Musings on the lingo of hobbies and interests
I had an interesting discussion with a coworker regarding language. He finds the lingo of fandom and of MMOs to be off-putting - partly it's a language purity thing (or so my impression was), but mostly he feels like it's gate-keeping and marking in-group and out-group. I can see where he's coming from, but at the same time, I wonder what he thinks of the specific terminology of other hobbies. If he doesn't feel the same way about, say, knitting, or even pen and paper RPGs (something I know he does), then something else must be going on.
In his case - since I didn't think to ask - it could well be that he dislikes all lingo. Some people do. But I can't help wondering if it's also a legitimacy issue. Some things are "real" and it's okay for them to have lingo, while others are somehow less than real and should stick to using "real words" (non-lingo). He said he didn't feel he should have to learn a special lingo to play one MMO, but the MMO in question was DDO - which he played because he's a D&D player. Has he forgotten that he had to learn a whole slew of special terms when he got into role playing? Did he feel like it was gate-keeping to have to learn what THAC0 meant? Dabbling in any hobby requires learning terminology, whether you want to play one game or knit one sweater.
I'm also reminded of the Douglas Adams quote on technology:
"I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things."
I'm beginning to think that that doesn't just apply to technology but to anything that's new to one. (Though some people hit thirty-five much younger than others, and some may never hit thirty-five.) In this case, either one goes "oh, new hobby, new words" (or "new social group, new words") or one goes "why aren't you using real words!?"
Granted, I've always been good at just sort of picking up stuff - plots of fiction I've never read or watched, bits about hobbies or sports, or whatever. If I have even a vague interest or if people talk about something enough around me, I'll pick up bits and pieces. I may find that easier than many people and not realize how challenging learning a new lingo can be. And I had friends who dragged me into MMOs and explained at least some of the terminology in their "you gotta try this" sales pitches.
But I keep going back to the Douglas Adams quote and to knitting. Anything you do that's new is going to require learning new things. Why shouldn't you have to learn a lingo to play a game? Is people saying "What fandoms are you in?" really different in any meaningful way from saying "What do you like?" I do agree with him that there is something a little deeper suggested by "fandom" than merely liking things. Or is that just the garbage of "fake fans" and not really inherent in the term at all? Though... while I'm a casual fan of a good many things, I think I would probably only say that I'm in Star Wars fandom - it's a participatory thing, I guess. At least in my head.
I don't know. I'm torn between thinking he has a bit of a point about gate-keeping and in-group/out-group marking, and thinking that it's more a reflection of whether society or an individual thinks that a group has a right to lingo. I mean, yes, learning the lingo does mark you as a member of that group, and not knowing it means you're not or are new to whatever it is. But that's true of knitting or car repair or golf or one's job or college major or... damn near everything.
Like I said, interesting conversation. One I'm still mulling over.
This entry was originally posted at http://smurasaki.dreamwidth.org/135003.html.
In his case - since I didn't think to ask - it could well be that he dislikes all lingo. Some people do. But I can't help wondering if it's also a legitimacy issue. Some things are "real" and it's okay for them to have lingo, while others are somehow less than real and should stick to using "real words" (non-lingo). He said he didn't feel he should have to learn a special lingo to play one MMO, but the MMO in question was DDO - which he played because he's a D&D player. Has he forgotten that he had to learn a whole slew of special terms when he got into role playing? Did he feel like it was gate-keeping to have to learn what THAC0 meant? Dabbling in any hobby requires learning terminology, whether you want to play one game or knit one sweater.
I'm also reminded of the Douglas Adams quote on technology:
"I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things."
I'm beginning to think that that doesn't just apply to technology but to anything that's new to one. (Though some people hit thirty-five much younger than others, and some may never hit thirty-five.) In this case, either one goes "oh, new hobby, new words" (or "new social group, new words") or one goes "why aren't you using real words!?"
Granted, I've always been good at just sort of picking up stuff - plots of fiction I've never read or watched, bits about hobbies or sports, or whatever. If I have even a vague interest or if people talk about something enough around me, I'll pick up bits and pieces. I may find that easier than many people and not realize how challenging learning a new lingo can be. And I had friends who dragged me into MMOs and explained at least some of the terminology in their "you gotta try this" sales pitches.
But I keep going back to the Douglas Adams quote and to knitting. Anything you do that's new is going to require learning new things. Why shouldn't you have to learn a lingo to play a game? Is people saying "What fandoms are you in?" really different in any meaningful way from saying "What do you like?" I do agree with him that there is something a little deeper suggested by "fandom" than merely liking things. Or is that just the garbage of "fake fans" and not really inherent in the term at all? Though... while I'm a casual fan of a good many things, I think I would probably only say that I'm in Star Wars fandom - it's a participatory thing, I guess. At least in my head.
I don't know. I'm torn between thinking he has a bit of a point about gate-keeping and in-group/out-group marking, and thinking that it's more a reflection of whether society or an individual thinks that a group has a right to lingo. I mean, yes, learning the lingo does mark you as a member of that group, and not knowing it means you're not or are new to whatever it is. But that's true of knitting or car repair or golf or one's job or college major or... damn near everything.
Like I said, interesting conversation. One I'm still mulling over.
This entry was originally posted at http://smurasaki.dreamwidth.org/135003.html.