The term “indie” has a somewhat amorphous meaning. Once applied strictly to underground music and films that were not made or financed by large corporations, the label can now be applied to a whole culture. Still, it’s hard to pin down exactly what it means. So I turn to that great and reliable resource, Wikipedia:
“The most general definition of the word is to be independent from the mainstream. The word has become most often associated with a subculture defined by its associated music, fashion, behavior and beliefs. Indie culture is a lifestyle which follows social trends that are considered to consciously deviate from the mainstream. One common belief within indie culture is anti-conformity.”
Many, including the entry of Wikipedia from which I gleaned that quote, have pointed out the irony that the indie culture, while seeking to be unique and independent, has developed a somewhat uniform and readily identifiable aesthetic. Indie connoisseurs wish to be different but are surrounded by a cadre of people who dress the same, watch the same movies, listen to the same “underground” music, and spew the same arguments denouncing the banal bourgeoisie.
But such a point is overdone and easy. I’d like to explore another reason that being indie is a bunch of bunk.
The indie identity is based on the idea of being independent from the mainstream. To this end, indie people buy clothes, CD’s, furniture, books, food, and concert and movie tickets that are not popular with the masses. Instead of going to Chili’s, they frequent their local Thai restaurant; instead of going to Wal-Mart, they go to Whole Foods; instead of picking up the new Coldplay CD, they buy an album from Blood Red Shoes; instead of shopping at the Gap, they buy from American Apparel; instead of buying a Dell they buy an Apple (sure they’re a big corporation, but they’re so cool). But what is the common denominator in all of those things? Spending money. Consumption. Indie people express their independence from the mainstream by doing the single most mainstream thing possible: basing their identity on what they consume.
A decade ago it was cool to wear clothing with a company’s logo splashed all over it. Nike and Gap labels were proudly displayed as badges of honor. These days such clothing is considered laughable; now shoppers want clothes that look unique or vintage (although frequently that “vintage” tee costs $40). But the underlying motivation remains the same; people are still expressing themselves by the clothes they buy. It doesn’t matter that instead of buying things from big corporations you buy free trade coffee, organic apples, and handmade Guatemalan rugs, you’re still basing your personal identity on your identity as a consumer. You are driven by the desire to consume something first before it is consumed by the masses. It’s the new millennium’s take on “keeping up with the Jonses.” And it’s just as conformist as it was in the 50’s.
Of course there is nothing wrong with liking certain kinds of music or clothing; it is entirely possible for a man to be interested in, and consume, all the aforementioned indie products, and yet not base his identity on them. But all too often such consumption is used to buy a persona, instead of actually putting in the work to it takes to attain an authentic one. Such accouterments instantly bestow some hipster cred but do nothing to transform the inner man. A man’s identity literally becomes a coat that can be put on or taken off, and there’s nothing cool about that.
Free yourself from being defined by what you buy or do not buy. Define yourself by the things you cannot purchase: values, ethics, and what you actually do. Let your actions speak louder than your ironic message tee. Want to be truly independent from mainstream society?
-Use your free time to serve people, not numb you mind with entertainment.
-Be courteous
-Stop “finding yourself” and embrace commitment and responsibility
-Don’t wear outdoorsy apparel, go camping
-Don’t spend big bucks to look like you shop at a thrift store, actually shop at one
-Don’t be ironic and sarcastic, be sincerely passionate
-Don’t just buy clothes and cell phones that support a charity, become charitable
-Don’t just buy a political bumper sticker, get involved in politics
Image by Suburban Cowboy
Facebook
{ 9 trackbacks }
{ 97 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
I do highly recommend any documentary by Adam Curtis. Century of the Self, certainly but also the Power of Nightmares.
Also,
The Corporation
Why We Fight
Excellent documentaries. Even if I am an idiot, you should at least look these titles up — they are phenomenal. Why We Fight is a BBC production that includes interviews with high ups, including John McCain. If you are looking for more, Iraq for Sale is important as well.
As tot he post,
I hardly think it is defensible to apply stereotypes to groups of strangers based on Wikipedia articles, but to each their own.
