If it’s one thing hipsters hate, it’s being called a hipster. A couple weeks ago, I met this very nice hipster guy who told me a great story about how he was accused of being a hipster, and he was totally pissed, told the guy who called him a hipster that not all white guys who have tattoos are hipsters, which is true. However, a white guy with tattoos who wears vintage clothes who is vegan who rides a fixie, well, nope, the shoe doesn’t fit.
But the truth of it is that I’m guilty of calling people hipsters out of jealousy. I mean, I don’t have the style to be a hipster, nor do I have the money or general sensibility. My taste in music is about five years late, and that’s a generous estimation. I mean, I rarely intend to say the word in a derogatory way. It’s a compliment undercut with jealousy, which makes it sound like an insult, sure, but I’m not fooled.
Yesterday, Reynard started a conversation about the word hoodrat, which is funny in its own way, because the stated definition of hoodrat seemed to imply that a hoodrat is just a hipster of another color, maybe a specific geographic location based on socioeconomics.
Except, except, I just looked it up. Surprise, it’s not in the OED. But the top ten or so definitions on Urban Dictionary (valid source of information, I know I know) says that a hoodrat is generally gendered female, one of a promiscuous sort, one who likes to engage in promiscuous activity. (Not necessary Urban Dictionary’s word choice, obviously.)
I always thought (wrongly) that a hoodrat was someone who affects ghetto, irrelevant of his or her ghetto experience. My nephew, for instance, I’ve on more than one occasion called a hoodrat. He affects like he’s from the “hood,” even though the closest he’s come to any “hood” is his gated neighborhood, which is a hood in itself, given that hood is short for neighborhood. His once perfect grammar has shifted to some bastardized south Texas ebonics, and his pants quite literally start at his knees. (Fuck: I sound like some old grandma.) But it takes hard work to be a suburban hood. (Note: I’m using “hood” instead of “hoodrat” from here on out, because ultimately, he’s performing “hood” as opposed to “hoodrat” which is a ghetto girl with a certain sexual disposition. It’s interesting how these terms have become interchangeable, how a bunch of ostensibly privileged people—myself included—have misappropriated it, redefining it, etc.) It takes effort and money, a conscious subversion of a language you’ve grown up speaking, to affect like you’ve had a different upbringing. I mean, it’s a guise. That, and his amazing shoe collection, his amazing hat collection, all for the purposes of fulfilling the role of hood.
And here, I’ll draw my connection between affecting hipster and affecting hood. Both roles—and let’s be clear here that these are roles to be acted and enacted, forced and reinforced—require a certain amount of liquidity of finances. (Think here of the episode of The Wire were one of the cops goes undercover, goes into “the hood,” which in this instance means the projects, which is not where many of my nephew’s hoodrat friends live.) It costs money to dress and act the way they do. Both roles require great attention to detail. The worst thing that can happen to either hipster or hood (Note: Isn’t it funny that hipsters wear hoodies? It’s all too fitting in the context of this discussion!) is to be revealed as “normal.” Because ultimately, it’s like we’re still in middle school. Except the popular kids who used to be preppy—good god I remember stealing my brother’s Polo shirts, jesus, the 80s, what an embarrassment—are now hipsters, and with the same cultural capital. You get what I mean. It’s like we’re all still so insecure we have to role-play in order to feel accepted, like dressing a certain way or other automatically gives us credence, instant popularity. I wonder if I wouldn’t be better off going back to my Magic cards or my theatre geeks.
Of course, I’m only speaking about people who affect these roles, but I’d argue that even people who do live in the very real projects work to fulfill their role as hood. They buy clothes they think will allow them to fit in, listen to music that will allow them to fit in, etc. And of course, even people who live in Williamsburg or Montreal (note: I think that you must be a beautiful hipster to live in Montreal, they won’t let you in otherwise, maybe as a tourist, but jesus, the most beautiful, put-together people I’ve ever seen in one place!) have to buy clothes that will allow them to fit in, find the most indie music to give them their music cred, be vegan to a pained fault, etc.
All this being said, I’ll admit again: part of this critique comes from a place of jealousy. Even to affect hipster or hood is to find instant community, instant acceptance. Even if it comes from a space of insecurity, at least they find acceptance. Probably, this doesn’t even make sense. Probably, I should just get back to work now.
One last thing: I propose to get rid of the term hipster altogether. Let’s resurrect the dandy!
i dunno. i tend to call these people ‘frogs in a well’s, which i think makes me a ‘ne’er do well’, or something.
what i find odd is that most ‘hipster’s lack any serious evidence of having hips.
You should start a non-profit: Hips for Hipsters.
and would consist of handing out decks of Magic cards and bags of cheetos. worked for some people i knew, oh so long ago, though not that really long ago..
what is a hipster
is that a thing
By your aesthetic you form an aristocracy of a few, or of one… and it’s possible that you shun converts. No one knows what you know, and maybe you don’t want them to, ever. Yet there are others, somehow, who are almost exactly the same. This isn’t entirely a drag, though it is, partly… It’s kind of a drag. You communicate like insects rather than chimpanzees. You don’t have to talk. Maybe you talk, but it’s not about words.
I like this. Thank you.
I always want to ask the hipsters what the random tatted stars on their arms represent. Is that a prerequisite? Do all hipsters need them?
it’s a way of classifying a bunch of individuals not as individuals but as a group based in external similarities. that is, a prejudice. like ‘redneck,’ it’s mostly socially acceptable.
Whether they know it or not, Hipsters, especially the Brooklyn variety, are ur-Americans, the logical end point of late capitalism, and dead center inside of the popcult miasma they so deludedly believe they are detached and orbiting.
That kind of generalization sounds smart but doesn’t really tell us anything about anybody except the speaker.
Good article. But you could’ve found a much better example of the breed.
i don’t use the word “hipster” in a kind manner. i think the main thing i don’t like about hipsters is the way that music, art, film, etc. is something that hipsters become elitist about without anything resembling authority on the subjects. i guess there might be a difference between hipster fashion and hipster attitude. though, i think their fashion is pretty dumb.
i have to wonder what would happen if the people in the picture above were dressed instead in the clothing of orthodox jews and we were invited to make generalizations on their character.
Right on.
Anti-Semite!
ha ha, kidding JY. hope you’re well. You going to be at the 9/11 reading for D-plot and JMWW? Those are the only two journals I’ve ever read/edited for and quit.
The woman on the left in the green shirt used to be the singer in my blackened twee band. I left because of artistic differences (i.e. wanted our stage show to be more “Fort Thunder” than “Skinny Puppy”) and now I think the whole band has dissolved; I’m too busy with other stuff to care, honestly. Also, I ran into the dude on the right at Union Pool once and he asked to borrow twenty bucks even though I’m pretty sure he lives on a kind of generous trust fund because his dad is a famous banker or something.
“i have to wonder what would happen if the people in the picture above were dressed instead in the clothing of orthodox jews and we were invited to make generalizations on their character.”
Hipsters are a Religion?
http://www.latfh.com/
Orthodox Jews aren’t a people distinguished by culture, shared dress, history, and other varieties of identifiable affinity?
oh yeah, i’ll probably be there, de!
You mean with that many *shared traits*, no generalizations are possible?
Obvi, hipsters have gone through the same type of trauma as Orthodox Jews. This is totes a responsible argument.
Dude, Hipsters were *born that way*… they have no choice. They’re a Gender.
Steven:
Do you mean to say that with many *shared traits* all generalizations are permissible when making a universal statement that by definition declares all members of a group to be uniform?
Salvatore:
Is one group more or less worthy of evenhanded treatment as individuals because of the amount of trauma they have or haven’t endured?
Orthodox Jews have no choice to identify or not identify with the group with which they identify? Can one become or unbecome an Orthodox Jew? (Yes, actually. One can.)
I can’t believe neither of those girls has a visible tattoo. I’m calling their credentials into question.
Anyway, we used to call them scenesters back in the 90s and I would like to see that word brought back.
I’d forgotten how much I dig that Hold Steady song. That whole album, really.
Yeah, I know! I’d forgotten about the Hold Steady until I saw the hoodrat comment yesterday, and then, o the memories.
Uh… aren’t we talking about Hipsters any more?
I think now we’re talking about the inefficacy of stereotyping and choosing to paint an entire category of human beings with a single brush.
If the group wears boater caps and suspenders to working class bars and says things to me like, “Oh. You like their 2003 album? Their ’97 live EP on Merge is the best thing they ever did.” Then yes. Definitely yes.
http://www.ohnorobot.com/?s=hipsters&comic=320&search=GO
My main problem with “hipsters” is not the dress, musical, or literary tastes (I share some of those), but the posturing. It’s a humorless pose that takes itself too seriously. I think hipsters would be much better if they spent more time making fun of themselves and other hipsters.
GAMBRELL IS THE AUTHORITY IN THE HIPSTER DEBATE
That’s right, you could never generalize about, say, the musical tastes of Goths or Deadheads or anything. Of course someone who’s dressed like Marilyn Manson is very probably a Bebop aficionado. And fleeting, optional style choices are perfectly equivalent to Gender/Religion/Race issues. Yeah.
steven, it bothers me, this kind of thing, whether the word is ‘old,’ ‘republican,’ ‘scottish,’ or ‘hipster.’ that’s really all i can say–i don;t have a argument for it, responsible or not.
Excellent point, Larry. Only late-Capitalism could birth a counterculture that isn’t counter to anything. Douglas Haddow wrote a great article in Adbusters about how hipsters represent the cul-de-sac of Western Civilization: https://www.adbusters.org/magazine/79/hipster.html
But man, they can dance!
“And fleeting, optional style choices are perfectly equivalent to Gender/Religion/Race issues. Yeah.”
Holy sarcasm Batman!
What, no smart-ass comments about suburban white kids? You know you wanna do it, Augustine, DO IT!
i agree with this. it is the air of elitism that bothers me, especially considering how these types of subcultures initially come from a mindset that is like ‘be like us, we can be different together’ but aren’t initially exclusionary of any person. now, people that identify as ‘hipster’ or ‘hardcore’ or whatever tend to use their social group as a pseudo-fraternity wherein they can feel superior through exclusion of the other. it’s totally self defeating and essentially just a reaction to the mainstream’s rejection of their self identity. there are some ‘hipsters’ that are genuinely nice people and accepting of everyone, of course there are, but i’ve heard too many of my ‘hardcore’ friends (hardcore being a subgroup actually very similar to hipsters) call other people ‘normals’ in a derogatory manner, thereby expressing their superiority by excluding them from their supposedly ‘better’ subgroup. you’re no better or worse for being a part of a social group.
I keep thinking that part of the girls bag on the left is like a tattoo all the way down her arm but it isn’t.
People should mock ‘hipsters’ less about riding fixies and being vegan and more about their coke habits.
What’s so terrible about sustainable diet and transport?
“What, no smart-ass comments about suburban white kids? You know you wanna do it, Augustine, DO IT!”
I guess you’ve never seen a Black Hipster, Dude. I’ve even seen a few in *Berlin* this year. Don’t be so provincial.
& the new word for hipster is…….. (based on a gawker poll earlier this year)
http://gawker.com/5500197/your-new-hipster-slur-fauxhemians
fauxhemians.
because it isn’t about those things but rather the status those things impart on them for them. plus, it’s totally a socio-economic privilege to shop at whole foods, to be able to be a vegan, to purchase a nice fixed gear bike. not many people living in the projects around my school ride fixed gears and eat vegan, i can promise you that. not sure what i’m arguing though. basically saying ‘fuck honkeys.’
Being vegan can be incredibly cheap. I guess you just have to think about their means of acquiring these things. Maybe you can tell that its a shallow engagement with ‘sustainability’ if their nose is bleeding.
Keep in mind that I am all for mocking nautical star tattoos.
hipster
hipster
if you distill all these various definitions of “hipster” in this thread (and anywhere else in any form of media) you end up with: “somebody that’s different than me that i don’t like”. which is retarded. everyone who has anything to do with this site (reads it, writes for it, posts comments) can equitably be called a hipster. for fuck’s sake, folks, this is a literary blog!
if you distill all these various definitions of “hipster” in this thread (and anywhere else in any form of media) you end up with: “somebody that’s different than me that i don’t like”. which is retarded. everyone who has anything to do with this site (reads it, writes for it, posts comments) can equitably be called a hipster. for fuck’s sake, folks, this is a literary blog!
They aged out of their permission to Hip
They aged out of their permission to Hip
http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&q=target advertisement
http://www.youtube.com/user/allofthetrash
http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&q=target advertisement
http://www.youtube.com/user/allofthetrash
I missed the hoodrat discussion, apparently, but here’s a seven-year old with the greatest possible public use of the word:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcqOgnQyXp4
MEAT IS REALLY EXPENSIVE DREW
I missed the hoodrat discussion, apparently, but here’s a seven-year old with the greatest possible public use of the word:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcqOgnQyXp4
MEAT IS REALLY EXPENSIVE DREW
this be some weird hangover fodder to find
this be some weird hangover fodder to find
Ok. Now define haters.
