Abstract
Thus far we have understood the space of hipsterism within societal developments of the capitalist west, such as aesthetic capitalism and creativity, individualisation and tendencies such as Do What You Love in the New Spirit of Capitalism. The life course within hipsterism ultimately demonstrated the progression into more far reaching neoliberalism. We were able to map out hipsterism as a space shaped by some contradictions. One such contradiction is the respondents’ engagement in classic milieu formation and distinction, whilst showing that they find this very formation problematic and exclusive, but without effectively addressing it in everyday practice. Another contradiction is criticising modes of consumption, but engaging in very specific types of consumption as a distinctive feature of their milieu.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
Thus far we have understood the space of hipsterism within societal developments of the capitalist west, such as aesthetic capitalism and creativity (Reckwitz, 2014), individualisation and tendencies such as Do What You Love in the New Spirit of Capitalism (Boltanski et al., 2018). The life course within hipsterism ultimately demonstrated the progression into more far reaching neoliberalism. We were able to map out hipsterism as a space shaped by some contradictions. One such contradiction is the respondents’ engagement in classic milieu formation and distinction, whilst showing that they find this very formation problematic and exclusive, but without effectively addressing it in everyday practice. Another contradiction is criticising modes of consumption, but engaging in very specific types of consumption as a distinctive feature of their milieu.
The question arose why the expressed criticism of specific tendencies in society was not, or could not, be put into practice consistently. Why are the problems brought up within practices of hipsterism, such as exclusion and milieu formation, as demonstrated by the lack of diversity in many hipster spaces, not addressed practically? How are issues like exploitation of labour throughout the world or climate change to be addressed in practice?
In a second research phase with these questions in mind, I went back into the field, observed, ethnographically listened and also explored some of these topics in narrative interviews.
By deepening the analysis of the field notes and the everyday practices of the individuals in these spaces, a lifestyle consisting of some fundamental beliefs, conceptions and approaches to action emerged. A space consists of values and cultural practices that are political (Elden, 2007). In this chapter we will analyse some of the conceptions within the field as interlinked concepts to utilise hipsterism as a paradigm for the development of culture in western societies. These underlying fundamental conceptions have been shaped by and in turn influence culture. The effects of these conceptions on their pattern of action can help further explain the inconsistencies within the field.
These elements can be seen as a framework that shapes everyday actions and lifestyle. Understanding this framework can provide explanations for the contradictions in chapter 3. Some elements of this framework have already been discussed in the first chapter within a spatial approach. Important distinctive elements of hipsterism are authenticity and creativity for example. However, underlying these elements are some other conceptions, and approaches to action. These are shaped by, and reinforce tendencies, such as individualism and globalisation in society. They express a negotiation of paradoxes of individualisation, for example between the collective and the individual (4.1.2), or the paradoxes in the attempt to eliminate inequality from a position of power and privilege (4.1.1).
Further challenges of the field are a general mistrust in the ability of the institutions of contemporary society (4.1.3) to address challenges that are more far-reaching than those that national institutions can effectively handle. So conceptions of institutions and actors within politics shape the pattern of action distinctly.
Another conception that shapes engagement in society in this milieu is the understanding of human nature, discussed in 4.1.4. It reinforces the impression of the normativity of the actors’ decisions and the consistency of their actions.
Fundamentally, all actions have an underlying normative understanding of a good or just society that emerges from the challenges that face society as a whole, such as climate change, racism, sexism, etc. This will be the starting point of this exploration in section 4.1.1, because it portrays the possible direction that the respondents want society to develop to and shapes their attempt to get there.
As they navigate through the vast field of paradoxes, this milieu emerges as one searching for appropriate forms of engagement in the framework described in 4.1 without falling back on traditional forms of engagement they have deemed inapproriate or unfit to challenge society’s condition.
The conceptions within these categories (individualism, collectivity, mistrust of institutions, the concept of human nature) are at times contradictory, leading to various approaches to action, or even paralysing in their effect. Ultimately they will demonstrate however, that hipsterism offers the individuals in this milieu a way to deal with difficulties to navigate in a consumerist and globalised culture, whilst wanting to change it to a sustainable and just society.
4.1 Conceptual Framework within Hipsterism
To find a common framework of fundamental conceptions might be seen as a difficult task in a highly individualised society, with an apparent decline of traditional ties to community. Especially in hipsterism, the self seems to be the centre and axis of the variation of lifestyles. However, authenticity and identity have a strong relational quality, and thus, as demonstrated in Section 3.2, also portray some countercultural tendencies in an individualised society.
As explored in Section 1.2 countercultures are a part of human experience and society, and can be found, in one form or another, in all societies (Yinger, 1977). However, the tendency to stereotype and exaggerate both dominant and counter culture, with the aim of drawing the sharpest possible contrast, has made this exploration difficult in the past, as Yinger describes. In a highly individualised society, the conceptual framework of hipsterism, including the fundamental conceptions and beliefs that shape engagement, will help us understand the actors beyond their narrative of their self as individual creatives. It will explore the elements that shape the paradox of being and doing analysed in chapter 3 and help explore the everyday actions that could be politically intended. Ultimately it will answer the questions why the respondents fail to translate the conceptions and beliefs in action, or whether that is at all possible.
These conceptions will partly demonstrate countercultural values, but also beliefs that are shaped by western, capitalist society. The resulting approaches to counter the culture that my respondents find themselves in, are shaped by these conceptions and will be discussed in section 4.3
4.1.1 Beliefs—or the Idea of a “Good” or “Just” Society
Various statements about the progress of society and its direction were made in the discourse in which I participated and to which I listened ethnographically (Forsey, 2010).
As described by Bauman (2015), liquid modernity does not lend itself to a state of ideal, being “modern” is embedded in everyday life and is an act of constant renewal.
Interestingly, a lot of the dialogue within the hipster scene, does not circulate around the self and individual biographies. Especially in the narrative interviews I conducted in the field the conversations quickly turned to issues of society and the world at large, such as environmental issues, gender issues, questions of privilege, working conditions, etc. Many questions I posed were answered by addressing structural issues and globalised challenges, that politics were seemingly hopeless to face within the framework of a profit-oriented society. In the sense of a liquid society, they were striving for betterment rather than putting forward an ideal state. Hipsterism appeared to be about progress rather than a negotiation of a possible utopia.
In various extracts, the individuals express gratitude and hope of the movement of society in a specific direction: towards more veganism for example. The attempts to transform society through conscious and ethical consumption shall be discussed in a following chapter, but for now it is important to note the wish that more people join, rather than wanting to be exclusive and individual.
One respondent expressed their gratitude and joy that more people were becoming vegetarian. This respondent explained that it was always difficult to find vegetarian items on many restaurant menues, but now that is becoming normal. Another respondent angrily explained that it would be wonderful if everyone became vegan, but that will never happen, because the corporations follow these trends and commercialise them.
The difficulty being portrayed here is not the mainstream masses following. They do not show the flight and chase attitude that is described by Simmel (1957). They express a desire or wish for others to follow. The enemies are not the masses chasing their trends, but the issue lies in the fact that they do not, or that the attempts to make fair trade or vegan consumption more popular are perverted by mechanisms of capitalism. It is reminsicent of the hippie generation, where political ideals were used for companies to sell more products, by recognising these trends and using them to market their products (see 1.2). However, in this case the Hipsters seem to be aware of this dynamic.
One respondent, the manager of a vegan café, mentioned to me explaining their low waste policy: “The purpose is having impact, even if it’s the tiniest impact, environmentally”. The statement shows that the purpose of actions is not necessarily connected to the identity, but more often than not it is framed as having a positive impact on the world.
Most expressions of individualism or distinction were evoked by a question or other form of intervention through myself. The answers that were given often reflected a value rationality, expressing the belief of the worth of the action detached from their actual practical effect. Similar to the description of Weber (2016), the action itself was deemed worthwhile, and even necessary, independant of the success or impact of the actions.
Generally, when asked about why they were upholding certain standards it was explained as “the right thing to do” or the “only way to live”, one respondent even expressed “it is like living a religion without God”.
In many conversations it was emphasised or implied that western, capitalist society did not just need to be criticised and the structures of society need not just be deemed unacceptable. It was further necessary that some sort of transformation had to take place. This transformation, while vague and ambiguous in its scope, can be seen within two opposing tendencies that give it impetus.