I guess it would be too much to ask that people be considered by their individual merits and not clumsily lumped into categories based on arbitrary similarities such as music or fashion preference.
Let’s face it, there are only so many different ways to be. But there are over 6 billion people.
Superficially, a lot of people are going to appear the same.
So if you want to feel superior, then this is a good start. If for nothing else other than irony factor.
But the reality is much more complicated then this overly simplistic posting that describes a large segment of our population based on something as meaningless as musical preference.
Defend it as you please.
Just be honest and admit, it does not match reality.
Just to be clear,
the problem: this post draws unjustified correlations between (a) vapid consumerism, (b) being a phony and (c) listening to music released by independent record labels (for those who have been a part of this for a long time, that is what the term means).
Which one does not belong?
Musical preference is a personal opinion. You might as well go after people that listen to rap or country. It would be just as uninformed.
Oh, but not everyone is like that!
Well, actually since you have nothing but personal experience to rely on (unless I missed data you sourced), your exception could actually be the rule.
Anyone is free to take shots at me, but this is shoddy work. As mentioned elsewhere, every group has vapid consumers, that’s what we do as a nation. Every group has pretenders.
You are not criticizing indie, you are criticizing phony consumer whores. I agree with the sentiment, for the record.
But you are being disrespectful to a large portion of people, and no your exception does not excuse you. You are perpetuating a baseless stereotype.
But I am thankful that you allow dissenting points of view in your comments. That’s what being a man is all about.
So…this blog post has become a distinctly polarised argument.
You cannot avoid consumerism, regardless of who you are, you will inevitably still shop at some large corporation [Walmart] for basic necessities. Or not. It just depends on personal preference and location.
Also being ‘Indie’ IS being defined as a genre – as a means to add yet another title to something the mass-market does not understand. Further to to posts I’ve read here, ‘Indie’ as a term does somewhat specifically define the type of person found in the image above. However, you could call any music ‘Indie’ if it struggles on a small label somewhere before ‘making-it-big’. [To which it would be disowned as soon as it becomes mainstream]
In the UK, I know of a few people who seem militantly ‘Indie’ and preach how Independent they are, and how they buy their LPs from the bargain bin and how their Converse trainers are limited edition…but I avoid them purely because of their seemingly elitist attitude to be Indie and how they disregard anyone else’s opinion – because they, of course, are right. [The same could be said about certain factions of geeks, LARP players, Rap fans, the list is endless.]
Rather un-gentlemanly.
It reminds me of how in ‘thee olde days’ when nerds we beat up on for indulging in technology the Jocks didn’t understand, which these days has become De Riguer for the Jocks – the latest must have Camera MP3 Phone.
It could go on forever and inevitably will.
Be a Gent. Simple.
“the label can now be applied to a whole culture.”
I read that as “whore” culture the first time
I’m all for not letting the definition of a word define your actions as a person for the sake of fitting in, and I’m also against consumerism for its own sake. Despite this, I find this article to be pretty demeaning and horribly researched.
It’s like the author was trying desperately to find something to criticize rather than write about the principles and practices that have enriched their own lives for others to follow, the types of articles I have subscribed to this blog for. I honestly don’t think the people that are subscribed to this site are looking for such articles either.
You do not win anyone to your side by criticizing the way they define themselves, you’re preaching to the choir at that point. You have to lead by example and treat people like rational human beings as opposed to children. If you treat them like children, they’ll stay that way.
I listen to indie rock (as well as pop, rap, classical, electronic, etc.) , try to shop away from stores like Wal-Mart and frequent my local Thai restaurant instead of Chili’s. I do all this because I like the music I listen to, disagree with the practices of the companies in question and like to support local restaurants (not to mention the fact that I like Thai food). You can do all these things for good reasons without being contrary for its own sake.
Damn your blog has gotten big. Good article
I think you meant ‘your’
“-Use your free time to serve people, not numb you mind with entertainment.”
