7 ms·

Author summarizes the rage quite well: "The reaction, then, had nothing to do with hipsters. It was a hatred of people that need to stand out for standing-out'

Author summarizes the rage quite well: "The reaction, then, had nothing to do with hipsters. It was a hatred of people that need to stand out for standing-out's sake. That realization was at once positive and negative—people didn't hate me because I was a hipster, they hated me because I looked like I was nakedly desperate for attention, and had gone about that attention-grabbing by glomming on to marginalized trends." I believe that statement would be true even without the "glomming" part. Societies seem to both love and hate attention seekers. We pour accolades on attention-seeking celebrities, but scowl at neighbors who buy flashy cars or ride a Penny-farthing (I had to look that up) seemingly only for the attention.

dnautics 13y ago
"It was a hatred of people that need to stand out for standing-out's sake. That realization was at once positive and negative—people didn't hate me because I was a hipster, they hated me because I looked like I was nakedly desperate for attention, and had gone about that attention-grabbing by glomming on to marginalized trends" But that is (one) definition of hipster. Casual speculation: Would the situation have been different if the sign advertising the service weren't hidden? I think yes. Would the situation have been different if he weren't wearing stereotypical "hipster attire", and instead were in say a pinstripe suit? I think yes.
- ebiester 13y ago
  Eh, I'd think hipster if I saw a pinstripe suit. Loose fitting jeans and a polo, however, might do it.
  - prawn 13y ago
    They he'd just be a hipster doing it wrong...
roc 13y ago
Typically, celebrities acquire accolades for having done things of note, other than attention-seeking. [1] The ones that deliberately seek attention for its own sake get as much scorn as anyone else; they're essentially tabloid heels. And they exist for the same reason cable news is in such a state: There just isn't enough 'news' to justify 24x7 coverage, so programming must be invented that is, by definition, not things that would otherwise be considered news. [2] [1] Without stepping into discussion of merit, our culture does ascribe value to people who play sports well, act well, are likable parts of the media, are fashionable/attractive, etc. [2] There are cross-overs, sure. Some famous-for-being-famous types cross over into 'actual' celebrity. But that's more an effect of the secondary content operating as a 'farm league' of sorts. They throw a lot of famous-for-being-famous / 'reality-star' stuff against the wall and graduate anything that 'sticks'. And I personally wonder at what point the 'celebrity media' will start openly paying C and D-listers directly, to generate content. e.g. pay a couple fashion models to go to the beach and provide photo content. maybe even get some clothing labels on-board to under-write the thing for the sake of having -their- products featured and plugged in the resulting copy. But I digress.
- bencollier49 13y ago
  Pretty sure they already do that. Fictionalised by Martin Amis in Yellow Dog, if I remember correctly.
- TheLegace 13y ago
  It's kind of interesting. I typically expected a shallow world to actually have a decent taste in beauty. But when I look at many celebrities, I find a serious lack of physical attraction to any of them. Like sure there are actresses that I can respect and admire, but many of them lack any talent, or even modicum of depth. And I always wonder, wherever I go I see young attractive women everywhere, and I go to a university where Liberal arts is the focus, so where are all the attractive actresses.
gabemart 13y ago
I think is is a really interesting point, and it's something I spend quite a bit of time thinking about. Why is some attention-seeking behavior generally seen as acceptable, even positive, while other attention-seeking behavior is seen as pathetic or rage-inducing? Based on my own anecdotal experience, I think part of the anger comes from a sense of discomfort at the dissonance between how one thinks the attention-seeker is being perceived and how one thinks the attention seeker believes they are being perceived. In the case of someone using a typewriter, the issue isn't simply that one thinks that person looks foolish, it's the dissonance between knowing they look foolish and imagining that they think they look super cool. Dissonance leads to discomfort, discomfort leads to anger. With other kinds of attention-seeking public behavior -- street performance, for example -- even if one doesn't enjoy it, there's a much closer match between how the performer believes themselves to be perceived and how they are actually perceived (assuming they are competent). I harbor no ill-will towards hipsters, self-identified or otherwise. But if I imagine someone using a typewriter in Starbucks, it does make me uncomfortable, and by far the biggest part of that is imaging that person thinking they are really funny or really cool.
- nemof 13y ago
  I guess it comes down to whether or not we should be patrolling how other people think of themselves. NO HIPSTER NO! You may think that bringing an Olivetti typewriter into a coffee shop is twee and wonderfully anachronistic, but you just look silly! Know your place Hipster! I'm generally, genuinely jealous of people who can go through their lives adhering to their own sense of appropriateness and style.
- flumbaps 13y ago
  That's very strange to me - I don't understand why a stranger thinking they are funny or cool would be upsetting. People have different tastes, why does it bother you?
pessimizer 13y ago
I was really impressed by that observation, and I thought that the article was going to turn in a pleasant way that I wasn't expecting. Sadly, instead of wondering why someone of a different perspective could think that of him, he continues: "The experience of being labeled and then cast aside made me realize that what many people call 'hipsterism' or, what they perceive as a slavish devotion to irony, are often in fact just forms of extreme, radical sincerity." So in the end, they hate us for our freedom. They criticise you because they are jealous of you, like mom said. I don't understand this lack of self-awareness in a generation and class so obsessed with self-cataloging.
- chris_wot 13y ago
  "Sadly, instead of wondering why someone of a different perspective could think that of him..." So it's his fault that people were nasty and hated on him? Way to go - blaming the victim much?
  - pessimizer 13y ago
    I literally wanted to end my comment by talking about "haters" and the people who talk about "haters" in a very nasty way, but since the guy I was criticizing didn't refer to "haters," I felt that was unfair and putting words in his mouth. To not rant: the fact that someone criticizes you is not a sign of a quality that they hold of being a criticizer, When people criticize you, they are criticizing you, and if you feel that that makes them a criticizer, it's because you define other individuals in terms of yourself. Instead, pretend that someone is telling you how they see you from their perspective, and decide whether their perception is distorted, or if you just have to eat it and accept it, and reflect. >So it's his fault that people were nasty and hated on him? Depends what you mean by fault. If somebody hates fox hunting, and I hunt a fox, is it my fault that people are upset with me? I'm just living my life how I want to live it. What does fault even mean? If you're a shitty singer, singing on the street outside of my apartment, and I stick my head out of the window and yell at you that you suck and should shut up, is it your fault that I told you you suck? What does that mean? Am I a hater? >blaming the victim much? The victim of being upset that people on twitter and reddit didn't like him? Cry me a river.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