The first tendency I observed was the intent to counteract a consumerist, throw-away society with conservative modes of consumption, for example to buy higher quality, more expensive goods that one hopes will last. This tendency is portrayed further in the use of analog cameras and the popularity of analog photography and film making, the use of type writers, etc. These can be interpreted as a classical form of conservatism in trying to uphold practices and norms of the past as opposed to following newer trends.
Another factor that portrays this notion is the opposition against modernisation seen in the vintage equipment and technologies that are popular within this scene, such as Volkswagen buses, old bicycles, walkmans, record players, type writers etc.
Instagram, a social media application, has become exceedingly popular in very many milieus. However at the beginning of researching this thesis it was known as a hipster application. The application allows one to share pictures with connected friends, and also add a filter to make them look like they have been photographed with an old camera and have been self-developed. Ironically, one needs a very modern phone to run this application. But it shows the affinity and romanticism of the past. The aesthetic still shows a tendancy that can be associated with an inclination towards conservative photography. Of course many in this milieu also engage in analog photography and developing pictures themselves.
Furthermore, there is an discernable DIY-mentality that expresses itself in efforts to establish the provenance of items, understand how they were produced and how they can be repaired, rather than replaced. It can also be associated with such a notion of conservative modes of consumption.
One example is the Fjällräven Kånken Backpack. Produced by a 60 year old company that is known for it’s outdoor and trekking gear. It became popular not just because of its simple and durable design, but because of the spread of a conservative message. The backpacks are quite expensive, for such a simple canvas item. But their durability and simpleness gives them a “timeless” look. As such the message they send is one of sustainability, a statement I heard countless times was that its better to buy something that is more expensive, but will last longer, in such a throwaway and consumerist society. Many of my respondents had a single-speed, fixed gear bicycle, which is a racing bicycle that has a sleek and minimalist look, because it doesn’t have gears. These bicycle parts are very expensive and often higher quality than average bicycles, especially in respect to the material. One respondent explained to me that it is important to them to spend a lot of money on their bicycles, because they are of high quality and have a higher durability. Instead of buying a new bicycle because the other has broken, they would rather spend the money and effort to have one that lasts them longer. This also implies that the amount of money spent reflects the quality, ergo that a more expensive product will last longer than a cheaper product. This can also be associated with classical conservatism. In many spaces the reason for being willing to spend more money on items was also associated with the cost of labour in an ethical sense, however in the context of buying equipment, such a backpacks or bicycles or technical equipment, the quality of the material and durability was emphasised. The act of spending money in a specific way is thus rationally purposeful, as well as value rational (Weber, 2016).
To conclude, within the milieu there is a tendency to counter act a consumerist, throw-away society with conservative modes of consumption. One can identify a focus on the maintenance and preservation of past convictions, such as wanting to know about the origins of objects they obtain as well as promoting ideals and ethical values associated with classical conservatism.
This is the first of the two tendencies that gives the development of society impetus. The second however can be seen as a more powerful and political tendency.
On a political spectrum, hipsterism might be more closely associated with the left, as often solidarity, social justice and tolerance are elements this scene identifies with, or is often associated with.
The fundamental belief at the core of the discourses about progress in society in hipster spaces is justice. This is also portrayed by the signs welcoming refugees in the cafes, and strong statements on such matters.
My respondents were also very vocal about feminism, abolishing extremes between rich and poor and the one per cent, LGBTQI+ rights, etc.
One respondent explained that “the socialist ideals were much closer to his own than the capitalist ones”. In an individualistic sense he did not identify merely with socialist ideals. He much rather defined his own individual and unique ideals as “closer” to socialism than capitalism. Generally a tenedency to identify with the left wing of the political spectrum can be observed in the whole milieu. They criticise the milieu formation and distinction mechanisms, by distancing themselves verbally from all exclusivity policies, even if they still engage in them (see section 3.3.5). They emphasise abstinence from belongings, ownership and especially greed. At the same time, in addition to this decidedly anti-consumerist attitude, they also engage in various forms of consumption. They despise the throw away society that is perpetuated by what they call “greed” and “selfishness”. This also expresses itself in highly moralised statements.
Even though these questions are highly politicised in society, they do not organise themselves in traditional forms of political action.
As a possible counterculture of contemporary society, the normative system of hipsterism should contain some themes of conflict with the values of society at large. As portrayed in Chapter 3, within hipsterism, there is an understanding of distancing onself from mainstream culture and identifying with a group that counters mainstream lifestyles. From this perspective it is also interesting to see how these values are portrayed or perceived from a standpoint of mainstream culture.
Hipsters’ supposed sensitivity and knowledge about injustices influences their everyday life. This understanding possibly leads to changes in the behaviour of the individuals, demonstrated by the fact that my respondents possibly understand their denial of labels and their dialogue and conversations about injustices as a mechanism to transform societal circumstances slowly and from within. I observed how values were negotiated in dialogue and practice, which will be explored further in 4.3.
Another respondent, an independent documentary filmmaker, who had previously studied anthropology, spoke to me about the challenge of wanting to make the world aware of social and cultural problems from a position of privilege.
It just seems really ridiculous to me [he laughs], me, a white privileged male sitting there, researching issues of indigenous populations on my laptop and trying to help them through awareness. The irony of it. But there isn’t anything else I could do.
Extract from narrative interview, Spring 2018
In this example a respondent is making his awareness of problematic distinction mechanisms explicit, in his pursuit of justice. It also expresses the helplessness felt by the individual to engage in the progress of society, implying that the reason he as a “privileged white male” can help raise awareness to indigenous issues, is because of the very privilege he is criticising. Dealing with this paradox, by still acting the way he thinks is right, expresses the normativity of his actions.
Another individual emphasised, that “alternative book stores are mostly very new age, like buddhism – but for the western mind” and that he doesn’t “like that”. This implies an awareness of the milieu’s cultural appropriation of spiritual practices that are not dominant in the west. The respondent expresses a discomfort with that dynamic.
While such very explicit reflections and conclusions were rather scarce, most individuals within this milieu seem to have an implicit understanding that milieu formations are problematic and also paradoxical and difficult to change. They stay firm in specific stances and stand by their statements, even though they are often ridiculed and not taken seriously and criticised as ingenuine.
It is not just within the realm of social media that Hipsters are criticised and not taken seriously. The research on hipsterism has thus far also been negative and accused Hipsters of abandoning the claims of counterculture, while merely retaining the “coolness” of subcultures (1.3), implying that they have forsaken any political or idealogical stance.
Generally the idea of “doing good” or civic engagement is often limited to very specific acts. A great deal of research has been conducted about civil engagement and participation outside the realms of associations, parties and unions in Germany. Especially in the wake of the refugee increase around 2015 it was confirmed that civil social engagement is increasing, while the number of members among associations, parties and unions is dwindling (cf. Haumann et al. (2018)). In these cases however, civil engagement is often associated with voluntary work.
In the context of the field I have observed, the idea of altruism or doing what is good seems to have developed a little further. It is no longer limited to the engagement or helping a distanced or unknown “other”, in a way that tends to reinforce unbalanced power relations. There seems to be an attempt to expand this “doing good” to one’s own environment somehow, because there is an understanding that there is much to be done, and traditional engagement might not suffice to address the issues as will be explored in the following sections.
4.1.2 Individualism and Collective Action
In late modernity, family and community ties are no longer as permanent as they used to be and leave more choices for each individual. There are more flexible and less stable relationships, and blended and patchwork families have become common. Changes in family composition, household structure, and work-life balance are influenced by tendencies of individualism and narratives of self-fulfillment. Individuals in western society are more likely to move and less likely to be connected to their neighbourhoods or communities.
This development can be seen in a large cross-section of society (Economic Co-operation et al., 2011), and also among my respondents.
None of the respondents had children, some were in long-term romantic partnerships, however most were single. In relationships, respondents were often testing out and negotiating boundaries.
This reflects a tendency that is typical in recent modernity. Generally, boundaries are constantly tested out and negotiated. This tendency includes spheres of “Us” and “Others”, but also between social spheres, between knowledge and superstition, between science and politics, etc.
These tensions express themselves in a field that spans the collective and the individual.
In my observations I also experienced this tangible negotiation and tension between individualism and a feeling of collectivity. Within discourses of hipsterism a dichotomy between collective and individual action was implicitly questioned.