Wow. This is contradictory to everything I’ve read on this site up until this point. As a man, I generally steer clear of people who make rash generalizations of people, be it the color of their skin or the label on their cardigan. Painting a group with a broad brush – about anything – is self-righteous, arrogant and isolating.
You neglected to make any valid or seemingly productive point other than the fact that you have a grudge against a certain group of people; what a useless waste of energy and a waste of subscribers time. If we wanted scathing opinion and rhetoric, we could just as easily listen to any of the limitless pundits with bad attitudes and a soap box.
I’ve appreciated quite a number of your posts and it’s usually very apparent that you’ve done your research and put a fair amount of effort into them. This is an unfortunate exception to that pattern and strangely similar to the kind of elitism you claim to be condemning. Sometimes being a man is knowing when to keep your mouth shut.
Following up on what Jonathan just said: Sometimes, being a man is knowing when to admit you made a mistake. I think such is the case with Brett & Kate, this time.
The good points in this article are overshadowed by pretentiousness, and might have done well without any mention of “indie” at all. I don’t follow the indie crowd, nor any other (to a point), but I thought this was hastily done, and quite out of key when it comes to the rest of the site; which is mostly excellent!
It’s always been cool to be uncool. Now, think about the paradox of this statement and you’ll get my point.
I always thought being an adult, educated, and….a “man” is by and large letting others “live and let live” and not getting lathered up about how someone else chooses to spend their money.
Some of you blokes need to grow up, and, quite possibly, graduate from high school.
I do like this site, but a lot of posts are thin, and not entirely serving any deeper essence of what men need; posts about what others purchase really do a genuine mission to relate to men in a new, conciousness-raising way a terrible damage.
That being said, everytime I see a hipster, I too want to punch them in the face, or hope they fall asleep on the train and end up in Ozone Park.
>And it’s just as conformist as it was in the 50’s.
I’m not sure this is true. Some “indie” folks may believe that if you’re not their kind of indie, then your not indie. But I think there is another strain that is in favor of most anything unusual.
Sure, indie folks are “conforming” by restricting themselves to the space of things that aren’t mainstream. But the space of things that aren’t mainstream of is a much larger space than the space of things that are, so it’s still a net win.
Still, a sensible approach is even better.
I think its hilarious that people are criticizing this post for being “poorly researched.” It’s an opinion piece! What kind of research were they supposed to do? I am sure it would have been hard to get a hold of the 2008 study on “Indie Hipsters and Their Inauthentic Identity” conducted by the Indie Hipster Research Institute.
@ Matt and Jay-I was speaking more of Marx’s sociological theories, not his economic ones, meaning how specific people in power are able to exert a large influence over the masses. After submitting my comment, I realized Marx was not the best person to bring in, but what could I do after submitting? Perhaps I should have put down Adam Smith. Despite this, yes I do understand Marx’s theories and I nowhere claimed that Marxism and capitalism were the same.
@ Jay-What was I describing that wasn’t accurate? How capitalism works? Because if that was it, I assumed most people had a general idea of how it works. Was it success of “indie” bands? The “cash cows” as you call them? Because if my idea is not accurate, could you please enlighten me to the accurate one? And seeing as how I listen to underground bands, some of which I can almost guarantee you have never heard of, I more that well aware of the existence of music outside of what major record labels/radio/t.v. release. And my point was not that these bands didn’t exist, it was refuting your idea that the cream of the crop were being rewarded for their abilities.
When I see someone on the train that can best described as “Indie”, and they have multiple facial piercings, large plugs in their ears (that will never close without surgery) and violent images tattooed in areas that cannot be hidden by a suit, I think to myself; why would someone go through the time and expense to make themselves unemployable? I’m sure they would say that “you can’t judge a book by it’s cover”. But, when someone makes themselves look so frighteningly strange, I have to wonder if there is some sort of pathology involved. People are hard-wired to take in most of their information through their eyes, so appearence is important. When one has rejected mainstream society to the point of irreversable self-mutalation, one should try not pass it off as some sort of virtue.
@ Jay:
You are a troll. Piss off.
@ E. Donk:
You are a troll. Piss off.