Ok. Now define haters.
ZZZIPP… fantastic resource
ZZZIPP… fantastic resource
You should start a non-profit: Hips for Hipsters.
I’m a hoodrat, I’m a hater. Things are going to change. I can feel it.
I’m a hoodrat, I’m a hater. Things are going to change. I can feel it.
what is a hipster
is that a thing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQRbDSwZIME
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQRbDSwZIME
By your aesthetic you form an aristocracy of a few, or of one… and it’s possible that you shun converts. No one knows what you know, and maybe you don’t want them to, ever. Yet there are others, somehow, who are almost exactly the same. This isn’t entirely a drag, though it is, partly… It’s kind of a drag. You communicate like insects rather than chimpanzees. You don’t have to talk. Maybe you talk, but it’s not about words.
I like this. Thank you.
I always want to ask the hipsters what the random tatted stars on their arms represent. Is that a prerequisite? Do all hipsters need them?
it’s a way of classifying a bunch of individuals not as individuals but as a group based in external similarities. that is, a prejudice. like ‘redneck,’ it’s mostly socially acceptable.
Whether they know it or not, Hipsters, especially the Brooklyn variety, are ur-Americans, the logical end point of late capitalism, and dead center inside of the popcult miasma they so deludedly believe they are detached and orbiting.
To be fair, this post was not anti-hipster. At all. If anything, my post did nothing but expose my jealousy towards those I deem “hipper” than me.
To be fair, this post was not anti-hipster. At all. If anything, my post did nothing but expose my jealousy towards those I deem “hipper” than me.
That kind of generalization sounds smart but doesn’t really tell us anything about anybody except the speaker.
hipoisie
hipoisie
Good article. But you could’ve found a much better example of the breed.
i don’t use the word “hipster” in a kind manner. i think the main thing i don’t like about hipsters is the way that music, art, film, etc. is something that hipsters become elitist about without anything resembling authority on the subjects. i guess there might be a difference between hipster fashion and hipster attitude. though, i think their fashion is pretty dumb.
i have to wonder what would happen if the people in the picture above were dressed instead in the clothing of orthodox jews and we were invited to make generalizations on their character.
Right on.
I don’t mind people who wanna wear certain things, or look a certain way, or be vegan or whatever. When I start throwing around the word hipster (in a derogatory way) is when people have no goddamn sense of humor and take themselves waaaaaaay too seriously. Cuz then it’s just funny to watch them get all mad and look even sillier.
I like ‘dandy,’ Lily. I second the notion that it should make a comeback.
I don’t mind people who wanna wear certain things, or look a certain way, or be vegan or whatever. When I start throwing around the word hipster (in a derogatory way) is when people have no goddamn sense of humor and take themselves waaaaaaay too seriously. Cuz then it’s just funny to watch them get all mad and look even sillier.
I like ‘dandy,’ Lily. I second the notion that it should make a comeback.
Anti-Semite!
ha ha, kidding JY. hope you’re well. You going to be at the 9/11 reading for D-plot and JMWW? Those are the only two journals I’ve ever read/edited for and quit.
The woman on the left in the green shirt used to be the singer in my blackened twee band. I left because of artistic differences (i.e. wanted our stage show to be more “Fort Thunder” than “Skinny Puppy”) and now I think the whole band has dissolved; I’m too busy with other stuff to care, honestly. Also, I ran into the dude on the right at Union Pool once and he asked to borrow twenty bucks even though I’m pretty sure he lives on a kind of generous trust fund because his dad is a famous banker or something.
“i have to wonder what would happen if the people in the picture above were dressed instead in the clothing of orthodox jews and we were invited to make generalizations on their character.”
Hipsters are a Religion?
http://www.latfh.com/
Orthodox Jews aren’t a people distinguished by culture, shared dress, history, and other varieties of identifiable affinity?
oh yeah, i’ll probably be there, de!
You mean with that many *shared traits*, no generalizations are possible?
Obvi, hipsters have gone through the same type of trauma as Orthodox Jews. This is totes a responsible argument.
we’re all still so insecure we have to role-play in order to feel accepted
Lily, surely this conformity is no surprise – is it not nearly ubiquitous among people (mammals?) that can ‘play roles’? Usefully synonymous expressions for “role-playing” in this context would be ‘socialization’ and ‘belonging to a community’.
It’d be equally correct to say that ‘most of us realistically – to the extent that we’re conscious – role-play in order to be accepted’.
To me, what’s important about social integration is that it’s dialectical, in the sense that some particular society might be sensitive to conscious transformation by its members, the germs of that transformation contained in whatever emancipatory germs ‘rest’ in that society (or whatever emancipation it’s pregnable by from without).
I mean that conscious, purposive refusal of norms can be communicated and taken up in non-dogmatically-imitative ways.
I think that both Marx and Nietzsche have had (and continue to have) this catalyzing or enabling effect, and that many artists have had (and have) it in less directed ways.
we’re all still so insecure we have to role-play in order to feel accepted
Lily, surely this conformity is no surprise – is it not nearly ubiquitous among people (mammals?) that can ‘play roles’? Usefully synonymous expressions for “role-playing” in this context would be ‘socialization’ and ‘belonging to a community’.
It’d be equally correct to say that ‘most of us realistically – to the extent that we’re conscious – role-play in order to be accepted’.
To me, what’s important about social integration is that it’s dialectical, in the sense that some particular society might be sensitive to conscious transformation by its members, the germs of that transformation contained in whatever emancipatory germs ‘rest’ in that society (or whatever emancipation it’s pregnable by from without).
I mean that conscious, purposive refusal of norms can be communicated and taken up in non-dogmatically-imitative ways.
I think that both Marx and Nietzsche have had (and continue to have) this catalyzing or enabling effect, and that many artists have had (and have) it in less directed ways.
Dude, Hipsters were *born that way*… they have no choice. They’re a Gender.
Steven:
Do you mean to say that with many *shared traits* all generalizations are permissible when making a universal statement that by definition declares all members of a group to be uniform?
Salvatore:
Is one group more or less worthy of evenhanded treatment as individuals because of the amount of trauma they have or haven’t endured?
Orthodox Jews have no choice to identify or not identify with the group with which they identify? Can one become or unbecome an Orthodox Jew? (Yes, actually. One can.)
I can’t believe neither of those girls has a visible tattoo. I’m calling their credentials into question.
Anyway, we used to call them scenesters back in the 90s and I would like to see that word brought back.
I’d forgotten how much I dig that Hold Steady song. That whole album, really.
Yeah, I know! I’d forgotten about the Hold Steady until I saw the hoodrat comment yesterday, and then, o the memories.
Uh… aren’t we talking about Hipsters any more?
I think now we’re talking about the inefficacy of stereotyping and choosing to paint an entire category of human beings with a single brush.
If the group wears boater caps and suspenders to working class bars and says things to me like, “Oh. You like their 2003 album? Their ’97 live EP on Merge is the best thing they ever did.” Then yes. Definitely yes.
Sometimes I wonder how a group of highly intelligent creative entities can be so caught up in the web of petri-dish developed mass media thought patterns designed to separate and code us from one another. I am speaking of the people this post is supposed to be about and those posting beneath. Does this mean me also? If I live in an environment I would be ignorant to think I am free of that same environment. We can start at the basics… the term hoodrat applied implicitly towards African-Americans. The term hipster applied toward Caucasian-Americans. No matter the discussion of why the term “hood” automatically brings up images of African-Americans. Essentially it is a class issue, the usage of “hood” and how it is accepted visually into the consciousness. It likely dates back to there being two “lower” classes — poor “whites” and poor “blacks” (here on out, until otherwise noted, both ethnicities will be referred to by their respective misnomer “white” and “black”. During the time where poor whites and blacks shared a commonality, it was thought of as too dangerous and it became a part of the design to create a chasm of difference.
Of course, as anyone who has spent time in the inner city knows that the “hood mentality/attitude” is an outgrowth of the environment (including what the school system teaches, to how the buildings are designed, to it all), and less an outgrowth from some sort of ingrained ethnic disposition.
It could be said then that the “hipster” is a similar outgrowth (as someone else above already mentioned). And yet you will find “hipsters” in the inner city, the same inner city you would find “hoodrats”. (Long Beach, CA to name one city)
No one ever wishes, especially among a group of writers, how we can so easily go along with the terms “white” and “black” as distinctions, knowing that they are factually incorrect. No disrespect to Ms. Hoang, but she opened the door to the discussion by showing us one label, and then peeling back this label to get at an understanding of what it is labeling. But I wish to peel back the sublabel…. scientifically speaking, white is an absence of color while black is its opposite, which means unless you are albino or the genetic opposite of albino, we are all shades of the same color —- brown. How do we go along with the same terms knowing those terms are wrong… simply by holding up my hand I can tell I am not black. I can tell my Jewish friend is not white. I can tell my Cherokee great grandmother was not red. The latter seems to be a less heated distinction, somehow.
Okay, off my soapbox now.
Sometimes I wonder how a group of highly intelligent creative entities can be so caught up in the web of petri-dish developed mass media thought patterns designed to separate and code us from one another. I am speaking of the people this post is supposed to be about and those posting beneath. Does this mean me also? If I live in an environment I would be ignorant to think I am free of that same environment. We can start at the basics… the term hoodrat applied implicitly towards African-Americans. The term hipster applied toward Caucasian-Americans. No matter the discussion of why the term “hood” automatically brings up images of African-Americans. Essentially it is a class issue, the usage of “hood” and how it is accepted visually into the consciousness. It likely dates back to there being two “lower” classes — poor “whites” and poor “blacks” (here on out, until otherwise noted, both ethnicities will be referred to by their respective misnomer “white” and “black”. During the time where poor whites and blacks shared a commonality, it was thought of as too dangerous and it became a part of the design to create a chasm of difference.
Of course, as anyone who has spent time in the inner city knows that the “hood mentality/attitude” is an outgrowth of the environment (including what the school system teaches, to how the buildings are designed, to it all), and less an outgrowth from some sort of ingrained ethnic disposition.
It could be said then that the “hipster” is a similar outgrowth (as someone else above already mentioned). And yet you will find “hipsters” in the inner city, the same inner city you would find “hoodrats”. (Long Beach, CA to name one city)
No one ever wishes, especially among a group of writers, how we can so easily go along with the terms “white” and “black” as distinctions, knowing that they are factually incorrect. No disrespect to Ms. Hoang, but she opened the door to the discussion by showing us one label, and then peeling back this label to get at an understanding of what it is labeling. But I wish to peel back the sublabel…. scientifically speaking, white is an absence of color while black is its opposite, which means unless you are albino or the genetic opposite of albino, we are all shades of the same color —- brown. How do we go along with the same terms knowing those terms are wrong… simply by holding up my hand I can tell I am not black. I can tell my Jewish friend is not white. I can tell my Cherokee great grandmother was not red. The latter seems to be a less heated distinction, somehow.
Okay, off my soapbox now.
http://www.ohnorobot.com/?s=hipsters&comic=320&search=GO
My main problem with “hipsters” is not the dress, musical, or literary tastes (I share some of those), but the posturing. It’s a humorless pose that takes itself too seriously. I think hipsters would be much better if they spent more time making fun of themselves and other hipsters.
GAMBRELL IS THE AUTHORITY IN THE HIPSTER DEBATE
That’s right, you could never generalize about, say, the musical tastes of Goths or Deadheads or anything. Of course someone who’s dressed like Marilyn Manson is very probably a Bebop aficionado. And fleeting, optional style choices are perfectly equivalent to Gender/Religion/Race issues. Yeah.
How about a discussion about writing? High school stereotype talk is really so high school, folks.
How about a discussion about writing? High school stereotype talk is really so high school, folks.
Thank Gawd! I thought Lily’s statement about gender and hoodrats was gonna compel me to stop using it for myself, but now that a li’l 7-year-old car thief broke it down — “I wanted to do hoodrat stuff w/ my friends” — I think I’m in the clear. Whew.
Thank Gawd! I thought Lily’s statement about gender and hoodrats was gonna compel me to stop using it for myself, but now that a li’l 7-year-old car thief broke it down — “I wanted to do hoodrat stuff w/ my friends” — I think I’m in the clear. Whew.
steven, it bothers me, this kind of thing, whether the word is ‘old,’ ‘republican,’ ‘scottish,’ or ‘hipster.’ that’s really all i can say–i don;t have a argument for it, responsible or not.
My girlfriend likes to say “davenport.” She ain’t no hipster. I think you’d like her.
My girlfriend likes to say “davenport.” She ain’t no hipster. I think you’d like her.
Excellent point, Larry. Only late-Capitalism could birth a counterculture that isn’t counter to anything. Douglas Haddow wrote a great article in Adbusters about how hipsters represent the cul-de-sac of Western Civilization: https://www.adbusters.org/magazine/79/hipster.html
But man, they can dance!
“And fleeting, optional style choices are perfectly equivalent to Gender/Religion/Race issues. Yeah.”
Holy sarcasm Batman!
What, no smart-ass comments about suburban white kids? You know you wanna do it, Augustine, DO IT!
