Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm certainly not talking about any of the people

> Rosie earlier mentioned. And I'm definitely not

> talking about the successful people Seabag

> mentioned.

>

> I'm talking about the people that have ensured

> that when I went to look for some new glasses,

> EVERY bloody pair was thick black rimmed.


... Except the bit

> about dressing up as Edwardian gentry (which by

> the way I'd never have labelled hipster - which is

> another example of how no one actually knows what

> a hipster is). I just find that particular group

> of junior right wingers a bit distasteful.


Dude. If your issue is just with spectacles, shouldn't you be berating graphic designers..?


Not sure how you know that you're not talking about any of the people I mentioned. I failed to state that the friends I mentioned earlier also have a penchant for hipster clothes: neon, 80s batwing jumpers, snow-washed denim, assymetric hairstyles, Victoriana and Edwardiana. Not all at once (usually). That would be ridiculous. There are a couple of beards too.


A point that I think has been missed is the way a lot of these trends are born out of a lack of finances. People working in retail / doing the door in clubs to support their street art habit don't have the disposable income to dress head to toe in Gap. Hence second hand clothes and the cheapest frames at the opticians. Then a momentum builds, a trend develops, and suddenly the thick black frames are in the Karen Millen range at Specsavers. Karen Millen (!) - purveyors of synthetic fibres used to denote the Made in Essex type of hard-faced fake-tanned french-manicured strumpet who's no better than she ought to be by wardrobe departments across the land.


Without wanting to labour a point, I'm just saying you can't judge a book by its day-glo cover.

RosieH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I failed to state that the friends I mentioned earlier also

> have a penchant for hipster clothes: neon, 80s

> batwing jumpers, snow-washed denim, assymetric

> hairstyles, Victoriana and Edwardiana.


Batwing jumpers? I need to keep up here.


Must be tough, being such an individual.

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It isn't complicated - if you see a man with a

> well-developed beard that is groomed to within an

> inch of its life- it is on a hipster imvho


So that puts Jeremy Beadle & George Micheal in your 'Hipster' gallery ?


Oh and George Clooney


Hmmm....

Admittedly I can't say with certainty that I wouldn't call the people you're describing as hipsters. Because I lack the psychic ability to know who you were thinking of. I was going by the friends of yours that I've been introduced to, or seen on social media. And by band videos you've shared. Haven't ever seen one of those and thought hipster.


I think you make a fair point about cash flow for clothes, but I disagree that having to buy second hand means you have to dress in a particular way. We all have our budgets (my clothing budget is tiny) and we choose what to buy with it.


I don't judge books by cover, and thinking someone looks a bit silly does not mean I make any judgement about them as a person. But equally human nature means that we're likely to be drawn towards the books that we think we'll enjoy the most.


But again we're talking about different people. You're talking about the people that bought the thick rimmed glasses out of necessity. I'm not.



ETA response to RosieH but started it an hour ago and got side tracked so cross posted.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You're talking about the people that bought the thick rimmed glasses out of necessity.


Red herring. That never happened. At no point in my lifetime have thick black rimmed glasses been the only cheapo glasses available.


It's also true that they became fashionable about 20 years ago, long before the word "hipster" had made it across the pond or beards were vaguely cool - or even OK.

I couldn't care less how somebody chooses to dress. If pushed to have an opinion on it, I probably prefer to see people taking risks with how they look, having fun with clothes and being creative. I know...Inevitably people will say "but they're all the same, they're clones", but for a group of people to be different enough as to be clearly identifiable as such, they clearly aren't. It also assumes that those levelling the criticism aren't a like themselves, when quite clearly, by being 'other', they are. Basically, what I'm trying to say (perhaps not very eloquently), is why disparage people for the way they dress? Especially, if they're doing it in a thoughtful, joyful manner (even perhaps with a little irony)?
@Otta - yeah, you're right, it is *mainly* just people having a laugh, but then I remember growing up in a small town where looking a bit different would get you a hard time. Never understood why people cared how others choose to look / live - so perhaps I do have a bit of a humour deficit with this kind of thing. Just reminds me of the kind of parochialism to which London (to my young mind) represented an escape.

I own a Saab.


I am most certainly not a free thinker. I just like the fact that I pretend to be a jet pilot in the Swedish Air Force. *makes jet plane and machine gun noises*


With a barbour jacket and duck boots (http://www.theguardian.com/fashion/fashion-blog/2014/dec/08/ll-bean-duck-boots-five-month-waiting-list) natch.


No beard though. More due to a lack of masculinity than a fashion issue.


I sense I'm falling between some gaps. Help.

Can we stop giving hipsters all this publicity please? The shaggy irony of looking like a tramp and drinking a cocktail out of a jam jar is lost on everyone other than Guardian readers who hope their area of London is next to be "hipsterfied" so that property prices increase.


Louisa.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
    • Very sorry to hear this, but surely the landlord is responsible for fixing the electrics?  Surely they must be insured for things like this? I hope you get it all sorted out quickly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...