Let's talk about Vice Magazine

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

OK, they put Original Pirate Material out in the US. I'll give 'em that. But I think the magazine is just awful -- if they didn't already do it on a regular basis, I'd recommend that they publish an all-encompassing Vice Guide to Political Incorrectness For Barely Literate Trendhoppers and Culture-Slummers. At any rate, read this.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 13 October 2002 07:15 (10 years ago) Permalink

"One thing we noticed is that people don’t want to read about music, really. Nor should they."

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 13 October 2002 07:22 (10 years ago) Permalink

Most American magazines are absolutely awful (rotten to the core, mealy-mouthed, no sense of style). Vice is not. They've covered a lot of the releases on my label, American Patchwork, without being paid off with advertising or tipped off by press officers. Presumably because they just like them. They gave photographer Ryan McGinley (a 'faggot', as they would put it) a lot of his first breaks. Their interview made me laugh.

― Momus (Momus), Sunday, 13 October 2002 08:08 (10 years ago) Permalink

jess thinks momus full of shit, overly-simplistic, banal-y "edgy" non shocker.

Is Vice just the whole pigfucker ethos with a $2,000 suit and a job in advertising? Must be!
I said "homo" and I'm so naughty! Tee-hee! I derive much enjoyment from shaking up people's preconceptions because it is so much fun! I feel giggly all over now! Tee-hee!

-- Michael Daddino (epicharmus@aol.com), June 28th, 2002

the fact that people continue to fall for this bullshit in 2002 makes me rather ill.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 13 October 2002 10:16 (10 years ago) Permalink

and actually, in reading the thread that quote came from, i'm quite disappointed in a large chunk of ilx (yeah, because that's the first time THAT'S happened.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 13 October 2002 10:24 (10 years ago) Permalink

(also, somehow i don't think it's a coincidence that the vice-stylee seems to be a rather big influence on all the blogs and indiezines i currently most hate.

GM: The punk rock-ness of that is just plain honesty. We seem really racist and homophobic because we hang around with fags and niggers so much. It just becomes part of our vernacular.

Albini: Given how intermingled the gay and punk subcultures were, it was assumed by anyone involved that open-mindedness, if not free-form experimentation, was the norm. With that under your belt, joke all you like. The word "fag" isn't just a gay term, it's funny on it's own, phonetically.

and if you actually belive any of this bullshit rhetoric may a group of passing meatheads beat the shit out of you rather than that fag or nigger they had planned to, in a rare moment of justice.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 13 October 2002 10:35 (10 years ago) Permalink

So are we to take it, Jess, that your position here is that words are *not* changed by context? That they have an intrinsic, objective, unchanging power to offend? Which puts you (in the terms of the 'classical music -- why bother?' thread) in the Status camp rather than the Contract camp?

― Momus (Momus), Sunday, 13 October 2002 12:25 (10 years ago) Permalink

I would think that giving Ryan McGinley a break would be a good thing, if you know, McGinley even had an iota of talent. Photographers like him come dime a dozen. He's lame, lame, lame.

― franky, Sunday, 13 October 2002 12:39 (10 years ago) Permalink

Well, I disagree. Ryan is in the Nan Goldin mold of selling pictures of his friends and his lifestyle. While that may be problematical when he gets to Corinne Day's level ('Oh Kate Moss is just my friend, I photograph her when she has her tampon in and just happens to be lying naked on my shitty carpet...'), for the time being it's refreshing. And instead of Corinne Day, he may quite possibly turn into a Wolfgang Tillmans figure.

― Momus (Momus), Sunday, 13 October 2002 12:54 (10 years ago) Permalink

(I'd also like to say add that putting 'Original Pirate Material' out in the US itself qualifies Vice for the Nobel Prize in pop.)

― Momus (Momus), Sunday, 13 October 2002 12:57 (10 years ago) Permalink

are there still people out there, 'sides the above mentioned meatheads and confused trendhoppers, who feel boxed-in or suffocated by the words and means of 'political correctness'? maybe in some utopian neverland where its assumed that not one single reader of vice actually hates black or gays or jews or foreigners of any stripe etc, then we can start playfully recontextualising formerly offensive words, but 1. that won't likely ever be, however narrowly vice may wish to define its readership and 2. that's clearly not the point: reading the above interview, their modus operandi seems to be something like 'let's gloss-up offensive "home truths" and see if the reader can spot-the-difference between shiny shirts and hateful invective. if they succeed, i'm guessing the reader (nb i haven't actually read this magazine) will likely get tired of asking "are these guys for REAL?" every page. if they fail, they can either start working for the magazine or go out and practice some non-glossy, real-life discrimation.

