If this means fewer — or no — zillion-dollar comic book character movies made for and pitched to kidults, COUNT ME IN.

The Avengers work for the secretive agency S.H.I.E.L.D.; Batman takes orders from Gotham police commissioner Gordon; even the villainous members of the Suicide Squad execute government orders in exchange for commuted prison sentences.

Why would anyone over the age of 10 even want to know this claptrap? And why should a reader of TIME magazine need to read it?

Fifty years ago, it was a joke that the anti-hero of A Confederacy of Dunces read Batman comics — because he was, you see, an adult. The joke came from the fact that he clearly was stunted in his development. Today it's a national (if not international) mania to know the "origin stories" and relationships of comic book figures like they were the last of the Plantagenets. If "wokehood" is swinging its scythe at them, I'll be on the sidelines cheering.

They make them sound as lawless as Warlord Raz's CHOP-CHAZ barricade guards. I guess Batman has yet to pour an AR-15 into a Jeep because a 16 year-old black teenager is driving down a road and could conceivably drive into Warlord Raz's "summer of love" block party - perhaps that'll be the plot when they bring back Michael Keaton, or perhaps when they just have Idris Elba play every character.

Today it's a national (if not international) mania to know the "origin stories" and relationships of comic book figures like they were the last of the Plantagenets. ~ Kevin at July 1, 2020 12:12 AM

I know a few ordinarily well-grounded and sensible people who know more about the history of the Star Wars or Star Trek universes than they do about their own. They'll talk about the Romulan Treaty as if it were of the same level of world-changing importance as any of the many Treaties of Versailles.

Most of the folks to which I'm referring are in STEM fields and seem to prefer a hypothetical world to a real one. One is a jobless alcoholic living on a trust fund who dropped out of my social group long ago, but occasionally contacts one of the members, so we all know what he's up to.

Perhaps we're not making the study of history or current events interesting enough for them. Perhaps the appeal is knowing that any mistakes with the imaginary Romulan Treaty will not have adverse effects on the world today. The real world is messy while imaginary worlds are usually not, being limited to the imagination of a few creators - no unintended consequences, except those written into the story line.

These days, the only way we can get anyone to pay attention to the Plantagenets is to put them in a sexed-up HBO miniseries.

If you're gonna talk about stupidity in fantasy fiction, see what a successful author thinks.

The clicks are all that matter.

Here's what Larry Correia thinks about conventions being racist.

When you're a stunted adult yourself, and when it's too easy to find real-life people who will happily discuss superhero comics - or current TV shows - rather than the subjects that were actually REQUIRED reading in high school and college (including current events), it's too easy to forget the advice that parents used to teach kids about how to talk to adults.

Namely: "Talk about what ADULTS are interested in, not what you're interested in, otherwise you'll bore adults to death."

Thirty years ago or so, that helped kids to grow up in general, to learn that "boring" subjects aren't so boring when you learn more about them, and to learn that after a certain age, if you want to be truly respected, you really need to stop talking about pop subjects in general with anyone who isn't an old and dear friend. The same goes for talking as if you know all you need to know about the news (or history) when you never read newspapers or history books.

There IS an extra problem, though. Teachers in middle school and high school are expected to teach more subjects than ever before, which means that no particular branch of history, for one, will ever get taught again, in as much detail, as kids may have been taught, say, before 1970. (Plus, of course, every year, there's more history to learn!) Luckily, for the last 50 years or so, there have been several history book series aimed at preteens that are reasonably fun to read - and they are reasonably famous series as well, so parents can't argue they've never heard of them.

In other words, while parents have every right to refuse to help kids with their homework, they still have every obligation to teach their kids those subjects and skills that just aren't part of the school's curriculum for one reason or another.

"I guess Batman has yet to pour an AR-15 into a Jeep because ..." ~El Verde Loco

I take it you've never played any of the lego superhero video games. Lego Batman need to destroy public property (benches, statues, etc.) for money. Not quite to the level of AR-15 into a Jeep but odd none the less.

