IDB

obliviongrace wrote:That's a very interesting point you make that perhaps this is Dan's way of accepting his feelings, and it leaves him feeling better than if he forced himself to act happy. I had forgotten about that speech in the liveshow, but the behavior I've seen in him is definitely similar to what he described. Although, if this is what is working well for him right now, that's a bit sad in that I find that kind of behavior most stressful. Perhaps I'll just have to avoid his liveshows whenever I'm already feeling stressed from a day.

I found a minute to dig up the quote I was thinking of from Dan's January 10 liveshow:

“That’s just my sense of humour, I believe that if you’re somebody that’s making fun of your problems with depressing jokes, that’s a really good thing because it shows that firstly you acknowledge issues and you’re not too proud and you’re willing to talk about things, which is good. And that you accept them and you don’t take life too seriously and you’re not judging yourself too harshly. I think people that ironically joke about things and themselves, they’re the kind of people that are quite honest with themselves, and that’s a good thing. So there we go.”

The problem with this is that if you're not in Dan's head it does read as negativity, and when it's Dan making depressing jokes about things you or feel vicariously proud of like it can almost feel like a judgement. Similarly when he mocks Phil too hard, even if Dan doesn't mean it as a judgement and Phil doesn't take it as a judgement, to the viewer who is not in their position of understanding, it becomes frustrating and a little depressing.

I also think in liveshows like today that's definitely a defense mechanism, too. He doesn't want to give anything to fans ('we don't deserve it' as he constantly reminds us) so he pulls hard in the opposite direction.

(And it is an honor to be shipped with you, obliviongrace!

[offtopic]I'm already thinking of alittledizzyXobliviongrace ship names. Alittlegrace? Obliviondizzy? So many possibilities![/offtopic]

I loved the joint liveshow. The "clean me" bit had me almost in tears, Dan's reaction to the whole thing was just so done. I usually like their individual shows and videos, but they bounce off each other so well that I think their joint shows are my favourite.

onetruetrash wrote:[offtopic]I'm already thinking of alittledizzyXobliviongrace ship names. Alittlegrace? Obliviondizzy? So many possibilities![/offtopic]

oh no, this has escalated so quickly!

I'm also not super excited for the Club Penguin video that I assume we'll be getting this weekend. I was actually looking forward to the 1hr my horse prince finale, hut maybe they're ditching that all together? Either way, I suppose they could surprise me and make club penguin super entertaining- it's happened before.

lmao hi i want to come out of lurking for a second and say hi to obliviongrace i'm so happy you made an account and thank you (and dizzy) for your kind words about my posts!! i think it's so interesting to contextualize dan's mood in this live show against the larger backdrop of the more overtly depressive comments he has been making since january, especially in light of the quote dizzy just posted (which for me was one of the most fascinating live show moments that has happened in the last few months - dan essentially openly talking about his mental health and the notion of using humor as a way to show that he isn't letting negative moods defeat him ... it was so unprecedented and important!) i agree that this combined with all of the other factors that have been discussed (that teasing and sarcasm seem to be a natural part of their banter, that dan is a bit more self-aware when he's doing a live show with phil and sort of reverts to constructing more distance between them so as not to do anything too sappy or gif-able basically) explain the sort of unbalanced nature of the teasing/mockery that happened in this ls.

however i also do want to boost what obliviongrace said about dan's comment while discussing the dna video. he said pretty much exactly what you thought he said although he slightly mis-speaks and uses a double negative which makes it sound confusing. i went back to get the exact quote (it happens around 19:35):

"i like that you made a video about something that’s kind of boring to the people that don’t have interests in things that are, like, even slightly not stupid, but everyone seems to love it."

