Thinking Back On All The Crap I Learned In High School
I took a quiz at a friend’s site yesterday that was supposed to determine which high school social category I fit into (were I still in high school, of course.) This determination was to be made from evaluating my responses to 50 questions mostly concerned with current pop culture and what my personal choices would be in certain preconceived situations.
It was kind of funny, first of all because I had only a tenuous grasp on most of the cultural references used in the test questions. I knew maybe 75% of the bands, understood some of the category labels, but hardly any of the ‘hip’ jargon.
This was the day of that long-anticipated formal announcement, then: “On this day in the Year of the Lord 2006, we pronounce you, Mr. Inca F. Peru, officially old and out of it. After a short speech and some Q & A, there will be coffee and donuts available in the lobby. Thank you.”
I tried to give truthful answers, though some of the questions were pretty vague or couldn’t really be answered in the relative scale format provided. Anyway, the results were tabulated and it was concluded that I am (or would be) 52% Jock, 42% Stoner, and 40% Emo Kid.
Obviously the percentages weren’t meant to total 100, as I had originally assumed. I guess what they mean is around 50% of me is a mixture of Jock, Stoner, and Emo Kid (I have some other smaller percentages in me, too; in categories like Hot, Loner, Prep, Geek-Nerd, and Punk. In short, I appear to be a cultural mutt. Also, I apparently have zero traits common to two other categories – Ghetto and Goth.)
The rest of me is left up to my own determination, I suppose.
**********
The first thing that occurred to me is that high school doesn’t appear to have changed a whole lot since I attended, back in the late 1970’s. Determining categories to put others in, and figuring out where you had been placed, was of paramount concern. In that sense, things are almost exactly like they were 30 years ago, and probably 60 years ago, too.
The labels have changed names here and there, and there appear to be more specialized sub-categories now, but really, from what I can tell the basic definitions and parameters are still in place.
We had Jocks, too, and Jockettes, who were girls who played sports and/or who dated jocks. We also had Wannabes, both boys and girls who wanted to be Jocks/Jockettes really bad, but couldn’t make it; so instead they hung around the fringes of the Jock world, as athletic trainers, hangers-on, and all-purpose sycophants.
In my school the drug consumers were called Jellies, short for Jellyheads. The modern equivalent would be Stoners, and we may have used that term as well. But there is a subtle difference, I think. At the time I was in high school, most everyone in my class got high at least sometimes. Whether one was a credentialed Jellyhead or not was determined by frequency of use and visible devotion to the practice. If you only smoked occasionally, at a party when someone passed over a joint (think Bill Clinton), you really didn’t qualify for drughead status. On the other hand, if you carried your weed with you at all times, kept a bong on the floor in your back seat, manicured your lid on top of your desk in the back of your English class during third period, drew marijuana leaves all over your cardboard book covers, etc., (think Cheech & Chong) you were likely a member in good standing of the Jellyhead club.
The rough 1970s equivalent for a Geek-Nerd was a Brain. I say roughly because I sense today’s Geek-Nerd designation is as much a critique of one’s social life (or lack thereof) as it is of one’s relative intelligence; whereas Brains were the kids who were obviously so intelligent that we couldn’t even think of anything derogatory to call them. Of course, Brains were often Geeks and Nerds socially, too; but not necessarily always. I had one friend who was of exceptional intelligence, far beyond what would be regarded as simply really smart. But he was also a starter on the football team, and drank beer and smoked weed with the best of them. I used to wonder sometimes when we were partying, since my friend was exponentially more intelligent than I was, did that mean when we were drinking and getting high that he was destroying exponentially more brain cells than I was? If so, I doubt it hurt him too much. He had plenty to spare.
By the way, if you were really aggravated at a Brain and wanted to take a shot at him, you called him "Slide Rule." That's right, Slide Rule. That was considered to be "dropping the big one" on somebody, as these things went.
The most universally despised category was the Straights, also called the Goodies, or (worst of all) the Narcs. No one wanted to be in this category. It was really a catch-all for Brains who knew they were Brains and were snooty about it; for Jocks who recited the company line their coaches fed them and/or were members of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes; and also for Student Council participants, determined virgins of both sexes, and people who wouldn't get high with you.
