Day 12: Nerdfighting!

Hello!

Or should I say…”Good evening Internet! It’s Friday!’

No? Okay…

So I’ve been running out of ideas for this blog. The next film I’m seeing is tomorrow. The two new albums I want to listen to aren’t out yet. I’ve had my Facebook rant. I’d rather do my Brit Award and Oscar rants closer to their times, given that their shortlists were released yesterday. And I’m saving my big albums post for next week.

Yup. Lucky for you guys, you will be succumbing to one of my infamous albums posts.

But in the mean time, I thought I’d write a little bit about something that I was never really interested in and, to be honest, still not particularly enthusiastic about, but everyone else is: YouTube.

The only things I really use YouTube for are movie trailers and videos from Later…with Jools Holland. Sure, I have shown people other videos. Maybe a funny ice-bucket challenge. Or a Ted talk. Or the TV series of Just A Minute. But all this was amid PSY’s smash hit Gangnam Style officially breaking YouTube. This has made me wonder if I’m missing out on anything.

Turns out…not really.

This is because the “YouTuber” who all my friends seem to rave about goes by the name PewDiePie. Given the fact that you have actually managed to find this blog in the mysterious vast expense of pixels and wasted time that is the Internet, I’m sure you’ve all heard of him. Basically, this Swedish dude films himself playing a video game. That’s literally it. And it’s made him a multimillionaire.

The thing I find incredibly odd about Mr Die Pie is that the thing that provides the entertainment is not the video game, which was specifically designed for entertainment, but his reactions to it. This means that some guy with an accent playing the game is more fun than actually playing the game.

Now, I’m not a gamer like many of my friends (the last game I played was Dance Central. And I ruled), but that just seems wrong in so many different ways!

However, amidst the confusing, unexplainable nature of YouTube, I have still managed to find things on YouTube (besides excerpts from tele) that I do rather enjoy. So, as a special treat to you guys, I will be sharing my five favourite YouTubers!

(As a disclaimer, you will know that I know nothing about YouTube, so you’ve most likely heard of all five of these guys. The reason I have chosen five is because they are the only YouTubers I know I like, having sampled very, very few. Regardless, hope you enjoy!)

5. The Third Pew

The thing that I seem to have in common with quite a few of the YouTubers on this list is that I seem to take a similar point of view to my blogging as they due to their…vlogging? It seems to be something they do for themselves rather than for their viewers (no offence guys. Please read my posts! PLEEEEEEASSE!). This means that they don’t follow a similar theme, so you never know what to expect. And this is exactly what Nathan from The Third Pew does perfectly. On top of him being one of the most hilarious people I’ve seen on YouTube, he just vlogs about whatever he feels like. That’s what gives the channel its variety, and thus awarding Mr Pew a coveted place on this rather shambolic list of YouTubers this guy has has come across.

4. Vlogbrothers

Ah, calling them big shots at #4 are John and Hank Green from the Vlogbrothers.

These guys are brilliant. They’re funny. They’re insightful. They’re inspiring. They have created an entire community on YouTube (Nerdfighteria, for those of you who have been living under an even darker rock than I have. Yet have still found themselves on this blog) which simply encourages people to be nice to each other. And they have gained such a huge, dedicated following based on this simple ideology. What better way to use YouTube than as a force for good in the way the Greens have managed to?

And give that, in general, two new videos are made EVERY WEEK, you’ll never be short of something on their channel to enjoy.

3. Jeremy Jahns

It’s seems a bit weird calling this guy a YouTuber, given that he is more of a film critic. But it’s on YouTube…so yeah! Logic!

I have watched a lot of film reviews on YouTube, but even the professional critics don’t view movies in the same way as Jeremy Jahns. This guy has an immense knowledge of film, and knows exactly what the lay cinema-goer is looking for in a film. Not to mention that his reviews are infinitely more entertaining than any professional movie critic. A lot of them just discuss the film in ways that are kind of unapproachable to people who watch films just because they feel like it. As Jahns reviews these films by himself, he can say whatever he feels like and not have somebody in his ear questioning him throughout.