so yes, he seems to be directly asserting that anyone with any non-stupid interests would/should be bored by phil's video. while i agree with dizzy that he sort of brings this around by making it a compliment to phil (that people with "smart" or not-stupid interests should dislike this video but they love it anyway, and that's ostensibly the power of phil's charisma/entertainment ability at work), it's still a compliment that's sort of predicated on arrogance. as someone who didn't like the dna video all that much, it still bothers me that there's a whole bunch of people out there who did like it and to whom dan might be indirectly aiming this little comment (that they should get more interesting hobbies basically). and it was especially irritating when grouped with that other little ramble about his contemplation of "philosophical themes" for weeks on end before filming dinof videos. obviously this is all a function of his own insecurity, etc. etc. but that doesn't rly excuse him from the potentially negative impacts of throwaway comments like these. def a good moment to make note of in the sea of otherwise kind of lovely, comfortable domesticity--thanks for pointing it out obliviongrace!

nihilist-toothpaste wrote:obviously this is all a function of his own insecurity, etc. etc. but that doesn't rly excuse him from the potentially negative impacts of throwaway comments like these. def a good moment to make note of in the sea of otherwise kind of lovely, comfortable domesticity--thanks for pointing it out obliviongrace!

Thanks to both of you - the impact of that remark Dan made passed by me the first time I watched the show (live) but upon rewatch I definitely see what you're both saying.

That is certainly my least favorite version of Dan, the version that can't see pride in anything without trying to also take a blow at it. It's frustrating but his own right when he's doing it to his own content from his own perspective but the implications he made towards Phil's content and Phil's viewers is frustrating, to say the least.

pilotlight wrote:I loved the joint liveshow. The "clean me" bit had me almost in tears, Dan's reaction to the whole thing was just so done. I usually like their individual shows and videos, but they bounce off each other so well that I think their joint shows are my favourite.

I'm also in the camp of just really loving that liveshow. It just felt like hanging out with a group of friends, and I'm just spending a while watching the couple bant on the sofa opposite me (though if they were actually not wearing pants I might be distracted ). I'm an introvert who can go a very long time without saying anything if other people are doing all the talking. Which I guess is to say that I wouldn't mind the third-wheeling much.

It's interesting that so many people seemed to find Dan annoying today (and he didn't even really shout! ). I'm not saying you all are seeing things that aren't there--I could easily just be missing them--but what I saw was really comfortable interactions between them and not any weird or uncomfortable moments (not any moment that was weird or uncomfortable to them).

LeftHandedism wrote:

pilotlight wrote:I loved the joint liveshow. The "clean me" bit had me almost in tears, Dan's reaction to the whole thing was just so done. I usually like their individual shows and videos, but they bounce off each other so well that I think their joint shows are my favourite.

It's interesting that so many people seemed to find Dan annoying today (and he didn't even really shout! ). I'm not saying you all are seeing things that aren't there--I could easily just be missing them--but what I saw was really comfortable interactions between them and not any weird or uncomfortable moments (not any moment that was weird or uncomfortable to them).

I think most people are not saying the liveshow as a whole was uncomfortable or that they didn't like it, just that Dan made a couple of remarks that weren't quite so cute or fun when you stop to think about them.

But bless him, seriously, for not shouting.

LeftHandedism wrote:
but what I saw was really comfortable interactions between them and not any weird or uncomfortable moments (not any moment that was weird or uncomfortable to them).

ya i agree! nothing rly came across as uncomfortable to them, i think the discussion has mostly been about moments that were uncomfortable to us, but they're still interesting moments to think about imo. as much as the domestic/affectionate bits, these moments of somewhat off-putting bickering and mockery also serve to demonstrate dnp's comfort with each other (it runs so deep that as a third party observer it can almost be a bit discomforting to watch). and the perhaps playful digs about AP content and whatnot reiterates some stuff about dan, to me at least, regarding his ever-present quality threshold for dinof, some of his internalized superiority complex or subtle arrogance in valuing certain types of content over others, and viewers of certain kinds of content over other viewers, perhaps the innate insecurity that leads to that sort of internal hierarchy, etc. also i don't know how formatting works sorry this quote looks ugly hahah

What I really liked as well for some reason was Phil telling Dan off for being too not-PG13 in a mostly serious face. (like 'usually these kinds of comments are fine but not now!') The description as well; 'Dan needs to wash his mouth out with soap'

nihilist-toothpaste wrote:

