.jpg)
Why Being “Indie” is a Bunch of Bunk
Email This Post To A Friend
Welcome back! Enjoy your stay, and don't forget to man up!
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
I find that it has that catch 22. Like the Hollywood types that want to be famous so much that when they find fame they wear sunglasses and disguises so not to be found.
It’s hard to be individual when everyone around you is also an individual doing the same thing you are and doing likewise.
Overall I believe it starts with having principles you won’ t concede, work from there.
“The one thing a non-conformist cannot tolerate the most is another non-conformist that does not subscribe to the pervailing standard of non-conformity.”
I wish I could remember who said that, but it’s pretty damn true.
I liked this blog when it first appeared and have been following it since, and it has become more and more elitist and preachy. I like things like, “how to shave,” “how to wear a hat,” and things like that, but the constant “get married, have a kid, and imitate teddy roosevelt” stuff is starting to get old. how about some new topics?
Going to wikipedia to look up a mis-understood stereotype is like looking in the dictionary for what it is to be a man…you’re just not gonna find the real answer.
Indie is what people make of it, just like emos and skaters….it’s just another word that people use to group people that look alike, even if they couldn’t be any more different on the inside.
lol @ Blood Red Shoes
I’ll agree with the post as a whole, the ‘indie’ title is just another subculture like emo, punk, goth, preppy etc. etc.
I’m gonna have to side with Eric about the, general, message alot of the later posts have been about with the whole ‘get married, live like it was the 50’s’ thing.
the older articles (seem to me anyways) to be more general and can be enjoyed by everyone as oppose to those with paticular mindset.
Stephen the whole thing with people looking alike, is they will be judged to be what they look like.
EVERYBODY makes inital assumptions based on appearance, and if anyone says they dont they are simply lying to others and to themselves.
an example of myself is, at work i dress professionally/behave professionally etc.
but outside of work im what you could call a punk rocker and my style of dress at home/out at a bar/with friends is such that anyone looking at me would (usually) be able to take a stab at my music interests etc.
so yea, im being judged on my appearance and im fine with that. Doesn’t really bug me one bit.
Anyone who gets upset because someone makes an assumption based on what they wear needs to either A. get more comfortable with the style of clothing they wear/there attitude etc. or B. Find something they truly ARE comfortable in and being identified as, as oppose to dressing a certain way to ‘fit in’ or however you want to put it.
I always find my teeth grinding uncontrollably when people refer to me as simply a ‘consumer’ as if I were a simple resource to be catalogued filed handled managed used and then disposed of. Independent usually has meant self reliant, can handle and survive on ones own, and to be independent requires a certain level of movement away from being a consumer. I am not saying we don’t consume (as we all do, we consume media/goods in much the same way we consume food, though we don’t have the same production of waste material as we do with food… though sometimes we do have a rant about what we have consumed which could be referred to as our ’shit’ along with packaging.) we should be independent and self reliant mostly just so that people don’t simply assume that we are consumers who will simply blinding take whatever new fandangled new nahawhooie (a technical term) and reduce us to like everyone else. When they start seeing us as people again (and in this specific case) as men again, to be dealt with personally, and not as a stereotype (no typical old spice shit either, not every man cares for old spice) which yes is remarkably inefficient, and costly but damn it maybe some of us are worth the one on one personal interaction, we wouldn’t be independent otherwise.
Finally, someone nailed it. I used to think it was peculiar back in high school when all the punk/goth/emo kids used to tell me they were “expressing their individuality.” By looking and acting like thousands of others…The fact is that there’s only two groups which seek to kill your individuality: military and subcultures.
The military trains soldiers and sailors in boot camp to work collectively as a unit. The worst thing to be in combat is an individual. So conformity is a requirement and it’s bludgeoned into the subconcious through rhetoric and uniform. Same haircuts, same clothes, same slogans, same EVERYTHING…sounds an awful like the so-called indies out there, doesn’t it?
Then again, this hypocrisy isn’t just exclusive to the indies. Ever seen the rap crowd? They claim to be “keepin it real,” but their identities couldn’t be more fake. Or how about those country guys who wear cowboy hats and have never ridden a horse in their life? I think if anyone can label themselves as being part of any niche crowd, they need to be smacked upside the head. Think for yourself, decide how you want to dress, what you want to watch, what you want to listen to…all you indies/emos/goths/punks/metalheads/gangstas/country boys/hippies/conservatives/liberals…man, I could go on forever.
