Abstract
One of the most interesting discourses I came upon in my research was also one of the biggest challenges for the research itself. It was on the labelling of Hipsters.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
By now I am quite confused about who is a Hipster, and who isn’t and why this is such a big deal. I should stop making the labelling process a theme of our conversations but focus on the practices themselves. It seems more and more as if it is an empty signifier that has no meaning?
Logbook, Summer 2016
One of the most interesting discourses I came upon in my research was also one of the biggest challenges for the research itself. It was on the labelling of Hipsters.
Especially at the beginning of my research it left me quite confused as to whether the Hipster was objectifiable at all. The fact was that there were various signs of hipsterism, but of all the symbols the main one that every conversation, joke or article seemed to have in common was that those designated as Hipsters did not identify with the label, or joked about it in an ironic way. A typical statement from Hipsters is denying being hipster.
It became clear that the explicit mention of the label Hipster itself was a taboo with my respondents, even though implicitly many things were expressed.
Today my friend Gina asked Franz “Would you consider yourself a Hipster?” Everyone burst out laughing and Joelle said “You can’t just ask that?!” [...] He clarified then [...] he is not superficial or does things because he wants to be cool, he [does things because he] actually likes them and believes in them.
Fieldnote from Giessen, Winter 2015
The act of collective laughter showed that there was something uncomfortable or funny about that question. There was a long pause before Franz answered. Implicitly everyone knew that there was no right answer to this question. Denying it would be so cliché of a Hipster, that one would not put a friend in the situation of having to answer. Hence “You can’t just ask that!”, which was exclaimed in obvious indignation. It seems to be considered rude to ask about this label.
As mentioned in chapter 2, a method of understanding a phenomenon is to analyse the hurdles of entry into the field, as they are encountered by the researcher. Any hurdle is simultaneously a feature of the field and determines the phenomenon itself. In the field of hipsterism, the first hurdle of entry I encountered was whether Hipsters existed at all. To research the practices of a discursive ideal type that seems to have no sociologically sound determination and to gain access to a field that was defined by a negation of its own existence was not only the first but also a reccurring challenge.
The main feature of my inductive approach was to enter the field with a paradox ontology, to assume that the hipster does not exist but still to observe what was happening in those spaces that were labelled as hipster.
To overcome the challenge of entry and interact with my respondents with the explicit purpose of analysing what is labelled as hipster practice, I entered the field in various ways. Identifying what areas are labelled as hipster and narrowing the area down geographically was easier, because individuals had no issue telling me what spaces were considered hipster, as long as it was not related to them personally. The most successful entryway was to start by using alternative terms that are not as polarised as “the Hipster” when I entered into conversation with my respondents. Then in further conversation I made the research more explicit and asked questions of how respondents feel when they hear this term, or how they identify with it.
Awareness of this puts those labelled as Hipsters in a awkward situation, because indeed they do not want to be labelled at all. Authenticity is more important than any ascription from the outside. Which means that in order to avoid the ascription process, one must try to make the decisions independent of such labelling. My respondents were not only trying to undo whatever is mainstream but also tried not to avoid the label, but not too vehemently, as not to confirm the cliché.
In the summer of 2016 one contact made a comment that made me realise there was a right and wrong way to be a Hipster, and as such, hipsterism was not just a volatile term pushed around with no meaning. The individuals in these scenes had opinions, strong ones, about right and wrong and especially authenticity. This contact said to me that
[...] the Hipsters that he knows do not really understand, that Hipsters should go to a flea market because then they are not supporting monopolies. [...] they want to be unique and find clothes in the flea markets that others don’t have.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
In this statement the individual distances himself from the Hipsters that he knows, so those that he would define as Hipsters. He explains that there is a right reason to go to a flea market: so one does not support monopolies, and a wrong way: to express individualism through unique clothing. The reasoning and self-narrative was very important. The idea of right and wrong generally will be discussed later, in the context of a conceptual framework of hipsterism (4.1, but for now the focus is the practice and dialogue of these individuals.
A concept that became clearer and more defined with time, authenticity seemed to be a defining moment for the Hipster. If Hipsters are authentic and real, if they do things mindfully and with intention, or even with conscious irony, it is being hipster. Nevertheless, discomfort with the term was addressed repeatedly. When asked about her friends calling her Hipster one contact said “I know people mean it well, but I don’t want to be associated with someone superficial”.
In the observed milieu authenticity is conceptualised differently to individualism. Important in this context is not to do things just to be individual or unique. Individualism is not seen as important as to have a set of justifications that are oftentimes not unique at all, but ended up being quite similar. This does not seem to be the issue, Hipsters appeared to be uncomfortable with the label Hipster, but had no intention of fleeing the practices that were labelled as such, because this would be deemed unauthentic.
Within the media discourse it became clear that the Hipster ideal type is a fully functioning contradiction that we have difficulty objectifying. There are elements to distinguish Hipsters from the mainstream, but these are also things they have in common with others who are designated as not hipster. In the media discourse Hipsters are accused of doing things just because they want to be cool. In reality they also do not quit them just because they become mainstream. That would be unauthentic and also influenced by what others say. They are also attacked for their political or social attitude.
Within the milieu, my respondents seemed very cautious and authenticity seemed to complement individualism, giving it a deeper meaning and causality. While individualism is conceptualised as distinction from the mainstream, authenticity was used in hipster discourses among the respondents to validate the justification of each cultural practice and choice. Choosing a particular place to live, decideing whether to become a vegan or riding a fixed gear bicycle just because it is cool, is not an option. The do’s and don’t’s of being hipster were associated with the reasoning and narratives of choices and practices, rather than the practices themselves.
All observable cultural practices of hipsterism can easily just be reduced fashion items. This means that to justify one’s own authenticity is a challenge. When any denial of the label Hipster is met with laughter and statements such as “Well, that’s what a Hipster would say, isn’t it?”, it can be a mistake for any researcher to pay too much attention to the label. It takes away the possibility of actually exploring the cultural practices themselves and their effect, one of many of these practices being the deflection of the label. Within the discourse, demarcation and distinction between what is hipster and what is not is frequent. While there is a lot of ambiguity about what is hipster, what is surely not hipster is clearer.
Authenticity as a concept will be reccurring throughout this chapter. It will explore becoming hipster as an adjective, not a noun.
To begin with the descriptions will initially sketch out the important elements of hipsterism. These mainly include descriptions of others about the Hipster, rather than self-descriptions, because of this labelling and identification challenge. Media and online content play and important role in this section and will supplement the observations and give them more consistency. We will then go into the fashion symbols and demarcation of hipsterism, which will include the essential element of creativity and its associated cultural capital.
Then some anti-capitalist and spiritual tendencies will be described and an antitype of the Hipster will emerge.
The process of transition within hipsterism, from a young adult exploring different work avenues to the (un-)successful Hipster will demonstrate an adaption to society towards the antitype or the successful functioning Hipster.
All these findings will then be set in the context of the urban space of hipsterism in Berlin and will help map out hipsterism. This includes some thoughts on the element of gentrification and we will explore access boundaries to becoming hipster. We will analyse the labelling process and the expressed embarrassment of individuals of this milieu, that they criticise milieu formation and aware of the problematics, but still engage and reinforce such practices in their everyday lives.
Ultimately these will lead to understanding hipsterism as a space that is marked by some contradictions and leave us with questions about the hurdles to expressing their ideals in spatial practice.
3.1 Cultural Capital and Hipsterism as Creativity
Hipsterism is a culture of access. So much of what is happening in this scene is closely connected to what Bourdieu (2012) called cultural capital that individuals use in a field. In his theory that has been shaping sociological investigation for decades, he explains the notion of a field, akin to the playing field. In this field the actors have a hand that is derived from their habitus. Similar to good playing cards, individuals have better or worse cards, by the way they have been socialised and have adapted subconsciously to society. This playing hand is comprised of economic, social and cultural capital. According to Bourdieu (2012) cultural capital is of the greatest significance. While all three types of capital can also be transformed into some other kind, through what he calls symbolic capital, it is the cultural capital that is the most difficult to recreate. Bourdieu would say it is an impossible task, as this subconscious adaption includes the way we speak and our taste. This leads to the fine distinctions between people that are very difficult to compensate. Cultural capital includes whether we have a more refined taste for music, foods or travelling, whether we enjoy going to museums or not, and the way we express ourselves. Language is a very important factor in this context, and according to Bourdieu it strongly influences the way we can act and the power we have in a field.
According to Bourdieu the motivation for any action is distinguishing ourselves from the masses and gaining influence and power. Ultimately we want to gain access to advantages in the field. He explains that this field is full of power struggle, with individuals trying their best to gain such advantages.
“Hipster Ariel”. (Anonymous online creator, 2016a)
As early as in the 1900s Simmel (1957) explained that fashion symbols have the aim of distinction as well. Within societies that have class distinction, fashionable clothing and fashionable practices develop along a continuum of flight and chase. A small number of individuals adopts a new trend, such as an item of clothing or a new café to frequently visit, this then slowly is “chased” by the masses and thus becomes mainstream or current. The adoption of such practices of flight can be observed to require what Bourdieu much later defined as cultural capital, or good taste. The chase leads the fashionable individuals to have to distinguish themselves yet again from the masses, and slight adoptations of fashion emerge. This continues and is an expression of class society.
In the context of hipsterism, this is very interesting. My respondents very concretely use cultural capital, in order to access where the next “place to be” is, or what the newest trends are. They are often associated with a very superficial coolness, and they are criticised for this immensely. Content analysis of media blogs, articles and posts about Hipsters shows that they are often ridiculed. Many jokes circulate, often around the topic of this superficial coolness.
One fashionable practice and aspect of hipsterism is an opposition against modernisation. It is seen in many objects that Hipsters are portrayed as using. They are said to prefer to listen to music on records. Items like record players as well as typewriters, for example, are considered hipster items.
Meanwhile, modern equipment is often used to produce items that look as if they were produced by much older equipment. The macbook provides various applications with a minimal layout, which greatly simplify word processing and make texts typed on the computer look as if they were typed on a typewriter. The iPhone provides one very popular application called Instagram. Before it became popular, it was known as a “hipster-tool”, which allows you to upload pictures and videos to share on a profile, after putting a filter on them. The aim of the filters is to make the pictures look like they are a Polaroid and have been taken by an old analogue camera, or as if they were developed at home. Concerning this matter, various jokes have circulated, such as “How much does a Hipster weigh? An instagram”. This affinity to older equipment, items and products became immensely popular very fast, and Instagram for example, launched in 2010, now has over hundreds of millions of users. So simultaneously the Hipster is associated with being avant-garde.
Today I was speaking with a guy at [a café] about my thesis, and he told me this joke: “Why did the Hipster burn his tongue? He drank his tea before it was cool.” He also ridiculed my research and said that Hipsters were just a bunch of privileged kids who had too much money to spare for fashionable items.
Field Diary, Autumn 2016
While there is some ridicule in the statement above, Hipsters are known to be familiar with societal trends, implied by the statement “before it was cool”. They are said to be quite sophisticated and avant-garde about societal trends. As such, this is a repeated joke, which can be found in different variations all over popular online platforms and social media websites, often in combination with popular culture tropes. Many internet memes based the figure of the Hipster can be found that were especially popular in the 2010s. Memes often have a theme or repeated catchphrase. One meme that became quite popular around 2011 is the so-called “Hipster Ariel” based on a picture of Ariel the Little Mermaid augmented with glasses that are often associated with the Hipster, from the animated Disney movie of 1989. The image 3.1 shows this cultural trope with the statement “I left the ocean, it was too current”. In the story of Ariel, she leaves the ocean to live among the people. This fact is used as a joke here, with the wordplay on the ocean being too “current”, so too popular to be there. The word “current” also means the movement of a large body of water through forces of nature. It implies that hipsters are very much part of the flight and what Simmel (1957) described in his essay as the flight and chase of fashion.
These memes and other jokes became more critical over time. Underlying the criticism that I observed repeatedly is the assumption the hipsters are hypocritical. One example of an accusation found in various spaces is that hipsters portray themselves as being against capitalism, but only because it is fashionable to be against capitalism. The meme depicted in the image 3.2 showing Karl Marx demonstrates this. The catchphrase reads that he blamed capitalism before it was fashionable to blame capitalism. An image of Karl Marx in black and white, as a critic of capitalism, is used and the title “Hipster Marx” was given to this meme, uploaded to a popular meme website. This implies that being critical of capitalism has now become a “cool” thing to do, rather than a serious political attitude, but something that is fashionable in contemporary society.
“Hipster Marx”. (Anonymous online creator, 2016b)
It remained pertinent to observe for myself those individuals in the milieu being described as hipster. In preparation for my field work, I asked some questions and explored options in the city I was studying in, Giessen, which is a town of about 80000 inhabitants. I asked some of my contacts in the field about these jokes and the criticism implied in them. In this context the discussion about the distinction between a real and a “want-to-be” Hipster arose.
... [I wanted]to ask where they think I should start to look for Hipsters to interview them. The answer was “Forget it, there are no real Hipsters here. You have to go to Berlin.” I have heard this a lot, that I should go to Berlin and there are no real Hipsters here.
Fieldnote from Giessen, Summer 2015
The statement “There are no real Hipsters here. You have to go to Berlin.” implies that in a town those labelled as Hipsters are not “real” Hipsters, but that the “real” ones are in Berlin. In a later conversations, a friend told me “Here everyone is a wannabe”. “Wannabes”, as people who try to be like others or to fit in with a particular group of people. The true Hipster seemed to be an urban, big-city phenomenon.
In another instance, whilst teaching a class about the phenomenon of hipsterism for BA Teaching Students, one student mentioned that the real, authentic Hipsters aren’t in Berlin anymore, they would be in Tokyo now. This loop continued for some time, and I realised that the labelling process is problematic, because no one identifies with the term Hipster, and it is a very elusive term.
After further and repeated conversations in various spaces, it became clear that while these contacts do not in anyway want to be identified with the label of Hipster, they do very much identify with specific practices that are implied in these jokes. Especially the idea of not being a follower of mainstream and consumerist capitalism and being somewhat critical towards capitalism in general, is fundamental to the expressed values. Furthermore, terms and concepts they identified with were living a creative and authentic life.
A number of extracts below portray some initial findings about authenticity and flight from the mainstream. Deep-reading my notes after the initial field work phase, I saw that some concepts and narratives kept reemerging.
Leo and his room mate live in the “Sonnenallee”, which I was told was “where everyone wants to live”. On asking people why, they say “authentic” and “real” a lot.
————
...where we spent the whole evening in the kitchen, discussing why The Hives sounded so much better on vinyl.
———–
Their slogan is: “Standard können wir nicht. Dafür aber alles andere.” which implies they don’t offer standard or mainstream products, but all things outside of that. Whatever that means.
Field Diary, Various 2016
In my self reflexion, following a reading of my field diary, I realised that it was necessary to try to understand the practice and conception of a term like “authentic” or “not mainstream”. As my annotation “Whatever that means” demonstrates, I was not sure what was meant by the authenticity or individuality that my respondents kept emphasising.
All those times when someone would say they loved it so much, because it’s colourful or multicultural or authentic, I never asked anyone what they meant...
Logbook, Summer 2016
If there was a narrative behind this term, it had to be closely connected to individualism. In the field authenticity was understood as having a set of justifications and values backing all personal decisions, rather than reasoning practices through fashion or individuality. As one respondent answered after being asked “Why do you live this sustainable, low waste lifestyle?”:
From very early childhood, it started when I was about seven, I always searched. At seven I became a vegetarian.
Extract from a narrative interview, Spring 2017
The statement above clearly demonstrates that the individual believes that the decisions they make in life and the lifestyle they have chosen, even at the tender age of seven, are based on personal search. So rather than being taught or socialised in a specific way, they believe in a path of search for ideals and values and in constructing their own framework of action.
The mentioned values also include the principle of authenticity in addition to the responsibility that the individual has. Authenticity in this context is defined by a unique narrative of one’s own justifications and also one’s inherent cultural capital.
Seen near Sonnenallee, demonstrating that hipsterism prioritises affectivity and subjective involvement of the subject over rational advertising. (Semple, 2018b)
The idea that the concrete use of cultural capital provides access to spaces, which can enhance advantages in a given field, is a fundamental element of Bourdieu (2012)’s Field Theory. However, it is interesting to look at how he describes that cultural capital comes about. Assuming his approach to the development of this capital, we acquire it through our habitus. This poses the question whether those who have a lot of this cultural capital should all come from a similar socio-economic background. Assuming his theory, they should come from families with high (at least cultural) capital. If unique taste, distinction from the masses and the value of authenticity are part of their self narrative, it is interesting to analyse my respondents’ biographies. Do individuals associated with this notion of a Hipster all come from similar backgrounds, are they all academics or artists? Analysing this as one dispersion in our prism of understanding modern, western societies, helps understand the workings of cultural capital in liquid societies, as described by Bauman (2015). Some of the the individuals I met came from working class background but had through some means or other acquired significant cultural capital.
In reference to the present-day analysis of cultural sociologist Andreas Reckwitz (2014), hipsterism demonstrates the movement of a “ends-rational” capitalism- in the sense of Max Weber- to an aesthetic capitalism and aestheticization of the social. Providing something new as in aesthetically appealing, not as a complete replacement or improvement and thus progression of the old, is a fundamental element of hipster everyday life. As such hipsterism expresses the social regime of the aesthetically new that Reckwitz (ibid.) describes. It being new and unseen aesthetically is then wherein its worth lies, rather that it being aesthetically adhering to fashion or advertising.
