BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Defining "The Hipster"

 
  

Page: (1)23

 
 
TeN
02:05 / 24.10.07
There's a thread about this from the convo here, but I wanted to delve into the subject a little bit more seriously.


I've been thinking a lot recently about hipsters.
Being an art student in Brooklyn, I see a lot of them. Every day. They're all around me.
And sometimes I feel as if I'm being drawn into their midsts. In many ways much of the music I listen to, many of the films I watch and the books I read, could be called "hipster." I take pleasure in "ironically" watching shitty television or movies. I play Super Nintendo. I find myself being drawn to marginal and fringe subjects and interests. I go to art school. I'm white. Upper-middle class. I live in Brooklyn. Originally from the suburbs. And I survive mostly off my parents' money.
But I can't be a hipster! I hate hipsters! But then of course there's the old joke of the hipster walking into a bar. "Let's get out of here," he says to his date, "this place is full of hipsters."
Denial is one of the stages before acceptance, right?

But just what is a hipster?
Let's look at what we know...

The cultural connotation of the word seems to be not so different from that of a "fashionista": someone who prizes the aesthetic above all else; Who prides themselves on their "cool" factor, to the detriment of actual emotion or sentiment.

More specifically, the term is closely tied to camp, kitsch, and the postmodern idea of irony. Hence, hipsters are seen sporting "Virginia is for Lovers" t-shirts, drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon, and listening to The Wu-Tang Clan.

I'm fairly sure this is primarily an American phenomenon, although I'm sure it's by now spread to all corners of the globe (Nathan Barley depicts somewhat of a mutant breed of the American variety).

The word first sprang up in the 40s to describe (typically white) jazz aficionados, members of the Beat generation. The definitive text on the 1940s hipster is Norman Mailer's The White Negro, which describes that group as being young Caucasian men "with a middle-class background (who) attempt to put down their whiteness and adopt what they believe is the carefree, spontaneous, cool lifestyle of Negro hipsters: their manner of speaking and language, their use of milder narcotics, their appreciation of jazz and the blues, and their supposed concern with the good orgasm."

The New Cab Calloway's Hepster's Dictionary of Jive gives a more in-depth, sympathetic description:
"To the hipster, Bird was a living justification of their philosophy. The hipster is an underground man. He is to the Second World War what the dadaist was to the first. He is amoral, anarchistic, gentle, and overcivilized to the point of decadence. He is always ten steps ahead of the game because of his awareness, and example of which might be meeting a girl and rejecting her, because he knows they will date, hold hands, kiss, neck, pet, fornicate, perhaps marry, divorce-so why start the whole thing? He knows the hypocrisy of bureaucracy, the hatred implicit in religions-so what values are left for him?-except to go through life avoiding pain, keep his emotions in check, and after that, "be cool," and look for kicks. He is looking for something that transcends all this bullshit and finds it in jazz."

But finding definitions of this newer breed becomes a bit tougher. The closest we can do is humorous definitions like The Hipster Handbook which gives the following: "One who possesses tastes, social attitudes, and opinions deemed cool by the cool. (Note: it is no longer recommended that one use the term "cool": a Hipster would instead say "deck.") The Hipster walks among the masses in daily life but is not a part of them and shuns or reduces to kitch anything held dear by the mainstream. A Hipster ideally possesses no more than 2% body fat."

How closely related is the 1940s hipster to the 1990s/2000s hipster?

Well one thing that ties the two together is their relationship to race and class.
The defining characteristic of Mailer's hipster was his appropriation of black culture. They adopted black clothing styles, slang, and listened to black music. Chicago jazz musician Mezz Mezzrow went so far as to call himself a "voluntary negro."
As I see it, today's hipster appropriates less specifically from black culture as he does from lower class culture in general. Not only is gangsta rap cool, so are aviator sunglasses, wolf shirts, atari, and caterpillar mustaches. Hipsters typically live in poor, urban, soon to be gentrified areas.

But we're still left without a clear cut definition.