I once thought this website stood for the enrichment of males everywhere but there is nothing manly or virtuous about having a holier than thou attitude towards another group, let alone one so misguided and unsubstantiated.
The trend to be ‘Indie’ here in the UK has indeed become something of a misnomer whereby most ‘vintage’ clothing now comes at a price!
Take for example the fact that there is an Oxfam charity shop in Manchester that now sells second-hand apparel and housewares at premium prices, which, for a charitable organisation is admirable as a means to make money, but it is marred by the fact that the ‘Independent’ people now consider it a haunt.
No one can be truly indie/independent, because of the societal need to bracket everyone under some pseudo-title. As human beings, we are all consumers, food, clothing etc and as such cannot avoid such title..but it just depends to what degree.
The worst type of ‘Indie’ person is the one who overtly claims non-conformity and yet has that underlying herd-mentality they do not want to admit is at the back of their minds…they are attention seeking whether they like it or not.
There are means of being independent [to use the word correctly] and that just means being yourself.
Well, I’ve been around a while and I have see “wannabees” ever since I was a kid. It’s the way the world is - perception - There’s a lot of people out the that want to be “soldier, tailor, tinker, spy” or shall I say they want to look that way. There’s an old saying from my mentor and goes something like this “Those people who look like they are, aren’t. Those that are don’t look like they are because they know they are and don’t have to fool anyone” Nuff said.
For me Indie means independence: No second (hidden or not) agenda behind a product. Just the product. I like independant music, films, clothing, designs, culture, etc. because they screw less with me
Marc
THANK YOU!!
This crap has been obvious to me for years, and yet no one else has managed to point it out, at least not as straightforward as this article. From middle school to high school and all through college, I never belonged to a particular “niche.” I wear/watch/eat/listen to what I like, and if it’s mainstream, fine, and if it’s “indie,” that’s okay too. Actually, at one point I tried to get into the “indie” music thing and I realized that all of their music sounded the same to me. That’s when I realized how laughable it all is.
Don’t criticize someone for being a “consumer.” We are all “consumers” on some level. The trick is to give back once in a while.
You’re not your f*cking khakis.
Since when does being proclaiming to be indie mean being anti-consumerist? Being “indie” means involving yourself in independent pursuits. Plus, it’s a terrible thing to paint an entire group of people with the same brush. I know lots of people that shop at Wal-mart that are not charitable and I know plenty of purportedly “indie” people who involve themselves with organizations like “Food not Bombs.” You have it in your head that everyone who wears a messenger bag hates the bourgeois culture and decries consumerism, but you’re committing the same mistake that these phantom “indie” people are committing: You’re over-generalizing.
Besides, shopping at places like Whole-Foods and listening to Pitchfork magazine approved bands does not an identity make. I love this site, but I think your soapbox is a little shaky on this one. You’re in law school, right? You, out of anyone, should understand that strong arguments have to be predicated on facts and not ill-informed generalizations.
@Lyndon-
Fact: You cannot buy an identity.
Fact: I pointed out there could be exceptions. See here:
“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.”
Your comment unfortunately doesn’t counter these facts.
This indie scene reminds me of the punk scene which I used to associate with. I pierced up and wore a mohawk to rebel against mainstream society, evoke judgment upon myself (so that I could say I was being judged), worry my parents, etc. The irony is that I moved out of one scene (suburbia) into another.
Then I grew up, individualized, found my own identity and set of values and have never looked back.
I’ve noticed that your website advocates accepting commitment and responsibility, (which is good), but the underlying suggestion seems to be ‘get married and have kids’. This is fairly sound advice, but the caveat should be ‘make sure you’re ready first ‘.
Keeping with the Indie theme I saw ‘Control’ this weekend, about the life and death of Joy Division singer Ian Curtis. This guy made a massive mistake getting married at the age of 18, and when he became a father the pressure on him (combined with his epilepsy and an extra-marital affair) led to his suicide. Obviously you can’t be a kid forever, but being responsible sometimes means putting commitment aside until later.
You could also say that of any musical subgenre - there is usually a very LARGE cultural element attached to it.
I’ve always considered myself “alt”, as in “alternative”.
I lovelovelove pop, rock, rap, hiphop, classical (including opera!), salsa and merengue (no so much bachata), goth (industrial and ebm), techno (not so much trance, house, and jungle), blues (NOT R&B), and bluegrass.
I love shows like Star Trek: TNG (trekker) and anything done by Joss Whedon. The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, Sell This House, Big Spender, any of the Law & Orders, CSI: Las Vegas, Mad Men, America’s Next Top Model, The Simpsons.