LeftHandedism wrote:
but what I saw was really comfortable interactions between them and not any weird or uncomfortable moments (not any moment that was weird or uncomfortable to them).

ya i agree! nothing rly came across as uncomfortable to them, i think the discussion has mostly been about moments that were uncomfortable to us, but they're still interesting moments to think about imo. as much as the domestic/affectionate bits, these moments of somewhat off-putting bickering and mockery also serve to demonstrate dnp's comfort with each other (it runs so deep that as a third party observer it can almost be a bit discomforting to watch). and the perhaps playful digs about AP content and whatnot reiterates some stuff about dan, to me at least, regarding his ever-present quality threshold for dinof, some of his internalized superiority complex or subtle arrogance in valuing certain types of content over others, and viewers of certain kinds of content over other viewers, perhaps the innate insecurity that leads to that sort of internal hierarchy, etc. also i don't know how formatting works sorry this quote looks ugly hahah

yes to both you and dizzys post!!

I overall enjoyed the liveshow. The first mess of 10 minutes was glorious, Phil fondly grabbing back Dan to bring him to frame and Dan immediately whining that he got scratched and Phil giving him a "stop being a baby you dork" yup.. good content.

Off the start you can tell there was a bit of a contrasting mood between the two where Phil was all smiley and upbeat wheras Dan was all shifty eyes and snide remarks. But we also got some sarcastic Phil with him saying " our hair looks sooo different rn, like boy, you've had the same haircut for ages, dont tease me like that. Them talking about Fabrice was the most domestic thing in the world. Phil complaining about Dan telling all HIS stories was so funny. Im glad Dan acts like the overdoting husband off screen as well as on. im totally not looking forward to a fabrice threesome fic *clears throat*

Dan was self-deprecative today but I could tell that every time he made a negative comment about his appearance Phil would just giggle and move on. He didn't even bother with a "no you're not Dan" which again spoke to the comfortable "long term relationship" vibes I got from the two. If youre with someone for so long and they act a certain way, you stop reacting at a point and just let them say what they want.

Phil cheekily getting dan to "clean us" he tells Dan off for saying "bukake" then does this, smh. He knew the implications but he still found it so hilarious and entertaining to make Dan do it. And Dan acted like he always does, whining and pouting but still listened to Phil. I sometimes think its funny how much influence Phil has on Dan, with one nudge, he's able to convince him to do things he'd actually not do on his own accord (pastel video being another glaring example)

Phil's relationship with his mom is honestly the sweetest thing in the world. I know we've become accostomed to it, but I found it so so sweet that they have cute traditions like sending flowers and that he tried to facetime her just so he doesn't break it

Phil has serious "hair envy" especially to Dans curls. This is like the millionth time he's brought up Dan voluminous locks and he even wants to curl his hair to achieve it.

"quality content": nihilist I agree with what you say, but I also have began to associate his behavior as a "dan" thing. Both have certain qualities I find annoying and for Dan its this "quality talk". One thing I found interesting is that he was self-aware that his product/end result was usually shit (because lets be honest, none of his videos have the deep philosophical meanings he talked about). It just seemed more harsh now because he was dragging Phils content in the process and that irked me. Youre allowed to set expectations and standards for yourself, but they're not universal, and you shouldn't attempt to compare and put down those around you even if they're good natured like Phil and wouldn't take it seriously. Phil throughout the whole "quality content" rant was just smiling and nodding along that he doesn't have that sort of attitude and he's fine with it. The thing is, is that its off putting to us, who haven't seen the other times they've discussed this. Seeing someone who usually talks so highly of Phil to be putting him down in this way was a but uncomfortable. I think it is deserves since it was a bad video imo, and I want to scream to Phil that it was, but I thought the execution made Dan look self-important and more Jack Howard-esque than usual.

I noticed throughout the ls they made a point to show that they did everything and anything together. The lyaway comments like "we're going to go get food" and "when we were at the movies" or even "we're going to attract bees when we're sitting on the couch later", like I GET THAT Y'ALL ARE MARRIED BUT THIS IS TOO MUCH. They even both cover their ears in the theaters and watch airplane movies together. I don't think you can get closer than that tbh.