Am I a hipster?
Are you?
How does one know?



What say you?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
08:09 / 24.10.07
I'm sorry TeN, but I don't think that quoting a couple of books and talking about previous incarnations of the meaning of the word justifies making a whole new thread about this in the Head Shop, when the bulk of what you're saying is just more of the same stuff that was in the Conversation thread.

Specifically it's what I found so problematic about much of that thread: you've made some very limited, arbitrary and subjective observations about a small number of people around you. This in itself is problematic: the defining characteristics you give "hipsters" do not strike me as convincing or reliable. On what is the claim that "hipsters like listening to the Wu-Tang Clan" based?

Moreover, the assumption that the reason "hipsters" allegedly listen to the Wu-Tang Clan is because they like "camp, kitsch, and the postmodern idea of irony" seems almost entirely speculative, and potentially quite insulting. In both this example and your later comment about gangsta rap, what's noticeably absent is the possibility that white people from middle class backgrounds might listen to contemporary black music because they like the way it sounds.

It's not that I don't think it's possible to have a serious discussion about the recurring figure of the person who "prizes the aesthetic above all else", who is self-consciously sub-cultural by choice and is able to make that choice due to their privileged background - not in any sense an American phenomenon, of course, and not limited to the word "hipster". But I don't think this thread is that, so far.
 
 
The Natural Way
13:00 / 24.10.07
Yeah, why is it ironic to listen to the Wu?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
13:31 / 24.10.07
My problem is that 'hipster' has a number of culturally specific meanings, depending on what time and place we're talking about.

There's also the same problem here as with taking the word 'chav' as a given. If we start a thread about them, using those terms, we assume that 'chavs' and 'hipsters' actually exist.

Culd we maybe pull the thread in the economic direction Pete mentions?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
13:37 / 24.10.07
Also, with this model of a class of 'wild' people, usually involved in the arts, from a wealthy and educated background but purposefully standing outside of some of the dominant morals of the time; one could apply it roughly to the loose group called Dadaists, also to the loose group called Beatniks; could one apply it to Baudelaire and co? To Keats and Shelley? What about the renaissance? How far back do we find examples of this group existing? Does the dominant ideology have to be a moral/post-puritan one for such a group to exist - i.e. do Shakespeare and Donne fit less, because they were expressing morals (or a lack of) that fitted a generally loose-living aristocracy and common people? Do we only get Bohemians after Cromwell? Or only after the printing press? Or only after the shift from Feudalism? At what point does 'standing for a philosophy' turn into hanging out with Francis Bacon and Tom Baker in Soho? Is there even a difference?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
13:51 / 24.10.07
And, reading through the other thread, I think this quote from Haus might jeapordise the whole idea of a hipster as distinct from anyone else:

It's predictable that some of the more empathy-negative members of this parish can't imagine people doing something which they don't do for fun for fun, but rather somehow masochistically forcing themselves to go to clubs, wear clothes and listen to bands they hate to seek the approval of a peer group who are defined around these pursuits that they secretly detest. They can't just want to look good and listen to (and be passionate about) music, can they? Oh, no.
 
 
TeN
16:48 / 24.10.07
yeah, the wu-tang/gangsta rap thing was probably a bad example
I listen to the wu-tang clan
and I listen to them because I like the way it sounds

the reason my description seems so scattershot is because I don't know a definition - that's what I'm attempting to find

of course, there is also the possibility that "the hipster" doesn't exist as it's own subculture, but rather, "fake" people, people "who prize the aesthetic above all else," "posers" if you will, exist in ALL subcultures

I think there certainly does exist a trend, however:
upper-middle class white kids who live in poor urban areas and have camp/kitsch taste
 
 
TeN
16:51 / 24.10.07
"Also, with this model of a class of 'wild' people, usually involved in the arts, from a wealthy and educated background but purposefully standing outside of some of the dominant morals of the time; one could apply it roughly to the loose group called Dadaists, also to the loose group called Beatniks; could one apply it to Baudelaire and co?"

the trend I'm talking about is more specific than just bohemia

all hipsters are probably bohemians, but not all bohemians are hipsters? that sounds about right
 
 
Jesse
23:37 / 24.10.07
I'm not clear on what kind of academic work has been done in the field. I'm actually planning on developing my own ideas on quirk into a paper that will hopefully be presented at an upcoming conference. I think quirk and the hipster are tenuously associated. I'm having a hard time finding any sort of writing on the subject at all, actually.

