Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
And it always will/has to, in order to appropriate new cultural capital. We're all hipsters now.
idk, people have been using the word for like 100 years at this point and people have been whinging about them ever since. i guess probably carl krauss was writing about how the coffee bar culture in vienna in the 1920s was running out of steam, and then in new orleans in the 1950s when white people started listening to jazz music.
the problem in this case is that the education system is pretty bad in this country, so all the wrong people ended up living in creative communities and in all the wrong places.
Norman Mailer wrote probably the best account of the 'historical' hipster but now (as everything) it's seen through the lense of neoliberal cultural appropriation and performed individualism.
utterly beyond me why anyone would spend ££££ living in some 'cool' area when you could spend ££ and live a 10 minute tube ride away.
If it costs ££££ it's not truly cool.
unless you're a hipster ;)))))
(in my dreams)
(i am saving up for a single speed. true fact.)
nothing of interest has ever been written about the 'end of the hipster'. and it never will be. and we're way past peak 'end of the hipster'. and i've been slagging of these kinds articles for a decade or so, for fffs sake.
for at least two years now.
a subculture like Mods, with a contrived fashion style etc but with a lot more intellectual posturing and surface level interest in complete shite like taxidermy. They're definitely a thing and like all things they WILL DIE.
done by meowington &c.
who isn't a hipster.
moustaches as a graphic device.
on items owned by mums and wankers who have got bored of their keep calm tat.
and who aren't hipsters.
people who write articles about hipsters > people trying to pin stuff down as being hipster > hipsters
*people... < people... < hipsters
the most 'hipsterish' person I've met expressed wonderment at the fact that I'd been to Bolton and it was great.
And most articles criticising 'hipsters' on the basis of being self-important and pseudo-intellectual just show the *writer* up as being self-important (to write a serious article about hipsters) and pseudo-intellectual (to persist for any length of time with the pretence that there's anything of any worth whatsoever to be gained from such an article).
writers looking for a big viewcount shouldn't be afraid to demonise middle class people by saying 'hipster' when they mean middle class.
would actually get more pageviews ireckon
For kids who've grown up in a capitalist system cherry picking odd tastes from outside their established cultural remit (time, socioeconomic stauts), I suppose. That's why they're a thing but you'll never meet one.
it's a spectrum thing though i suppose
who are way more hung up on the way alleged hipsters are allegedly obsessed with their personal brand than there are actual hipsters who are obsessed over their personal brand.
And it wouldn't mean they enjoy those things anything less than someone else, it's just an idea about how people relate to themselves.
Plus it's probably subconscious tbf tbh
i'm secure in myself and confident in what i like, as i am passionate about things.
could never like things solely for cultural capital but maybe that's because a) i've always been poor and can't afford to and b) i'm incredibly aware that MOST people have a dickhead/bullshit/fronting detector.
I think hipsters are pretty harmless really as long as they're not the sneery bourgeois type. (not sure if your post's a dig at me but it's pretty far off the mark if it is imo)
just different kinds of self interested people in their mid-20s who are peddling some kind of personal brand. It's soooo boring but I guess if you grow up middle class in London you probably feel quite privileged so you've gotta try and subvert that privilege somehow.
I know a really really nice person who is into all this stuff (even invited me to a taxidermy evening, despite that fact she's vegan?!) but genuinely doesn't see how she's a cliche, it's quite sweet really, it reminds me that all those people are just normal inside, even if they do live totally unempathetic lifestyles. Everyone has an aesthetic, they just choose to 'wear it'- it's kinda tragic imo but people can do what they want.
The thing that annoys me personally is that I find them culturally narrow minded. No theatre (unless it's Punchdrunk's The Drowned Man), no film (unless it's a campy horror film or David Lynch), no non-western or experimental music unless it relates directly to their aesthetic (e.g. something east-asian and 'edgy' is good, anything jazz/compositional is bad) etc etc.
But then that's not just the case for so-called hipsters, it's what happens to everyone who has a defined aesthetic/pseudo-subcultural thing going on. Most of the pop kids I know are pretty heavily just into 60s British culture etc.
"'Normal' people do 'cliched' 'hipster' things and 'hipsters' do 'normal' 'narrow-minded' things."
Perhaps best to stop worrying so much about categorizing other people based on what they get up to and, in particular, get over the fact that you're into the theatre much more than most other people ever will be.
That's basically at the root of that sort of hipster bashing I reckon. More than a will to label people anyway.
but my point was, that rather than it being this smoke and mirrors post-modern thing where everything is knowingly performed, these people have these half-interests (taxidermy or whatever) which serve their aesthetic, but which they genuinely think they developed an interest in organically, and the fact that everyone else who shares their aesthetic is also into exactly the same niche stuff is just coincidence as far as they're concerned. They're just quite impressionable/lack self awareness, just an 'alternative' version of people who watch X Factor etc without exactly knowing why. They're just a mirror image of mass culture.
I don't think it's any particular look or subculture. Just someone who has to be seen to be into what the most fashionable publications are talking about at the time.
Few things are as grating as broadsheet newspapers writing about `hipsters` tbh.
well done guardian, you're definitely shortlisted for newspaper troll of the year already.
omg rental pricesssss stilll
businesses occupying space whilst trying to appeal to this niche instead of appealing to normos and contributing something to society
Tell me more about this alarmingly new phenomenon.
just cause somethings obvious doesn't mean its bad and that you can be so passive stop being so passive
Are you criticising `hipsters` or are you criticising gentrification? The article being discussed here doesn't really deal with the latter so...