They would be rather bored, however, because this guy is so quick on the ball and possesses such a wonderful exuberance about him, that they wouldn’ really have much to say.

2. Savanna Brown

Again, Savanna Brown’s channel is full of stuff that is simply random ramblings about whatever. I’m not sure what there is to say about this YouTuber, except that she just gives off that incredible feel-good vibe. As if, whatever video of hers I decide to watch, by the end of it I’ll have slightly more happiness and faith in humanity than I did just prior to pressing play. And that’s everything I need in order to be satisfied on a scale of YouTube-satisfaction.

1. Bazpierce

One of my good friends, Ed (hi Ed!!!!!!! I’m not sure what the worst thing that can happen by putting names on my blog is…anyway) has, in my opinion (and his) an excellent sense of humour. It’s highbrow, sarcastic, but also just plain random. What better sense of humour is there than that?

Basically, Barry Pierce (a.k.a Bazpierce) is a gay, Irish version of Ed.

This guy is the epitome of everything I love about the actual BookTube community which reviews stuff other than young adult. Not only does he have an impeccable knowledge of both modern and classic literature, but he is able to convey his enthusiasm and ideas in such an effective way. This makes his videos hilarious on one end of the scale, but also valid as a book review video on the other. A beautiful combination!

His review of Eleanor Catton’s The Luminaries actually convinced me to read it for some strange reason…and it was incredible!

So that’s my random post for the day…

See you guys soon!

P.S In reference to the Brit Awards, the only category really worth watching out for this year is that for “Best International Group”, whose nominees are The Black Keys, First Aid Kit, Foo Fighters, War On Drugs and 5 Seconds Of Summer. This is only because War On Drugs have been nominated, and if producing what was arguably the best album of 2014 doesn’t get you a Brit Award, then lord help the Brit Awards.

John Green – The Fault In Our Stars

When deciding on a book to immerse myself in, I often receive many recommendations from a range of sources. Sometimes it may be my friends that urge me to read various books. My dad urged me to read the hilarious Hitch-hiker’s Guide To The Galaxy and also the not-so-hilarious 1984. Ed has urged me to read the more time-consuming books, such as The Luminaries, but also some of the most thought-provoking, such as Lolita and Slaughterhouse-Five. Sav urged me to read My Sister’s Keeper, and as a result I remain the only person in four years to have ever rented this book from the school library.

Sometimes it is cinema that makes me read these books. When I saw that Under The Skin was in cinemas, when I found it was a book, I read it immediately. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and Anna Karenina also provoked this reaction, though the former was too boring to read beyond 150 pages, and having seen the latter, I decided that the film (an extraordinary one, by the way) can be seen without reading the 700-page-classic-Russian novel.

However, neither of these factors stimulated my interest in reading John Green’s most recent novel The Fault In Our Stars, which has received a Twilight-proportionate amount of interest from teenage fangirls. So unsurprisingly, it wasn’t a friend or the recently released film that caused me to read this book: society recommended it to me.

I remember when I first came across the trailer to this film, and seeing that four of my Facebook friends had shared the YouTube link with messages such as ‘OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!’ and ‘SO BEAUTIFUL!!!!! [insert relevant emoticon]’ Ever since that fateful day, not only has it been heavily advertised in every form of media, but has also become a key talking point with many if my friends, and wasn’t helped by my recently-instigated interest in the Vlogbrothers.

So I decided to check out what all the fuss was about, and read the book. Was it good?

Well…I guess.

This wasn’t a viewpoint I wasn’t expecting to have, being surrounded by a public that seems to define this books as the best thing that has happened, and will happen, to literature and people themselves. But hype can have contrasting effects. Sometimes, one will hear of the hype created and immediately increase their standards, as is what generally happens, whether this be a book, a film, an album, whatever. Alternatively, to the more cynical of us, it is assumed that if social media hype something, then it is immediately mainstream/not cool/unsuitable, and thus rubbish, hence standards are lowered. For this particular novel, it was the former. Having seen the trailer and rekindled my almost unhealthy interest in teen/coming-of-age fiction, I will not deny that I was excited about reading it. And whilst I wasn’t disappointed as such, I felt that improvements could have been made.

