Societal Problem

HarveyCanal

Why are so many people today defining themselves by what they don't like?People are so damned forthcoming when it comes to snide attitudes directed at those things that within their little peer groups have been deemed as unfashionable.Yet on the flipside, rarely do those same people openly ride for anything.It's like with each individual, we get a mountain of rejection sitting next to a mere morsel of cosignature.

funky16corners

Why are so many people today defining themselves by what they don't like?

People are so damned forthcoming when it comes to snide attitudes directed at those things that within their little peer groups have been deemed as unfashionable.

Yet on the flipside, rarely do those same people openly ride for anything.

It's like with each individual, we get a mountain of rejection sitting next to a mere morsel of cosignature.

You have very succinctly defined the basic nature of the modern hipsteur...

CBear

Out is the new in. I'm over this thread already.

bassie

It's easier to bitch than praise, easier to defend what you hate than what you love. And I think folks think saying you like/love something makes them look soft.

DrJoel

It seems like a lot of people i talk to about music, film, beer, art, etc are only concerned with what is the best of something. When you ask them what they thought of something it's always, "I've had better" or "It's not his best work/album" over and over again.

Things can just be good.

onetet

If you express dislike for everything, you get to position yourself as too cool and above everything this world offers. Furthermore, there's no need to actually read, watch, listen to, go to, taste, or experience anything because you already know that it all sucks.

Egbert_Souse

I really like this song:



as performed by this lady:





Happy?

Reynaldo

I blame rap.

HarveyCanal

Why are so many people today defining themselves by what they don't like?

People are so damned forthcoming when it comes to snide attitudes directed at those things that within their little peer groups have been deemed as unfashionable.

Yet on the flipside, rarely do those same people openly ride for anything.

It's like with each individual, we get a mountain of rejection sitting next to a mere morsel of cosignature.

You have very succinctly defined the basic nature of the modern hipsteur...

That's the obvious case. I think it goes far beyond hipsteurs though. Like people who could tell you a million bad things about the Bush administration, yet then couldn't follow it up with a shred of what they would rather see happen. Within that, Bush being a dufus is such an easy answer. And folks put so much energy into fully expressing that easy answer that they're not really leaving themselves the headspace to come up with the much-more complicated solution.

I don't know if it really represents a mass societal change or if it's always been like this, but it's like the self can no longer just represent itself as the self anymore. The self must now filter itself through some external stimulus before being able to then represent itself as a reaction to that stimulus.

Possibly this is an evolutionary pre-cursor to us further removing ourselves from our own humanity by chipping ourselves and such as we become more and more like cyborgs.

The internet already has way too many people putting full faith in its brain trust capabilities, as if info that doesn't exist on the net doesn't exist at all.

I mean, I totally believe in the idea of shared consciousness as directed by DNA and the inherent meaning of symbols. But I'm not so keen on the idea of a shared consciousness as orchestrated by a handful of scientists rather than by Nature itself.

Okay, I'm getting off track now...

CBear

My moms always told me that one can go through life building up, or tearing down, and they have a choice. I always thought that was good advice.

soulmarcosa

All I know is that my coworkers are playing the new Rilo Kiley album and it sucks pretty bad. Mostly because it sounds like Fleetwood Mac who also suck thoroughly.

DocMcCoy

Why are so many people today defining themselves by what they don't like?

People are so damned forthcoming when it comes to snide attitudes directed at those things that within their little peer groups have been deemed as unfashionable.

Yet on the flipside, rarely do those same people openly ride for anything.

It's like with each individual, we get a mountain of rejection sitting next to a mere morsel of cosignature.

I have to cosign this. More and more nowadays, it strikes me that a lot of people's default position on almost everything is out-and-out cynicism, as if they're more eager to prove they're not taken in by any kind of hype than anything else. It can't be a coincidence that many of the same people will rarely display anything as unfashionable as genuine enthusiasm for something without checking themselves beforehand. And don't get me started on people who write off performers (or even entire genres of music) purely on the basis of the people who like them. Whenever I hear someone use a term like "music for people who don't like music", for example, I know I'm in the presence of a certified halfwit.

keithvanhorn

Why are so many people today defining themselves by what they don't like?

People are so damned forthcoming when it comes to snide attitudes directed at those things that within their little peer groups have been deemed as unfashionable.

Yet on the flipside, rarely do those same people openly ride for anything.

It's like with each individual, we get a mountain of rejection sitting next to a mere morsel of cosignature.

complaining about people who complain....

HarveyCanal

And I think folks think saying you like/love something makes them look soft.

Apparently so...but if they were really concerned about looking soft they might want address other areas before that one.

