First, “Synecdoche, New York”
Even though you’re supposed to form your own opinions on films, and what they mean is dependent on your personal interpretations – here are two links of youtube videos giving a bit of analysis on the film. I typically don’t like to read reviews, but I found these two be very helpful in pointing out a lot of irony in the film. (Note that in comparison to the “Altered Ego” review, these links present a more positive opinion on the film)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fep0nNIj1qs#t=783
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYTTBrc0_KE
The film presents the idea of blurring lines between reality and theatre, whether through Caden’s inability to connect in his reality because he is absorbed in creating art or consumed by his hypochondria, or through the actors themselves who become incredibly invested in the roles they play. The video talks about the woman hired to play Ellen, the cleaning lady – Caden hires her because she said she knew how to clean, and that’s what she did all day; so the question posed is “is she an actress or is she a maid?” What’s the difference between “the roles that we play and who we really are?”
How does this idea relate to the hipster, or more specifically to the hipster’s who appropriate pieces of other cultures? By creating an identity based on the identity of others, do hipsters ultimately lose themselves, and get to a point where who they really are, is a combination of different cultural idiosyncrasies? Does that take away their authenticity or supplement it?
A film review in the guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/may/15/synecdoche-new-york) writes “Caden's huge, mad, pasteboard world stands for the real world, is part of it, is superimposed on to it, and finally melts into it.” To what extent do you think this same idea is true about hipsters and hipster culture? Does what makes up hipster culture eventually become a part of the mainstream once again? Are all elements of hipster culture initially part of the mainstream and it’s just a matter of changing fashion?
In response to the essay "Hip Affected Earnestness," how can you relate it to the film? Do you think they parallel in regards to ideas of authenticity and individuality? (page 199)
- On pages 200 - 201, the essay discusses the idea of "New Sincerity" what are your thoughts on this ideal? Can you think of any other examples - like that of Evil Knievel - that exemplifies this ideal?
- For those of you that know the bands mentioned on page 203, do you think that their music is actually stripped down and honest, (and for those of you that like them) and that is what makes it good music? Is it possible that some of these bands, or similar artists apply the "equation: pure voice + instrument = sincerity" to be labeled as hipster bands? Or does it come from a more sincere place, of the artist wanting to express their emotions in a more raw manner?
And finally, today we associate Hipster's with irony - but the essay, to an extent, emphasizes the fact that hipsters are meant to be moving away from irony and towards sincerity. What do you think that says about the authenticity of hipsters today?
Christine, I think you bring up an interesting point when you talk about Ellen, the cleaning lady. Caden wants to find a maid not an actress, because he feels like a real maid can play the part in his play better than an actress. I think that in society everyone plays specific roles. The youtube review covered this, but everyone acts differently depending on who they are with. I act differently in front of my parents than I do my friends. I’m not saying this is good or bad but it does exist. That, then, introduces the question of who are we, really, or who truly knows us? So that being said I think there is a big difference between “the roles that we play and who we really are.” The complicated part is finding out what those differences are. I feel like who we really are is an internal component of your being. No matter what situation you are in, you always act differently around people. In terms of hipsters, they are exactly the same and maybe even more so “roles” rather than “who they are.” One of the basic components of a hipster is appropriation. The picking and choosing of cultural capital for your own use. This act is used to portray the role of a hipster. It isn’t your individual identity, it is, as you said, “an identity based on the identity of others.”
ReplyDeleteIn regard to your later questions, New Sincerity came about as an opposition to the postmodern cynicism of the late 20th century. A group or example of this ideal that interested me a lot is in cinema. The article mentions directors such as, Wes Anderson, Sofia Coppola and Zach Braff, and the fact that there movies try to capture the honesty, and purity that used to exist in past movies before Post-modernism. Talking about the bands, I do think they are honest. The original folk movement of the 1930’s focused on real life struggles involving the great depression. Later on, these folk songs would focus on politics and social movements. While, these bands may be considered “hipster”, I think to a large extent their lyrics are from the heart and true. I think, while the article may say that hipsters are moving away from irony towards sincerity, it is a process that still has not yet occurred. Once hipsters start thinking and acting as individuals to create their own identity, then this authenticity will be revealed.
