I’m alright with the individual people I know who are hipsters. I’m even on good terms with them. As individuals, I can certainly carry on a conversation with them.
But the group of hipsters, who Julia Plevin wrote on The Huffington Post, have an, “iconic carefully created sloppy vintage look,” I have no respect for. It is simply a convolution of the styles of the past sixty or so years, thrown up and shook together. I cannot consent to a bunch of people who are simply apathetic about everything, and yet have created their own counterculture and style (Pabst Blue Ribbon has certainly embraced their title as the unofficial alcohol of hipsters), I especially have disdain for indie anything: poetry (I spend some afternoons sitting and laughing at the first few lines of hipster poetry – which virtually all the time makes no sense at all), music (especially Pitchfork Media, the leaders of the hipster movement if they could be described that way, which basically work to be sensationalistic in their album ratings and have a supreme distaste for any music close to mainstream), &c.
The major thing I dislike about them is that they seem to have this air of intellectualism, and yet the vast majority do not know much about anything. It’s basically the movement disdaining, yet embracing, popular culture. Although this is viewed by the leaders among hipsters, such as the defunct Stylus Magazine (I guess the MadTV to Pitchfork’s SNL) as “a pose, a pretense…[involving] a hipster costume, worn to appear ‘cool’, a liberal education, and so on,” this is how it was and will be propagated – a bunch of college-aged folks with no real view of anything other than the new Arcade Fire album (a view copped from Pitchfork) and their own ridiculous style.
Join us for next week’s edition of Tuesday Afternoon Stuff I Dislike, when I discuss the Guggenheim.