I have just watched Peter York's excellent short documentary about the phenomenon known as Hipster culture. The documentary started out arch, but became deeply fascinating. In a modest 59 minutes that feels shorter, York beautifully captures this movement like a collector fixes a butterfly.
The documentary has allowed me to articulate for the first time what I feel about the rise of Hipsterism in my own city, London. I have watched this culture mushroom here with a skeptical eye. I have never felt welcomed by this culture, nor have I warmed to it. It has always seemed at one step removed from the society that I grew up in, and indeed still inhabit. But what is it that irks me about this movement, these people?
On the surface it would appear I share some common values with Hipsters - the buzz words ethical, local, artisan imply a kind of William Morris approach to work, design and living that is wholesome and beneficial to all; yet I discover that hipster culture is exclusive rather than inclusive, and that it is born out of consumerism rather any kind of socialist or grass roots activism. At its core, it is old school Adam Smith capitalism. In a way, what is wrong with that? And what is wrong with quality in an mass-produced age? Well nothing (so do you actually have a point? Ed.), in fact what is fascinating is that it reveals how underpriced our consumer culture is. Oil, that precious, finite, unbelievably useful commodity that is destroying our planet, is ludicrously cheap. It means that we can have a crazy, unfettered capitalist culture that is, unlike the core ethos of Hipsterism, unsustainable and dangerous. And yet the two cross over in uncomfortable ways. It's like the same insane dilemma that seems to confront us at every turn these days: which way will it tip?
Hipsterism could be part of an essential movement away from the mass-produced, over-produced, grossly wasteful and grossly waste-producing culture of recent history. An age so voracious that it is threatening to destroy our entire ecosystem. And boy do we need to do that. Or Hipsterism could simply be up-themselves twats rearranging artisanal deckchairs on the Titanic. For entirely subjective reasons, I think it's the latter. Because whenever I encounter one, they always seem grumpy and unfriendly. What have I done to earn your Hipster ire? Yes, it's the unwarranted exclusivity that irks me. Anyway, forget my small-minded objections, what Hipsterism reveals are the massive fractures in our out-of-control culture, the vast and often bewildering gaps between what is local, simple and communal, and what is a gargantuan system run by computers, where humans are simply part of the algorithm. Which way will it go? Or will we in fact fracture into entirely different cultures, splitting even our existential reality into one of separate possibilities? I hope, but I am not certain, that I will have a choice which path I go on.
Saturday, 5 November 2016
Monday, 4 April 2016
I've been thinking about this thing we call 'time'...
I've been thinking about time, how we perceive it and whether 'now' really is 'now'.
What do we mean by now? I think what most people mean is that now is the the very latest event to be occurring in a linear history of time. That now is the leading edge of existence, and that there is nothing ahead of now. But what if that wasn't the case at all? What if where we are 'now' is simply a position in time, neither the beginning or end of it, but somewhere unidentifiable within the flow. For some time, I have seen time like a river. The river flows endlessly, and in fact, cyclically, and 'we' flow along within it. Our point of reference, which we call now, is simply a relative point of perception. The 'future', that we believe doesn't exist yet, is actually just further along the same river, and the past is equally just further along the same river, although (perceptually) behind us, not in front of us. The 'river of time' is constantly braiding, currents swirling, things moving at different speeds along it, sometimes colliding, sometimes flowing in unison. We call these things - from our point of perception - events. If we understand that time is like a river, it's possible to explain prescience, foresight, dreams that come true, visions. Because of course they are insights into events that are simply flowing and actually occurring, or very likely to occur, further downstream from our point of perception. In other words, we are connected to future events, completely and inextricably. What this means is that if we can open up our perception, we can tune in more effectively to our understanding of the flow of events, and our ability, in smaller or larger part, to influence them. We often have an intuition or gut feeling about 'future' events, and this is because we are already part of them, joined to them and in some way, shaping them. Furthermore, quantum physics seems to show that 'time' can actually run backwards, given that (according to a fascinating article in the Daily Mail):
In layman's terms, we are not only able to influence events, but without us, do they even happen? We seem to be either the creators or co-creators of existence. And 'time' is therefore something 'we' have invented. As a writer, it is amusing to consider that we invented time in order to experience drama. Because without time, there is no drama; no stories, no struggle, no triumph and no change. And given that we are story-creating entities, surely that explains why time is so essential to our existence? But also, perhaps this explains that time is simply a construct of our minds? |
Wednesday, 13 January 2016
David Bowie, Cracked Actor
Revisiting the incredible songs of my cruelly extinguished guiding light, David Bowie, I was reminded how the lyrics to his 'Quicksand' have such resonance with
Hamlet's famous 'To be or not to be..' soliloquy.
"I'm torn between the light and dark
Where others see their targets
Divine symmetry
Should I kiss the viper's fang
Or herald loud
the death of Man
I'm sinking in the quicksand
of my thought
And I ain't got the power anymore..."
"I'm torn between the light and dark
Where others see their targets
Divine symmetry
Should I kiss the viper's fang
Or herald loud
the death of Man
I'm sinking in the quicksand
of my thought
And I ain't got the power anymore..."
..and this led me to realise that I've never watched the 1974 Alan Yentob
documentary about Bowie, 'Cracked Actor'. So I've just watched it. It
opens with Quicksand. And there are scenes from his Cracked Actor
persona with him holding a skull in Hamlet mode. Like Stephen Dedalus in
James Joyce's Ulysses, who is also obsessed by Hamlet, in this film
Bowie comes across as a deeply conflicted young man, who almost knows
too much...
It's a wonderful, wonderful documentary, check it out - vintage, perfect Bowie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsPVrsZcbZU
It's a wonderful, wonderful documentary, check it out - vintage, perfect Bowie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsPVrsZcbZU
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)