The comment about Phil dying: Im with Dan on this one and I can understand the frustration that comes with a question like that. When people ask these things it seems like they have an expected response and just want to capture Dan saying it and it makes everything so superficial. When Dan speaks highly of Phil, he usually does it on his own terms when he's feeling overly affectionate and genuinely wants to express his amazement/ love for his companion, asking him to do it just for the sake of getting a response to take his genuine gestures and make it a circus show. At the end of the day, their personal feelings are their business so they'll share what they want to and not be forced to so otherwise. And if anyone's curious of how Dan would react if something happened to Phil, ahem HE PUBLISHED IT IN A BOOK:
Moving on, the part when they're talking about the Blue Exorcist and Phil repeats himself 4 times to a point where Dan has to look back questioningly was so interesting to me. Usually Phil doesn't care when he's talked over, but at this point and time he seemed to be very firm and stubborn in making sure he got his word in. It's the kind of Phil I wish to see more onscreen. I dont think he's ingenuine in ls and collabs when people talk over him and he struggles to get a word in, he actually seems to have an anxiety over speaking and being heard. This being very evident in the most recent vidcon panel where he would put the microphone to his mouth but never have the confidence to make a comment. But I'm glad that at least with Dan, he has this degree of comfort and a firm nature that allows him to signal when Dan's being obnoxious or loud to a point where he's not being heaqrd and can easily reel it back a bit.

They were alluding to so much mystery in this ls, but I left with more questions than I went in. Why are they so busy and why are they telling us that they're busy? Should I be hyped or lower my expectations? With them its honestly so hard to know. What I do know was that this was a pretty chill ls and we got to see more of their relationship shine through. It seems more genuine in a sense, people who have lived together for so long don't have this perfect relationship with no flaws, there can still be deep love and annoyance for certain habits and quirks. With them, it seems to be the case and it gives me a realistic version of them which is more preferred than the idealistic "storybook" version.

nihilist-toothpaste wrote:however i also do want to boost what obliviongrace said about dan's comment while discussing the dna video. he said pretty much exactly what you thought he said although he slightly mis-speaks and uses a double negative which makes it sound confusing. i went back to get the exact quote (it happens around 19:35):

"i like that you made a video about something that’s kind of boring to the people that don’t have interests in things that are, like, even slightly not stupid, but everyone seems to love it."

so yes, he seems to be directly asserting that anyone with any non-stupid interests would/should be bored by phil's video. while i agree with dizzy that he sort of brings this around by making it a compliment to phil (that people with "smart" or not-stupid interests should dislike this video but they love it anyway, and that's ostensibly the power of phil's charisma/entertainment ability at work), it's still a compliment that's sort of predicated on arrogance. as someone who didn't like the dna video all that much, it still bothers me that there's a whole bunch of people out there who did like it and to whom dan might be indirectly aiming this little comment (that they should get more interesting hobbies basically). and it was especially irritating when grouped with that other little ramble about his contemplation of "philosophical themes" for weeks on end before filming dinof videos. obviously this is all a function of his own insecurity, etc. etc. but that doesn't rly excuse him from the potentially negative impacts of throwaway comments like these. def a good moment to make note of in the sea of otherwise kind of lovely, comfortable domesticity--thanks for pointing it out obliviongrace!

I don't think Dan misspoke, though, I understood that as in "it was a science-y video and people in general aren't interested in that/are stupid, but Phil made it interesting by the power of his amazing brain". He still basically called Phil's audience stupid, but I don't think that was his intention, it wasn't to drag Phil or the kind of audience he attracts, it was more of typical Dan remark "people are stupid", I think. That, and even if I didn't hate Phil's video as much as others, Dan's definitely biased (which is understandable because they live together and he sees the making process).

