posted by guest

May 31, 2007 10:16AM

that straw fedora thing is KILLING me! hipster? more like back up dancer for JLo

posted by mfm

May 31, 2007 10:17AM

i think you got it all, but i might add that most hipsters i've seen don't wear watches. they have no where to be at any particular time.

posted by anon

May 31, 2007 10:26AM

old people are so disgrunted. leave the hipsters alone!

posted by allie

May 31, 2007 10:46AM

hmm, i've never heard of this disgrunted you speak of.

posted by guest

May 31, 2007 11:00AM

God, those people suck. This is like an open admission that being a hipster isn't in any way about doing your own thing or going against the grain. Just another uniform, except dirtier.

posted by Allison

May 31, 2007 11:11AM

That article was a little bit ridiculous... Sweet hipsters v. vicious hipsters? Please tell me this article was some kind of irony.

posted by canary

May 31, 2007 11:23AM

The only thing more tired than hipsters is making fun of hipsters.

posted by guest

May 31, 2007 11:25AM

it's true: being a hipster isn't in any way about doing your own thing or going against the grain. it is just another uniform, except dirtier.

honestly, though. if you go to any suburb, you'll see tons of 'hipsters' today, and they dress/act exactly the same as their nyc counterparts. so how cool can it be? not to mention that it's probably more socially acceptable in the city to dress hipster than it is to be, for ex, preppie, or glam, or -gasp- normal. so that's why hipsters do need to go away (and not just to bushwick or wherever they currently nest)

posted by anon

May 31, 2007 11:36AM

oh, so everyone in manhattan should shop at the gap and wear a blue shirt and kahkis everyday and dress alike and that would be okay, but if they dress similar and are wearing fedoras and tshirts thats not okay? makes sense!

i wont even go into how "hipsters" are the inspiration for all your overpriced mass produced bull shit brands like precious marc by marc. ughhhh.

posted by mpw

May 31, 2007 11:45AM

shouldn't the chucks be white?

posted by Flower

May 31, 2007 11:48AM

Christian has been writing this same article for a long ass time. Boy he really hates those hipsters!

posted by guest

May 31, 2007 12:06PM

is that what he/she said? that we should all be gap clones? clearly not.

what's absurd is how most hipsters think that they're the original purveyors of cool and originality. they all buy into the herd mentality while subsequently denying that they are! i'm not sure if you're aware, but the hipster hasn't been original for quite sometime now.

i read that tony article yesterday. while much of it was bordering on ridiculousness, i understand the main point the author was trying to make: nothing is more insufferable than arrogance and a better-than-thou attitude, while not exclusive to hipsters, is certainly being eternized by them.

it is undeniable that hipsters have contributed greatly to fashion, but it's important to remember that they're not the only group to which the fashion industry has drawn inspiration from. regardless, that does not give anyone the license to believe others' tastes and preferences are inferior to their own simply because they're different. bascially, that's the part of the hipster that needs to die.

posted by kim

May 31, 2007 12:06PM

is that what he/she said? that we should all be gap clones? clearly not.

what's absurd is how most hipsters think that they're the original purveyors of cool and originality. they all buy into the herd mentality while subsequently denying that they are! i'm not sure if you're aware, but the hipster hasn't been original for quite sometime now.

i read that tony article yesterday. while much of it was bordering on ridiculousness, i understand the main point the author was trying to make: nothing is more insufferable than arrogance and a better-than-thou attitude, while not exclusive to hipsters, is certainly being eternized by them.

it is undeniable that hipsters have contributed greatly to fashion, but it's important to remember that they're not the only group to which the fashion industry has drawn inspiration from. regardless, that does not give anyone the license to believe others' tastes and preferences are inferior to their own simply because they're different. bascially, that's the part of the hipster that needs to die.

posted by Alison

May 31, 2007 12:29PM

Yeah, the "sweet" vs. "vicious" hipster theory espoused by Lorentzen in the article was ridiculous. It's a good idea for an article - anything with the word "hipster" in it is sure to polarize the readers. Controversy is good for business. But, really, what is a hipster anyway? That word is so ambigious as to be totally meaningless.