I think the hipster is best defined as someone who does everything for meaning, in some sense that is separate from the act itself. This could apply to a number of different "types" (the fashion-obsessed, for instance, might wear shoes for the sake of their fashionability--not because they are simply shoes that they like). I think the same "hyperreal" element plays a part here, but for the hipster the meta-meaning contains intellectual or ironic overtones. E.g. you don't watch summer blockbusters because you genuinely enjoy them, but because you enjoy viewing their popularity as a reflection of the culture in which you yourself are part of--i.e. it's not for pleasure, but for insight.

Beyond that, I'm afraid that the other meanings I've grappled with are either too broad to be meaningful or too narrow to be very applicable. It's actually why I'm pursuing quirk as an aesthetic, as opposed to something broader like the hipster.
 
 
TeN
01:23 / 25.10.07
I'd be very interested in reading that paper.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
11:10 / 25.10.07
upper-middle class white kids who live in poor urban areas and have camp/kitsch taste

See, how is this any different from, well, all or most students?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
11:11 / 25.10.07
(the fashion-obsessed, for instance, might wear shoes for the sake of their fashionability--not because they are simply shoes that they like).

But don't this person 'simply like' the shoes for their being in fashion - the two aren't mutually exclusive?
 
 
gridley
15:15 / 25.10.07
To my mind the hipster fad seems like a deliberately ironic balancing act:

--You go to the latest trendy bars, but when you get there you drink the same cheap beer working class guys drank thirty years ago.

--You always download the newest cool Indie bands on your ipod, but when you're putting money in the jukebox, you need to play some Johnny Cash (preferably one judged to be obscure).

--You go to an overpriced clothing boutique, but once there you buy the sort of cheap trucker hat you used to only see at highway truckstops.

--You make the effort to be a hipster, but anxiously deny that you are one if accused.

In some ways, it's like an anti-trend, because it makes bucking perceived trends into a trend of its own.
 
 
EvskiG
16:52 / 25.10.07
Seems to me that there are two key elements to hipsterdom: lack of authenticity and slumming.

Lack of authenticity: it's a pose.

You don't drink Pabst Blue Ribbon because you like the taste, or it's cheap, you drink it because for you (e.g., a highly educated person from a different class) its working-class signifiers are ironic. You don't listen to Journey because Steve Perry is a great singer, you listen to Journey because Steve Perry's apparent sincerity singing an 80s rock ballad is worth mocking.

Slumming: you can do better, either because you're richer or have better taste than the target audience for a given cultural product.

You can afford Kandinsky but you buy Keane. You watch pro wrestling, but you can't help making references to Greek drama and catharsis.

These explain why hipsters and hip movements often come from marginalized or disenfranchised groups -- they're people who because of circumstances aren't able to capitalize on all of the benefits of their education and taste, and therefore decide to ironically appreciate the cultural products they can access and afford.

As AAC noted above, much of this could apply to groups as diverse as the Beats and the Dadaists. But once someone really starts caring about a given work or movement, he or she no longer seems to have the ironic distance necessary to be dubbed a hipster.

I just pulled all the above from my ass, so feel free to disagree.
 
 
Closed for Business Time
17:09 / 25.10.07
If hipsterdom is all about striking a pose and maintaining an ironic distance - what do we call the hipster that genuinely cares for hipsterdom, who is aware of, affirms and embraces the poses and the irony? A jerk?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
07:16 / 26.10.07
I am moving this thread to the Conversation.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
08:39 / 26.10.07
Please do. This is not a Head Shop thread.
 