"The real world is messy while imaginary worlds are usually not ..." ~Conan

There is a lot to be said for that theory.

Fifty years ago, it was a joke that the anti-hero of A Confederacy of Dunces read Batman comics — because he was, you see, an adult.
__________________________________

And fifty years ago, parents didn't try to get their PRETEENS to read more by bribing them with comics and graphic novels, because adults understood, without being told, that true intellect is developed when young readers are forced to use their imaginations by reading books WITHOUT pictures - and that reading such books is actually something to be PROUD of.

This is as good a time as any to repeat an excerpt from Canadian critic Michele Landsberg's book "Reading for the Love of It" (1987, pages 234-235, paperback edition):

"The problem of preadolescent reading is admittedly more difficult. No eleven-year-old wants to have mummy or daddy peering over her shoulder at the library and recommending books, and the most heartfelt urgings from a parent or teacher may have a stubbornly contrary effect..."

"...I've had concerned, literate parents beg me to tell them how to wean their children from trash reading. Alas, there is no easy answer, although a parent who reads and enthusiastically enjoys a sprinkling of the most highly recommended children's books is a vital example for any youngster. Though I would never attack a young person's choice of a book, good or bad, I would never pretend to a false approval, either, any more than I would feign a rapt delight in those boring recitals of television plots to which some children are so given. The 'mm-hmmm' response is one I have polished to a high gloss. It signifies an interest in the child and his feelings, while withholding an ecstatic approval of the subject matter: it might be of keen significance to me that a child is wildly excited by a police shoot-out on television, for example, while the program itself is interesting only as an example of cultural aberration. And the child gets the message: He is left with an uneasy question in his mind about what exactly the adult thinks of all this. Our reticence can provoke a wholesome uncertainty; all understanding begins in questions."

Historically, the vast majority of the people buying comic books were white teens and pre-teens and the writers and illustrators were all white men. I do not say this as a problem but to point out that you write what you know and for your audience.

We can also note that far more businessmen are murderers in cop shows and movies than in real life. Such bad guys make a more interesting story than just another drive-by shooting. Should we start protesting this?

There are adults who enjoy setting up and participating in fantasy baseball leagues. These people are capable of rattling off obscure statistics for hours.

There are adults who can explain to you in detail the mythological underpinnings of Tolkien's Middle-earth as described within the Silmarillion. These people can rattle off detailed histories of an entire world that never existed.

There are adults who engage in table top war gaming who also happen to be historical war buffs who enjoy exploring counterfactual histories with mathematical mechanisms and interpersonal competition. These folks are also capable of talking your ear off about the civil war, WWII, WWII, etc... for weeks in addition to their own personal "what if" theoretical outcomes.

There are adults who can tell you about every comic book character under the sun from golden age, to silver age, to modern age comics. They can explain various retcons and how different story threads weave together to form a larger overarching plot.

There are adults who can tell you all there is to know about star wars, or star trek, or dr. who, or any number of other science fiction series.

These things are just hobbies people may participate in and I don't see a point in judging them so long as they are paying their bills and enjoying themselves.

There is nothing more noble about being able to properly describe the various wine grape regions across the globe as compared to someone who is able to talk your ear off about last football season or Pratchett's Disc World.

These things are all just a matter of taste and like-minded folks will tend to gravitate toward each other to share their thoughts on topics of shared interest.

Too many superheroes are "white dudes"?

OMG - this person needs to get a freaking life.
Or, better yet, write a comic book or make a movie about a whatever race/gender/political identity you want for YOUR superhero.

There are adults who can tell you all there is to know about star wars, or star trek, or dr. who, or any number of other science fiction series.

I have reached the point where, if a pop cultural reference is made that seems to have no "handle" by which to grasp it, I assume it's from Game of Thrones or some of the Star Wars cultural kudzu. A polite nod and I'm on my way.

At least with Batman, Superman, et al. I get the gist: Guy dresses up like a bat and fights bad guys. Guy dresses up like a spider and fights bad guys.

" A polite nod and I'm on my way."