With food, I am also all over the map. How do I dress? Either very “office”, or kind of punky/edgy. I also adore the retro look for women.
I typically read science fiction (Orson Scott Car, Asimov), some fantasy (David and Leigh Eddings) and romance novels. Not even romance novels with literary pretensions - just straight up, formulaic, can’t-read-more-than-once Harlequin Romance. Magazines are equal parts “Scientific American” and “Allure”.
So whether you want to talk recent developments in physics or celebrity gossip and fall fashion trends - I’m your girl. Now put that in a box and smoke it.
So I just sum it up as “alt”, as in ‘alternative’ to everything else.
@ Granata- Agreed. I also ran around the punk scene in high school. I remember being at a show and looking around at everyone with their jean jacket vests with Mustard Plug and Drop Kick Murphy patches safety pinned on ( because sewing them would look too tidy and conformist) and I realized that these people weren’t non-conformist; they’re just a bunch of sheep and I got suckered into it.
Thankfully, like you, I grew up and found my own values and have been doing my own thing. That’s not to say I don’t listen to All or MxPx every now and then. I just won’t feel guilty enjoying “mainstream” pop music anymore.
Way to go attacking a caricature of a stereotype. Indie and Hipster are just labels that people who don’t know any better apply to certain patterns and trends that arise out of youth culture.
You are the digital equivalent of an old fart yelling for the damned kids to get off your lawn.
@ the people who don’t like the get married message-
We’ve had this message from the beginning and will be discussing it in the future. So if you don’t like it, you probably not going to enjoy this site. Getting married (when the time is right of course) is an essential and vital part of manhood.
What is interesting is that when we do posts on grooming or “how to’s,” I get angry emails about how we shouldn’t be talking about such “fluff.” And when we do posts about manliness, we get complaints about how we need to do more stuff on fashion and grooming. Listen fellas, there’s lots wrong with men today, from their values to their clothes, and this site is going to cover it all. It has from inception and it will continue to do so. We’re never going to please everyone, and that’s okay. So simmer down.
“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.”
This is very true. Because it is true I would like to suggest that judgments are not made instantly upon seeing someone. There are in fact intelligent, good people who from appearance would appear goth, emo etc. Assuming anything from that would simply be a logical fallacy.
To be more specific, it is the Aristotelian logical fallacy of the undistributed middle. Something we would all do well to learn and not fall into.
To me the worst thing about “Indie” is when you ask someone what kind of music they listen to, and they respond with “Indie”. The problem there is they think indie means their specific brand of music they like, when in reality it just means music from an independent label. Theoretically, you could have indie polka music and indie death metal.
“Indie” is not a genre of music.
@Brett
“Getting married … is an essential and vital part of manhood.”
Say what now? This is wrong, wrong, wrong. Being a man means owning up to your commitments and standing by your word. Marriage is not necessary for this.
The preaching of your narrow little view is getting old.
Huzzah! Great point.
@Brett:
I must respectfully disagree with two points:
Firstly, I believe you can buy an identity. I think the best example of this are some rap stars. They purchase expensive items and vehicles to cultivate a specific identity. And, we all do it to a certain extent. Being a consumer and purchasing things that help improve our self-identity is the natural order of things. The term “Consumer” isn’t a pejorative; being an uninformed consumer could be.
Second, the argument that, ““…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.â€?
is exactly what I was saying. My argument simply points out that the article is over-broad. It singles out one group of people that are very, very loosely related by music, fashion, food, etc. and chastises them for not being courteous, or virtuous. However, I believe that ultimately, you’re concerned with “indie” people’s alleged self-righteousness and selfishness. Unfortunately, I think it’s an age thing and not an identity thing.
I think selfishness knows no boundaries; age, sex, affiliation with a certain group, or otherwise. As I’ve grown older my tolerance for selfishness has diminished. Now I’m going to generalize, but I believe that the younger you are the more selfish and self-centered you are. As you grow and mature you see more of the world and you gain more empathy. As a general rule, I can confidently say that most people experience some form of empathetic growth.
In my opinion, everyone should follow the list of qualities on the blog, not just people who where messenger bags.
Hey guys, the messenger bags look dorky. You’re not a 16 year-old girl.
@Lyndon-
I agree that the things you buy can create a indentity, but I don’t think it is an authentic identity. I think a true indentity is rooted in our values and actions, not what goods we possess.
I’m not saying that indie people aren’t courteous or virtuous, as many are. I am saying that if you want to be independent from the mainstream, which is the impetus behind the indie style, then you should cultivate truly independent values, not try to buy the appearance of them.