dnautics 13y ago

"It was a hatred of people that need to stand out for standing-out's sake. That realization was at once positive and negative—people didn't hate me because I was a hipster, they hated me because I looked like I was nakedly desperate for attention, and had gone about that attention-grabbing by glomming on to marginalized trends" But that is (one) definition of hipster. Casual speculation: Would the situation have been different if the sign advertising the service weren't hidden? I think yes. Would the situation have been different if he weren't wearing stereotypical "hipster attire", and instead were in say a pinstripe suit? I think yes.

ebiester 13y ago
Eh, I'd think hipster if I saw a pinstripe suit. Loose fitting jeans and a polo, however, might do it.
- prawn 13y ago
  They he'd just be a hipster doing it wrong...

roc 13y ago

Typically, celebrities acquire accolades for having done things of note, other than attention-seeking. [1] The ones that deliberately seek attention for its own sake get as much scorn as anyone else; they're essentially tabloid heels. And they exist for the same reason cable news is in such a state: There just isn't enough 'news' to justify 24x7 coverage, so programming must be invented that is, by definition, not things that would otherwise be considered news. [2] [1] Without stepping into discussion of merit, our culture does ascribe value to people who play sports well, act well, are likable parts of the media, are fashionable/attractive, etc. [2] There are cross-overs, sure. Some famous-for-being-famous types cross over into 'actual' celebrity. But that's more an effect of the secondary content operating as a 'farm league' of sorts. They throw a lot of famous-for-being-famous / 'reality-star' stuff against the wall and graduate anything that 'sticks'. And I personally wonder at what point the 'celebrity media' will start openly paying C and D-listers directly, to generate content. e.g. pay a couple fashion models to go to the beach and provide photo content. maybe even get some clothing labels on-board to under-write the thing for the sake of having -their- products featured and plugged in the resulting copy. But I digress.