Fantasy nerds don't accost me for liking the wrong franchise. I can't say the same for sports fans.

This may be the first time ever but I agree with Artemis. I happen to like Comic Book Movies, Comic Books, Charles Dickens, Jane Austen, history, and other things too numerous to mention. My latest purchase being history of Vinegar Joe Stilwell and Lord Mountbatten's Burmese Campaign during that unpleasantness from 39 to 45. You can have diverse interests and still be a serious person. You might even have an unhealthy interest in such inane bs as Miss Manners, Lenona, and be an adult...maybe.

Causticf,

There are lots of folks who have agreed with me on a wide variety of topics.

What a trio of folks have done over the years is jump in on any reasonable conversation I have been a part of and utterly derail the thread with nonsense.

In any event, enjoy the things you like and find people to chat with who share your interests.

I have never understood the propensity of folks to denigrate the interests and hobbies of others when it has absolutely nothing to do with them... just live and let live.

Define "inane bs," please.

If you'd ever read "Miss Manners Rescues Civilization," you'd know she's one of the wittiest people alive - and a modernist to boot. On any subject you please, if it happens to be in the index. (Yes, that includes truly tough issues, like crime prevention and preventing exploitation in general.)

For one thing, she likes to point out that there are two types of political correctness, just as there are two types of cholesterol. (Of course, even quite a few lefties, right now, would argue that there's way too much of the bad kind.)

And there's nothing childish about wanting to remember what good manners are, or how to recognize unkind people in advance - or reading a column that's truly wise and thoughtful, as a rule. (Unlike Amy Dickinson's column, which gets trashed half the time, since she doesn't think ahead very well.) Otherwise, I might have gotten brainwashed by the common idea that it's perfectly civilized for your party hosts to charge you admission just because they want to entertain above their means. No, it isn't - it's a shakedown, and a certain "host" lost several friends as a result. How is Amy Alkon's book on manners any more relevant? Unless you're putting down that book too.

Btw, I'm not disagreeing with Artemis. Except that, on the point of "these things are just a matter of taste," it's more complicated than that. E.g., not reading newspapers is not "just a matter of taste." Where would we be if almost no adults read newspapers? Things would be even worse than now. You can't say that about most types of pop culture. It's bad enough that many people freely say "I'm not into politics" as if that were practically a good thing.

And when you engage an adult stranger in conversation (outside of any convention, of course), it's merely a safe move to assume that that person prefers to discuss traditionally adult subjects. But it gets pretty discouraging when it gets harder and harder to find any adults who care about anything that isn't tech or pop related, since you can only listen politely for so long. As Kevin said, you can just nod and move on - but to whom?

Which is not to say that it's ever civilized to be a show-off, in real life, regardless of the subject matter. As the wise man said: "Being well-informed is but a stone's throw from being boring - and stones WILL be thrown."

"Define "inane bs," please."

Lenona

Okay, let's go with "Frivolous, puerile, trifling"

"Btw, I'm not disagreeing with Artemis. Except that, on the point of "these things are just a matter of taste," it's more complicated than that. E.g., not reading newspapers is not "just a matter of taste." Where would we be if almost no adults read newspapers?"

Lenona

Most Adults don't read newspapers today. Why would they? Newspapers aren't the main source of news for the everyday person. There are thousands of news sources that cater to different interests. This probably troubles you since you seem to need a guiding hand (Miss Manners) to live your life.

You're dodging my question. Of all the MM columns I've quoted from, what was irrelevant, frivolous, puerile, or trifling about any of them? It's not as though I'd ever quote anything she ever wrote about forks - unless, of course, Amy raised the subject first. (And mostly, MM only raises that subject when someone ASKS her. She cares far more about other subjects.)

As she's written over and over, practicing good manners isn't just a matter of keeping your job, a good friend or a spouse - it's often a matter of life or death, as in the case of road rage or dodging criminals. (Or raising potential criminals.) In that sense, manners are just as important as road markings and traffic laws. Hardly "trifling." The law is the "big brother" of manners, so manners are what keep us free from writing more and more laws to be enforced by the police.