I agree with that. At the end of the day, no matter how hard you try, it’s just stuff. It’s how you act and treat people that matters.
Nice post. Those interested in its general premise might want to check out, among other things, the thought-provoking book Nation of Rebels: Why Counterculture Became Consumer Culture. That is all. Carry on.
I think some people may be missing the point. The important part of the article is at the end–yes you may disagree with the critique at the top. However, it is trying to point out that if you really want to be different and go against the prevailing ‘culture’ be virtuous, don’t be a narcissist but think of other people, then it doesn’t matter what you look like or consume per-se but you’ll certainly be going against the grain in any age.
People are social animals, and since the dawn of time, the most important thing to any social animal is fitting into the tribe or pack. If you take a look at another social animal, the wolf / dog (I group them together because they are genetically identical), a dog will endure an enormous amount of abuse just to fit in with the pack, or said another way, the familly. We humans are the same way. Fitting in with some tribe, group, subculture is of the utmost importance. We will wear the uniform of the tribe, speak the language of the tribe, worship the tribal Gods. All this builds the unit cohesion required for survival. We all do it. That being said, Indies seem like 21st Century beatniks to me. It will be interesting to see how they grow up.
**I put this at the bottom, but am adding it at the top for emphasis, Indie music actually means Independent Record label (or possibly independent film). And “Indie” is a term fools use who want to categorize people by their musical preference **
Wow, what a deep and insightful article that I am sure will cause a mental awakening to any 15 year old out there experiencing an identity crisis.
But seriously, low caliber post, probably the worst I have seen on this site. Sure, on the internet, everyone is a critic. And I didn’t even read the whole article! I tried, but stopped at:
“Indie people express their independence from the mainstream by doing the single most mainstream thing possible: basing their identity on what they consume.”
(insert obvious and over-used Fight Club quote in the place of actual thought)
Or possibly, there are people who enjoy certain things in life that did not get much attention before (such as music that was previously not on MTV) and these things are now getting attention, and all sorts of people like yourself throw around vapid and superficial labels.
Believe it or not, labels are applied to people that don’t really mean anything! There are some of us that do need other people or clothes or cool movies (really, is living by Fight Club quotes any better?) or cool blogs to define us and we just like. what. we. like.
How about instead of your preachy list, just one:
Respect other people by treating them as you would like to be treated and respect yourself by being your own person.
The rest is a bunch of bullshit. I don’t necessary disagree with the list, just the tone. The list is just not for everyone.
(Did I mention that this post has all the nuance of an 8th grade locker room? Next, let’s go after the sk8trz vs the preps! Or how about nerds vs jocks!)
– as a PS, I am going to give you the real scoop on Indie music. It’s not about being different! It’s about enjoying good music.
See, previously the dominant market force (and subsequently, dominate voice to music consumers) was record labels promoting through mass media such as radio and television, where it was often pay to play at worst, or at best you have a very small group of suits deciding what the hot new sound was going to be.
Along came the internets. Here, through survival of the fittest that would make Darwin proud, the good stuff rises to the top through word of mouth. You no longer had to impress a record label exec to get your music out there.
The birth of Indie music (as we know it today — though independent distribution existed before the internet, it is no coincidence that indie became prominent with the internet). And it is as simple as that.
Indie music actually means Independent Record label. Wow! I did not even need to go to wikipedia to figure that out!! And now people who listen to “Indie” music are being labeled as “Indie” by hopelessly uninformed folks like yourself.
You know what they say, it’s better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it to the world.
Missed the point? The point was to paint with a broad brush and use garbage like music tastes to define a group of strangers. This article was hopelessly flawed from the outset.
Next up : critique on why men who wear glasses should stop going to Star Trek conventions.
@Bret
Hey, let’s have at it
“Fact: You cannot buy an identity. ”
Fact: putting “Fact:” before a sentence doesn’t make it a fact.
That sir, is an opinion.
“Fact: I pointed out there could be exceptions. See here:”
A nice little escape hatch you have built.
For your next article, I suggest you rail against liberals, because they are America hating, tree hugging hippie doves.
(Just include an exception that not all are that way)
Hey guys, authors at AoM write poorly researched (wow, you went all the way to wikipedia???!) preachy opinion fluff pieces dressed up as useful social commentary! But oh, some exceptions apply.
I am going to have to agree with some of the comments previously made. This post definitely comes across as condescending . It seems that this post runs against the general conventions of this blog. Doesn’t being virtuous and courteous include refraining from speaking ill of others?
