November 21st, 2006


Previous Entry Next Entry
11:29 pm - on not watching tv...

(55 comments | Leave a comment)

 
on not watching tv... - graffiti.maverick — LiveJournal

• Recent Entries
• Friends
• Archive
> ChrisMaverick dot com
• profile


Art & Photography
> 365 Days of Mav
> Elseworld.com
> Mav's Flickr Stream
> MavTV (youtube)
> Party Nook

Wrestling
> International Males
> IWC Wrestling
> BDW Wrestling
> CWF Wrestling

Other
> 1KWFFH
> Mav's DVD Library
> Verdandi (currently down)
> Mav's Schedule (currently down)
> Mav's MySpace
chrismaverick. Get yours at flagrantdisregard.com/flickr

Comments:


[User Picture]From: chrismaverick Date: November 29th, 2006 - 05:10 am (Link)
see my answer to your other comment or my answer to Meron above for my question about the why and the being too busy. To sum up, I get having other interests. I have plenty of non-popular interests, but don't you feel like you're missing out by not being aware at least on some level of general knowledge?
[User Picture]From: marsinthestars Date: November 30th, 2006 - 03:49 pm (Link)
Not at all. In fact, I don't understand other peoples' obsession with many of the "popular" interests. I've always lived by the philosophy (though I would not have termed it a philosophy until just now) that you should be interested in what you enjoy, not what other people say you enjoy. Sounds pretty obvious, right? People say it all the time. But then they turn around and chew you out for not knowing the show or film Reality Bites. (This happened to me yesterday.)

But I actually believe it; I'm not missing out on anything on TV, because I don't enjoy sitting and watching TV. Unless I'm sitting with good friends, and we're watching TV as background to conversation/are amused by the show at the moment. But I won't watch it because it's popular. That's stupid. Double that for music.
[User Picture]From: chrismaverick Date: November 30th, 2006 - 04:09 pm (Link)
I don't mean watch things because they're popular. I mean know enough about things that people might be talking about to follow the conversation. For instance, I actually don't watch Lost. But it comes up enough in casual conversation that its worth it for me to know itsa show about people who were on a plane and crash landed on an island and there's a mystery going on. That's pretty much all I know. But its better than not knowing at all. In the case of Lost you seemed to be on par with me. But you've acknowledged before that you don't always know that much.

I mean, take for instance my examples from before of Pam Anderson. I'm not saying go out and see every piece of tripe she puts out. That would be stupid. But I actually talked to a person who wasn't sure which actress she was. I can't imagine not knowing who she was well enough that you couldn't pick her out of a line-up.
[User Picture]From: marsinthestars Date: November 30th, 2006 - 04:44 pm (Link)
I don't think I could pick her out of line-up either. Where would I have seen her?
[User Picture]From: chrismaverick Date: November 30th, 2006 - 04:59 pm (Link)
she's the person in the picture on this entry. As an actress she's probably most famous for having been on Baywatch. But really, she's more famous for being her.
 

• Go to Top
LiveJournal.com