Hipsters and the beauty of irony

"Look, and it can't be seen.

Listen, and it can't be heard.

Reach, and it can't be grasped.

...

You can't know it, but you can be it,

at ease in your own life.

Just realise where you came from:

this is the essence of wisdom." Lao-Tzu, Tao-te-ching

At the turn of the 21st Century the world expected a progression, or at the very least change. Philosophically, and politically, idealism had died. People had either lost faith, found it was no longer relevant or simply wasn't believed anymore. The ideas of Hegel and the Young Hegelians, notably Karl Marx, were proving unsatisfactory to a great deal of people. If their ideas weren't discarded they were at least modified and personalised.

Following the expansion of Existentialism and Absurdism following the Second World War, the world seemed to have changed. Not only did it seem to get smaller, it got more hostile as more people surrounded us yet all the while individuals felt isolated and alone. Our role in the world as a person became more and more miniscule.

Danger lurked around every corner, the threat of nuclear war was fresh in the public's mind after Hiroshima/Nagasaki and the Cuban Missile crisis, and conflict remained constant. Permanent fear.  Colonialism and Imperialism still existed - despite the slow decline of monarchies - but in different forms under various pretenses.
The 60's gave birth to the all-loving hippies as a result. But by the 80's most had sold out and cashed in. Now in the second decade of the 21st Century, where do we stand?



What has become evident is our self-imposed divisions through labelling and classificationism; through nationalities, race, creed, colour, stances, positions, ideas and ideals. All previous attempts to rid the world of it's ills just resulted in further divisions, contradictions, and internal and external conflicts.
Once again society has required, but not asked, for the youth to step up to the plate. Not unlike every other attempt, they were received with ridicule as soon as they showed their face.

Just as reactionaries, conservatives, and capitalists treated the hippies with contempt: so too do the pessimistic and hopeless, seemingly elders, of today's world treat today's youth. The hipsters.

I think that, through irony the world can come together. Or better yet, stop us from destroying ourselves.

It is the beauty of irony: hipsters reject the use of labels, one of the causes of divisions. To answer the question "What is a Hipster?" would be ironic. To ask is also ironic. It cannot be attempted without causing some form of irony. Trying to create a definition would be contradictory to it's (lack of) message. It cannot be done without destroying it's magnificence.
Just as the hepcats of the 40's called their jazz-wise peers, you're either in "the know" or not. You either "dig it" or don't. You're either "cool" or not.


Through irony the Hipster can spread their message by spreading no message. By using t-shirts as a modern art-form which unites it's followers and members it may seem to the untrained eye that it just allows them to wear Che Guevara, witty captions and various printed images. It takes thought and contemplation to notice it's deeper meaning.
Postmodern art was the fore-runner of ironic art. Where postmodernists challenge social constructs and deny the myth of objective meaning to anything, Hipster continue the mission.

They give no meaning to their work. And all the time people are searching for it.
When people see their t-shirts, graffiti, hair-styles or fashion choices people want to work out what they're saying and why. Why? And if they don't do this, then they laugh and ridicule that which they do not yet understand.

Here lies the beauty of it all: hipsters are playing off the desire to understand and to know. It ultimately creates situations and scenarios where the way out is unintelligible. By understanding each other, we stereotype, label and classify purely for simplicity and ease of living's sake. But it causes divisions, disagreements and eventually hostility between each other.
And so, hipsters have recognised the path to living happily and peaceful. It begins with irony.
To tell the world of their message, people must want to receive it and be ready for it. But what has always happened, fallaciously, is that ideas are judged by those who propose them. By offering no message, hipsters demand that people think for themselves and contemplate what it is to live in the Absurd. That is (not) their message.

The Hipster's objectives are not idealistic, they are not world-applicable: they are local and egotistic. In allowing ourselves to seek what we wish to seek, without judgment, without evaluations or decisions we no longer rely on subjective morality or personal choice for matters that affect people beyond the ego.
This subculture is never depicted as unhappy, some argue that the 'Emo' was the predecessor of the Hipster and if this is a valid suggestion then it illustrates what I am suggesting. From the depths of depression and deep contemplation they have risen. They like to have a good time and spend their time kindly with each other. This is, in part, achieved because they do not argue over messages.


Just as Anonymous is a collective term for a group, with no individuals, comprised of no one - so to speak. They are united by a common goal and in theory have no means in which to advocate or pursue it. Without figureheads, leaders or spokesmen they are unable to send messages. They are, simply, a united group of people who wish to see progress for progress's sake.
Although, as is usually the case, the practice contradicts the theory - in the Youtube videos being released on 'behalf' of Anonymous, they are committing acts of irony. When one person speaks, the message they profess is dead upon being spoken. When one person types a word, it instantly becomes nullified.
What Anonymous hated most about it's publicisation is that media groups have always incorrectly labelled them or summed them up. Whereas hipsters revel in the fact that the public always incorrectly try to. It is their goal that noone succeeds.
They would probably laugh at Time magazine's opinion that everything they do is "to give off the vibe that they just don't care." Is it that they don't care, or are they playing off the Absuridty of the world, which is, in the end, meaningless. Is there nothing, in fact, to care about?

Analysis of hipsters have always been carried out in individual spheres: fashion, music and entertainment. Seemingly you can define them by looking only at one of the following; what they wear, what they listen to and what they do in their spare time.
Where jazz music led to the idolatry of abled black musicians and the hepcats of the 1940's were those who "dig it." They started to let the white fans into their group and culture. From there the hippies continued unified behind political, sexual and personal freedom and ideals. Equality and love for all. At this point we come to the hipster: they, the ones who take note of the past, digest and say nothing. Nothing.
So you see, there is no point in considering hipsters in these particular modes of thought or areas of society. Officially, they don't exist, or offer a standpoint on any of them. They are just there.

Are the wanting to give society a make over? By saying nothing do they mean to suggest that nothing needs to be said, but something needs to be done? That there is simply only a change in mentality required for the world to transform into what we want it to be? By saying nothing, are we coming to terms with the fact that we won't know anything and can't be certain of certain things? If you haven't realised yet, I cannot comment.
In retrospect, this whole attempt of a post is ironic. In trying to explain, I failed at the outset. But maybe, every once in a while, a message does need to be sent.

And so, to answer the great questions of life, the universe and everything...What is the meaning behind it all? I like to think that Douglas Adams maybe predicted the prevalence of irony. 42 has never been such a good answer. In the end, you just might as well do what you want. Any meaning behind it it subjective anyway.

Albert Camus asks the question in The Myth of Sisyphus as to whether or not, man can live the Absurd life without committing actual or philosophic suicide? The answer, according to hipsters, is yes. But for now, it has to be ironic.