(Not to mention that when you know the difference between good and bad manners, it helps you to spot the red flags in a potentially abusive relationship. Very important. Parents who know the difference - and CARE - also know how to teach their kids to grow up to be considerate human beings. Five-year-olds whose parents can't be bothered to teach them not to hit people or use foul language will likely grow up to be a threat to humanity.)

Most Adults don't read newspapers today. Why would they?

Because they should care about getting all sides of a story?

Because they should care about being well-informed when in the company of other well-informed adults?

Because they should care about setting an example of mental exertion for the lazy young to live up to?

It's like asking "why SHOULD anyone read the book when one can watch the movie version instead?"

Which brings me to the media critic Neil Postman (1931-2003), author of "Amusing Ourselves to Death." I don't remember whether he addressed the subject of kids needing truly adult role models, but, as the reviewers of his book said, he picked up where "the medium is the message" left off. Did he ever. Bottom line: TV news is no substitute for reading the news, and videos are not the way to give children a real education, however slow and difficult it might be to teach children to enjoy reading any book that takes more than a day to read. (In the same vein, dumping five-year-olds in front of video games at home is no way to teach them, later on, to do chores with any enthusiasm, expedient though it is at the time.)

Finally, why would teens WANT to grow up, overall, when they're surrounded by adults with a hedonistic, anti-intellectual attitude, since the existence of conventions isn't exactly a secret?

In case anyone didn't get my last paragraph:

Americans have a reputation for having a culture of shallowness, so there's every reason to fight against that. (One could argue that Southerners do just that, since they're stereotyped as being practically illiterate, but there's a long list of critically acclaimed Southern writers from the last 150 years or so.)

And regarding
"I have never understood the propensity of folks to denigrate the interests and hobbies of others when it has absolutely nothing to do with them..."

Actually, it does.

Coloring books for adults have been a big industry for the last few years. This is despite the fact that for the last 50 years or more, art teachers have been urging parents to give their children blank paper and crayons and NOT to buy coloring books, because such books stunt children's imaginations and encourage laziness. Can anyone blame parents and teachers for complaining when they can see that "kidults" are becoming the rule rather than the exception, since it makes their jobs all the harder?

As syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman wrote almost thirty years ago: "It isn't that parents can't say no. It's that there's so much more to say no to."

Or, as a fictional teen said:

"I am just about sick and tired of adults! They have the nerve to tell kids what to do and then they go ahead and break all their own rules."

And parents who revolve around their kids instead of the other way around are giving them yet another incentive NOT to grow up. (Example: no, you DON'T have to play Candy Land with your kids all the time; you can figure out how to arrange more playdates so the kids can play with PEERS more often, while you do your own thing. Or, you can tell the kids they have to help you finish the housework FIRST - and after a few weeks of that routine, they just might be happy to play alone, just to get out of chores. Adults who have their own lives are mysterious and alluring to children. "Kidults" are just boring after a while. Almost like groupies.)

From this old, long thread:

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/05/orit-might-be-a.html

myrna minkoff, don't you think not having kids is kind of immature? i mean, everyone has to grow up sometime.

myrna minkoff: one of us sits home watching "spongebob squarepants," wears t-shirts and sweat pants everywhere and vacations in disneyland; the other wears big-girl clothes, attends the opera and vacations in paris. you're right; one of us does need to grow up.

Bottom line - if you oppose the dumbing-down of society - and who doesn't? - that typically means putting some effort and sacrifice into that opposition. Even if that means never reading, in public, either "Harry Potter" OR "Fifty Shades of Grey." (Better yet, getting them from libraries, if you must, instead of paying for them.)

From Bill Maher, almost 20 years ago, for what it's worth:

"...history, religion, economics — all the courses recent college graduates have been allowed to skip so they could study Madonna and Muhammad Ali and vampires and lesbian novels after World War If and porn and how to brew beer. Those are all real college courses, I couldn't have improved on them comedically if I tried."

