A superb article recommended, once again, by Alec. I would not be surprised if this were the definitive article on the movement: it is honest and sincerely intelligent without a personal stake in maligning the culture -- as was the case (ironically) with the Adbusters article on "The End of Hipsterdom," despite the interesting points it made (the obliteration of the meaning of the keffeyeh through the aesthetic of pastiche sticks in my mind) -- and manages to intertwine a conversational tone with extremely clear and precise language. As much as I believe David Foster Wallace's E Unibus Pluram remains the essential breakdown of postmodern irony and its circumstances, I'm pleased to have a different and more contemporary perspective focused on providing greater historical context.
New York Magazine: What Was the Hipster?
There are many fascinating points made about, for example, the primitivism of current hipster music and the movement's origins in African-American culture in the 40s, but this section in particular struck me as brilliant:
"Through both phases of the contemporary hipster, and no matter where he identifies himself on the knowingness spectrum, there exists a common element essential to his identity, and that is his relationship to consumption. The hipster, in this framework, is continuous with a cultural type identified in the nineties by the social critic Thomas Frank, who traced it back to Madison Avenue’s absorption of a countercultural ethos in the late sixties. This type he called the 'rebel consumer.'
The rebel consumer is the person who, adopting the rhetoric but not the politics of the counterculture, convinces himself that buying the right mass products individualizes him as transgressive. Purchasing the products of authority is thus reimagined as a defiance of authority. Usually this requires a fantasized censor who doesn’t want you to have cologne, or booze, or cars. But the censor doesn’t exist, of course, and hipster culture is not a counterculture. On the contrary, the neighborhood organization of hipsters—their tight-knit colonies of similar-looking, slouching people—represents not hostility to authority (as among punks or hippies) but a superior community of status where the game of knowing-in-advance can be played with maximum refinement. The hipster is a savant at picking up the tiny changes of rapidly cycling consumer distinction.
This in-group competition, more than anything else, is why the term hipster is primarily a pejorative—an insult that belongs to the family of poseur, faker, phony, scenester, and hanger-on. The challenge does not clarify whether the challenger rejects values in common with the hipster—of style, savoir vivre, cool, etc. It just asserts that its target adopts them with the wrong motives. He does not earn them.
It has long been noticed that the majority of people who frequent any traditional bohemia are hangers-on. Somewhere, at the center, will be a very small number of hardworking writers, artists, or politicos, from whom the hangers-on draw their feelings of authenticity. Hipsterdom at its darkest, however, is something like bohemia without the revolutionary core. Among hipsters, the skills of hanging-on—trend-spotting, cool-hunting, plus handicraft skills—become the heroic practice. The most active participants sell something—customized brand-name jeans, airbrushed skateboards, the most special whiskey, the most retro sunglasses—and the more passive just buy it.
Of course, there are artists of hipster-related sensibility who remain artists. In the neighborhoods, though, there was a feeling throughout the last decade that the traditional arts were of little interest to hipsters because their consumer culture substituted a range of narcissistic handicrafts similar enough to sterilize the originals. One could say, exaggerating only slightly, that the hipster moment did not produce artists, but tattoo artists, who gained an entire generation’s arms, sternums, napes, ankles, and lower backs as their canvas. It did not produce photographers, but snapshot and party photographers: Last Night’s Party, Terry Richardson, the Cobra Snake. It did not produce painters, but graphic designers. It did not yield a great literature, but it made good use of fonts. And hipsterism did not make an avant-garde; it made communities of early adopters."
4 comments:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAzojbN9_yk
Directed by the Cobrasnake. I think that music is the most obvious and meaningful frontier for hipsterdom.
Non-hipster music hasn't changed much in the past ten years.
Here's a summary...