As for the issues you’ve raised in this post, the real issue seems to be that language has not kept up with culture. The term “indy” was much more fitting in the 90s, but that subculture has largely become mainstream. Now the term is a bit of a misnomer. The same is true for modernism that is roughly 70 years old and largely dated. Do we blame the modernists for now being retro?
@ Brett
“I am saying that if you want to be independent from the mainstream, which is the impetus behind the indie style, then you should cultivate truly independent values, not try to buy the appearance of them.”
The real title of this piece? Don’t be a poser!
And, actually, those few words would be sufficient for the body as well.
I’d go as far as to suggest removing this post from the site because it is an embarrassment of ignorance.
Criticizing a group by criticizing a stereotype of that group is sophomoric.
I consider myself a fairly non-mainstream person and am, in fact, an indie musician, but I find little in common with the urban hipster fantasy world this post paints.
I buy music I like, go to concerts that I like, shop at Gap & Kohl’s, drink store brand coffee, eat Taco Bell, have never paid more than $20 for a piece of furniture, rarely walk or bike, and work a 9-5 job with a 401(k) — and the fact is, so do most of the people I went to concerts with and listened to records with in college.
There is a fine line separating music enthusiasts from the subset of “scene” types who live to outdo everyone else in terms of indie-ness. These are the “posers” to which Jay alluded, and the latter suffer from consumerism.
You make a legitimate point about consumerism and how some “indie” folks display traits that parallel their “mainstream” consumerist counterparts, but all this post did was single out the indie subset for cheap shots when you could have made a broader and more insightful point about consumerism turning up in unexpected places.
Dude, this article is a few years too late. “Indie” no longer means to be counter to the mainstream, it’s just a term used to describe a genre of music. It no longer holds the meaning it once had. This happens often (see: Punk). There are “indie” bands on major labels and mainstream mediums. This isn’t really a contradiction. Indie is simply the term that ended up describing a particular sound of music and style of dress. Surely you could have found something more siginificant to begin the week with.
@ Jay
First off, Brett made no “Fight Club” quotes. Secondly, as amazing as it sounds to say that “indie” music (both the genre and labels) made became popular through their own merits, this is not true. Some bands did have talent and, through the “internets,” created a fanbase. But once this happen, major record labels scooped them up and began mass processing bands that sounded exactly like them because these bands were “cool” and everyone believed that they were unique and special for listening to them. And as nice as it is to think that survival of the fittest worked with these bands, how many talentless bands are now making millions because they are Myspace/Youtube stars? Darwin’s theories don’t apply here, Marx’s do.
I think a lot of people (Jay-dude you are one angry hipster) are missing the point of the post. Nowhere does the author take “cheap shots” or disparage people who are into indie stuff; they simply says that buying that kind of stuff is not alone sufficient to become an independent person, you must change the inner-man too. Where’s the controversy in that? I swear…some of the posts on this site that are “controversial” are that way only because readers don’t read the whole post or simply don’t understand nuance. Perhaps the authors of this site need to dumb down their material and make every thing ultra-explicit for the pointy headed morons who frequent the blog.
Something I’ve noticed that bothers me…..why do some Christians have to be “indie” Christians? Living the teachings of Jesus should make you independent enough. But it seems a lot of Christians want to show that hey, I’m Christian but I’m still totally cool and edgy.
@Rich: Capitalism is Marxist?
“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.”
The criticism in this post is about American consumerism, not about indie at all. The author takes a few gratuitous swipes based on broad and ill founded stereotypes and no actual research, just anecdotal evidence. Simply put, there is no correlation other than Americans like to spend and some Americans like indie music.
The author does not even understand what the term “indie” means, yet decides to wag his finger at people who enjoy the music.
The attack on indie is just an ignorant swipe.
To quote President Bush 43, in his call to Americans to make a sustained commitment against the War on Terror ™,
“I encourage you all to go shopping more.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/12/20061220-1.html
Your beef is with Bush, not people who listen to music released from independent labels.
Also, @Rich do you understand the concept of Marxism? Because what you are describing, even if it were accurate (it is not) is Capitalism, as in– consumers vote with their wallets.
And just because you only see the corporate cash cow acts doesn’t mean the other music is not out there.
Interesting piece, and has a similar kind of theme to an Adam Curtis documentary called “Century of the Self”, which will probably be avaialble to view on one of those sites that does stream video documentaries.