And, anyway, what's `bad` (to use your words) and what can be done about it?
the most important thing is to RAISE THE PALATE
It is used to describe such a wide group of people. I think really all it is now is a term used to describe someone who is a bit pretentious.
Honestly I think the word needs to be dumped and something else assigned to it.
usually covers it pretty well, I think.
Just used as a catch-all term to encapsulate people who have interests different to yours.
'Someone who is trying to look like they are having more fun than me' is normally more accurate.
is why i think the mithering over hipsters being obsessed with their 'personal brand' misses the mark.
people who are angry about it are people who are afraid of being called out on being a bore obsessed with their self image
i mean, remember the fashion thread a while back where people were being overly laughed at for their choices of what they thought looked nice/acceptable to wear?
boring enough to call them out as a bore.
basically the modern expression of what once was hippys/punks/mods/rockers/goths/new romantics/grungers/emo etc. If that's the case, and that's what hipsters are, then of course it will pass on, aside from a few hardcore believers (I look forward to seeing aging hipsters 40 years from now, faded sailor tattoos, manic beards, too arthritic for their fixie).
I don't know if the whole hipster thing is that easily quantifiable though.
'Hipster' is definitely not a subculture in my opinion. Even punk/goth etc is like a parody of a subculture really. Before subculture was commodified/repackaged as youth culture in the 1960s it was pretty much exclusively linked with criminal activity, rather than cultural activity. Teds were probably the last big, truly subcultural movement, and also the crossover moment I guess.
they're all wearing those miners' knitted hats and getting finger tattoos now.
fucking hell DiS keep up
shorter and shorter timespans of revival.
Everyone's being a dandy instead of a hipster anyway at this point.
is already taking the place of the now quite essex lad tattoo sleeve, beard and flannel shirt
beards and flat caps have been mainstream
for at least two years now.
alldaybrekkieinatin | 22 Jun '14, 21:08 | ^ This | Reply
Is this idea that their passions and interests are in some way inauthentic.
As a generic 'other', perhaps they serve a function of allowing us to convince ourselves that OUR passions and interests aren't just shallow and arbitrary accoutrements, that OUR sense of self is something more than just a grab bag of distractions that allow us to attribute meaning to life.
So, they will be a bulwark for as long as we need them ... probs forevs.
Living in a time where we can cherry pick interests from outside our generation or traditional geographical/socioeconomic interests because of globalization has effected everyone - people who use that idea to feel more authentic than others are misapprehending how it's come about.
My point is, they are the same as us, but the invention of them as 'other' allows us to maintain the illusion that we are different, that there is more to us.
in calling out people who only seem to have a surface interest in an activity, while it is current and "cool" and drops it as soon as something different turns up, and making up a group of people that are inauthentic in order to make yourself look more "real". I think that both of these things happen, and I am not sure where hipsters lay on this scale. It should also be noted that people who care very stongly about something also get an inordinate about of grief from people for "caring too much". I appreciate I have used a lot of ""'s in this comment.
than people who actually look like the archetypal hipster.
and dick waggling over how alt or special some of their tastes are
Like maybe just for a fucking week or two
I wouldn't hold yr breath
and become one (concerningly miserable) poster now?
i'm not miserable next you'll be calling people hysterical
it was never about the music!
are genuinely into shit like riding silly bikes and live in "art spaces" and put on free shows of homemade pottery and stuff. But I suppose it will peak when there are more people with silly beards and clothes who are just on a bandwagon and have a normal job and listen to Kasabian. Then the "real" ones will move on and do something different. Fuck knows what though.
They are just arty people. They are interesting in a genuine way, they like what they like because they like it. I'd like to think I'm the same and resent being cast into the beards and flat caps because I love classical and jazz music.
could never be described as hipsters. Audiences for stuff at Cafe Oto, or artists film club at ICA or whatever aren't hipster in the slightest. They're more like academics (and often actually ARE academics). The silly hat/fixie/sleeve tattoo brigade are never seen at these kind of cultural events, and to be honest even the successful art students aren't 'hipsters', granted they're often rich, entitled little shits, but ones who are more interested in their creative practice than their personal brand.
I think ultimately 'hipster' is about social interaction, so they tend to shun cultural consumption which isn't directly social.
all the arty friends /you/ know
are more genuine than the arty friends /I/ know
I'm losing my edge
and move to the home counties and be wealthy. They're just alternative yuppies.
is really that you are all starting to agree with me that people only ver pretend to enjoy things purely to adjust/allign their sense of self with the sort of person that they want to be.
cool, thanks kids.
i include myself in the group 'people'
lot of replies here
someone somewhere could come up with a pretty good contextualisation of the concept and the psychology behind the idea from both sides of the divide with respect to late capitalism/globalisation/whatever else.
as someone who 'likes alternative things', but only does so as an act of fakery. I think only the former part of that definition is correct. If you're just pretending to be into this or that alternative lifestyle, you should be called a faux-hipster.
Let's face it, DiS is hipster central HQ, you alt-festival going, cardigan wearing, speciality coffee drinking hipster schmucks.
I think yet another slightly vague definition of "hipster" was exactly what the thread needed at this point
I'm not gonna squabble over which activities precisely define a hipster, but for the most part I think people know it when they see it.
*coolly blows hand-rolled cigarette smoke over my specialist coffee roast while flicking through Pitchfork disdainfully *
People trying to tie it down to being into this or that are missing the point I think. The main thing is you're into hip things.