Egbert_Souse

I really like plaid and argyle and my new haircut.

wholewheat

the inherent meaning of symbols

Harvey-

I agree with a lot of what you're saying about folks being more likely to spend their energy trashing something they dislike than talking about what they actually do like. But the above phrase makes no sense to me. It seems to be in conflict with the very definiton of the word "symbol".

Reynaldo

And I think folks think saying you like/love something makes them look soft.

It makes them be soft.

Egbert_Souse

You know what I love?


I love to sing-a
About the moon-a and the June-a and the spring-a,
I love to sing-a,
About a sky of blue-a, or a tea for two-a,
Anything-a with a swing-a to an "I love you-a,"
I love to, I love to sing!

Give me a song-a
About a son-a gun that went and done her wrong-a.
But keep it clean-a,
With a cottage small-a by a waterfall-a,
Any sob-a that will throb-a to a bluebird's call-a,
I love, I love to sing!

I was born a singin' fool-a,
Lah-de-dah!
Ol' Major Bowes is gonna spot me,
Got through Yale with boula-boula,
Lah-de-dah!
Old microphone's got me!

I love to sing-a,
I love to wake up with the south-a in my mouth-a,
And wave a flag-a,
With a cheer for Uncle Sammy and another for my mammy,
I love to sing!

The swingin'est,
Hot singin'est,
Bell-ringin'est,
Song singin'est
High tootin'est,
Sky tootin'est,
I love to siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing!

HarveyCanal

the inherent meaning of symbols

Harvey-

I agree with a lot of what you're saying about folks being more likely to spend their energy trashing something they dislike than talking about what they actually do like. But the above phrase makes no sense to me. It seems to be in conflict with the very definiton of the word "symbol".

Within a conversation about the possibility of a shared consciousness...there are certain symbols that maintain a specific meaning no matter how they are used in a context that would differentiate them from their original, inherent meaning. And even if our overt mind recognizes a manipulated symbol as an extension of its new context, our subconscious mind is still very likely to continue registering the inherent meaning of that symbol.

iron_monkey

Why are so many people today defining themselves by what they don't like?

People are so damned forthcoming when it comes to snide attitudes directed at those things that within their little peer groups have been deemed as unfashionable.

Yet on the flipside, rarely do those same people openly ride for anything.

It's like with each individual, we get a mountain of rejection sitting next to a mere morsel of cosignature.

I have to cosign this. More and more nowadays, it strikes me that a lot of people's default position on almost everything is out-and-out cynicism, as if they're more eager to prove they're not taken in by any kind of hype than anything else. It can't be a coincidence that many of the same people will rarely display anything as unfashionable as genuine enthusiasm for something without checking themselves beforehand. And don't get me started on people who write off performers (or even entire genres of music) purely on the basis of the people who like them. Whenever I hear someone use a term like "music for people who don't like music", for example, I know I'm in the presence of a certified halfwit.

I know people like this, and I'm sure I'm guilty of doing this from time to time as well. I think a lot of it is attributed to the overwhelming amount of media and the the speed which it comes at you in every conceivable direction. It's hard not to filter a lot of it out and feel urged to classify things quicker, form opinions and dismiss things perhaps before they get the chance to develop. This factor has caused countless bands/artists to lose record contracts and/or support from their labels. I'm sure there are parallels to this phenomenon in other media industries as well. Wouldn't be surprised if it were also partially responsible for contributing to ADD too.

HarveyCanal

Why are so many people today defining themselves by what they don't like?

People are so damned forthcoming when it comes to snide attitudes directed at those things that within their little peer groups have been deemed as unfashionable.

Yet on the flipside, rarely do those same people openly ride for anything.

It's like with each individual, we get a mountain of rejection sitting next to a mere morsel of cosignature.

I have to cosign this. More and more nowadays, it strikes me that a lot of people's default position on almost everything is out-and-out cynicism, as if they're more eager to prove they're not taken in by any kind of hype than anything else. It can't be a coincidence that many of the same people will rarely display anything as unfashionable as genuine enthusiasm for something without checking themselves beforehand. And don't get me started on people who write off performers (or even entire genres of music) purely on the basis of the people who like them. Whenever I hear someone use a term like "music for people who don't like music", for example, I know I'm in the presence of a certified halfwit.

I know people like this, and I'm sure I'm guilty of doing this from time to time as well. I think a lot of it is attributed to the overwhelming amount of media and the the speed which it comes at you in every conceivable direction. It's hard not to filter a lot of it out and feel urged to classify things quicker, form opinions and dismiss things perhaps before they get the chance to develop. This factor has caused countless bands/artists to lose record contracts and/or support from their labels. I'm sure there are parallels to this phenomenon in other media industries as well. Wouldn't be surprised if it were also partially responsible for contributing to ADD too.

Haughty attitude as defense mechanism against information overload...good point.