In various situations, single decisions that an individual makes in their life, were reframed in the conversations as a collective movement. One statement for example was: “We don’t believe in gender roles and oppose them”. In this context it was not clear who this “we” includes. In another situation one respondent explained that his bicycle parts were more expensive, because he preferred higher quality, but his statement was: “We spend a lot of money on our bicycles, because they are of high quality and have a higher durability.” Again in this case it was not clear who “we” is.
In one case, a respondent was asked various biographic and individual questions. He often responded with “we”-statements, even when questions were posed directly to him.
This demonstrated a collective horizon and at one point in the interview I asked who “we” includes. He explained they are “a very diverse group, they don’t have typical image things, some of them you never would guess that they are vegan”. From this statement it became clear that he understood himself and his friends, all of whom were vegan as a collective. While they are portrayed by him as very diverse, he still sees them as a group, because of this binding element of veganism.
All in all my impressions confirmed again and again that many individual decisions are framed as collective actions. Acting against the exploitation of workers, animals and the environment, for example, binds together these groups. These actions are not less collectivist, just because they are not organised in a traditional collective way.
At the same time, he often corrected himself in the interview when he expressed things as generalisations. Statements along the lines of “gender roles don’t exist” were often followed by “but also we try not to push people, and we are focused on our own problems”. He also emphasised that no one is perfect.
In his own narrative he explains that he is very self-focused. He explained to me that while there is lots of activism in his network, they also try not to push people, but try to focus on their own problems.
This showed that there is a tension between having a very individualistic narrative, including being non-judgemental of other people, and this notion of collectivity.
The individual actions of my respondents included an assumption that various people are moving in this direction all over the world.
This attitude of a collective movement is still complemented by a strong sense of individualism. Individualism is a central, possibly a foundational feature of the hipster paradigm of thought or master narrative—and so these worldwide movements are then understood or imagined as also bearing a kind of individualistic grounding. This could be understood as an imaginary, similar to a social imaginary as Taylor (2002) describes: as the way ordinary people imagine their social surroundings, seemingly shared by a fairly large group of people.
Taylor explains that this imaginary includes
the normal expectations that we have of one another, the kind of common understanding which enables us to carry out the collective practices that make up our social life. This incorporates some sense of how we all fit together in carrying out the common practice. This understanding is both factual and “normative”; that is, we have a sense of how things usually go, but this is interwoven with an idea of how they ought to go, of what missteps would invalidate the practice. (ibid., p. 118)
This can be applied to veganism, but also to hipsterism in general. Encompassing the whole milieu are those elements that are included in this chapter. They describe the social imaginary shared by hipsters.
One of the pinnacles of the hipster imaginary is individualism, as a foundational tenet. However it also encompasses the expectation of the progress of society and how every individual that is part of this understanding is moving to better themselves. Underlying this is also a clear understanding of what one ought to do, for example to try and reduce waste as much as possible or to slowly transition to a vegan lifestyle. To counteract gender stereotypes is another element of the “ought to go” that Taylor describes. These developments are seen in an individualistic way, however, as individualism is a grounding tenet of the narrative of my respondents.
When asked why he became not only a vegan, but also an entrepreneur in this area, the vegan café owner explained:
It all started with him being part of a group of conscious people / just being friends, and then there was a switch in his mind, he felt guilty, every single day he tries to better himself, to become a better person.
Conversation notes, Summer 2016
However, the same individual commented later, in a conversation where he was quite uncompromising about his values and expressing them very clearly, that everyone should respect each other and make up their own minds, as shown also in the statement below:
Everyone in the café works as individuals, they respect each others feelings, everyone has their own mind, if you feel someone is overstepping, you have to deal compassion. No one can say “you shouldn’t wear..../ you aren’t feminist enough”
Extract from narrative interview, Summer 2017
It was repeatedly emphasised that there shouldn’t be judgement, but self-development and how you try to “better yourself every single day” is really important. One respondent emphasised that he personally does a lot of things other than just being vegan and tries to impact every indivdual, regardless of who they are.
While autonomy and individualism take a lot of space in the discourse, as seen above, young people in this milieu did not see their personal development and decisions as independent and autonomous. They saw their decisions as impacting the world, in whatever small way, akin to a movement.
Mass individualisation does not mean that groups or communities cease to exist or even lose any importance. The energies and efforts formerly exerted with the intention to belong, have now turned into flexibility and delimitation and distinction processes. These processes facilitate the negotiation of identity in contemporary societies, that is shaped by an often normative, constructed and reflective lifestyle, that gives it consistency. In observing and being part of some of these practices, I realised that while responsibility is reassigned to the individual level, most of these decisions and reflections have a collective horizon.
My respondents had an underlying belief, that traditional forms of collective action organised in contemporary society are not a viable option for civil engagement. This does not necessarily lead young people into uncertainty and disorientation, but rather to understand their own actions more in the light of collective individualised action, which will be explored further in the resulting approaches 4.3.
4.1.3 Mistrust in Institutions and Politics
While individualism can be traced back to the beginnings of modernity, a collective horizon seemed to me to be a more recent development. Where was it coming from?
The respondents seem to have realised that problems that encompass the whole world, need a world embracing space of action. The lack and need for such a space of engagement is demonstrated by some developments in modernity. These developments that seem world-embracing were talked about frequently. Amongst others, climate change, the exploitation of labour and abuse of animals around the world are interesting examples.
In these areas, the actions of few nations and organisations can impact the environment of all. Furthermore, the consumption of one product can be traced back globally and we can find out whether it was treated with pesticides, whether it was farmed ethically, how it was transported etc. These themes were frequent in my conversations in the field. It seems to be possible to rate the act of the consumption of even a single product according to its influence on society and the world at large.
To demonstrate, climate change was one area that my respondents were very worried about. They expressed their mistrust that institutions could answer the needs to counteract it.
Climate is a sphere where the slightest changes influence the world environment, irrespective of nation. The developments demonstrate that nations cannot protect themselves independantly, and that the consequences of actions of one nation, affect the environment of all. Actions within some technological, industrial and agricultural systems influence the whole global sphere of society.
There was a mistrust detectable in my respondents towards institutions, especially of their efficiency to be able to address such world-embracing problems, such as climate change.
This worry that the actors that have an effect on climate change are nations, and as such insufficient to address global issues, is also evident in international spaces. In my milieu complaints about spaces such as the World Economic Forum or even the UN were deemed insufficient, with diminishing remarks such as: “They can’t do anything anyway” or “We all know that is not where the change is going to happen.”
These events have in common, that the parties involved in the discourse identify and decide as as organisations or nations, and implement as nations too, evident in the national action plans that are then adopted.
However, these world-embracing issues need to be solved at a global level, and thus need a space of action that is also world embracing, and where all individuals can take part. This understanding leads my respondents to the question where that stage of action can be. Either it can lead to hopelessness, or to finding alternative ways of engagement that feel like they can have an effect.
Another issue is that many of these world embracing challenges are closely connected and cannot be solved in a fragmented way. My respondents demonstrated an understanding that, while the exploitation of animals is often perceived as an ethical issue, there is growing belief that the animal industry is one of the leading causes of climate change.
To recognize that the issues the world is facing might be too encompassing for actors such as nations to address is an understandable reading of reality. My respondents might feel the solidarity and sympathy for animals, exploited workers and the environment, but realistically recognize that the institutions that are trying to solve these issues are limited in their scope.
It is indicative of this milieu, when searching for explanations for the failure of attempts to better society, to turn to the individual.
This is not because they lack criticism for institutions and the government. When asked about the responsibility of the government or institutions, respondents answered with “It’s no use” or “They are hierchical” or something along the lines of “I don’t like politics”. The explanations for failure to transform society is reassigned to the individual, because institutions and government have already been implicitly declared unfit to address these issues.
It is interesting in this context, that while the respondents do have very clear sociopolitical attitudes as described above, leaning towards the left, they do not identify as political. They consiously distance themselves and reintepret their contribution as apolitical, because it does not respond to classic forms of political engagement.
One respondent, Olivia, explained to me that our individual actions have a huge effect on global issues. One example she mentioned is the positive effect of the vegetarian lifestyle on the environment, as a strategy to counter act climate change. When asked about the effectiveness of this and how it’s limited unless very many people joined in, Olivia explains to me that she acted this out on principle.