Buying stuff wasn’t alwasy a means of expressing your identity - it s relatively new concept that started when prouduction lines in the early 20th century meant mass-produced goods could be bought at relatively cheap prices. Companies needed to get people to buy this stuff and turned to the help of a nephew of Freud’s who used his uncle’s ideas to appeal to people on an emotional level, rather than the weirdly factual advets you see at the beginning of the 20th century.
Then the hippies came along - at first they were politicl, but after getting shot at Kent State and beaten with batons at the ‘68 Democratic Convention, with retreat to like their wounds and decided society coudl be changed by individuals changing themselves - the Easlen (?) Institute in Big Sur, California ran workshops encouraging people to express their inner, repressed identity.
This idea was immensely popular and soon everyone was an individual and wanted to express themselves, just like everyone else. The marketing people noticed this, and realised that with short-line massed produced items they could get people to buy stuff to express their individuality. Then Reagan and Thatcher noticed it and promised to pull government off people’s shoulders and let them ‘be themselves’ - ushering in a decade of ugly consumerism in the 80s.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, was how teenagers express themselves by wearing the same clothes, listening to the same music and following them same fads as whatever sub-culture we happen to land in. When they get to adulthood they are all still pretty much concerned about the same things - money, job security, family - as everyone else, so so much for being an individual.
sheesh, looks like we have a lot of disgruntled indie kids on our hands ’round here. i thought it was a great post, and a very fitting welcome-back-from-vermont post to boot! hope y’all had a great vacation and keep on with the well-written and well-reasoned posts- i love ‘em!
I feel like a lot of the commentary on this post has been on either side of a value judgment about how you spend your money. And that judgment is based either in the symbolism of the objects you buy ( for example: a messenger bag) or the amount you spent ( see conversations about vintage pricing). People seemed to be vexed by the other side. But I think the strongest point is missed by alot of the commentary. Then again I also think that what could have been the strongest point was not made prominent enough, because it didn’t make the punch list at the end.
I found it in the paragraph quoted below. I’ve blanked out the word “hipster”, feel free to use any genre/category/stereotype/ whatever word you’re comfortable with. I think that “indie” or “hipster” is a good case because it is a very pervasive youth culture, with a pretty uniform look and seemingly uniform attitude, particularly from the outside. A hipster in Montreal can look alot like a hipster in Texas, and the same can be said for Melbourne.
“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 _______ 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.”
The important part is the transformation of the inner man. It is the examination of one’s self; deciding if purchasing specific objects ( be it clothes or computers), or the activities you engage in really line up with ideals or aesthetics you hold or want to hold. Rather than the reverse, purchasing objects, and engaging in activites and seeing what ideals or aesthetics you have left over. If you look at all these things in your life and you still find yourself with “all the aforementioned indie products”.. great! you’ve got an identity that is based on you, rather than those products. It is hard for us cynics, but you know there is some guy or girl in Wiliamsburg who is living his life and it is an examined one, it just happens to be lined up with the image we have for a stereotype. For other examples, see Goths, or RPG Gamers, or Frat boys, or drunks.
And yes, of course something like “indie” is going to get co-opted by the main stream. It is a culture that started in the youth culture. That’s how the mainstream puts food on its table. Its already happened, it is happening to something else right now, probably Brazil, and it is already got it’s eye on the next meal . But you know, I find it a funny thing about the “mainstream”, no one wants to be part of it, but few want to stray to far from it. It gets lonely out there.
Like most of the stuff on the website well written!
Wikipedia thing was humorous and I do agree about the whole consumer society so get over yourself please, it’s so true.
The greatest thing is all the disgruntled people coming out of the wood work, listen people the writer is saying were all part of the same consumerist society so please new subgroup of society that is emerging don’t be pretentious, and welcome to the fold.
Another semi-sensationalist blog title from AoM, I feel. Instead, I’d have picked “Why Consumption Doesn’t Equal Being Indie”…
I consider myself pretty “indie” - but I’m also one of the most frugal people I know. To me, being indie equals living within your means, doing what matters to you (including perhaps living an alternative lifestyle), and having good taste in things like people, music, movies, food, fashion, etc. I think each person has a different definition of it, though. The punk movement ran into many of the same problems of definition/conformity, but was (and is) still a valuable sub-culture, so let’s not write off the new “indie” version in its entirety.
While we’re on the subject of ideas that are bunk, I somehow dislike the new Febreeze Dog ad that popped up on the AoM homepage - it’s intrusive and unmanly. Please destroy!
This is one of the most brilliant posts I’ve seen on this site. Keep up the great work, my man.
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.