I like this a lot, Lily, especially when you connect hipsters to hoodies. That is classic.
However, to clarify what I believe is a misperception, I’d like to contribute this pearl: your nephew is not a hoodrat but a wigga. A wannabe _______, which is ALL affect. I think to be a legit hoodrat you have to live in the hood (i.e., a real city for starters), and like peewee car thief above said, ya gotta wanna hang w/ your friends and do hoodrat things, which, to bring us full circle, must include sucking down forties in graffiti alleys and … wearing tight sweaters(?).
Peace, y’all. It’s Olde English time.
I like this a lot, Lily, especially when you connect hipsters to hoodies. That is classic.
However, to clarify what I believe is a misperception, I’d like to contribute this pearl: your nephew is not a hoodrat but a wigga. A wannabe _______, which is ALL affect. I think to be a legit hoodrat you have to live in the hood (i.e., a real city for starters), and like peewee car thief above said, ya gotta wanna hang w/ your friends and do hoodrat things, which, to bring us full circle, must include sucking down forties in graffiti alleys and … wearing tight sweaters(?).
Peace, y’all. It’s Olde English time.
fast food isn’t
fast food isn’t
But People, “[h]igh school stereotype talk” is (sometimes) ‘talk about how the mind works when it’s not thinking’ – surely something worth thinking, reading, and talking about?
But People, “[h]igh school stereotype talk” is (sometimes) ‘talk about how the mind works when it’s not thinking’ – surely something worth thinking, reading, and talking about?
i agree with this. it is the air of elitism that bothers me, especially considering how these types of subcultures initially come from a mindset that is like ‘be like us, we can be different together’ but aren’t initially exclusionary of any person. now, people that identify as ‘hipster’ or ‘hardcore’ or whatever tend to use their social group as a pseudo-fraternity wherein they can feel superior through exclusion of the other. it’s totally self defeating and essentially just a reaction to the mainstream’s rejection of their self identity. there are some ‘hipsters’ that are genuinely nice people and accepting of everyone, of course there are, but i’ve heard too many of my ‘hardcore’ friends (hardcore being a subgroup actually very similar to hipsters) call other people ‘normals’ in a derogatory manner, thereby expressing their superiority by excluding them from their supposedly ‘better’ subgroup. you’re no better or worse for being a part of a social group.
Jen: Don’t get pissy because you don’t understand something. Ask questions. What I said makes perfect sense. Maybe you don’t agree with it, which is a good place to start. But don’t accuse me of being nonsensical when it is more than apparent that I’m not being nonsensical. All of the above words connect to each other. Same with the sentences. All I’ve done is agitated your insecurity. Explore that. Let’s talk.
Jen: Don’t get pissy because you don’t understand something. Ask questions. What I said makes perfect sense. Maybe you don’t agree with it, which is a good place to start. But don’t accuse me of being nonsensical when it is more than apparent that I’m not being nonsensical. All of the above words connect to each other. Same with the sentences. All I’ve done is agitated your insecurity. Explore that. Let’s talk.
I keep thinking that part of the girls bag on the left is like a tattoo all the way down her arm but it isn’t.
I would! I LOVE the word ‘davenport.’ My grandparents used to always used to call their couch that. I love when people use words that died generations ago.
I would! I LOVE the word ‘davenport.’ My grandparents used to always used to call their couch that. I love when people use words that died generations ago.
People should mock ‘hipsters’ less about riding fixies and being vegan and more about their coke habits.
What’s so terrible about sustainable diet and transport?
“What, no smart-ass comments about suburban white kids? You know you wanna do it, Augustine, DO IT!”
I guess you’ve never seen a Black Hipster, Dude. I’ve even seen a few in *Berlin* this year. Don’t be so provincial.
Now you’re on the trolley.
Now you’re on the trolley.
& the new word for hipster is…….. (based on a gawker poll earlier this year)
http://gawker.com/5500197/your-new-hipster-slur-fauxhemians
fauxhemians.
because it isn’t about those things but rather the status those things impart on them for them. plus, it’s totally a socio-economic privilege to shop at whole foods, to be able to be a vegan, to purchase a nice fixed gear bike. not many people living in the projects around my school ride fixed gears and eat vegan, i can promise you that. not sure what i’m arguing though. basically saying ‘fuck honkeys.’
Being vegan can be incredibly cheap. I guess you just have to think about their means of acquiring these things. Maybe you can tell that its a shallow engagement with ‘sustainability’ if their nose is bleeding.
Keep in mind that I am all for mocking nautical star tattoos.
hipster
if you distill all these various definitions of “hipster” in this thread (and anywhere else in any form of media) you end up with: “somebody that’s different than me that i don’t like”. which is retarded. everyone who has anything to do with this site (reads it, writes for it, posts comments) can equitably be called a hipster. for fuck’s sake, folks, this is a literary blog!
Golly, you’re two peas in a pod!
Golly, you’re two peas in a pod!
They aged out of their permission to Hip
“Caucasian-Americans”
you mean “Americans”
“Caucasian-Americans”
you mean “Americans”
http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&q=target advertisement
http://www.youtube.com/user/allofthetrash
I missed the hoodrat discussion, apparently, but here’s a seven-year old with the greatest possible public use of the word:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcqOgnQyXp4
MEAT IS REALLY EXPENSIVE DREW
Semantic intention’s just a venn diagram. Wittgenstein et al.
this be some weird hangover fodder to find
Ok. Now define haters.
ZZZIPP… fantastic resource
But, Joseph, is any sort of group identity, whether chosen or otherwise, off the table? I tend to think humans are affiliative beings. It’s deep in our makeup, coexisting with our individuality. Sheer individuality seems like an illusion. On the other hand, it seems like a mistake to just turn identity into some kind of mad lib, where orthodox Jews and hipsters are just interchangeable options. That wipes out the nuances of identity, the individuality of groups, if you will. It also elides the fact that groups define and regard things like “identity” and “choice” differently. Sure, one may “choose” to repudiate one’s identity as an orthodox Jew, but that is not the same type of decision as becoming a hipster or distancing oneself from it. Seems like the former has more ontological weight, more implications as far as family, as far as fluid interchange and crossover with other groups and identities or lack thereof, less room for irony and humor about the decision and oneself. Maybe you’re right, and we should all be striving for an out-and-out individualism, shredding the labels. It seems as though it would be a universe like that in Borges’s “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius,” without nouns. The imaginative leap that this demands is what fuels Borges’s story, I think.
But, Joseph, is any sort of group identity, whether chosen or otherwise, off the table? I tend to think humans are affiliative beings. It’s deep in our makeup, coexisting with our individuality. Sheer individuality seems like an illusion. On the other hand, it seems like a mistake to just turn identity into some kind of mad lib, where orthodox Jews and hipsters are just interchangeable options. That wipes out the nuances of identity, the individuality of groups, if you will. It also elides the fact that groups define and regard things like “identity” and “choice” differently. Sure, one may “choose” to repudiate one’s identity as an orthodox Jew, but that is not the same type of decision as becoming a hipster or distancing oneself from it. Seems like the former has more ontological weight, more implications as far as family, as far as fluid interchange and crossover with other groups and identities or lack thereof, less room for irony and humor about the decision and oneself. Maybe you’re right, and we should all be striving for an out-and-out individualism, shredding the labels. It seems as though it would be a universe like that in Borges’s “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius,” without nouns. The imaginative leap that this demands is what fuels Borges’s story, I think.
yeah i always liked using the term scenester too… it seemed to disappear at the start of the 2000’s when independent bands moved more into the mainstream. i remember using it a lot my senior year of high school… ahh memories
yeah i always liked using the term scenester too… it seemed to disappear at the start of the 2000’s when independent bands moved more into the mainstream. i remember using it a lot my senior year of high school… ahh memories
I’m a hoodrat, I’m a hater. Things are going to change. I can feel it.
i love bashing trendy people as much as the next person, but tend to get “weird vibes” when people start discussing why people do things, such as eating a vegan diet, ride bikes, etc, especially when those things are actually good for the planet. even if they are just doing it to be cool, the fact that it’s better for the world, and their bodies, actually is pretty cool. there have been a lot worse trends and it obviously sucks when something you care about seems to get tossed around without much care from trendy people, but at least people are reading books, looking at art, watching movies that mean something, and eating healthy, even if its for “the wrong reasons.” it seems like a start if anything. maybe when the trend appeal wears off, a few new people will be impacted and i don’t see that really being a bad thing.
i love bashing trendy people as much as the next person, but tend to get “weird vibes” when people start discussing why people do things, such as eating a vegan diet, ride bikes, etc, especially when those things are actually good for the planet. even if they are just doing it to be cool, the fact that it’s better for the world, and their bodies, actually is pretty cool. there have been a lot worse trends and it obviously sucks when something you care about seems to get tossed around without much care from trendy people, but at least people are reading books, looking at art, watching movies that mean something, and eating healthy, even if its for “the wrong reasons.” it seems like a start if anything. maybe when the trend appeal wears off, a few new people will be impacted and i don’t see that really being a bad thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQRbDSwZIME
Provincial? Oh, Augustine, is there a dig you can’t leave out? What do black hipsters have to do with anything? I’ve seen Asian, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Fat, Skinny, and Old hipsters, too… is that supposed to mean anything or is this just another way for you to sneak in the fact that you live in Germany– again? Yes, what an anomaly! A black man in Berlin! A bohemian black man!
I’m bored already.
I was simply making fun of the fact that your idea of devaluing something seems to be labeling it the child’s play of “suburban white kids” as if that were a genuine, eye-opening critique.
I’ve got news for you, Augustine, you come off more ignorant than you do cultured.
Provincial? Oh, Augustine, is there a dig you can’t leave out? What do black hipsters have to do with anything? I’ve seen Asian, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Fat, Skinny, and Old hipsters, too… is that supposed to mean anything or is this just another way for you to sneak in the fact that you live in Germany– again? Yes, what an anomaly! A black man in Berlin! A bohemian black man!
I’m bored already.
I was simply making fun of the fact that your idea of devaluing something seems to be labeling it the child’s play of “suburban white kids” as if that were a genuine, eye-opening critique.
I’ve got news for you, Augustine, you come off more ignorant than you do cultured.
I agree, Chris. Also, the term “hipster” was used frequently by Beat poets, particularly Allen Ginsburg, to refer to themselves and their community in the late ’50s/through the ’60s. It’s not new. It’s been recycled and applied to my generation (I’m 23 yrs old). Beatniks, hippies, scene kids, etc.
I agree, Chris. Also, the term “hipster” was used frequently by Beat poets, particularly Allen Ginsburg, to refer to themselves and their community in the late ’50s/through the ’60s. It’s not new. It’s been recycled and applied to my generation (I’m 23 yrs old). Beatniks, hippies, scene kids, etc.
Ginsberg*
Ginsberg*
To be fair, this post was not anti-hipster. At all. If anything, my post did nothing but expose my jealousy towards those I deem “hipper” than me.
hipoisie
I don’t mind people who wanna wear certain things, or look a certain way, or be vegan or whatever. When I start throwing around the word hipster (in a derogatory way) is when people have no goddamn sense of humor and take themselves waaaaaaay too seriously. Cuz then it’s just funny to watch them get all mad and look even sillier.
I like ‘dandy,’ Lily. I second the notion that it should make a comeback.
we’re all still so insecure we have to role-play in order to feel accepted
Lily, surely this conformity is no surprise – is it not nearly ubiquitous among people (mammals?) that can ‘play roles’? Usefully synonymous expressions for “role-playing” in this context would be ‘socialization’ and ‘belonging to a community’.
It’d be equally correct to say that ‘most of us realistically – to the extent that we’re conscious – role-play in order to be accepted’.
To me, what’s important about social integration is that it’s dialectical, in the sense that some particular society might be sensitive to conscious transformation by its members, the germs of that transformation contained in whatever emancipatory germs ‘rest’ in that society (or whatever emancipation it’s pregnable by from without).
I mean that conscious, purposive refusal of norms can be communicated and taken up in non-dogmatically-imitative ways.
I think that both Marx and Nietzsche have had (and continue to have) this catalyzing or enabling effect, and that many artists have had (and have) it in less directed ways.
In my experience, most hipsters “cook vegan” and “eat vegan food” but are not actually vegan. Also, I think the not-so-new hipster thing is to eat lots of meat and fast food and shit.
In my experience, most hipsters “cook vegan” and “eat vegan food” but are not actually vegan. Also, I think the not-so-new hipster thing is to eat lots of meat and fast food and shit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxxPLDZnqwA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxxPLDZnqwA&feature=related
Sometimes I wonder how a group of highly intelligent creative entities can be so caught up in the web of petri-dish developed mass media thought patterns designed to separate and code us from one another. I am speaking of the people this post is supposed to be about and those posting beneath. Does this mean me also? If I live in an environment I would be ignorant to think I am free of that same environment. We can start at the basics… the term hoodrat applied implicitly towards African-Americans. The term hipster applied toward Caucasian-Americans. No matter the discussion of why the term “hood” automatically brings up images of African-Americans. Essentially it is a class issue, the usage of “hood” and how it is accepted visually into the consciousness. It likely dates back to there being two “lower” classes — poor “whites” and poor “blacks” (here on out, until otherwise noted, both ethnicities will be referred to by their respective misnomer “white” and “black”. During the time where poor whites and blacks shared a commonality, it was thought of as too dangerous and it became a part of the design to create a chasm of difference.
