Against Snobs and Hobby Snobbery
Photo by Alphonso Rodrigez https://twitter.com/AdolfoRT/status/700008996351188992?s=20
I am a massive film and music buff. I love video games, especially Nintendo. I collect action figures. I am a fan of fiction, when I have the time to read an actual book (my to-read list of books I actually own is nearly endless.) To make a long story short, I am a nerd. But I am a nerd of the people. I am not a snob. I try to make my hobbies as accessible as possible to others for a reason that should be obvious to anyone. Marketing!
This mindset shouldn’t be that rare, but it is. Snobs fill the hobbies I love to the brim. There’s a reason I hate film critics. You’re calling yourself a critic; I know not to take you that seriously. Jeremy Jahns, on the other hand, calls himself a movie reviewer.
Because he is not a snob. You can’t fake that. I don’t like every movie he recommends, but I can feel the dude is simpatico with how I see things. One movie buff to another, check him out. He’s on YouTube.
Video game snobs are also annoying. The console wars are over, bro. Just play the game on the exclusive platform it’s on or play any other game that’s on every platform ever, even your microwave. Not that complicated. Nintendo built a lot of goodwill with me and a lot of other folks. First-party Nintendo games are virtually the only ones I pre-order, as I discussed previously. Nintendo Polish is a term in the industry for a reason. Game-breaking launch day bugs are virtually unheard of with Nintendo games. Because the Nintendo guys genuinely care about the craft. Do some of the games in a franchise get slightly repetitive? Certainly. But that’s not how Nintendo markets itself. Every E for Everyone game Nintendo makes is intended to be the first game a new gamer plays. It’s a system that clearly works wonders for Nintendo. Absolutely crushing Sony and Microsoft this console generation, not only in sales but profit margins. Launching a console to combine the best ideas from one of its worst-selling consoles with one of its best-selling handhelds is just printing money for Nintendo. Of the video game reviewers out there, Jeremy Jahns does the occasional one, but I will always respect Ben “Yahtzee” Croshaw (as I have mentioned previously) for giving it to me straight. I don’t always agree with him, especially on Nintendo games, but I can tell he isn’t bought and paid for like so many other video game “journalists” seem to be.
The merch snobs are just weird. Stop basing your personality on your Funko POP! collection. Weirdos… I get why those things are so popular, being an accessible collectible that is sometimes the only merchandise a franchise ever gets. But seriously, they’re not the bee’s knees you think they are. I own at least 30, but still. Action figures will always be the better option. So much more diversity.
Then there are the card game snobs. The Yu-Gi-Oh! TCG is the biggest one in the world for a reason, MTG true believers. When you figure that one out, I’ll be right over here, finishing my “not coffee.” Probably water. Maybe milk. Perhaps a milkshake.
Oh, the anime/manga snobs. God, they’re insufferable. One Piece is the biggest manga in the world. The creator just never seems to rest. I’m nowhere near caught up. Because I don’t have unlimited money and time, but gorram, it’s popular for a reason. The manga/anime you snobs prefer? It’s weird. Or not for children. Or both. Anime targeted to children, even if based on a manga for teenagers, will always do better with the broader public. Because people grew up with them. Why do you think Pokémon is the biggest franchise in the history of the world? Exactly.
But the worst of the lot are music snobs. The people who saw High Fidelity and didn’t realize the music snobs were mostly miserable assholes. The main character was depressed and using the audience as his therapist. He grows to realize his behaviors are self-destructive. Not someone to emulate, bro. I don’t want to talk about these people that much because they’re not worth it. Let people enjoy things, somebody once told me…
Just because something is popular, especially with the normies, doesn’t make it bad, you Hipster douchebags. Basing your personality and interests on what isn’t well-known or currently popular is a constantly losing game. Just like what you like. Stop being ashamed of your natural interests. It’s not a happy way to live.
As mentioned in my Money-Power-Influence article, I just want to introduce people to things I already like so that those things become more widely loved and appreciated. So that I get more of what I love. But I also try to get people to tell me cool stuff I’ve never heard of, especially music. Ninja Sex Party is awesome. Still. I bring those dudes up all the time here because they’re my favorite band. I want more people to appreciate them so that the fully independent band gets more fans and more money so that I get more and better content from them. My M.O. ain’t hard to figure out, nor it is evil. A little mischievous? Sure, but that’s my brand. You either accept it at this point, or you stopped reading well before you got to this sentence. Never change.
The problem with aesthetics is the assumption that some things are better than other things and, more than that, it’s possible to tell the difference.
