeeming value, but the two are irrelevant- I find Gibson to have no redeeming value, and his stuff is fun as hell to read. Where'd this need to claim that everything we like is some profound intellectual pursuit, or even worth doing in the first place, come from anyway? Is it tax-deductible if it has social significance? Is there some minimum tally of "worthwhile things" you need to get done this month that you're slacking on?
