so "the man" tells me to like so-and-so, the "anti-man/establishment/whatever it is that you're anti for the mere sake of being contrary" tells me not to like so-and-so. either way, someone is trying to tell me what to think. so why not just decide what i actually do like or dislike, rather than just saying "well i can't conform to what 'the man' wants me to do, so i better do the opposite." at the end of the day, who the crap cares? if you like it, like it. if you don't, don't. but don't let your decisions be based on the logic of "everyone else is doing it, so i should too," or "everyone else is doing it, so i should do the opposite." if that miley cyrus song makes me want to move my hips like yeah, i'm going to freakin' move my hips like yeah. i'm not going to refuse to listen to the song because it's on the Top 100 and i'm "so above that mass-produced drivel." whether you dedicate your life to fighting or following the oh-so-nebulous "man," the sad fact of the matter is this: your life revolves around him.
i think what i'm trying to say here is that sometimes, the whole struggle between conformism/nonconformism is a joke. being contrary for the sake of being contrary doesn't make you an independent thinker--you are just as much of a slave to the masses as everyone else, because your opinions depend on that mass for something to oppose. i think it's the constant need to feel unique or special that gives rise to this myth of nonconformism. i dunno. here's my take on it--if you can wake up and go to bed feeling happy and comfortable with who you are, regardless of how many people like or dislike the things that you do, regardless of how many people do or do not do the same things that you do, or think the way you think, you're good. i daresay that being "unique" is highly overrated, while owning who you actually are is woefully undervalued.
i'm hungry.
6 comments:
yes.
It's been one of my goals for a while to do things for my own reasons-- neither to conform nor to rebel.
you shake your hips if you want to.
I think I agree with the idea of what you’re saying, but I disagree with how you worded it. Even now, I can hear you say, “Tristan! Don’t argue with me about semantics!” but I really do think it’s important to note here.
You said:
“I think what i'm trying to say here is that sometimes, the whole struggle between conformism/nonconformism is a joke. being contrary for the sake of being contrary doesn't make you an independent thinker.”
Non-conformism and being contrary are not the same thing. I’d say that non-conformism is against doing something solely because everyone else is doing it. It’s not necessarily against doing that thing in general.
For example, non-conformism would be against liking Miley Cyrus just because everyone else likes her. But I don’t think non-conformism means that you can’t like Miley Cyrus. If you genuinely like Miley Cyrus, you’re not conforming, because you’re not attaching yourself to anyone else’s ideas. You formed those opinions yourself.
So having said that, I don’t think there is anything inherently contrary to non-conformity ideas. Non-conformity by no means has to imply being contrary.
Did that make sense?
So back to your original point. Does being contrary for the sake of being contrary make you an independent thinker? No, of course not. Does being a non-conformist make you an independent thinker? By definition I would say yes.
Also, I think it’s horrible to say that being unique is overrated. But I’d agree that being unique for the sake of being unique IS overrated. And you said that owning who you are is woefully undervalued, and I agree, but owning who you are IS being unique because no one else is like you!
like it.
sounds like you can submit this premise to Muse for their next song?
Oh Amy... you are genius. And this is beautifully said. Also, you never fail to crack me up. Keep being awesome. :)
i agree w tristan.
Post a Comment