Design becomes paradigmatic to advertising and fashion, but also to everyday life. The affect every action had was more important to my respondents than the rational effect. The creativity dispositive is demonstrated by preferring the creation of the aesthetically new in advertising for a shop, rather than rationally advertising. This can be seen in the picture I took in image 3.3. From this poster it is neither clear what the store exactly will provide, which services it offers, and when it will open. The idea is to involve the subject, making the audience curious and showing them aesthetically new “advertising” that they might not have seen before in this way. It also shows the affinity towards the undone, unprofessional and home-made within the scene.
My respondents often practised an expression of their distinction and creativity over rational and normative practices.
Again and again I meet individuals from the scene who might vary in their socio-economic background but have one thing in common: they express themselves and take pride in creativity. Similar to how Reckwitz (2014) describes the creativity dispositive, it is essential to hipsterism to constantly come up with a new aesthetic affect.
We sit in Two and Two, an interesting combination of a French coffeehouse with croissants, coffee and pastries, and stationary shop, specialised in Japanese stationary. The shop counter is cluttered with notebooks, pens and folders etc. all with pretty Japanese lettering on them, as well as coffee speciality equipment, all for sale. The rest of the store is decorated in a more minimalist style, a few vintage looking chairs and tables in a tight space, lots of greenery.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
To combine two already quite popular things within this scene provides for the new aesthetic appeal, whilst not reinventing or progressing. Japanese stationary is already popular in this social milieu, companies like MUJI, a Japanese retail store, express a minimalist, no brand strategy and hardly any money is spent on advertising or classical marketing, relying mainly on verbal propaganda and the simple, clean, unchaotic shopping experience. Coffee and pastry culture is also strong within hipsterism, so combining the minimalist ethic and the Japanese stationary in this establishment vouches for the owners’ creativity in the sense of Reckwitz (ibid.).
Another example of this kind of creativity was a bookstore on Weserstrasse, which combined the trend of hashtags on the Internet with the concept of a bookstore. Hashtags are normally used to group together thematically some statements on social media platforms such as twitter. The statement will be followed by a hash and specific tag word, such as #hipster, for any posts pertaining to the theme of Hipsters. These have become increasingly popular.
Instead of sorting the books by author or genre or language, the books were sorted by subjects and into boxes, by having a common motive or subject. The shop manager who came up with the concept explained that the idea was to group together books according to a hashtag they might have. He explained to me that one of the reasons why they did this was to make the consumer surprised and amused that a classic like Wuthering Heights would be in the same category as a book like the soft pornographic novel Fifty Shades of Grey. They also have a category called Friday, and that will contain books that start on a Friday. In this context the consumer becomes the aesthetic audience and enjoys the aesthetically new way the shop is sorted, but also the conceptually new structure of the objects, that can also be aesthetic in nature.
As Reckwitz (ibid.) describes, the regime of the new also needs an institutional regulation, in addition to the subjects as creators (shop manager), the aesthetic audience (the consumers) and the aesthetic items (the arrangement of the books, offering a new affect). One could argue that without the institutional regulation of attention usually shaped by markets, media, politics or the state, that Reckwitz describes as a fourth element in the scaffold of the creative aesthetic regime, there is something missing. This may be the reason why the shop had to shut down during the writing of this thesis. The shop manager explained to me that they were often times struggling and he assumed: “The concept, however, does not come naturally to the people around somehow, if we were in New York or LA, it would work better, somewhere where there is more of a sense of humour. Also there is no money in Neukölln, so we don’t sell loads of books”
However difficult to sustain, the creative act as such was very important to my respondents, more so than success in classic economic senses.
Sam is 27 [...] and moved to Berlin before completing his degree. He works part time at a refugee home, and is planning to finish MA from here... We had a conversation about “what constitutes a good life”. He implied that he is often jealous of others, especially of his room mate, because he sees on instagram and facebook what everyone is doing, that they are traveling, and especially that they are working creatively. All their jobs are creative and fun, and this makes him a bit envious.
Field Diary, Winter 2016
Sam’s flatmate is a young urban creative with a minimalist style and minimalist interior design aesthetic. When I asked him whether he could give me a tour of their cool Berlin apartment, he showed me his room. As I looked at his minimalist furniture, bed, lamps, clothes rack, he immediately started showing all the things he made himself and explaining how he made them. The self-narrative that this respondent communicated to me was that it is important to be well travelled and creative. He would not be tied to classic jobs, or conservative lines of work. This causes the jealousy of Sam towards his “cool hipster flatmate”, as he calls him.
Others that I met through this connection and in this apartment were also all pursuing creative or artistic careers, such as a freelance fashion photographer, a student of fashion design at the university of applied sciences, a very quiet girl who worked at a gallery. Other careers I encountered included working as a make-up artist at the theatre, or a full time poetry slammer and an events curator. One young man was studying composition.
The following case example demonstrates an age of becoming within hipsterism and striving towards living a creative life.
At 26 he lives on a low-paid job and the support of his parents. He is only works part-time at the moment, even though he finished his BA in graphic design several years ago. His parents support him by paying the rent of his apartment, and he works for a small café once a week. In his free time he does art. He doesn’t want to work in an office environment, where he has to follow the visions of someone else, thereby displaying the Do-What-You-Love attitude. He has many ideas for the future, but merely in theory. Becoming an artist, or opening up a coffeehouse are some ideas he has.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
Often the individuals I met were between studies and jobs, doing internships, or starting up a company. Some were owners or managers of coffeehouses and restaurants. They had the tendency to move to a bigger city after studying, or when starting a higher degree, in order to pursue further steps, such as finding a job or even starting up their own company. One group of three friends had started what they called a “Creative Office”, comprised a photographer, a web designer and two graphic designers, who offered services to companies looking for “unique creative solutions”.
Frequently reactions to questions and circumstances showed the desire, enthusiasm and satisfaction of being an independent creative individual. The respondents put forth this idea of a creative life in contrast with the boredom and lack of motivation of living life as a bureaucratic worker living an uneventful life in suburbia. Ultimately this led to the wish to turn life into art, similar to the radical modern aesthetics thinking and living subcultures of the Romantics, the Bohème and the Avant-Garde (Reckwitz, 2014, p. 35). However, my respondents lived this creative life, or life as art, with a stronger adaption to societal circumstances and in a less radical way.
Cultural capital has the purpose of enhancing and advancing the individual in a field. Within this social milieu the advantage is to be understood as a creative subject and to understand oneself as a creative subject. This is an idealistic state that Reckwitz also describes in his theory of a creativity dispositive. The hipster spaces are creative spaces that are arranged in a way that creative subjects can express themselves and also experience the aesthetic stimuli. In addition to Reckwitz’s description, they are also meant to protect the individual: not just from boredom and lack of creativity, but also from commercialisation, as we will see in the following chapter.
3.2 Enslaved or Uninspired—the Hipster Antitype
Understanding how important creativity and authenticity are to the narrative of hipsterism leads to the question whether hipsterism is merely another form of distinction mechanism according to Bourdieu (2012). Or is the phenomenon of hipsterism captured and expressed as the creating individual that Reckwitz (2014) describes?
Observation showed that there is more to hipsterism that qualifies the individuals as hipster than mere creativity and authenticity. In this section there are various tendencies that I observed within hipsterism, which can be best understood as what a Hipster is not. The definition by distinction, so defining something as what it is not, will help us understand some of the more subtle elements that are reflected in statements such as: “A Hipster would never be a banker”.
That a certain antitype to the Hipster exists became clear when I was speaking to some respondents about the Soho House, a private members’ clubs for people working in the arts and media. The access to the club is by recommendation and a contact mentioned not wanting to recommend a “random” person as an applicant for the club. This idea of not wanting to be random or strange alluded to the antitypes described in this section. In order to conceptualise these antitypes within hipsterism I reflected on my own attempts of fitting in and strategies of not being a “random” person. As described in my methodology (chapter 2), personal reflections and self-analysis can strengthen the data by complementing it.
The tendencies described in this section include independence from monopolies and chains, aversion to neoliberalism, and intentional minimalism. Other tendencies that were observed included romanticising precarity or insecurity on the one hand, and the idea of building safe spaces to protect Hipsters from inclinations of wider society on the other. These tendencies led to the emergence of the Hipster antitype. This antitype can be understood as either an uninspired, consuming worker, who is “enslaved” as a respondent put it, or as a neoliberal, capitalist boss who exploits his or her workers.
As described in section 3.1 some of the respondents were entrepreneurs, often of startups that were still struggling to become viable businesses. However, many understood themselves to be in a transitional period, working towards some alternative goal in the long run. Many of them were between school and work, either studying or beginning to work. All my respondents had in common that they understood themselves as exploring options. They did not yet feel fully defined as social beings, because they had not found their respective job and as such fulfilment.
Kristin whom many describe as a Hipster has moved from a small student town to Hamburg after finishing her BA in German and Art studies. She currently works at a burger restaurant in an alternative, trendy neighbourhood of Hamburg, the Schanzenviertel.
Field Diary, Winter 2016
Kristin was one of the trusting and hopeful, rather than cynical respondents (see section 3.3.4), who described her dreams of a career as a writer. Having finished her Bachelor’s degree, she worked in a part-time job in the service sector, and expressed her creativity on instagram, by accompanying her pictures with lengthy and oftentimes humourous texts. She also wrote long speeches and letters for friends’ events, such as birthdays or weddings. While she was light-hearted and carefree in everyday life, she expressed her worry to me, that she would be stuck in work that she would not enjoy, or would not allow her to express herself. Not long after the above fieldnote was gathered, she started an internship at a newspaper. She was given the opportunity to publish some articles on their website. While she was interning, she realised the exploitative nature of interships, but still was anxious about losing the opportunity to do creative work.
This anxiety was rarely expressed to me very explicitly, but it seemed to be a genuine underlying worry of many of my respondents. Kristin was able to express it so openly, because of the nature of our friendship and how it developed (see section 2.2.1).
Generally, the anxieties of the respondents and their personal aims in this transitional phase, yielded information on what my respondents were trying to avoid. This avoidance can clarify the Hipster antitype, which plays such an important role in the distancing process in the practice of identity-building.
Noam was talking about independent book stores to his colleagues and they were very lovely and offered me a coffee. I asked what “independent bookstore” meant and they explained that theyare not part of a chain and they have their own concept Footnote 1 .
Field Diary, Summer 2016
Here, and in other casual conversation about their bookstore, Noam calls the book store “independent” every time. Emphasising their independence and the twist in the conceptualisation of their book store, Noam expresses that in addition to their creativity, independence and not belonging to chains or monopolies is very important. Many respondents emphasised that the places they worked at, as well as the stores, restaurants and cafés they frequented, were not part of chains. The companies I observed also supported independent artists and writers. Two bookstores had a corner dedicated to self-published authors. One of them offered events for struggling artists to read from their novels or share their poetry, or play their music.
One of the coffeehouse’s owners had bought and showcased two of the barista’s artworks in his coffeehouse. He tried to advertise for them and tell people about the art they could purchase from them.
Another important element is detachment and not being too focused on money or profit, as the statements below show:
He also explained “we don’t earn money hahaha” and I asked how it is sustainable. He said “It’s not, we will do this for another year or so and then we will file bankruptcy” I asked why, they said it’s because they want to be able to do what they want at least for some time and they are enjoying it.
Field Diary, Spring 2016
By emphasising that they wish to do what they want, for a while, even though it might not be profitable, the respondent expresses that doing what you love is more important than earning money. One can even risk becoming bankrupt and losing all the money, in exchange for engaging in work that you really enjoy. In another instance this individual laughed about probably dying poor. This again shows that attachment to material things is not as important as living a passionate and creative life.
Another tendency that underlines this attitude is expressed in the following statement from a narrative interview with a young woman named Olivia:
For example in my relationship it’s the same now, A. pays for more, or at least more than I do, because he just has more money at the moment. I think it’s really terrible to try and split up and break down the bills.
Extract from narrative interview, Spring 2017
In this extract Olivia claims that it is “terrible” to split bills. She expresses that relationships are more important than division of bills in an equal way. This understanding of justice or fairness will be explored further in section 4.1.1. For now it is sufficent to say that the one who wants to split bills down the middle, without considering how much money each individual has, is “terrible”. This can be undertood as another attribute of the antitype. The individuals associated with this antitype are frugal, want to split things down the middle, money is important to them, and they have jobs they do not like.
The following extract from a Facebook Messenger Conversation demonstrates the priority of friendship and meaningful conversation over the quality of products being sold, or services rendered. In my second research phase, I asked this shop owner, who I had met in the first research phase, how to get back in touch with him. He answered:
hey dear!!! we were on vacation until the 1st of sept.but now we back doing our shit. the shop opens on Teusday. ill be there everyday from 15–20! yougotta come over. we got out lousy coffe and a good conversation :)
Facebook Messenger Conversation, Autumn 2016
The coffee is lousy and the work they do is described as their “shit” but the conversations one can have are good. This also emphasises the importance of human connection and relationships taking priority over material things. It also shows the contradiction between Doing-What-You-Love, but not taking work in general too seriously, or showing that it is not the most important part of your life. My respondent cannot admit that he takes his work seriously. This is demonstrated by calling his work “doing our shit”. If he shows that he does take his work seriously and emphasises it too much, he is in danger of being the antitype, the—as Noam once described it to me—enslaved one:
He says he is scared of future, for when he is old or sick, so he wants to enjoy life while he can, just not to enslave himself. He was spoilt as a child and now he will probably die poor he says laughing.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
The implication of the assumption that he will die poor expresses the idea that if one does not “enslave oneself” one must die poor. As Noam is fascinated by great literature he describes a grand narrative of his biography here: being spoilt as a child and then following his dreams and ultimately dying poor.
The respondents speak of lousy coffee, being poor and laughing about probably going bankrupt, show a kind of romanticising of failure within the given capitalist, neoliberal framework, which also works as an antithesis to enslaving oneself and becoming a knob in the works of capitalism.
A different picture, but also trying to distinguish from the dispassionate worker who sees no culture or deeper value or meaning in his work, was drawn by Finn. He shows this in the following notes I gathered from statements and practices of their group of collaborators from a vegan coffeehouse.
They go to ’Cupping’, a coffee festival, and that inspires them, reminds them why they are doing it, because sometimes it gets a bit dull / lose track, and then you go to these places. [...Finn tells me that] If you go other places that are small [like his coffeehouse], people there are real, like a family. Populous [another small coffeehouse close by] emphasise their family business, they have a huge connection, it’s blatantly obvious love and respect coffee culture/each other/ quality
Field Diary, Summer 2017
Two things stand out especially in this summary. The first is the importance of the purposefulness of the work they are doing. By emphasizing that they have to remind themselves of why they are doing their work, he shows that working meaningfully is important. It is not just creativity that is important, there is a deeper meaning or a morality to it, expressed by the emphasis of a family business. The second is how he emphasizes the importance of people being “real, like family”. In this context the social connection and love and respect for each other is associated with being real, so being authentic.
My respondents’ nightmare was a stable office job. They would rather want to do something they love, something creative, however risky or unstable that might be. The concept of Do-What-You-Love and the world of work will be further explored in section 3.3. However, there was certain observable discomfort in speaking about doing what you love, or advertising it too much.
I noticed that the extracts in which the work is explored more deeply was in the context of me asking individuals to talk to me about their work, because it is a theme of my thesis. In casual conversation, even if it went on for hours, there seemed to be discomfort or disinterest in speaking about your work too much. This could be another indicator of the fear of falling into the antitype. It seems that there is an underlying worry that is harboured secretly, either to die poor as Noam described earlier, or to not be able to find a creative and fulfilling job, without becoming the antitype.
The slogans “Do What You Love” and “Follow Your Dreams” can be associated with the notion of work and are emphasised indirectly in this milieu. In image 3.4 you can see how a store on a side street of Weserstrasse sells reminders for Hipsters not to forget what they came to Berlin for. Reminiscent of how the hippies symbols were commercialised, this popularity of hipster symbols and slogans takes effect in Neukölln as well. In the 1960s Hippies were discovered as potent consumers, especially with their passionate urge to express themselves, and thus established a new market for specific consumer goods. This new market was developed with commodities that satisfied the needs of hippies for authentic goods, such as records, clothing etc. In this context, expressive advertising was developed, aiming the hippies and their need for the accentuation of their personality as the target consumers. These forms of advertising spread the idea that consumer goods are the means for self expression into society as a whole. The cultural movement lost its subversive and countercultural power. ((Tripold, 2012), (Willis, 2014))
Buying Do-What-You-Love. (Semple, 2016a)
However, as I observed the milieu, none of these items being sold as can be seen in 3.4 were actually in my respondents homes. Advertising that you have a job you love was just something they would not do. When conversations turned towards work, many individuals from this milieu felt uncomfortable or quickly changed the topic. Again this seems to express a kind of secret worry of becoming the neoliberal antitype. As such, while hipster fashion or lifestyle can be commercialised very well, it is not the milieu I was observing that actually consumed those items. I visited the store depicted in 3.4, amongst a few others, various times and always just observed tourists there. As this area is becoming popular for tourists because of this milieu, my respondents feel more of an urge to distance themselves from such behaviour.
Multiple times I observed awkwardness and embarrassment about speaking too much about your work, and how successful you are. The following extract was noted down after a meeting with some contacts that had moved from a small student city in the north of Germany to Berlin. Realising that they were part of the milieu I was observing I met with them to learn more. One of the first questions I had was what they were doing, whether they were studying, interning, or working.
