Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin
I really don't understand all the hatred directed towards "hipsters", aside from the eternal contention between youth and grumpy aging men. As in the article, the most common complaint generally seems to be that as a group it has no "meaning" or goal, unlike the cultures associated punk or hip hop thus not making it a "real counterculture" or whatever, despite that it makes no pretenses as even attempting to do so. And must every little subculture have delusions of "revolution" in any event?
From what I see of who are typically described as hipsters are people who enjoy visual arts, enjoy drugs and drinking, are liberal and non-religious, ride bikes, take pictures, live in cities, etc. Whats so bad about this? Sounds better than the dominant Christian-conservative, suburban culture of America. While nothing about hipsters may be revolutionary, they do in part signify the continued movement towards a more tolerant, educated, fun-loving society.
|
i agree. there are a lot worse guys to hang out with than dudes with a cool bike, some musical talent and a desire to live in an old walkup in the industrial part of town.
side note? openly "political" subcultures tend to just be sinks of hateful earnestness. you have not lived until you've been excoriated by a rodentlike british columbian for having had the temerity to buy your food in an actual store (rather than retrieve it -- three days later -- from the goddamned dumpster behind the market).