Posts Tagged ‘meta’
So the other day Hark and myself and our housemate E and her friend-guest-of-the-moment were at London’s Wellcome Collection, learning about death, because, well, why wouldn’t you? Anyway, E and I ended up in the exhibition library, as might be expected from a PhD candidate and a failed PhD candidate, and got to nosing at some of the works amassed therein, readers, for the edification of.
E asked “do you identify as a collector of anything?” and gave the example of books accumulated for work – they’re not a ‘collection’, they weren’t assembled for the purpose of assembling, possessing and displaying them, they’re just there because we need them so often that it’s more useful to have our own copies than not – but we do think of them as distinct from the other books in the house, those belonging to other people or read for pleasure or whatever. She went on to explain that the book she had her nose in was posing a definition of ‘collection’ that was somewhat broader, and just referred to a group of artefacts amassed by a person. This is the sort of question which young academics ask of each other and is to be expected. Naturally, my thoughts flew to gaming, which is also to be expected, and I explained that – to me – there is a distinction between just owning stuff and collecting it.
Allow me to elucidate (well, I’m going to whether you do or not, it’s my blog after all). What it all reminds me of is what the staffers used to say to new customers, which I heard time and again whenever I went into GW of a Saturday, or a Sunday, or indeed of a Wednesday afternoon when I should have been doing double Games (in a way, I was… right?). In any GW branch, near or far, the hail-and-well-met salutation would always be ”So, what do you collect?”
I concede games quite often. More often, I suspect, than is widely considered proper, and perhaps more often than I should. It’s come to my attention of late that my motives in so doing are frequently unclear. If even the woman I love is sufficiently in the dark about said motives to be greatly confused and offended by my bowing out of a board game (and she is), it’s clear that some territory needs to be staked out and explored, and a case for concessions made.
I’m breaking the only-every-three-days rule because this post, this conversation, is probably more important than my arbitrary meta-rules about when I do and don’t blog. I’m posting it here because 1300 words is far too long for a comment thread in my opinion.
The back end of a year customarily sets one thinking in a state-of-the-system, stock-taking kind of mould. New possessions are acquired, room must be made, consideration of how they’re to fit into collections undergone. Doing so invariably indentifies a certain amount of absolute tat that just has to go, and a certain amount of stuff which might be perfectly valid in its own right but reduces efficiency in that of which it is a part. Chaff, in other words.
The What D&D Character Am I meme is doing the rounds again. I did it, because I’m a sheep and I was bored, but I noticed an Interesting Thing in the results. I’ll spare you the full writeup of my results (I imagine that anyone reading this has some idea of what they mean) but here’s the bit that isn’t telling folks how to suck eggs.
True Neutral Human Wizard/Sorcerer (2nd/1st Level)
No way have I got higher CHA than INT, unless I really did bluff my way through three degrees, but apart from that I think it’s pretty spot on. The inexplicable dual-class choice probably represents my inability to commit to either a creative or academic lifestyle. I have, after all, made some pretty counter-intuitive choices in my time… One does wonder how a Wizard/Sorcerer would actually play: maybe using the Sorcerer slots for spells you’re likely to spam, and the Wizard ones for selectively-prepared doom spells?
I actually want to try that now. Anyway, the gist rather than the gristle is this.