Interviewer: With vegetarianism for example, its actual effect doesn’t happen unless everyone joins in, right? And if some people keep eating meat, then isn’t it a bit useless just on the level of effect?
Olivia: I live this way because I feel that this is the right way to live, and I feel if I didn’t live that way, I just couldn’t.
Extract from narrative interview, Summer 2017
The extract above from a longer interview about her lifestyle and the narrative of her choices demonstrates that being vegetarian is a normative decision, even though her narrative before this statement, framed it as a politically intended action. Beck (2008) explains that it is specific to late modernity that the developments have a normative tendency. He explains that the individual has control over the way he constructs his life, how he defines his social and biographic identity, and again according to Beck has no institutional check pattern to regulate and control his actions. Individuals have to develop the abilities needed to create a biographical narrative; they have to create abstract principles to explain and justify their decisions. When individuals are de-traditionalised, they hereby become the craftsmen of their identities and live in worlds where nothing is excluded and everything has to be decided by own thought out principles and justifications.
However, while these decisions read as normative, individualistic life choices, there is an imagined community that makes their everyday decisions seem politically intended.
In this context it is interesting to consider what politics are engaging in and how it relates to individuals, and especially young adults. My respondents found politics cannot exert the necessary changes, and thus could turn to either apathy or engagement in other ways. This reaction expressed itself in attempts at finding realistic alternatives of engagement in a constrained framework.
My respondents all harboured a general mistrust and insecurity towards traditional forms of engagement, as demonstrated by these statements of Olivia below:
I really don’t like hierarchies and I feel that these parties and also the state in general is very hierarchical. I think submission is very dangerous, what is way more useful and effective is dialogue and exchange, dialogue and speaking to each other about these issues is so much more helpful than politics. Another problem is neoliberalism is so strong, all these parties are influenced by neoliberalism, and the whole way everything is done, no one can actually make independent decisions any more. You can see that people are hopeless about this by the way they go on the street. Politics cannot work, because there isn’t a perfect solution, there is no utopian ideals that we can follow, everything has to develop slowly.
For example look at our friend P., he is really a good guy and wants to do good by everyone who works for him, but he is bound to the system.
Extract from narrative interview, Spring 2017
P. is an entrepreneur, who owns an independent café. In using the expression “he is bound to the system” Olivia explains in this abstract that she does not believe in any system changing from within. While it is not entirely clear, which system she means, her explanations before hint that hers is indeed the lack of trust in politics and hierarchical systems that prompt her to search for other avenues of engagement.
Another system that is criticised in this milieu frequently is capitalism.mShe criticises politics for being neoliberal, which could stem from an understanding of the social disparity caused by a profit oriented and self-regulating market. It could also be a slogan-like statement (“neoliberalism is bad”) very popular in the hipster milieu. This criticism of neoliberalism seems to be founded on a more intuitive concern that the structures of capitalism are resistant against change, similar to how Boltanski et al. (2018) describe them in the New Spirit of Capitalism.
Another type of mistrust of classical forms of engagement through institutions or politcs comes from the assumption or observation that humans are gullible about or ignorant of the certain challenges, such as capitalist modes of production. Positive trends can therefore be manipulated by large-scaled corporations, as seen in the extract below.
“I hope it becomes popular, all fairtrade, I would love it if that happened, realistically we all know that’s not gonna happen” I ask him about the increase of vegan consumption and he says some people are waking up, but then money, ignorance, hate, and fear stops people, for example then this trend is imitated by Starbucks/McCafe, speciality coffees like Starbucks, with their quirky hip lay out. He says they are nice and beautiful, so then the trend is capitalised again and again, so you lose faith.
Conversation notes, Summer 2016
It seems as though, in a society where decisions and impact of the nations seem paralysed from the outset, because of the global issues and the risks pertaining to everyone of climate change for example, these individuals reassign their contribution as a citizen (see also section 4.2) to the individual level. Anything organised that one would traditionally associate with engagement is deemed too hierarchial or neoliberal, as was emphasised in statements by my respondents. The lack of trust and possibly also a lack of understanding how traditional ways of engaging, such as involvement in trade unions, or demonstrations, or petitions could contribute to effective change, is conducive to this development.
4.1.4 Implicit Understanding of Human Nature
Another fundamental assumption that shapes the world view and the approaches to action that my respondents in the field take, is their conception of human nature. Sometimes expressed implicitly, but in some situations asserted rhetorically, various representations of an anthropology of human kind were stated. To reconstruct this reflection on the human condition in my field, I analysed the interviews and statements and found some patterns that also shape the respondents’ behaviour.
While details of the ontological considerations of anthropology remain unstated in the milieu, generally two tendencies were predominant. One was the perception that humans are incorrigibly egoistic, competetive or conflictual creatures, that are motivated primarily by self-interested pursuits, and as such cannot function as agents of change. Within this notion ones own moral or normative behaviour was often interpreted as an exception.
On his own political nature: He is disillusioned, he doesn’t believe that anything can change, and not a fan of humanity. Groups are always evil, he likes individuals. Interested in corruption, who is the worst.
Conversation notes, Summer 2016
Noam in the above example mentioned to me and emphasised his underlying belief that groups are fundamentally evil, implying that while individuals may be be likable, when humans come together it is always problematic. He implied in other situations that the majority of humankind is bad, and that only few indivuals are kind-hearted or able to show sacrifice and gratefulness, expressing for example that “people are always complaining” and that he wishes there were more of the “kind-hearted” or “sacrifical kind of people”.
Another respondent, Tom, a successful poetry slammer, who also commits his time to helping the elderly with alzheimers by writing poetry with them, explained his idealistic mindset and his attitude.
Went to Cuba and explained that the socialist ideas were much closer to his ideals, but he realised there more than ever, that “in the end the human nature is capitalist and there is no possibility to build a different, better world, because humans are selfish and a**holes”.
Conversation notes, Summer 2017
Tom explicitly states that human nature is capitalist. His interpretation can be associated with the classical model of the “economic man” who pursues his self-interests in a rational, calculated and self-maximizing manner within an arena of competition over scarce resources. While in anthropological theory scientists acknowledge that behaviours are more complex and multi faceted, it remains a popular thought, demonstrated also by my respondents, to render human beings to such a simplistic models.
“it is capitalism’s fault people are like this, people are their habits/ routines, the whole team and café stand very strong against this. For us, compassion and understanding is more important [...]” Finn describes his attitude towards humanity with a quote by Henry Rollins, he explains to me that Rollins is a singer in black flag, and a writer / poet, writes speeches, and he talks about his travels, and how he’s done with “we”, “you” exists and he likes “you”, but there is not “we”, C. thinks “we” are pretty much f***ed. I looked up the quote and it’s from an article in the Guardian, where Rollins says: “I like you but not us.” Finn explains that there are only pockets of powerful energy, as a collective we are pretty messed up
Conversation notes, Summer 2017
While Finn, quoted in the above extract, blames capitalism and its mechanisms for individual behaviour, he defines people as their habits or routines. He expresses that for their team however, compassion and understanding are more important than capitalism, or capitalist habits or routines. He frames the team as an exception, that is countering the norms of society.
Interestingly, those with this first tendency, whilst being quite firm and steadfast in their own stance, do not believe that the advancement of society is possible. This hinders them from being engaged in any collective or more serious way, and constrains their actions within a framework of their own realm of influence (see also 4.3), and mere consumption choices (see 4.3.2). The lofty ideals described in 4.1.1 give way to resignation, negativity, and frustration. It’s interesting that Finn still frames their little group as a “pocket full of powerful energy”, because it goes beyond the mere individualism.
He has a stronger connection to animals than people, because humans are vile and animals are great. You never see an animal hit another animal, cause it does not come from hatred. It’s only to survive. There is something about nature which is beautiful, because there is no hatred.
Conversation notes, Summer 2017
This anthropology seen in the extracts above, describes humans being “selfish”, “vile” or “capitalist”. This describes an anthropology akin to the homo economicus, but with a great deal of contempt.
However, opposing this is a second tendency that suggests human beings are influenced by their environment and that they can develop or change according to their circumstances and the conversations that one can have with them.
For example at work it’s very different. There I get to know people who are very different, you have to start right from the beginning.
Extract from a narrative interview, Spring 2017
This distinction people “who are very different”, is associated with the idea of having to start right at the beginning. It implies again this direction of society, and that all have to move that way.
