Ilya Shambat <
ibsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One example that I have observed was a young man named Kevin in San
> Francisco Bay Area. He was into Jim Morrison, had long hair and walked
> around shirtless, and took me on an excursion to the ocean coast where
> he and his friend played a digiridoo all night. His mother kept
> calling him a poser; but what she did not understand is that, when
> someone does something that's not a trend and that's not a cool, then
> it must be something that means a lot to him. So that, while many of
> the original hippies were doing it because it was a trend, someone who
> does it when it is not a trend and remains persistent in doing it is
> the real McCoy.
Well, okay, you have a good point here: moving counter-trend can
be taken as evidence of authenticity.
I'm going to argue against it, though, because that's the kind of
guy I am.
For one thing, in an example such as the one you cite of the
Morrison fan, you might argue that this retro-hippie is copping a
pose to achieve some in-group approval, it's just that at this
point the group is a genuine "sub-culture" rather than a
nation-wide trend.
But maybe that's not a terribly interesting line of argument,
what I'm actually more interested in is questioning the notion
that authenticity is all about "being true to yourself", that
it's all about finding sincere expression of the core of your
soul. Every individual, then, is regarded as this mysterious
white hole of creativity, and we all most listen down inside
ourselves to determine the modes of social interaction that are
right for us. But what really then is the point of the social
interaction at all, if inside each of us we already have this
perfect sphere at the core? Realistically, doesn't this core
actually come from somewhere outside of ourselves? Isn't it
strongly influenced (if not solely determined) by that social
interaction?
Creativity does not *have* to be something practiced by a lone
individual in isolation: it could be that the entire sub-culture
is the real creative unit, that the process of exploration needs
to be a group exploration.
And if the group is successful, if they find something that
really resonates with the zeitgeist, that speaks to a
generation... why shouldn't what they come up with spread far
and wide and become a trend?
Are you supposed to abandon your life-style if it happens to be
in sync with the times?
Popularity is not, in itself, proof of inauthenticity.