To thine own self be true ...
01/03/2004 . Source: Geoff Willmetts 

How do you see other people? All right, those waving their arms up in the air shouting, ‘With my eyes’, kindly sit down although it does have some bearing.

Hello everyone

How do you see other people? All right, those waving their arms up in the air shouting, ‘With my eyes’, kindly sit down although it does have some bearing.

How we look has some bearing on which groups we associate with. It’s almost an instinctual tribal reflex to ‘stay with your own kind or at least what looks like or believe to be your own kind’. Oddly enough, it isn’t really that racial. Anyone remember how with all the ‘Planet Of The Apes’ films that when it came to feeding/meal time, the cast split into chimpanzees, orangs and gorillas, irrespective of the person’s colour under the make-up. Human members of the cast ended up eating with the human looking crew.

It’s as if we feel safe amongst what we feel our own crowd. No doubt being one of a crowd also acts as a safety measure. If a predator is going to attack then your chances of survival are greater in a group than if you stick it out as an easy target. ‘Course, if you’ve watched any of the wildlife programmes on television, if a lioness has you sighted then she stays focused on you...unless you’re lucky enough to get back into the crowd and not young or elderly.

All right, that’s established the probable source of why people group up although even then further groupings take place invariably starting off with the pecking order. This can vary from species to species. Generally, the healthy alpha male keeps the other males in check to claim mating rites and general leadership. The male isn’t always seen as the head forever as there is also a significant pecking order of who’s in charge amongst the female members of the pack which doesn’t change as much as the male side. If there’s a battle of the sexes where polygamy is concerned, then there’s always another male that can look after the procreation angle. In many species, it’s the female alpha that rules the roost and the male alpha is only seen as a temporary figure. For other types of groupings, it tends to depend on other abilities like knowledge or leadership qualities as much as brawn.

Things change again when the intellectual angle changes or develops. Outside of particular tasks where brawn and brains make a symmetrical mix, individuals prefer company that matches their own level. Again, a demonstration of some internal mechanism taking place in blending in with your own company. Having something in common no doubt allows stimulation in ways that would otherwise be left undeveloped otherwise although it's still a representation of social grouping.

Now here’s the rub. As the ‘Planet Of The Apes’ example above pointed out, there isn’t always instant knowledge of the people whom you regard as your equal and it can easily be fooled. Much of the time, it’s more a surface appearance thing than prejudice. We like to be amongst people who look similar to ourselves. Even at SF conventions, people divide according to the costumes they wear although that can be seen as having a similar interest...unless you’re a Klingon that is. Likewise, there is a tendency to view everyone as being equal to yourself until you realise there is some marked differences. Such things invariably start with such innocent things as skin colour to style of clothing which can indicate wealth or attitude. Mannerisms or intellect that don’t come over as similar to our own can invariably be looked on as not being like ourselves that then is taken into play as to at what level you confide in people. Saying that, it’s easier to recognise your intellectual inferior far quicker than someone who is mentally superior and might be masking it for some time. Indeed, as you get older such criteria tends to be established rather quickly suggesting that experience or earlier knowledge is used to base some of these judgements on.

As first impressions go beyond that, we tend to see other people as we see ourselves. It’s when we realise they aren’t than an unconscious reaction kicks in to either separate from or look for someone matching your own ‘class’. Saying that, ‘class’ itself is a grey area cos all sorts of people masquerade to blend in to whatever they feel is their own category. Mind you, it’s not always that difficult to spot the fish out of water who don’t carry off such masquerades completely. They are either tolerated or expelled from the group should their behaviour not stay within particular perimeters. It’s even more interesting spotting those who accept such people as it’s probably an indication that they are either too easily fooled or masquerading in themselves.

Such mechanisms aren’t without their own protections. People who have some area of retarded intellect don’t necessarily see others as being any different to themselves which must be seen as some sort of internal protection against feeling inferior. In many respects, because they aren’t considered rivals cos often enough end up being protected instead. I’m making a generalisation here but it seems to hold true. Then again, we all fall for this if a subject is ‘over our heads’.