Like, I just remember the last 20 years I was all alone being a veggie [vegetarian], and I’ve always felt alone with this, and there were, so many annoying discussions. I have had to justify myself so often for it! People were really not accepting and when you are asked for a vegetarian meal they would look at you funny but now it’s different, finally I feel so much better, it used to be so difficult
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2016
The personal experience that Olivia describes above sets the tone for her hopeful outlook to the development of humanity. She, and some others, see dialogue as a tool to transform. Conversations about important issues can be seen as an action towards the progress of humanity. In another context she explained: “The most important thing is the conversation, it’s something collective, when you have the feeling that you doing good”.
These conversations are embedded in an understanding of oneself as a part of a collective that encompasses the evolvement of humanity towards a more just and ethical future as described in 4.1.1. Its further embedded in an understanding of oneself also as a transforming individual that is trying to learn through friendships and conversations.
...my only expectation from the life is to live a good way. Again and again I discuss and negotiate how I can be a better person, where is there still room for improvement, what am I still doing wrong, these conversations are beautiful and I love having them with my friends. It really permeates our friendships.
Extract from a narrative interview, Summer 2017
These friendships and conversations are not only an expression of self development or cultural practice, but also seen as a tool to change other peoples’ behaviour. A salesperson in a low waste, vegan shop told me once that “the customer, and talking to the customer is the most important, even more important than food”.
The following statement also reflects this attitude of being able to influence people, and the idea that the obstacle for change is not the incorrigible nature of humans, but rather lack of education or love.
...it is important to maintain that everyone is welcome, and show love, for everyone in the line ... if you treat someone with hate, it only creates hate, if you treat everyone with love, love spreads, we respect each others feelings, everyone has their own mind, if you feel someone is overstepping, you have to deal compassion.
Conversation notes, Summer 2017
Many theories might suggest to analyse these attitudes in light of sociological theories of consumerism and individualism, which means the main motivation for actions is to gain advantages in a field, or to mark one’s identity.
However, the data shows how contradictory the statements can be. While these individuals dream of a just world, where people and animals are treated fairly, where the environment is saved and the challenges that mass consumption and consumerism are overcome, they sometimes seem paralysed by the image of the individual as self-interested and egoistic. Their own steadfastness can be interpreted as a normative stance and in some cases even hopefulness that society could move in this direction.
4.2 Individualism and Citizenship: Two Analytical Categories
In analysing the mindset and narrative of the respondents that is described above, two analytical categories emerge. In contributing to the progress of society it seems my respondents’ self-understanding can be associated with citizenship, complimented by indvidualism.
Economic behaviour is often inadequately interpreted within the scene of hipsterism because distinction is such an important factor of authenticity (see 3.1). But even further, those who study economic behaviour professionally are strongly committed to specific theories of action. Especially distinction theory (Bourdieu, 2012) has influenced this field, and while this considers the network of interpersonal relationships that shape consumption behaviour, the behaviour is reduced to having merely distinctive purposes.
Analysing this behaviour through the lens of individualism, fashion in the sense of Simmel (1957) and distinction in the sense of Bourdieu (2012) led to entanglement. In this milieu the individuals have the unique challenge of being very opposed to being labelled and put strong emphasis on individualism. They find milieu formation problematic, but still engage in ways that cause distinction. They criticise consumption, but still identify with specific modes of consumption. The narrative of the self and the actions associated with distinction showed many contradictions. However, seeing the actions through the narrative and perspective of the milieu itself allowed for the category of citizenship to emerge.
Evidently, participating in the actitivites and conversing with the respondents demonstrated their implicit understanding of their responsibilty and duties, as well as an expansion of the citizenship from a national to a broader, global level.
The idea that citizenship is bound to a legal status and has purely juridical implications has long been contested. But even within academic discourses that acknowledge citizenship as a practice, these are often associated with very specific practices that are defined beforehand.
Robins et al. (2008) explain that an “active citizen” has come to be a buzzword that disregards political agency that is embedded in everyday life. They argue that research on citizenship should function detached from normative convictions, but should rather analyse everyday experiences.
The actual experience of citizenship as a practice is of course bound not only to the reality of actors’ particular social and cultural context, but also to their own conceptions of these. The understanding of society, human nature, institutions, politics, as well as the understanding of themselves as citizens shape this practice, and are closely connected to their perceived identity. As such they also influence their individuality. However, when duties and responsibilities toward an imagined global community become important, distinction practices take a backseat.
Citizenship is one category to analyse my respondents’ approaches to action. National citizenship poses two challenges in contemporary society, that my respondents try to address.
The first is the challenge within the nation. A multitude of cultures and nationals live together in cities and neighbourhoods, as described in chapter 3. While these various cultures contribute to diversity, it becomes evident that results are distinction and milieu formation that my respondents observed to be problematic. Within the nation there are also individuals that do not have legal rights as a national, but are still perceived and attempted to be welcomed by my respondents, such as refugees. This is especially pertinent, as my respondents and their milieu was geographically in an area that is very dense with migrants.
A second challenge for national citizenship is that the afflictions of society, such as climate change, concern the whole world and not just single nations—as described in section 4.1.2 and 4.1.3—and that many institutions and traditional forms of collectivity have been deemed unfit or untrustworthy to address the challenges of a globalised world.
As Giddens (2013, p. 225) describes, modernity’s referential systems are influenced by the expansion through globalisation. The world my respondents find themselves in, is unified by the creation of high-consequence risks, such as the collapse of the eco system. They also demonstrate that they are affected by issues that do not concern them individually, but rather society as a whole, such as the injustices around exploitation of labour around the world. Thus, they demonstrate yet again their implicit understanding of themselves as part of a world community. Within this community they see themselves as politically motivated actors for the benefit of society, contributing to its progress through an imagined collective.
A tendency observable within hipsterism is an implicit understanding of one’s own responsibility and duties towards a global entity that goes beyond the nation. The feeling of expressed solidarity went beyond the group my respondents belonged to. It also expanded national citizenship to global citizenship and is strengthened by my respondents’ growing awareness of the connection throughout the world through capital and the distribution of goods, and impending climate change that will affect all. This also adds to the idea of an imagined community (Taylor, 2002) including all the peoples of the world.
Environmental issues and mass migration have brought on an understanding of society as a whole. A pressing call to answer to the needs of a growing, rapidly developing, but not yet united or peaceful global population has influenced these respondents. The world faces environmental and political challenges, such as pollution, global warming and the capitalist expectation of infinite growth despite finite resources. This has raised awareness in my respondents, that it is not sufficient to render quality of life to mindless consumption or mere voluntary work, but that the ways to engage need to be explored, reflected and reimagined. These forms take on a lot of mocking and ridicule in media and even the sciences, but need to be taken seriously at least as attempts of figuring out new ways of engaging for the progress of society in a new, digitalised, globalised world.
As evident in their narrative, the respondents do not associate their actions with distinction, but rather with global, individualised citizenship.
In a study in 2010 Myers (2010) had high school students construct their understanding of global citizenship. This understanding, whilst anaylsed in younger participants and in the US, includes elements that also seem implicit in my respondents’ understanding. Even though they never used the term “citizenship” itself, they mentioned what is described in Myers study as the purpose of global citizenship: moral commitment that does not require any special legal status and that requires active efforts to address world problems.
While citizenship seems a better category to describe the conception of the self-understanding within hipsterism, a fundamental tenant is still individualism.
Individualism plays a large role, as can be seen in the attitude of non-judgement of other lifestyles, as many statements implied, and awareness of the power imbalances that occur when one tries to apply their moral reasonings to others. Furthermore, the respondents’ conception of human nature sometimes paralyses collective action in an organised way. Thus the desire to contribute to the progress of society develops in a normative, individual way, with an imagined community, rather than a practical one.
Hipsterism seems to be an attempt to navigate between individualism and collectivity and thus form a kind of citizenship based on an imagined global community that they empathise with and feel solidarity towards.
4.3 A Pattern of Action
As demonstrated in 3, it first seemed that the criticism expressed by the respondents does not influence their everyday practice in a perceivable way. One example is that distinction mechanisms and classic milieu formation are still apparent within the field (see 3.4). In searching for the conceptions that shape this lifestyle, a framework emerged. The question remains if the conceptions express themselves in tangible action.