 
Closed for Business Time
08:55 / 26.10.07
Seconded.
 
 
Lurid Archive
11:30 / 26.10.07
To be fair, I think the thread starter and contributors were trying quite hard to make it a Head Shop thread, though not really succeeding. I would have been happy for the thread to remain in the Head Shop had there been an attempt to question the validity of using "hipster" in the way the thread starter does, or at least a move away from the unexamined use of the term.

I realise that these points were brought up in the original thread, but I don't see the harm in a discussion if one or more parties don't find the conclusions self evident. Having said that, I don't have a burning desire to move this thread back to the HS either.
 
 
TeN
16:51 / 26.10.07
I think it's definitely worthy of a serious discussion, and that's why I wanted it in the Head Shop

I suppose I didn't really do a very good job getting that discussion started though, so I can understand why it got moved here, and that's fine

I do want to challenge the idea of the hipster, and I'd love to hear arguments against the existence of such a subculture. as Sontag says about camp, "To snare a sensibility in words, especially one that is alive and powerful,1 one must be tentative and nimble. The form of jottings, rather than an essay (with its claim to a linear, consecutive argument), seemed more appropriate for getting down something of this particular fugitive sensibility."
I think the same could be said for this topic - hence the lack of a concrete argument, direction, or definition.

But regardless - let's keep talking...

"they're people who because of circumstances aren't able to capitalize on all of the benefits of their education and taste, and therefore decide to ironically appreciate the cultural products they can access and afford."
not sure I buy this. what circumstances? the hipster is upper-middle-class. it's not that they can't afford anything better than pabst blue ribbon - it's a choice. people who shop at thrift stores do so because they can't afford new clothes. people who shop at "vintage" stores, paying full price or more for old, used clothing, do so because they think it's cool.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
17:06 / 26.10.07
people who shop at thrift stores do so because they can't afford new clothes. people who shop at "vintage" stores, paying full price or more for old, used clothing, do so because they think it's cool.

Thing is, given that "hipster" appears to be a label applied from outside, how does the observer know where the observed bought their clothes? I mean, for a subculture that apparently "prizes the aesthetic above all else", this clearly makes no sense whatsoever. If the aesthetic is prized above all else, then surely it wouldn't actually matter?
 
 
unbecoming
17:35 / 26.10.07
I think authenticity seems to be the key issue here ( as mentioned above), linked into the conception of cool and the aesthetics of cultural positioning.
To me, this figure of the negatively valued hipster is just a construct to affirm the authentic credentials of the accuser. The accuser alleges that the hipster’s interest in different cultural behaviours or practices is adopted purely as an aesthetic (with the only motivation to achieve the abstract principle of cool) as a means to reassure hirself that hir interest in certain cultural practices is, in fact, authentic and done according to enjoyment.
So they might say “I’m not cool (read; trendy, hipsterish)enough for x" when what they're actually saying is “i’m too cool (read; authentic, unpretentious)for x”
And so interesting, culturally aware and self conscious people frown upon interesting, culturally aware and self conscious people, perhaps aware that it seems difficult to pinpoint what an actually authentic experience is.

It seems wrong to separate enjoyment from aesthetics as this discussion seems to. On the one hand we have someone who does not enjoy something but does it anyway to achieve “cool” and on the other we have someone who enjoys something for what it is regardless of “cool”. Isn’t it possible that somebody could enjoy something but also enjoy enjoying “cool “ things? Hence actually enjoy being hip merely for being hip’s sake whilst also rather liking the music or whatever. I suppose that brings up the difficult problem of whether or not cultural choices are actually choices, which is a can of worms.
 
 
TeN
18:18 / 26.10.07
Definitely.

That also explains why no one ever self-identifies as a hipster.
 
 
gridley
11:54 / 28.10.07
I'm suspicious of all this talk about hipsters doing things even though they don't enjoy them. It makes little sense and isn't the case with the hipsters I'm friends with.