bencollier49 13y ago
Pretty sure they already do that. Fictionalised by Martin Amis in Yellow Dog, if I remember correctly.
TheLegace 13y ago
It's kind of interesting. I typically expected a shallow world to actually have a decent taste in beauty. But when I look at many celebrities, I find a serious lack of physical attraction to any of them. Like sure there are actresses that I can respect and admire, but many of them lack any talent, or even modicum of depth. And I always wonder, wherever I go I see young attractive women everywhere, and I go to a university where Liberal arts is the focus, so where are all the attractive actresses.

gabemart 13y ago

I think is is a really interesting point, and it's something I spend quite a bit of time thinking about. Why is some attention-seeking behavior generally seen as acceptable, even positive, while other attention-seeking behavior is seen as pathetic or rage-inducing? Based on my own anecdotal experience, I think part of the anger comes from a sense of discomfort at the dissonance between how one thinks the attention-seeker is being perceived and how one thinks the attention seeker believes they are being perceived. In the case of someone using a typewriter, the issue isn't simply that one thinks that person looks foolish, it's the dissonance between knowing they look foolish and imagining that they think they look super cool. Dissonance leads to discomfort, discomfort leads to anger. With other kinds of attention-seeking public behavior -- street performance, for example -- even if one doesn't enjoy it, there's a much closer match between how the performer believes themselves to be perceived and how they are actually perceived (assuming they are competent). I harbor no ill-will towards hipsters, self-identified or otherwise. But if I imagine someone using a typewriter in Starbucks, it does make me uncomfortable, and by far the biggest part of that is imaging that person thinking they are really funny or really cool.

nemof 13y ago
I guess it comes down to whether or not we should be patrolling how other people think of themselves. NO HIPSTER NO! You may think that bringing an Olivetti typewriter into a coffee shop is twee and wonderfully anachronistic, but you just look silly! Know your place Hipster! I'm generally, genuinely jealous of people who can go through their lives adhering to their own sense of appropriateness and style.
flumbaps 13y ago
That's very strange to me - I don't understand why a stranger thinking they are funny or cool would be upsetting. People have different tastes, why does it bother you?

pessimizer 13y ago

I was really impressed by that observation, and I thought that the article was going to turn in a pleasant way that I wasn't expecting. Sadly, instead of wondering why someone of a different perspective could think that of him, he continues: "The experience of being labeled and then cast aside made me realize that what many people call 'hipsterism' or, what they perceive as a slavish devotion to irony, are often in fact just forms of extreme, radical sincerity." So in the end, they hate us for our freedom. They criticise you because they are jealous of you, like mom said. I don't understand this lack of self-awareness in a generation and class so obsessed with self-cataloging.

chris_wot 13y ago
"Sadly, instead of wondering why someone of a different perspective could think that of him..." So it's his fault that people were nasty and hated on him? Way to go - blaming the victim much?
- pessimizer 13y ago
  I literally wanted to end my comment by talking about "haters" and the people who talk about "haters" in a very nasty way, but since the guy I was criticizing didn't refer to "haters," I felt that was unfair and putting words in his mouth. To not rant: the fact that someone criticizes you is not a sign of a quality that they hold of being a criticizer, When people criticize you, they are criticizing you, and if you feel that that makes them a criticizer, it's because you define other individuals in terms of yourself. Instead, pretend that someone is telling you how they see you from their perspective, and decide whether their perception is distorted, or if you just have to eat it and accept it, and reflect. >So it's his fault that people were nasty and hated on him? Depends what you mean by fault. If somebody hates fox hunting, and I hunt a fox, is it my fault that people are upset with me? I'm just living my life how I want to live it. What does fault even mean? If you're a shitty singer, singing on the street outside of my apartment, and I stick my head out of the window and yell at you that you suck and should shut up, is it your fault that I told you you suck? What does that mean? Am I a hater? >blaming the victim much? The victim of being upset that people on twitter and reddit didn't like him? Cry me a river.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]