Quote:
Originally Posted by zachsd
And metal-heads wouldn't be considered social contrarians? This is one of the problems with the term "hipster" in my opinion. It attempts to identify a group that doesn't have any common attributes worth identifying. There is no common way of thinking among hipsters, no ideology, not even clear tastes in music. So when people are asked what makes a hipster a hipster, they just say something along the lines of them being social contrarians.
In my opinion, the only reason why such a social group, or perception of a social group, exists in the first place is because of the internet.
|
No, I don't think metalheads are contrarian. I think they generally see the way they do things as a better, smarter way or at least their preference. Punks would have been a better comparison but even Punks have aim's.
Hipsters are more identifiable because of the internet, but they don't exist because of them. Whether or not they have commonalities that are worth identifying is unrelated as to whether or not they have them.
To sum it up in a word, hipsters are "anti." Not any one thing, everything, even bands they enjoy because they have a misanthropic tint by nature. They're often a reflection of what they hate about everything else. Whether they intended it or not, they became the Aristotelian Mirror to almost anything they've come into contact with.
The problem with them, as a group, is that theres an implicit moral judgement made on the things they scorn, though not verbalized. Meaning the can wriggle their way out of having a purpose and yet continue their ridiculous jihad against them. (Music, fashion, cultural values, transit even)