Overall, it was a really great ls for me and it provided yet again an interesting insight into their dynamic, like Phil's "Can we calm down, please" when Dan was frantically removing pollen from the laptop, I loved that bit. I didn't find anything off-putting, laughed out loud a few times, the moments when they weren't agreeing on something, like the Adventure smell thing and later about how good is Riverdale, were especially interesting to see how they "negotiate". I also liked how even if Dan didn't really have an opportunity to gush about how good the Marc of Oxin was as he would've done in his own ls, he chose to read some praising comments in a very serious voices, without any mocking that was present for the rest of the ls.

Nobody had mention this yet, so here's a couple of things from twitter.
#Dector is lit
Bryony appreciating Phil wearing the blanket she made for him

What a great liveshow! I watch with low expectation (and honestly I already forgot that we discuss the possibility of announcement in the ls) and it turns out great.

First of all, they look very nice. Light-hearted Lester looks adorable as usual, Dan's new haircut looks great.

Talking about haircut, I also swear we already know they both went to Fabrice. So, I use the advanced search option (thanks me later, eevee, I'm using it!) and our Fabrice timeline is:

Phil can't find Fabrice because he quits from the salon > we need to find Fabrice for Phil!! > Phil announce he found Fabrice and will do his haircut at home > we hate Fabrice for giving Phil bad fringe > we love Fabrice because their American hairdresser sucks > Fabrice is now doing Dan's hair too

And I found this post that actually discuss that we don't know if Fabrice cuts Dan's hair too back in thread 18

confusedpanda wrote:

Catallena wrote:

danphil333 wrote: ohh i think dan pics fabrice too. and for over a year now he insists on that shaved sides haircut that is decent only on one side.

Right right. Every bad decision Phil makes it actually Dan's. Unless me my memory is failing me (and it could because I'm tired af and need to sleep ), I don't think they've mentioned going to the same salon like... ever. It's always Phil who talks about Fabrice. Dan just talks about how much he wants Phil's hair and asks his hairdresser for the same thing. Also, the thing is that their beloved matching haircut works better on Dan because his hair has natural volume to it, while Phil's hair is straight and flat which makes it look odd. Whatever that American hairdresser did though, is indeed kinda terrible.

I thought they both mentioned something about going a place called Tony's & Guys or something in the Not Worth Watching video they did earlier this year with Lousie. Isn't that a hair dressing chain in the uk? Or maybe it's another thing? But I could've sworn they both mentioned going there in that video when Louise was playing with their hair. But yeah, that doesn't mean that Dan also has Fabrice as a hairdresser.

link

I actually forgot that we already talk about it before

Moving on, I'm glad they both already have a dinof (and unless I misheard, a new ap too?) video to go

I'm not sure how to feel about Club Penguin though, I never played it so I have zero attachment to the game, hopefully it will be entertaining. And when they are announcing it, I actually thought they gonna say Horse Prince at first lol

About DanandPhilCrafts, I'm not sure if I want it or not but I will be okay either way. If there is a different prank, I will be okay with it too. Just, please do something on the 1st April. That's how low my expectation is.

"what will Dan do if Phil die?"
What an uncomfortable(?) question to ask, I actually wonder why they read it outloud instead of ignoring it. I was very uncomfortable during the whole thing, Idk why. I half thought they gonna say something jokey/cracky like 'Dan will summon my soul in a wii mote and we will continue dapg together" or something like that, instead we got a "Dan playing alone in dapg will be the sadder channel than dinof"

Nice thing I like includes:
- Phil asking Dan to clean the webcam and people went 'clean me daddy' and Dan was so done
- Plant updates
- The picture book thing! The best thing ever. I hope they make a sidechannel vid where they read the book to us, but who am I joking.
- Phil in blanket, hello
- Air freshner thing. Dan says it's smell of nature and outside but Phil says it's smell of inside of a tent (paraphrasing)
- Phil accidentally give himself the mother's day flower that is a very phil thing to do

Overall, nice liveshow, I thoroughly enjoy it

Extra:
- Yes, more #phimmy proof
- jaej333 who, it's all about alittlegrace now

coffeepenguin wrote: I don't think Dan misspoke, though, I understood that as in "it was a science-y video and people in general aren't interested in that/are stupid, but Phil made it interesting by the power of his amazing brain". He still basically called Phil's audience stupid, but I don't think that was his intention, it wasn't to drag Phil or the kind of audience he attracts, it was more of typical Dan remark "people are stupid", I think. That, and even if I didn't hate Phil's video as much as others, Dan's definitely biased (which is understandable because they live together and he sees the making process).