Of course, as anyone who has spent time in the inner city knows that the “hood mentality/attitude” is an outgrowth of the environment (including what the school system teaches, to how the buildings are designed, to it all), and less an outgrowth from some sort of ingrained ethnic disposition.
It could be said then that the “hipster” is a similar outgrowth (as someone else above already mentioned). And yet you will find “hipsters” in the inner city, the same inner city you would find “hoodrats”. (Long Beach, CA to name one city)
No one ever wishes, especially among a group of writers, how we can so easily go along with the terms “white” and “black” as distinctions, knowing that they are factually incorrect. No disrespect to Ms. Hoang, but she opened the door to the discussion by showing us one label, and then peeling back this label to get at an understanding of what it is labeling. But I wish to peel back the sublabel…. scientifically speaking, white is an absence of color while black is its opposite, which means unless you are albino or the genetic opposite of albino, we are all shades of the same color —- brown. How do we go along with the same terms knowing those terms are wrong… simply by holding up my hand I can tell I am not black. I can tell my Jewish friend is not white. I can tell my Cherokee great grandmother was not red. The latter seems to be a less heated distinction, somehow.
Okay, off my soapbox now.
How about a discussion about writing? High school stereotype talk is really so high school, folks.
Thank Gawd! I thought Lily’s statement about gender and hoodrats was gonna compel me to stop using it for myself, but now that a li’l 7-year-old car thief broke it down — “I wanted to do hoodrat stuff w/ my friends” — I think I’m in the clear. Whew.
My girlfriend likes to say “davenport.” She ain’t no hipster. I think you’d like her.
Aw, shucks. You guys are the bees’ knees.
Aw, shucks. You guys are the bees’ knees.
I like this a lot, Lily, especially when you connect hipsters to hoodies. That is classic.
However, to clarify what I believe is a misperception, I’d like to contribute this pearl: your nephew is not a hoodrat but a wigga. A wannabe _______, which is ALL affect. I think to be a legit hoodrat you have to live in the hood (i.e., a real city for starters), and like peewee car thief above said, ya gotta wanna hang w/ your friends and do hoodrat things, which, to bring us full circle, must include sucking down forties in graffiti alleys and … wearing tight sweaters(?).
Peace, y’all. It’s Olde English time.
fast food isn’t
But People, “[h]igh school stereotype talk” is (sometimes) ‘talk about how the mind works when it’s not thinking’ – surely something worth thinking, reading, and talking about?
Jen: Don’t get pissy because you don’t understand something. Ask questions. What I said makes perfect sense. Maybe you don’t agree with it, which is a good place to start. But don’t accuse me of being nonsensical when it is more than apparent that I’m not being nonsensical. All of the above words connect to each other. Same with the sentences. All I’ve done is agitated your insecurity. Explore that. Let’s talk.
I would! I LOVE the word ‘davenport.’ My grandparents used to always used to call their couch that. I love when people use words that died generations ago.
Now you’re on the trolley.
Having seen, in one night, two clips of Katt Williams standup, and another standup clip also posted on HTMLGiant, I am struck with the realization (and also the accompanying realization that I probably should have realized this before) that standup comedy is nothing but a secular form of the sermon. Fascinating stuff.
Having seen, in one night, two clips of Katt Williams standup, and another standup clip also posted on HTMLGiant, I am struck with the realization (and also the accompanying realization that I probably should have realized this before) that standup comedy is nothing but a secular form of the sermon. Fascinating stuff.
Golly, you’re two peas in a pod!
“Caucasian-Americans”
you mean “Americans”
http://www.ioffer.com/img/item/121/163/001/RaHKfJDl7uJBnAQ.jpg
http://www.ioffer.com/img/item/121/163/001/RaHKfJDl7uJBnAQ.jpg
i agree, a vegan diet can be very cheap, especially if you’re shopping at a farmers market, roadside stand (anyone that lives in new orleans, i suggest this cool old dude on napolean in uptown), or a grocery store other than whole foods. produce at winn-dixie (amazing name, i know) is crazy cheap and they’ve had an organic section for about a year now. they have buy-one-get-one-free on certain things each week. this week tomatos and cantaloupes are amongst those. score.
i agree, a vegan diet can be very cheap, especially if you’re shopping at a farmers market, roadside stand (anyone that lives in new orleans, i suggest this cool old dude on napolean in uptown), or a grocery store other than whole foods. produce at winn-dixie (amazing name, i know) is crazy cheap and they’ve had an organic section for about a year now. they have buy-one-get-one-free on certain things each week. this week tomatos and cantaloupes are amongst those. score.
yes sir, not to mention “spinster” for women “doing their own thing” even before that.
yes sir, not to mention “spinster” for women “doing their own thing” even before that.
But, Joseph, is any sort of group identity, whether chosen or otherwise, off the table? I tend to think humans are affiliative beings. It’s deep in our makeup, coexisting with our individuality. Sheer individuality seems like an illusion. On the other hand, it seems like a mistake to just turn identity into some kind of mad lib, where orthodox Jews and hipsters are just interchangeable options. That wipes out the nuances of identity, the individuality of groups, if you will. It also elides the fact that groups define and regard things like “identity” and “choice” differently. Sure, one may “choose” to repudiate one’s identity as an orthodox Jew, but that is not the same type of decision as becoming a hipster or distancing oneself from it. Seems like the former has more ontological weight, more implications as far as family, as far as fluid interchange and crossover with other groups and identities or lack thereof, less room for irony and humor about the decision and oneself. Maybe you’re right, and we should all be striving for an out-and-out individualism, shredding the labels. It seems as though it would be a universe like that in Borges’s “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius,” without nouns. The imaginative leap that this demands is what fuels Borges’s story, I think.
yeah i always liked using the term scenester too… it seemed to disappear at the start of the 2000’s when independent bands moved more into the mainstream. i remember using it a lot my senior year of high school… ahh memories
I thought a spinster was a woman who never got married? Not that that can’t be a sort of “doing their own thing,” just that in many cases it was due to a woman not being “marriageable” for some reason or another or possibly being a lesbian before such things were acceptable.
I thought a spinster was a woman who never got married? Not that that can’t be a sort of “doing their own thing,” just that in many cases it was due to a woman not being “marriageable” for some reason or another or possibly being a lesbian before such things were acceptable.
i love bashing trendy people as much as the next person, but tend to get “weird vibes” when people start discussing why people do things, such as eating a vegan diet, ride bikes, etc, especially when those things are actually good for the planet. even if they are just doing it to be cool, the fact that it’s better for the world, and their bodies, actually is pretty cool. there have been a lot worse trends and it obviously sucks when something you care about seems to get tossed around without much care from trendy people, but at least people are reading books, looking at art, watching movies that mean something, and eating healthy, even if its for “the wrong reasons.” it seems like a start if anything. maybe when the trend appeal wears off, a few new people will be impacted and i don’t see that really being a bad thing.
Provincial? Oh, Augustine, is there a dig you can’t leave out? What do black hipsters have to do with anything? I’ve seen Asian, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Fat, Skinny, and Old hipsters, too… is that supposed to mean anything or is this just another way for you to sneak in the fact that you live in Germany– again? Yes, what an anomaly! A black man in Berlin! A bohemian black man!
I’m bored already.
I was simply making fun of the fact that your idea of devaluing something seems to be labeling it the child’s play of “suburban white kids” as if that were a genuine, eye-opening critique.
I’ve got news for you, Augustine, you come off more ignorant than you do cultured.
you’re right, marriage or it’s lack there of, is what that title was really about, but i think outside of lesbianism, their not being married often had to do with them focusing on careers, activism, etc, which now-a-days really isn’t anything “crazy” but back then was pretty “cutting edge.” to me, it seems like a lot of them were choosing to focus on other things other than what was expected of them, i.e. getting married and shooting babies out of their vaginas, which kind of parallels today’s 20something “hipster” culture a bit.
you’re right, marriage or it’s lack there of, is what that title was really about, but i think outside of lesbianism, their not being married often had to do with them focusing on careers, activism, etc, which now-a-days really isn’t anything “crazy” but back then was pretty “cutting edge.” to me, it seems like a lot of them were choosing to focus on other things other than what was expected of them, i.e. getting married and shooting babies out of their vaginas, which kind of parallels today’s 20something “hipster” culture a bit.
I agree, Chris. Also, the term “hipster” was used frequently by Beat poets, particularly Allen Ginsburg, to refer to themselves and their community in the late ’50s/through the ’60s. It’s not new. It’s been recycled and applied to my generation (I’m 23 yrs old). Beatniks, hippies, scene kids, etc.
Ginsberg*
“What do black hipsters have to do with anything?”
Uh, because you were expecting me to make a default smart-ass comment about white suburban kids just because Hipsters were under discussion?
Hey Stu, I love it when pissy little things like Stu take a swipe at me and then react badly when I swipe back. Maybe I didn’t get the memo about the no-fly zone around your tricycle.
Also, next time: stop typing *before* you complain of “boredom”… wouldn’t that make more sense?
“What do black hipsters have to do with anything?”
Uh, because you were expecting me to make a default smart-ass comment about white suburban kids just because Hipsters were under discussion?
Hey Stu, I love it when pissy little things like Stu take a swipe at me and then react badly when I swipe back. Maybe I didn’t get the memo about the no-fly zone around your tricycle.
Also, next time: stop typing *before* you complain of “boredom”… wouldn’t that make more sense?
In my experience, most hipsters “cook vegan” and “eat vegan food” but are not actually vegan. Also, I think the not-so-new hipster thing is to eat lots of meat and fast food and shit.
“During the time where poor whites and blacks shared a commonality, it was thought of as too dangerous and it became a part of the design to create a chasm of difference.”
That’s it.
“During the time where poor whites and blacks shared a commonality, it was thought of as too dangerous and it became a part of the design to create a chasm of difference.”
That’s it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxxPLDZnqwA&feature=related
Aw, shucks. You guys are the bees’ knees.
Having seen, in one night, two clips of Katt Williams standup, and another standup clip also posted on HTMLGiant, I am struck with the realization (and also the accompanying realization that I probably should have realized this before) that standup comedy is nothing but a secular form of the sermon. Fascinating stuff.
http://www.ioffer.com/img/item/121/163/001/RaHKfJDl7uJBnAQ.jpg
i agree, a vegan diet can be very cheap, especially if you’re shopping at a farmers market, roadside stand (anyone that lives in new orleans, i suggest this cool old dude on napolean in uptown), or a grocery store other than whole foods. produce at winn-dixie (amazing name, i know) is crazy cheap and they’ve had an organic section for about a year now. they have buy-one-get-one-free on certain things each week. this week tomatos and cantaloupes are amongst those. score.
yes sir, not to mention “spinster” for women “doing their own thing” even before that.
I thought a spinster was a woman who never got married? Not that that can’t be a sort of “doing their own thing,” just that in many cases it was due to a woman not being “marriageable” for some reason or another or possibly being a lesbian before such things were acceptable.
i think we have some people judging a “group of people” based on the most irritating / superficial members of it. that’s not really fair. a hipster doesn’t have to be rich and faux-vegan, they can be whatever. there’s assholes everywhere, people. seems to take a lot of energy to decide to blanket-dislike one “specific type” of “young person” or whatever.
i think we have some people judging a “group of people” based on the most irritating / superficial members of it. that’s not really fair. a hipster doesn’t have to be rich and faux-vegan, they can be whatever. there’s assholes everywhere, people. seems to take a lot of energy to decide to blanket-dislike one “specific type” of “young person” or whatever.
I think this is just a characteristic of many humans’ behaviour, though. It’s worth remembering that many people who (arguably, erroneously) consider themselves “normal” look on, and speak of, many other social groups in a derogatory or superior manner. It’s just standard petty tribalism. This is what people do.
I think this is just a characteristic of many humans’ behaviour, though. It’s worth remembering that many people who (arguably, erroneously) consider themselves “normal” look on, and speak of, many other social groups in a derogatory or superior manner. It’s just standard petty tribalism. This is what people do.
If this is true and not a bizarre joke, why doesn’t Generous Trust fund dress better?
I don’t understand why these three keep being used as examples of hipsterism. Here’s the thing: hipsters look cool. These three look like temporally displaced tweens. They’re failed hipsters.
Fund should’ve been capitalised, obvs, etc.
If this is true and not a bizarre joke, why doesn’t Generous Trust fund dress better?
I don’t understand why these three keep being used as examples of hipsterism. Here’s the thing: hipsters look cool. These three look like temporally displaced tweens. They’re failed hipsters.