4.3.1 Collective Individualised Action
Hipsters are attacked for not engaging in any serious way in social media as portrayed in 4.1.1, but also by social scientists that have explored their behaviour so far (1.3), stating that Hipsters have abandoned the claims of counterculture, while merely retaining the “coolness” of subcultures (Greif, 2010a).
One respondent shared with me his understanding why communism had failed, searching for answers in the lack of individuals’ willingness to contribute to the common good, which was discussed in 4.1.4. However, my respondents do not feel hopeless or desperate, and these conceptions do not lead to becoming cynical or doing everything merely ironically, as the research of the past, and media discourse, so far suggest. Their attitude seems sober and realistic, and they emerge as individuals who understand their actions as part of a collective, searching for new ways of engagement.
In any case, my respondents identify with a collectivity in form of a sociality and solidarity that expresses itself globally and not just in neighbourhoods or in a form of classical community. This ultimately leads to an understanding of oneself and one’s everyday actions as a lifestyle that takes place within an imagined community, with a strong individualistic element. As such it seems hipsterism offers an attempt to overcome the dichotomy between the individual and the collective, and also the lack of a world embracing stage where they can act, by reassigning this responsibilty to the individual and imagining the community.
This means however, that the responsibility to transform or change the state of the world is reassigned to individuals and thus can only triumph if humankind is able to make a change on an individual level across a large scale.
Underlying this understanding of individual actions as collective actions can be traced back through a development in western societies, bearing in mind multiple processes that have occurred in recent modernity.
In this context I understand the term “action” as more than the distinction described in chapter 3, but rather as a politically intended or politically motivated everyday action. These actions will display a result of the conceptual framework described above in section 4.1. Furthermore, such actions, sustained over the course of life, can portray an intentional hipster lifestyle.
Leading to this section of the chapter, a framework of conceptions has been defined that shapes the way the respondents interact with and undertake measures to transform or better society. The direction of this transformation was described in section 4.1.1 and can be understood as politically progressive.
The measures to contribute to what Hipsters understand as a more just society are usually unrelated to classic political engagement. My respondents rather try to reimagine appropriate forms of engaging that fits to their understanding of the structures of society.
These conceptions, including that young people see no political global arena of engagement on which to act collectively, do not result in complete disengagement. Instead, new forms of engagement are being generated, in the form of such actions.
These actions can be attributed to citizenship as a category, rather than individualism, as explored in 4.2.
Self-determination and individual empowerment, and the values they are based on—such as creativity and innovation, allow my respondents to assess their own situation and to respond to their personal and the perceived societal circumstances, with appropriate action. Two types of responses can be identified here.
Firstly, they decide to try not to “join in”, phrased as “not enslaving oneself” or “not becoming capitalist”. This is more related to their work.
Second, they are attempting to find expressions of action in their lifestyle. The politically intended actions within hipsterism are a whole spectrum of activities that vary in degrees of committment. This spectrum includes the idea of conversation as a tool to transform societies. It also includes trying to construct spaces where different cultures, genders and ethnicities are welcome, such as their cafés with welcoming signs and events they organise. Another array of actions is sustainable living as well as conscious consumption. This can be seen in the milieu being ecological, travelling sustainably, consuming vegan and no waste goods, etc.
The elements of the first, related to work, has already been discussed in 3.2 and 3.3. All respondents harbour antipathy towards any kind of job that supports big chains, within any financial or capitalised sector or the idea of becoming a “typical” entrepreneur. This can be attributed to a lifestyle that is dominant in this milieu. However, it is not a sustainable development and commitment to this idea weakens with time, because it evolves along an adaption to structures that were criticised initially, as portrayed in 3.3.4. Thus it is not necessarily sustained throughout the course of life, as a politically intended lifestyle.
The second response is to act in a politically intended or motivated way and expresses itself within the realm of consumption. Not only the consumption itself, but also conversations about it, reflection and self-criticism in consumption, and in groups of friends that are organised by their way of consumption. Consumerism, as the force that shapes the framework for action of my respondents, influences the understanding of my respondents on how they can contribute or engage in society, and shapes not only their identity, but also their relationships. Within the practice of consumption found in hipsterism, the pattern of ethical or conscious consumption stood out in my observations.
4.3.2 Conscious Consumption
It seems that globalisation is not just a cultural change, but might actually influence the political sphere and expand it through capital. Our global economy is one example of a world embracing sphere, as described above in 4.1.3. As we are politically connected by capital and the distribution of capital, this is where my respondents see the most likely way of engaging.
Andorfer (2013) investigated self-reported Fair Trade consumption in Germany, investigating the social function of ethical consumption. The findings of the conducted study lead to the conclusion that social status, attitude, general environmental concerns as well as solidarity and religiousness are important determinants. Atkinson (2012) published a qualitative study in which she discovered that socially conscious consumers found the cost of their consumption, such as inconvenience or limited choice, as pleasurable, because these sacrifices were reframed within the ideals of acting selflessly and working for a common good. According to Atkinson these socially conscious consumers embody an alternative concept of citizenship. Hudson et al. (2013) published an experiment in 2013 that investigated explanations for willingness to engage in ethical consumption in which individuals were asked to choose between fair trade and regular coffee. They discovered that status and information provision did not significantly affect the decisions of consumption.
Generally the motivation for consuming consciously is bound within a framework of ideals, rather than information and knowledge.
One of my respondents described himself as “critical of consumption and plastic and he does think he is a minimalist”. However explaining these themes in conversation often did not turn to the individual’s narrative or themself or their personal lifestyle, unless I asked about it. Respondents were more interested in speaking about the issues as such. However, when respondents were asked about their identity and biography, there was noticably strong normativity in their understanding.
One of the shops close to Wesestreet selling organic cosmetics. (Semple, 2017c)
In 4.1 one can see one of the many shops on Weserstrasse. It had purely no waste cosmetics and organic products. The image in the window depicts a woman showering in twigs and leaves and feathers, demonstrating a bathing in nature. The image also portrays the woman with average porportions, as opposed to many advertisements in cosmetic shops that use skinny and photoshopped flawless models on the posters and pictures. While the image is purposefully simple in style, using only few brush strokes, there are lines on the legs emphasising unshaved legs. There seems to be special emphasis on the idea that the lady portrayed is not only connected closely to the nature, and has average proportions, but especially that her legs are not shaved. As such, she is not adhering to expectations of beauty pushed by commercial capitalism.
In many conversations respondents placed their consumption in a framework of politically progressive ideals. They shop in stores, that propagate a strong stance against objectification of women, chemicals in the cosmetic industry, and that condemn wastefulness and single use plastic. These are all portrayed as political choices and also as something they really identified with, in the context of a personal individualised lifestyle.
Other extremely predominant trends were minimalism, buying sustainable ethical goods, fair trade products etc. Many conversations in this social milieu rotate around what people no longer buy. These tendencies are also evident in many videos on the Internet platform Youtube, where videos with a distinctly hipster aesthetic are propagating movements towards living a more minimalist, less consumerist, and as such more fulfilling lifestyle.
Explanations for this behaviour are often not only politically framed, but also associated with conscience and feelings of guilt. The following extract from my field diary describes a very early conversation, revolving around the way my respondents felt, facing the fact that consumers are accustomed to purchasing goods that are either produced far away and have to be flown in, or that produce greenhouse gases, all with immense costs for the environment.
Part of the convo with the girls was also about all the foods they feel like having, but can’t have, because they feel guilty, because it’s not the season.
Field Diary, Summer 2016
Buying regionally and seasonally was posed as an alternative to consumerism. The conscious consumer portrays an alternative to the classic consumer that my respondents’ find problematic. The inherent problem of the market economy was often identified as a problem of consumers. The economy answers to the needs of the consumers that another respondent described as people that “just want to push a button and get what they want immediately, because they are in such a rush”.
The challenges were not only ascribed to the consumers.
My respondents were also aware and discussed problems such as planned obsolescence, in which products are designed in a way that shortens their replacement time. These are all issues that they as individuals do not feel they can solve, except in addressing them through their own consumer behaviour.
Ultimately the question that remains is whether the respondents consume this way in an attempt to express an individualistic narrative of their biography and identification with certain values, or as a political reaction to the paralysis of possible engagement in any other way. Is it in fact the desire to act for the common good that is reduced to consumption, because it is understood as the only or most efficient way to influence and engage in an effective way? Or are the consumption patterns merely marking belonging and distinction, and, as Greif (2010a) put it, a “coolness” of subcultures devoid of any serious political intention?