Where another category is concerned and equals are discovered, there is a need to blend in and look alike far before any pecking order develops and places your rank. This has happened with all generations. Even in the ‘Punk’ generation which proclaimed individuality, those who followed the trend ended up looking alike. These days, a similar thing affects people who choose to tattoo or metal decoration puncturing their bodies. Again, it's developing a social group that they can feel safe in. A camouflage mechanism to hide within a group irrespective of whether they really are part of the group. There’s a tendency to hide with what appears to be the biggest group. The fact that we don’t all feel like belonging to a single group probably has more to do with a little diversify protects the genetic pool from falling into an evolutionary cul-de-sac. Is it any wonder then that where a spontaneous mutation across a species happens, the new batch tends to group together first and no doubt attracts others who want to be part of the new group. It might well take advantage of mating with the camouflage group to spread its mutant gene more effectively.

Ultimately, for our own species, we tend to see others as ourselves until we are proven differently. It is then up to whether we intellectually overturn the mechanism and accept the difference or declare some prejudice that is undoubtedly the core root for things such as racism of any sort. It’s all very well that we can change our attire to fit in but it's a lot more difficult with skin colour or customs. A lot of the time, it’s how we declare our openness as to whether we are capable of belonging to one group or many that indicates how much or little it affects us. Some tend to be rather classless and don’t even need such trappings to get on with people.

Now we come to an interesting quandary. The Net is a great equaliser as no one really knows what anyone looks like other than the words on the screen. Indeed, it is common to believe the people behind the words on the screen are only presenting a particular image of themselves that might not match the physical reality. Even photos aren’t necessarily believed to be the person they represent. It’s when someone doesn’t act within the concords of any particular group that tends to indicate someone is really out of place. Contrary, we’re also much more aware if people become too familiar too quickly as well. People new to any group are eager to please, show their knowledge, etc to show they should belong there. I’m often reminded over the years how people come to me declaring their expertise and fall down on some innocent question but I’m probably singularly unique. It isn’t as though I belong to any group. Loners tend to be the ultimate wildcard.

That’s not to say that the mechanism still isn’t employed although now it’s applied more purely by subject matter. You’re here primarily because of an interest in Science Fiction or its grey cousins, fantasy and horror. Your level of expertise differs. Some of you are here to widen your knowledge of the subject. Others to keep their information up to date. Some even to add to the knowledge base. Many don’t speak at all. The core are probably using it as a means to talk to other members of the core. Depending on the level of interest in other subjects depends how you spread yourself across the Net looking for like-minded people. Notice the trend? The Net really enables not so much a classless grouping but a division of doers and lurkers. What turns you into a doer let alone a player depends on your desire or motivation to contribute to the conversation.

The mechanism works whatever the medium. There is always this need for people to group like with like first. This might change if some facet seems out of place and faces expulsion from the group or a desire to find others matching closer to your internal specification. If nothing else, this is now a demonstration of social evolution using a very old internal mechanism that affects every species on this planet. Humans are no better or worse coming from the same genetic pool.

If it happens here, imagine what it must be like on other worlds with sentient creatures as they climb the evolutionary tree. Should this mechanism be less, equal or stronger than our own, we might experience a dangerous reaction from either side should we ever meet. If anything, it’s a demonstration that we have to put out automatic groupings aside and be more tolerant as we go out into the universe. We might group but at least it shouldn’t lead to violence.

As some of the examples have shown, appearing as something you’re not indicates just how flimsy the group effect is really on people. If it’s possible to get on with people when we can’t see their faces - well, unless you’re on camera anyway - then it really should be the start of the decline in racism...providing that is, appearances don’t mean very much any more.

‘Course, in the real world, the group effect will take effect. You’ve got to be bloody-minded to be individual and even more bloody-minded to be equal to a class grouping you encounter and not afraid to stand out in a crowd. Whether it will cause other people to change is debatable. The flexibility to blend in with everyone can itself be considering a grouping as well. Then again, deeming other people as being more equal than not can only be considered a change for the better than not.

