Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Manchu wrote:@Ahtman. Go on. Especially with regard to relativism and the internet, two things that I think have allowed people to communicate more genuinely.

I would disagree on both points. I think they have opened up the number of people that we have access to communicate with, but I don't think that the quality of the communcation has risen. If anything studies are showing that the ability to communicate is dropping. Younger generations don't pick up on non-verbal communication in nearly the same capacity as the previous ones becuase so much more communication is done through text (websites, texting) and less face to face. Add that to something like Facebook or Myspace where you may be friends with some of the people on ones friends list, there will also be a ton you never met and likely never will. Opening up the world has had the effect of isolating us even more. It also tends to breed an all or nothing attitude toward discussion, with subtlety and nuance being the casualties. Relativism just makes so many people think there is no truth and so they don't listen, or don't need to, anyone as everything is just, like your opinion, man. Again, this is a fairly isolating attitude. I suppose it isn't a suprise than that the decade starts with torture (Hostel, SAW) and ends with Zombies.

Manchu wrote:I'm thinking more of Max Brooks's Zombie Survival Guide.

That was a really good read. But that has more to do with the author rather than the actual content. Brook's used the zombie as a means to convey his message, which was in essence the changes a world may incur after a devestating event adn the personal stories involved.

The reason I would peg the zombie phenomenon on is the concept of the zombie itself. As a genre, it was widely ignored up until recently. Since we have done pirates. vampires and space travel related media in massive quantities, the small amount of zombie related material was light in comparison.

Hence an oft-ignored concept became widely used.

Another argument could be that the zombie itself as a message is powerful. When you think zombie, what can you relate as a metaphor for the shambling animated corpse of a dead man?

Ahtman wrote:

Manchu wrote:@Ahtman. Go on. Especially with regard to relativism and the internet, two things that I think have allowed people to communicate more genuinely.

I would disagree on both points. I think they have opened up the number of people that we have access to communicate with, but I don't think that the quality of the communcation has risen. If anything studies are showing that the ability to communicate is dropping. Younger generations don't pick up on non-verbal communication in nearly the same capacity as the previous ones becuase so much more communication is done through text (websites, texting) and less face to face. Add that to something like Facebook or Myspace where you may be friends with some of the people on ones friends list, there will also be a ton you never met and likely never will. Opening up the world has had the effect of isolating us even more. It also tends to breed an all or nothing attitude toward discussion, with subtlety and nuance being the casualties. Relativism just makes so many people think there is no truth and so they don't listen, or don't need to, anyone as everything is just, like your opinion, man. Again, this is a fairly isolating attitude. I suppose it isn't a suprise than that the decade starts with torture (Hostel, SAW) and ends with Zombies.

This was basically what I was getting at concerning "Teen & Twenties texting/chatting" ,but Ahtman expressed it much more eloquently.

FITZZ wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

Manchu wrote:@Ahtman. Go on. Especially with regard to relativism and the internet, two things that I think have allowed people to communicate more genuinely.

I would disagree on both points. I think they have opened up the number of people that we have access to communicate with, but I don't think that the quality of the communcation has risen. If anything studies are showing that the ability to communicate is dropping. Younger generations don't pick up on non-verbal communication in nearly the same capacity as the previous ones becuase so much more communication is done through text (websites, texting) and less face to face. Add that to something like Facebook or Myspace where you may be friends with some of the people on ones friends list, there will also be a ton you never met and likely never will. Opening up the world has had the effect of isolating us even more. It also tends to breed an all or nothing attitude toward discussion, with subtlety and nuance being the casualties. Relativism just makes so many people think there is no truth and so they don't listen, or don't need to, anyone as everything is just, like your opinion, man. Again, this is a fairly isolating attitude. I suppose it isn't a suprise than that the decade starts with torture (Hostel, SAW) and ends with Zombies.

This was basically what I was getting at concerning "Teen & Twenties texting/chatting" ,but Ahtman expressed it much more eloquently.

And Ahtman's 4444th post better be a good one for reaching such a milestone!

I was about to attempt to buck the trend and say I've been a fan of zombies since i was 9 but then i did the maths and that is only a month or two before the 2003 start of trend point :(

corpsesarefun wrote:I was about to attempt to buck the trend and say I've been a fan of zombies since i was 9 but then i did the maths and that is only a month or two before the 2003 start of trend point :(

Well...if we're bucking trends,then I suppose I qualify as I've been a fan of the zombie genre since 1979 when I first saw the original Dawn of the Dead.

@WarOne: Are you thinking World War Z maybe?

@Shuma: Cool concept. This is also what I think is the least plausible part of the Zombie Apocalypse scenario, however. It makes sense in "Night of" (where the threat parameters are mysterious) but not in "Dawn of" (where the threat is very well-known). And from what I gather, this "environmental" concept is all about clearly-defined threats, just ones that happen to be (or are made out to be) insurmountable.

