That piece on cultural authenticity has a lot of insight + useful literature review, although too clever by half: http://hilobrow.com/2010/06/01/fake-authenticity/ …
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
I will suggest hipster "authenticity" was a symptom of the subcultural mode (http://meaningness.com/modes-chart ) and is now obsolete. [Writing IOU]
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Subcultures need exclusivity—a boundary—to survive. Hipster "authenticity" was a tactic for keeping muggles out of the in-group.
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Due to the internal contradictions of subculturalism (plus the internet), boundary-maintenance is now impossible. So "authenticity" is over.
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
All culture is available to everyone, instantly. So: "does the food taste good?" matters, not "is it authentic Khmer cuisine?"
3 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
The optimal size for a social group is dozens up to thousands. Optimal size for a culture is tens of millions at minimum.
#mismatch1 reply 3 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
A subculture of 100-10,000 people can be an exhillarating artistic scene, but cannot provide the breadth and depth of meaning humans need.
1 reply 2 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Using subcultures as social groups was a reason the subcultural mode http://meaningness.com/modes-chart failed. Size mismatch; inadequate breadth/depth.
1 reply 2 retweets 3 likes
The future: diverse cultures with critical mass (10^7) to create breadth and depth of meaning, plus supportive subsocieties (10^2–10^4).
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.