To answer this question, it is interesting to observe that while there is a lot of denial within the scene whenever someone is labelled a “Hipster”, the actual fashion symbols do express belonging to the group rather than a constant need for distinction. Even though specific items rapidly become extremely popular, they are still seen in hipster culture. This expresses authenticity (see also 3) and also poses many questions about fashion and how it has developed in contemporary society and evolved since Simmel’s time.
If my respondents consume specific interchangeable items in order to escape from the mainstream, they portray a further evolution of Simmels fashion in a liquid society (Bauman, 2001). This can be associated with the developments of society in general and my respondents would merely illustrate the distinction mechanisms in contemporary society.
Between my respondents, consumption often plays a meaningful role in the shaping of not only identity, but also of relationships, as the following extract shows. In the interview quoted below Olivia had described to me her attitude towards consumption. When I asked which influence Olivia’s consumption had in her life she said:
It influences how and what kind people I’m friends with, it has a huge impact on friendship. The most important thing is the conversation, it’s something collective, when you have the feeling that you’re doing good. 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. Again and again I discuss and negotiate how I can be a better person, where is there still room for improvement, what am I still doing wrong, these conversations are beautiful and I love having them with my friends. It really permeates our friendships.
Extract from narrative interview, Summer 2017
Here the respondent frames consumption patterns as something collective, while it is also deeply personal and individualistic. She frames these decisions within a commitment and responsibilty for the greater good of society, as well as personal development. The actions, such as consumption, could also be understood as politically intended, and thus portray citizenship.
Political Scientists Micheletti and Stolle have explored the notion of “sustainable citizenship” and studied it in the context of institutions, such as non-governmental organisations and corporations, and in the context of individuals, particularly those engaged in political consumerism and vegetarianism (Micheletti et al., 2012).
In the context of hipsterism, it is interesting to consider their empirical exploration and analysis of individuals involved in sustainable citizenship. They question whether being a good citizen has the potential to challenge structural causes of social injustices and environmental challenges. In their definition they expand citizenship beyond the bounds of a nation state and the sphere of politics, but refer to the values and practices to promote sustainable development. They explain that the discourse on citizenship has come to include lifestyles and routines, just as personal habits and choices.
In this context, citizenship can be seen as an expansion beyond the mere obeying of laws, serving of one’s country and taking part in elections. Citizenship can include the responsibility to analyse and reassess one’s own habits and the politics of day-to-day choices, as a means to object to inequality, human oppression, exploitation of nature, colonialism, et cetera.
One way in which citizens engage in activism is for example through boycotting some products, while specifically seeking out others.
Consumers may, for instance, decide to purchase (buycott) certain goods as much as possible for sustainability reasons, to become vegetarians or vegans, or to live simply without many material possessions. (ibid., p. 93)
Through the lens of Bourdieu’s taste as a matter of distinction (Bourdieu, 2012) the behaviour of my respondents could be reduced to markers for identity and individualism. Through Simmel’s lens of fashion, this consumption could be understood as an expression of the dualism of adaption and distinction, between flight and chase (Simmel, 1957).
However, a citizenship approach shows that consumption can be an expression of a felt responsibilty and as a politically intended action. Hipsters are often vegan or vegetarians and embrace ecological and environment-friendly lifestyles. They can be seen eating at vegan restaurants or cafés, and using fair trade products. They work for social or ethical organisations, or even own or startup such establishments themselves. Many startups that Hipsters find within the realm of consumption are organic, or have a feminist or otherwise ethical stance.
In this context my respondents often also reframed their consumption choices as a political decision, as seen below. The statement is an explanation to why the individual was a vegan rather than a vegetarian.
He explained that he
...met someone who really inspired him and said there is no such thing as being a vegetarian, you either support the animal industry, or you don’t.
Field Diary, Summer 2017
In this context it can be understood as a political action to become vegan, as a vegetarian still supports the animal industry by consuming dairy, eggs or other animal products, like leather or wool.
Here it is important to differentiate between those practices that can be associated with flight and chase in the sense of Simmel, and an actual buy- or boycotting in the way it is described by Micheletti and Stolle. Following the notion of mass culture in a strict sense, hipsterism could be a practice that is defined by mere consumption. The question here is whether Hipsters merely consume, or whether they are ’acting’ individuals. In this sense, acting is understood as defined earlier, as a politically intended everyday action.
Micheletti et al. (2012, p. 90) explain that
Sustainable citizenship expects individuals and institutions to support and safeguard social justice and nature even if they do not receive a direct reward or payoff in return. It expects them to give serious consideration to how their beliefs, policies, and practices might reflect and reproduce social and environmental injustices of the past (e.g., from legacies of slavery and colonialism) and how their present practices and lifestyles may have a negative effect on the well being of other humans, nature, and animals today and in the future. Sustainable citizenship includes responsibilities for economic, environmental, and equitable development that are to be practised daily. In this way, it expands and extends what is generally considered as necessary to be a good citizen. Moreover, it includes more actors as citizens and more arenas in which citizenship is practised. In particular, it stresses the responsibilities and practices of businesses and consumers and views both private and economic life as important centers in the making and performance of citizenship.
Criticism of this engagement often notes that a focus on consumption will foster more individualism and even further jeopardise the possibilities of collective action, rather than show a viable expression of engagement in an individualised, yet globalised, society.
However, the awareness of my respondents that affluent consumption has increasing negative effects on the environment and vulnerable people throughout the world was evident. If individuals assume, as demonstrated by my respondents, that classical engagement models and traditional politics are hindered to the point of paralysis from achieving effective change, they could demonstrate an attempt to find models of engaging as individuals across a large scale. Consumption is only one that they have found so far. They could be seen as a contemporary subculture, searching for adequate ways of being political, within their conception of reality.
4.3.3 Consistent Consumption as a Lifestyle—A New Form of Citizenship?
The same consumption behaviour of my respondents can be observed through two different analytical lenses.
Looking at the behaviour from a fashion perspective led to entanglements of labelling, distancing and classic flight and chase behaviour Simmel (1957). Looking at consumption choices from the perspective of lifestyle and citizenship, demonstrated consistency and commitment with a political motivation.
Through the analytical lens of fashion in the sense of Simmel (ibid.) this behaviour can be attributed to an attempt to distinguish oneself and to belong to a group. As a lens, distinction theory Bourdieu (2012) leads to understanding aspects of the respondents’ behaviour as expressions of good taste, distinction and individualism in the field. The class has shifted to be a creative one, but there is still an underlying class mentality.
As demonstrated in this chapter however, the conceptions of Hipsters—individualism, collectivity, institutions, etc.– and the emerging actions, can portray the emergence of a form of global citizenship in highly individualised, whilst globalised, society.
The reaction of conscious consumption is connected not only to mass culture and globalisation, but also to the individualistic narrative of the self, and its possible movement toward citizenship. It is important to acknowledge the effects of the framework of action that hipsterism is practiced within. If analysed deeply and precisely from within, we can observe a possible movement from individualism to citizenship as a model for sustainable (political?) engagement in an age lacking a global stage with inadequate institutions in globalisation. Both the individualistic narrative of the self and biography and identification with certain values, as well as the reaction to the paralysis of possible engagement and desire to act for the common good, might structure these decisions. All in all, we cannot merely reduce these cultural practices of hipsterism to either civic action for the common good, or as individualistic distinction driven mechanisms. It has been helpful to maintain a holistic approach to understanding what dynamics affect modern societies and how it poses questions about models of engagement on individuals within the global yet liquid environment infused by the new spirit of capitalism.
In the context of the conceptions expressed in 4.1 it seems likely that the realm of consumption is an area where actors feel they can influence society on a global scale, as opposed to other forms of engagement. When individuals look for ways to engage in problems that are global, not just national or transnational, such as massive migration, waste pollution through plastic, and climate change, which are some areas that my respondents were very passionate about, they realise that these world spanning challenges also need a global political stage to engage on. To my respondents, it seems most likely in the realm of consumption, where consumer choices seem to actually influence the global community.
The question is whether their behaviour is truly political in this scene, even though and maybe even especially because of the fact that it has a lot to do with consumption. The idea of active consumers has been discussed against the background of approaches to reflexive modernism (Beck, 1992), which generally pointed out that classical political institutions lose significance and politics of everyday life becomes more important.