See how easy that was? Now do you have something of substance to say?
Brett,
I’ve been a long-time reader and proponent of your blog, but this post had me reluctantly unsubscribing my feed. This tirade unfortunately reads like one of those ’50s propaganda pieces about “the gays” — equally stereotypical, ill-informed and inaccurate. You’re writing from an outsider’s perspective about something of which you lack a complete understanding, and it plainly shows. I wouldn’t consider myself “indie” despite having a fervent interest in non-mainstream culture, however your post throws its net so blindly wide that even I find it offending. Do a find and replace “indie” with the word “cultured” and you might gauge how silly you sound from another perspective.
To put it another way, being a studying law is a bunch of bunk, because law students all wear suits because they think they’re better than everyone else, and they study law so they can screw the poor people. And all law students are Republicans. Man up and don’t be a law student, be a doctor?
I’d suggest removing and revising this post, because as it stands, the only thing you’re showing is your own ignorance and arrogance.
@Paul-
Unfortunately, your comparisons really don’t make any sense. The reason that being “indie” is bunk is because it is essentially an attempt to buy an identity. It is style without substance. You cannot buy a lawyer identity and you cannot buy being cultured. These things require action, not purchases. They result in inner changes not superficial ones.
Interestingly, after posting this piece, someone sent me a link to an Adbusters Magazine article that makes essentially the same point. I hardly think a magazine like Adbusters can be accused of spinning 1950’s-esque propaganda.
http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/79/hipster.html
Finally, by unsubscribing from a site you generally like after disagreeing with one article, it is you who shows his ignorance and arrogance, not I. Good luck navigating the world with that kind of attitude.
@JW – HA! You’re killing me!!!
I think we all applaud the IHRI’s ground-breaking work in the field!
@Brett – Loved the point of the article. I’ve thought the exact same thing quite often! I’ve run into way too many people who identify themselves based on what music they like and what clothes they wear, as though that is what makes them who they are. Only the thoughts, deep convictions, and actions of a person truly define who they are and not enough people recognize that. Music changes, fashion changes, but character is what lasts and will set you apart. There are very few men worth my respect, but when I do meet one, I sit up and take notice.
A person enjoying ANY of the myriad of music genres and styles of dress is fine with me, as long as it is a genuine reflection of what they connect with. But what really annoys me is when a small percentage of these people (regardless of what sub-culture they identify themselves with) become indignant the second whatever they like gains notoriety in the popular consciousness. Suddenly it becomes clear that their motivation for choosing these bands, clothes, movies, whatever, was not simply because they LIKED them, but because it made them DIFFERENT. It’s this need to appear unlike others, that is so obnoxious. Their choices aren’t actions based on true identity or convictions, it’s just a reaction to everyone else around them, and there’s nothing inherently “independent” about that. In fact they are as much slaves, in their need to be contrary to the masses, as the masses are in their need to be the same. They’re still sheep, they just belong to a different herd.
I LOVE indie music, but it doesn’t define the kind of woman I am. My beliefs and how I treat others are my identity and you are absolutely right – not enough people spend the time contemplating and refining THAT.
I have a number of issues with this article.
First is the topic itself. I fail to see the connection with the general idea of manliness. Sure, eventually you connect it with a bullet point list, but even so, it felt as a last ditch attempt to link it to the blog’s main topic. Why target that specific group of people? If the Indie ‘lifestyle’ was generally associated with manliness I would understand, but it’s not and I don’t. Especially when considering that women just as well as men can be classified as ‘indie’.
But let’s say for a moment that being ‘indie’ was somehow connected with manliness or lack of it (tell that to a number of my ex girlfriends who, although they would hate the idea, would probably fall under your brilliant Wikipedia definition of ‘indie’) . Stylistically, the article comes across as clumsy and lecturing, and not up to the standards that some of the earlier articles have achieved. The article boils down to a holier than thou ‘Indie sucks!’ I personally thought that humility was one of the many attributes of manliness, wouldn’t you agree? If you made any points which were subtler, I’m afraid the hectoring tone meant that they eluded me.
