Ever since I was about ten years old and watching Comedy Central when it was still known as The Comedy Channel, I recognized that the comedian Gallagher’s routine was overly and detrimentally simplistic: he smashed things with a hammer, and people laughed at it. At that age I was waking up to the benefits of layering meaning onto things, so even my ten-year-old self realized that there was no depth to smashing watermelons with a hammer and, subsequently, little to no artistic value. Enough people apparently disagree with this that Gallagher is still floating around these days, so his popularity was also an early lesson in the large numbers of people who can be entertained by dumb things. (Myself fully included, but I feel like the performer has to be at least somewhat self-aware of the dumbness before I can enjoy it. Otherwise I’m worried that they’re just as dumb as their art.)
To sum up that paragraph, Gallagher is terrible. That’s why I found his interview with intellectual hipster bastion The A.V. Club so utterly compelling: the interviewer took a completely awful performer, gave him enough rope to hang himself about eight times, and got a really curious and entertaining read out the other end. It does a great job of communicating the subject’s lack of talent without ever directly touching on it, simply by giving a man who smashes things for entertainment the space to rant about the celebration of mediocrity.
Golf clap to you, David Wolinsky, for recognizing when less is more to make your point effectively.
From AdBusters, my senior-year Print Media Design professor’s favorite publication:
An artificial appropriation of different styles from different eras, the hipster represents the end of Western civilization – a culture lost in the superficiality of its past and unable to create any new meaning. Not only is it unsustainable, it is suicidal. While previous youth movements have challenged the dysfunction and decadence of their elders, today we have the “hipster” – a youth subculture that mirrors the doomed shallowness of mainstream society.
While the working-class symbol usurpation thing always galled me, I don’t think calling these goofs symbolic of “the end of Western civilization” is really valid. Hipsters have always been about cooler-than-thou meaninglessness for socializing’s sake. If you hold people like that out as the political vanguard of a generation, of course things are going to seem hopeless. In the real world, that guy on Rivington with the tilted Fidel Castro hat is too busy organizing the Of Montreal after-party to want to be a spokesman for social change, nor should he be seen as one.
So yeah, hipsters = not worth that much intellectual dissection.
G and I were discussing the election yesterday, and I noted how Barack Obama’s oft-cited appeal to young, creative types like us — that might be flattery, but hey, we are the target demo — makes me worry that the rest of the country might actually resent him for it. His flock might be seen as too cool and hip for the average folk, and they’d hold it against him. Then I read this, and it brought that thought home in a neat geeky analogy:
I’ve taken shots at Apple before for their cooler-than-thou branding, and their fan base in some ways parallels the nature of Obama’s. But I think it would be unfair to make this comparison based on Hillary and Obama themselves, since Obama is putting forth ideas and optimism without exclusion, and some of his supporters just happen to trend toward the young and fashionable. Apple’s anti-PC thing is a deliberate marketing strategy; Obama’s audience came together on its own, and while the young part of it gets a lot of press, he has supporters of all stripes.
It’s still an interesting comparison of the two Democratic camps. And like Microsoft, Hillary is doing pretty well in financial market share herself.
Ever since I was about ten years old and watching Comedy Central when it was still known as The Comedy Channel, I recognized that the comedian Gallagher’s routine was overly and detrimentally simplistic: he smashed things with a hammer, and people laughed at it. At that age I was waking up to the benefits of layering meaning onto things, so even my ten-year-old self realized that there was no depth to smashing watermelons with a hammer and, subsequently, little to no artistic value. Enough people apparently disagree with this that Gallagher is still floating around these days, so his popularity was also an early lesson in the large numbers of people who can be entertained by dumb things. (Myself fully included, but I feel like the performer has to be at least somewhat self-aware of the dumbness before I can enjoy it. Otherwise I’m worried that they’re just as dumb as their art.)