That's the way i understood it too.
And i don't think the remark was a big deal or anyone should feel offended by it.

Call me cynical, but i don't think any remarks Dan, or both of them, express about eachother's content on camera are the same they express privately.
Dan is Phil's hypeman , and you kind of have to be, that's how youtube works.

coffeepenguin wrote:
I don't think Dan misspoke, though, I understood that as in "it was a science-y video and people in general aren't interested in that/are stupid, but Phil made it interesting by the power of his amazing brain".

just want to clarify that i interpreted this quote the same way in my post, but that there is a double negative that makes it mean the opposite of what you and i both said? he says the AP vid should be "boring to people who DONT have interests that are even slightly NOT stupid" which, in that form, means the vid should be boring to people who have stupid interests, not boring to people who have "smart" interests. it's pretty clear based on context that he meant the opposite, that this video should be "boring to people who DO have interests that are even slightly not stupid," but it was just a grammar flub! that's all i was pointing out when i said he misspoke.

interesting additions though and kuensukki i'm living for all of your thoughts on the ls as a whole, especially the distinction about setting standards for yourself versus treating them as universal; the way phil insisted that dan clean the screen even though he was whining about it (so cute omg); and the reference to dan's little self-written exploration of how he'd react to phil's death which i think far too many people forget about!!!

nihilist-toothpaste wrote: so yes, he seems to be directly asserting that anyone with any non-stupid interests would/should be bored by phil's video. while i agree with dizzy that he sort of brings this around by making it a compliment to phil (that people with "smart" or not-stupid interests should dislike this video but they love it anyway, and that's ostensibly the power of phil's charisma/entertainment ability at work), it's still a compliment that's sort of predicated on arrogance. as someone who didn't like the dna video all that much, it still bothers me that there's a whole bunch of people out there who did like it and to whom dan might be indirectly aiming this little comment (that they should get more interesting hobbies basically). and it was especially irritating when grouped with that other little ramble about his contemplation of "philosophical themes" for weeks on end before filming dinof videos. obviously this is all a function of his own insecurity, etc. etc. but that doesn't rly excuse him from the potentially negative impacts of throwaway comments like these. def a good moment to make note of in the sea of otherwise kind of lovely, comfortable domesticity--thanks for pointing it out obliviongrace!

Ah, hi nihilist-toothpaste! I engage with your tumblr thoughts a lot through anon messages, since my dnp blog is a sideblog. It's nice to see you here! As I said earlier you largely helped in getting me back into dnp in December and me needing a place to analyze everything

I continue to be confused by what Dan said about the audience and stupid interests. I think I finally understand with this explanation:

nihilist-toothpaste wrote:just want to clarify that i interpreted this quote the same way in my post, but that there is a double negative that makes it mean the opposite of what you and i both said? he says the AP vid should be "boring to people who DONT have interests that are even slightly NOT stupid" which, in that form, means the vid should be boring to people who have stupid interests, not boring to people who have "smart" interests. it's pretty clear based on context that he meant the opposite, that this video should be "boring to people who DO have interests that are even slightly not stupid," but it was just a grammar flub! that's all i was pointing out when i said he misspoke.

I think I immediately took it as him dragging Phil's audience because I felt he had made depreciating comments about the intelligence of his audience in his last liveshow, which had really bummed me out. But this makes sense to me as well, especially because Dan is a serial miss-speaker.

alittledizzy wrote:That is certainly my least favorite version of Dan, the version that can't see pride in anything without trying to also take a blow at it. It's frustrating but his own right when he's doing it to his own content from his own perspective but the implications he made towards Phil's content and Phil's viewers is frustrating, to say the least.

This is a much better phrasing of what I was trying to say before. And of course I think it's great for him to do if it's what helps him cope, but I do find it grating.