posted by guest

May 31, 2007 12:34PM

thank you. i don't think people take issue with the fact that hipsters dress the way that they do other than personal preferences (and, in fact, that hipster way of dressing was extremely popular both high/low fashion in the past few years) but rather the idea that it is in some way an individualistic expression/fashion/lifestyle. when it clearly isn't, if you can see untold numbers of people dressing in identical ways, from the midwest to nyc and everywhere else. now hipster dressing seems to have gotten to the point of uniformity and systematically trying to find more and more ridiculous sunglasses.

hopefully with slimane gone at dior we can all move on. i think it's time.

posted by anon

May 31, 2007 12:41PM

kim - i would agree with the part of your arguement that an obnoxious attitude is never appreciated. but, ALL hipsters think they are better then everyone else based on their fashion choices? even MOST? that is a ridiculous statement.

sure, there are a few who may, but there is an equal percentage of poorly dressed girls from new jersey who think their DG sunglasses make them better then sayyy, a hipster, orrrr, the guy working at startbucks. or, a mid level manager at a bank who thinks his tie makes him more important then someone who works at google in jeans. the list goes on and on and on forever.

i agree with allison that how can you define a hipster anymore. so many dress in what may be a now generic "hipster" fashion BUT its so ridiculous to slam all "hipsters" for the wider acceptance of their style.

have you ever seen 2 people in very similiar outfits and one looks great and stylish and one looks ridiculous and awkward. personal style should be accpeted how ever one choices to express themselves through their clothing and faux hipsters so suck, but no more the faux UES girls carrying fake fendis

ok, i'm done now

posted by kim

May 31, 2007 1:15PM

i didn't slam ALL hipsters. i was taking umbrage with the ones that the article was specifically addressing, which were the hipsters who were so concerned with being cool that they were negating the concept entirely.

i wasn't "slamming" the fact that people have embraced their style and/or culture thereby popularizing the hipster as a hole, but rather the pervasive arrogant attitude that MANY of them have. remember, i said that this wasn't exclusive to just hipsters. i would assume that would mean that i acknowledged the existence of other groups to perpetuate intolerance as well.

posted by guest

May 31, 2007 1:38PM

SO - some people in some groups sometimes have a personality defect just like some hipsters sometimes do? oh.

and - some people can shop at the gap some people can shop at prada and some people can dress like hipsters but you must fall into one group? and sometimes its ok and sometimes its not?

in law school we called this circular logic, as in, you have absolutely no point or no foundation, your just saying things to say them.

posted by anony

May 31, 2007 2:42PM

it's disgruntled.

posted by kim

May 31, 2007 2:59PM

no, i'm saying things to make a point, and if you are unable to comprehend that point, then that is your problem.

first of all, i also NEVER said that people had "personality defects" or that they "must fall into one group." where are you getting that from? those are insinuations you're making to twist my arguments, so you have something to attack.

to simplify this for you because i really don't want to confuse you anymore than you've already confused yourself, it's okay to dress however you choose and to associate with whomever you choose. that's what free will is, and that is not a tenant i would EVER argue. what is not okay is believing that your inclinations and partialities are better than, say, those who would choose to listen to pop music and wear prada sunglasses rather than listening to indie rock and wearing vintage clothes.

BUT i suppose you're going to falsify what i just said to mean that all conformists hate counterculturists or something equally ludicrous.

in law school, we call this the fallacy of extension. you're just arguing just to argue.

posted by guest

May 31, 2007 3:15PM

sweetie i'm not arguing to argue. i wasn't even aware that i was arguing. and i am most certainly not confused.

i'd just like to know where you get the notion that hipsters think they are better this pop music prada sunglass loving girl you speak of? i've never noticed that to be the case myself, and if you're going to say crazy things, i'm curios as to why.

i'll conceed that maybe once, you saw a girl from kansas in pink walking down the street and then saw a hipster scoff at her. but, really? i've seen girls in pink scoff at hipsters. so again, we are back to the fact that i dont see the difference between the attitude of a hipster and that of anyone else.

there assholes in any group of people you attempt to classify, but i dont understand how that would define an entire group of people, especially when such people are obviously so diverse as 2007 "hipsters" and range from suburban mall rats to that dude on the cover of tony.

posted by Stephanie

May 31, 2007 3:18PM

This argument seems to be more about certain maybe, 'generational' qualities, than about style of dress.

In the 50s, young people who dressed differently than their sweater set/shirt & tie counterparts were called hipsters, too. And I'm sure that there were just as many faux-bohemian/poor/enlightened people then as there are now.

