The Hipster Aesthetic
The more melancholy aspects of Kierkegaard’s existentialism, filtered through the minds of the twentieth century and again through the sexual revolution, resulted finally in the (loosely labelled) aesthetic of ‘alternative’, ‘punk’, or ‘goth’. The aesthetic eventually crossed over into the mainstream, appropriating the label ‘emo’. The resultant existential attitudes proved very attractive to Generation Y, who found themselves under so much pressure to please the now middle-aged heirs of the sexual revolution. The natural desire not to conform, combined with laziness and apathy led them to appropriate the emo aesthetic. The aesthetic adopted, however, was only an aesthetic of appearance, not action. ‘Alternative’ had become a fashion, and hipsterism was born. The existential aesthetic of the hipster is shallow, it is limited to watching Mad Men, living in social cliques, social causes (in the sense of being socially acceptable, not necessarily socially concerned) and a strange obsession with deer. It is a fashion–the conceding of appearances to the culture’s leering sexual desire, but disguised, and thus much more dangerous than the overt sexualisation that ‘true feminists’ rail the ‘failed feminism’ for creating. Thus the hipster’s aesthetic existentialism, which they hold so close, is no aesthetic at all, much less existential. While the validity of various aesthetic approaches is still debated profitably, the question as to whether existentialism is even possible within Generation Y seems to demand a resounding ‘no’.
As hipsterism gains momentum, practitioners find safety in numbers. They come to believe that their world view has substance, that it is worth something in the public arena. All people ought to have a valid voice, and so they have done themselves a great disservice, as espousing such a faux-aesthetic cannot amount to any depth of social or political insight. They are the new yuppies. Therein lay the dangers, when they begin to be accepted – not by their peers, but by their leaders and entertainers – and accommodated, our collective imaginations shall disintegrate with a sigh.
As I started this short discourse with Kierkegaard, let me end by paraphrasing him. The act of choosing is essentially an expression of the ethical. The hipster’s choice is an aesthetic choice, but an aesthetic choice is no choice at all. Transfiguration is never attained by the one who chooses merely aesthetically. The rhythm in that person’s soul, in spite of all its passion, is a spiritus levis, they have chosen emptiness.
1 Comment