As fads go, I'm pretty fond of it because I see it as a rejection of the cultural gentrification that's been creeping through American cities. It's saying "Yes, I could spend nine dollars on a fancy little goblet of the latest imported Belgian wheat beer, but frankly I would enjoy a $2 PBR and shot of Jim Beam special just as much."
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:54 / 29.10.07
I think I have a copy of "Second-Hand dresses and the role of the ragmarket" at home, which I'll try to dig up - I think it might have something useful to say about this.

Meanwhile, a couple of questions. When are we dating the hipster phenomenon or subculture, if either of them it be, to? Nathan Barley was kicking around from about 1999 onwards, and one could expect a youth culture to go through a few variations since then. But Barley wasn't exactly a "hipster" - he was a Shoreditch Twat, which involves among other things a different approach to technology. Pre-hipster, probably, in the rather pale, broad way the terms seems to be being used, to describe pretty much anybody in their twenties who drinks Pabst Blue Ribbon and is not recognisably blue collar.

I'd suggest possibly going back to the start. TeN, you say that you are surrounded by hipsters, you do things which you identify as "hipster things" - in what sense are you not a hipster, and indeed in what sense can you say that you hate hipsters, especially if nobody actually identifies as a hipster to start with? Reading your account, I see problems in attempts to tie the Jazz-age hipster to the "not just black, but lower class" culture of those identified externally as hipsters in the modern day - in what sense, for example, is Atari lower-class? Is anything retro lower-class, because modernity is expensive?

Also, you then suggest that possibly "fake" people exist in all subcultures - and that what you have been calling a hipster is simply the "fake" version of the kind of twentysomething art student the real version of which is you. How do you define "fake", here? To narrow it down, what is the difference between the way you play Super Nintendo and the way a fake person/hipster plays Super Nintendo?
 
 
Olulabelle
17:32 / 29.10.07
I don't know, I understood what TeN was saying to mean he had actually come to suspect that he might be a hipster, and that seeing as he didn't like other hipster people he saw around him perhaps his definition of such hipsterdom was either wrong and hipsters are another group of people, or he was in fact denying his true hipster status.

I don't think he was saying he was the real version, I think TeN didn't identify as a hipster, and thought hipsters were fake people who only pretended to like things, but then realised that he in fact did all the things hispters did and actually enjoyed doing them, which therefore must make him a hipster.

It also means that either he is fake, or proves to him that hipsters are not in fact fake people doing things for the sake of things, but instead happen to be people like him doing things because they do genuinely like them. So maybe hipsters, such as they are to him, have been misrepresented.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
18:48 / 29.10.07
I think a lot of this comes down to how sarcastic/ironic someone appears/how sarcastic their demeanour is. An 'art student' walking down the road wearing a Mickey Mouse T-shirt 'ironically' might actually just be wearing it because they like it, and one could be misreading their facial expression or body-language. The same goes for heavy glasses and old men's hats. I.E.:

1) Person is aware that they are stereotypically 'uncool' but wears them anyway.

2) Person is aware that they are stereotypically 'uncool' but wears them to show they're even cooler than the people who reject them/person doesn't 'like' them in themselves but for what they say.

3) Person doesn't know or care whether or not the items are 'cool' or not.

One wouldn't really know which of these is true without speaking to the person.

In the UK, among the essentially student demographic Ten's talking about, a 'scenester' tends to mean anyone who is considered to 'care too much' about dress sense, especially males. So, for example, the boring indie band Nine Black Alps can say in an interview with a boring indie magazine something like 'We're about music, not fasion - real music that stirs your soul. We don't like it when scenesters turn up at our gigs'.

Of course, a glance at what Nine Black Alps actually look like:




...will give you carefully managed head and facial hair, and carefully constructed outfits. In fact it's unclear to me how the division here is anything other than arbitrary, or indeed an 'us-them' signifier to snatch a target audience (because, of course, no-one likes scenesters).

There's also a distictly unpleasant - and boring - idea floating around here that 'real' people can't enjoy dressing up - that if you openly enjoy and indulge in fashion, nice clothes, nice hair, etc, you're somehow 'fake', which is pretty hypocritical coming as it does from people who themselves preen. The Arctic Monkeys are also sold on this ticket.
 
