I HAVE MOVED

Hello, everyone. Thank you very much for reading CinemaSlants these few years. I have moved my writing over to a new blog: The Screen Addict. You can find it here: http://thescreenaddict.com/.

I hope you follow me to my new location! You can find an explanation for the move on that site now or on the CinemaSlants Facebook page.

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

The Hipster Revolution is Upon Us! (Or is it?)



When Arcade Fire won the Grammy for Album of the Year this past Sunday, it was a moment that played like the high school rejects coming in and crashing a party thrown by the popular kids. Up to that point, the evening had played out like most any Grammy ceremony that had come before: light on the handing-out of awards, heavy on musical performances by the industry’s hottest artists. Until the end of the show, few risks were taken.

Then came indie-rock sensations Arcade Fire, who performed “Month of May,” undoubtedly the hardest-rocking song they’ve ever written. It was a manic, over-the-top, typically polarizing performance. They then proceeded to win Album of the Year, and play us out with “Ready to Start.” To some, this may signal the beginning of some sort of hipster revolution. However, this is likely not the beginning of a trend, but rather the continuation of something that’s been happening across all forms of artistic media.


I should note here that the word “hipster” is more or less irrelevant to everything I’m saying. It’s a word that seems to have an adjustable meaning based on who is using it. People rarely define themselves as “hipsters” because it seems to have taken on a derogatory meaning. Even people who fit the basic “hipster” definition no longer refer to themselves as “hipsters;” often deflecting it onto others. I am only using the word because Arcade Fire is often referred to as a “hipster” band, and to some their winning of a Grammy Award signifies something greater.

It is true that what was once underground is becoming much more aligned with the mainstream, and this can be seen in most forms of media, including film. Last year’s Oscar winner, The Hurt Locker, made only $17 million domestically, and it went on to become the lowest-grossing Best Picture winner of all time. This feat is made all the more impressive by the fact that it beat out the highest-grossing film ever in James Cameron’s Avatar. However, Debra Granik’s Winter’s Bone could steal that crown if it’s able to pull off an (incredibly) unlikely victory next weekend. That film only made $7 million.

This all hints that box office success is becoming increasingly irrelevant to institutions such as the Academy Awards. The Oscars have always erred on the side of quality, but success used to play a bigger part in the proceedings as well. In the ’90s the Oscars gave the top prize to such box office smashes as Titanic, Forrest Gump, Schindler’s List, Braveheart and The Silence of the Lambs. These days, financial success doesn’t necessarily mean automatic recognition. People are now going out of their way to find art like Winter’s Bone that’s off the beaten path yet still worthwhile.

However, this does not mean that all future Grammy ceremonies will be populated by indie bands and so-called “hipsters.” Arcade Fire winning Album of the Year feels significant because they don’t look, sound or feel like your typical Grammy-winning act. Earlier this year, their album The Suburbs was the No. 1 album in the world. They’ve been able to find their way to the musical forefront without completely sacrificing their signature sound, and that’s impressive. They’re a weird band, but they’re quickly becoming both popular and weird.

Their win has also seemed more significant because of the insane Internet reaction to the whole ordeal. There’s even a (rather profane) Tumblr site devoted to our nation’s Arcade Fire ignorance. Most people are not so willing to allow indie rock like Arcade Fire into their lives. When one looks at these Twitter and Facebook comments, it’s a little jarring how so many people equate popularity with greatness.

This all leads me to believe that the world s not quite ready for a full-on hipster/indie-rock takeover. After all the Grammys remain the most irrelevant of all the major awards, even after an out-of-nowhere victory like the one Arcade Fire had.  Music is the most subjective of all artistic media, and not many people will listen to the Grammys when they tell them this is what’s good.

Another thing being ignore is the fact that Album of the Year hasn’t always gone to the most popular artist. In recent years the Album of the Year trophy has gone to the likes of Robert Plant & Alison Krauss, Herbie Hancock and Ray Charles. While all these acts are respected, none of them are all the rage with the kids, and none of them have the online following of a Bieber, Gaga or Eminem.

Ultimately, the Arcade Fire win may indicate a larger trend of the underground becoming more prominent, but it’s unlikely to inspire an immediate rush of all things indie/hipster to the forefront. If it does happen, the process will likely be a bit more gradual than that, but Arcade Fire will likely be leading the crowd.

Meanwhile, the major film (as discussed before) and television awards seem more willing to embrace the obscure. Mad Men, the Emmy winner for the past three years, only dances around 3 million viewers. It was only a matter of time before the music world hopped on board and gave a band like Arcade Fire the Grammy bump, even if popular music fans everywhere want them all to go return to the dark, damp Canadian hole from whence they came. It’s certainly a trend that cannot be ignored, even if it doesn’t signify an imminent, violent overthrow of pop culture life as we know it.

Anyways, hipsters may find full-on revolution far too mainstream these days. What with Egypt and all.

No comments:

Post a Comment