Talk:Hipster (1940s subculture)

message: I think the article is biased and mostly based on stereotypes.  I think it should be changed. --Juju 15:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: also there are no references whatsoever --Juju 15:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Reference 3 seems to be incomplete --anon 18:00, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Stereotypes

message: I think that these two subcultures are highly distinct!  I frankly do not understand the suggestion to merge them!  They hardly resemble each other, and even if they were more similar than they are, I think they would still deserve their separate pages.  Cazort 00:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree that the two cultures have some similarities, I wouldn't say they have the same culture or anything close to it.  For one, there was a large time gap of well more than a generation in which the term was hardly used at all.  Music is integral to both cultures, but the 40's culture centers around Jazz, and the contemporary subculture centers around Indie rock.  This alone is enough for there to seem (in my opinion) to be little overlap between the two cultures.  People in the contemporary subculture are not trying to emulate the musical interests, styles of dress, cultural values, of the old culture--they merely share some of them in common.  I think this is also reinforced by the fact that there ARE contemporary subcultures that emulate the 1940's subculture, and I doubt they would be called "hipster"; they tend to refer to themselves by names more like "hepcat" or such.  I hope this doesn't seem like I'm splitting hairs--I think that it's a pretty big distinction (as someone who likes Jazz and can't stand Indie rock!)  Cazort 19:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the articles should be merged...they completly relate if following the etmology...the word means to see...both of these 'hipsters' see trends before they hit the marketplace.  one was more concerned with intellectual growth...while the other consumer related ideas...but nevertheless...they are very similar...--Juju 15:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Again, see my "pants" analogy above; just because they share the same root does not make them the same thing. Also, consider that, for example, there is a different article on every significant Christian sect, even though all Christians share certain core beliefs (and are probably more similar to one another in these beliefs than even one "hipster" is to another). \sim Lenoxus " * " 10:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: i understand your point.  but to me hipster as used today, is just a subnote to what it was in the past.  if the hipster movement of today, becomes more then just a marketing ploy then perhaps yes seperate them.  but as it is now, it is just a way to market shit to rich urbanites.--Juju 18:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia so it should cover things for what they are.  If your assertion that the modern "hipster" is nothing more than a marketing ploy is true, then I think that is actually a stronger argument to keep the two separate, because the older subculture certainly was not a marketing ploy!  Also, like I mentioned earlier, there are also people today who draw from and emulate the earlier subculture, and they are largely separate from the modern one.  Cazort 02:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: well i think what i am trying to say, is that if more can be written about the modern word hipster then it should be a seperate page, but as of now, not much can be said about it.--Juju 13:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging

message: The article mentions special dress. A picture would be welcome, if anyone can find one in their attics. Did they really look like the black&white pic here, or is it a different subculture? Thanks! Nicolas1981 (talk) 04:05, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs picture 

message: While I can't disagree that someone who is hip may have used cannabis there is no reference.  Can we get some pictures of some hip people smoking cannabis for reference?
--Potguru (talk) 17:39, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cannabis 

message: In most 1940s media, these zoot suiters and jazz enthusiasts are referred to as "hep" rather than "hip". If you mention the word "hipster" these days the first thing that comes to most people's mind is a trendy 20something Londoner with a beard and glasses, and not a swinging American "hepcat" of the 1940s.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 22:21, 22 January 2016‎ (talk • contribs) Osama57
:Well "Osama", what you did there is potentially a highly controversial move that perhaps ought to have been discussed beforehand. Robert the Broof (talk) 23:31, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted the undiscussed move to "hepcat". Most articles with bracketed disambiguations are not "the first thing that comes to most people's mind" for the unbracketed term alone - that's why the brackets are there.  --McGeddon (talk) 15:20, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hep or hip? 

message: I have to echo an earlier poster's concern, I find it strange that this page is so intently focused on white hipsters and white jazz musicians.
Okay, so the "initial" hipsters were mostly white - why does this page never get around to discussing the later, presumably more diverse hipsters?
The hipsters followed "mostly black" jazz musicians - yet the page names *fourteen* white artists, and only two black ones? 
Also, tone - "ought to be included"? That sort of authorial opining does not belong on Wikipedia.
I unfortunately don't know enough about this topic to add the missing information myself, but someone really ought to.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by PurrfectPeach (talk • contribs) 02:13, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very Caucasian-focused 

message: Hepatitis and heroin - from cab calloway on terry Gross' "fresh air"
:....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  hepcat