There were a few others I’ve forgot by now, I am sure, and some subcategories I left out intentionally so as not to make things more confusing than they already are (Goat Ropers a/k/a Shit Kickers, for one; these were specifically children of the well-off who decided to get back to their roots, or somebody's roots, and dip Skoal and join the FFA and sign up for Industrial Arts classes.) But I think I got most of them. Today’s Jocks and Stoners match up almost directly with their 1970s antecedents, and the Geek-Nerds are a rough match for the Brains of yesteryear. Today’s Preps were yesterday’s Straights, basically. However, that still leaves us with today’s Hot, Loners, Emo Kids, Punks, Ghettos, and Goths.
The Punk, Ghetto and Goth kids would have been Jellies in the 1970s. The Jelly Heads as a category had ambiguous boundaries, and just about anyone who got high and was a little off otherwise got that designation. "Hot" is a pornography term that has crept into the culture since I was in school; at any rate, I don’t remember any strict categorization based on looks only. We did have Loners, of course, but I guess we did not put them into a separate category. If forced to choose, I guess the Loners would have been Jelly Heads, too, probably further designated by a sub-category like Freaks, a/k/a Weirdos. That meant freaky and/or weird in a vaguely positive sense, by the way.
The oddest category I came across in today’s parlance was Emo Kids. Initially I had no idea what that was, even though I am apparently 40% one. Checking online at the Urban Dictionary confused me even more. I finally decided the Emo Kids category is the 2000s version of a catch-all designation, since apparently no one agrees on a general definition. I gather one predominant Emo Kid trait is what we used to call being “laid back.” Someone who was laid back was universally admired for not getting too worked up about anything, for not being overly concerned with outward appearances, and for not slavishly following trends.
Someone who was laid back was always “cool”; and knowing someone who was cool and being cool oneself was the coolest thing of all. As I am sure it still is.
Emo Kids, huh?
I took a quiz at a friend’s site yesterday that was supposed to determine which high school social category I fit into (were I still in high school, of course.) This determination was to be made from evaluating my responses to 50 questions mostly concerned with current pop culture and what my personal choices would be in certain preconceived situations.
It was kind of funny, first of all because I had only a tenuous grasp on most of the cultural references used in the test questions. I knew maybe 75% of the bands, understood some of the category labels, but hardly any of the ‘hip’ jargon.
This was the day of that long-anticipated formal announcement, then: “On this day in the Year of the Lord 2006, we pronounce you, Mr. Inca F. Peru, officially old and out of it. After a short speech and some Q & A, there will be coffee and donuts available in the lobby. Thank you.”
I tried to give truthful answers, though some of the questions were pretty vague or couldn’t really be answered in the relative scale format provided. Anyway, the results were tabulated and it was concluded that I am (or would be) 52% Jock, 42% Stoner, and 40% Emo Kid.
Obviously the percentages weren’t meant to total 100, as I had originally assumed. I guess what they mean is around 50% of me is a mixture of Jock, Stoner, and Emo Kid (I have some other smaller percentages in me, too; in categories like Hot, Loner, Prep, Geek-Nerd, and Punk. In short, I appear to be a cultural mutt. Also, I apparently have zero traits common to two other categories – Ghetto and Goth.)
The rest of me is left up to my own determination, I suppose.
**********
The first thing that occurred to me is that high school doesn’t appear to have changed a whole lot since I attended, back in the late 1970’s. Determining categories to put others in, and figuring out where you had been placed, was of paramount concern. In that sense, things are almost exactly like they were 30 years ago, and probably 60 years ago, too.
The labels have changed names here and there, and there appear to be more specialized sub-categories now, but really, from what I can tell the basic definitions and parameters are still in place.
We had Jocks, too, and Jockettes, who were girls who played sports and/or who dated jocks. We also had Wannabes, both boys and girls who wanted to be Jocks/Jockettes really bad, but couldn’t make it; so instead they hung around the fringes of the Jock world, as athletic trainers, hangers-on, and all-purpose sycophants.
In my school the drug consumers were called Jellies, short for Jellyheads. The modern equivalent would be Stoners, and we may have used that term as well. But there is a subtle difference, I think. At the time I was in high school, most everyone in my class got high at least sometimes. Whether one was a credentialed Jellyhead or not was determined by frequency of use and visible devotion to the practice. If you only smoked occasionally, at a party when someone passed over a joint (think Bill Clinton), you really didn’t qualify for drughead status. On the other hand, if you carried your weed with you at all times, kept a bong on the floor in your back seat, manicured your lid on top of your desk in the back of your English class during third period, drew marijuana leaves all over your cardboard book covers, etc., (think Cheech & Chong) you were likely a member in good standing of the Jellyhead club.
