Huh, interesting. Never having seen either one, I am intrigued by this. What makes a show geek-point-worthy? Are whole genres positive in the geek point world? Are whole genres negative?
I'd say it depends on whether the show has achieved cult standing. With Buffy, the cult viewers became entrenched in the characters lives and actually felt an emotional, personal connection with them. That is definitely geek point worthy. In the case of most reality shows like Survivor and American Idol, mere popularity doesn't translate the same level of obsession and personal involvement and hence I would call them geek point neutral (not negative).
In fact I would question whether anything can have negative geek points. In my opinion a deep interest or obsession can add to your total geek points but everything else has a neutral impact.
I would say that there are certain shows that either partake of or contribute to geek culture. Buffy, X-Files, Firefly, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, that sort of thing. I don't think all science fiction movies necessarily get the geek points, but the TV series sure seem to. (Also Monty Python, and quite a few other British comedies, come to think of it.)
I'm not sure I agree with the "cult standing" definition below. I do agree that I went a little too far with Survivor automatically being negative geek points -- I think negative points are appropriate for a water-cooler keeping-up-with-the-popular-culture sort of reference (back when it was in fact popular), but if one were deeply into a reality show for whatever twisted reason one could become a Reality Show Geek with positive-geek-point references that a casual viewer would not understand.
I don't know survivor, it didn't make it across the ocean. Any sports reference (unless it's a really obscure sport) is pretty much negative points. You might get away with fencing, archery, or something not generally shown on TV.
To me, a geek is someone who delights in geekery. Which in itself was beautifully described by a friend of mine:
"My definition of geekery is pretty much "anything that someone is really into the details of HOW it works." You could be into art, but an art geek knows about pigments and optics or the effect of fashion on art through history, and things like that."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
In fact I would question whether anything can have negative geek points. In my opinion a deep interest or obsession can add to your total geek points but everything else has a neutral impact.
no subject
no subject
I'm not sure I agree with the "cult standing" definition below. I do agree that I went a little too far with Survivor automatically being negative geek points -- I think negative points are appropriate for a water-cooler keeping-up-with-the-popular-culture sort of reference (back when it was in fact popular), but if one were deeply into a reality show for whatever twisted reason one could become a Reality Show Geek with positive-geek-point references that a casual viewer would not understand.
no subject
Any sports reference (unless it's a really obscure sport) is pretty much negative points. You might get away with fencing, archery, or something not generally shown on TV.
To me, a geek is someone who delights in geekery. Which in itself was beautifully described by a friend of mine: