Novel Trends of Hipsters

Why?

I was in Urban Outfitters yesterday. This store is famous now for stocking items suitable for addition to the wardrobes of people seeking a thrift store-type look without actually having to visit a thrift store, or pay meager prices for whatever they might find there. They also sell novelty items, cheesy 70s/80s style glasses (with clear non-prescription lenses), sunglasses, small gadgets, books, shoes and other items. After finding a shirt, I looked around a little bit and found several 35mm cameras; some were oversized, while others were small snapshot Vivitars like the one I used to have when I was a kid, as well as at least one book illustrating the greatness of vinyl records.

This reminded me of at least two instances where I saw buying and using vinyl somewhat glamorized in the last few years. I'm sure there have been several more instances of it in ads and other media, but these two I remembered as I started forming an opinion on the attraction to now-obsolete technology, or the agenda to promote it in media -- I was trying to find out the motivation behind it. Was the media reflecting what a large amount of people felt and did, or was it reflecting the thoughts and wants of the creators of the media itself? Was vinyl actually bought and used by a large amount of people, or just a favorite of Generation Xers now putting their mark on modern "culture?" As stated above, I find 35mm cameras and vinyl to be completely obsolete now in terms of actual practical use, except for dedicated fans and people without enough money to purchase a computer, or both.

As a fan of older things in general, I sympathize with people wanting a device that is the opposite of the new, (relatively) expensive, and power-demanding smartphones, laptops, cars, and cameras. This stems from not having much money to spend (up until about two years ago), and the distaste for devices which promise to be more useful and satisfying than anything ever made, but can't run without electricity, a short-life rechargeable battery, and/or constant attention to maintain complex systems which can't be repaired by the consumer. Even the beloved iPhone can't always make phone calls or maintain a steady data signal. Many portable devices with specifications comparable to personal computers ten or twenty years ago are now produced so often they are often upgraded by newer ones within a few years, becoming more and more disposable. 

Phones, for example, have gone from being a stationary and reliable staple of every home, powered by electricity provided by a telephone wire so that even if there was a general power outage, a person could still make calls. Now, the few advantages of the analog telephone have been literally traded for cellular phones, relying on electricity to recharge their batteries, and a wireless signal to make calls and transfer data. Although cellular providers are constantly upgrading their coverage areas (to sell more phones), users often complain about being in "bad cell areas," dropped calls, and slow data connections, even in urban areas supposedly blanketed by a network of towers. The adoption of less-efficient (in terms of power usage and reliance) and less reliable devices and machines for the sake of higher performance seems illogical, and the loss of access to older technologies by the masses due to economic feasibility can be seen as a step in the wrong direction. Prior to the RJ-11 jack, the plug still used on analog telephone cords and DSL cables plugged into inner walls of homes, telephones were semi-permanently attached to wires within walls, and were considered to be part of an apartment or house. The phone companies owned the telephones, which were on loan to consumers. Passenger trains in many parts of the US have been scarce for decades, killed off by companies not able to compete with airlines offering a faster and more environmentally dangerous method of travel. My point is, older devices and systems still have their selling points, even years and decades later.

However, I'm not so sure 35mm cameras, record players and vinyl really qualify. I was recently looking for a new digital camera, as the one I bought several years ago was disused and outdated, but I wasn't interested in buying a small, beeping, autofocusing one. I wanted an actual camera. My mother owns a Canon AE-1, which I always considered to be a "real camera," but only recently learned was actually an SLR. It was 35mm, and was manual advance, i.e. a lever the user thumbs to advance the film to the next frame, and a manual film rewind crank. Although SLRs (and now DSLRs), have always been considered to be the first choice of professional photographers, many many other cameras taking many different types of film over the years have had these manual features and didn't rely on batteries. Even flashes in the 1950s through early 1980s (if I remember correctly) used disposible flash cubes and strips as opposed to a battery-operated integrated or attachable flash. 