That said, I look forward to your article about marriage, which, if it follows current trends will probably be called something along the lines of ”Get married, you nerd!’. But hopefully I am wrong and said article will display more of the interesting thoughts found in earlier entries.
I dig this post. It’s not saying that being indie is bad, but simply that it’s not enough to break free from the mainstream. I couldn’t agree more.
So dope– nice article. I”m going to go lace up my chucks and smoke some cloves now… but with sincerity.
I believe the correct term you are referring to is ‘HIPSTER’
PS
a related article on exactly what you are articulating:
http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/79/hipster.html
I bought an Apple because I liked the way they make their computers
I eat Thai food because I like the taste of it and Chiles food is sub-par
I shop at Urban Outfitters because I like the look of the clothing
I shop at Whole Foods because they have fresher produce and less chemicals in their goods.
I don’t buy Coldplay albums because they make my ears bleed
I made these decisions based soley on my individual likes and dislikes, not to “purchase” my way into some fad. You make horrible generalizations in your article Brett, claiming that people make the choices they do simply to look cool and not because *gasp* they actually like said products. And yes I read the part that not all people do this, but why single out Indie kids? Everybody in the US is guilty of trying to “buy cool” at one point or another If you can honestly tell me that you’ve never bought a single product in your lifetime because it was “popular” then maybe you’d have a right to state such blatent lies as you did in this article. Face it, outside of sewing your own clothes, growing your own food, producing your own music etc etc..there is ABSOLUTELY no way to escape popular consumerism. So in a sense you are just as guilty, but try and make yourself seem a little more righteous by attacking (ignorantly so) a genre of culture you simply don’t understand.
So when people start to follow your advice at the end of the article (getting involved in politics, being charitable etc..) are you going to suddenly start attacking these people as well for “conforming” to such idea? Ridiculous.
Oh and another thing, why oh why are you and your wife so nasty to people on here who have opinions that differ from your own yet you praise and commend those who agree with your every word? Highly unprofessional if you ask me, have a friendly debate with those who disagree, but sometime you (and especially your wife) come off as extremely high and mighty, perhaps you two should research and write an article on how arrogance is an highly distastful trait.
@Lani-
We singled out indie kids because that is the most popular form that the pursuit of coolness takes these days. And because some men buy into the idea that this pursuit makes them independent from the mainstream. The dichotomy between being “indie” and truly being independent was something we thought was interesting and worth exploring.
“If you can honestly tell me that you’ve never bought a single product in your lifetime because it was “popular?” then maybe you’d have a right to state such blatent lies as you did in this article. Face it, outside of sewing your own clothes, growing your own food, producing your own music etc etc..there is ABSOLUTELY no way to escape popular consumerism.”
The article is not about not consuming things that are popular or not being a consumer. I have no problem admitting that I am a consumer and like popular goods, and indie goods as well. The article is about not buying into the perception that you can buy an identity and resting on that perception instead of putting in the work to change your inner man not just your outer man. This article was never intended an an attack on indie people, but as encouragement to not just stop your transformation with your belongings but to be sure to carry it into your actions and behavior as well.
“So when people start to follow your advice at the end of the article (getting involved in politics, being charitable etc..) are you going to suddenly start attacking these people as well for “conforming”? to such idea? Ridiculous.”
Again, this article is not against conforming. I wouldn’t have a problem with a man conforming to his religious ideals, or conforming to the rules of the military or conforming to their social group’s expectations. The problem we are addressing is believing you can buy an identity.
I’m truly sorry if I come off as nasty or high and mighty. I don’t think I even responded to this particular post so I am interested in examples of where you think I display this trait. Truly, I’m not being snarky here. We certainly welcome people to disagree with us and to do so civilly. But unfortunately, many people use some pretty over the top language in condemning what we write and it is admittedly hard to put on a happy face in response. It’s not right, and I try not to, but it is hard to not respond using the same tone as the commenter. For example, while you label us as being nasty in our tone, you say we possess the distasteful trait of arrogance, our points are “ridiculous,” we use “blatant lies,” and are ignorant. I fail to see how your tone differs from the one you are condemning. When such inflammatory language is used, it’s hard not to respond in like with inflammatory language. Nevertheless, we should indeed try to be bigger people and not respond at all.