I was not sure entirely what exactly they were doing when I visited Jenny and Thomas in Berlin. When I asked they dodged the question joking around and saying “this and that”. And then after some persistence Tim seemed awkward and embarrassed and explained, “well we don’t have a real studio, but we kind of sort of have a film studio”. And I was like, “yea so what do you do there?” Again with the this or that, and something about music videos and advertising clips “and anything that has to be designed basically”. I felt like I was being rude asking them. They really didn’t want to tell me, I don’t know why. Jenny then gave me their card, so I could take a look at their webpage etc.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
While the statement “anything that has to be designed basically” speak strongly for the creativity dispositive, there was embarrassment and discomfort speaking much about the work they are involved in. In this example it is especially clear, but also in another other interviews I conducted, or conversations I had, it seemed that no-one ever emphasised greatly that they did something creative, or exclaimed with pride that what he was doing was very cool. At some point I realised that it seemed improper to advertise, to take pride in the work you do, almost as if that would be too capitalist.
Lisa and I prepared the food together while she told me about her life. She didn’t say much about her job, just that she studied fashion photography and she is freelancing at the moment, and it is going “well enough”.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
In the conversation with Lisa I noticed that it was difficult, much like with Jenny and Thomas, to find out more information on what her work actually entailed. The subject was quickly changed to a different more general topic.
In these cases, the respondents are free lancers or even entrepreneurs. An antitype of hipsterism seems to be an entrepreneur that takes pride in their work and talks about it a lot.
The embarassment of talking about one’s work too much later appeared to be linked with the transition into becoming a capitalist or failed Hipster as described in section 3.3.
I also observed these antitypes in my own distancing process, by observing and analysing my own demarcation process as a means of access.
Within my self reflection, and in my meta observation notes, I noticed some mechanisms of my own adaption to the field. As a researcher, who only fits in partially, the mechanisms of trying to fit in are especially interesting, as described in section 2.2.1. The scene shows how I am adapting to the field and as such start to partially fit in with the attitudes of the milieu.
This specific case demonstrates the failure of building friendships within a coworking space and strategies to overcome this hurdle.
I joined a coworking space that was directly on Weserstrasse, a colourful, very green, yet minimalist space, with colourful origami cranes hanging from the ceiling. As such it expressed aesthetically my conception of a hipster coworking space. Coworking will be explored more deeply as a space of ambiguity between leisure and work in section 3.3.4. Here it is the setting of strategies of partially fitting in and as such amplifies the clarity of the Hipster antitype.
A first conversation with the manager of the coworking space was very telling, especially in the way that what she described did not materialise in my case.
When I arrive she tells me that there are currently quite a few start-ups here and she will introduce me. She also proposed that it can be helpful to speak to [the boss], who the project [of the coworking space] belongs too and that had the inspiration for this first of three coworking spaces in Neukoelln. (All in the Weserstrasse I might add...). Friendship develops by individuals engaging in activities together and not just talking. All the individuals I engaged within this social milieu have work that consists of cooperation with friends. I ask her how to join in these activities and collaborations. “Oh most things we find out through small talk in the kitchen. We cook together, that is great to do some networking. Also just go outside. A lot of people take cigarette breaks regularly, you can converse with them easily then.” All this unfortunately hasn’t really happened yet, I am mostly ignored and they have only cooked together once until today and no one asked anyone to join in. I noticed when they were already eating.
Field Diary, Winter 2016
In this context I am asking a manager of a space how the service I am paying for will materialise. As advertised to me, the aim of coworking is that collaboration, friendship and cocreating naturally occurs. Reflecting on the initial disappointment also presented an excellent opportunity to reflect on my strategy of access, which was kind of buying myself in, through just paying the membership fee and working on my thesis there. However, since this strategy failed, other ways I pursued can be seen in the following extract.
I decide that I might need a more systematic approach to show visibility and openness without being a socially awkward weirdo that has no friends. I decide to take ages making my coffee in the morning and try to make small talk in the kitchen, have all my meals at the working space and have my coffee outside every time I have it, so I can enjoy the sun and engage in small talk with smokers. Making friends is so much easier as a smoker.
Logbook, Summer 2016
Thinking about these strategies and trying to implement ways of belonging shows the hurdles and boundaries of the field. It is nearly impossible to gain access through this work space in only three months time, which was my allocated time frame for the field work. In a space where values like openness, creativity and collaboration are formalised and turned into a business, only few ways of interacting worked, and I reflected on these. These reflections led to more attributes of the antitype that I am describing. Coworking as an ambiguous space that represents a mixture of work and leisure and a possible gradual adaption to the norms of wider society will be discussed in 3.3.5. But in terms of my own adaption to the field, the following observation of a successful connection in the coworking space was very telling.
The following scene is from outside the coworking space, where a man in an expensive looking shirt and shoes was talking to a soft-spoken young man who was dressed in hipster clothing. This young man turned out to be Matteo, an intern for the other man’s startup company. They were on a break from work, sitting on a bench.
The two of them were speaking and Matteo mentioned something he had planned after his internship in Berlin that he “hoped” to do. His supervisor got all neoliberal and annoying about it, and said [...] “Why do you say you hope? Anyone can do anything, they just have to believe in themselves, you should say “I will” rather than “I hope” because otherwise you will never amount to anything.” I couldn’t help myself and interrupted, explaining that I thought this was actually just humility and just acknowledging that not everyone is lucky enough to do what they want. [...] Matteo took a great liking to my line of argumentation and we became friends.
Field Diary, Autumn 2016
In these reflections, one can see that as a researcher I was annoyed and not objective in my description of the scene. I myself feel impatient with the supervisor and show my annoyance, which then evokes sympathy with Matteo and subsequently makes it easier to converse with him. The attitude of being able to have any job you want as long as you “believe”, as expressed by the supervisor, is not shared by Matteo. He is unsure about the future as he expressed to me in that and also subsquent conversations. By criticising his supervisor’s attitude I distance myself from a neoliberal mindset, which can be seen as an antitype within hipsterism.
While the understandings of the term neoliberal may vary, in this context I understood the antithesis as such: to idealise investing in your own capital and thus be able to economise and benefit from it in a free and privatised economy. Matteo takes great liking in my arguments. My statements may have influenced this particular conversation a lot, but the following conversation showed that he opened up to me. It is likely that my distancing from this neoliberal tendency affected our relationship and made him more open to talk to me.
The following self-reflection in the logbook demonstrates another very interesting element of access.
I am not really part of everything here [in the co-working space], because I am not a cool, hip start-up, but rather an observer. I am worried people could perceive me as a pretentious academic, much like A. did when he said I have institutionalised power. So when Matteo [works for a start-up at the co-working space] asked what I was doing here, I explain hipsterism as a lens and mentioned that I was now looking at hipsterism as a space. He asked what kind of space, and I answered “I don’t have a clue. I’m supposed to find stuff out about space. I think that’s hip in sociology now, so yea that’s what I’m doing. Help me!” We both laugh, I think because it made it less official, down to earth, I think he liked that. And he says a few things. I ask him if I can write it down, because it is so helpful. He seems pleased with himself he can help me, and we both smile. We exchanged email addresses and will meet up again.
Logbook, Summer 2016
I realised when reflecting on this situation that I would have answered very differently if a fellow PhD candidate or supervisor had asked me the same question of what space as a lens means. Without consciously realising, I overemphasised my insecurity about the lens of space. In reality, by this point I had read Lefebvre (1991) and knew that this would help me understand hipsterism. I was going to try to analyse the lived experience of the social milieu that I was interacting with, analyse how it had been ideologically conceived, perceived and adapted with all its everyday practices and materiality. Space provided a lens with which I could understand how hipsterism is socially constructed and modified over time, and how it is invested with symbolism and meaning. Instead, I chose to say “I think that’s hip in sociology now, so yea that’s what I’m doing”.
Coming back and looking at these notes, there is a striking similarity between my reaction when asked about academia as an academic and the reaction of those in the field, when asked if they are Hipsters. I realised that I have unconsciously adapted to this field, by the way I have likened my reactions to those of my observed Hipsters. In a sense, they react a bit clueless, with ironic distancing and humour. Explaining exactly what a Hipster does, then distancing yourself by adding a “oh but I wouldn’t know, I am not a Hipster am I? Haha” is similar to explaining you are indeed an academic pursuing a PhD, but “Oh I wouldn’t know, I am not a real academic”.
I only became aware of this through self-reflection, deep reading and awareness of my own thoughts, as well as through the evaluation and comparison with other field notes. Only through this distance is one able to critically discern the difference between what I answered in the field, and what I answer myself when thinking about this, or what I have answered in the past, when my supervisor or PhD colleagues asked about the concept of space in my work.
This extract from the field notes shows an almost orchestrated-like adaption, and seems to evoke sympathy and empathy, as well as distancing from labels, such as “the academic” and bears similarity to the Do-What-You-Love movement. It mirrors statements as the one by Noam when asked about his career: He claimed laughing, that: “we don’t earn money” and that it’s not sustainable and they will keep going for a while until the file bankruptcy.
The insecurity that I echo within this milieu helps me gain access and reflects Matteo’s own insecurity. It is similar to the romantisation of precariousness and unsureness in the statements of Noam, when he explains his work and purpose with irony and makes jokes about becoming bankrupt.
Ultimately, the antitype within hipsterism is not just an uninspired worker, but can also be the Do-What-You-Love entrepreneuer. Someone who really believes in his work or dream.
Furthermore, within the discourse on hipsterism and its lifestyle, I observed a constant practice of distinction from what I have so far described as the antitype of the Hipster. This antitype is attached to material belonging, is selfish, uncreative, and unoriginal. The antitype is unaware of their own privilege, is neoliberal and loves speaking about their job. In a conversation about ownership and belonging Olivia explained to me:
“Of course we are very lucky, we are with people who believe in the same stuff. It’s not self-evident, I also get to know people who are very different, where you have to start right from the beginning.”
Conversation notes, Spring 2017
The idea of having to start “from the beginning” was explored further in a narrative interview and later showed the idea of having a general direction or progression in society (see chapter 4). But it was also used in distinction and expressed a kind of antitype. Someone who is attached to their belongings. Someone who is attached to success. Someone “terrible” as she put it once before.
In order to protect himself and others from the greed, consumerism and capitalism of the anti-hipster lifestyle, Finn manages a space that is safe. He describes that as a manager of a vegan café he provides healthy food and fair products and tries to distribute them with little waste. He explains to me that:
The goal of the shop is to spread veganism and also to open up to everyone, it is a safe space for anyone who would like to have good organic food
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2017
It is interesting that the safe space is also a space to connect to others, to be able to express yourself and thus express your authentic self and be creative. One individual expressed that they would use their coworking space to cook together, that it is a very homely atmosphere and that I would be welcome. She described it as the perfect place to connect with others. One of the reasons people came to this working space and worked here was to connect to other creatives. This might not manifest in reality, but it is clearly part of the idealism of such spaces.
Finn mentioned to me that he feels “very comfortable and balanced, especially gender wise”, and emphasised that they try to avoid gender stereotypes in the shop as well. He describes the safety of the space as following:
No pressure for the staff, rules for a shop: if someone is rude, you don’t have to take it; gender roles don’t exist, bottom line: equality, we don’t apply gender, we speak about it a lot, to raise awareness.
Conversation notes, Summer 2017
This concept of a safe space extends not only to coffeehouses, restaurants or art galleries, but to the whole city of Berlin:
As Finn stated: “In Berlin, finally, I found somewhere I am safe”. Noam once said to me: “Being gay is a good reason to come to Berlin”. Presumably he meant that there was less discrimination here, or more people to connect with and a greater sense of openness, as opposed to how he described the situation for people who are gay in other places.
Similarly, Matteo describes Berlin as a safe space too, but rather in terms of being yourself and being able to hold onto and fulfil your dreams without being ridiculed. He explains, after I asked him about space, that
“For me all of Berlin is a space, not just this area. Because everyone who has a dream comes here. That’s why people make fun of us, you can come here to fulfil your dream, for self-realisation. Spaces also have walls, and this wall is that everyone can be whoever they want here. It is colourful and diverse, and no one will laugh at your dreams here, because we all have them.”
Conversation notes, Summer 2017
In the lifestyle of hipsterism and in the way they conduct their day to day life, the respondents distance themselves from this antitype by being minimalist, creative, and even spiritual, as the following examples show.
This minimalist attitude extends to wanting to be more, as opposed to being, as one respondent claimed, one of those “people who want it now, and cheap, to just press a button, because they haven’t got time” Many of the individuals I encountered within this milieu were using words like spiritual or holy. It seems to be essential to this lifestyle, as yet another way to distinguish yourself from the antitype: the capitalist, or the materialist.
In the context of solidarity and sharing, Olivia shared with me that she believed she was religious: “I live according to these values, exactly with what some people see as their religion, I am a deeply religious person, without God.”
In another conversation she shared with me as follows:
I’ve always had this boredom, always looking for meaning, but nothing satisfied me really, and always/something, in my life. I took lots of drugs and had a lot of men, always trying to satisfy myself somehow- maybe don’t write this part down (laughs). I am joking, of course you can put everything. I really believe in Freud, my superego is just really strong. I really want to live according to these values I have
Extract from a narrative interview, Spring 2017
The idea of being a seeker and looking for meaning which goes beyond the antitype of just living for the material world, results in attempted, vague and ambiguous forms of spirituality. In this case, Olivia shows that while she is slightly uncomfortable sharing this (a reminder that she is aware that it might be frowned upon in the wider society) she has tried to find this by experimenting with drugs and sexual relations.
During my time in Berlin, Noam curated many events about occultism and paranormal societies, as the following extract from my field diary shows:
He believes in sublimated spirituality, he is religious even though he doesn’t believe in God, calls himself a agnostic. He says he has a very open mind. Interest in occultism: Alleister Crowley in Berlin -> super popular, 1200 people came, OTO do events in their shop. Events on UFOs, paranormal society does events there as well (Noam also claims to have seen a UFO and would love to see a ghost, but also believes that the UFO was just in his head, which doesn’t make it less real, mentions Carl Gustav Jung)
Conversation notes, Summer 2016
How he sees spirituality as a sublimation, as a defense mechanism to socially unaccepted urges or desires, was not entirely clear to me. However, Jung’s theory of sublimation is mystical in nature. Noam understood his belief in irrational things, in the power of the mind, and occultism, as an expression of distancing himself to the homo economic rational man.
I encountered more or less serious forms of spirituality repeatedly in my observations, mostly as a mechanism to distance or to protect oneself from the antithesis of hipsterism described above.
The hipster Weserstrasse also advertises shamanic practices, holistic yoga healing and other forms of spirituality that can be associated with the New Age and with the practices of spirituality stemming from the 1960s and 1970s.
I observed many posters, post-its, and flyers advertising alternative healing practices and shamanic healing art, as well as more superstitious practices, such as Tarot. Image 3.5 shows some of these, again with the aesthetically new, creative advertising that might not be conscious in this case, but is reminiscent of the advertising of the tattoo studio that was mentioned in the context of creativity (3.3).
Seen near Weserstrasse, advertising alternative healing methods with sound work above and core shamanic healing below. (Semple, 2017a)
Also on Weserstrasse, an offer to a tarot seminar. (Semple, 2018d)
Though I did not meet any people actually using such forms of therapy, in one conversation a group of friends excitedly discussed the possibility of going to a session together, where the psychedelic drug ayahuasca, which stems from spiritual medicine of indigenous nations around the Amazon, would be used as a method to get rid of the self and ego and live in pure consciousness.
In this sense, the individuals that are associated with hipsterism that one can encounter today are strongly reminiscent of the ‘Angel-headed hipsters’ Ginsberg (2015) described in his poem about the beats, looking for a heavenly connection, and hoping to evoke a spiritual awakening from within.
There is also a basic awareness that the appropriation of such practices, such as in New Age spirituality, could be problematic Fig. 3.6.
Alternative book stores are mostly very new age, like Buddhism – but for the western mind. Noam doesn’t like that.
Conversation notes, Summer 2016
While criticism of western cultural imperialism or cultural appropriation was not explicitly stated, my respondents did in some cases show awareness of this problem.
It would not be hipster if there was not also an example of this spirituality used ironically in a hipster coffee shop. Like weeds, coffeehouses with an minimalist hipster aesthetic that offer speciality coffee and vegan, organic foods, are sprouting on the Sonnenallee, such as “Holy Coffee”, which suddenly showed up between a Turkish fast food restaurant and a cheap Chinese restaurant.
Image 3.7 shows the slogan is “In coffee we trust”, a mockery of the motto “In God we trust”.
“In Coffee we trust”. (Semple, 2018c)
Generally, my impression remained that apart from curiosity and interest, my contacts in the field did not seriously engage in any of these practices with long term committment. These spiritual or alternative means of healing were rather to be understood within a larger sense of generally finding meaning in life:
I guess it’s giving yourself a sense of purpose, in the end, the eternal search for something. I don’t know for what I am living exactly, I am still searching for meaning in this world, and my only expectation from the life is to live a good way.
Extract from a narrative interview, Spring 2017
In addition to the construction and adaption of values, spiritual or moral in nature, some alternative ways to challenge the worlds problems were also mentioned, which we will analyse further in chapter 4.
The discourse often revolved around how a response of love to hatred, as well as mindfulness in actions, can have an effect. Love, spirituality and mindfulness are seen as an antitode within the safe spaces to protect the respondents. Finn explained to me that if one of his employees was not working well, he would not be worried about the customers or the impact on the income, but rather how to spread love.