What I was looking for was an inexpensive camera with manual focus capabilities, and the only ones available nowadays are DSLRs. In the case of cameras, the convenience of digital, which is great, is paid for by the loss of manual operation and in most cases, the complete lack of mechanical parts (in non-DSLRs), and the total reliance on battery (and by extension, AC) power. The only way I would find 35mm worth using in this decade and into the future would be if negative and print processing could be accomplished at home. In my mind, this would completely justify actually taking up photography as a hobby, without having to resort to any kind of "camera snobbery," of course. Conversion of images on film to digital format would be almost entirely impossible for the regular consumer. This would most likely have to be handled by a local photo lab. Although many people still rely on labs to print their digital photos, the use of film has been in decline for many years now, and a dedicated scanner is necessary for image input in conjunction with a computer for digital conversion and storage. How long will retail stores support film? In order to obtain digital versions of film photos, users would have to resort to using mail services, or scanning prints.

Vinyl, on the other hand, is completely unnecessary. Yet I've seen it shown in multiple places in the last few years. Only certain dedicated DJs, vinyl lovers and collectors, and people trying to seem cool actually use and buy records. People old enough to have a large collection of records and DJs with talent and dedication enough to mix without a BPM readout and haul heavy crates around to "gigs" are excused. Using a purely analog and mechanical device to play vinyl doesn't require powering up a computer or using a portable media player's battery life, but the sound quality can't in any way compare to digital, especially uncompressed files. I used to have a small collection of vinyl mostly comprised of low-priced 1980s dance albums and singles I would find while browsing around at Half Price Books. Occasionally you can find a small cache of records you might like, as though some collector or enthusiast needed a few extra dollars or passed away. A few years before that, my mother found an old (i.e. "vintage") AM/FM/Phono stereo with two medium speakers in very good condition, and bought it for me without certainty I was looking for one, on the condition I pay her back for it. My grandmother at some point had also given me at least four vinyl boxed sets of classical music from Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin, etc. Unfortunately I lost all of that in an apartment fire, but if I still had it now, it wouldn't be doing much except taking up valuable space in my small apartment. Even the CDs I own which weren't stolen or destroyed in the fire sit in a plastic-sleeved book in a closet, and I don't own a CD player except for the drives in my PC.

In 2000, I saw High Fidelity, a movie about an owner of an urban store called Championship Vinyl. That year my car had a cassette player, and didn't even own my own computer, so a character in a movie who sold records actually seemed more legitimate than it might today. If High Fidelity came out today, I'd see Rob to be a die-hard fan of vinyl, but somewhat delusional about the future success of his business. I actually think music stores are great. I spend many paychecks in the 90s on CDs, even though I had never actually heard what the music sounded like unless a friend gave me a cassette copy. Going to the music store was something to do, and there was always a possibility you might actually meet someone you like there. In spite of liking record stores, seeing references in movies and television ads taking place in the present is slightly confusing and somewhat annoying. There's nothing wrong with collecting and even liking the sound and format of vinyl, but I have a hard time not thinking that liking vinyl is sometimes part of a trendy persona some people subscribe to in order to fit into the "alternative" hipster-type social environment that has "prevailed" in the last ten years and refuses to be replaced with something more toward what I actually prefer. In a first-season episode of Californication, a college-aged female suitor of the almost middle-aged main character (played by David Duchovny) finds his record collection and espouses her love of vinyl. In a soft drink ad online I saw recently, a young african-american guy is seen in a record store, buying a record. Why? If vinyl was offered as a cheap option to CDs by record labels, it might actually work. A low cost, but low-fi version of music, available to consumers for around $3-5 dollars might actually work if it were marketed in a way that would cater to people who don't download music (a small minority, I would assume), or who don't agree with downloading music. USB record players can already be purchased at a cheap price relative to the cost of an iPod.

Slate.com has a "column" or blog called Bogus Trends, where they comment on the media's attention of "what the (young) people are doing now." Is the use of outdated technology a false trend? Only for people who aren't actually fans. Using old technology can be an inexpensive substitute for modern electricity-reliant devices as long as people keep offering the products, but liking obsolete stuff shouldn't be about your image. Think of some good reasons why you're still using film and playing records, instead of just pretending like you're living in 1982.