Do you believe that Indie kids choose to label themselves as Indie? No! People are usually stereotyped with terms and labels created by those outside of that particular fad. Thats like saying people who are labeled “rednecks” should physically have necks in the color of red. Indie is simply a term invented by somebody to label a group with similar interests. As a person with many “Indie” friends and one who considers herself to have somewhat of an “Indie” persona, I have never once thought of myself as such because I have an independent views or am trying to break outside the norm. I simply go along with the label because its what people will group me in regardless. I don’t see it as any different than any other steretype, yet you and your husband singled out this particular cultural group to insult and frankly it is rather nasty of you. Did an Indie kid spit in your soup or something?
You and your husband should be promoting cultural acceptance instead of adding to the ever increasing amount of stereotyping going on these days. So I say shame on you. I could say that by you insulting popular culture you yourselfs are trying to conform to a certain persona. Any stereotype can be “bought into” consumerism is so overwhelming these days that any persona can be purchased. So I say again, why the bias towards Indie kids? I could make claims of jealousy on your behalf, but thats short-sighted of me so I’ll wait for you to give me a valid reason besides your claim ” that is the most popular form that the pursuit of coolness takes these days,” which I find to be untrue.
I have never met an indie kid who purchased his persona. That makes absolutely no sense, why buy something if you don’t truely want/like it in the first place? Most stereotypes are far beyond a simple outfit or decoration, they are a state of mind and a set of personal beliefs, so I find it very hard indeed to believe you can buy yourself into a persona.
No Kate, you did not comment specifically on this article, but I’ve read comments on other articles and you and your husband have this constant Holier-than-thou attitude which I find extremely irritating, even when I agree with the article. You are one of the few published blog writters I have seen that reply to comments. Honestly I think it makes you look somewhat insecure. Writers who are secure with their publications tend to not feel the need to stick up for themselves or put down those with differing beliefs.
@Lani-
We obviously aren’t going to agree here, so the only other thing I’d like to address is the fact that, while I’m not sure which blogs you read, all the authors of all the blogs I read respond to their comments, some actually respond to every single comment posted. That is the whole idea of a blog-the readers get to interact with the author and each other. In comparison with other blogs we actually respond fairly infrequently, and only when something really irks us or catches our eye.
I have to add that the nasty tone of your comments while simultaneously condemning our nastiness continues to be rather hypocritical.
@ Lani
Amen sister! I hate the small minded people who come along and make such generalizations about groups of people. I’m not even what you would classify as “indie” and this article irks me to no other! I also find it fairly laughable that a couple such as Brett and Kate who write articles that constantly reek of conservatism dare write a piece about supposed “hip” and/or “independent” culture. Have you read their pieces on how men are supposed to treat women? You’d think we still lived in the victorian era (I reccomend you read the recent one on “rescuing women from bad body issues” apparently being an openly sexual being makes you bad in relationships HA!)
I didn’t think you sound nasty as all, you are simply defending a topic with which you are familiar with, whereas it is apparent to me that Kate and Brett are not “in the know” when it comes to the indie scene, so they turn to baseless assumptions and seem to get angry when people dissagree. If you are going to write a blog, you sure as hell should have tough enough skin to take people’s criticism.
@ Kate
Its not called hypocrisy when you have a valid arguement, she has a right to get worked up, especially since your article does not have any real merit. Using definitions from wikipedia does not a fact make. You do realize that wikipedia is not the factual bible and one cannot simply look up a definition, paste it on a blog and say to somebody “see that, you are that because wikipedia says it to be.” If you wanted a true definition of what “Indie” is perhaps you should have taken the time to actually ASK somebody who considers themselves such, but then again if you had done that you wouldn’t have wrote this article in the first place.
Oh I bought some black nailpolish the other day cause I liked it, that must make me goth or emo huh?