Fund should’ve been capitalised, obvs, etc.
you’re right, marriage or it’s lack there of, is what that title was really about, but i think outside of lesbianism, their not being married often had to do with them focusing on careers, activism, etc, which now-a-days really isn’t anything “crazy” but back then was pretty “cutting edge.” to me, it seems like a lot of them were choosing to focus on other things other than what was expected of them, i.e. getting married and shooting babies out of their vaginas, which kind of parallels today’s 20something “hipster” culture a bit.
“What do black hipsters have to do with anything?”
Uh, because you were expecting me to make a default smart-ass comment about white suburban kids just because Hipsters were under discussion?
Hey Stu, I love it when pissy little things like Stu take a swipe at me and then react badly when I swipe back. Maybe I didn’t get the memo about the no-fly zone around your tricycle.
Also, next time: stop typing *before* you complain of “boredom”… wouldn’t that make more sense?
“During the time where poor whites and blacks shared a commonality, it was thought of as too dangerous and it became a part of the design to create a chasm of difference.”
That’s it.
“Hey Stu, I love it when pissy little things like Stu take a swipe at me and then react badly when I swipe back. Maybe I didn’t get the memo about the no-fly zone around your tricycle.”
Hey I got a new one. What the definition of an “Augustine”?
I know what he would say: “cool, Berlin based black bohemian writer” (pass the fucking beret and the Charles Mingus albums, it’s going to be a cliched ride folks…)
Let me take a stab at an alternate definition. How about: silly bastard who thinks he is the most interesting man on the planet, who gets his rocks of waving his “intellect” around like a monkey throwing shit in a zoo, and reacting like a little bitch whenever anybody answers him back.
Will that do?
“Hey Stu, I love it when pissy little things like Stu take a swipe at me and then react badly when I swipe back. Maybe I didn’t get the memo about the no-fly zone around your tricycle.”
Hey I got a new one. What the definition of an “Augustine”?
I know what he would say: “cool, Berlin based black bohemian writer” (pass the fucking beret and the Charles Mingus albums, it’s going to be a cliched ride folks…)
Let me take a stab at an alternate definition. How about: silly bastard who thinks he is the most interesting man on the planet, who gets his rocks of waving his “intellect” around like a monkey throwing shit in a zoo, and reacting like a little bitch whenever anybody answers him back.
Will that do?
Hey Stu, Xcetera: you “guys” are truly welcome as junior cadets of the Augustine Anti-Fan Club! Thanks for the hard work and I look forward to your participation as you make your way up in the ranks! Even if you’re both sock-puppets of the same mid-level cadet! Welcome!
Hey Stu, Xcetera: you “guys” are truly welcome as junior cadets of the Augustine Anti-Fan Club! Thanks for the hard work and I look forward to your participation as you make your way up in the ranks! Even if you’re both sock-puppets of the same mid-level cadet! Welcome!
i think we have some people judging a “group of people” based on the most irritating / superficial members of it. that’s not really fair. a hipster doesn’t have to be rich and faux-vegan, they can be whatever. there’s assholes everywhere, people. seems to take a lot of energy to decide to blanket-dislike one “specific type” of “young person” or whatever.
I think this is just a characteristic of many humans’ behaviour, though. It’s worth remembering that many people who (arguably, erroneously) consider themselves “normal” look on, and speak of, many other social groups in a derogatory or superior manner. It’s just standard petty tribalism. This is what people do.
god, you really love the sound of your own voice, dont you?
please reply. i know you cant resist it, you fucking phony.
god, you really love the sound of your own voice, dont you?
please reply. i know you cant resist it, you fucking phony.
If this is true and not a bizarre joke, why doesn’t Generous Trust fund dress better?
I don’t understand why these three keep being used as examples of hipsterism. Here’s the thing: hipsters look cool. These three look like temporally displaced tweens. They’re failed hipsters.
Fund should’ve been capitalised, obvs, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajnEJtzhC-Y&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajnEJtzhC-Y&feature=related
“Hey Stu, I love it when pissy little things like Stu take a swipe at me and then react badly when I swipe back. Maybe I didn’t get the memo about the no-fly zone around your tricycle.”
Hey I got a new one. What the definition of an “Augustine”?
I know what he would say: “cool, Berlin based black bohemian writer” (pass the fucking beret and the Charles Mingus albums, it’s going to be a cliched ride folks…)
Let me take a stab at an alternate definition. How about: silly bastard who thinks he is the most interesting man on the planet, who gets his rocks of waving his “intellect” around like a monkey throwing shit in a zoo, and reacting like a little bitch whenever anybody answers him back.
Will that do?
I want to frogsplash all hipsters. I get the sense there are some hipsters here in fact. I will smash your neon bikes and beanies you wear when it’s 90 degrees. And please stop cutting your jeans into shorts. That look does not work.
I want to frogsplash all hipsters. I get the sense there are some hipsters here in fact. I will smash your neon bikes and beanies you wear when it’s 90 degrees. And please stop cutting your jeans into shorts. That look does not work.
Hey Stu, Xcetera: you “guys” are truly welcome as junior cadets of the Augustine Anti-Fan Club! Thanks for the hard work and I look forward to your participation as you make your way up in the ranks! Even if you’re both sock-puppets of the same mid-level cadet! Welcome!
I wish I was a hipster. Fact is, I’m what people from where I live call a river-rat.
I wish I was a hipster. Fact is, I’m what people from where I live call a river-rat.
You’re interesting
You’re interesting
god, you really love the sound of your own voice, dont you?
please reply. i know you cant resist it, you fucking phony.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajnEJtzhC-Y&feature=related
What about the poor rats? Everybody’s making fun of rats when they are pretending to make fun of something else. God can’t you people even think?
What about the poor rats? Everybody’s making fun of rats when they are pretending to make fun of something else. God can’t you people even think?
if river-rat is something brilliant, then, yes, that must be what you are.
if river-rat is something brilliant, then, yes, that must be what you are.
Hipster dinosaurs in crayon, no less!
http://www.forkparty.com/hipster-dinosaurs/
Hipster dinosaurs in crayon, no less!
http://www.forkparty.com/hipster-dinosaurs/
yes. i am.
yes. i am.
I want to frogsplash all hipsters. I get the sense there are some hipsters here in fact. I will smash your neon bikes and beanies you wear when it’s 90 degrees. And please stop cutting your jeans into shorts. That look does not work.
I wish I was a hipster. Fact is, I’m what people from where I live call a river-rat.
You’re interesting
Yes, I do mean Americans. I’ve noticed how in America we tend to separate even in our attempts for inclusion. I’ve noticed that we tend to say ____-American for every ethnicity except Caucasian. I’ve found it fascinating since elementary school when I first noticed it.
I’m watching Tekken right now. It kind of sucks….
Yes, I do mean Americans. I’ve noticed how in America we tend to separate even in our attempts for inclusion. I’ve noticed that we tend to say ____-American for every ethnicity except Caucasian. I’ve found it fascinating since elementary school when I first noticed it.
I’m watching Tekken right now. It kind of sucks….
between the comments last week about “white people” from chen and now comments from hoang about things that are “ghetto” I am eagerly awaiting some cracker’s comments about asian culture.
between the comments last week about “white people” from chen and now comments from hoang about things that are “ghetto” I am eagerly awaiting some cracker’s comments about asian culture.
What about the poor rats? Everybody’s making fun of rats when they are pretending to make fun of something else. God can’t you people even think?
if river-rat is something brilliant, then, yes, that must be what you are.
i’ve already done quite a bit of that but maybe i can drum something up in my drum machine just for awesome’s sake, i’ll let you know
i’ve already done quite a bit of that but maybe i can drum something up in my drum machine just for awesome’s sake, i’ll let you know
the START Natural Language System was not very much help with this whole thing. the world may never know…
the START Natural Language System was not very much help with this whole thing. the world may never know…
Hipster dinosaurs in crayon, no less!
http://www.forkparty.com/hipster-dinosaurs/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4s6H4ku6ZY&feature=fvst
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4s6H4ku6ZY&feature=fvst
yes. i am.
Yes, I do mean Americans. I’ve noticed how in America we tend to separate even in our attempts for inclusion. I’ve noticed that we tend to say ____-American for every ethnicity except Caucasian. I’ve found it fascinating since elementary school when I first noticed it.
I’m watching Tekken right now. It kind of sucks….
between the comments last week about “white people” from chen and now comments from hoang about things that are “ghetto” I am eagerly awaiting some cracker’s comments about asian culture.
i’ve already done quite a bit of that but maybe i can drum something up in my drum machine just for awesome’s sake, i’ll let you know
the START Natural Language System was not very much help with this whole thing. the world may never know…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4s6H4ku6ZY&feature=fvst
How does someone under the age of 35 not know what “hood rat” means?
How does someone under the age of 35 not know what “hood rat” means?
How does someone under the age of 35 not know what “hood rat” means?
I reccomend the works of Pierre Bourdieu, his reflections on “distinction”. He tries to explain how the intellectuals, royals and bourgois people in the 19th century – actually the ancient hipsters – create a manner of music, wearing fashion, talking language, a special taste let’s say – to estabilsh a way of exlusion. I don’t know how to say it in english, but its really really interesting. The thing that sucks about hipsters is not ther glasses and their vintage clothes. It’s that some people who dress like this use also music and clothes etc, as a manner of exclusion. What they don’t realize is that their recurring culture of repetition is really boring and annoying.
I reccomend the works of Pierre Bourdieu, his reflections on “distinction”. He tries to explain how the intellectuals, royals and bourgois people in the 19th century – actually the ancient hipsters – create a manner of music, wearing fashion, talking language, a special taste let’s say – to estabilsh a way of exlusion. I don’t know how to say it in english, but its really really interesting. The thing that sucks about hipsters is not ther glasses and their vintage clothes. It’s that some people who dress like this use also music and clothes etc, as a manner of exclusion. What they don’t realize is that their recurring culture of repetition is really boring and annoying.
Maybe that is the reason why a lot of the american hipsters congregate in Berlin. The whole hipster concept fits so well into the german nature.
Maybe that is the reason why a lot of the american hipsters congregate in Berlin. The whole hipster concept fits so well into the german nature.
I mean the taling things very seriously and not having humorat all.
I mean the taling things very seriously and not having humorat all.
Hi Steffi: I think I actually used the term cultural capital, which is Bourdieu’s. I wanted to fit in the habitas somewhere, but when it came down to it, I lost my own patience. I like Bourdieu very much. Great thoughts, thank you.
Hi Steffi: I think I actually used the term cultural capital, which is Bourdieu’s. I wanted to fit in the habitas somewhere, but when it came down to it, I lost my own patience. I like Bourdieu very much. Great thoughts, thank you.
humorrat
humorrat
“Maybe that is the reason why a lot of the american hipsters congregate in Berlin.”
Nah. The Hipsters don’t have very much to do with the Natives here; they’re here because you can keep a high standard of living for very little cash in Berlin. Dinner for two at a decent place can be as cheap as €20. You can get in very “in” clubs for a cover charge of €15. You’d have to be an investment banker to afford the place we live (plus we keep a studio flat)… we even have a private back yard (a rarity within the city). The hipsters are here because they can’t afford London; when I first settled here, it’s because I couldn’t afford London. Now I wouldn’t live in London for all the _____ on Earth.
Hipsters live primarily in two places here: the former near-East and the Turkish ghettos. They don’t generally integrate/assimilate in either location. There’s some cross-national fucking (because the German girls can be *eye-meltingly* attractive and have fetchingly-dark voices and haven’t professionalized the romance thang, fully, yet… the German guys are seeing less of the action) but that’s about it.
When the Euro climbs again, the Hipsters will recede until only the richest (and most irritating) remain.
“Maybe that is the reason why a lot of the american hipsters congregate in Berlin.”
Nah. The Hipsters don’t have very much to do with the Natives here; they’re here because you can keep a high standard of living for very little cash in Berlin. Dinner for two at a decent place can be as cheap as €20. You can get in very “in” clubs for a cover charge of €15. You’d have to be an investment banker to afford the place we live (plus we keep a studio flat)… we even have a private back yard (a rarity within the city). The hipsters are here because they can’t afford London; when I first settled here, it’s because I couldn’t afford London. Now I wouldn’t live in London for all the _____ on Earth.
Hipsters live primarily in two places here: the former near-East and the Turkish ghettos. They don’t generally integrate/assimilate in either location. There’s some cross-national fucking (because the German girls can be *eye-meltingly* attractive and have fetchingly-dark voices and haven’t professionalized the romance thang, fully, yet… the German guys are seeing less of the action) but that’s about it.
When the Euro climbs again, the Hipsters will recede until only the richest (and most irritating) remain.
In fact, read all about it at THIS RECORDING:
http://thisrecording.com/today/2009/8/6/in-which-we-visit-berlin-and-eat-in-the-dark.html
In fact, read all about it at THIS RECORDING:
http://thisrecording.com/today/2009/8/6/in-which-we-visit-berlin-and-eat-in-the-dark.html
ooops:
“You’d have to be an investment banker to afford the place we live…” if it were anywhere else in the developed world.
ooops:
“You’d have to be an investment banker to afford the place we live…” if it were anywhere else in the developed world.