And finally before I'm off to class - thank you for bringing back "The Urge!" I always forget that Dan wrote that part about Phil's funeral and how he'd feel about it. Of course its his fanfiction, but I'm still kind of surprised he put that in the book, because he surely knows how everything is picked apart.

wait coffeepenguin i think i'm realizing what you mean more, and that dan was trying to say the vid should be boring to people who have stupid interests because it's about science which is different from my interpretation, you're right! what the hell why are his statements like a legit logic puzzle

either way i think the impact of the statement doesn't change? it just flips targets and now he's indirectly calling most of phil's audience stupid or not interested in science, and while i agree that that's probably not his intent per se, and that he obviously respects phil, it does sound a little bit too much like the same implicit derision/condescension towards their audience that i know has been discussed before here on idb when dan makes comments about catering content towards the edgy ("smarter") sarcastic dudes in his audience. maybe it's unreasonable to think about these comments together because the one in the live show is sort of in a different context and aimed at phil/phil's audience, but i think that it's at least worth entertaining the possibility that the natural extension of that hierarchical thinking that dan uses for his own channel would be that he might feel critical of/better than some of the sort of audience that phil's channel attracts too, idk (or something a little more watered down and less negative than that, i'm just so sleepy rn and more nuanced phrasing is difficult haha)

nihilist-toothpaste wrote:wait coffeepenguin i think i'm realizing what you mean more, and that dan was trying to say the vid should be boring to people who have stupid interests because it's about science which is different from my interpretation, you're right! what the hell why are his statements like a legit logic puzzle

either way i think the impact of the statement doesn't change? it just flips targets and now he's indirectly calling most of phil's audience stupid or not interested in science, and while i agree that that's probably not his intent per se, and that he obviously respects phil, it does sound a little bit too much like the same implicit derision/condescension towards their audience that i know has been discussed before here on idb when dan makes comments about catering content towards the edgy ("smarter") sarcastic dudes in his audience. maybe it's unreasonable to think about these comments together because the one in the live show is sort of in a different context and aimed at phil/phil's audience, but i think that it's at least worth entertaining the possibility that the natural extension of that hierarchical thinking that dan uses for his own channel would be that he might feel critical of/better than some of the sort of audience that phil's channel attracts too, idk (or something a little more watered down and less negative than that, i'm just so sleepy rn and more nuanced phrasing is difficult haha)

good job understanding what I said, honestly, because the more I look at my post, the less comprehensible it seems even to me, and ok, English is my third language, but why is expressing thoughts so complicated?..

anyway, I agree with you in a way (I have a complex opinion on Dan's relationship with his own audience, though, and him possibly catering to edgy dudes, but I'm not ready to even start formulating it yet), but I don't think he realises what he's said. It's like his statements on his family, he just likes to reason in absolutes, all those "I don't have friends" and "I never go outside" (or "Damon Albarn is a god", all this - "tumblr-speak" if you will) are from this category, or like in this great clip of him saying that his mum "is not senile enough" to be on his channel:


Ideally, I'd like Dan to be more aware of what he's saying, but the problem with it is that in that case he starts overthinking everything, like he's with his opinions on pop culture and especially on complex issues like politics, so he never gives an actual opinion and in the best case just waffles for some time, which is awfully frustrating. And I'm not sure that with his unfinished higher education, his job and what he's regularly exposed to in regards to that (I mean both the fandom echo-chamber overhyping everything and your typical Internet trolling), as well as the kind of media he consumes for personal enjoyment, he's capable of finding the right balance between the two, at least for now I'll be more than glad to be proven wrong, though.

Louise posted this

^i saw that. do you think its a part of this super secret project they're doing or something?

coffeepenguin wrote: anyway, I agree with you in a way (I have a complex opinion on Dan's relationship with his own audience, though, and him possibly catering to edgy dudes, but I'm not ready to even start formulating it yet), but I don't think he realises what he's said. It's like his statements on his family, he just likes to reason in absolutes, all those "I don't have friends" and "I never go outside" (or "Damon Albarn is a god", all this - "tumblr-speak" if you will) are from this category, or like in this great clip of him saying that his mum "is not senile enough" to be on his channel:

Don't feel qualified to participate in this discussion, but thank you for reposting this clip. Dan's reaction to what he just said about his best friend's kind and welcoming mum (or you know, his potential MIL if you are into that) will never not be hilarious

@nihilist-toothpaste I lowkey stalk all your content across your many blogs on tumblr, welcome!