I have to say that I’m a little tired of female commenters who for some reason are regular readers of a blog called the Art of MANLINESS and who keep getting on this blog and shrilly railing against the posts. I mean, Patty, are you really surprised with this vintage theme that the authors of the blog might be into Victorian era stuff? Note to you ladies: this blog is not for you! Bug off!
On the topic of this post, it seems to me that the very defensive responses from the indie kids actually proves the point of the post. I found this article through a link on my friend’s Christian-themed blog. He really liked the article, and as a Christian man, I also really liked it. And it seems to me that this is because I have a core identity, so I’m not threatened by it. I like indie stuff, and people would probably think I was a “hipster,” but I know that’s just my outward appearance, and my real identity springs from real convictions. But for a lot of indie kids, being indie is all they have and when you attack them they get really defensive, because you’re exposing just how superficial their identity and life is.
Kate, ok I’ll concede the point that it was hypicritical of me to throw insults in return, I’ll chalk it up to this article bringing out the worst in me.
I won’t fight you on the issue any longer, I will simply say that the next time you wish to write an article criticising poplular culture, perhaps you shouldn’t single out a particular group, I just feel this article would have been more accepted and intelligently written had it been more generalized. Perhaps it would have been seen more as a observation and not an attack on a particular group How would you feel if somebody singled out married blog writters and accused them of being a certain way when in fact EVERY blog writer was in fact “that way” Every stereotype in some sense has purchased an item to better establish themselves as part of a group, to single one particular group out seems like you’re just trying to pick a fight.
@Lani-
Fair enough. I understand your point. The idea of the post was to use the specific topic of being indie as an example of the bigger point about not basing your identity on what you can buy. We chose the indie culture to make this point since it is so prominent currently. Nevertheless, I can see how singling out only one group for criticism could be seen as offensive. As a whole, I have taken your comments to heart and will try to make my comments less snarky in the future.
@JW-
Brett and I welcome female readers to the site. Manliness does not exist in a vacuum and women have a valuable viewpoint on what makes men, men.
@ JW
I’m a man btw…Part of what makes you a man is your ability to form relationships, which does include the female gender. I find the female perspective on this sight refreshing, if not for them we’d been drowning in testosterone fueled comments. As a male, I’m always curious about the female point-of-view.
I don’t see anything wrong with somebody sticking up for themselves when they feel like they are being wrongfully attacked and/or singled out. I mean if none of these indie kids came on here to defend themselves you’d be accusing them of admiting to their faults because they didn’t say anything against your accusations. Its a lose-lose situation. I don’t consider myself indie in any way yet I commend these people for defending themselves. Stereotypes are just such because somebody felt the need for labeling a certain group. Usually those doing the labeling are not members of those stereotype, and those who are usually disagree with the label they’ve been given. For example, we assume that all video game players or sci fi watchers are nerds when this is simply not the case. Just because I happen to enjoy some Wii or watch a sci fi movie does not make me a nerd. Superficial is almost an obsolete word to me these days because it applies to everybody. People purchase acceptance everyday, whether they admit it or not. If you are going to single out a specific group for being a certain way you should pick a topic that doesn’t apply to the entire US population, because as Lani said, it makes it look more like an attack rather than an intelligent observation.
I find the overall concept of this article to be well-thought out, but I find the flaw to be singling out a specific group. You shouldn’t isolate a few when the in fact the masses are at fault as well.
the crows seem to be calling my name
Great article – disastrous illustration.
Patty:
“I find the flaw to be singling out a specific group. You shouldn’t isolate a few when the in fact the masses are at fault as well”
Very true.
This was interesting, thanks.
Can’t say I agree with this bit of advice: “don’t be ironic and sarcastic” (it also contrasts with your recent advocacy of oratory).
If you meant “don’t be a smart-ass”, then I agree. It’s all a matter of dosage, as it often happens.