Firstly, the characters. This story tells the story of Hazel and Augustus, two cancer-stricken teenagers who fall in love. Now, some may be against the fact that I have decided two describe the two as ‘cancer-stricken’, which is understandable. I read one description that this books was about two people with cancer, but ‘is not about cancer’. Whilst it is clear that Green works very hard to distance cancer from the relationship itself, as it should be, it still acts as an incredibly strong obstacle, and so cancer is always discussed, or implied, and whilst it may not play a specific part in the events occurring, it is always present. For example, near the beginning, Hazel is asked to tell her story, and she begins with ‘I was diagnosed when I was thirteen…’ This causes Augustus to interrupt and ask her to tell her ‘true’ story, but it shows that cancer is a particularly prevalent theme of the novel. which kind of defeats the point of not being ‘about cancer’. In hindsight, it seems that Green has meant for this to happen, but when trying to focus on a relationship, cancer is always mentioned and intrudes on whatever is happening. Whilst some may consider this necessary, it did hinder my enjoyment of the book as a whole.

Secondly, metaphors. This book is very poetic, though not a Lolita-kind-of-poetic (Lolita. Love of my life. Fire of my loins. My sin. My soul. Lolita.). That was poetic in a more literary sense, making reading it almost like reading an anthology, and an effervescently beautiful one of them. The Fault In Our Stars is poetic for the purpose of meaning rather than literature, hence the ridiculous amount of metaphors, ranging in success from the powerful to the downright absurd. An example is the fact that Augustus, despite being in remission from cancer, still carries cigarettes and always has one in his mouth, but never lights it.

‘You put the killing thing right between your teeth, but you don’t give it the power to do its killing.’

This particular metaphor, undoubtedly the most prevalent of them all, has generated hugely contrasting opinions, from those who consider it to be the leading message of the novel, to those who think it to be a meagre attempt by Green to create meaning. Personally, I am not too sure. I appreciate that it is a clever metaphor, given their dire situations, however you easily get tired of it when it is cigarettes are put in mouths every other page. I guess metaphors are only really there to enable people to think about it, so think as you like.

Thirdly – and, granted, this is being petty – inconsistency. Nothing to do with the science or anything, but more specifically the language of Hazel and Augustus. Hazel always mentions that her parents wish she could live like a normal teenager (her excuse whenever she enters the typical hormonal strop of any 15-year-old). However, she speaks very eloquently when talking about certain topics, such as her favourite book, An Imperial Affliction (which, if you’re interested, doesn’t exist in real life, and thus neither does the epigraph at the beginning), but not so eloquently about other topics, generally smalltalk. Similarly, Augustus writes extremely eloquently, as shown by his letters, and also speaks very eloquently when discussing his metaphors. However, there are stints where he speaks like a typical teenager. Whilst it might be Green’s attempt to highlight interests, passion, wonder etc., it seems odd how the style of speech can jump quite quickly, thus confusing me a bit.

Despite these three factors, which admittedly did hinder my admiration of the book, I still found the book very enjoyable to read. It may have been the curiosity of what could happen to them, given that their days were numbered. Or it could have been the fact that you are always rooting for them regarding their cancer battles, which make the characters seem more tangible than fiction, which is always important. Or it could be that I read the entire book whilst listening to Badly Drawn Boy’s The Hour Of Bewilderbeast (brilliant, and also relevant in places. I strongly recommend it).

Anyway, in conclusion, if you are looking for a friendly, quick Summer read, then The Fault In Our Stars is a great book for you, and I’m very open to disagreements, so I’d be interested to hear any of your own opinions.

If you have read it, or are for some reason desperately trying to avoid this book:

-For a coming-of-age novel, read The Perks Of Being A Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky.

-For a cancer-related novel, read My Sister’s Keeper by Jodi Picoult.

Alternatively, just listen to Badly Drawn Boy, okay?

Okay…