How to Live Without Irony
If
irony is the ethos of our age — and it is — then the hipster is our archetype
of ironic living.
The
hipster haunts every city street and university town. Manifesting a nostalgia
for times he never lived himself, this contemporary urban harlequin
appropriates outmoded fashions (the mustache, the tiny shorts), mechanisms
(fixed-gear bicycles, portable record players) and hobbies (home brewing,
playing trombone). He harvests awkwardness and self-consciousness. Before he
makes any choice, he has proceeded through several stages of self-scrutiny. The
hipster is a scholar of social forms, a student of cool. He studies relentlessly,
foraging for what has yet to be found by the mainstream. He is a walking
citation; his clothes refer to much more than themselves. He tries to negotiate
the age-old problem of individuality, not with concepts, but with material
things.
He
is an easy target for mockery. However, scoffing at the hipster is only a
diluted form of his own affliction. He is merely a symptom and the most extreme
manifestation of ironic living. For many Americans born in the 1980s and 1990s
— members of Generation Y, or Millennials — particularly middle-class
Caucasians, irony is the primary mode with which daily life is dealt. One need
only dwell in public space, virtual or concrete, to see how pervasive this
phenomenon has become. Advertising, politics, fashion, television: almost every
category of contemporary reality exhibits this will to irony.
Take, for example, an ad that calls itself an ad, makes fun of its own format, and attempts to lure its target market to laugh at and with it. It pre-emptively acknowledges its own failure to accomplish anything meaningful. No attack can be set against it, as it has already conquered itself. The ironic frame functions as a shield against criticism. The same goes for ironic living. Irony is the most self-defensive mode, as it allows a person to dodge responsibility for his or her choices, aesthetic and otherwise. To live ironically is to hide in public. It is flagrantly indirect, a form of subterfuge, which means etymologically to “secretly flee” (subter + fuge). Somehow, directness has become unbearable to us.
Take, for example, an ad that calls itself an ad, makes fun of its own format, and attempts to lure its target market to laugh at and with it. It pre-emptively acknowledges its own failure to accomplish anything meaningful. No attack can be set against it, as it has already conquered itself. The ironic frame functions as a shield against criticism. The same goes for ironic living. Irony is the most self-defensive mode, as it allows a person to dodge responsibility for his or her choices, aesthetic and otherwise. To live ironically is to hide in public. It is flagrantly indirect, a form of subterfuge, which means etymologically to “secretly flee” (subter + fuge). Somehow, directness has become unbearable to us.
How
did this happen? It stems in part from the belief that this generation has
little to offer in terms of culture, that everything has already been done, or
that serious commitment to any belief will eventually be subsumed by an
opposing belief, rendering the first laughable at best and contemptible at
worst. This kind of defensive living works as a pre-emptive surrender and takes
the form of reaction rather than action.
Life
in the Internet age has undoubtedly helped a certain ironic sensibility to
flourish. An ethos can be disseminated quickly and widely through this medium.
Our incapacity to deal with the things at hand is evident in our use of, and
increasing reliance on, digital technology. Prioritizing what is remote over what
is immediate, the virtual over the actual, we are absorbed in the public and
private sphere by the little devices that take us elsewhere.
Furthermore,
the nostalgia cycles have become so short that we even try to inject the
present moment with sentimentality, for example, by using certain digital
filters to “pre-wash” photos with an aura of historicity. Nostalgia needs time.
One cannot accelerate meaningful remembrance.
While
we have gained some skill sets (multitasking, technological savvy), other skills
have suffered: the art of conversation, the art of looking at people, the art
of being seen, the art of being present. Our conduct is no longer governed by
subtlety, finesse, grace and attention, all qualities more esteemed in earlier
decades. Inwardness and narcissism now hold sway.
Born
in 1977, at the tail end of Generation X, I came of age in the 1990s, a decade
that, bracketed neatly by two architectural crumblings — of the Berlin Wall in
1989 and the Twin Towers in 2001 — now seems relatively irony-free. The grunge
movement was serious in its aesthetics and its attitude, with a combative
stance against authority, which the punk movement had also embraced. In my
perhaps over-nostalgic memory, feminism reached an unprecedented peak,
environmentalist concerns gained widespread attention, questions of race were
more openly addressed: all of these stirrings contained within them the same
electricity and euphoria touching generations that witness a centennial or
millennial changeover.
But
Y2K came and went without disaster. We were hopeful throughout the ’90s, but
hope is such a vulnerable emotion; we needed a self-defense mechanism, for
every generation has one. For Gen Xers, it was a kind of diligent apathy. We
actively did not care. Our archetype was the slacker who slouched through life
in plaid flannel, alone in his room, misunderstood. And when we were bored with
not caring, we were vaguely angry and melancholic, eating anti-depressants like
they were candy.
FROM
this vantage, the ironic clique appears simply too comfortable, too brainlessly
compliant. Ironic living is a first-world problem. For the relatively well
educated and financially secure, irony functions as a kind of credit card you
never have to pay back. In other words, the hipster can frivolously invest in
sham social capital without ever paying back one sincere dime. He doesn’t own
anything he possesses.