Egbert_Souse

I like Kayagum music.


and The Rach!

james

they're more eager to prove they're not taken in by any kind of hype than anything else.

I mean, yeah. I can???t speak for elsewhere, but a certain unwillingness to be fooled--to be made to seem foolish by having invested, even/especially spiritually, in the Wrong Thing--has long been a Great American Defense Mechanism (second only to, I guess, murder). But for a good while that skepticism in what you didn't like was coupled with a belief in the importance and imperative of voicing enthusiasm for what you did like (e.g. ???I like the Whopper, fuck the Big Mac???), and for a long time, the pace of culture made it possible for the two to coexist. As the media cycle has quickened, though, and as more and more fields of cultural production have become super-saturated and micro-divided and hyper-exposed, that coexistence has become less and less tenable. The cornerstone of enthusiasm is confidence (or faith, or belief, or whatever you prefer to call it), and when you???re constantly made aware that there???s always something newer/better/realer around the corner, always something more relevant that you might be overlooking, always a seminal influence that you???re inadvertently shortchanging in favor of some come-lately faker, that confidence is under perpetual assault, and it becomes more and more apparent that the only way to maintain any kind of enthusiasm for one thing is to just flat-out ignore some other things. It's true what they say: Love, to some extent, is blindness. It???s ignoring history and context and cachet and just liking what you like in your own way and for your own fucked-up human reasons. But blindness--especially willful blindness--can be seen as foolishness, and nobody wants to be seen as a fool, and so the love that necessitates the blindness gets jettisoned, to the detriment of everyone. ???I might not be a lover, but I???m definitely not a fool.???

It saddens me. A lot.

funky16corners

You know what I love?


I love to sing-a
About the moon-a and the June-a and the spring-a,
I love to sing-a,
About a sky of blue-a, or a tea for two-a,
Anything-a with a swing-a to an "I love you-a,"
I love to, I love to sing!

Give me a song-a
About a son-a gun that went and done her wrong-a.
But keep it clean-a,
With a cottage small-a by a waterfall-a,
Any sob-a that will throb-a to a bluebird's call-a,
I love, I love to sing!

I was born a singin' fool-a,
Lah-de-dah!
Ol' Major Bowes is gonna spot me,
Got through Yale with boula-boula,
Lah-de-dah!
Old microphone's got me!

I love to sing-a,
I love to wake up with the south-a in my mouth-a,
And wave a flag-a,
With a cheer for Uncle Sammy and another for my mammy,
I love to sing!

The swingin'est,
Hot singin'est,
Bell-ringin'est,
Song singin'est
High tootin'est,
Sky tootin'est,
I love to siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing!

Owl Jolson meets Soulstrut.
I think my head just 'sploded.....

HarveyCanal

they're more eager to prove they're not taken in by any kind of hype than anything else.

I mean, yeah. I can???t speak for elsewhere, but a certain unwillingness to be fooled--to be made to seem foolish by having invested, even/especially spiritually, in the Wrong Thing--has long been a Great American Defense Mechanism (second only to, I guess, murder). But for a good while that skepticism in what you didn't like was coupled with a belief in the importance and imperative of voicing enthusiasm for what you

did like (e.g. ???I like the Whopper, fuck the Big Mac???), and for a long time, the pace of culture made it possible for the two to coexist. As the media cycle has quickened, though, and as more and more fields of cultural production have become super-saturated and micro-divided and hyper-exposed, that coexistence has become less and less tenable. The cornerstone of enthusiasm is confidence (or faith, or belief, or whatever you prefer to call it), and when you???re constantly made aware that there???s always something newer/better/realer around the corner, always something more relevant that you might be overlooking, always a seminal influence that you???re inadvertently shortchanging in favor of some come-lately faker, that confidence is under perpetual assault, and it becomes more and more apparent that the only way to maintain any kind of enthusiasm for one thing is to just flat-out ignore some other things. It's true what they say: Love, to some extent, is blindness. It???s ignoring history and context and cachet and just liking what you like in your own way and for your own fucked-up human reasons. But blindness--especially willful blindness--can be seen as foolishness, and nobody wants to be seen as a fool, and so the love that necessitates the blindness gets jettisoned, to the detriment of everyone. ???I might not be a lover, but I???m definitely not a fool.???

It saddens me. A lot.

Yes to this analysis.

People are shortchanging themselves and as much as it can be blamed on technology/the media/etc. it's still people who are doing the actual shortchanging of themselves.

Egbert_Souse

Man, I'm posting all sorts of cool shit that I like in this thread! Where is the love?









Dokkbokkie!

DJ_Enki

they're more eager to prove they're not taken in by any kind of hype than anything else.

