Hipster backlash

[John Junk]

I eventually came to realize why WFMU became like a religion for me after getting out of college and trying to negotiate my hipster-heavy early twenties existence.  WFMU is all about lifers. People who are in it for the long haul. Tom Scharpling: Lifer.  Terre T: Lifer (and proud veteran of the punk wars).  Evan "Funk" Davies: Lifer.  Ken Freedman: Lifer.  Joe Belock: Lifer.  The list goes on.  I think it's okay to be a hipster for a while, but far better to be a lifer for, uh, life.

--One caveat though, that "Rise of the Idiots" video reminded me of how nuts it would drive me when I would be walking down the street in Brooklyn and some regressive jackass would be riding a bike made for a 12 year old on the sidewalk.  This would make me so fucking mad.  It's the dumbest thing ever.  Look, if you wanna move to the city, move to the city, but don't RIDE YOUR BIKE ON THE FUCKING SIDEWALK like you're 12 YEARS OLD when you're 25.  It's dangerous and annoying.  This isn't the no-pedestrian-traffic-having cul de sac outside of your parents' house in suburban Old Bridge, son.

[Gore Marie]

After seeing this thread, I saw the article in question in Barnes and Noble and read it.  I'll try to summarize the author's problems with the inauthenticity hipsters in my own words:
Unlike previous "subcultural" movements where the majority of participants were comprised of 'artist' types and creators, many "hipsters" are in fact bankers/lawyers/etc.  Further, the hipster movment "cannabilizes" (author's word) stylistic aspects of previous countercultural movements such as hippies/punks/grunge/etc, without any acknowledgement of the meaning or the previous contexts of those countercultures.  Author also noted the "safeness" of hipsters in comparison to subcultures of previous generations, which, i suppose, had more of an edge. 
Basically, hipsters are the gentrification of subcultures. 

Though, personally, I dont see "cannabilizing" of subcultures as anything new--major labels have been doing it forev.

Interestingly enough, appeared in TIME OUT NEW YORK, although editor did mention Swift's "A Modest Proposal" in his letter.

[Pride of Staten Island]

Does anyone else ever get mad that the more stylish and popular the hipster, the less they seem to know about music and movies and culture? 

I remember Terre T once telling me years ago that, generally speaking, the more punk rock someone dresses, the worse their taste in music is. Like that dude with the mohawk might be into the Weirdos but he's probably more into the Exploited. I think the same applies here.

I think the thing that irks many people about hipsters is the sense that they're having a fancy, elitist dress up party and that their cultural name-dropping are just perfunctory passwords to get them in the door. This is probably the case for a percentage of the hipster population but has their ever been a cultural phenomeon that didn't have it's bandwagon jumpers and poseurs? It's not really fair to paint every hipster with the same brush.

John H is totally correct in calling hipsterism and "amorphous and bullshit" catagory. You could call just about anyone in their 20s whose tastes and slightly to left of the mainstream a hipster. You could shoehorn just about anyone who listens to WFMU into the hipster camp. And, of course, anyone who hates hipsters could probably be called a hipster. Only a hipster would be hip enough to identify a hipster, right?

The world is filled with ridiculous and shallow people of all varieties. The hipster-baiting and hating seems a little too easy for me. Not many people would probably indentify themselves as hipsters so trashing a group to which no one really belongs but could easily be applied to nearly anyone kind of smacks of conveniently appropriated misanthropy.

[Lwanda]

If you want to see what's wrong with hipsters, read any of the comments at Onion's AV Club.