View Full Version : Food for thought for nerds (My anti-top 100 100th solution)

05-15-2009, 11:49 PM
One of the more intellectually stagnant and unimpressive entries in an equally intellectually stagnant and unimpressive modern tradition - the Top 100 (Whatever) of All Time Tradition.

- - http://comics.ign.com/top-100-villains/ - -

This list might as well have been posted on one of those celebrity-crazed reality television stations.

Having a list that spans all publishers in this medium, a medium that is rich in intelligent, multifaceted, imaginatively wrought, intriguing, and above all else dangerously unpredictable, world-ending(ly) malicious antagonists (i.e. your Jokers, Thanos for crying out lound, Sinister, The-King-of-All-Tears, Stryfe, Cobweb, Apocalypse, and what-have-you), that features characters like these being ousted by simplistic ones representing passing fads, guilty but superficial fetishes, and recent but forgettable pop-culture exposure (ugh- Wolverine and those X-Men movies).

Catwoman, HarleyQuin, Lex Luthor,and Kingpin took a 'much' higher spot than the ones I mentioned (if they even appeared at all) besides the Joker, who was ousted for #1 by a character who actually has very little presence in comics at all, just the movies.

IGN is a nerds' website, there are plenty of closet meatheads that go there, sure, but for the most part, - for relatively fringie-#### lovers by relatively fringie-#### lovers. There should be some intellectual sanctuary from insufferable popular tastes, but there isn't.

This isn't all just about a specific subcultural vendetta either, all of these lists suck, and I usually don't believe in drawing absolutes, but there it goes, 'oh no I didn't.'

If HarleyQuin is more intense (intellectually, philosophically, viscerally, aesthetically, spiritually . . . .) than Thanos than I am deeply surprised Linsday Lohan (I don't care if I mispelled her name, it grieves to even know it) didn't land the top spot.

Let's just give Paris Hilton an honorary mention and Nobel Prize regardless what ridiculous list it is.

Its all my fault, I guess, for even reading the damn thing. I just wanted to watch the new Infamous gameplay and I happened to see a little headline that almost certainly meant a severe teabagging for a subculture I've loved since I was a little brat, and I just had to see how wrong they would get it. In a sad way, I was not disappointed.

Truth be told, the tally page loaded for ####, if I didn't have a severe cold right now, I would not have whittled away an hour and a half reading the damn thing.

That's it, I just got a brilliant idea, a solution to the top 100 countdown question. It is undoubtedly asking too much for them (never met' em) to simply stop making top 100 greatest anythings and just do something more productive with ones time, and mine too regrettably.

Instead, we'll just swing in the exact opposite, and equally tasteless, direction of passing fad, - stubborn elitism.

Any and all Top 100 underaged, bestiality money-shots caught on film - or whatever, must now be unbarably cosmopolitan and smug.

Why not, I mean the majority of those reading this nonesense on these large scale websites, that I guess I also visit, are probably just looking at the screen because they like to watch shiny things in motion. For the rest of us though, one hateful intellectual extreme is has gotten tiresome, let's swing the other way further than necessary until a few years down the line we exploit that 'trendy' outlook to death and repeat the cycle.

- From this day forward, all of these lists must hereby be weighed and written by panels of no less than 35 highly intelligent but pretentious and fanatical social parasites that no one wants to talk to, and who've never laid finger on the opposite sex (or the same, or corpses, or animals for that matter).

- Ten of them should be obsessive in the subcultural arena for which the list is themed, and I am saying they should make my irritating longwindedness seem lazy.

- The other 25 should consist of morbidly acute and (anal)ytical scholars in the fields of psychology, philosophy, history, anthropology, and so forth, and it is crucial that all of them be locked up alone for a week straight in a library pertaining to whatever cultural phenomena that is being needlessly tallied up.

- There is also the necessity for these madmen to all be in opposing viewpoints in their respective fields; for example the psychologists must be a volatile mix of egocentric humanists, behaviorists, and Freudians, as should the well-read philosophers of fervent utilitarian outlook be thrown in with equally well-read solipsistic nihilists.

- All the participants must tally up, say 600 hopefuls, then be escorted to an underground auditorum filled with armed guards who'll prevent the sleep-deprived scholars from killing one another until 100 champions have been grudgingly agreed upon.

Once all this has been finalized the results can then be aired. 70% of the viewers won't remember their own reactions after such reading or watching such a trainwreck that is so over-the-top in its own esotericism that their demograph can be disregarded, as it should with so many things.

As for all of the extremists, elitists, and the halfway literate sick housebound people (how I hope I am still just one of those), the results will probably make them halfway ecstatic and half-way want to vomit onto the publication.

Smaller ratios of the transfixed viewers will have either agreed wholeheartedly with what was said and be seized by a violent state of psycho-erotic euphoria, whilst the parties who were offended by the majority of the results likewise lose themselves to a tempest of rage.

This having happened both opposing extremes in a subculture next to no one cares about will swarm into the streets and an utterly apocalyptic Wild Hunt of a riot ensues, like the ones between bankers and lawyers of differing stances that occur over in countries like Pakistan and Taiwan.

Remember reading in history books in high school how earlier on in the 19th and 20th centuries riots, and often quite violent ones, would break out between, let's say, Surrealists and Impressionists, Modernists and Da-Da. At least those would have been entertaining.

Over here they always stem from moral agendas that have become stuck in politics, like gay marriage, and I have no plans to bring politics into this, but c'mon, abortions been done to death. Let's bring back riots starting over art that has a detrimental impact over the human psyche.

There was a time when certain unconventional symphonies performed in orchestral halls would, on occasion would exhibit a King in Yellow - like effect (never as bad mind you) over the crowd. Frightening? Most certainly. Fun? Hell yeah.

No more of all this- people either burning cars or ####ing in the streets because Michael Jackson got acquitted, or down in Mexico City when, last year, thousands of metalheads (guilty as charged) swarmed into the streets to beat up emo kids (though not of this).

Looking over this mess, I have my doubts regarding whether or not I really want to post all this. It is ironic that, just the other day, I fervently defended madness, in a thread that was aimed at deglamorizing it in one artform, and here I am, this rant instigated by IGN doing the same things, simply not in a way worthwhile to my elitist-fanatical loser temperament.

Its Friday night, and I sure as #### hope I lose this pneumonia pretty soon.