I reccomend the works of Pierre Bourdieu, his reflections on “distinction”. He tries to explain how the intellectuals, royals and bourgois people in the 19th century – actually the ancient hipsters – create a manner of music, wearing fashion, talking language, a special taste let’s say – to estabilsh a way of exlusion. I don’t know how to say it in english, but its really really interesting. The thing that sucks about hipsters is not ther glasses and their vintage clothes. It’s that some people who dress like this use also music and clothes etc, as a manner of exclusion. What they don’t realize is that their recurring culture of repetition is really boring and annoying.
Maybe that is the reason why a lot of the american hipsters congregate in Berlin. The whole hipster concept fits so well into the german nature.
I mean the taling things very seriously and not having humorat all.
Hi Steffi: I think I actually used the term cultural capital, which is Bourdieu’s. I wanted to fit in the habitas somewhere, but when it came down to it, I lost my own patience. I like Bourdieu very much. Great thoughts, thank you.
humorrat
“Maybe that is the reason why a lot of the american hipsters congregate in Berlin.”
Nah. The Hipsters don’t have very much to do with the Natives here; they’re here because you can keep a high standard of living for very little cash in Berlin. Dinner for two at a decent place can be as cheap as €20. You can get in very “in” clubs for a cover charge of €15. You’d have to be an investment banker to afford the place we live (plus we keep a studio flat)… we even have a private back yard (a rarity within the city). The hipsters are here because they can’t afford London; when I first settled here, it’s because I couldn’t afford London. Now I wouldn’t live in London for all the _____ on Earth.
Hipsters live primarily in two places here: the former near-East and the Turkish ghettos. They don’t generally integrate/assimilate in either location. There’s some cross-national fucking (because the German girls can be *eye-meltingly* attractive and have fetchingly-dark voices and haven’t professionalized the romance thang, fully, yet… the German guys are seeing less of the action) but that’s about it.
When the Euro climbs again, the Hipsters will recede until only the richest (and most irritating) remain.
In fact, read all about it at THIS RECORDING:
http://thisrecording.com/today/2009/8/6/in-which-we-visit-berlin-and-eat-in-the-dark.html
I once frogsplashed Mr. Fuji.
I once frogsplashed Mr. Fuji.
ooops:
“You’d have to be an investment banker to afford the place we live…” if it were anywhere else in the developed world.
I once frogsplashed Mr. Fuji.
Sometimes when i think about snobs or whatever i think ‘they think they have better taste than me fuckers’ or ‘they think the can flaunt their better taste fuckers’ or ‘they think theyre different than me fuckers’or ‘they dont want anything to do with me fuckers’ but then im just like yeah fuck it.
Sometimes when i think about snobs or whatever i think ‘they think they have better taste than me fuckers’ or ‘they think the can flaunt their better taste fuckers’ or ‘they think theyre different than me fuckers’or ‘they dont want anything to do with me fuckers’ but then im just like yeah fuck it.
Sometimes when i think about snobs or whatever i think ‘they think they have better taste than me fuckers’ or ‘they think the can flaunt their better taste fuckers’ or ‘they think theyre different than me fuckers’or ‘they dont want anything to do with me fuckers’ but then im just like yeah fuck it.
people can like, ride and eat whatever they want, as long as they have a sense of humor about themselves and ditch the attitude. and as long as they don’t wear indian face paint too. that’s annoying.
let’s discuss the way “native americana” has not been incorporated into white hipster culture. the band neon indian is example a.
*should read “has now been incorporated”
people can like, ride and eat whatever they want, as long as they have a sense of humor about themselves and ditch the attitude. and as long as they don’t wear indian face paint too. that’s annoying.
let’s discuss the way “native americana” has not been incorporated into white hipster culture. the band neon indian is example a.
*should read “has now been incorporated”
people can like, ride and eat whatever they want, as long as they have a sense of humor about themselves and ditch the attitude. and as long as they don’t wear indian face paint too. that’s annoying.
let’s discuss the way “native americana” has not been incorporated into white hipster culture. the band neon indian is example a.
*should read “has now been incorporated”
I think of hipster as perfect for describing kids who haven’t experienced hardship, but pretend to be outsiders. Kids from good backgrounds who pretend to be rejects as long as it is accepted. Fashion and snootiness are key. So I see it as a derogatory term.
I think of hipster as perfect for describing kids who haven’t experienced hardship, but pretend to be outsiders. Kids from good backgrounds who pretend to be rejects as long as it is accepted. Fashion and snootiness are key. So I see it as a derogatory term.
Whatever.
‘Hipster’ is simply a way for someone who’s spent his/her life ‘going with the flow’ to belittle someone who has had the guts to be different. I’ve always seen more than a little jealousy in that term.
The word ‘trendy’ has a similar goal: to try to color individualists as hypocritical conformists by pointing out that there are more than one of them.
I see it as no mistake, certainly, that nontraditional writers still face the same bitter opposition.
Whatever.
‘Hipster’ is simply a way for someone who’s spent his/her life ‘going with the flow’ to belittle someone who has had the guts to be different. I’ve always seen more than a little jealousy in that term.
The word ‘trendy’ has a similar goal: to try to color individualists as hypocritical conformists by pointing out that there are more than one of them.
I see it as no mistake, certainly, that nontraditional writers still face the same bitter opposition.
I think of hipster as perfect for describing kids who haven’t experienced hardship, but pretend to be outsiders. Kids from good backgrounds who pretend to be rejects as long as it is accepted. Fashion and snootiness are key. So I see it as a derogatory term.
Whatever.
‘Hipster’ is simply a way for someone who’s spent his/her life ‘going with the flow’ to belittle someone who has had the guts to be different. I’ve always seen more than a little jealousy in that term.
The word ‘trendy’ has a similar goal: to try to color individualists as hypocritical conformists by pointing out that there are more than one of them.
I see it as no mistake, certainly, that nontraditional writers still face the same bitter opposition.
“Going with the flow” is a term used by all the blowhards to hate on the deluxe creativity of happy people! (comic relief)
I love the hipsters. Hooray to kids who feed art scenes with their enthusiasm and money.
My point is that hipsters are a breed of poser – not the individualists you refer to, but the ones posing as individualists. Wishing they had the guts to be different, but not wanting to take the risk.
While I admit hipster is a term used with a dumptruckload of abhorrent jealousy on my part, I also have taken notice that these kids have perhaps a drop of a cloying preciousness going on. Like privileged kids in their 20s have had for generations. And will continue to have.
“Going with the flow” is a term used by all the blowhards to hate on the deluxe creativity of happy people! (comic relief)
I love the hipsters. Hooray to kids who feed art scenes with their enthusiasm and money.
My point is that hipsters are a breed of poser – not the individualists you refer to, but the ones posing as individualists. Wishing they had the guts to be different, but not wanting to take the risk.
While I admit hipster is a term used with a dumptruckload of abhorrent jealousy on my part, I also have taken notice that these kids have perhaps a drop of a cloying preciousness going on. Like privileged kids in their 20s have had for generations. And will continue to have.
Hipster = post-Wes Anderson, pre-career Yuppie
Hipster = post-Wes Anderson, pre-career Yuppie
“Going with the flow” is a term used by all the blowhards to hate on the deluxe creativity of happy people! (comic relief)
I love the hipsters. Hooray to kids who feed art scenes with their enthusiasm and money.
My point is that hipsters are a breed of poser – not the individualists you refer to, but the ones posing as individualists. Wishing they had the guts to be different, but not wanting to take the risk.
While I admit hipster is a term used with a dumptruckload of abhorrent jealousy on my part, I also have taken notice that these kids have perhaps a drop of a cloying preciousness going on. Like privileged kids in their 20s have had for generations. And will continue to have.
Hipster = post-Wes Anderson, pre-career Yuppie
I think “poser” is exactly the character of the sneer, regina.
“Hipster” is meant, when it’s said with hostility, to indicate conformity. So, is conformity always weak or malicious – that is, contemptible?
When a fan of some sports team conforms, that person is owning their belonging-to, asserting some kind of strength and authenticity that can only be gotten by ‘belonging to’ this group. It’s one kind or part of a self – namely, that pertaining to group identity.
(Smells like totalitarianism? I think: only superficially. Fans of teams are also fans of rivalries, of leagues of teams and of those sports themselves, and embrace difference in the sense of privileging the competition along with their teams’ winning of it. “Totalitarian” means ‘two minus one’, where sports loyalty needs ‘one plus one equals game’.)
On another hand, when “hipsters” – let me specify ‘posing hipsters’ – conform, they’re conforming to a consumption-driven assertion of resistance and independence. What’s objectionable about this pose is its absolutely repellent hypocrisy.
‘I’m wearing this gear that’s uncomfortable to me, and listening to these crappy bands, and pretending to read this impenetrable gibberish, visibly to belong to a tribe of Finer Earthlings – finer because ‘we’ live mindfully.’
If playing a role is a matter of getting a piece of ass, or a promotion, or parental acceptance, well, ok – sad, but universally human. (Whatever it takes, all’s fair, etc.)
But catering to the image of not catering to images at all? – as a commodified sign of superiority to ‘images’ and even to ‘commodities’?? Blech.
A fair question would be: how does one know that a “hipster” is posing? how does one know whether one is committed – or fake – oneself?
But are these meta-authenticity questions really effective? You know whether you listened more than once to those indie frisbees you foolishly bought. And you know when someone who ‘worships Beckett’ doesn’t in fact “remember” anything about Beckett’s books.
Sure, hypocrisy is a spectrum – everybody is a hypocrite in some way blah blah. But posing admits of modes and degrees. When people say “hipster” in an unkind way, they mean ‘there’s nothing but a coat-hanger in that costume’.
I think “poser” is exactly the character of the sneer, regina.
“Hipster” is meant, when it’s said with hostility, to indicate conformity. So, is conformity always weak or malicious – that is, contemptible?
When a fan of some sports team conforms, that person is owning their belonging-to, asserting some kind of strength and authenticity that can only be gotten by ‘belonging to’ this group. It’s one kind or part of a self – namely, that pertaining to group identity.
(Smells like totalitarianism? I think: only superficially. Fans of teams are also fans of rivalries, of leagues of teams and of those sports themselves, and embrace difference in the sense of privileging the competition along with their teams’ winning of it. “Totalitarian” means ‘two minus one’, where sports loyalty needs ‘one plus one equals game’.)
On another hand, when “hipsters” – let me specify ‘posing hipsters’ – conform, they’re conforming to a consumption-driven assertion of resistance and independence. What’s objectionable about this pose is its absolutely repellent hypocrisy.
‘I’m wearing this gear that’s uncomfortable to me, and listening to these crappy bands, and pretending to read this impenetrable gibberish, visibly to belong to a tribe of Finer Earthlings – finer because ‘we’ live mindfully.’
If playing a role is a matter of getting a piece of ass, or a promotion, or parental acceptance, well, ok – sad, but universally human. (Whatever it takes, all’s fair, etc.)
But catering to the image of not catering to images at all? – as a commodified sign of superiority to ‘images’ and even to ‘commodities’?? Blech.
A fair question would be: how does one know that a “hipster” is posing? how does one know whether one is committed – or fake – oneself?
But are these meta-authenticity questions really effective? You know whether you listened more than once to those indie frisbees you foolishly bought. And you know when someone who ‘worships Beckett’ doesn’t in fact “remember” anything about Beckett’s books.
Sure, hypocrisy is a spectrum – everybody is a hypocrite in some way blah blah. But posing admits of modes and degrees. When people say “hipster” in an unkind way, they mean ‘there’s nothing but a coat-hanger in that costume’.
Blah, blah blah.
There’re large tribes and there are small tribes. Everyone needs to join a tribe if they do not wish to live a rather difficult life. This is not only human nature, it’s what we’re SUPPOSED to be doing.
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Suborder: Haplorrhini
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: sapiens
Tribe: none that I know of
Clan: approximately twenty members – extended ‘family of origin’; a scattering of in-laws – out of a sense of obligation, mostly; a few ‘chosen-family’-type friends
Pack: five humans, two dogs
Number of humans I’d die for: two, my biological offspring
Number of non-human animals I’d die for: in theory, if I could keep a species from going extinct, I might be willing to die, if I was old anyway and in failing health; in practice, none
Number of non-human animals I anthropomorphize with silly nicknames (“Einstein”, BedHead”, “FrightWig”) and baby-talk: two
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Suborder: Haplorrhini
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: sapiens
Tribe: none that I know of
Clan: approximately twenty members – extended ‘family of origin’; a scattering of in-laws – out of a sense of obligation, mostly; a few ‘chosen-family’-type friends
Pack: five humans, two dogs
Number of humans I’d die for: two, my biological offspring
Number of non-human animals I’d die for: in theory, if I could keep a species from going extinct, I might be willing to die, if I was old anyway and in failing health; in practice, none
Number of non-human animals I anthropomorphize with silly nicknames (“Einstein”, BedHead”, “FrightWig”) and baby-talk: two
[BLAH BLAH BLAH alert]
Yes, Owen, belonging to tribes is ineradicably part of being human.