I love this question of irony vs. sincerity in regards to the modern day hipster because I think that it is a confusing a debatable question. On one hand, hipsters may insist they respect authenticity yet, as we have learned, most hipsters thrive on borrowed cultural capital and ironic ideals. The film, for instance, focuses on the irony and hopelessness of human existence since we are all hurtling towards death, but the audience (perhaps hipster audience) admires the film for it's authenticity. For example, when Hazel first sees her home on fire she tells the her agent that she is worried about dying in the house yet she buys it anyway. This, of course, is another example of metaphor or symbolism (I will not try to pretend I understood this film) used by the director, however, it is still an example of the movie's irony used to explain the reality that we live in. I think this idea draws a very interesting parallel between the two seemingly opposite concepts. Maybe hipsters love irony as a way to comment on sincerity. An ironic style choice is just another way to promote authenticity and the idea that we all play so many of these "roles" that Kauffman shows us that there is no authenticity. And if there is no authenticity, there is no inauthenticity, so anybody can be anybody and I would argue that the people who embrace this idea are the modern day hipsters.
ReplyDeleteI think that your questions are really insightful and stirring - thanks for that. Regarding what you bring up about about "Synecdoche, New York," I think that theatre is a real part of reality, ergo the two are inextricable. When theatre and portrayals are authentic (authentically conceptualized, written, produced, et cetera) and primary focuses, they translate into reality. Likewise, "the roles that we play and who we really are" ultimately become one and the same. Granted, we are rendered actors by such, but putting on those hats and masks evolves into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Hipsters are rendered sincere as a consequence of this. Psychology proves that if they appropriate enough of one culture, they'll start to subconsciously adapt the tendencies of that culture and begin to genuinely identify with such. I do not think this counts as losing themselves, though; I simply find it to be evidence of self-discovery and personal growth. Identity crises are proof of consciousness, which in turn proves identity (it's a paradoxical idea, but bear with me). Thus, I think that as hipsters have evolved, they've consequently grown increasingly sincere (to answer your question, it supplements their authenticity).
ReplyDeleteI’m very interested in the first question regarding the blurring of lines between the roles that we play and who we really are, and think that this idea is very closely tied to the hipster’s struggle for authenticity. Caden, in attempts to maintain his supposed theatrical brilliance, nearly loses the ability to differentiate between his art and his reality. Similarly, hipsters, in attempts to appear authentic and novel, can inadvertently blur the line between their created identity and their real one. More specifically, those hipsters who appropriate pieces of their identities from other cultures and subcultures can lose their real sense of self in their ironic endeavor to be an genuine, original, and creative individual. The end result is a group of claimed unique and differentiated individuals who are really crafted and borrowed objects of a combination of appropriated cultural capital. In my opinion, this ironic identity-crafting greatly takes away from these “hip” individuals’ authenticity. The desperate strive to be authentic, I believe, will almost always lead to the loss of this desired genuineness, for the very act of attempting to be real and searching for what is real is artificial and contrived in the first place. Caden loses himself, his family, and (arguably) his genius because his is striving to create a “new reality,” or his own “authentic” New York. The fact that in the film these two realities become indistinguishable, that time becomes irrelevant, and that what is real and what is not is are incredibly indistinct, relays the message that the strive for authenticity can lead directly to the fall towards fakeness.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to start off by saying that I have no idea what was going on in Synecdoche, New York. There were several points throughout the movie where I just started laughing and thought to myself, "Is this a joke?" Which is probably a very similar to your reactions while watching the movie. But that laughter got me thinking that those scenes weren't meant to be a joke. They were being ironic, which explained why we were watching this for a hipster class. Irony is the epitome of the hipster. Or is it? The question that has been brought up several times now is whether the modern day hipster is leaning towards being more ironic or more sincere. Knowing that this is a very tricky question to take on, I'd like to argue that the modern day hipster is a mix of both. As Thomas mentioned in a previous post, irony is most commonly seen in speech because in speech it is much easier to distinguish tone and purpose. Which is why I think many hipsters today still like to make their speak and make points ironically. Which is probably why this movie is seen as a hipster-appreciated film. However, I think hipsters are moving towards sincerity in their stylistic choices. It is becoming more and more unlikely that someone is wearing something or that someone looks a certain way to be ironic or to express that they really don't like that thing that they're wearing or that look that they're "pulling off." Moreover, to agree with what Evan previously said, once someone truly starts to delve into certain stylistic choices, whether they be ironically driven or not, they start to assimilate into whatever culture those styles originated from and then begin to see themselves as someone who is authentically from that culture. This is getting super confusing and I think I'm rambling but what I'm trying to say is that hipsters retain both ironic and authentic qualities, but as time goes on I think they will become more focused on sincerity rather than the past hipster that was focused on irony.
ReplyDeleteOn a side note, some things in the movie that I found very interesting were the burning house, the therapist, and some of the last few lines of the movie where Ellen says that basically no one is different from anyone else and everyone struggles through the same thing and no one has any distinguishing characteristics. I didn't quite get the underlying meanings here, but I think they'd be really great topics to delve into in class.