If someone is not working well/ impolite to customers etc, he constantly thinks about how to deal with this, how to do the best thing. (He uses the example of Trump) “If you treat someone with hate, it only creates hate, if you treat everyone with love, love spreads.”
Conversation notes, Summer 2017
Amongst all these values, it is most interesting that the milieu has great issues with capitalism and consumption, but engage very explicitly in a specific kind of consumption collectively. One respondent described this antitype as the person who wants everything immediately. Thoughtless consumption and directly wanting to fulfil your desire to consume by ordering at online shops such as Amazon are criticised repeatedly. However, the milieu engages in constant consumption of a specific kind. Whether it is minimalism (consuming very little in an aesthtically pleasing way), consuming spiritual good (specific drugs or engaging in shamanic practices), or consuming fair trade and vegan all are practices that are very much defined by consumption. Consumption becomes a stratifying element, just like Bauman (2008) describes. The effect and potential of consumption will be explored further in section 4.3.2. But for now it is interesting to see that the antitypes are understood as capitalist and slaves to consumption and production, but the respondents engage and occupy their minds at length with these processes.
3.3 Do-What-You-Love—A Process of Transition
As an antitype to the enslaved or uninspired worker, and being as creative as they aspire to be, my respondents demonstrated a cross section of various stages in the process of the becoming of hipster. This process can be described along two simultaneous narratives.
Observed along a linear process of life course, the respondents demonstrated becoming self-sufficient working adults, from being part-time workers, students or interns. My respondents demonstrated various stages of this process.
From a spatial perspective, my respondents interacted with space and constructed spaces for the use of work or leisure, often interchangeably. This spatial dimension demonstrates the process of transformation of leisure into work and vice versa. The objects that occupy these spaces are also of importance. They demonstrate a fetishisation that facilitates this transformation process along with the physical space.
The spaces that were involved not only facilitated the linear process of individuals described above and ambiguity of spaces of work and leisure, but also a transformation of awareness about one’s own privilege and the structures of capitalism—and how they enable or hinder the growth process of becoming a Hipster.
These two narratives, the linear process of becoming and the spatial perspective, interlace in the attitude of Do-What-You-Love. This motto articulates the attitude that young adults are encouraged to pursue work that is enjoyable or pleasurable to them. Thus Do-What-You-Love expresses the first perspective- finding work and becoming a self-sufficient adult- and the second—transitions and interchangeability of work and leisure.
In the following chapter I will introduce the concepts of Do-What-You-Love and the fetishisation of commodities by means of coffee culture. Then we will turn to the question of having freedom to choose work you love and implications of the new spirit of capitalism (Boltanski et al., 2005) and the dimensions of capital and advantages in the field (Bourdieu, 2012). My respondents partly demonstrate a sense of security that is elicited by capitalism to undergo risks. This sense of security stabilises capitalism itself.
Following this description of the social milieu on the basis of my observations, the idea of hipsterism as a process of becoming an adult, and the life courses with various stages along these lines will be described. Ultimately the analysis of their life course showed that my respondents demonstrate the different stages of the process, and especially two different results of this process that I will describe: the heroic failure of Do-What-You-Love, framed as a flaw of capitalism, and the successfully established and adapted adult Hipster.
The process described is facilitated by spaces of ambiguity that demonstrate obstacles and barriers of hipsterism, as well as a growing awareness and consciousness of the dynamics of capitalism at play. The context of spaces that represent this process will be introduced, in reference to Lefebvre (1991).
Conclusively, the coworking space shall be introduced as one manifestation of contradictions that result between the lived, conceived and perceived or practised space. It emerges as a space facilitating the adaption to the reality of a economy dominated by capital, profit and competition, whilst trying to maintain a creative, collaborative and friendly atmosphere.
3.3.1 Do-What-You-Love
The first and foremost choice within a lifestyle remains what one chooses to do to earn a living. As a more fundamental choice, rather than the day to day decisions that also give life consistency, this choice is slightly more ultimate. All my respondents had work that directly or indirectly shaped culture—again showing the importance of creativity (Reckwitz, 2014) and cultural capital (Bourdieu, 2012) in this social milieu.
Considering work life, according to Giddens (1991) lifestyles in modern societies usually impact the choice of work. My respondents emphasised choosing a job based not only on their strengths or talents, but rather one that they are passionate and joyous about. This can be associated with the Do-What-You-Love attitude. Giddens (ibid., 82 f.) explains that an individual’s lifestyle forms an institutional setting that helps the individuals shape their everyday actions, and also their strategic life-planning and life politics. The life-planning and life politics express their emancipated decision-making and directing of their own biography. This includes the important aspect of what to do for a living.
My respondents showed strong identification with the work they were doing– or trying to do. However, unlike what is typical in western, modern individuals of higher class, it was not necessarily the work that they earned a living for. They often understood themselves as creating individuals, still finding out how to make it sustainable.
My respondents spoke of doing what they love repeatedly. Some aware of the fact that it probably will not be sustainable, others with the idea that there might come a breakthrough. The idea of Do-What-You-Love is closely associated with hipsterism and youth culture in general.
His parents support him by paying the rent of his apartment and he works for a small coffeehouse once a week. In his free time he does art. He doesn’t want to work in an office environment, where he has to follow the visions of someone else, thereby displaying the Do-What-You-Love attitude. He has many ideas for the future, but merely in theory. Becoming an artist, or opening up a coffeehouse are some ideas he has.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
The above observation is a typical example for many conversations pertaining to work. Respondents expressed their wish to do some work they are passionate about, often a combination of something creative and ethical. One of the startups that I encountered in the observations within a coworking space was a company that produced organic tampons, which were biodegradable. One respondent had made his hobby of writing poetry slams his full-time career. He was touring around German speaking countries with shows of his own, publishing books, giving workshops and was being commissioned by various companies to write texts for them. He also had a project with the elderly with Alzheimer’s, writing and reciting poetry with them.
The idea of working for someone else, or on a dream that is not one’s own, is looked down upon. As the respondent above explained to me, he doesn’t want to work for an office job or for someone else, thus expressing the importance not only of creativity, but also of independence and authenticity. One is again reminded of the anti-type of the uninspired, or even enslaved and exploited worker, who would have to work for someone else. However, in the example above the individual agrees to work for someone else part time, thus possibly enabling himself to fulfil his dream of becoming an artist, or opening up his own coffeehouse in the future.
While various respondents demonstrate different stages of the process of Doing-What-You-Love, especially divergent stages of being able to earn a living with it, the transition of leisure to work often included a fetishisation of the products that individuals deal with in their work, most present in my data in the example of coffee culture.
In the following I will demonstrate this fetishisation of the work and the objects surrounding it, as an example of Do-What-You-Love in the baristas that work in cafés and coffee shop owners.
3.3.2 Coffee Culture and the Practice of Fetishisation
Coffee, as a commodity, is not just sold, but also ritualised and served in the setting of a coffeehouse, which is a highly frequented space in the hipster scene.
As early as in the 17th century, the coffeehouse stood for a space where intellectuals would meet and engage in political and public discourses. As [Manzo 2010, 141–142] explains, public sociality and social interaction are closely connected with the commodification of coffee and the sites of its consumption.
Modern sociability is closely connected to coffee consumption today, and thus it also includes an important role in spatially organising encounters and discourse. Manzo (ibid.) explains that “among a subculture of certain coffee connoisseurs, the coffee itself is a topic that is an organizing focus of, and for, that sociability”.
Some of my respondents spoke of their work the way Benjamin did. He was slightly older than the rest of my respondents at 35, and describes aspects of his work below.
There is this movement called third wave coffee or speciality coffee and it’s like a different view on coffee as a beverage, and you have to have a certain mindset on coffee and what it is as a product. And I look for cafés that have this special mindset. This means that I choose cafés that share this mindset. They see more in coffee than just a bitter drink that makes you awake.
Extract from narrative interview, Summer 2016
Third wave coffee consumption as my respondents mentioned, is described by Manzo (ibid.) in the context of the first two waves. He describes this historical perspective of what he calls the coffee geek culture.
The “first wave,” according to the coffee geeks’ timeline, refers to how coffee was prepared and consumed in, say, the 1950s until, say, the early 1990s, when coffee was a “caffeine delivery system” prepared in percolators or massive urns in offices and banquet halls. (Manzo, 2010, p. 143)
This pertains to the description of my respondent, explaining that he sees more in coffee than “just a bitter drink that keeps you awake”.
The “second wave” refers to that period, starting in the early 1990s, when coffeehouse chains (Starbucks, Gloria Jean’s, The Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf, Second Cup, etc.) were founded and became common features in urban storefronts and suburban malls. The “second wave” purveyors, this history claims, laid the groundwork for the “third wave,” which comprises small-batch artisanal coffee roasters and independent or smallchain coffeehouses that are themselves part of a supply chain including a collection of field-to-cup actors starting with direct-trade growers with whom the coffee brokers, roasters, and coffeehouse owners are understood to have a relationship. (ibid., p. 143)
My respondents repeatedly criticised what turned out to be second wave coffee, either explicitly or implicitly and through distinction. Statements were made about how the trends being described here as third wave are then imitated by coffeehouse chains such as Starbucks or McCafé, and “are then capitalised again and again, so you lose faith” as one respondent described.
To identify with a product you are selling to the extent of calling it a mindset or attitude, as Benjamin does in the statement above, demonstrates the fetishisation of coffee and the process of drinking it. In current coffee culture, the taste of the coffee and gentle processing of the coffee bean are extremely important. As one respondent explained, the aim is to keep the original taste that one can find in the cherry and sustain it through the entire coffee-making process.
One element of this fetishisation is then learning or acquiring a taste for what is considered good coffee. In reference to Bourdieu (2012), coffee becomes one taste in a palette of distinction. Bourdieu (ibid., p. 441) explains that by their taste, individuals position themselves in society and this bears testimony to their unique personality and indicates their position in the social space they find themselves in.
However, while Bourdieu (ibid.) explains consumption patterns as a result of societal circumstances and habitus, my respondents saw themselves as if they were on a mission to civilise and educate the masses about the true value and taste of coffee, and they saw an effect through their behaviour. They framed it, much like in the case of veganism, as an attempt to help others see and widen their horizon. Benjamin once mentioned how he is proud of showing others what coffee can be.
In addition to being able to differentiate good and bad coffee, and detecting “the different nuances of taste that can be found in the original bean”, as one respondent put it, third wave is identified as a transformation of the production of coffee. It involves communication and transparency during the whole process of commodification. This means including every party in the communication, from the coffee farmers to the preparation of the drink itself, “in order to get the best flavour”, as one respondent explained.
This has various supposed side benefits that the respondents emphasise, such as better conditions for the farmers.
Framed as a positive side effect, one respondent explained:
(...) there are different ways, and it has a huge effect and makes a big difference also in the taste at the end. And then there is also the aspect of the trading between farmers and roasters. Usually there is a market that determines the price and availability. In the third wave approach, roasters try to engage directly with the farmers, without a middleman, there is a direct approach. Direct trade is what it’s called. (...) The idea is that if you have a direct relationship between farmers and roasters, it benefits all: there is an exchange of knowledge and everyone benefits and can earn more. What happens is that the roasters then have a big impact on how the how farming is done, the farmer can implement the recommendations, and the roaster gets higher quality raw coffee. So this cooperation is developed and the farmers can earn more, for example through having a better product, or having less waste. All in all, you get a higher quality product, we get better coffee and the customer, and the farmers have a higher yield when they harvest the coffee, because they get tips from experienced roasters.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
What stands out is the “huge effect” and “big difference” that this mindset is supposed to make. While the difference in the taste of the coffee is likely minimal, described in terms as “subtle” and “nuanced”, the infrastructure around it is given the biggest importance according to this statement.
In this context the respondent emphasises that a direct relationship between himself and coffee farmers has various advantages that benefit all. It is understandable that a greater influence on the farming process is an advantage for the roaster who will receive beans that have been farmed in a way that enables him to sell a better product to his customers. According to this respondent, the farmer is benefitting from the expertise of the roaster. I could not find out whether this advantage for the farmers is an actual benefit that can be measured, for example whether they are able to charge more for the beans or something similar.
However, one aim of this third wave process is to uncover hidden information about the commodification process and reveal the conditions of production, also to inform consumers about their relevance. Some coffeehouses offer seminars, courses and workshops about these subjects and teach how to process the coffee yourself in this gentle way. This information can then also influence consumers, allowing them also to make ethical decisions about their consumption, which is important to them. Within the social milieu, buying fair trade coffee is emphasised as important. Most of the coffee houses also have a low waste policy, or offer incentives to customers to take away food and drinks in their own containers that they had brought from home.
Nevertheless, in my experience, having spoken to established entrepreneurs and roasters in this social milieu, the positive effects for the coffee farmers or environment for example, are understood as a “side benefit” as Benjamin also once called it. This distinguishes it significantly from veganism or vegetarianism, which is often framed by my respondents as a clear ethical decision, in support of sustainability, the environment and animal rights (see also 4.3.2). The first and foremost priority in the third wave movement seems to be having a great product and to educate the masses on how important the quality and preparation of the coffee are.
My respondents’ moral and ethical choices and solidarity played a larger role in their consumption behaviour (see also 4.3.2) rather than for the production or sale of products. For an established entrepreneur and owner of a coffeehouse, the product itself and how to sell it played a larger role. What can be seen here is the transformation along their life course, but also the movement from an idealistic consumer of goods who wants to buy ethical products, towards a salesperson who will have to ensure that his business can survive in the economy. This process is facilitated by spaces such as the coffeehouse itself.
3.3.3 Freedom and Choices to Do-What-You-Love
The freedom of choice to not only consume such goods, but even to pursue a kind of work that one loves, is enhanced by the privileges that the respondents enjoyed, for example high economic and inherent cultural capital (Bourdieu, 2012), as well as security nets through their families. They also demonstrated a belief in the security that capitalism offers, even if they did not have a family or economic safety net to fall back on in case of failure. While some respondents had not studied but had rather done an apprenticeship, many came from high socioeconomic backgrounds, and benefited from higher education, either through themselves or through their parents.
At 26 Marvin identifies himself as an artist, and only works part-time at the moment, even though he finished his BA in graphic design several years ago. His parents support him by paying the rent of his apartment, and he works as a barista a few days a week.
Marvin is able to work a part-time job and to do art at the same time, with its cost of time-consumption and the expense of materials and a studio. Amongst others, this example demonstrated how interdependent the areas of work, leisure, identity and privileges are—such as having supportive parents and high economic capital.
In this context it is essential to look at the various areas of work and leisure, the construction of identity and the spaces of hipsterism as a coherent whole.
While it seems to be an uplifting piece of advice, Do-What-You-Love can be associated with a very privileged and elitist world-view and is closely related to the idea of neoliberalism, in which individuals are urged to invest in their own human capital (Harvey, 2005), in order to be able to earn a lot of money, whilst doing something they really enjoy.
Here a contradiction emerges, as being neoliberal is also an antitype to hipsterism.
Do-What-You-Love does not take social inequity, unfair conditions and circumstances of capitalistic society into consideration. The ideology of Do-What-You-Love can be used to justify a discrimination of labour workers, as opposed to successful entrepreneurs and self-employed individuals. This discrimination stems from an understanding that failing to work for yourself or have a job you really love if your own fault. The reason for their failure to get a high paying and excellent job that makes labour workers happy and inspired is that they were not inspired enough or worked hard enough to do something for a living that they love. In other cases from among my respondents, labour is regarded merely as a stepping stone for a “real”, “fulfilling” career. As the following extract shows, Benjamin, the owner of the coffeeshop, emphasises that he understands that working for him is merely a stopover, and not an employer’s “life” yet. This also emphasises that once you find a fulfilling job and can Do-What-You-Love, this work becomes your life.
...most of my employees are in a situation where they are studying. So they work for me to get them through school. And I myself worked jobs like that during my studies [...]I try to always remember that people who are working for me, it’s not their life. Those who work in my cafe as baristas or servers, it’s not their life or main focus. [...] I always try to help and support, and make things easier for them, as this job is not their entire focus, and I understand that and try to make it work.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
Individuals who are not so successful in finding such a job that they love longterm could be held responsible for their failure themselves. This takes the prerequisite of capital in all its facets according to Bourdieu (2012) for example, out of the equation.
To start up a new company based on an idea, or to seek ones fulfilment as an artist while working as a barista, requires safety in an economic sense, through substantial economic capital, or a safety net of a materially comfortable family. But even those who didn’t have such a financial safety net, such as Noam, demonstrated the belief that capitalism stabilises society. Even though the respondents were critical of capitalism, when explored more deeply in conversations, they demonstrated the belief that on some level capitalism gives you freedom to do what you wish. Another understanding that was very common in older respondents was that capitalism is just. This did not at all reflect younger respondents’ attitudes. Benjamin, one of the oldest respondents, once stated that he also has all the risk, so it is only fair if he earns more than his workers. While his workers are in a safe position, he has invested all his savings into this coffeeshop, as well as the financial help he was getting from his parents. His workers however are still young, and carry none of the risk, which is why they are not paid as well.
Another example portrays a belief in the security net of a welfare system. Noam believed that he risks becoming bankrupt and can take that risk, because of the system he acts in. He also appreciates that the laws make it possible for him to Do-What-He-Loves.