The counter-effect of such grouping often results in attacking those to which group we don’t belong. It’s often thought that racism is in-built and something that takes some effort to over-come. Such attacks are normally associated with differences in colour or religion. It will have to show even greater restraint should we ever encounter extra-terrestrials, let along how they might see us. Hopefully, it will be intellect that will restrain such primal controls and will put us equal to whoever we meet. It might even work amongst our own kind if certain groups can accept we are more alike than unlike behind a lot of our own trappings.

I doubt if anyone totally matches any particular grouping. If you make a list of labels that you think matches you then there can be some determination of how many group orders you blend with. Finding all the people with similar labels and put them together would be a life-time’s work so, much of the time, you end up being happy with one or two. The bigger the groupings, the easier it is to blend in at the edges or rise through the ranks to the core. The level of grouping importance is immaterial compared to getting on with everyone else...presuming you want a long and happy life. To do otherwise is what puts the world at risk.

None of this is about conformity but raising tolerance. If it can extend to interests then the same applies to the colour of your skin, religion and maybe some political orders. A more serious thought about what drives you to be prejudice against one thing but not another may prevent you thinking an extreme reaction is required to sort it out. If nothing else, it might lead to many truces and a tad more peaceful world.

Be happy. Be safe. Enjoy the rest of the website.

Thank you and good night

Geoff Willmetts

editor: SFCrowsnest.com

PS For those keeping up with my health, all I’ve currently got currently is the odd sniffle cold. My Mum’s been in Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton (hi folks) for three weeks. Now home and recovering for at least another month. If the editorial above is anything to go by when I’m pre-occupied, watch out for the future.

(Less Serious) Thought For The Month # 1: Just once, don’t you wish the captain of an Starfleet vessel was found and admitted guilty of anything, even if it was just jay-walking, littering with intent or not cleaning up his pet dog’s poohs?

(Less Serious) Thought For The Month # 2: There are many things about the TV series ‘Andromeda’ that puzzle me that’s it’s difficult to know which one to pick on. How about if all the Highguard were as good as Dylan Hunt, why did they ever lose the war?

Brood Patch: Considering all future SF shows from ‘Star Trek’ through to ‘Babylon 5,’, ‘Stargate SG1’, ‘Farscape’ and ‘Andromeda’ use energy based weapons, don’t you think it would make sense that personal force field or deflector technology would have developed at the same pace so as to offer some sort of protection from being zapped?

PS If you’ve survived this far in the editorial, let me reiterate something from the website newsletter and the above editorial. As you can see from the main page, we have one of the biggest SF/fantasy/horror monthly reviews columns on the Net. Our success has increased the number of books that comes in and our policy is to read everything before giving a review. We roadtest books so you have some idea of what you’re letting yourself in for when all you’ve got to go by is the cover and promotional blurb. That means actually reading the product and telling others what you think.

If you like reading books in the genre, think and can show you can write a decent review and, most importantly, live in the British Isles (sorry, expense, time and distance travelled prohibits elsewhere), contact me below for my ‘Reviews Flyer’ - put this in the subject ebox and we’ll see if you’ve got what it takes. We can’t pay you but a review for the price of a book has to be a good incentive. We have one of the most popular SF review columns on the Net. Think you’re up to writing a review or do you think it's a hard thankless task??

PPS: For those keeping track, I’m still about 20 months (early April 2003) behind with going through the ebook samples. Thank you for your patience but let me know if you’ve sold elsewhere so I can reduce my pile or if you’ve changed address, especially e-mail address. I can’t give you my comments unless that’s up to date.

This isn’t much of a repeat, just to show you’re not forgotten. Those sending in samples, be prepared for a long wait and read the Guidelines elsewhere on this website. They are there to help you do some of the right things and reduce the number of times I’m repeating myself over silly grammatical errors.

It makes editing a lot easier if any editor has less work correcting poor English which should have been sorted out in the first place. There’s an old editorial adage, if you can’t aim for perfection why should an editor nurse-maid you to that state? If you’re a writer, then you should understand the words and grammar of the job you’re supposed to be writing or are you considering it as mundane and boring as any other job to get right? Fall in love with making every sentence the best you’re ever letting anyone else read it.