If you are willing to swallow the camel of “some things are better than other things and it’s possible to tell”, the gnat of “this particular instance of entertainment sucks, actually” should be easy going down.
Now, sure. There are a bunch of Partisan Idiots who argue that some matters of taste are actually matters of aesthetics. Like, which is better? The XBox One X Controller or the PS4 Controller? Well… I could see how someone would prefer the one and someone else would prefer the other and there’s no right or wrong.
But there are stories like, say, a melodrama where you’ve got a victim, a villain, and a hero.
And there are stories that are a bit more mature where you’ve got a victim that is surprisingly strong… a villain with a surprisingly understandable set of motivations, and a hero that is surprisingly cruel.
Some stories are good the first time only. A second viewing doesn’t give anything that the first viewing didn’t give.
Some stories that contain enough richness that you find something new with each return to it. “How did I miss this the first time? Or the second time? Or the third time?”
And people who have spent enough time sorting through the pile to realize that Sturgeon was an optimist are going to have strong opinions about the stuff that isn’t crap.
And the people who show up saying “This entry-level stuff is awesome!” are going to find themselves inundated by opinions about Naruto.Report
Great article!
I like to critique things because it’s fun for me and it helps me improve as an artist (I like to think so anyway.) If I sometimes get worked up over it, it’s that I think corporate creativity is an end so dead it’s oppressive to good art, and that needs to be pushed back on. And then sometimes I like to explore the reasons why people like the things they do (or claim to). But yeah I agree the gatekeeping for its own sake is really tiring.Report
“You’re calling yourself a critic; I know not to take you that seriously”
that’s a weird stance to take. criticism (literary, music, film, whatever) is an evaluation with historical and contextual analysis. it is not a “review” nor should it be. i get that you’re not interested in this kind of evaluation, and i applaud your self-awareness on that front, but it is a distinct form of engagement with art.
re: someone from pitchfork and david toop are both engaged in the act of writing about music, but they’re doing it with very different approaches and goals. both are valid, as far as i’m concerned, but i’m very sure people confuse the two on a consistent basis.
now, i think a more interesting angle here is why the existence of different modes of engagement seems to annoy everyone at some point. i have a straightforward answer: fans are terrible at love and confuse the objects of their affection with themselves to the point of delusion, but this is probably a less-than-compelling analysis for others.Report
I think the point being made is that anyone can call themselves a critic, but that doesn’t mean they are engaging is some manner of honorable criticism, as opposed to just being a snobbish reviewer with opinions.Report
from the text: “There’s a reason I hate film critics. You’re calling yourself a critic; I know not to take you that seriously.”
i’m hard-pressed to think that criticism could be dishonorable. not impossible, mind you, but definitely difficult – perhaps someone inventing slander?
more the point, i think the notion of “honorable” (i’m using your term as a jumping off point, rather than trying to be tedious about your word selection) feels like a holdover of the current general expectation of criticism – reviews that reinforce one’s worldview. in the case of modern fandoms, that means reinforcing one’s view of a work/series/etc as a part of oneself and, to a certain extent, identity, group belonging, and so on.
i don’t doubt that for some criticism (good or bad) feels like slander, dishonor, calumny, an attack on all that is good and pure, etc…it feels like snobbery, because when someone says something critical, what is heard is “you are less than I.” now, is that true? and even if it is true, should it matter? it’s just one opinion.
i mean, give me enough o’douls and i’d go so far as to say “frick, this is terrible near beer! but more to the point, fandoms are a cancer upon culture and impede our growth as a species.” at that point i hope the fake bartender cuts me off from the fake beer and calls me a fake cab, because i’m taking it a bit too far.
but on the other hand, the norse gods were created by the humans who venerated them knowing that all things end, and the engine of our destruction often lies in trying to avoid our fates and chaining our weaknesses away to reckon with only when it is far too late.
in fandom’s hands, ragnarok is just another word for nothing left to lose. or gain, for that matter. i would argue that if one has built an identity that requires a continual watering of the tree of intellectual property with the blood of opportunities for change, then indeed criticism feels deadly.
it is saying “this could be a part of something larger” rather than a thing in and of itself to be scored, absorbed, and added to our identities. it will feel like snobbery, because when someone takes a piece of your heart and holds it up, examines it, and declares it less than the sum of all greatness, it will feel like a diminishment of who you are rather than simply an opinion.
i have irrational loves, but know them to be irrational and chain them down in the basement of false gods, which is where they belong. not necessarily the best advice, but it feels like the most true advice.Report