Are there no meaningful differences between tribes? – no intelligible, communicable ways of preferring one to others, or reasons for condemning any tribe by virtue of its priorities and commitments??
That’s the point of wondering about the pejorative “hipster”: what are the values that phonies in fact act on? should they be disdained for acting in contradiction to their assertions? (As, say, virtuecrat politicians are despised when they break the rules they would impose; they’re not looked down on for paying whores (or whatever the ‘sin’), but rather, for pretending to be superior to paying whores.)
[BLAH BLAH BLAH alert]
Yes, Owen, belonging to tribes is ineradicably part of being human.
Are there no meaningful differences between tribes? – no intelligible, communicable ways of preferring one to others, or reasons for condemning any tribe by virtue of its priorities and commitments??
That’s the point of wondering about the pejorative “hipster”: what are the values that phonies in fact act on? should they be disdained for acting in contradiction to their assertions? (As, say, virtuecrat politicians are despised when they break the rules they would impose; they’re not looked down on for paying whores (or whatever the ‘sin’), but rather, for pretending to be superior to paying whores.)
What a shock: dead boy wants to fight.
Actually, the reason we join one tribe and not another is for the very reason that there ARE meaningful differences between them.
Do I really need to explain this?
As for ‘hypocrisy’, this is something that is deliberately read into certain groups of people (in this case “hipsters” – a made-up label intended only to slander other people, often people like yourself in order to make yourself feel less hypocritical than you actually are) who have joined a certain tribe, in order to discredit or slander them. Tribal warfare, if you will.
Anyone who really thinks they haven’t chosen a tribe: look at the clothes you wear. Look in the mirror and see what your hair looks like. Think of the phrases you use, how you talk. If you’re a writer: look at the material you write. Finally: think of the friends you’ve chosen.
I’m sure many of you will think “Oh, I’m friends with lots of different kinds of people, all sorts of people, they’re all different, blah blah blah.” Nonsense. If you really think about it: they all have things in common, these being the things they have in common with you.
I’m not trying to be aggressive here. I’m only pointing out that all this talk about what sort of hypocrisy qualifies as hipsterism is getting everyone precisely noplace, and that the word ‘hipster’, in fact, has no valuable meaning except to attack other people in order to make yourself feel superior.
I think we can all be better people by refusing to use the word ‘hipster’.
What a shock: dead boy wants to fight.
Actually, the reason we join one tribe and not another is for the very reason that there ARE meaningful differences between them.
Do I really need to explain this?
As for ‘hypocrisy’, this is something that is deliberately read into certain groups of people (in this case “hipsters” – a made-up label intended only to slander other people, often people like yourself in order to make yourself feel less hypocritical than you actually are) who have joined a certain tribe, in order to discredit or slander them. Tribal warfare, if you will.
Anyone who really thinks they haven’t chosen a tribe: look at the clothes you wear. Look in the mirror and see what your hair looks like. Think of the phrases you use, how you talk. If you’re a writer: look at the material you write. Finally: think of the friends you’ve chosen.
I’m sure many of you will think “Oh, I’m friends with lots of different kinds of people, all sorts of people, they’re all different, blah blah blah.” Nonsense. If you really think about it: they all have things in common, these being the things they have in common with you.
I’m not trying to be aggressive here. I’m only pointing out that all this talk about what sort of hypocrisy qualifies as hipsterism is getting everyone precisely noplace, and that the word ‘hipster’, in fact, has no valuable meaning except to attack other people in order to make yourself feel superior.
I think we can all be better people by refusing to use the word ‘hipster’.
I think “poser” is exactly the character of the sneer, regina.
“Hipster” is meant, when it’s said with hostility, to indicate conformity. So, is conformity always weak or malicious – that is, contemptible?
When a fan of some sports team conforms, that person is owning their belonging-to, asserting some kind of strength and authenticity that can only be gotten by ‘belonging to’ this group. It’s one kind or part of a self – namely, that pertaining to group identity.
(Smells like totalitarianism? I think: only superficially. Fans of teams are also fans of rivalries, of leagues of teams and of those sports themselves, and embrace difference in the sense of privileging the competition along with their teams’ winning of it. “Totalitarian” means ‘two minus one’, where sports loyalty needs ‘one plus one equals game’.)
On another hand, when “hipsters” – let me specify ‘posing hipsters’ – conform, they’re conforming to a consumption-driven assertion of resistance and independence. What’s objectionable about this pose is its absolutely repellent hypocrisy.
‘I’m wearing this gear that’s uncomfortable to me, and listening to these crappy bands, and pretending to read this impenetrable gibberish, visibly to belong to a tribe of Finer Earthlings – finer because ‘we’ live mindfully.’
If playing a role is a matter of getting a piece of ass, or a promotion, or parental acceptance, well, ok – sad, but universally human. (Whatever it takes, all’s fair, etc.)
But catering to the image of not catering to images at all? – as a commodified sign of superiority to ‘images’ and even to ‘commodities’?? Blech.
A fair question would be: how does one know that a “hipster” is posing? how does one know whether one is committed – or fake – oneself?
But are these meta-authenticity questions really effective? You know whether you listened more than once to those indie frisbees you foolishly bought. And you know when someone who ‘worships Beckett’ doesn’t in fact “remember” anything about Beckett’s books.
Sure, hypocrisy is a spectrum – everybody is a hypocrite in some way blah blah. But posing admits of modes and degrees. When people say “hipster” in an unkind way, they mean ‘there’s nothing but a coat-hanger in that costume’.
wants to fight
There was nothing hostile in the post you’re responding to, Owen. What a shock.
Do I really need to explain this?
Not to me, who says: “Everybody is a hypocrite in some way blah blah.” and “belonging to tribes is ineradicably human”; and who asked “Are there no meaningful differences between tribes?” rhetorically.
I guess we should both choose our rhetorical questions more carefully – me, because I might not be understood, and you, because you might be understood too well.
Tribal warfare[.]
You’re missing the point, Owen. “Tribes” are accepted (by me, explicitly) in the premise of ‘human’, as are differences between them.
The question I raised in response to your “[tribes are] what we’re SUPPOSED to be doing” was whether the criterion of integrity can and should be applied to the way people think they are – or try to appear to be – clumping together.
Again, it’s not, from my (explicit) perspective, a matter of non-hypocrites looking down on hypocrites, but rather of hypocrisy being practiced to different degrees and in a variety of modes, in which case ‘less of less vicious’ would actually be “superior” to ‘more of more vicious’.
Look in the mirror[.]
Often good advice, Owen. You wrote: “a made-up label intended only to slander other people, often [by] people like yourself in order to make yourself feel less hypocritical than you actually are”.
You think you’re “less hypocritical” than whomever you’re talking to here, right, Owen? – indeed, a “better” person? Or are you doing nothing “valuable […] except to attack other people in order to make yourself feel superior”?
getting everyone precisely noplace
The point wasn’t ‘to get anywhere’, Owen. The point of much of this thread has been to clarify what pejoration could be reasonably intended by “hipster” and whether that sneer is deserved.
What do you think of people who purport emphatically their independence of thought and behavior by way of belonging to a cozily manufactured tribe?
wants to fight
There was nothing hostile in the post you’re responding to, Owen. What a shock.
Do I really need to explain this?
Not to me, who says: “Everybody is a hypocrite in some way blah blah.” and “belonging to tribes is ineradicably human”; and who asked “Are there no meaningful differences between tribes?” rhetorically.
I guess we should both choose our rhetorical questions more carefully – me, because I might not be understood, and you, because you might be understood too well.
Tribal warfare[.]
You’re missing the point, Owen. “Tribes” are accepted (by me, explicitly) in the premise of ‘human’, as are differences between them.
The question I raised in response to your “[tribes are] what we’re SUPPOSED to be doing” was whether the criterion of integrity can and should be applied to the way people think they are – or try to appear to be – clumping together.
Again, it’s not, from my (explicit) perspective, a matter of non-hypocrites looking down on hypocrites, but rather of hypocrisy being practiced to different degrees and in a variety of modes, in which case ‘less of less vicious’ would actually be “superior” to ‘more of more vicious’.
Look in the mirror[.]
Often good advice, Owen. You wrote: “a made-up label intended only to slander other people, often [by] people like yourself in order to make yourself feel less hypocritical than you actually are”.
You think you’re “less hypocritical” than whomever you’re talking to here, right, Owen? – indeed, a “better” person? Or are you doing nothing “valuable […] except to attack other people in order to make yourself feel superior”?
getting everyone precisely noplace
The point wasn’t ‘to get anywhere’, Owen. The point of much of this thread has been to clarify what pejoration could be reasonably intended by “hipster” and whether that sneer is deserved.
What do you think of people who purport emphatically their independence of thought and behavior by way of belonging to a cozily manufactured tribe?
Blah blah blah.
Blah blah blah.
“This is not only human nature, it’s what we’re SUPPOSED to be doing.”
According to…?
“This is not only human nature, it’s what we’re SUPPOSED to be doing.”
According to…?
That was quick – no need to think, no need even ‘to read’.
. . . Oh, right.
That was quick – no need to think, no need even ‘to read’.
. . . Oh, right.
I don’t know, all these assessments about who is more authentic than whom strike me as a cul de sac. Who is the authentic reader? What is it to read authentically, or to listen to music authentically, or to purchase music authentically? Can I be doing my laundry while partaking of music or a book authentically? If it’s Beckett, ought I be in Ireland? Or perhaps France would be more apropos? Can I check my email intermittently? How many times do I have to listen to my new cd, and am I allowed to connect with it some days and not on others? The nature of art is to rather perpetually call into question authenticity, identity, and so we ride the waves of inconstancy. Sometimes I read things I’m “supposed” to like and don’t, and occasionally the inverse happens, and often I’m in flux along the way. I dunno, man. Faulkner, long before Frankie, went to Hollywood, right? What’s authentic, really? The advertisers have co-opted postmodern and meta. We all make compromises and I’d wager we all wrestle with this fact, just as we wrestle with our tribal affiliations, in-group and out-group. We define ourselves against, sometimes we caricature, and sometimes caricatures are funny, occasionally hitting truth-nerve, more often intellectual slapstick. Is this more authentic if I hammered it out on a manual typewriter first? What was I listening to as I wrote this–will you ever know? What if it is a band that doesn’t exist, but is strongly influenced by Radiohead? Is that too much of a sellout, even in its ephemeral neural state (available only in my brain)? I say make and take in art and figure out what is great (to you) without presuming to know where someone falls on some scale of authenticity, which is implicit even if you pay lip service to “everyone is a hypocrite.” I’d say it’s different for politicians, too. They’re legislating, ergo prescribing, and while Shelley’s notion that “poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world” makes me swoon a little, the fact is that aesthetic influence doesn’t subjugate, deprive others of rights and agency and resources in the same way politics does, and so the hypocrisy in fans of art dressing a certain way and doin’ some name-dropping bugs me a helluva lot less.
I don’t know, all these assessments about who is more authentic than whom strike me as a cul de sac. Who is the authentic reader? What is it to read authentically, or to listen to music authentically, or to purchase music authentically? Can I be doing my laundry while partaking of music or a book authentically? If it’s Beckett, ought I be in Ireland? Or perhaps France would be more apropos? Can I check my email intermittently? How many times do I have to listen to my new cd, and am I allowed to connect with it some days and not on others? The nature of art is to rather perpetually call into question authenticity, identity, and so we ride the waves of inconstancy. Sometimes I read things I’m “supposed” to like and don’t, and occasionally the inverse happens, and often I’m in flux along the way. I dunno, man. Faulkner, long before Frankie, went to Hollywood, right? What’s authentic, really? The advertisers have co-opted postmodern and meta. We all make compromises and I’d wager we all wrestle with this fact, just as we wrestle with our tribal affiliations, in-group and out-group. We define ourselves against, sometimes we caricature, and sometimes caricatures are funny, occasionally hitting truth-nerve, more often intellectual slapstick. Is this more authentic if I hammered it out on a manual typewriter first? What was I listening to as I wrote this–will you ever know? What if it is a band that doesn’t exist, but is strongly influenced by Radiohead? Is that too much of a sellout, even in its ephemeral neural state (available only in my brain)? I say make and take in art and figure out what is great (to you) without presuming to know where someone falls on some scale of authenticity, which is implicit even if you pay lip service to “everyone is a hypocrite.” I’d say it’s different for politicians, too. They’re legislating, ergo prescribing, and while Shelley’s notion that “poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world” makes me swoon a little, the fact is that aesthetic influence doesn’t subjugate, deprive others of rights and agency and resources in the same way politics does, and so the hypocrisy in fans of art dressing a certain way and doin’ some name-dropping bugs me a helluva lot less.
Blah, blah blah.
There’re large tribes and there are small tribes. Everyone needs to join a tribe if they do not wish to live a rather difficult life. This is not only human nature, it’s what we’re SUPPOSED to be doing.