Obviously,
hipsters (male or female) produce a distinct irritation in me, one that until
recently I could not explain. They provoke me, I realized, because they are,
despite the distance from which I observe them, an amplified version of me.
I,
too, exhibit ironic tendencies. For example, I find it difficult to give
sincere gifts. Instead, I often give what in the past would have been accepted
only at a White Elephant gift exchange: a kitschy painting from a thrift store,
a coffee mug with flashy images of “Texas, the Lone Star State,” plastic
Mexican wrestler figures. Good for a chuckle in the moment, but worth little in
the long term. Something about the responsibility of choosing a personal,
meaningful gift for a friend feels too intimate, too momentous. I somehow
cannot bear the thought of a friend disliking a gift I’d chosen with sincerity.
The simple act of noticing my self-defensive behavior has made me think deeply
about how potentially toxic ironic posturing could be.
First,
it signals a deep aversion to risk. As a function of fear and pre-emptive
shame, ironic living bespeaks cultural numbness, resignation and defeat. If
life has become merely a clutter of kitsch objects, an endless series of
sarcastic jokes and pop references, a competition to see who can care the least
(or, at minimum, a performance of such a competition), it seems we’ve made a
collective misstep. Could this be the cause of our emptiness and existential
malaise? Or a symptom?
Throughout
history, irony has served useful purposes, like providing a rhetorical outlet
for unspoken societal tensions. But our contemporary ironic mode is somehow
deeper; it has leaked from the realm of rhetoric into life itself. This ironic
ethos can lead to a vacuity and vapidity of the individual and collective
psyche. Historically, vacuums eventually have been filled by something — more
often than not, a hazardous something. Fundamentalists are never ironists;
dictators are never ironists; people who move things in the political
landscape, regardless of the sides they choose, are never ironists.
Where
can we find other examples of nonironic living? What does it look like?
Nonironic models include very young children, elderly people, deeply religious
people, people with severe mental or physical disabilities, people who have
suffered, and those from economically or politically challenged places where
seriousness is the governing state of mind. My friend Robert Pogue Harrison put
it this way in a recent conversation: “Wherever the real imposes itself, it
tends to dissipate the fogs of irony.”
Observe
a 4-year-old child going through her daily life. You will not find the
slightest bit of irony in her behavior. She has not, so to speak, taken on the
veil of irony. She likes what she likes and declares it without dissimulation.
She is not particularly conscious of the scrutiny of others. She does not hide
behind indirect language. The most pure nonironic models in life, however, are
to be found in nature: animals and plants are exempt from irony, which exists
only where the human dwells.What would it take to overcome the cultural pull of
irony? Moving away from the ironic involves saying what you mean, meaning what
you say and considering seriousness and forthrightness as expressive
possibilities, despite the inherent risks. It means undertaking the cultivation
of sincerity, humility and self-effacement, and demoting the frivolous and the
kitschy on our collective scale of values. It might also consist of an honest
self-inventory.
Here
is a start: Look around your living space. Do you surround yourself with things
you really like or things you like only because they are absurd? Listen to your
own speech. Ask yourself: Do I communicate primarily through inside jokes and
pop culture references? What percentage of my speech is meaningful? How much
hyperbolic language do I use? Do I feign indifference? Look at your clothes.
What parts of your wardrobe could be described as costume-like, derivative or
reminiscent of some specific style archetype (the secretary, the hobo, the
flapper, yourself as a child)? In other words, do your clothes refer to
something else or only to themselves? Do you attempt to look intentionally
nerdy, awkward or ugly? In other words, is your style an anti-style? The most
important question: How would it feel to change yourself quietly, offline,
without public display, from within?
Attempts
to banish irony have come and gone in past decades. The loosely defined New
Sincerity movements in the arts that have sprouted since the 1980s positioned
themselves as responses to postmodern cynicism, detachment and
meta-referentiality. (New Sincerity has recently been associated with the
writing of David Foster Wallace, the films of Wes Anderson and the music of Cat
Power.) But these attempts failed to stick, as evidenced by the new age of Deep
Irony.
What
will future generations make of this rampant sarcasm and unapologetic
cultivation of silliness? Will we be satisfied to leave an archive filled with
video clips of people doing stupid things? Is an ironic legacy even a legacy at
all?
The
ironic life is certainly a provisional answer to the problems of too much
comfort, too much history and too many choices, but it is my firm conviction
that this mode of living is not viable and conceals within it many social and
political risks. For such a large segment of the population to forfeit its
civic voice through the pattern of negation I’ve described is to siphon energy
from the cultural reserves of the community at large. People may choose to
continue hiding behind the ironic mantle, but this choice equals a surrender to
commercial and political entities more than happy to act as parents for a
self-infantilizing citizenry. So rather than scoffing at the hipster — a
favorite hobby, especially of hipsters — determine whether the ashes of irony
have settled on you as well. It takes little effort to dust them away.
Christy
Wampole is an assistant professor of French at Princeton University. Her
research focuses primarily on 20th- and 21st-century French and Italian
literature and thought.
Comments
Post a Comment