Noam explained more about his work situation for me today. He explains that it is special to Berlin that there aren’t many chain stores but rather small stores. “In the US and Israel and with amazon, so you have no chance. Here there are laws of how much a book can cost, big chains and us, we sell at the same prices, but we have a better selection of special books.”
Field Diary, Summer 2016
Noam is explaining here that he appreciates the laws on how much a book cost, which make it possible for a small independent store to compete with large scale online ones. At a later time he emphasised how lucky he felt to be in Germany, and how little understanding he had for people who complain a lot. He claimed that while he does not like capitalism and he also sees major problems in market economy, there is at least safety, “you will always have a roof over your head at least”.
However, both Noam and Benjamin explained that they risk becoming bankrupt and losing all their investments, whether financial or personal.
Being able to live such in a way, risking to fail or become bankrupt, demonstrates what Boltanski et al. (2005) explain as the assumed security which capitalism seems to provide in the new spirit of capitalism. One very interesting example is job security, which was very important in the 1960s as well as in current societies. However, in the 60s it involved paternalism, a high importance of personal relationships and personal property. Now job security is reframed through the concept of employability. This employability re-assigns the job of gaining and maintaining security to the individual workers, who develop their own employability as they gain experience.
We also see a third tendency amongst these respondents: they believe that capitalism allows them to have a job they do not enjoy, for now, and enables them thus to Do-What-They-Love in the future. Or vice versa. This is demonstrated in Noam’s statement about always having a roof over his head at least. It is also demonstrated in the idea of doing another job for now so you can Do-What-You-Love in the future, the way Benjamin describes it and Matteo lives it.
To believe that there is a safety net and thus to get involved in capitalism, corresponds to the general arguments in favour of capitalism outlined by Boltanski et al. (ibid.). As mentioned in 1.4.3, when individuals believe that generally involvement in capitalism is exciting, because it provides liberation for those involved to pursue a career they enjoy, that capitalism offers security and safety for all involved, and that capitalism ultimately leads to the common good, it becomes stable against criticism.
However, the main problem that Boltanski et al. (ibid., 163 ff.) describe, is that these arguments do not take into consideration various or unique constitutions of an individual’s life, and how these factors might benefit or hinder them.
In spite of this dynamic that Boltanski et al. (2018) describe, my respondents, without exception, showed awareness and understanding that the unique circumstances, often framed as “luck” in the discourse, give them privilege and allow them to pursue options. They expressed their understanding that others, who live in a society with the same economic circumstances, are not able to pursue such an option.
In practice, this understanding and awareness expresses itself in two models of thought, which can also be understood along the lines of a linear life course.
On the one hand it can express itself by understanding that these social differences are present, and there is not much that can be done about them. This feeling of helplessness thus leads to a cynical attitude towards societal structure.
On the other hand, I have observed in my respondents a feeling of obligation towards society and thus to try and shape the little factors that lie in one’s power to compensate for this injustice. This is portrayed by the generous and “cool” boss, described in section 3.3.4.
Which of these reactions comes into being is closely connected to the implicit anthropology that underlines the thought of the individual (discussed in 4.1.4), and also the success or failure of the individual to use circumstances and conditions to pursue a Do-What-You-Love career, as will be discussed in the next section.
3.3.4 The Process of Transition—Life Course in Hipsterism and Success and Failure
The process of becoming within hipsterism can be narrated along three different stages. These stages correspond to different levels of not only increasing economic independence and self-sufficiency, but also along the awareness of—and adaption to—the dynamics of capitalism.
Another element that detectably decreased in the process of my respondents is the level of idealism and the hopefulness to be able to contribute meaningfully to society.
In order to demonstrate this process and its subsequent stages, we will distinguish three very simplified ideal types in the following, illustrated by examples from the field.
In the first stage, the individual in this social milieu is a young adult, who was either studying or recently finished school or university and was starting to work or starting an internship.
The following statement is by an intern who was working for a startup in a coworking space.
“That’s why people make fun of us, you can come here [Berlin] to fulfil your dream, for self-realisation. ...It is colourful and diverse, and nobody will laugh at your dreams here, because we all have them.”
Conversation notes, Winter 2016
The respondent moved to Berlin in the hope of finding fulfilment. There is a sense of collectivity expressed here by using the word “us” and “we”. Berlin is romanticised as a place where those who have not yet lost hope, or those are young and full of enthusiasm and dreams are welcome. It resonates with the safe space that is described in section 3.2.
Within this stage, the respondents are also aware that their dreams are sometimes unrealisable. They emphasise that they just want to try. The understanding that it is unlikely is a subtle indicator that there is an awareness of privilege and capital as determinating factors for Do-What-You-Love. In no conversation did I meet anyone who met the criteria of hipsterism but that emphasised that Doing-What-You-Love is easy or merely takes determination and will-power.
Characteristics of this stage are hopefulness and idealism, but also an awareness that there are contradictory dynamics of capitalism that might stand in the way of fulfilling one’s dreams.
Noam was an especially interesting case study in my field, because I encountered him right at the beginning of my first research phase and kept in touch with him until the writing of the thesis now. The progression along this linear process was very visible, in one of the first conversations he said the following:
I ask about the sustainability of their company and Noam explains that after the first year they kind of covered cost, but barely. But they haven’t made profit yet, but his colleague, the owner, has money to spare. “The salary I make is very low, so hopefully soon we can make it work to survive, and keep it going as long as we can.”
Field Diary, Summer 2016
As a young man starting to work as a manager of an independent book store, Noam represents this early stage. While he is aware that the success of his shop might be difficult in the age of Amazon and other internet stores, as well as big chain book stores with a higher variety of choices, he is hopeful. He shows an awareness that sustaining a shop with these aims does not come without its challenges. Two years later, the store has gone bankrupt and has closed.
The general attitude of Do-What-You-Love might lead one to believe these individuals are just naive and privileged individuals that do not understand that it requires a lot of privilege. This is how Hipsters are also often portrayed in the media and across internet platforms. They show however that even in the earliest stages they are aware of the social discrepancy and disparity in some areas.
My respondents expressed their awareness that it is problematic, either explicitly, or through ironic self-distancing. Their awareness of their own privilege can be seen in the following extracts.
The biggest and most basic thing is that I always know that I have the support of my family in my decisions. And I always knew my family has my back. Unless it is a really stupid decision, I can always count on their support.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
In the following case the individual, who was one of the few respondents who hadn’t studied, was from abroad. He maintains an awareness of the privileges he enjoyed, and he distinguishes himself from political refugees or people who have left the country because of economic challenges.
He says it is hard for him to say that he left for political reasons in the classic sense, because he is not a refugee, “I’m not even an immigrant, but a citizen here.” He also had a family to help and support him home. Also he is not the one suffering from the regime. He describes that it’s more the “middle class I’m sick of all this shit”- reason and because the political system there is so “intense” it took a toll on him, he was angry and sad and depressed all the time.
Field Diary, Spring 2016
In this case the individual distinguishes himself from refugees who have to flee for political and economic reasons. He explains that he has a support system, as opposed to many refugees who also come from abroad. The reason for coming to Berlin is mostly because there was political turmoil in his country, and he needed to escape from that. He frames this as a privilege that many other refugees do not have. The awareness that one enjoys certain privileges seems to be fundamental to my respondent’s sense of authenticity. As mentioned before, authenticity is an important element of being hipster. This earliest stage shows that from the beginning, there are important elements of awareness and authenticity within this social milieu.
The second stage can be understood as the gateway or entry into the job market. Characteristics of this stage are the decrease of financial support from parents or institutions and thus increasing economic independence, insecurity and a practical experience of the dynamics at play in capitalist societies.
This practical experience in turn has a twofold effect. The first effect is the growing disillusionment as regards the opportunities or possibilities to contribute meaningfully and change social and economic structures, all while having and keeping a job one enjoys. A typical statement might be something along the lines of “I have been working for a while now, and the company I work for does not earn so much money. Our product is a niche-type product, and we can’t keep up with Starbucks / Amazon / McCafé”.
The second possible effect of this entry into the market derives from a direct experience of the imagined or real benefits of capitalism. This experience leads to decreasing idealism and reduces hope to find creative and ethical work.
Of course, with hipsterism being a transition phase between education and pursuing a career as a means of becoming the imagined self-sufficient, creative individual, the respondents are actually confronted with the real necessity to finance yourself and provide for the material means of living. One respondent, for example, explained that he had not gone to university, but if he had, he would have studied “something with humanities” and it would not have made a difference to his current situation, because “with that you don’t get a job anyway”.
This demonstrates the increasing disillusionment and decreasing idealism, that one can actually earn a good living with things one is passionate about. It also reflects an increasing understanding within the milieu that work security has decreased in modern society, and it is up to the individuals to stay active and make themselves attractive enough for the work market.
In another instance a respondent explained that they do not make money and that their business is not sustainable and doomed to fail. All they want to do is to be able to work in a field that they find interesting—at least for a little time—before they inevitably fail and move on. This is portrayed by a later stage with Noam and his explanation that he is basically waiting until he becomes bankrupt and that he is trying to enjoy the job as long as he can.
In the following example the respondent demonstrates a subtle but growing doubt about his Do-What-You-Love career and whether it is sustainable.
I think that people are happier now, that they used to be. People used to be sad, just working for money. I grew up in a family where I was told that I can do whatever I want, I could just pick my studies and so on. And I think that these decisions I made were shaped by these freedoms. Even though it might be that I am fooled by capitalism, I pressed myself into this shape. I work so much, and I hardly ever go on holiday.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
In the above case the respondent links the mere working for money to unhappiness. However, he expresses the feeling that while the decisions he makes seem to be shaped by his freedoms, he may be “fooled by capitalism”. He feels as if he pressed himself into a shape, because he hardly ever goes on holiday and works a great deal. This implies knowledge, or at least growing awareness that Do-What-You-Love also leads to individuals working much more than they might do otherwise. It resonates with the New Spirit of Capitalism (Boltanski et al., 2005), in which exploitation is more subtle and freedom to do what you love comes at a high cost. These observations complement Boltanski et al. (ibid.)’s theory, by the subjects’ growing awareness of issues affected by the New Spirit of Capitalism, without understanding the underlying structures that shape them.
Benjamin described his attitude and his work with coffee as a special mindset. When I first met him, he was looking for collaborators and other coffeehouses that have a similar attitude. While it started out as passion-driven and creative work, with the progression of the business, Benjamin, like any other entrepreneur, was faced with the need to sustain his coffeehouse. To be able to survive and sustain your business you need customers and increasing sales. With this realisation come techniques and ideas one might have to conform to, to be able to sell. One being the example Benjamin shared was the possibility of getting his coffeehouse on a special map to advertise the mindset that attracts customers who are interested in the specific product.
And there is a kind of service in quotations marks that’s called third wave coffee map, and then the coffeehouses are listed. People apply for a marker on this map and then they check your sources and website and Instagram and Facebook account, to see if you are like-minded with their ideas and if they think you fit in their profile of shops, they put a marker for your coffeehouse on their map.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
This also implies a growing awareness that to be like-minded and idealistic is not enough, but one needs to be visible and attractive to customers. His description is a very technical and rational one, and as such distances it from other statements I heard from him. In this case he matter-of-factly states that he needs to be on the map, because that is where specific clients can find your business and buy your products.
The third and final stage along this continuum marks the success or failure in the process of Do-What-You-Love. While the stages of this process do not necessarily end in a climax or complete and utter failure, there are two narratives that one can hear from the respondents.
The clearest forms of recognising the advantages of a supportive and economically stable background are visible in this stage, as the following extract shows:
My family, my background is typical German upper middle class. Both my parents work since I was little, three siblings. Overall I lived in a family where I can more or less freely express myself and it was never a problem that I wanted to quit a secure and safe job, but instead take a risky unsecure route of starting my own business.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
One young respondent, Caroline, who was described by her friends as “a Hipster by the book”, exemplifies this stage. During the fieldwork done in the summer of 2016, she broke up with her boyfriend, while she was working at the city theatre as a successful make-up artist.
Her reason for breaking up with him is that he is not driven enough and does nothing. It seems she also prefers to hang out with her colleagues, who also happen to be Hipsters, working at the theatre [...] She shows no serious interest in keeping up and hanging out with their mutual friends. Questionably, this could be a problem of hipsterism, in which Caroline wishes to live her life as a Hipster and a contributing, artistic member of society, and wants to isolate herself from those that are holding her back, or it could be a common lifestyle problem that isn’t hipster-related, but rather has to do with taking responsibility as an adult and being independent.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
The struggle that she has with her boyfriend is described that he is doing “nothing”, whereas in reality they seem to be at different stages within their life course. He is still in the phase of having a temporary job, whilst she was moving on to become successful in her artistic work and wished to live a lifestyle that reflected that success. Within a few months she became the managing make-up artist. He is still working part time at a coffee house. In my observation at that time I asked myself the question of whether this is a problem of hipsterism, or whether it is a natural progression along a continuum in life with the step of taking responsibility as an adult and wanting to become financially independent. It seems that a question that then seemed to be “either or” turned out to be a false dichotomy. Hipsterism progresses along this exact continuum.
Her advantage in this case is that she works for a state-funded cultural institution and does not have to worry about her own business. Thus she can still express hipsterism by distancing herself a little from neoliberalism and businesses in general, but can still continue to make a living in a creative way.
However, there were also individuals with their own business who were not working for the public sector, who went on to become successful. They show a more drastic adaption to elements that they had criticised in an earlier life course stage.
An example for this successful creative ideal type is the poetry slammer Tom, who describes himself as a roaming poet. He has managed to turn his hobby of writing and performing poetry slams and hosting his own competitions into a career that can sustain him very well. After going from renting to buying his own apartment, he performed a slam text about being called a “square” by some of his friends. In the text he attacks his imagined opposite “Martin” and defends himself as a square. He allowed me to translate and use some of his text that will demonstrate the transition to a successful entrepreneur and the distinction he felt towards the younger generation of Hipsters.
But if your parents do not own their living space, ask them how shit it is to soon have to pay the rent from their pension. And to leave you to only inherit the money from a savings account that has shrunk slowly in the course of your lifetime, or was flushed down the toilet in an equity fund. Maybe they have no property because they wanted to finance your communication design studies and they had to suck on crispbread and participate in illegal elderly battles, because while the other communication design students loved your designer I-phone cases made from upcycled children’s braces, no one wanted to buy them. And do you actually know that by law you have to be held liable with your assets for the care of your parents when their own fortune is exhausted?
Performed Poetry Slam—Reprinted with permission of author, Autumn 2016
The text implies that owning property, while it may be designated “square”, is a reasonable and sensible choice in an age of financial insecurity. He implies the existence of financial insecurity through the example of his parents’ shrinking savings account and the lost money of the equity fund. The text also criticises the financial dependence of the individuals in creative scenes on their parents, using the example of communication design as a typical course of studies and the upcycled I-Phone cases as a startup idea that failed.
Tom goes on later in the text to explain that the reason he is no longer interested in parties and loud music is because he is busy and successful.
I wonder, Martin, who also called me a Square when I told you that I complained about the loud music in the bar underneath my apartment, what you would do if your crowdfunding project became successful and you suddenly had to stop playing morning table football in your company at 10, but had to be at a project presentation with investors by 8, and would realise that the dream you always had, is about to be fulfilled. And whether the word fulfilment would not get a whole new meaning. The feeling that you have because something that was important to you, now becomes something generally important.
Performed Poetry Slam—Reprinted with permission of author, Autumn 2016
His imagined opposite Martin has criticised Tom that he gets up early and complains about music if it is played too loudly late in the evening. Tom’s own success and his meetings with investors and presenting projects early in the morning is contrasted with the attempts and dreams that individuals have, whose dreams are not yet “important” to anyone except themselves. This again demonstrates the adaption and the celebration of being able to live square, as opposed to living a hip life. The hip idea of making a living off poetry slams is implemented and adapted to make a square lifestyle possible. This is reminiscent of the concepts of square and hip like the designations of Hipsters of the Bebop generation 1.2.
Further examples of the ideal type of the successful adult Hipster are those entrepreneurs who can be closely associated with the hip, casual entrepreneurs of the New Spirit of Capitalism (Boltanski et al., 2005).
I had the opportunity to join two friends of mine who already had a Burger joint, and since my job at the time was kind of boring and I always played with the idea to be self employed, I just took the chance. [...The job I had before] was a typical nine to five office job and it was a medium size company where the sales department has all the power, and they dictated how the marketing work should be done. Either way, I felt a little bit like I couldn’t do the work like I wanted to, and I didn’t have much freedom, and I felt stuck and I played with the idea to leave for a long time, so when the opportunity came I took it.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
The ideal type of an entrepreneur within the New Spirit of Capitalism (ibid.) combines a few elements that can be closely associated to a “successful” Hipster in this narrative. One is that the respondents which were successful were dressed very casually. They also communicated a very casual attitude and spoke in informal ways. All the employees call them by their first name.
One of these exemplary entrepreneurs explained the relationship with his employees as follows.
First of all it makes it more enjoyable if you feel like you are working with peers, or people that you are on one level with, rather than a boss and employee situation, where one is subordinate. I made a lot of really good friends with my employees. It’s more often I feel like working with friends, than being a boss that manages employees. We also hang out in our free time after work. We have a semi-regular meeting at work. You don’t have to come, it’s not paid, but we have games night or watch a movie. And it’s sometimes also work-related, like we meet to try new menu items. It’s always a good time for me. I think for the employees it’s similar too.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
It seems interesting that the lines between leisure and workplace are becoming further blurred in the above example. This is depicted not just by the large companies which are forerunners of this model, such as Google and Ben and Jerry’s, but also but also by the small, independent, unfranchised, local coffeehouse.