I think we can safely say that an entitled, arrogant attitude dressed in rags stinks just as much as one dressed in Abercrombie.

posted by anais

May 31, 2007 3:22PM

hipsters = death!
seriously, though, leave it to a hipster to detach the sign from the signifier.

posted by elizabeth

May 31, 2007 3:24PM

Firstly--I do agree with Alison's assessment of the cover look--this kid looks like an extra from Swingers, and though I love that movie, it's a little, well, anachronistic.

As for the article itself, my reaction was less "are you kidding?" and more "what else is new?" There have been articles decrying the rise in population of this group for years--one of the most illuminating is a five-part series from last year from Harper's called "My Crowd," by Bill Wasik. And with any sub-culture--hipsters, punks, socialites, whatever--you're going to have the true originals and then you're going to have the hangers-on who just want to be seen as having "good" taste.

It's not worth the gnashing of teeth that this writer or the countless others before him have done--instead of constantly searching for "the next 'cool' thing," why not own what one likes and say f*** off to what anyone else thinks?

posted by Kyle

May 31, 2007 3:49PM

So what they're saying is that it's time for the inevitable hordes of young folks who move to new york to live out their dreams of being fabulous and super succesful in some creative field (or atleast do drugs with people who are) to get a new look and lable?

posted by Chels

May 31, 2007 4:11PM

Wait...I thought bashing hipsters was so old we were supposed to ironically love them, right?

Or is that just the Golden Girls...

posted by Flower

May 31, 2007 6:01PM

And Christian works (way) under Bill Wasik at Harper's so maybe that's why he couldn't write his crap article for them.

posted by pilar

May 31, 2007 10:22PM

The other day I went to Salvation Army to replenish my supply of ironic old T-shirts, but they were all out. They only had blue shirts and khakis.

posted by pilar

May 31, 2007 10:29PM

The other day I went to Salvation Army to replenish my supply of ironic old T-shirts, but they were all out. They only had blue shirts and khakis.

posted by pilar

May 31, 2007 10:32PM

The other day I went to Salvation Army to replenish my supply of ironic old T-shirts, but they were all out. They only had blue shirts and khakis.

posted by John

May 31, 2007 11:41PM

whoa, was just pointed out to me that cover dude is not just some anonymous cover dude but Jeff Stark, of the nonsenseNYC (BK-centric alt-events) mailing list. don't really know dude so I don't know if that's his usual wardrobe, but he's definitely a noteworthy figure within the amorphous blob of hipsterdom - the casting, if not the wardrobe, is apt

posted by my fall collection

Jun 01, 2007 1:29AM

holy muffled laughter! the only thing lamer than hipsters are law students!

posted by John

Jun 01, 2007 11:29AM

how about law students arguing about hipsters? in law school we call this awesome

posted by tmm

Jun 01, 2007 11:36AM

Hey anonymous, for being in law school, your grammar is more aweful than that dated outfit on the TONY cover. Your grammar is the white belt of that outfit. Is it hip to be ignorant?

Doesn't it take some base knowledge in the English language to go to law school?

posted by my fall collection

Jun 01, 2007 2:25PM

maybe law school is the new band camp. "this one time, in law school... " teehee.

posted by guest

Jun 01, 2007 2:39PM

hey, tmm, my grammar is fab, and it's awful not "aweful" idiot.

also, i graduated law school 2 years ago, sorry if having knowledge outside of fashion is not okay with everyone here.

and my fall collection, with comments like "holy ---" and "teehee" you should probably just shutup.

posted by tmm

Jun 01, 2007 3:22PM

Perhaps, annonymous, it's your lack of commas. Having graduated law school has nothing to do with a love of fashion. No one has stated that you must have lost your fashion sense when you matriculated or otherwise.
Looking at your previous posts, I can see that you are perpetually missing the point yet again.

I hope that you have an excellent paralegal to keep you up to date on the latest punctuation!

posted by guest

Jun 01, 2007 3:36PM

ohhhh boyyy, you, are, what, we call, in, law, school, a, DOUCHEBAG.

posted by guest

Jun 02, 2007 8:30AM

Lorentzen is indeed right about one thing...hipsters are white, very white.

posted by guest

Jun 02, 2007 8:31AM

Lorentzen is indeed right about one thing...hipsters are white, very white.

posted by Rosie

Jun 03, 2007 4:45PM

Does this person really think that hipsters wear trucker hats?
I don't think truckers even wear trucker hats anymore.