According to our current definition of “basic” — a shortening of “basic bitch” — a “basic” is a millennial who is inescapably predictable. She (and it is always a she) cherishes uninspired brands — a mix of Target products, Ugg boots over leggings, and Starbucks Pumpkin Spice Lattes (the ultimate signifier of basicness) — and lives a banal existence, obsessed with Instagramming photos of things that themselves betray their basicness (other basic friends, pumpkin patches, falling leaves), tagging them #blessed and #thankful, and then reposting them to the basic breeding grounds of Facebook and Pinterest.I recommend reading the whole thing for its exquisite misery. But, before you do that, read this:
[T]he “autonomous self,” who is savvy to all the techniques of society and appropriates them according to his or her discriminating tastes, whether it be learning consciousness-raising, consumer advocacy, political activism liberal or conservative, saving whales, TM, TA, ACLU, New Right, square-dancing, creative cooking, moving out to country, moving back to central city, etc. The self is still problematical to itself, but it solves its predicament of placement vis-à-vis the world either by a passive consumership or by a discriminating transaction with the world and with informed interactions with other selves.This, of course, is Walker Percy, who I've been referencing quite a bit lately. To paraphrase, again: lacking a religious and spiritual sense, mankind is unable to form a self-definition. One may either transcend through science or art--make oneself an angel looking down on oneself--or one can sink into immanence--become an animal in an environment. The autonomous self is sort of a "smart" animal, like a bird who chooses only the brightest and most colorful bits of string to decorate its nest.
The misery Petersen describes is entirely of the autonomous self. Percy points out that the problem with this kind of self is that it devours its environment's significance and leaves it empty. Talk to someone who waited in line for a new iPhone six months after he bought it; the ecstasy is gone and he dreams of the next release.
How long ago was it that Ugg boots were all the rage? That Target was the savior of those unhappy with WalMart? That pumpkin-spice coffee was the most delicious thing ever? The joy of those has been sucked dry, and those that continue to pursue them are thought be leading a "banal existence."
Petersen is simply, in her way, an early-adopter of autonomy. But it hurts. Consider this:
[Older "basics"] just consume in feminized (and thus readily dismissible) ways appropriate to their generations: my mom, who lives in northern Idaho, is so basic that she drinks decaf single-shot lattes at Starbucks, shops online at Chico’s, and posts pictures of her heirloom vegetable garden to Facebook. She drinks slightly more expensive white wine and goes to a slightly more erudite book club than the basics half her age, but she too is basic.Do you hear her pain? Her mother is trying to avoid being basic, by reading better books and drinking better wine, but she's hopeless. Petersen doesn't want to look down on her mother but...Starbucks?
Petersen loves her mother--she might even admire her--but the definition she's chosen autonomously makes her, well, better than her mother.
But she isn't better than her mother and she knows it. So, how does one resolve this situation?
Percy and E.F. Schumacher fans already know--by going up.
“What is the best method of education?” presents, in short, a divergent problem par excellence. The answers tend to diverge, and the more logical and consistent they are, the greater is the divergence. There is “freedom” versus “discipline and obedience.” There is no solution. And yet some educators are better than others. How does this come about? One way to find out is to ask them. If we explained to them our philosophical difficulties, they might show signs of irritation with this intellectual approach. “Look here,” they might say, “all this is far too clever for me. The point is: You must love the little horrors.” Love, empathy, participation mystique, understanding, compassion-these are faculties of a higher order than those required for the implementation of any policy of discipline or of freedom. To mobilize these higher faculties or forces, to have them available not simply as occasional impulses but permanently, requires a high level of self-awareness, and that is what makes a great educator.By operating from a transcendent remove, one can resolve divergent points.
It should be pointed out that the two authors aren't talking about the same thing. What Schumacher encourages is an operational position--one should be acting out of love. What Percy describes is an intellectual perspective--the human escape from incongruities of the self. But both ways describe going up to resolve crises.
Petersen has to resolve the tension between a definition that she is better than her mother and her knowledge, intellectual and otherwise, that she is equal with her mother, and she resolves this through the only transcendent avenue available to her: politics.