I mean, yeah. I can???t speak for elsewhere, but a certain unwillingness to be fooled--to be made to seem foolish by having invested, even/especially spiritually, in the Wrong Thing--has long been a Great American Defense Mechanism (second only to, I guess, murder). But for a good while that skepticism in what you didn't like was coupled with a belief in the importance and imperative of voicing enthusiasm for what you

did like (e.g. ???I like the Whopper, fuck the Big Mac???), and for a long time, the pace of culture made it possible for the two to coexist. As the media cycle has quickened, though, and as more and more fields of cultural production have become super-saturated and micro-divided and hyper-exposed, that coexistence has become less and less tenable. The cornerstone of enthusiasm is confidence (or faith, or belief, or whatever you prefer to call it), and when you???re constantly made aware that there???s always something newer/better/realer around the corner, always something more relevant that you might be overlooking, always a seminal influence that you???re inadvertently shortchanging in favor of some come-lately faker, that confidence is under perpetual assault, and it becomes more and more apparent that the only way to maintain any kind of enthusiasm for one thing is to just flat-out ignore some other things. It's true what they say: Love, to some extent, is blindness. It???s ignoring history and context and cachet and just liking what you like in your own way and for your own fucked-up human reasons. But blindness--especially willful blindness--can be seen as foolishness, and nobody wants to be seen as a fool, and so the love that necessitates the blindness gets jettisoned, to the detriment of everyone. ???I might not be a lover, but I???m definitely not a fool.???

It saddens me. A lot.

Yes to this analysis.

People are shortchanging themselves and as much as it can be blamed on technology/the media/etc. it's still people who are doing the actual shortchanging of themselves.

I cosign this, but it does raise a follow-up question:

How does one parse offhand dismissal or cynicism versus "I heard it, I gave it a chance, I just didn't like it?"

iron_monkey

they're more eager to prove they're not taken in by any kind of hype than anything else.

I mean, yeah. I can???t speak for elsewhere, but a certain unwillingness to be fooled--to be made to seem foolish by having invested, even/especially spiritually, in the Wrong Thing--has long been a Great American Defense Mechanism (second only to, I guess, murder). But for a good while that skepticism in what you didn't like was coupled with a belief in the importance and imperative of voicing enthusiasm for what you

did like (e.g. ???I like the Whopper, fuck the Big Mac???), and for a long time, the pace of culture made it possible for the two to coexist. As the media cycle has quickened, though, and as more and more fields of cultural production have become super-saturated and micro-divided and hyper-exposed, that coexistence has become less and less tenable. The cornerstone of enthusiasm is confidence (or faith, or belief, or whatever you prefer to call it), and when you???re constantly made aware that there???s always something newer/better/realer around the corner, always something more relevant that you might be overlooking, always a seminal influence that you???re inadvertently shortchanging in favor of some come-lately faker, that confidence is under perpetual assault, and it becomes more and more apparent that the only way to maintain any kind of enthusiasm for one thing is to just flat-out ignore some other things. It's true what they say: Love, to some extent, is blindness. It???s ignoring history and context and cachet and just liking what you like in your own way and for your own fucked-up human reasons. But blindness--especially willful blindness--can be seen as foolishness, and nobody wants to be seen as a fool, and so the love that necessitates the blindness gets jettisoned, to the detriment of everyone. ???I might not be a lover, but I???m definitely not a fool.???

It saddens me. A lot.

Yes to this analysis.

People are shortchanging themselves and as much as it can be blamed on technology/the media/etc. it's still people who are doing the actual shortchanging of themselves.

I cosign this, but it does raise a follow-up question:

How does one parse offhand dismissal or cynicism versus "I heard it, I gave it a chance, I just didn't like it?"

Well, at least the person who took time out to actually check it out before forming an opinion (no matter how rushed) is in a better position to be, over time, exposed to more quality and quantity of material and thus being more open in general to new ideas. Less likely to put the proverbial blinders on.

PATX

Haughty attitude as defense mechanism against information overload...good point.

this book is quite interesting on the subject of info overload. But I guess since it was written over 30 years ago, we have gone from defining ourselves by smaller and smaller subcults to just defining ourselves by everything/nothing at the same time. Aka, the crux of the Great American Hipster Debate.



Has Faux Rillz posted yet?

Mjukis

It seems like a lot of people i talk to about music, film, beer, art, etc are only concerned with what is the best of something. When you ask them what they thought of something it's always, "I've had better" or "It's not his best work/album" over and over again.

Things can just be good.

"It's a minor Dickens. Not his best work."

Egbert_Souse

Its alot easier to give up on new music completely than to suffer through hours and hours of shit you don't like just to (maybe) find a song that you do. Its better to avoid it completely and go back to the old music for enjoyment.

A definite soulstrut no-no is comparing any new music to the classics. The Canon, if you will.