The rough 1970s equivalent for a Geek-Nerd was a Brain. I say roughly because I sense today’s Geek-Nerd designation is as much a critique of one’s social life (or lack thereof) as it is of one’s relative intelligence; whereas Brains were the kids who were obviously so intelligent that we couldn’t even think of anything derogatory to call them. Of course, Brains were often Geeks and Nerds socially, too; but not necessarily always. I had one friend who was of exceptional intelligence, far beyond what would be regarded as simply really smart. But he was also a starter on the football team, and drank beer and smoked weed with the best of them. I used to wonder sometimes when we were partying, since my friend was exponentially more intelligent than I was, did that mean when we were drinking and getting high that he was destroying exponentially more brain cells than I was? If so, I doubt it hurt him too much. He had plenty to spare.
By the way, if you were really aggravated at a Brain and wanted to take a shot at him, you called him "Slide Rule." That's right, Slide Rule. That was considered to be "dropping the big one" on somebody, as these things went.
The most universally despised category was the Straights, also called the Goodies, or (worst of all) the Narcs. No one wanted to be in this category. It was really a catch-all for Brains who knew they were Brains and were snooty about it; for Jocks who recited the company line their coaches fed them and/or were members of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes; and also for Student Council participants, determined virgins of both sexes, and people who wouldn't get high with you.
There were a few others I’ve forgot by now, I am sure, and some subcategories I left out intentionally so as not to make things more confusing than they already are (Goat Ropers a/k/a Shit Kickers, for one; these were specifically children of the well-off who decided to get back to their roots, or somebody's roots, and dip Skoal and join the FFA and sign up for Industrial Arts classes.) But I think I got most of them. Today’s Jocks and Stoners match up almost directly with their 1970s antecedents, and the Geek-Nerds are a rough match for the Brains of yesteryear. Today’s Preps were yesterday’s Straights, basically. However, that still leaves us with today’s Hot, Loners, Emo Kids, Punks, Ghettos, and Goths.
The Punk, Ghetto and Goth kids would have been Jellies in the 1970s. The Jelly Heads as a category had ambiguous boundaries, and just about anyone who got high and was a little off otherwise got that designation. "Hot" is a pornography term that has crept into the culture since I was in school; at any rate, I don’t remember any strict categorization based on looks only. We did have Loners, of course, but I guess we did not put them into a separate category. If forced to choose, I guess the Loners would have been Jelly Heads, too, probably further designated by a sub-category like Freaks, a/k/a Weirdos. That meant freaky and/or weird in a vaguely positive sense, by the way.
The oddest category I came across in today’s parlance was Emo Kids. Initially I had no idea what that was, even though I am apparently 40% one. Checking online at the Urban Dictionary confused me even more. I finally decided the Emo Kids category is the 2000s version of a catch-all designation, since apparently no one agrees on a general definition. I gather one predominant Emo Kid trait is what we used to call being “laid back.” Someone who was laid back was universally admired for not getting too worked up about anything, for not being overly concerned with outward appearances, and for not slavishly following trends.
Someone who was laid back was always “cool”; and knowing someone who was cool and being cool oneself was the coolest thing of all. As I am sure it still is.
Emo Kids, huh?
2 comments:
You need to create a quiz for us 70's kids. Yeah, I'm still a kid.
Oh man, the names back then. Our Jellies were called dopers. The kids that smoked cigarettes were greasers. Socials were the snobs. Yep, brains for the smart kids. Long haired guys and gals that fell with them were freaks, not a bad thing to be called back then. The outcasts of our school had a homegrown name taken after the last name of a boy five years older who did something at school so out of the norm that if you were called this last name, you were definitely an outcast. And narc. Anybody who wanted to be cool would rather die than be called a narc. I remember a boy being called a narc during school and he vehemently denied it, almost to tears. Narc was not a nice thing to be called back then, and I'm not sure why. I honestly think the name narc had too many definitions to many people, that no one really knew what it actually meant. There was more to being called a narc than just refusing a toke. There had to be.
Post a Comment