The Moose Lexicon #1
In an effort to make up for abandoning the blog on the weekend, I'm back with something I've wanted to do for a while: comment occasionally on words as they are currently used and/or misused in American parlance. For my first time out of the box, I'd like to attempt to clarify a definition for an oft-confused word:
geek
1. A person whose abiding interest in and knowledge of a particular topic, vocation, technical field, hobby, cultural phenomenon, or genre of art/entertainment exceeds that which is considered acceptable by prevailing social norms and attitudes.
2. A member of a social group dedicated to a particular topic, vocation, etc., whose association with such sets him/her outside the bounds of normal social intercourse.
To define a "geek", I think, necessarily implies a distinction from a similar, but not equivalent word: nerd. If you look on Dictionary.com, you'll find the same definition applied to both "geek" and "nerd":
2. A person who is single-minded or accomplished in scientific or technical pursuits but is felt to be socially inept.
Granted, this is a secondary definition for both, but I think it's untrue, or at least less true for "geeks" than "nerds". Many geeks are, in fact, highly social; they simply choose groups with the same interests and tendencies they have with whom to socialize - as these groups are comprised predominantly of other geeks, they may seem socially inept by virtue of their difference from conventional social routines, but within their own groups, they are generally quite socially comfortable. Indeed, geeks have been on the vanguard of redefining social interaction, since it was largely geeks networking and seeking fellow geeks with their own interests who jumpstarted the social interaction on the Internet which has now become commonplace for "normal" people.
That definition is also too narrow in that it confines the pursuits that fall under the "geeky" heading to science and technology. True, there is the classic "computer geek", but one can be a theatre geek, a sci-fi geek, a knitting geek, an Italian film geek, a rock 'n' roll geek, and, yes, even a sports geek. (There is little qualitative difference between someone who can rattle off the armor class adjustment of a pair of magic bracers and someone who can instantly list the batting averages of the top five hitters in Major League history - they have both devoted themselves to pursuing knowledge of a subject considered trivial.)
This is where the distinction with nerd comes in. Under this definition of geek, I think a "nerd" could be considered a sub-species of "geek", whose particular interests are academic, scientific, and/or technical in nature. A nerd - whether or not s/he is unusually gifted intellecutally, though many are - tends to be diligently studious of his/her chosen field, often to the neglect of all else, including customs, dress, grooming, etc. that most consider "normal." Nerds tend to focus on fields that are connected with significant academic or professional value and tend therefore to find success in academics and in certain fields that require their specialized knowledge - scientific and technical fields especially. A geek need not be academically or professionally successful, or even productive. In fact, many are not, since their chosen fields of interest are often considered frivolous and therefore difficult to connect with gainful employment. (Not everybody's lucky enough to write comic books for Marvel or do color commentary on ESPN.)
The primary "official" definition listed for "geek" is also inadequate:
1. A person regarded as foolish, inept, or clumsy.
Again, this mostly misses the mark. Geeks can sometimes be considered foolish for their devotion to trivial pursuits (to coin a phrase). As to their ineptitude, I've already spoken about their social interactions, and they are, of course, remarkably knowledgeable and capable within their chosen interest. Clumsy? Well, okay, even in my rather broad treatment, most geeks are not especially inclined toward physical prowess, but there's nothing inherent in geekiness that necessarily implies being uncoordinated or physically awkward.
There is of course the etymological origin of the word as the description for a carnival performer who bites off the heads of birds and performs other bizarre rituals - the cultural precursor of Ozzy Osbourne, I suppose. But that's merely a curiosity these days; it's not in common usage.
It's a toss-up as to which of these words - "nerd" or "geek" - is still connected most strongly to a pejorative connotation. With the rise of tech companies, people have begun to realize the value of "nerds". "Geeks", while somewhat marginalized, are major drivers of certain entertainment markets and as such have their own clout to throw around. Yet both are labels that many would not necessarily apply to themselves.