Another example of this success is Finn, who manages a vegan café.
Finn explains that bigger places try to come and use their success to sell their goods, many times companies like coca cola want to collaborate with them, but “We have that power, Coca Cola comes knocking, and we say no thank you, that’s empowering, that you have the power to say no”
Field Diary, Summer 2017
Success is framed here as the ability to say no to or refuse collaboration with companies that are bigger and more successful, even if it might be financially beneficial to both sides. Finn describes his position as an empowered one, because they are so successful with their business, their café, that they are able to say no and be independent of companies bigger and more powerful than theirs.
Another point is the conception of being a nice or good employer who is a team player. Here Benjamin describes what kind of a boss he tries to be:
...I myself worked jobs like that during my studies and I had very cool bosses and I had very shitty bosses, and I try to be like the cool ones I had. ...I try to remember this and put myself in their [the employee’s] shoes and try to be a good boss. Not just on a pure professional level, but especially on a personal level. I think it’s important to communicate with your employees, to understand and realise if they are having struggles, whether it is work-related or study-related. I always try to help and support, and make things easier for them.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
To assume and to try to understand and accept, as an entrepreneur, that the people who are working for you have another life purpose, seems aligned with the privilege within this scene. While the individuals working in this hipster coffeehouse might need a bit of extra money to keep them afloat while they are pursuing their studies, for example, they are not as dependent on it as someone whose whole livelihood is based on this job. The employer tries to make it fun for them, also understanding that these individuals will move on to their own careers in life, probably when they, too, open up a coffeehouse or begin a start-up company.
In the context of being a good boss, Finn also shared:
There are tons of other stuff I believe in, for example treating ourselves and how we treat staff, to take breaks, them to step outside if they feel too pressured, because we are human, we are not robots, everyone is allowed to be themselves
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2017
The statement that Finn believes in “treating ourselves” can be associated with a mentality of regularly partaking in activities that ones enjoys. This idea of being the nice entrepreneur, who is hip and trendy but also helpful and kind and treats himself with the other employees is completely aligned with the entrepreneur described by Boltanski et al. (2005), who use this conception to explain that a new more subtle kind of exploitation is taking place.
Their workers just work temporarily and part time and thus do not demand the job security they would if they were employed properly. Perhaps a more subtle exploitation is possible, because they are working with a short-term vision that is reframed as enabling them to Do-What-They-Love in the future.
In this case, the implication that labour work is not really worthwhile becomes more apparent. It is implied that this work, (in the case of my respondents: cooking, baking, waiting tables and making speciality coffee beverages) is not a career or long term job. It is just a little stop over, before you find fulfilling work and can Do-What-You-Love.
However, if one fails to find this fulfilling work after trying, the narrative is a bit different.
As someone with little capital, who was unable to start his own shop or coffeehouse, the manager of an events space explained to me that his friend is the owner, because the friend is the one who has the economic capital. The respondent works for him and manages the space and organises events there. He shared that he wanted to become a writer, but that did not work out and he would not be able to live off it. He described that he had “grown out of that dream”.
This example explains why he has forsaken his dream, in this case the dream of becoming a writer, implying that it is not possible to survive on writing. It is quite possible to make a living on a career as a writer, just not very likely. It is implied that not many manage to successfully navigate a writing career, and thus a more sensible choice is to curate an event space, as an employee. It is interesting that this manager also implies this linear progression by saying that he has outgrown the dream rather than given up.
Similar to what Boltanski et al. (2018) describe in their profile of the project-oriented justificatory regime, this respondent has sacrificed dreams and no longer wants to be a writer. He demonstrates activeness, project initiation, his ability to get involved, adaptability, and flexibility, and with those attributes he curates the event space. He demonstrates the regime, by necessarily giving up plans as an investment to be ‘great’ someday, but for now, he uses his abilities to benefit him and his friend’s idea, but without much hope that it will become successful.
In his explanation of what he “brings to the table”, he narrates his contribution with emphasis on his ability to communicate with others and the ability to generate enthusiasm.
This narrative is often supplemented by a criticism of capitalism that appears to be a contemporary equivalent of the artistic critique of the late 60s (ibid., 419 f.). It attacks capitalism for the lack of opportunity to live a creative and artistic life.
In another statement a further respondent described the process of becoming successful as “pressing himself into the shape”, which is incompatible with the idea of living an authentic life.
Respondents formulated their frustration about not being able to get a job they love, but rather to pursue seemingly more secure work, as a heroic failure. In my conversations this heroic failure appeared as a coping strategy to explain the lack of success in pursuing a dream. Statements such as “Capitalism simply does not allow...”, followed by various ideas of what they had originally planned to do, were frequent. They also shared the idea of not wanting to press themselves into a shape that was set by capitalism.
An interesting example of this stage was another couple, Marvin and Anna. After a few years of Marvin trying to become a successful artist and working part time in sales, Anna complained in one instant, jokingly:
“Marvin doesn’t get that if work felt like leisure, it wouldn’t be work, it would be leisure. Work isn’t supposed to be super exciting, meaningful, and varied all the time. That’s what your free time is for.”
Conversation notes, Winter 2018
The frustration implied in this instance is supplemented by the heroic acceptance of having to live a very simple life, with little money. Anna explains to me that she studied art, but will work at a job that is not amazing or fulfilling, but rather standard. Instead of finding that fulfilling Do-What-You-Love job, the two of them try to work part-time and never full-time. Anna explained to me that they “don’t need much to live off, I don’t need fancy things or holidays. We have our minibus and we buy very little.” She explained that they would prefer that than to become “one of those crazy uptight workaholics that we would have to be to become successful”.
In this instance one can see how the failure to become successful in this area is reframed as a distinction mechanism. To live a simple life is living an authentic life, because you have not as Noam once put it, “enslaved yourself”, which you should avoid at all costs.
3.3.5 Spaces of Ambiguity
The influence of Do-What-You-Love and the process of transition leads to the emergence of ambiguous spaces that were once clearly designated to work or leisure. Thus, the social milieu of hipsterism offers various spaces that demonstrate the melting point of leisure and work activities. The development of such spaces and their effects on the individuals that frequent them, serve as examples for the all-round capitalisation of space and individuals.
An example of this is the emergence of the Soho House, an establishment that some of my respondents frequented. As a private membership-based club that targets people who are in the creative industries, it offers a space that some of my respondents explained was useful to connect to established artists or curators.
As will be explored in Section 3.4, it is embarrassing for individuals to be part of these practices of exclusivity, especially the admittance by nomination and recommendation. This demonstrates an understanding that such practices of exclusivity are problematic, but that they are also perceived by the individuals as unfortunately necessary to succeed within the creative industries.
When trying to start up a company, individuals are faced with the need for a clientele and advertising to be able to compete and succeed. These ambiguous spaces seem to facilitate the process of transmuting an idea or startup into a livelihood, in an atmosphere that conveys values that contradict this idea of exclusivity in a paradox way. Soho House employers mention time and again that their aim is to shake up the way the industry works, not to admit members merely because of their fame or celebrity status, but to merit their creativity instead. Another factor is that they claim that they do not allow sponsors to support their events and that they guard the secret of who and how individuals are invited to events of the houses, as was mentioned to me. As a vague denominator, “creativity” seemingly replaces economic with social and cultural capital.
While the Soho House in Berlin was still called a “Hipster Hangout”, my respondents felt the need to justify their membership, and also emphasised the exclusive practices as a “necessary evil” quite explicitly. The resignation seems to grow with the respondents’ exposure to the need of becoming successful and maintaining and sustaining their business or freelance work.
Another trend that is observable in Kreuzkoelln is the increase of so called coworking spaces. Various definitions for coworking space can be found, many emphasising that it is a community work space. In the broadest sense, coworking spaces are offices that vary greatly in their set up and interior design. Coworking in Kreuzkölln can generally be understood as a mode of working that is associated with collaboration and mutualism, rather than competition. Especially for those who are not bound to working in an office, but miss the day-to-day interactions and small talk that happens around an office space, coworking is a model that allows them to work alongside others. Coworking spaces usually consist of some desks in one area dedicated to working in a focused way, so one can dedicate time to concentrate and accomplish tasks. Conversations between the coworkers are encouraged, and there are often other areas besides the desk area, such as lounges, kitchens, outside areas, or meeting rooms, which provide environments to chat and collaborate.
Coworking spaces are not specific to the hipster milieu, but the idea of creative collaboration that is meant to take place there resonates in the milieu strongly. The idea is that if artistic and creative people have an open and collaborative mindset in the right material conditions, creativity and cooperation will occur.
Coworking is meant to enhance the connections, collaboration and social relations between freelancers, independent contractors, telecommuters etc. By spending a considerable amount of time in a coworking space in the heart of Kreuzkölln, I observed many dynamics and contradictions in the idea of a coworking Space and how this one specifically ran. The manager proudly told me that this was one of the first coworking spaces in all of Berlin, and the first in this area of Kreuzkölln (three others followed). The manager told me about their principles of coworking, cocreating and collaborating; and also about the leisure time and casual activities that the coworkers enjoy. However, my ongoing efforts to converse or befriend anyone in the coworking space failed.
Friendship as a method (2.2.2) seems strongest when friendships do not materialise. So, the access boundary that hindered me from taking part in the coworking, cocreating and collaborating, as advertised, demonstrates a stratifying element of the space.
The coworking space is a place where conscious efforts are made to maintain a friendly, social and inspiring atmosphere. Managers and users of such spaces strongly emphasised the image of a space in which one collaboratively creates. The aim is to provide the spatial practice, through a generated physical form that is used and thus conceptualised to that image.
However, it is not socially produced in the described way. There is a paradox relationship between the intention of the space, which can be associated with the materialism and the idealism of the space in reference to Lefebvre (1991), and the actually lived space. While the intention is to provide that space where social relations and “longlasting friendships” naturally occur, the spatial practice does not manifest these casual encounters, or any easy-going spontaneous creative collaboration. The coworking space is a business and one has to pay to rent a temporary or permanent desk there. As such the space has to deliver on its promise to provide the collaborative, cocreative atmosphere and the creative friendships that are supposed to result in new ideas. As this does not happen, as far as I observed, the space tries to compensate for the reality of it being difficult to realise this image. They attempt the compensation by organising cooking evenings, members-only events such as Christmas parties, workshops, yoga lessons etc. These events often feel forced or superficial with no significant lasting relationships developing.
It seems that these spaces function as if to turn the Do-What-You-Love attitude into an understanding of the dynamics of a capitalist market economy. These spaces are an environment in which these young adults turn into success-oriented individuals, responsible for their own material wellbeing and success. They are faced with real demands of the industries.
While it may appear cynical, one can imagine the coworking space as an emptying machine. The dream or illusion of becoming a co-creating, non-neoliberal and collaborative individual that is not a workaholic and is not influenced by the culture of competition turns out to be impossible in a profit-driven economy that is dominated by supply and demand. This impression was amplified by assuming the working, adult Hipsters are in the coworking space, after the first research phase. I entered and spent time in the coworking space, but did not see anything resembling what the collective imaginary of hipsterism should be. It echoed the idea that Hipsters do not exist.
3.4 Access and Boundaries—Mapping Hipsterism
In the following chapter the attributes, practices and antitypes of hipsterism come together as a space marked by various contradictions. In this chapter we will attempt to map hipsterism as a space which is geographic and material, as well as the way it is conceived as a mental space, and how it is lived and socially produced. In reference to Lefebvre (1991) this triad will show that hipsterism expresses contradictions that were not necessarily an issue in Lefebvre’s time. Lefebvre conceptualised space as a coherent model with these three moments and demonstrated how space is perceived, conceived and ultimately lived. These moments of space were not seperate, but rather dimensions or perspectives of the same space. My observation, however, showed that in the space of hipsterism these three dimensions did not coherently and holisitically come together as could be expected from Lefebvre’s perspective.
My experience of the space during the fieldwork was participant observation. I encountered the lived and socially produced space. This first hand experience with its symbolism and order conveyed a meaning that was irritating. It expressed values but was marked by contradiction. Lived hipsterism expresses the contradictions because it is real and imagined; it combines the materialism of the spatial practice and the idealism of representation of space.
By rereading and analysing the field notes and identifying the other two dimensions of space, its materiality and its conception, the contradictions that were felt and expressed in my logbook could be made explicit. We will see based on specific examples that the conception of hipsterism includes many idealistic (in refence to Lefebvre (ibid.) conceived) elements that do not necessarily materialise. In this chapter we will see how perceived and conceived space contradict one another.
I will begin by describing the spatial practice and how the physical form is produced concretely and how it is generated and used materialistically. This represents the spatial practice in reference to Lefebvre (ibid.). It will be portrayed in the geographic narrowing down process undergone in the research. This observation includes the first contradiction: a value placed on a colourful area with a diversity of cultures and ethnicities, in how the space is respresented in reference to Lefebvre (ibid.), but without any long-term interactions or friendships between the various cultures in spatial practice.
Another contradiction is the denial of the labelling as a “Hipster” and the implicit criticism of distinction processes that is expressed through embarrasment of distinction practices, whilst still engaging in these practices and engaging in milieu formation. This goes hand in hand with the wish that others join specific practices, because of the intention of the practice, for example in vegetarianism.
The third contradiction is the wish to experience authenticity, but doing it in an area that has nothing to do with your own heritage or reality. This can also be read as a contradiction, in which respondents express their awareness that these dynamics are problematic, exemplified by gentrification.
3.4.1 Narrowing Down Hipsterism—A “colourful” Kreuzkölln
I will begin by describing the spatial practice, how the physical form is produced concretely and how it is generated and used materialistically. It will be portrayed in the geographic narrowing down process undergone in the research. This observation includes the first contradiction: a value placed on a colourful area with a diversity of cultures and ethnicities, but without any long-term interactions or friendships between the various cultures.
In 2015 while I was researching for my Master Thesis, repeatedly I was told that I would have to go to Berlin.
And so I went to Berlin in search of what was being labelled there as hipster.
A question I had in mind to investigate during this process, was why the Hipsters specifically wanted to be in Berlin? The respondents I encountered were from all over the world. I asked them what led them to Berlin and one example for a reason was that it was easier to be vegan in Berlin. This individual came from south England and explained how he had kept trying to be vegan in south England, “but it was a crap life”. To reason moving to another country, because a specific mode of consumption is in itself a sign for the importance of consumption in the milieu, and whether modes of consumption actually qualify as lifestyles shaping the place individuals live, their work and ultimately their relationships will be explored further in chapter 4. In any case, as a reason to move to Berlin, the acceptance of diverse lifestyles and ease was often mentioned.
Another individual stated in a conversation “Being gay is a good reason to come to Berlin”, possibly referring to the long history of the gay rights movement and LGBQTI+ neighbourhoods in Berlin.
After the first research phase, following many conversations and research on lifestyle blogs, I narrowed Berlin down to the district of Neukölln, bordering Kreuzberg. Kreuzberg was described to me as the former hipster, now heavily gentrified, area. Neukölln was still “authentic”. The part of Neukölln immediately bordering Kreuzberg was called Kreuzkölln.
In conversations about this area the factor of authenticity and that of multiculturalism was often mentioned. Neukölln is “colourful” and that is what makes it attractive. This concept of multiculturalism is not just mentioned but also advertised visually in many places, also public spaces, such as youth centres or government buildings that draw attention to this fact, as one can see in figure 3.8. It shows a statue of a frog in front of a state-owned building with a youth centre for the district. The frog is colourfully decorated and the slogan reads “Berlin bleibt bunt” meaning “Berlin will stay colourful”. This message was conveyed materially on this statue, however it contains a conception. The concept of Berlin being colourful is a mentally produced and imaging fact, that can be asscoiated with idealism, rather than the spatial practice. Spatial practice is not only about the materiality but also about the use of the space.
Youth Centre on Weserstrasse. (Semple, 2016d)
Further examples of the conception of the space from the statements and imaginings of the respondents include the idea of Berlin being a safe space for all who have dreams and hopes and do not want to be ridiculed. Acceptance for ones authenticity seemed to make Berlin an attractive place to be.
I continued through research phases to narrow the geographic area down, by speaking to many individuals and asking where the Hipster could be found. I ended up living on a street connecting the parallel streets Sonnenallee and Weserstrasse.
After understanding this conception of Kreuzkölln as a colourful space and celebrated as such, I perceived the space in its materiality. So, what is physically happening, how is the space used, what can we see?
When observing the spatial practice at a very initial phase I was having difficulty finding anyone who could be labelled a Hipster in that area. Thankfully, a friend that I knew from before the research phase, Anna, also lived in Berlin and had just moved to that area. At 23, she was born and raised in Berlin and studied computer science.
The following extract shows my initial impressions and our exchange.
I told my friend Anna who lives in Neukölln too, that I don’t get the deal with Neukölln being described as the hipster area on the internet and on various blogs etc. It seems more like the Arab territory to me and I am happy I can get all my Persian goods here, before I came to Berlin they were really hard to find. The whole Sonnenallee, which I was told was the “place to be” is peppered with the odd hipster coffeehouse, but really still dominated by colourful Shisha teahouses, Arab halal butcheries, Syrian restaurants, falafel places and super markets with goods specialising on afro hair or asian and middle eastern foods.
