For Mark Greif,
one of the founding editors of the literary and political journal n+1, the modern-day hipster was reborn
around 1999. His dating accords with my own perception. During my senior year
at Vassar, before I became consciously aware of the name by which to designate
the trend, I wondered at why some of my smartest Caucasian friends spurned
high-gloss refinement, why they stopped
reading French theorists and started watching TV, forsook microbrews or
Guinness in favor of cheap beers like Pabst Blue Ribbon, and began wearing
trucker hats. As a black guy, from a genuinely middle-class background, I was
mystified by these déclassé affectations.
I remained in a muddle about all of this, after financial obligation sent me
back to the predominantly black suburbs of northeastern Maryland where
styles had remained more or less consistent with those that I'd known since high
school.
In 2005, I got an office job in Manhattan. Through a coworker I learned how
to name the trend that I'd brushed up against intermittently, when I'd drop in
on friends in Williamsburg. I can still recall her surprise that I was
unfamiliar with hipster accoutrements like Vice magazine or websites
that posted party photos, such as the Cobra Snake. Aside from feeling removed from what was supposedly the vital
present, what struck me in talking to her was the hypocrisy she wore as lightly as a chiffon scarf when speaking contemptuously
about the hipsters of her Williamsburg neighborhood
or about the pretentiousness exhibited by some of the Vice editorial
staff, to whom she'd
applied for an internship. As if
all-knowing (the very definition of a hipster) she personified the lame
but telling quip, "What's the easiest way for a hipster to offend another
hipster? By calling him a hipster!"
There is a history to this sort of outsider-insider
exceptionalism. In his primordial incarnation, as memorably anatomized in
Anatole Broyard's 1948 essay for Partisan
Review, "A Portrait of the Hipster" this dean of the streets was
assumed to be of African-American descent. Broyard—a Creole who in part made
his name by trading on his intimate familiarity with black culture, but passed
himself off as white—advanced the claim that the hipster sauntered out of the muck
of institutionalized racism. The savvier-than-thou posturing, which became his
calling card, was predicated on inverting the power structure that conspired to
keep blacks on the periphery of tony society. Philosophic legerdemain assisted
him in this feat; he concealed his ignorance by contriving to make others feel
theirs. In this way, the hipster charmed or chafed the squares around him with
his persona which radiated what Broyard refers to as a priorism: "[This quality] arose out of a desperate, unquenchable
need to know the score; it was a great projection, a primary self-preserving
postulate. It meant 'it Is given to us to understand…' Carrying his language
and his new philosophy like concealed weapons, the hipster set out to conquer
the world. He took his stand on the corner and began to direct human traffic."
This patented cool—a supposed flower of his racial
heritage—would not remain solely at his disposal for long. White kids wanted to
aggrandize themselves, too. As Norman Mailer wrote in his controversial 1957
essay for Dissent, "The White
Negro: Superficial Reflections on the Hipster," "there was a new
breed of adventurers, urban adventurers who drifted out at night looking for
action with a black man's code to fit their facts. The hipster had absorbed the
existentialist synapses of the Negro, and for practical purposes could be
considered a white Negro." The assurance with which Mailer defines the
lineaments of black identity, and suggests how easily it can be appropriated,
should give one pause.
The aftermath of the civil rights and Vietnam
era witnessed the rise of punk, which in turn spurred the emergence of '80s
indie culture. These countercultures flowed out of a rejection of what many
young people saw as an increasingly corporatized world. On the heels of these
movements (which eventually became co-opted by the mainstream, as the
documentary 1991: The Year Punk Broke attests), neighborhoods like
Williamsburg in Brooklyn and Wicker Park in Chicago rose to prominence as
places that were connected with bohemia and artists. But by the late '90s these
locales seemed less identified with a community and more with attitude, prime
real estate, or even the brands associated with them. Out of the nexus of these
events the hipster regained his strut.
In the spring of 2009, the editorial board of n+1 convened a group of intellectuals to
deliver papers and participate in a dialogue with an audience at the New School
in Manhattan. What Was the Hipster? A Sociological Investigation presents
a record of these proceedings as well as responses and reflections occasioned
by them. "For once," Grief writes in his introduction, "here is
analysis of a cultural phenomenon not learned from TV, or pre-digested."
The book's kaleidoscopic mapping of the (typically white) hipster, in his or
her many guises (e.g., "the poison conduit" between the "rebel
subculture" and "the dominant class" or, in the case of the
female hipster, one beholden to the photographic lens), feels so of-the-moment
that it may make you cringe at your online profile.
Returning to the subject of hypocrisy, one of the virtues
of the book is how the contributors inscribe themselves in the topic of investigation.
Thus, with no small display of wit, Christian Lorentzen in his essay, "I
Was Wrong," confesses to having profited from "a massive fraud…
[that] held that there were people called hipsters who followed a creed called
hipsterism and existed in a realm known as hipsterdom. The truth was that there
was no culture worth speaking of, and the people called hipsters just happened
to be young and, more often than not, funny-looking." Or Rob Horning, who
writes:
Hipsters…reduce the particularity of anything you might be
curious about or invested in into the same dreary common denominator of how 'cool'
it is perceived to be…. Thus hipsterism forces on us a sense of the burden of
identity, of constantly having to curate it if only to avoid seeming like a
hipster….We keep consuming more, and more cravenly, yet this always seems to us
to be the hipster's fault, not our own.
As with almost any book composed by various contributors,
there is a range of quality in the offerings—sometimes within the pieces
themselves. Given the recurring motif, which runs throughout a number of the
articles, of the hipster as the beneficiary of gentrification, Jenifer
Baumgardner's "Williamsburg: Year Zero" seems a tad redundant in its
evocation of the author's ambivalence as a participant in, and observer of,
gentrification. Yet it remains interesting inasmuch as it broaches the topic of
whether all the fuss over stylish men in skinny jeans conceals a latent
homophobia.
One of the salient questions that linger in the mind after
one emerges from all of this self-reflection is whether, in the panoptic age of
the Internet, a counterculture can thrive without corporate interference. I'll
leave it to you to ponder this conundrum that apparently entraps us all.
Please sign in to add a comment on this article.