I've had a theory  for a while, and it's generally unpopular... I'm almost the only one who holds  it.  Of course, popularity  is not correlated with validity AT ALL (sometimes quite the opposite), but  still, if you advance an unpopular theory,  you should be sure you have  something compelling to offer the opposition.  So this is the first time this one's coming out.
This theory has to  do with the general angst and disapproval of "hipsters" in popular  culture.  It's pretty ubiquitous at this point... "Fuckin' hipsters" is an alarm sounded all over New York, the  Lower East Side, and (I assume) everywhere else. It's a stigma that can be applied to neighborhoods  (Williamsburg), beers (PBR), articles of clothing (pork pies), filmmakers (Wes  Anderson), musicians (Connor Oberst), and people (that dude who lives in the  apartment above you).  They get so  much bad press, you'd they were EVERYWHERE, a plague of locusts on our  Manhattan avenues.  There are some powerful voices attacking the Hipster... Nothing Nice to Say, a generally amazing punk comic,  has run a number of strips whose target was the Minneapolis hipster.  More notably, Time Out New York just ran an article called  "The Hipster Must Die."
But where are  they?  I can't fucking find them.  I occasionally see a dude in a  fedora, or a girl in eccentric post-hippie attire, or someone drinking a PBR,  but none of them seem like the shallow bad-faith revolutionaries that are such a  bugaboo of modern media.  For a while, I figured they were specifically a  plague on the streets of Willyburg and Minneapolis, and that I wasn't seeing  them because I just wasn't in the right place.
But then, one day,  someone called ME a hipster.  Normally, I'd have just laughed and said, "Oh  yeah, you bastard?  YOU'RE the hipster, I'm just a kid who lives in  Brooklyn" (kind of like in an article in The Onion).  But instead I made the  mistake of looking at my own life and tastes and noticing that I share a range  of attributes with the stereotype.  I genuinely like Wes Anderson, and I  like bullshitting about Postmodern film. I have a philosophy degree.  I  like Bright Eyes.  I used to be a punk, and now I listen to The Postal  Service and Ted Leo (among many other things).  Despite the reassurances of  my friends ("hipsters are out there, but you're totally not a hipster!") I started to dwell on it: what's a hipster?  Did I have the  necessary or sufficient characteristics?  Who is it I'm supposed to be  differentiating myself from?
Hence my theory  arose: there's no such thing as a "hipster."  The hipster is an assemblage  of half-hearted characterizations, designed as a sort of cultural "folk devil." These are characteristics that are benign, taken individually.  Drink PBR?  What's the  problem?  Listen to indie rock, talk about the politics of the bands?   You may be a music snob, but who cares?  Live in Williamsburg?  Sure,  it's a growing neighborhood.  If you're a friend of mine, you can fit  three, four, five of these characteristics and not be a hipster, cause it's all  in good faith.  But if I don't like you, and you exhibit even ONE of these  qualifications, you're a damn hipster.  I hate you  people.
This "cultural folk  devil" concept (which I am currently coining as a variation of the classic "folk  devil") is actually fairly common.  There are always large groups who have  been stigmatized and blamed for culture's problems, from Jews to Teenagers to  Fags.  These days, this kind of stigmatization has gone from "evil" to  "annoying"... we tend to label concepts as stupid, bothersome, played-out, and  obnoxious.  Admittedly, it's a step up, but it's still a bad social  habit.  Some of the cultural folk devils stigmatized in recent times have  been "sXe (straight-edge)," "emo," "postmodernism," and "chavs."  It's up  for debate whether each of these deserves its widespread ire.  However, all  of these ideas and subcultures have at least existed on some  level.
I repeat: the  hipster doesn't exist.  It's an imaginary scapegoat, a convenient target  for our disapproval and ridicule.  I know this because I've looked for a  definition that was worthy of my own distrust, and I've found nothing of the  kind.  It's sort of a cultural stereotype, so my main avenue has been  asking friends, but none of them seemed to have a good definition for me.   Finally,  looking for something comprehensive, if not exactly "precise," I consulted  Wikipedia. Even if it's rarely well-written or accurate, it's at least a good  representation of generally-held cultural beliefs on certain  topics.
The article on  hipster is here.
As you can see,  there's NOTHING to go on.  There's a vague mention of PBR, and a reference  to metrosexuality, but there's really nothing else to  reference.
Okay, wait, there's  one thing... irony.  And in a way, that redeems the definition.  If a  hipster is someone who adopts an aesthetic with no intention of buying into it  or taking it seriously, then I can understand some of the pan-cultural ire they  earn.  Maybe that's what everybody is talking about?  Williamsburg is  a neighborhood where people tend to be ironic?  PBR is an insincere choice  for a favorite beer?  Wes Anderson is an ironic  filmmaker?
The definition has  slipped through our fingers, folks.  Even if Wes Anderson is ironic, or  people tend to like Wolfmother just for the novelty value of self-deprecation,  there's no worthy link between the far-flung accusations and the core  complaint.  Irony is too hard to pin down, and it's been used effectively  in too much art, literature, and music for it to really make sense at the center  of a stereotype.  So we pile on these auxiliary characteristics, and build  ourselves a specter that amounts to nothing.
If you want to make  a stand against a culture of irony and excessive bad taste, then assert your own  good taste.  Become a fashion designer, play the ukulele, write for  BlogCritics.  Make a positive statement about what's awesome, whether  you're speaking with your tongue in your cheek (hipster-style) or you're buying  into it 100% (traditional nerd style).   It's a worthy cause.  Stop distracting yourself with random catharsis,  dumped on a scapegoat represented by a term you can sling, but can't really  define.  No sterotype apparitions need to die for culture to be  reborn.  We just have to fucking DO IT.
 
 
1 comment:
Crazy thing is I just figured this out in my head and decided to google "hipsters are the modern scapegoat" which turned me to your article. Sir u have shed a bit of enlightenment upon me. Society has evolved to accept those who were blamed in the past and now all we can safely criticize is some mythical character based on superficial judgments. It's sad how even though we have seemed to accomplish so much in just the past couple of decades that we still sustain the shallow sheepish qualities of a primitive society. Thanks for making me feel less alone good sir.
Post a Comment