-mashups
-hipster runoff (like daft punk's resurgence)
-autotune
-degeneration of hip hop into nothingness
-free and beautiful sounding rock music gets pummeled by emo on the popular stage
-everyone misses the 90s SO bad
-some people manage to miss the 80's SO bad
in fact... i could extend this and say that the reason most visual hipster arts are so lacking is because they are the visual equivalent of the MASHUP. tired of making new stuff, most hipsters sought to appear new by decorating themselves as combinations of rare, strange, and other older aesthetics.
you might think "the point is to distinguish myself"
perhaps the point is that there are not necessarily any new frontiers for traditional arts. maybe the way to access new ideas is to reinterpret and combine old ones.
you would hesitate to call LADY GAGA a hipster, but she has essentially done the same thing.
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/photos/28431/153721
also, in regards to the tattoo artists comment:
One of my favorite groups of people in history is the vikings. They are far from role models, but there are some pretty sweet aspects of their way of life. About 90% of viking artwork was engraved upon useful, everyday objects. They believed this was the true forum for art and pursued it intentionally (not ironically :) )
in regards to party photographers:
I think the non-hipsters are the worst perpetrators of this non-art of all. Think about the millions of frat party and house party facebook photos that exist. AT LEAST in hipster party photos, people are a strange (albeit often sad) but interesting look at modern man, dressed awkwardly and overly concerned about their own artistic merits.
Also, as a counter point to that:
http://wearebinary.com/blog/
check all the sweet photography associated with that blog.
I have more to say, but this is becoming much larger than even a post...
One last point to make...
Liking PBR, trucker hats, skinny jeans, eagles, vintage bikes etc. may not be fascinating or trendsetting in a genuine way...
but way to LIKE things. Might sound strange, but I don't feel any particular culture of people spends their time liking so many random things.
the problem -- and where it falls apart -- is when hipsters hate things. It always seems so random. But most groups do hate things. Hip hop and gangster ass people dislike emo (occasionally hilariously liking it privately). Everyday bros dislike art that's caught in between the 5 year nu-retro mark and the current top 40. Grassroots type people dislike mainstream hip-hop. Jazzy deep house lovers pretty much hate most other music (except soul and r'n'b). Gamer bros have no sense of like or dislike whatsoever (and may be one of the most laudable art communities in a strange way).
Despite my many objections I agree in a very strong and undeniable way that in fact -- hipster can be defined, and if we ever want to move on and evolve it -- we have to see it clearly and understand it.
Which means we gotta stop blindly hating things by calling them that. It's fun and easy, but does more to preserve the movement than destroy it. In fact, the bro dismissing "some hipster shit" is SUBSTANTIALLY less interesting and fun than whatever person is up to that no good hipster shit.
This article hits a lot of things interestingly on the head, yet it still seems to be full of criticism.
I still assert that you cannot deny hipsterdom artistic merit for two reasons.
1. Nothing else has any right now. It's the equivalent of saying "there hasn't been anything interesting happening for the last 10 years" And that is just not true. Even if you've been ignoring it, trying to relive your childhood over and over again, you probably got a whiff of current music and culture. And if you didn't, I'm not about to give you an award for ignoring it.
2. The better reason, from my perspective: Hipsters have an appreciation for the colors in life. Nothing says it more than...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR4PC3fEBaI
Want to like disco and upbeat funk music enthusiastically and without reservation? Want to like any kind of crazy music you want? Want to party? Want to let your hair fly out the window of your car and enjoy it sincerely? Hang out with some hipsters.
Want to talk shit on your friends, get drunk, and dislike things? Hang out with some bros.
Want to listen to ONLY one genre of music? Hang out with social groups based on specific music genres.
Want to eat raw food and have doubts about humanity and the nature of people? Hang with some modern hippies.
Want to make some ski/snow/lake plans with rich people? Hang out at some ritzy palo alto shit.
Want to enjoy traditional art? Go to some museums/galleries (seriously, it's a great idea. Not sarcastic -- and as a sidenote, this is far from preventative of hipsterdom)
Last 20 minutes of unfiltered writing summarized in 1 sentence:
Hipsters are a cultural scapegoat that continue to generate new ideas at a time in which they are desperately needed and nowhere to be found.
there's no need to randomly bash the people that you are very slowly learning from.
Post a Comment