mooBlog 16-11-2010: Stealing Hipster-ism...

In my last blog "If We Settle For Nothing Now" I raised the question of the changing role of hip hop, and in more general terms, other fringe music genres, in the role of social change. I guess I was frustrated by the lack of quality musicians, both in terms of talent, but with regards to raising important issues as well. I think it goes further than the lyrics of the new age hip hop songs, the new indie songs, the new punk songs. I think regardless of the intentions of the musicians themselves, the fact that the most popular music genres have huge fan bases of people from lower economical circumstances is an interesting point to look at. It is the fans of the (oh-too-often-used-term) "up and coming band" that either make or break their success. It's ironic, that although these people, often simply normal, or even quite poor members of our society, can have such influence on the popularity of a band. But it doesn't ever last long. And it's not only the music which is taken over by the ruling class within our society. 


Over the last few years, we've seen a rise in what is now referred to as hipster fashion. A while back, this thriving video meme caught my attention.





 while incredibly funny, it also provides an amazing social commentary of how 'beatnik' culture is once again thriving, but also how those who are more well-off are also inclined to follow this "poverty-chic" culture. 


It was frustrating, and I wasn't sure as to the reasons behind this phenomenon. Until I stumbled up an essay published in the New York Times a few days ago. Titled "The Hipster in the Mirror," the essay looks at the sociology of the hipster culture, the reasons why this culture has expanded so much, and what this says about our culture. The main argument which it's author, Mark Greif, puts forward, is that fashion is a weapon in the class struggle. People from poorer demographics often have to resort to completely new fashions in order to identify themselves. It is one of the only areas in which the working class have a superiority over the ruling class within our society. So, like in any area of society, when the poor latch onto a new culture, the buzzards of the ruling class come to join in the fold, or as Greif puts it "Think of Paris Hilton in her trucker hat."
When this occurs, it is no longer the fashion per say, but the branding of this fashion which counts toward superiority. 


People from the ruling class like to think that they have better taste than people of lower class, so when the working class actually pushes a new sub-culture, it is no wonder the higher classes want in. But they don't only want in, they want to control this new sub-culture. It is no surprise that you see so many so called "fashion rebels" wearing hats with 59fifty stickers still on them. Although it would seem that this is simply superfluous, it is a tactic by the brand to involve the poorest people within society to force the cultural change. In fact, I actually heard someone on the train complaining because his sticker was coming off. He could only be consoled when a friend of his told him to reapply it with some fabric adhesive. I just couldn't understand this, until I realised that this is a statement, part of the brainwashing of the working class. It's aim is to dilute any possible means for the working class to gain social superiority over the ruling class. If we have nothing to identify us from those who steal our wealth, how can we resist it, how can we change it?


I don't mean to say that I don't think that fashion isn't important. In fact, I think that it is one of the greatest means of self expression. Out of all of this, we can easily say, however, that the those far better off will always envy the poor for their superior taste in fashion, music and art.


From one of my favourite books of all time, "100 Years of Solitude" comes a great quote quote which almost sums up what I'm trying to say:

"Poverty is the servitude of love"