@Ahtman: Relativism entails a set of values like any other conceptual framework. I think it makes communication more possible in the particular because it has universalized some aspects of more restrictive frameworks--i.e., provided a common ground if not always a common language. The same is functionally true of the internet.

Another question worth asking is "who is the primary consumer of this zombie fad?" Baby boomers? Some other generation?

FITZZ wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I was about to attempt to buck the trend and say I've been a fan of zombies since i was 9 but then i did the maths and that is only a month or two before the 2003 start of trend point :(

Well...if we're bucking trends,then I suppose I qualify as I've been a fan of the zombie genre since 1979 when I first saw the original Dawn of the Dead.

Bastard Though twas the original dawn of the dead that brought me to the light as well.

corpsesarefun wrote:

FITZZ wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I was about to attempt to buck the trend and say I've been a fan of zombies since i was 9 but then i did the maths and that is only a month or two before the 2003 start of trend point :(

Well...if we're bucking trends,then I suppose I qualify as I've been a fan of the zombie genre since 1979 when I first saw the original Dawn of the Dead.

Bastard Though twas the original dawn of the dead that brought me to the light as well.

No need to be upset Corpses, the fact that I got to see DotD in it's original release only means that I am now bone gratingly old.

FITZZ wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

FITZZ wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I was about to attempt to buck the trend and say I've been a fan of zombies since i was 9 but then i did the maths and that is only a month or two before the 2003 start of trend point :(

Well...if we're bucking trends,then I suppose I qualify as I've been a fan of the zombie genre since 1979 when I first saw the original Dawn of the Dead.

Bastard Though twas the original dawn of the dead that brought me to the light as well.

No need to be upset Corpses, the fact that I got to see DotD in it's original release only means that I am now bone gratingly old.

Well that would depend on how old you were at the time it was 31 years ago (nearly 32) so unless you were between 30 and 40 at that time i wouldnt really class you as bone gratingly old. Though ive still got at least 5 decades of life ahead of me

Manchu wrote:@Ahtman: Relativism entails a set of values like any other conceptual framework. I think it makes communication more possible in the particular because it has universalized some aspects of more restrictive frameworks--i.e., provided a common ground if not always a common language. The same is functionally true of the internet.

That is what happens in theory, but the way it plays out is different; let's call it the unintended consequences of modernism. Relativism in Philosophy can be a conceptual framework, but in lay use is used as an excuse to justify just about any behavior. The trouble with the internet could just be growing pains as it is such a radical new way to communicate and it came up on us fast. We are still learning how to properly integrate it and still learn to communicate in a meaningful way. Of course, it could just be that we are just creating generations of isolated little twerps that just sit inside all day getting high on themselves. That isn't fair as it really isn't just newer generations that do this but it is the ones that grow thinking that this is just how it is that will have more trouble coping without. As I stated before, there are studies showing that they lack basic understanding of non-verbal comminication. They can't read people. I have seen several examples of this in real life. I've seen teens have friends over and the entire time one would be on the computer while one watched a movie while the other would be on the phone. Their idea of hanging out was just being in the same house, not even necessarily the same room. There was a group of girls at a table in a restarount in which all of them where not talking to each other but were texting the whole time. There is also the times where I have seen people talking where one would ask the other what was up and they would tell them to check their facebook page. I always want to yell "YOU ARE RIGHT THERE, JUST TELL THEM!". There are also a great deal of all age groups that are navel gazing thanks to the net.

As I said this is just a work in progress, not a fully formed thesis paper or anything.

corpsesarefun wrote:

FITZZ wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

FITZZ wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I was about to attempt to buck the trend and say I've been a fan of zombies since i was 9 but then i did the maths and that is only a month or two before the 2003 start of trend point :(

Well...if we're bucking trends,then I suppose I qualify as I've been a fan of the zombie genre since 1979 when I first saw the original Dawn of the Dead.

Bastard Though twas the original dawn of the dead that brought me to the light as well.

No need to be upset Corpses, the fact that I got to see DotD in it's original release only means that I am now bone gratingly old.

Well that would depend on how old you were at the time it was 31 years ago (nearly 32) so unless you were between 30 and 40 at that time i wouldnt really class you as bone gratingly old. Though ive still got at least 5 decades of life ahead of me

I was 10 at the time (but tall for my age),went with my two older cousins to see it and immediately was hooked by the whole concept of a small group of survivors facing an enemy that could not be reasoned with or that would ever surrender.
I saw Night of the Living Dead a month or so later and have been a "zombie junkie" ever since.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:

Manchu wrote:@Ahtman: Relativism entails a set of values like any other conceptual framework. I think it makes communication more possible in the particular because it has universalized some aspects of more restrictive frameworks--i.e., provided a common ground if not always a common language. The same is functionally true of the internet.

