(Note: I'm writing this listening to The Distillers and drinking red wine - lots.)
I didn't realize until today about all the hullabaloo surrounding Jessica Pressler's piece in the Times about black Hipsters, or "Blipsters." I read the article on Saturday, didn't think much of it - much of what she reported on was old news and I didn't gather much relevant information from it. Actually, one of my first thoughts was, 'damn, I could have written a better piece." Where have the folks at the NYT been? Shit, Afropunk has been out for like, three years now. But there is a lack of reportage on black rockers - articles about rockers who can rock but just so happen to be black - plus, there are a ton of black rock musicians (especially female) toiling away in Brooklyn, Chicago and Atlanta nightclubs that no one pays any attention to, that could use the media attention instead of talking about black folks who like rock music.
In my humble opinion, the term Blipster simply doesn't make any sense to me. Why should, as Pressler writes, black youth who wear tight pants and Vans and like Nirvana suddenly be lumped with a term in which participants that fall under the category of hipsterism are (in my opinion) white people who think it's cool to look poor even though most of them are probably rich, who poke fun of Hip-Hop through their "Ghetto" and "Kill Whitey" parties. In Toronto, it's the dirty youth who think it's cool to have greasy hair and hang out at Soundscapes, Who use what they think is 'black vernacular' with a mocking air. Please don't lump folks like me who prefer alternative and metal music in with those people, who wouldn't piss on me if I was on fire.