 
Olulabelle
19:14 / 29.10.07
That's very true, I do think that lots of it has to do with the presumption that someone elses style of dress is 'preening' and I think it occurs because sometimes people seem unable to comprehend why another person might choose an item of clothing or listen to a particular band. Maybe because it's so incomprensible it starts to be labelled as 'fake'.
 
 
whatever
19:52 / 29.10.07
This question was asked once in a class I took and the responses were generally about affectations, or examples of texts hipsters would consume. They weren't particularly insightful or on-target, but all no less doubt with surface-level observations.

This, I think is essential, as to at least this room full of people, hipsters were devoid of any unanimous philosophy, and were united more by aesthetic taste. This often comes out in the clothing, which I sort of think is the main way people tend to define and categorize subcultures. Music helps too, and hipsters definitely have that. Kings of Leon, I'm looking at you.

But it's sort of confusing, in that it seems to be the first ever to draw purely from the concept of coolness. Even though there's always this sort of naysaying, this "cooler than cool" or "so uncool it's cool," the idea is still prominently featured, and emphasized or deemphasized to a point that probably merits particular importance.

I've always sort found hipsters sort of ridiculous, but always dreading that I am one myself. In what other subculture could that happen?
 
 
Glenn Close But No Cigar
20:19 / 29.10.07
The following, from The Onion, may be useful:

Local Hipster Over-explaining why he was at the mall

Two Hipsters Agrily Call Each Other 'Hipster'

Crime Scene Used to be Cool
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:26 / 29.10.07
Thanks, Olula - that's an interesting spin. I was taking TeN's:

of course, there is also the possibility that "the hipster" doesn't exist as it's own subculture, but rather, "fake" people, people "who prize the aesthetic above all else," "posers" if you will, exist in ALL subcultures

To mean something like in every subculture, including the subculture of people like me (art students, white upper-middle class, liking kitschy and working-class cultural artefacts), there will be people who are doing it for effect - although that gets us into the problem of how one wears, say, a NASCAR baseball cap with anything other than some form of aesthetic aim in mind. So, the antithesis was between posers and those sincere in their expressions, although you're quite right that there is no definite association with one or t'other.
 
 
Olulabelle
21:46 / 29.10.07
Yes, I see. So if TeN is making the assumption that some people do it for effect, well then really some proof would be needed from him, about how he has come to the conclusion that anyone is doing it for effect instead of genuinely liking it, as in your example of playing Nintendo in a real way, as opposed to an affected way.

I think that question is genuinely really interesting. When people are described as fake, how does anyone actually know? Fake to whom? Faking what?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:55 / 29.10.07
Indeed - and there's the "fake it till you make it" thing - that all self-expression is a sort of performance, and never stops being performance. I mean, I might as a youth have loved a band for their musical purity, but that may well not have prevented me from trying on a number of different T-shirts when dressing to go to a gig by them, because the interplay of perception, by self and others, was part of the experience of liking-that-band-heit. But I wouldn;'t have thought of that as performance, exactly, and certainly not faking it, and that's a point where the question "am I _unwittingly_ a hipster?" is really interesting - which brings us back to TeN's first post.
 
 
ibis the being
22:32 / 29.10.07
Add me to the skeptical camp on this one. It appears to me that the term "hipster" is akin to "political correctness," in that it exists as a concept only in the minds of critics of some nebulous cluster of stereotypical characteristics, assumed motivations, and suspected secret agendas.

I especially don't understand the way fashion is being analyzed in this definition of hipster. Isn't fashion necessarily about aesthetics, and isn't it nearly always referential? How and why is participating in one fashion trend or another more or less authentic than any other?
 
 
TeN
05:03 / 09.08.08
sorry to bring this back from the dead, but I think it's still worth talking about and I thought this might be of interest:
http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/79/hipster.html
 
  

Page: (1)23

 
  
Add Your Reply