That is what happens in theory, but the way it plays out is different; let's call it the unintended consequences of modernism. Relativism in Philosophy can be a conceptual framework, but in lay use is used as an excuse to justify just about any behavior. The trouble with the internet could just be growing pains as it is such a radical new way to communicate and it came up on us fast. We are still learning how to properly integrate it and still learn to communicate in a meaningful way. Of course, it could just be that we are just creating generations of isolated little twerps that just sit inside all day getting high on themselves. That isn't fair as it really isn't just newer generations that do this but it is the ones that grow thinking that this is just how it is that will have more trouble coping without. As I stated before, there are studies showing that they lack basic understanding of non-verbal comminication. They can't read people. I have seen several examples of this in real life. I've seen teens have friends over and the entire time one would be on the computer while one watched a movie while the other would be on the phone. Their idea of hanging out was just being in the same house, not even necessarily the same room. There was a group of girls at a table in a restarount in which all of them where not talking to each other but were texting the whole time. There is also the times where I have seen people talking where one would ask the other what was up and they would tell them to check their facebook page. I always want to yell "YOU ARE RIGHT THERE, JUST TELL THEM!". There are also a great deal of all age groups that are navel gazing thanks to the net.

As I said this is just a work in progress, not a fully formed thesis paper or anything.

Some interesting points here,I've witnessed the type of behavior you refer to almost every day with alot of the younger guys I work with,they seem positively lost with out their cell phones in their hands,and for the most part carrying on a face to face conversation with them is next to impossible as they have to stop every few seconds to check their text messages.

@Ahtman: The facebook example is a good one as it shows that there is more that needs to be communicated than a simple verbal exchange can effectively convey; people are referring each other to the context as well as the content. At the end of the day, I don't see any better reason to be pessimistic about these forms of communication than to be optimistic. The connection to the zombie fad therefore doesn't compute.

Manchu wrote:@Ahtman: The facebook example is a good one as it shows that there is more that needs to be communicated than a simple verbal exchange can effectively convey; people are referring each other to the context as well as the content. At the end of the day, I don't see any better reason to be pessimistic about these forms of communication than to be optimistic. The connection to the zombie fad therefore doesn't compute.

It could be viewed as seeing people as "less than human" and more of a "wall of text" that one interacts with,the mediums remove the "human" equation from communication.

Manchu wrote:@Ahtman: The facebook example is a good one as it shows that there is more that needs to be communicated than a simple verbal exchange can effectively convey; people are referring each other to the context as well as the content. At the end of the day, I don't see any better reason to be pessimistic about these forms of communication than to be optimistic. The connection to the zombie fad therefore doesn't compute.

Well it isn't the entirety of the issue, but it is certainly a piece of the puzzle. As a tool of isolation, or possibly being awkward at physical communication, let alone actual confrontation, zombies fit the bill pretty well. It doesn't get much more in your face and confrontational then a zombie trying to eat you.

I wonder if this hypothetical internet-consumed youngster feels anxiety bordering on fear when dealing with people she/he is no accustomed to? Sounds like a teenager from any era to me. And this isn't the first zombie fad.

I'll grant that technology is part of the very large puzzle but I'm not convinced the internet has much to do with the 2000s resurgence of the image/genre.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe the financial crisis?

Is it that people can imagine themselves as zombies or other people as zombies?

Manchu wrote:I wonder if this hypothetical internet-consumed youngster feels anxiety bordering on fear when dealing with people she/he is no accustomed to? Sounds like a teenager from any era to me. And this isn't the first zombie fad.

I'll grant that technology is part of the very large puzzle but I'm not convinced the internet has much to do with the 2000s resurgence of the image/genre.

Isolationism and fear,could be contributing factors to the resurgence though,remember the last surge in "zombie popularity" took place in the early Regan 80's.

When are people not afraid? When is the world not so complicated as to defy easy understanding? When are people not worried about their relationships with other people? These are the reasons I've had trouble coming up with a satisfactory explanation. Ahtman makes a good point to Shuma: zombies may be perennial because of their narrative usefulness, but why here and now and why for so long? Anti-tech sentiment would also posit that the net-gen's attention span would be incapable of focusing on zombies for this long. And yet, here we are. Still fascinated. Maybe more fascinated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Could be that as a "nerd" or "geek," I was more aware of the trend earlier. But that's still a long stretch by the standards of most fads. Popular bands have shorter lifespans than the current craze over shamblers.

Manchu wrote:I wonder if this hypothetical internet-consumed youngster feels anxiety bordering on fear when dealing with people she/he is no accustomed to? Sounds like a teenager from any era to me. And this isn't the first zombie fad.