And like all stereotypes, we fling ["basic"] at others in order to distance ourselves from them. These people are this thing; therefore, I am this other thing. Stereotypes are deployed most fervently — and with the most hostility — when the group wielding them is most anxious to distance itself from another group that, in truth, isn’t so distant after all...By calling someone “white trash,” a certain segment of white consumer person distinguishes themselves from another segment of white consumer, thereby bolstering their position within the capitalist hierarchy.
...
So what are those who make fun of basics actually frightened of? Of being basic, sure, but that’s just another way of being scared of conformity. And in 2014 America, the way we measure conformity isn’t in how we speak in political beliefs, but in consumer and social media habits. We declare our individuality via our capacity to consume differently — to mix purchases from Target with those from quirky Etsy shops — and to tweet, use Facebook, or pin in a way that separates us from others.
...
[T]o be excited about the September arrival of the Pumpkin Spice Latte isn’t an indicator that that student has no taste as much as it’s about how there are few other outlets accessible to her.
...
Unique taste — and the capacity to avoid the basic — is a privilege. A privilege of location (usually urban), of education (exposure to other cultures and locales), and of parentage (who would introduce and exalt other tastes). To summarize the groundbreaking work of theorist Pierre Bourdieu: We don’t choose our tastes so much as the micro-specifics of our class determine them. To consume and perform online in a basic way is thus to reflect a highly American, capitalist upbringing. Basic girls love the things they do because nearly every part of American commercial media has told them that they should.Sure, her mom's wine, books, and coffee are all a little embarrassing, but it's not her fault--it's capitalism's fault, it's 2014 America's fault, it's our commercial media's fault! At last we've come to a definition to describe why we're so much better than our moms--privilege.
Petersen seems to believe that the cutting edge of being an autonomous self should be universally available. Does she propose we ship every rural citizen into city centers so that they can enjoy the benefits of bodegas and independent coffee shops? Or should the government begin a hipness subsidy program, allowing trendy individuals to open small-town boutiques?
What Petersen hasn't considered is that maybe these things aren't all that important. Certainly one can derive pleasure from wine and coffee and boots but that's altogether separate from deriving definition from them.
What's tragic about this article is how completely modernity has trapped Petersen. There she is, torn by the demands of the autonomous self, yet she doesn't see that the whole charade can be abandoned. She could reexamine the priorities she's created; she could ask what exactly she gets out of her coffee that she can't get out of Starbucks'. Instead, she turns her attention to politics--a vague politics that buzzes with "capitalism" and "privilege"--not realizing that she's only replaced one tension for another.
---
What's funny is that, in some ways, the better America she seems to want--where everyone has access to cool stuff--is similar to what I think is best. I dislike the proliferation of WalMarts and Starbucks and Ugg boots made in China, not because they're "basic" but because I'm against the domination of our country by centralized corporations.
Most of America looks like "Bank of America's Soviet Russia"--communism with corporate sponsors. Most small towns look like interstate exits, with interchangeable boxes labelled "McDonalds" or "Target." The regional distinctions are being rolled over by sensibilities designed thousands of miles away.
But that's only the cosmetics. More importantly, who can compete with WalMart? Who can compete with the overseas manufacturers who supply WalMart? Opportunity in modern America is the opportunity to be huge--if one isn't interested in dominating the nation, then you'd better get a job working for someone who is.
Some of what contemporary autonomous selves like Petersen are enjoying is living life at a human scale. If she's gratified buying the same coffee from an independent coffee shop instead of Starbucks, it's because everyone in the building is an individual. It's someone's business, not a revenue center. It has employees, not labor costs. She buys their coffee; she isn't purchasing units.
Unfortunately, the autonomous self gets its satisfaction from being the type of person who goes to independent coffee shops, not from what the shop itself offers.
---
It should also be mentioned that there is the typical Buzzfeed #solidarityisforwhitewomen problem: The term "basic bitch" comes from black slang, an insult between black women which has a slightly different meaning.
Petersen plays social anthropologist in order to justify what is--on Buzzfeed's own terms--clearly appropriation. "Yes, yes, black people used to say this among themselves," she seems to say, "but I want to talk about how white women use it."
This goes over in the comments about as well as one expects.
No comments:
Post a Comment