The way I perceived it, being cool had much to do with taking risks: smoking, riding a motorcycle, having a brawl, not fitting in - somehow all these things are now considered too risky. (Except the part about hating the establishment, another hint that's only happening on the surface...) Given that being cool is now about being a smart nerd that can land a job at a FAANG, making money on social media leeching on your friends attention, ... how much is the lack of coolness about actual (economical) risks?
This could also make us more optimistic of a Return of Cool, if it in true that it helps to navigate situations where you have more skin in the game than a typical millenial middle-class setting like I grew up in. Indeed, the trickster mindset is taking steem, mostly as a reaction to the colorless answer of stoicism, athentic consumerism and worship of the protestant work ethic, see mainstreem memes like Taleb's Fat Tony or the whole r/wsb-spirit.
Short story was great - never guessed it. Sent it to my girlfriend, she thought I was trying to send her a message.
It might be a simpler point, but the one thing I noticed when I was learning how to be cool in years past (a dreadfully uncool thing to do), mostly unsuccessfully, was how many of the truly cool actors earned it. Most of the Bogart era actors were ex-military, even if they didn't see any combat, I imagine it has a pretty formative impact either way. Steve McQueen was the same, racing motorcycles and living recklessly.
Mickey Rourke grew up boxing and left acting to go pro for a bit, training with Freddie Roach, one of the greatest there is. How good he was is up for debate (some questionable fights exist on Youtube if you're inclined to look), but the point is that it was earned. The reason it feels so fake these days watching an actor play a 'cool' character, is because for the most part, it is. It just isn't natural, that's why the vibe feels off.
You watch someone go through a minor metamorphosis in a real, grimy Boxing or Muay Thai gym, because the attrition rate is so high, and the training is so tough. I have a photo of 40 or so beginners from my first day in the gym, there's only 2 of of us still there. Most of the coaches aren't even nice to you at first, let alone the regulars.
But everyone that sticks around develops a different attitude, a cool demeanour that either comes from dominating their mind and body in training, or the confidence in their capability to defend themselves. They don't react, because they don't need to react.
Great point about Apple and their concern for aesthetics. It's not something I see discussed anywhere near as much - but they just look so much cooler than the other bits of tech out there. Aesthetics matter.
After a drink or two, I could see that whole final paragraph turning into a novella. There is a LOT of uncool trends around these days, I mean just look at the 'rock' charts for the last 10 years. Imagine Dragons is the biggest rock band in the world. Dios mio.
Great post as always, expertly put together. I would love to see you 'go in' on fanboy culture at some point - there needs to be a revenge against this revenge of the nerds.
A flip response: coolness and authenticity need each other, as the skin and core support each other. But, it is better to have an earnest, authentic core and a removed, devil-may-care surface, than an authentic skin making plain a removed, insincere core. I admire those whose skin is thin, and whose authentic cores are thinly veiled, but to have authenticity on the surface all the time is grating at best, deeply suspicious at worst. Those whose authentic cores are well hidden are mysterious and possibly dangerous, a different source of joy. (Although my perspective as a person with much privilege should be taken into account!)
If only people would see coolness and authenticity as a form of play, it would be much better. Some players are in it to win, others just to have a good time. The game is ruined when you take it too seriously or too flip, though.
One of the earliest definitions of cool may be from 17th century French author La Rochefoucault, who wrote "L'honnête homme est celui qui ne se pique de rien".There's a play on words here. In old French, "Se piquer" both means "pride yourself on your knowledge/accomplishment of something" and "easily taking offense of something". So, the ideal man would be the one who remains calm and never loses his temper, and also the one who never boasts nor prides himself with anything (and before anyone calls LR a soyboy, he spent half his life in the military and was decorated and wounded many times). I find it a pretty cool definition.
I totally agree with your de-escalation theory, I never really thought of it that way. Perhaps we could dare to say that once God is dead, we are left with only ourselves; there isn't a watchful eye above us anymore and we're left alone facing the crushing dread of existence. So maybe the only adequate attitude in face of this catastrophe is to "let it go", lean back, light a cigarette and enjoy the ride... ? Remember, you can trick your brain into thinking other toughts... So if I feed him my devil-may-care attitude and my best Bogart rictus, maybe he'll end up leaving me alone ?
Finally, I noticed something strange in our post-modern cultural era. Everything must indeed be cool, even what's not supposed to be, so of course nothing is cool anymore. Fine. But then why do we see more and more books and movies absurdly serious? Children super-hero movies darker than my cofee when really it's just another galactic super-vilain on his way to destroy the world and a posse of spandex freaks trying to stop him. Or regular dramas and "adventure" movies in which the hero always seems to hold himself back from cracking a joke. Maybe they think their work will be more emotional and feel more respectable that way, but it's just boring and heavy most of the time. Is it a just clumsy attempt to escape the cool-culture for marketing segmentation criterias, or am I missing something deeper here?
"the bizarre and largely unnoticed real life cultural shift whereby once-cool counterculture types have somehow morphed from being anti-corporate activists to the (unwitting?) champions, apologists and footsoldiers of these same forces.?"
Great read, thank you.