I'll grant that technology is part of the very large puzzle but I'm not convinced the internet has much to do with the 2000s resurgence of the image/genre.

The internet hasn't been around that long, at least not as the ubiquitous thing that influences our daily lives as it does today. Also, I am not putting it just on 'the teenagers', it is just that the generations that have grown up communicating with their peers mainly through message boards and the like, are much more likely to be effected by these phenomena. Combine social dysfunction, communication retardation, a steady diet of everything is equally valid/nothing is valid, and toss in terrorism/wars on terrorism, and Fox News and you get a climate just aching for zombies.

Is it that people can imagine themselves as zombies or other people as zombies?

Other people, though I would think it is just the outside world in general, not just people.

So back to Shuma's environmental monster: the zombie is what's away from the computer.

Manchu wrote:When are people not afraid? When is the world not so complicated as to defy easy understanding? When are people not worried about their relationships with other people? These are the reasons I've had trouble coming up with a satisfactory explanation. Ahtman makes a good point to Shuma: zombies may be perennial because of their narrative usefulness, but why here and now and why for so long? Anti-tech sentiment would also posit that the net-gen's attention span would be incapable of focusing on zombies for this long. And yet, here we are. Still fascinated. Maybe more fascinated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Could be that as a "nerd" or "geek," I was more aware of the trend earlier. But that's still a long stretch by the standards of most fads. Popular bands have shorter lifespans than the current craze over shamblers.

People may always be afraid but the driving forces behind societal agitation does change over time. In fact, horror movies have been a good barometer of understanding what was on the cultures mind during those times. I'm sure FITZZ can be more explicit in that area, though there are several books and documentaries on the subject. I also shouldn't limit it to just social pages and poor body reading skills. Throw in piracy and you get another angle of isolation. Entertainment is now more widely available if you have an internet connection but it is more of a solitary event than ever before. Going to a movie used to be a communal event, a shared experience, but that has been eroding bit by bit ever since the VCR came out. We are at the zenith of that moment, I think. Television and Film has become less of a shared experience while, oddly enough, video games have become more of a shared experience as online gaming has exploded. The trick there is that most are violent games where you are killing the unknown other much of the time. Offline multiplayer that isn't sports is a rare thing these days.

Manchu wrote:So back to Shuma's environmental monster: the zombie is what's away from the computer.

You are thinking to literally about social anxiety. We are talking representing that anxiety, not the placement of actual zombies. They represent a unconscious communal fear vis a vis a sense of isolation and separation from meaningful human contact.

They aren't scared of being outside, they are scared both of not being able to deal with people concretely (face to face) as well as that they won't be able to have concrete relationships with real flesh and blood humans. There is no sense of connectedness to the tribe.

The explanation I keep returning to is the apparently agentless global financial crisis, where the indivdual greed of lower middle class consumers can allegedly destroy national and even regional economies while banks can somehow be more profitable than ever in the midst of a depression. The fiction of corporate personality is the touchstone for these times: the person who is to blame is unidentifiable, maybe identityless, a crowd of inscutable anti-beings that consume meaninglessly but are nonetheless frenzied by a bottomless hunger that does not seek nourishment. And the fear is that I'm going to turn into one of them or--oh God--am already infected.

Maybe that's why the real bastard in these stories is the guy in the suit who has the cure but won't give it out because he hasn't figured how to optimize his profits?

I mean, it's so . . . done.

We know who the bad guys are. We just got done sending them to Congress--no one really knows why. How many people would be overjoyed to hear of a zombie apocalypse? How many would think that the world would make more sense in that case?

We know who the bad guys are. We just got done sending them to Congress--no one really knows why. How many people would be overjoyed to hear of a zombie apocalypse? How many would think that the world would make more sense in that case?

People don't like to blame themselves for external problems that they take part in feeding. The zombie apocalypse would presumably make a lot more sense to people that don't understand cause and effect.

Also, I think you guys are looking too hard into external factors relating to the prevalence of the zombie in the current decade. Popularity is self replicating until it collapses, it doesn't need external input beyond simple visibility to maintain.

You might find this interesting Manchu...

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/06/21/night_of_the_living_wonks

Personally I'm of the opinion we need to do everything possible to make the zombie apocalypse sexy.

Peter Wiggin wrote:Personally I'm of the opinion we need to do everything possible to make the zombie apocalypse sexy.

Hmmm,I find myself curiously attracted to her.

Duh, sexy zombie. Rawr.

That pic is proof that even zombies can be afflicted with "butter face"

That looks liek Cannerus put on a few punds and did Halloween drag. Not sexy to me, folks.

@Fitzzy: Thanks for the link, mate. Prime example of my concern rather than an explanation thereof.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although . . . chick in the background has potential.

It really DOES look like Cannerus!