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Suborder: Haplorrhini
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: sapiens
Tribe: none that I know of
Clan: approximately twenty members – extended ‘family of origin’; a scattering of in-laws – out of a sense of obligation, mostly; a few ‘chosen-family’-type friends
Pack: five humans, two dogs
Number of humans I’d die for: two, my biological offspring
Number of non-human animals I’d die for: in theory, if I could keep a species from going extinct, I might be willing to die, if I was old anyway and in failing health; in practice, none
Number of non-human animals I anthropomorphize with silly nicknames (“Einstein”, BedHead”, “FrightWig”) and baby-talk: two
Well, Tim, you’ve articulated the relativistic defense of Never Calling Anything Bullshit Nor Anyone a Poser:
Who is the authentic reader? [. . .] We all make compromises and I’d wager we all wrestle with this fact, just as we wrestle with our tribal affiliations[.]
Knowing that one is flawed makes – or should make – one less vicious in pointing out flaws in others, but, Tim, does this knowledge really make one no longer responsible for and to one’s perception of flaws in others – especially, as you point out in the glaring case of politicians, in the case of malicious or otherwise destructive effect?
Rather than speaking abstractly, let me use your post to make myself clearer. You write: “I say make and take in art and figure out what is great (to you) without presuming to know where someone falls on some scale of authenticity, which is implicit even if you pay lip service to ‘everyone in a hypocrite.'”
I’m not saying you’re wrong about “lip service” with respect to me or any other specific person, Tim. I’m pointing out that you’re illustrating how the privilege of judgement is as universally assumed as are ‘belonging to tribes’ and ‘hypocrisy’. (That is: how do you know, in some particular case, it is “lip service”?)
To me, buying and wearing a costume – literally and figuratively – that says ‘I’m superior to costumes; I’m “free”‘ is contemptible. How do I know that this or that person is a phony in this way? Not simply by looking at them, Tim – that’s what I denied with the “Beckett” example.
Let me put it in this meta-discursive way: who am I to call someone ‘inauthentic’? Who are you to question the accuracy of my perception??
You understand the gist of the this rhetoric, right? We’re both judging, and in conversation – ‘these are my reasons!’ ‘oh, well that‘s half wrong!’ etc. – , neither of us has become objectively “superior” to our respective perspectives.
Well, Tim, you’ve articulated the relativistic defense of Never Calling Anything Bullshit Nor Anyone a Poser:
Who is the authentic reader? [. . .] We all make compromises and I’d wager we all wrestle with this fact, just as we wrestle with our tribal affiliations[.]
Knowing that one is flawed makes – or should make – one less vicious in pointing out flaws in others, but, Tim, does this knowledge really make one no longer responsible for and to one’s perception of flaws in others – especially, as you point out in the glaring case of politicians, in the case of malicious or otherwise destructive effect?
Rather than speaking abstractly, let me use your post to make myself clearer. You write: “I say make and take in art and figure out what is great (to you) without presuming to know where someone falls on some scale of authenticity, which is implicit even if you pay lip service to ‘everyone in a hypocrite.'”
I’m not saying you’re wrong about “lip service” with respect to me or any other specific person, Tim. I’m pointing out that you’re illustrating how the privilege of judgement is as universally assumed as are ‘belonging to tribes’ and ‘hypocrisy’. (That is: how do you know, in some particular case, it is “lip service”?)
To me, buying and wearing a costume – literally and figuratively – that says ‘I’m superior to costumes; I’m “free”‘ is contemptible. How do I know that this or that person is a phony in this way? Not simply by looking at them, Tim – that’s what I denied with the “Beckett” example.
Let me put it in this meta-discursive way: who am I to call someone ‘inauthentic’? Who are you to question the accuracy of my perception??
You understand the gist of the this rhetoric, right? We’re both judging, and in conversation – ‘these are my reasons!’ ‘oh, well that‘s half wrong!’ etc. – , neither of us has become objectively “superior” to our respective perspectives.
[BLAH BLAH BLAH alert]
Yes, Owen, belonging to tribes is ineradicably part of being human.
Are there no meaningful differences between tribes? – no intelligible, communicable ways of preferring one to others, or reasons for condemning any tribe by virtue of its priorities and commitments??
That’s the point of wondering about the pejorative “hipster”: what are the values that phonies in fact act on? should they be disdained for acting in contradiction to their assertions? (As, say, virtuecrat politicians are despised when they break the rules they would impose; they’re not looked down on for paying whores (or whatever the ‘sin’), but rather, for pretending to be superior to paying whores.)
Yeah, dg, I don’t think I’m just espousing relativism. More saying that we all wrestle with the roles that we crave, those we dread, those we feel we were born into and those we picked out at the vintage store and maybe grew into. Sure, we can call bullshit–on others and ourselves–and I do it on myself all the time, but I’m pretty forgiving of it. Except when it comes to issues of justice and dignity, wherein I’m proportionately unforgiving. Or try to be. I’m digging Foster Wallace’s essays a lot these days. I think he manages to be a non-relativist who manages to judge without dismissing, which I think is tough but laudable. Anyway, there are all kinds of things to judge, and I guess I just don’t think inauthenticity is on my hit list.
Yeah, dg, I don’t think I’m just espousing relativism. More saying that we all wrestle with the roles that we crave, those we dread, those we feel we were born into and those we picked out at the vintage store and maybe grew into. Sure, we can call bullshit–on others and ourselves–and I do it on myself all the time, but I’m pretty forgiving of it. Except when it comes to issues of justice and dignity, wherein I’m proportionately unforgiving. Or try to be. I’m digging Foster Wallace’s essays a lot these days. I think he manages to be a non-relativist who manages to judge without dismissing, which I think is tough but laudable. Anyway, there are all kinds of things to judge, and I guess I just don’t think inauthenticity is on my hit list.
What a shock: dead boy wants to fight.
Actually, the reason we join one tribe and not another is for the very reason that there ARE meaningful differences between them.
Do I really need to explain this?
As for ‘hypocrisy’, this is something that is deliberately read into certain groups of people (in this case “hipsters” – a made-up label intended only to slander other people, often people like yourself in order to make yourself feel less hypocritical than you actually are) who have joined a certain tribe, in order to discredit or slander them. Tribal warfare, if you will.
Anyone who really thinks they haven’t chosen a tribe: look at the clothes you wear. Look in the mirror and see what your hair looks like. Think of the phrases you use, how you talk. If you’re a writer: look at the material you write. Finally: think of the friends you’ve chosen.
I’m sure many of you will think “Oh, I’m friends with lots of different kinds of people, all sorts of people, they’re all different, blah blah blah.” Nonsense. If you really think about it: they all have things in common, these being the things they have in common with you.
I’m not trying to be aggressive here. I’m only pointing out that all this talk about what sort of hypocrisy qualifies as hipsterism is getting everyone precisely noplace, and that the word ‘hipster’, in fact, has no valuable meaning except to attack other people in order to make yourself feel superior.
I think we can all be better people by refusing to use the word ‘hipster’.
I happen to read quickly, dead boy, especially when it’s all blather.
I happen to read quickly, dead boy, especially when it’s all blather.
wants to fight
There was nothing hostile in the post you’re responding to, Owen. What a shock.
Do I really need to explain this?
Not to me, who says: “Everybody is a hypocrite in some way blah blah.” and “belonging to tribes is ineradicably human”; and who asked “Are there no meaningful differences between tribes?” rhetorically.
I guess we should both choose our rhetorical questions more carefully – me, because I might not be understood, and you, because you might be understood too well.
Tribal warfare[.]
You’re missing the point, Owen. “Tribes” are accepted (by me, explicitly) in the premise of ‘human’, as are differences between them.
The question I raised in response to your “[tribes are] what we’re SUPPOSED to be doing” was whether the criterion of integrity can and should be applied to the way people think they are – or try to appear to be – clumping together.
Again, it’s not, from my (explicit) perspective, a matter of non-hypocrites looking down on hypocrites, but rather of hypocrisy being practiced to different degrees and in a variety of modes, in which case ‘less of less vicious’ would actually be “superior” to ‘more of more vicious’.
Look in the mirror[.]
Often good advice, Owen. You wrote: “a made-up label intended only to slander other people, often [by] people like yourself in order to make yourself feel less hypocritical than you actually are”.
You think you’re “less hypocritical” than whomever you’re talking to here, right, Owen? – indeed, a “better” person? Or are you doing nothing “valuable […] except to attack other people in order to make yourself feel superior”?
getting everyone precisely noplace
The point wasn’t ‘to get anywhere’, Owen. The point of much of this thread has been to clarify what pejoration could be reasonably intended by “hipster” and whether that sneer is deserved.
What do you think of people who purport emphatically their independence of thought and behavior by way of belonging to a cozily manufactured tribe?
Blah blah blah.
“This is not only human nature, it’s what we’re SUPPOSED to be doing.”
According to…?
That was quick – no need to think, no need even ‘to read’.
. . . Oh, right.
I don’t know, all these assessments about who is more authentic than whom strike me as a cul de sac. Who is the authentic reader? What is it to read authentically, or to listen to music authentically, or to purchase music authentically? Can I be doing my laundry while partaking of music or a book authentically? If it’s Beckett, ought I be in Ireland? Or perhaps France would be more apropos? Can I check my email intermittently? How many times do I have to listen to my new cd, and am I allowed to connect with it some days and not on others? The nature of art is to rather perpetually call into question authenticity, identity, and so we ride the waves of inconstancy. Sometimes I read things I’m “supposed” to like and don’t, and occasionally the inverse happens, and often I’m in flux along the way. I dunno, man. Faulkner, long before Frankie, went to Hollywood, right? What’s authentic, really? The advertisers have co-opted postmodern and meta. We all make compromises and I’d wager we all wrestle with this fact, just as we wrestle with our tribal affiliations, in-group and out-group. We define ourselves against, sometimes we caricature, and sometimes caricatures are funny, occasionally hitting truth-nerve, more often intellectual slapstick. Is this more authentic if I hammered it out on a manual typewriter first? What was I listening to as I wrote this–will you ever know? What if it is a band that doesn’t exist, but is strongly influenced by Radiohead? Is that too much of a sellout, even in its ephemeral neural state (available only in my brain)? I say make and take in art and figure out what is great (to you) without presuming to know where someone falls on some scale of authenticity, which is implicit even if you pay lip service to “everyone is a hypocrite.” I’d say it’s different for politicians, too. They’re legislating, ergo prescribing, and while Shelley’s notion that “poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world” makes me swoon a little, the fact is that aesthetic influence doesn’t subjugate, deprive others of rights and agency and resources in the same way politics does, and so the hypocrisy in fans of art dressing a certain way and doin’ some name-dropping bugs me a helluva lot less.
Well, Tim, you’ve articulated the relativistic defense of Never Calling Anything Bullshit Nor Anyone a Poser:
Who is the authentic reader? [. . .] We all make compromises and I’d wager we all wrestle with this fact, just as we wrestle with our tribal affiliations[.]
Knowing that one is flawed makes – or should make – one less vicious in pointing out flaws in others, but, Tim, does this knowledge really make one no longer responsible for and to one’s perception of flaws in others – especially, as you point out in the glaring case of politicians, in the case of malicious or otherwise destructive effect?
Rather than speaking abstractly, let me use your post to make myself clearer. You write: “I say make and take in art and figure out what is great (to you) without presuming to know where someone falls on some scale of authenticity, which is implicit even if you pay lip service to ‘everyone in a hypocrite.'”
I’m not saying you’re wrong about “lip service” with respect to me or any other specific person, Tim. I’m pointing out that you’re illustrating how the privilege of judgement is as universally assumed as are ‘belonging to tribes’ and ‘hypocrisy’. (That is: how do you know, in some particular case, it is “lip service”?)
To me, buying and wearing a costume – literally and figuratively – that says ‘I’m superior to costumes; I’m “free”‘ is contemptible. How do I know that this or that person is a phony in this way? Not simply by looking at them, Tim – that’s what I denied with the “Beckett” example.
Let me put it in this meta-discursive way: who am I to call someone ‘inauthentic’? Who are you to question the accuracy of my perception??
You understand the gist of the this rhetoric, right? We’re both judging, and in conversation – ‘these are my reasons!’ ‘oh, well that‘s half wrong!’ etc. – , neither of us has become objectively “superior” to our respective perspectives.
Yeah, dg, I don’t think I’m just espousing relativism. More saying that we all wrestle with the roles that we crave, those we dread, those we feel we were born into and those we picked out at the vintage store and maybe grew into. Sure, we can call bullshit–on others and ourselves–and I do it on myself all the time, but I’m pretty forgiving of it. Except when it comes to issues of justice and dignity, wherein I’m proportionately unforgiving. Or try to be. I’m digging Foster Wallace’s essays a lot these days. I think he manages to be a non-relativist who manages to judge without dismissing, which I think is tough but laudable. Anyway, there are all kinds of things to judge, and I guess I just don’t think inauthenticity is on my hit list.
I happen to read quickly, dead boy, especially when it’s all blather.
I support the term dandy and anyone who applies to it.
I support the term dandy and anyone who applies to it.
I support the term dandy and anyone who applies to it.
you ARE a hipster