The way I perceived it, being cool had much to do with taking risks: smoking, riding a motorcycle, having a brawl, not fitting in - somehow all these things are now considered too risky. (Except the part about hating the establishment, another hint that's only happening on the surface...) Given that being cool is now about being a smart nerd that can land a job at a FAANG, making money on social media leeching on your friends attention, ... how much is the lack of coolness about actual (economical) risks?
This could also make us more optimistic of a Return of Cool, if it in true that it helps to navigate situations where you have more skin in the game than a typical millenial middle-class setting like I grew up in. Indeed, the trickster mindset is taking steem, mostly as a reaction to the colorless answer of stoicism, athentic consumerism and worship of the protestant work ethic, see mainstreem memes like Taleb's Fat Tony or the whole r/wsb-spirit.
Short story was great - never guessed it. Sent it to my girlfriend, she thought I was trying to send her a message.
It might be a simpler point, but the one thing I noticed when I was learning how to be cool in years past (a dreadfully uncool thing to do), mostly unsuccessfully, was how many of the truly cool actors earned it. Most of the Bogart era actors were ex-military, even if they didn't see any combat, I imagine it has a pretty formative impact either way. Steve McQueen was the same, racing motorcycles and living recklessly.
Mickey Rourke grew up boxing and left acting to go pro for a bit, training with Freddie Roach, one of the greatest there is. How good he was is up for debate (some questionable fights exist on Youtube if you're inclined to look), but the point is that it was earned. The reason it feels so fake these days watching an actor play a 'cool' character, is because for the most part, it is. It just isn't natural, that's why the vibe feels off.
You watch someone go through a minor metamorphosis in a real, grimy Boxing or Muay Thai gym, because the attrition rate is so high, and the training is so tough. I have a photo of 40 or so beginners from my first day in the gym, there's only 2 of of us still there. Most of the coaches aren't even nice to you at first, let alone the regulars.
But everyone that sticks around develops a different attitude, a cool demeanour that either comes from dominating their mind and body in training, or the confidence in their capability to defend themselves. They don't react, because they don't need to react.
Great point about Apple and their concern for aesthetics. It's not something I see discussed anywhere near as much - but they just look so much cooler than the other bits of tech out there. Aesthetics matter.
After a drink or two, I could see that whole final paragraph turning into a novella. There is a LOT of uncool trends around these days, I mean just look at the 'rock' charts for the last 10 years. Imagine Dragons is the biggest rock band in the world. Dios mio.
Great post as always, expertly put together. I would love to see you 'go in' on fanboy culture at some point - there needs to be a revenge against this revenge of the nerds.
All the best, Conor
A flip response: coolness and authenticity need each other, as the skin and core support each other. But, it is better to have an earnest, authentic core and a removed, devil-may-care surface, than an authentic skin making plain a removed, insincere core. I admire those whose skin is thin, and whose authentic cores are thinly veiled, but to have authenticity on the surface all the time is grating at best, deeply suspicious at worst. Those whose authentic cores are well hidden are mysterious and possibly dangerous, a different source of joy. (Although my perspective as a person with much privilege should be taken into account!)
If only people would see coolness and authenticity as a form of play, it would be much better. Some players are in it to win, others just to have a good time. The game is ruined when you take it too seriously or too flip, though.
One of the earliest definitions of cool may be from 17th century French author La Rochefoucault, who wrote "L'honnête homme est celui qui ne se pique de rien".There's a play on words here. In old French, "Se piquer" both means "pride yourself on your knowledge/accomplishment of something" and "easily taking offense of something". So, the ideal man would be the one who remains calm and never loses his temper, and also the one who never boasts nor prides himself with anything (and before anyone calls LR a soyboy, he spent half his life in the military and was decorated and wounded many times). I find it a pretty cool definition.
I totally agree with your de-escalation theory, I never really thought of it that way. Perhaps we could dare to say that once God is dead, we are left with only ourselves; there isn't a watchful eye above us anymore and we're left alone facing the crushing dread of existence. So maybe the only adequate attitude in face of this catastrophe is to "let it go", lean back, light a cigarette and enjoy the ride... ? Remember, you can trick your brain into thinking other toughts... So if I feed him my devil-may-care attitude and my best Bogart rictus, maybe he'll end up leaving me alone ?
Finally, I noticed something strange in our post-modern cultural era. Everything must indeed be cool, even what's not supposed to be, so of course nothing is cool anymore. Fine. But then why do we see more and more books and movies absurdly serious? Children super-hero movies darker than my cofee when really it's just another galactic super-vilain on his way to destroy the world and a posse of spandex freaks trying to stop him. Or regular dramas and "adventure" movies in which the hero always seems to hold himself back from cracking a joke. Maybe they think their work will be more emotional and feel more respectable that way, but it's just boring and heavy most of the time. Is it a just clumsy attempt to escape the cool-culture for marketing segmentation criterias, or am I missing something deeper here?
great sunday read Tom, thank you.
"the bizarre and largely unnoticed real life cultural shift whereby once-cool counterculture types have somehow morphed from being anti-corporate activists to the (unwitting?) champions, apologists and footsoldiers of these same forces.?"
didn't ring any bells for me. example?