Sure, if “indie” is merely what you characterize it as, it is a “bunch of bunk.” But I’m not sure that that’s all that there is too it enough of the time to make such a generalization. In fact, it seems likely that an observer only distinguishes this group by their consumption, and in a bout of self-importance decides that this is where the line is actually drawn. (This may be true of many other groups, as well.)
What is also a bunch of bunk is needlessly looking for a group of people to typecast and denigrate. But hey, I’m sure the controversy will get you some nice blog traffic for a little while.
When I subscribed to your RSS feed some months, I found the article premises, at least, to be intriguing, and was often impressed by the quality of the article itself, as well. Since then, though, it has largely been uninteresting but inoffensive, and so I check the feed less often. With this article, however, you’re simply uninteresting — and I’m not even an indie kid. Bravo.
“I generally steer clear of people who make rash generalizations of people, be it the color of their skin or the label on their cardigan.”
If that isn’t a contradiction I don’t know what is!! LOL
The term ‘indie’ is a marketing term. People who consider themselves ‘indie’ are victims of said marketing. No one with a truly independent spirit considers themselves or anything they do in life ‘indie’.
So, in my opinion, this post attacks, not those who stay true to themselves and follow their own hearts and individual intellects in the matters of style, art and occupation. Rather it targets those who want to wallow in the facade of being ‘indie’ without truly dedicating themselves to what that really means, and allowing researchers in corporate boardrooms to dictate what’s cool and what’s not.
As far as consumption goes, the United States is based on commerce. The dollar has power. So, instead of the supermarket I may spend my dollars at the local farmers market or community owned organic grocery (please note: Whole Foods is an excellent example of a large company with an effective marketing scheme as described above…as is Mac, Volkswagen, Chipotle..etc.)
Where I choose to spend my dollars without being affected by someones persuasive marketing has a lot to do with my independence.
when i was in highschool i wore all black, and certain kinds of pants from hot topic but always black, i still wear black at all times, other then at work, because im comfortable in it, but im straying from my point in highschool i was consistantly labeled as goth, and i am by no means goth i was a victim of consumer stereotyping, i was followed in the mall by the security guards because i was that kid in all black with few or no people around, i live in the bible belt so there is an abundance of ignorance towards people who arent the same as you. to finally make my point i have never labeled myself in any one particular group nor do i want to be labeled simply because i then have to conform to that group
It looks as though some comments made about this indie article are looking too far into the subject. The article seems to be about keeping personal independence no matter what others may have followed into. The indie culture would just be the first target unfortunately because of the idea that indie represents free and independent thought.
Clothes will never distinguish you. 5 words of conversation instantly can, though. If in person, the way you carry yourself and your face will be enough. Over the phone, the tone, volume, intonation, tempo, style and emotion of your voice will be enough. By almost all people, this is not consciously focussed on, and in totality reveal much about your personality — all before the content of what you say (which is really what distinguishes you or doesn’t) even enters the picture. Someone adept at making snap judgements (this comes with experience, hastened by conscious training) will make very accurate ones in an incredibly brief time.
But when you’ve actually done something, it’s enough to let your actions speak for themselves or other people speak for you.
You know, I used to really like this blog till it started ratting on anything they deemed not manly.
I don’t see how you can just diss on something like this, and then back it up from sources like wikipedia. If you think that being indie is about being different and whatnot from everyone else then you’re wrong. You can’t just define something like that and then toot your own horn, it’s hypocritical.
I thought this website was about being your own man, but apparently not if you’re indie. You lost a reader with this article. I really think that this is a rude blog, and if you really care about your readers then I would expect more respect to each individual.
“Getting married (when the time is right of course) is an essential and vital part of manhood.”
ha! lets just alienate everyone not interested in marriage, people who may never meet a suitable partner, homosexuals…
or Not….u could just help everyone “man up” without the narrow dogma
and…u could have said more about the concept that shopping independently, organically, locally, etc can help make the world better by supporting businesses that act responsibly, sustainably, chemical-free, fair trade, and on and on, rather than perpetuating corporate globalization/homogenization
p.s.
I’d go so far as to say I’m indie, and a man.
These days, Indie describes the music more than the culture.
← Previous Comments