Field Diary, Spring 2016
As a first stop after their often long and arduous journey, Sonnenallee provides a first kind of safe haven to the many immigrants coming to Berlin. Refugees from all over the Arab world, but especially Syria since the war began, frequent this area. The space is peppered with familiar cultural centres, such as Quran schools or mosques.
What would attract them is obvious: having a concentration of shops whose shopkeepers speak their language and sell their native products and feeling safer in an environment that feels familiar. As one can detect in the pictures, the shop signs are often in arabic. Oftentimes the signs are not translated into german (see figure: 3.9)
Bakery and Restaurant on Sonnenallee (Semple, 2018a)
The reasons for creative young adults wanting to move to this area of Neukölln specifically were not quite as clear. However the explanations I heard echoed those one could imagine hearing from the migrants: “this area is safe”, “one can dream here”, “it is easier to be your authentic self here”.
Anna, the Berlin local, who is mentioned in the field note above, showed me Weserstrasse and said that this street is what people actually mean when they say that Neukölln is hipster and that it is specifically called the “hipster street”. Anna said, “it is where the hipsters come out of their holes”, as if they were hiding like mice. As the parallel street of the Sonnenallee, Weserstrasse is full of art galleries, tattoo parlours, independent fashion designers, book stores, coffeehouses etc.
In such close proximity to eachother, these two streets and a few others connecting them comprised the neighbourhood that was described as Kreuzkölln. Weserstrasse opens up a space right by the colourful Sonnenallee that caters to the Hipsters’ perceived needs, mirroring the way the Sonnenallee answers to the real needs of the refugees. It accumulates the elements of creativity, minimalism, (western) notions of new age spirituality, and conscious and ecological consumption. It is comprised of restaurants and coffeehouses that sell organic whole foods, vegan pasteries and speciality coffee, merely a few hundred meters from the halal butcheries of Sonnenallee.
Within the discourse, diversity and multiculturalism play an important role in hipsterism. This area is the epicentre of the hipster scene, at least in the discourse on Weserstrasse. One coffeehouse in the Weserstrasse is named “K-Fetish”, which is the café with a yellow sign on the right in picture 3.11. I was told that the name of the café “K-Fetish” stands for Kollektiv-Fetishismus, expressing the fetishism of working in a collective. Sayings, such as “Fight Patriarchy” decorate the walls; and they also host feminist and antifascict events in their café. They promote their model of solidarily sharing all the work with one another. The politics of hipsterism will be discussed in chapter 4. It is interesting to note however that the café advertised “Refugees welcome” and “No place for Nazis” in Turkish, expressing solidarity towards migrants from Turkish background. The image 3.11 also shows a bar on the left advertising the slogan “no border. no nation”. It expresses a decidedly anti-nationalist political stance.
Often seen around Kreuzkölln, the sign “No Place for Nazis” in a copy shop. (Semple, 2017b)
On Weserstrassse: K-Fetish café on the right and a bar on the left. (Semple, 2016c)
Many explained that they loved this area so much because it is “colourful” or “multicultural” or “authentic”. I wondered about this however, realising quite quickly that the crossovers between the hipster population and the migrants are not observable. I never saw any one with a hijab in one of the hipster coffeehouses or shops, even though on the street itself there were always so many individuals wearing this expression of their faith.
Park (1915) writes that one of the first questions we should ask ourselves if we want to observe a neighbourhood is what constitutes the individuality of the neighbourhood—including a description of the populations that live there.
Hipsterism is obviously a certain social milieu, comprised of specifically young adults and demonstrating the thirst for creativity Reckwitz (2014) describes. However, with a milieu that expresses notions of solidarity; what effect does it have, that so many migrant families live right next door? Does the conceptualisation of Kreuzkölln as a multicultural space that goes beyond nation borders materialise in spatial practice? It appeared not to.
However, before we get to deeper reflections to the materialisation of this concept, it might be helpful to look at the process of gentrification and its reasons here.
The neighbourhood of Kreuzkölln offers migrants many opportunities to maintain their culture. On a street connecting the Sonnenallee and Weserstrasse was an Islamic cultural and educational centre, offering Arabic lessons and Qurán classes for children and youth (3.12).
Islamic cultural and educational centre. (Semple, 2016b)
As mentioned before many supermarkets and businesses, for example offering muslim weddings, are located in this area. While looking for an apartment in this specific neighbourhood I realised how expensive rents were and people mentioned again and again how difficult it is to find an affordable place and that rents had become extremely high recently. However, generally Neukölln is understood as a working-class neighbourhood.
Understanding how and why the young, affluent and educated demographic is attracted to this area is essential, because their choices are the ones that have most significantly changed it from a typical working class neighbourhood densly populated and shaped by migrants, to a more hipster area.
In an attempt to explain this phenomenon, one popular narrative (White, 2015), (Carroll, 2017) follows this logic: In urban centres, young university graduates from an affluent background move into lower-income neighbourhoods. They are followed by coffee shops and hip boutiques that start to replace older stores. The narrative indicates that new residents move there because it is affordable and conveniently located. Shortly after, real estate developers and agents follow, and the rents increase dramatically. This narrative is derived from cities such as New York City, where population growth is far exceeding the housing supply, and eventually all neighbourhoods are changing and rents become exorbitant, mostly due to wealthy incomers.
The narrative is described by Hertz (2018) in his social commentary on gentrification and the irritation it evokes as follows:
Part of what many people find so irritating -or dangerous, depending on how much you have at stake -about upwardly mobile young people moving to working-class city neighborhoods is the sense of frivolity, of flightiness, they carry with them. In this story, communities, social networks built over generations, give way to trend-chasing bars and twentysomethings who move on after a few years of renting, passing from neighborhood to neighborhood (and maybe out of the city entirely) with each new life event: a 9-to-5 job, marriage, kids.
The irony did not escape me during my observations: many young, affluent creatives were moving to Neukölln, opening up cafés and putting up signs saying “Refugees Welcome”, while this whole process was making rents so high, it was impossible for refugees with an asylum status to find apartments they could afford there. The question that arises in discourses about gentrification is why educated, artistic young adults—that once might have favoured more affluent urban neighbourhoods—are moving to low-income areas also labelled as working-class areas.
Reasons for moving are often cited as cheaper housing costs. The population moving to low-income minority neighbourhoods is educated, but their higher wages are still outpaced by rising housing costs (Hyra, 2016). However, as demonstrated by my respondents they move to such areas not because of lower housing prices, but desire to live there in spite of high housing costs. This is expressed in the sentiments such as “He lives on Sonnenallee, where everyone wants to live” or “the place to be”.
As a matter of fact, many authors emphasise the role of young adults in gentrification. However, the forces that drive gentrification stem from multiple levels, and are often too complex to reduce to an argumentation as described above. They include government policies and investment, increased racial tolerance, or even trends such as wanting to live in an edgy or hip area (ibid.).
One explanation found by some authors has been that many of these young adults desire to be perceived as choosing an edgy and hip neighbourhood, as a mere fashion choice (ibid.). While the purpose of my study on hipsterism was not to understand how this trend evolved and what it can tell us about gentrification, the observations offer some insight on how to gain a deeper understanding to why a low-income neighbourhood like Neukölln becomes trendy and popular, as opposed to other working class neighbourhoods—however more research would be needed in this respect.
In this context, it is pertinent to reexamine the description of the desirabilty of the neighbourhood. In the case of my respondents, many used words such as “real” or “authentic”.
He lives on Sonnenallee, which I was told was “where everyone wants to live”. On asking people why, they say “authentic” and “real” a lot. I don’t really understand how so many immigrants that don’t come from the same place as you, makes it authentic to you, but oh well.
Logbook, Spring 2016
Authenticity is often associated to a life lived independent of cultural norms. In the context of countercultures of the west (see section 1.2) living authentically is an opportunity to oppose the values of wider society in a behavioural and idealogical sense. There is generally a close link between being authentic and being real, the same way it was used in the discourse. Being fake as opposed to real can be associated with not only being unauthentic, but also with being capitalist. In music culture for example, unauthentic musicians are those who have sold themselves out and become commercialised. This was criticised in the conversations I observed.
This might lead to the impression that the respondents’ attraction to areas such as Kreuzkölln stem from their appreciation of the uncommercial small hipster cafés and the independent book stores and galleries. However, through their attempts to invite and interact with other populations and especially with migrants, however unsuccessful, could be identified their appreciation of the cultural diversity. My impression from being part of the field is a high appreciation of refugee populations. Even though the interactions are held to a minimum, the colourfulness of Kreuzkölln was also always mentioned in the context of authenticity. The respondents emphasised that they love shopping in the ethnic stores, that they liked the cultural diversity, that the shisha bars with their tables outside and smoking on the streets were authentic etc. My respondents frequented the arabic falafel vendours just as often as the hipster vegan cafés.
This appreciation was also addressed partially in the cinema Wolf that opened on Weserstrasse during the research phase in 2016. As a crowdfunded cinema that shows many foreign films, also farsi and arabic ones, it is inviting to my respondents and shows their attraction to foreign films and a respect for the cultures that inhabit the neighbourhood, in addition to the hipster milieu.
If authenticity is associated with refugees, migrants and foreign culture, and authenticity stands for nonconformity and being true to your self, gentrification could reflect the admiration of my respondents for the populations that do not conform. As such the attraction to such areas could reflect trying to live amongst populations that seem more authentic and real, because they are not only less privileged, but actually do not adapt to their surroundings and do not conform to society. They keep their culture and language to a certain extent. This could be an expression of authenticity that makes this neighbourhood popular in the hipster milieu.
However, this does not lead to interactions or crossovers between the hipster population and the migrants. Some obstacles became clear to me in retrospect, through my own behaviour and self-reflection.
During my field research I was out and about in our neighbourhood taking pictures. There was a family living on Weserstrasse in a small apartment. They came from Syria and had lived in Berlin for five years. One of the younger daughters of the family was fascinated by my single lens reflex camera and asked to borrow it. She took many pictures. I had absolutely no access boundaries (real or imagined) to befriend this family. In my logbook I reflected this as a true and coincidental friendship, rather than all the processes that had to happen to gain access to the hipster spaces. Gaining access to hipster spaces was a partial fitting in with many hurdles I felt I had to overcome.
During my time in Neukölln, I made friends with a family from Syria. The Sonnenallee where “everyone wants to live no”, is still littered with Arab shops, which clearly dominate the odd hipster café, oddly reminiscent of weeds germinating and driving prices up. I go shopping in the Sonnenallee, I appreciate the oriental supermarkets with the Persian goods I had missed in my old student town, and naturally built relationships.
Initially, I felt that had nothing to do with the hipsters. But for the least part: I was living in exactly the same neighbourhood geographically. And the hipsters claim they love it here “because it’s so colourful”. But none of those observed had a real relationship with anyone who actually identified as a foreigner there. [...]
Personally, I fell in love with this area in my second research phase: I get my Persian food here and have many Arabic speaking populations around me, with whom I feel I share a some cultural heritage. At the same time, there are the hip student bars and many vegan, healthy restaurants.
Logbook, Spring 2017
While geographically this area comprises a specific intersection of the gentrification process, I myself whilst contributing to that process, identified with many migrants around me. I only have a second generation experience of being a migrant and an upbringing with all the comforts and privileges of national citizenship of European countries. Nevertheless, being a daughter of religious refugees connected me to this family and made a friendship easily possible. I helped with homework and after school activities. The friendship continued through and beyond my research phases, until I moved away from Berlin completely. I was not able to establish a genuine friendship within the milieu of hipsterism with such ease. Furthermore, I slowly noticed during the research and my reflexions that none of my respondents from the hipster milieu had a genuine friendship with anyone from migrant populations like this.
As mentioned in 2.1.1 friendship does not need to become a blind spot for the researcher if it is constantly reflected. It can rather support the research process and complement the data. As such, through diligent self-reflection I realised that I eased with much less effort into the friendship with this local family than the intended fitting in with hipsterism.
The hipster milieu had many hurdles that I had to overcome. In this manner, I started observing all my processes of adaption to the field closely, especially what I did to feel welcome and comfortable in the hipster coffeehouses and galleries. But in comparison to the ease of adaption and building of a friendship with this family demonstrated that friendship as a method within hipsterism is strongest, when friendships do not materialise. In an ongoing process I observed where awkward or uncomfortable moments occured within the hipster spaces that significantly differed from the feelings that I described in the logbook entry above. I started to analyse those incidents when I defer from the social ritual, in a way that arises suspicion and looks peculiar, the way Park (1915, p. 584) describes. This description can map boundaries of hipsterism. These deferals and the discomfort analysed will feed into the next chapter on labelling, distancing and embarassment within the milieu.
In the logbook entry below, I reflect on the friendships between another friend, Zahra, who fled from Afghanistan with her husband, and Dennis, a composer with whom I had some conversations about islamophobia and tolerance.
Dennis insists on tolerance and accepting new cultures and other values, that we should question our belief systems, especially in the west, but he swallows considerably when I tell him [about] Zahras culture of having to ask for permission from her husband when she wants to meet with me. As well as [him] always asking if other men will be there. I told Dennis today that I love having such different friends with different cultures, but it’s sometimes hard for me to support and respect her culture, as it is foreign to me sometimes. Dennis doesn’t know what to say. I realise that I maybe understand Zahra better, because of my familiarity with this culture on a personal level, as opposed to Dennis. I have some things in common with her, I love her culture of hosting so lovingly, her great respect for family ties. We cook the same food. The only thing Dennis has in common with her seems to be me.
Logbook, Summer 2017
The advantage of having some things in common with Zahra helps me build a relationship with her, despite the things I might politically and personally disagree with. Dennis however is overwhelmed by the conversation. His inability to contribute speaks for his lack of experience in being friends with anyone so foreign to his own culture. He cannot relate to what I am describing and from that a moment of silence and awkwardness results. It is a further example of how the conceptions of acceptance and tolerance and the slogans such as “Refugees Welcome” and “no border. no nation.” can not materialise in spatial practice. How would someone like Dennis, who is against mongamous relationships and sees himself as questioning the norms of society by living in “free love”, build a relationship with someone like Zahra? This point is not to stereotype or draw extreme contrasts between these lifestyles. In some senses Dennis and Zahra have a lot in common. However it is the relational aspect to eachother that shows no manifestation in a practical way. The cafés can hang up signs reading “refugees welcome” as much as they want, but the refugees addressed here do not feel invited and neither Zahra, nor the family I befriended on Weserstrasse, sees the point in paying so much for a cup of coffee drink that they could theoretically make at home.
One can conclude that the spatial practice showed physical forms of culturally diverse milieus. However, in the practice of how it is used, the impression remained that these groups are very much characteristic of the big city as Park describes it: the meeting and mingling of peoples that do not necessarily comprehend one another and that “touch elbows on the street, [and] still live in totally different worlds” (Park, 1915, p. 595).
How then, can posting signs and the verbal expressions of solidarity be interpreted? Possibly, these acts of solidarity express the respondents’ underlying and implicit understanding of milieu formation, and an attempt to overcome this. Even if they are unsuccessful in spatial practice they have to be taken seriously as attempts to overcome these divides and this milieu formation in a neighbourhood that is, in fact, diverse.
3.4.2 Labelling, Distinction and Implicit Criticism—An Embarrassing Affair
In my experience observing the practices and the narrative of self within the hipster scene, individualism and the mere fact of being a very fashionable individual are not as important as the posts and media discussions on the topic might suggest. However, the respondents are often aware of the labelling process and deny to belong to any category. At the same time they are active in many practices that make others label them Hipsters and are reluctant to change.
This media portrayal however, does put pressure on anyone living this lifestyle or frequenting these spaces, resulting is a functioning contradiction, as the individual denies the label, but explicitly acts and dresses in a way that would be associated with that label. As such, the denial of the label also belongs to the categorisation. Any attempt at conceptualising hipsterism, has to include an analysis of the labelling process.
Hipsters are often portrayed in a derogatory manner, as shown in picture 3.13 below, as extremely sensitive towards political issues and are labelled “Social Justice Warriors”. The picture is a meme, which is a humourous image accompanied by text that is copied and spread rapidly on the Internet. “Social Justice Warrior” is a derogatory label for individuals with progressive views that express anger or sensitivity towards racism, sexism, homophobia and various other forms of oppression.
Image from a petition to remove SJW from the Internet. (Anonymous online creator, 2017)
The idealtypes labeled as “social justice warrior” and “Hipster”, are often depicted very similarly in discourses on popular social media platforms such as Reddit, Facebook and 9gag. The image chosen to accompany this petition is just one example of portrayals of “social justice warriors” with temporarily trending hipster fashion symbols, such as the micro-bangs (a hairstyle with a very short fringe) and round, transparent glasses. This is one of many examples of how Hipsters and “social justice warriors” are portrayed similarly in social media and also shows an ironic stance against them and what they stand for.
The image 3.13 is taken from an online petition asking to remove “Social Justice Warriors” from the popular social networking site tumblr. While it is not clear in this posting who they actually identify as “Social Justice Warriors”, the petition asks to remove them from the website. This would mean that they would not be able to post anything on this social networking site anymore. This is not really possible, because the label “Social justice warrior” is an ascription and not something one identifies as, but is rather used soley to criticise or ridicule others. This online petition can this be understood as a humorous attempt to show how many people disapprove of “social justice warriors”, who often earn this title, by posting statements against oppression. It portrays, as one example amongst many, how Internet users think that Hipsters or Social Justice Warriors are being “too sensitive”, which is also portrayed by the caption.