And now, what I meant to post this morning before idb locked me out grumble grumble
On another note I re-watched the monster-pops video thinking now I would be more immune to the innuendoes and bants by now and nope, it's still just as amazing as when I originally watched it. What even was that video...Even in a post-baking video universe it still sticks out as highly sexual and shocking lol.

coffeepenguin wrote:

nihilist-toothpaste wrote:however i also do want to boost what obliviongrace said about dan's comment while discussing the dna video. he said pretty much exactly what you thought he said although he slightly mis-speaks and uses a double negative which makes it sound confusing. i went back to get the exact quote (it happens around 19:35):

"i like that you made a video about something that’s kind of boring to the people that don’t have interests in things that are, like, even slightly not stupid, but everyone seems to love it."

so yes, he seems to be directly asserting that anyone with any non-stupid interests would/should be bored by phil's video. while i agree with dizzy that he sort of brings this around by making it a compliment to phil (that people with "smart" or not-stupid interests should dislike this video but they love it anyway, and that's ostensibly the power of phil's charisma/entertainment ability at work), it's still a compliment that's sort of predicated on arrogance. as someone who didn't like the dna video all that much, it still bothers me that there's a whole bunch of people out there who did like it and to whom dan might be indirectly aiming this little comment (that they should get more interesting hobbies basically). and it was especially irritating when grouped with that other little ramble about his contemplation of "philosophical themes" for weeks on end before filming dinof videos. obviously this is all a function of his own insecurity, etc. etc. but that doesn't rly excuse him from the potentially negative impacts of throwaway comments like these. def a good moment to make note of in the sea of otherwise kind of lovely, comfortable domesticity--thanks for pointing it out obliviongrace!

I don't think Dan misspoke, though, I understood that as in "it was a science-y video and people in general aren't interested in that/are stupid, but Phil made it interesting by the power of his amazing brain". He still basically called Phil's audience stupid, but I don't think that was his intention, it wasn't to drag Phil or the kind of audience he attracts, it was more of typical Dan remark "people are stupid", I think. That, and even if I didn't hate Phil's video as much as others, Dan's definitely biased (which is understandable because they live together and he sees the making process).

Overall, it was a really great ls for me and it provided yet again an interesting insight into their dynamic, like Phil's "Can we calm down, please" when Dan was frantically removing pollen from the laptop, I loved that bit. I didn't find anything off-putting, laughed out loud a few times, the moments when they weren't agreeing on something, like the Adventure smell thing and later about how good is Riverdale, were especially interesting to see how they "negotiate". I also liked how even if Dan didn't really have an opportunity to gush about how good the Marc of Oxin was as he would've done in his own ls, he chose to read some praising comments in a very serious voices, without any mocking that was present for the rest of the ls.

This is such a good post. Dan often annoys me because he doesn't seem to know what the fuck he's actually saying. He does tend to be very all or nothing, though, which is annoying, too. It's either, "shut up about everything forever" or it's, "I'm going to be totally unfiltered", both of which are terrible choices in his career.

Luckily for him, he's charismatic enough that it usually doesn't matter, but, as someone who places a lot of value on words and the way things are phrased, it makes me really annoyed.

Tomska is an example of someone who dealt with this really well. He went totally unfiltered at one point, realized that that's not the way things work, and then figured out the perfect balance. His jokes all seem to teeter on offensive (like, from a social justice perspective), but he always seems to balance it out very well, and it's just very impressive to me. Too bad he doesn't have a fandom I can invest myself into.

mod note:

Sorry guys, I seemed to have deleted everyone's avatars by mistake earlier when I was adjusting the forum settings.

Hope it's not too much of an effort to re-upload them, definitely feeling like a major idiot for doing it, sorry again.