Also: "Liars and panderers in government would have a much harder time of it if so many people didn’t insist on their right to remain ignorant and blindly agreeable."

Lenona Says:

"And when you engage an adult stranger in conversation (outside of any convention, of course), it's merely a safe move to assume that that person prefers to discuss traditionally adult subjects. But it gets pretty discouraging when it gets harder and harder to find any adults who care about anything that isn't tech or pop related, since you can only listen politely for so long."

The fundamental issue at hand Lenona is that you are choosing to define "traditionally adult subjects" in a narrow way that manages to encompass your own personal interests while excluding items that you personally find boring.

That you personally find "tech" to be something intolerable to listen to for long periods of time... I believe that Causticf's point is that there are a great many adults who would rather stab out their own ear drums than engage in a conversation revolving around advice column topics.

That you see the value in such things and that you find those topics interesting is great... it is wonderful... but that is a matter of personal taste.

On a related note:

"For one thing, she likes to point out that there are two types of political correctness, just as there are two types of cholesterol."

There aren't just two types of cholesterol.

I am quite certain that a discussion on the chemical nature of cholesterol and the various types that exist would bore you to tears... which is why you do not actually know how many varieties of cholesterol there are.

At the same time, there are loads of people who would happily engage in a conversation about biochemistry over a conversation about what Miss Manners has to say on a given topic.

There is nothing more noble about your own interests than theirs.

In my opinion it would do everyone some good to cultivate a better societal expectation of scientific literacy... but unfortunately that opinion is not shared by everyone.

For the record, I don't discuss her column with real-life people. (Which is not to say I won't demand a stop to rude or vulgar behavior whenever I encounter it, as is everyone's right.)

There are other interests of mine that I care far more about - but I almost never mention them here, since they have far less relevance. Since Amy cares plenty about good behavior, wrote a book on it, and she brings up that subject time and again, directly or indirectly, that makes manners and etiquette relevant here.

And believe me, I can think of quite a few lofty, academic subjects I'd find boring. Take philosophy and chemistry, much of the time. But I'd still rather be with adults who at least CARE about academic subjects in general than with anyone who only cares about following the herd when it comes to the latest fads, conversational or otherwise. (Of course, lately, those who follow herds have become truly scary.)

Lenona,

Many folks fancy themselves interested in academic topics... and then utterly fail to be able to discuss them in an academic way.

While I share your desire that people should care about academic subjects, the overwhelming majority of folks are simply interested in acting as if they are educated or qualified to discuss these subjects at an academic level when they simply are not.

There is an overwhelming amount of people who believe they are experts in a wide variety of subjects they simply know next to nothing about.

Believe me, I don't want people to try to talk about things they don't know about - it leads to no good. I just wish adults wouldn't assume that other adults WANT to talk about traditionally juvenile subjects when there's a good chance they don't. Not talking much is often perfectly fine; it gives people time to think about what they will say, later on.

Btw, I have a certain fascination with botany and zoology, but I don't bring up those subjects here, because neither Amy or other posters tend to bring them up. So I couldn't say how long I could hold the interest of anyone with a degree in those fields.

To summarize what I said before: if one is opposed to the dumbing-down of society, there simply has to be a firm division between childhood and adulthood, so that children can truly look up to adults and learn to think "maybe working hard really CAN be a source of happiness, even when it's exhausting."

Lenona,

Wouldn't it just make more sense for adults engaging in conversation with others to read the room and try to discuss things of mutual interest, whatever that interest happens to be?

Depends on what you mean by "read the room."

You don't just assume that a bunch of women in their twenties would be delighted to talk at length about hair and shoes. Especially if they're not coiffed and dressed up.

Lenona,

Who exactly just walks into the middle of a group of people and then decides what the overall conversation is going to be about?

I have never identified a social situation where anything like this has ever happened.

Usually you are talking to one person, or a small group of people and the conversation evolves naturally.

No one is just walking up to a bunch of people they just met and deciding that the conversation topic for everyone involved is shoes.