The discussion about dicourses on and dissemination of moral consumption was thought by some authors such as Lamla (2013) and Hellmann (2013) to possibly result in a new social system, from the grass roots, first through the interconnectedness of consumers, then through the networking of associated organizations, ultimately resulting in a form of consumer communication.
The most important thing is the conversation, it’s something collective, when you have the feeling that you’re doing good.
Extract from narrative interview, Spring 2017
Depending on their attitude towards wider society as described in 4.1.4, the relationship and actions towards others vary. Some within this milieu see it as their task and obligation to have conversations with friends outside of this milieu, with quite a normative approach, seeing it as their duty to spread their ideals.
After talking about the problem that not many people are yet engaging in sustainable or ethical consumption behaviour, one respondent explained that “we are all not perfect and consistent”, and stated the following.
But that’s okay, because there’s so many conversations that are helping motivate everyone, to become more and more consistent.
Extract from narrative interview, Spring 2017
In the extract above the respondent demonstrates another aspect: that she is not just aware that many substantial conversations and interactions are needed to change peoples’ consumption behaviour. She also demonstrates that not everyone is or can be perfectly consistent, but what is needed for individual and collective progress is an ongoing process of action, reflection and consultation with friends and family and interactions with wider society.
Another respondent’s greatest contact with the diverse populations of Neukölln was frequenting ethnic supermarkets. She was also living a low waste lifestyle. Many of the ethnic stores in Neukölln are prone to giving the buyer many plastic bags to store grocery items in. This individual explained that she still frequents these places and hopes that having her ecological, reusable fabric bag will make others in the supermarket aware and make them think. This way she hopes to have a positive impact through interactions there, and also does not have to stop frequenting those places, that offer her encounters with people of diverse cultures. She sees here presence there as a suggestion to others rather than telling them and thus imposing her values on others.
Another respondent explained:
I had an interesting conversation with [my boyfriend] about this. You know it’s about way more, it’s about what is the right thing to do and how are people allowed to live. I don’t live perfectly, and [my boyfriend] said “Really why are your expectations so high? if everyone lived the way you are, there would be no problems any more. Environmental and like other stuff too.”
Extract from narrative interview, Spring 2017
This statement also emphasises that the conversation is important towards advancement, not only conversing with others, but also as a process of self-reflection and bettering oneself. Giddens explains that through the variety of choices, and because we are under pressure to choose in consumer society, all these decisions affect self-identity, while self-identity in modernity is a reflexive achievement. As a pattern of living, self-identity is shaped, altered and reflexively sustained in the course of life (Giddens, 1991, p. 215). Life patterns, can be altered and practices can be changed, while the general lifestyle provides consistency.
I observed in my respondents that a more or less consistent mode of consumption is placed in the context of not only a whole lifestyle, but a politically intended one at that.
[I buy something on] Amazon, for example, and then I feel guilty, even though there so many conversations that motivate you to do the right thing. And then you become lazy and you think about it and then you realise that you’ve ordered on Amazon again, even though you know it’s wrong, and you feel guilty.
Extract from narrative interview, Summer 2017
This respondent implies that buying something on Amazon is not consistent with her lifestyle, most likely because of the bad working conditions of warehouse workers and their terrible contracts, that Amazon has been criticised for. To be highly critical and maybe boycott companies that are merely very good at modern-day capitalism and thus very successful, is of course a counter cultural stance. The struggle of this individual to lead a coherent life, which reflects her ideals, is exemplary for understanding lifestyle as participation. Generally, the respondents also gave the impression of collectivity.
So while many of these conversations circled around autonomy, non-judgement and making one’s own decisions, these actions and practices were still being described or portrayed as movements or collective action. The respondents assume that people globally are also engaging and sharing these values.
Fragmentation of society and its institutions and individualisation did not affect my respondents’ feeling of belonging to movements or causes. While they did not identify necessarily with groups, except for belonging to an imagined global community, they very well identified with causes, such as veganism and gender equality. Lifestyles usually express individual values and are shaped by the stress and pressure of the society. The reactions of my respondents express a movement from focusing on the individual to more global, ethical issues and assuming responsibility that can be described as citizenship.
Many attempts to challenge dominant mainstream values are expressed not only in the individual lifestyle, but also determine relationships within groups of friends.
Olivia shares her wardrobe with F. In these 2 years I have known them now, I have only ever seen them shop at flea markets for clothes. They buy stuff together, and they seem completely detached from who pays for what. I’ve never seen them borrowing or lending money. Whoever has money in that instance just pays. When I ask Olivua about this, she says she loves the concept of a shared wardrobe, because while it does sometimes- very seldom she emphasised- lead to her not being able to wear something, because F. is already wearing it, it expresses the solidarity. She said: “In that instance you have to decide whether you want to get upset, that you wanted to wear that item and you can’t, or if you use it as an opportunity to practice abstinence.” I ask her to explain what she means by abstinence and she says she means abstinence from ownership, greed and belongings. I kept observing this and realised that they do the same with food and cosmetics in their home.
Field Diary, Spring 2017
To frame the practice of sharing and abstaining from consumerism within one’s lifestyle as an expression of solidarity is a reaction my respondents showed to complicating features of modernity.
Olivia also shared with me how she distrusts institutions or politics, because they do not stem from the grass roots. It seems to her a more genuine form of engagement to pay for whatever needs to be paid for in their home, whenever she has the money. This opposes the culture she lives in, which sees the need for calculating fair shares, with an economical understanding of fair being that all pay the same amount. This attitude also expresses an alternative, one could go as far as to call it counter-cultural, understanding of justice or fairness. To Olivia and her friends, the financial means that are earned are also spent for all, independent of a difference in wages or expenditure.
This lifestyle seems politically intended.
One could argue, that the urge to act in this way, is prompted merely by the urge to distance oneself from the masses and fulfil the task of building a more or less coherent identity with a set of authentic values that justify your life choices. But to do so would ignore that despite these individualistic tendencies, these norms of behaviour are shaped by the stress and anxiety within society. Thus the observation and analysis of the practices themselves, if looked at within this process of identity creation, but also as an end itself and not just a means to fulfil the call of individualism, can create a deeper understanding of society and counterculture in the current age.
My respondents framed their lifestyle as an engagement process with society and expressed politically intended action in an individualised society.
These attitudes demonstrate a countercultural posture: my respondents are trying to better society through ethical and conscious consumption, within a lifestyle based on countercultural values. So as a reaction to the stresses of society, they adapt the way they consume, and thus attempt to counter the prevalent mechanisms.
However, they limit the possibilities of challenging and countering norms of wider society, through merely another form of consumption, which is still constrained within a framework of the new spirit of capitalism. These actions are an engagement with society, but seem unlikely to challenge or even threaten functioning mechanisms of capitalism, unless many more people take part and they are taken to the extreme.
While boycotting can be found in hipsterism, as a lot of products that express exploitation will be avoided, engagement can also be more subtle. Not just by punishing those companies that individuals disagree with, but also in making consumer choices that are less motivated by punitive or awarding concerns, but rather by a desire to act in a way that benefits society as a whole. The conversational dynamics also contribute to this.
In addition to exemplifying individualism as a task, the disintegration of traditional societal roles, and youth becoming adults that are engaged in a becoming of their own, my respondents demonstrated the changes in participation and engagement in recent modernity. Many of my respondents identified with a normative lifestyle, for example with minimalism or veganism. However, in a constant process of self reflection, they analyse their reasons, their justification patterns, whether they are effective and whether they are authentic.
As a reaction to the stress of consumerism, mass culture and a throwaway society, my respondents demonstrated the movement of individualism to citizenship. It shows that individuals are imagining appropriate forms of engagement, posed by their own framework and principles, such as their willingness to engage in specific practices or engaging in dialogue about cultural and economical issues.
In a society in which they no longer trust the institutions to be able to address world problems, they reassign the responsibilty to their own selves and engage in politically intended lifestyles, whilst maintaining a individualistic stance. This lifestyle is developing and unfolding while Hipsters search for the most efficient and beneficial ways of engaging in a globalised society.
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). From Individuality to Imagined Global Citizenship. In: Hipsterism. Kultur und gesellschaftliche Praxis. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39536-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-39536-0_4
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)