The woman portrayed in the image 3.13 is not just portrayed as a hipster; the image also includes the heading “I’m triggered”. This is a play on so-called trigger warnings. Trigger Warnings are often depicted at the beginning of material (videos, texts, images) on the Internet, that might cause distress to the audience. This is especially done on sensitive material that might portray domestic abuse, violence, or similar content that might psychologically trigger and distress those who have experienced trauma in this area, or anyone that does not wish to be exposed to such content.
While it is very much contested whether trigger warnings actually have a positive or helpful effect for traumatised individuals (Sanson et al., 2019), in this case it is being used as a humourous device, making fun of people who are easily offended. In this image and also in other jokes circulating various popular social media sites and plattforms, to be “triggered” and to be “offended” by something are used interchangeably. Hipsters are portrayed as very sensitive and easily upset or offended by many things.
Another statement heard in the field demonstrated a negative portrayal of wanting to be tolerant. A student was talking about her flatmate who was considered a Hipster. The student complained in an annoyed tone that her flatmate identified as heterosexual man and still engaged in homosexual acts.
“It seems to be cool for Hipsters now to be bisexual or something. He makes out with guys every time we go out, but I think he’s supposed to be straight. You know how Hipsters are, always having to show how tolerant and open they are”. She did air quotes on saying the word “tolerant”.
Field Diary, Summer 2017
While this statement seems very much to be an unreasonable deduction, many negotiations around labels and actions of this kind took place. In this expression of annoyance, the individual’s irritation stems from the assumption that having sexual relations with other men, whilst identifying as a heterosexual, is a disingenuous expression of tolerance. Again in this case labelling as either a homo- or hetero- or bisexual is implicitly criticised by the flatmate through this act. He irritates his flatmate by not labelling himself as homosexual, but openly engaging in these acts. This is either a successful irritation of the norms of sexuality, or an expression of an indiviuals sexuality. In any case, it seems to express a cultural sensitivity towards contemporary issues, such as in this case criticism towards the often binary norm of sexuality.
Generally one can conclude that it is negatively portrayed from the outside, the milieu is ridiculed for their attempt to be tolerant and to challenge norms they perceive as oppressive.
The main criticism across all plattforms is that Hipsters are not authentic and all their practices are based on distinction. Another statement that expresses this was when I told a guest in a café that I was working on the practices of hipsterism and he answered “Hipsters are just trying to be cool”.
The expressed appreciation of cultural diversity, as well as sensitivity towards delicate cultural matters, such as homosexuality, spirituality, etc., however erratic or inconsistent, are demonstrated in chapter above and are negatively portrayed by others. This is interesting, because the tendencies shown by my respondents by and large are not portrayed as good or fashionable across social and other media, but rather as negative, for example as insincere or hypocritical. If such practices are portrayed negatively, it can show that the respondents act a certain way, even though they do not benefit from it in the sense of Simmels conception of fashion (Simmel, 1957) or as cultural capital in the sense of Bourdieu (Bourdieu, 2012). If respondents still continue to act a certain way, even though it is ridiculed, we can assume it is—at least to some extent- intrinsically motivated, whether individually or by the norms of the group.
Nevertheless they defy this label most aggresively. One respondent got very angry when i mentioned hipsterism, explaining that:
“Hipster is just a stupid label thrown around to not take people and their lives seriously”
Conversation notes, Summer 2016
The general denial and refusal of identifying with the label Hipster, shows an implicit awareness that such labelling and distinction processes are problematic. They do not criticise the content of the label itself, but rather the act of labelling as such.
Another way that this awareness shows itself is when the borders of the milieu are teased out.
The borders of the milieu, so where hipsterism begins and ends, can be teased out by mapping the field of the Hipster: seeing how to gain access to the hipster spaces and experiencing obstacles to access. Fundamental in this respect are self reflection and observation of own practices of gaining access and becoming one with the field. Especially within my own position as a researcher, the edges of observations are especially insightful and help gain a deeper understanding of the field.
One of the spaces where I encountered hurdles in the mapping process was the moment of awkwardness, when I did not know about the existence and meaning of the Soho House. Soho House is membership club that allows members to invite two of their friends at a time to join them there for dinner for example. In the following observation, Jenny and Thomas ask within a group of friends who wants to join them for dinner at the soho house. As soon as they ask there is silence for a few moments.
Nobody reacted for quite a while and then I asked what Soho House is. A bit embarrassed Jenny and Thomas explained, that it was a club you have to be a member of to eat there, but only Jenny was a member, and just because of the fitness Studio, which was good and cheap. You pay 50\(\text{\EUR } \) a month and they have courses, she goes especially for Yoga. The place is great according to them, but it is a bit dodgy and criticised that it has such a policy of exclusivity. Jenny was nearly apologetic because of it.
Field Diary, Spring 2016
There is a moment of embarrassment when I ask about the Soho House, because implicitly everyone in this conversation knows what it is and how it works. However, it is not just an uncomfortable moment for me, but when Jenny invites her group of friends, no one answers for a while. Presumably because the club is very exclusive and from the whole group of friends only two can join them. Jenny answers my question and also explains that she is a member there only because of the fitness studio, because it is good and cheap. She explained this further in nearly a justificatory manner. She also mentions that it is quite exclusive. There is an awareness that this is not in accordance with her ideals. By justifying and expaining herself, she is reiterating her own framework of values that is strictly against exclusivity and anything related to class or distinction. I ask her to tell me more about the policy of the Soho House and how you can become a member there. This is the exact thing she is uncomfortable with and she seems that way in her explanation.
You have to apply for membership, which means you have to explain what you do and what you can contribute, especially creatively, because its main purpose is networking. Also famous people are there, so they want to be sure you are not weird and won’t stalk them. Cameras and phones are forbidden. Also two people who are already members have to write you a kind of recommendation. One of Jennys friends also wanted to become a member, so Jenny asked the friend who gave her the recommendation to write her friend one as well. Her friend wanted to meet with the “applicant” for coffee first. “To check if she’s cool enough” I remarked. Jenny laughed awkwardly and said “Yea, well, that was super annoying, but I guess she wanted to make sure she wasn’t recommending some random” I failed to ask what the consequences would be, if she did “recommend some random” but I am pretty sure social stigmatisation and not really any serious consequence. It sounded like a country club for Hipsters.
Field Diary, Spring 2016
The same network orientations that apply to this group of friends, do not apply to me, as for me meeting important or famous people that help you network and connect to other creatives is not as relevant. In this case lack of knowledge about such places becomes a failure of me trying to fit it, or be hipster. Jenny explains the situation of her friend wanting to become a member and needing a recommendation letter with annoyance and embarassment. My interruption of her implying that the other member wanted to meet with her friend for coffee before writing her an application to “check if she’s cool enough” makes the exclusivity and milieu forming practices explicit and makes it more uncomfortable.
Only I agreed to join them that evening, the other two of the three spots they had left stayed unoccupied. Jenny gave me the handbook with the rules that she got when she was accepted and got her card.
This starting point of reflection led to observation of strategies to not be considered “random”, the first of being the knowledge about such places, that demonstrates good taste and inherent cultural capital. When I actually went to the Soho House, Jenny gave me the handbook, which included various rules. I analysed my strategies, conscious that I didn’t want to embarrass them when I was there. This handbook is especially interesting, as it seems to make explicit the implicit norms and rules that young urban creatives should adhere to.
Soho House members’ handbook explains that one should not take pictures or post anything about the events on social media. As a distinction to tendencies of wider society, to photograph and upload pictures of everything one does, this is emphasised a few times in the handbook. Further more the handbook points out that the guests one brings should “behave themselves”.
I went it very confidently and said I was expected upstairs. I prepared myself before mentally, because I had to go by myself, they said they would meet me there...I found it a bit daunting, because I don’t have a member card or anything, I would have to tell them I am meeting someone at the restaurant. She had told them when she arrived that there would be an extra following. I changed clothes beforehand, and decided to sum up my courage and be super confident when I arrived, so as to make sure there would be no doubts of my belonging there. Indeed, they were friendly and immediately led the way.
Logbook, Spring 2016
These notes show distinction mechanisms that are clear demonstrations of classic formation of milieus. However, this group seemed conscious of the dynamics of the exclusivity practices and also was embarrassed by them. It was obvious that of the group of friends only three could join, even though there were many more present. I was the only one who ended up joining them with the explicit purpose of wanting to observe for my thesis. Jenny felt the need to justify herself for being a member, she emphasises that she is only a member for the yoga and the good quality and reasonably priced food. This shows that there is a discrepancy between the actions: going to such places, being a member etc., and the condoning of exclusivity and labelling. The same group of friends does not wish to be called Hipsters, even though they dress and act as such.
Another hurdle of entry I analysed was the popular techno club Berghain, which is known for its exclusive door policy. Berghain is associated with decadence and hedonism and breaking with the norms of society. One respondent mentioned “It is where night becomes day and day becomes night and everything is allowed”. The club has no mirrors or reflecting surfaces that can be interpreted as a means to lose yourself or forget your identity.
Berghain is one of the most famous and popular clubs in the world, rather than an independent, unknown club that one would assume Hipsters would prefer. But the exclusive door policy makes it very difficult to get in. I was told that if I want to meet Hipsters in an informal setting, Berghain would be a great address. I started asking everyone I knew, and people they knew, why they like it there. The answers I got were surprising to me, because I associated them with a very different notion: all the answers I got had nothing to do with the hedonism, the decandence, the freedom it seemed to provide or even the music—Berghain being known for hosting some of the best DJs in the world. All the answers I got were more or less connected to one feeling: the feeling of unity. They included: “It just feels like we are all connected.” “Its a break from the harsh reality of the world out there” “Everyone is connected by their love for each other and the love for the music” “There is an indescribable feeling of unity”. It seemed to be a good place to undergo participant observation and I wondered if the hurdles would tell me more about hipsterism.
I informed myself before I went online of “how to get in”. The internet is full with all this stuff, and I got very anxious. I decided to follow the advice and wear black. In Berlin you can’t really go wrong with wearing black. I guess because it isn’t a colour. So a friend helped me, by asking her boyfriend, who works as a bouncer/doorman at the club to put me on the guest list. I was nervous, but went with a friend. I was nervous because its super hard to get in, and there was a 200m queue, even though it was a sunday afternoon. I still felt triumphant though, walking past the queue and just getting in. It felt satisfying. It was impossible to speak to anyone inside though. I spoke to three people but they were drunk or high and didn’t really want to talk.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
While this observation did little in fulfilling what I hoped it would, it did show my process of trying to overcome boundaries into the hipster milieu. The self reflection of my process of trying not to draw attention to myself or be suspicious as shared in the field diary entry above helps map out hipsterism. The moment of overcoming a hurdle can be compared to, as Park (1915) describes, incidents when one defers from the social ritual somehow, as arises suspicion and looks peculiar. The attempts to avoid such an arousal of suspicion or feeling out of place are incidental. The reflective notes are especially interesting, because they portray attempts to inform myself about the social rituals and mode of behaviour, even though I already knew that I would not have to overcome this hurdle of getting in. I was on the guest list and as such knew that I would get in to the club. However, looking at my field notes from that time with some distance, I see that I was attempting not to arise suspicion, feel out of place, or look peculiar.
The following extract from my reflexion show that while some attempts were made through the dress code and the act of being on the guest list to feel “united” as it was described, failed.
I am not sure. I didn’t properly get in, but just through a friend, and even though I felt triumphant while I walked passed the queue, I didn’t feel together. Maybe it’s because I don’t drink or take drugs, I felt very apart from everyone, even though everyone was very friendly and in a good mood and smiled a lot. Most of the time I thought it is Sunday afternoon, what the hell am I doing with my life.
Logbook, Summer 2016
It seems that with the milieu formation more than just physical access should be granted. It demonstrates it is a hurdle that stems from lifestyle patterns that are not shared, rather than things that can be easily adapted, like a sense of fashion.
After my visit to Berghain, I interviewed the visited the doorperson who had put me on the guest list and talked to him about the door policy over a cup of coffee. He explained that the system of letting people in is not like in other clubs. He claimed that in other places they often check whether the guests are too intoxicated or too young or too aggressive to enter the club. At a club like Berghain the doorperson has a double function. In addition to what is done in a classical club, he has to ensure a “unique configuration of people in the audience that night”.
There was an air of mystery around how he spoke of it, using phrases like “nobody knows why you get in”, “there is just a feeling”, “you can’t describe who gets in and who won’t”. He emphasised that the exact same person could get in on one night and not get in on another. But the reason the club was always so full was that people loved it there, was because of the audience. The audience is a perfect mixture of people and a great balance and that is why people love it.
I critically asked whether the unified feeling and that togetherness is not evoked by the strictness of the door itself. He denies it.
All in all it is very interesting that exclusivity policies and milieu formation is implicitly and sometimes even explicitly criticised amongst my respondents. At the same time many such practices are undergoing. In some cases this is critically reflected through moments of embarrassment when having to talk about such practices.
3.5 Interim Conclusion
The phenomenon ‘Hipster’ expresses a contradictory order of urban space: it demonstrates elements of classical milieu formation and distinction, as well as an (implicit) awareness that this milieu formation is problematic and exclusive. The individuals criticise this with their refusal to accept the categorisation—however without effectively addressing it in everyday practice.
All in all, by analysing the hurdles of entry to hipster spaces and the practices undergone in self reflection: the embarrassment of belonging to an exclusive club as the Soho house, the mystery of who gets in to the Berghain, the ironic self-distancing of one’s own capitalist aspirations as an entrance strategy, all express a contradiction of urban space.
Generally, sometimes my respondents were very explicit about their awareness of power dynamics that demarcate social milieus and create boundaries, as you can see in the following example:
He mentions right at the end, when he speaks with academics (me) he feels they have institutionalised power, and he does not have the language, and sometimes there is an element of misuse of terms
Field Diary, Summer 2017
As these examples show, while hipsterism explicitly expresses a dislike for practices of exclusivity and labelling, and embraces the idea of multiculturalism and diversity, they fail to address this problem in practice. The spaces are not generated and used in a way that dissolves these real and imagined boundaries, in a material sense.
Another attempt to challenge classic societal structures and forming new more inclusive relationships, is the attempt of my respondents to embrace all lifestyles. Again and again an attitude of non-judgement is portrayed and the acceptance of all lifestyles that are outside the norm is expressed, which one can observe in the expressions of new age spirituality, the use of drugs and practices of polyamory, etc. In the following example a young man had expressed his avid appreciation of starting a polyamorous relationship with his boyfriend, but when this was implemented, was seemingly less happy about it.
However he has had bouts of jealousy recently. He feels a strong desire to want to be detached, he expresses this to me. He wants to just be happy for his partner and the new addition this partner has been having a physical relationship with. I discussed with him, that I don’t really think that he can ever reach a state where he doesn’t feel pain because his partner wants to be with someone else instead of him in that moment. But if he wants to continue this lifestyle, he has to accept that pain, or just decide he doesn’t want to. Because if it doesn’t hurt and he doesn’t care, it’s the opposite of love- is it not? I ask him. He seems very conflicted about this, but still adamant about his values.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
Much like in the example of Dennis in section 3.4.1, these individuals express difficulty of putting the conceptions and convictions that they express and cling to into practice. Not necessarily for lack of trying, but rather for lack of finding ways to overcome the hurdles they encounter.
Repeatedly I observe this contradiction in the milieu of hipsterism: attempts to counteract the existing conditions of modernity, but failing to address them consequentially.
To gain a more profound understanding of this contradiction of urban space, it is helpful to analyse given data through the lens of Lefebvre. His triad can help us understand how hipsterism as a space demonstrates contradictions of capitalism that Lefebvre in his time did not see.
Lefebvres’ triad assumes a concurrence of the three interconnected moments of space. If we examine the circumstances of hipsterism through the triad that is offered to us by Lefebvre, my respondents seem to demonstrate the simultaneous existence of at least two of his dialectically connected dimensions of space. On the one hand they mentally produce the conception of Kreuzkölln (specifically Weserstrasse and Sonnenallee area) as idealistically colourful and tolerant. As an instrument to idealise the space, the representation of the hipster space includes the idea and knowledge that there is a mix of cultures in this area in social discourse. In the second dimension, it is socially produced, reproduced and modified over time. Kreuzkölln is invested with real and imagined meaning, as a space that expresses these fundamental values of authenticity, creativity and multiculturalism. By aggressively going against this labelling processes, implicitly and explicitly demonstrating how it is overly simplified, and by hanging signs in the coffeehouses and shops and bars that express these conceptions (as seen in figures 3.11 and 3.10), they invest this area with these concepts and meanings.
However, the spatial practice itself, the perceived, physical, real space, that is concretely generated and used in a material sense, expresses no such crossovers.
The ’denial’ of the term hipster, and the awkwardness at the empirical evidence of exclusivity—such as in the case of the Soho House club and the Berghain—may be an indirect, but empirical reflection of my respondents that these milieu formations are problematic. On the one hand, they still engage in very classical milieu formation and demarcation, on the other hand they seem to have an at least implicit awareness that this milieu formation could be problematic, exclusive, etc. With the refusal to accept the categorisation, they seem to indirectly criticise this formation and exclusion within the dynamics of urban space, but without effectively addressing them in everyday practice.
Notes
- 1.
explains the concept described in section 3.1 with the hashtags
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Semple, T. (2023). The Space of Hipsterism—The Paradox of Being and Doing. In: Hipsterism. Kultur und gesellschaftliche Praxis. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39536-0_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39536-0_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-39535-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-39536-0
eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)