So there you have it. My first attempt to nail down a definition based on current usage of a slang term that's never been too precisely defined. Does that make me a language geek? Probably.
geek
1. A person whose abiding interest in and knowledge of a particular topic, vocation, technical field, hobby, cultural phenomenon, or genre of art/entertainment exceeds that which is considered acceptable by prevailing social norms and attitudes.
2. A member of a social group dedicated to a particular topic, vocation, etc., whose association with such sets him/her outside the bounds of normal social intercourse.
To define a "geek", I think, necessarily implies a distinction from a similar, but not equivalent word: nerd. If you look on Dictionary.com, you'll find the same definition applied to both "geek" and "nerd":
2. A person who is single-minded or accomplished in scientific or technical pursuits but is felt to be socially inept.
Granted, this is a secondary definition for both, but I think it's untrue, or at least less true for "geeks" than "nerds". Many geeks are, in fact, highly social; they simply choose groups with the same interests and tendencies they have with whom to socialize - as these groups are comprised predominantly of other geeks, they may seem socially inept by virtue of their difference from conventional social routines, but within their own groups, they are generally quite socially comfortable. Indeed, geeks have been on the vanguard of redefining social interaction, since it was largely geeks networking and seeking fellow geeks with their own interests who jumpstarted the social interaction on the Internet which has now become commonplace for "normal" people.
That definition is also too narrow in that it confines the pursuits that fall under the "geeky" heading to science and technology. True, there is the classic "computer geek", but one can be a theatre geek, a sci-fi geek, a knitting geek, an Italian film geek, a rock 'n' roll geek, and, yes, even a sports geek. (There is little qualitative difference between someone who can rattle off the armor class adjustment of a pair of magic bracers and someone who can instantly list the batting averages of the top five hitters in Major League history - they have both devoted themselves to pursuing knowledge of a subject considered trivial.)
This is where the distinction with nerd comes in. Under this definition of geek, I think a "nerd" could be considered a sub-species of "geek", whose particular interests are academic, scientific, and/or technical in nature. A nerd - whether or not s/he is unusually gifted intellecutally, though many are - tends to be diligently studious of his/her chosen field, often to the neglect of all else, including customs, dress, grooming, etc. that most consider "normal." Nerds tend to focus on fields that are connected with significant academic or professional value and tend therefore to find success in academics and in certain fields that require their specialized knowledge - scientific and technical fields especially. A geek need not be academically or professionally successful, or even productive. In fact, many are not, since their chosen fields of interest are often considered frivolous and therefore difficult to connect with gainful employment. (Not everybody's lucky enough to write comic books for Marvel or do color commentary on ESPN.)
The primary "official" definition listed for "geek" is also inadequate:
1. A person regarded as foolish, inept, or clumsy.
Again, this mostly misses the mark. Geeks can sometimes be considered foolish for their devotion to trivial pursuits (to coin a phrase). As to their ineptitude, I've already spoken about their social interactions, and they are, of course, remarkably knowledgeable and capable within their chosen interest. Clumsy? Well, okay, even in my rather broad treatment, most geeks are not especially inclined toward physical prowess, but there's nothing inherent in geekiness that necessarily implies being uncoordinated or physically awkward.
There is of course the etymological origin of the word as the description for a carnival performer who bites off the heads of birds and performs other bizarre rituals - the cultural precursor of Ozzy Osbourne, I suppose. But that's merely a curiosity these days; it's not in common usage.
It's a toss-up as to which of these words - "nerd" or "geek" - is still connected most strongly to a pejorative connotation. With the rise of tech companies, people have begun to realize the value of "nerds". "Geeks", while somewhat marginalized, are major drivers of certain entertainment markets and as such have their own clout to throw around. Yet both are labels that many would not necessarily apply to themselves.
So there you have it. My first attempt to nail down a definition based on current usage of a slang term that's never been too precisely defined. Does that make me a language geek? Probably.