― Mitch Lastnamewithheld (mitchlnw), Sunday, 13 October 2002 13:19 (10 years ago) Permalink

If we're going to wait for Utopia before allowing that words might be changed by context, we'll be waiting a long time, with Scotch tape across our mouths. And it'll be a waste of time and tape, because words are changed by context right now. And the context of Vice is that they actively promote the work of NY 'art fags' like Phiiliip and Ryan McG.

If you like I'll retype that last sentence without the 'inverted' commas.

― Momus (Momus), Sunday, 13 October 2002 13:30 (10 years ago) Permalink

(nb i haven't actually read this magazine)

http://www.viceland.com/

― Momus (Momus), Sunday, 13 October 2002 13:38 (10 years ago) Permalink

Hmmm....liked the graphics, the writing seemed to be kind of dumb and lazy.

― Nicole (Nicole), Sunday, 13 October 2002 13:46 (10 years ago) Permalink

The problem with this whole let's recontextualize old bigot terms in order to rid them of their previous offensive connoctations and thus provide a way for diferent people to come to terms with each other WITHOUT the intrusion of the Politically Correct Police is that it might feel very daring and liberating and laudable for the average white straight male; but if you've spent your entire life getting kicked around for being a "fag" or "nigger" or what have you, you'd be much less likely to see VICE's stuff as the highly subversive breaking down of the PC walls etc that its staff thinks it is, and much more likely to see it as a bunch of guys celebrating their bigotry under the guise of "irony", regardless of whether or not they employ members of the groups they're throwing cuss words at. And you'd probably be right.

Cf: "The White Noise Supremacists" by Lester Bangs

― Daniel_Rf, Sunday, 13 October 2002 13:57 (10 years ago) Permalink

okay maybe I overstated the point, but I do think that if the recontextualisation is done in the service of quasi-racist "hip to hate" rhetoric, then yeah, let's wait till we're all running around naked, embracing each other and painting colour field abstractions in the sun-dome (I stole that imagery from someone) before we decide to remove the scare quotes from 'fag', 'nigger' etc just because we'd rather use those words intead of "gay" or "black" or "nigga" (nb. what I understand Vice to be doing is v different from a proud "what was bad now is good" reversal of meaning, seems to me something closer to a kind of skinhead-coquette thing - "are they 'jews' or are they 'kikes'?" "are they 'gays' or are they 'fags?' "). doesn't seems to me as if they've got the work of 'fags' (no, I'm not ready to remove the 'inverted' commas) up on display in an attempt to dilute the negativity of the word, at least not while they remain committed to (as Mike D. says) giggly controversy baiting and 'wink wink' racism. I dunno if I can say anything more about this, because excepting that interview, I HAVEN'T read anything from these guys, and I feel like I'm talking more about what I understand as the Vice "attitude" that's adopted by certain people I don't much like than the (possibly eqaully vile) magazine itself.

(in between writing and posting this, I see Momus's link, which I'll check now and see how it changes what I've just typed)

― Mitch Lastnamewithheld (mitchlnw), Sunday, 13 October 2002 14:07 (10 years ago) Permalink

look, i don't have time to *really* get into it now, but the thing that has ALWAYS bothered me about vice is that it's essentially repackaging maxim's boorish anti-intellectualism in a much more insidious package (once couched in illusions of "hipness").

whenever i pick up a vice, the prevailing message i seem to get from it is one of "aw shit, dude, don't think about things so much! titties are fun, some music sucks ass, mainstream media is all bullshit, this is REAL. have some fun you uptight fuckwad."

but i think the thing that bothers me most about vice is their undeniable beavis factor; sometimes in their brazen stupidity and painful 'realness', they hit at the root of a subject with more effectiveness and insight than anyone else.

― mark p (Mark P), Sunday, 13 October 2002 15:22 (10 years ago) Permalink

i mean, if you're someone who's always been insecure about your identity with reference to the supposed counterculture (ie. your exclusion from it), then vice's rhetoric is difficult to defend against. here are people actively doing what most of us ostensibly *wish* we were: getting laid, getting drunk, having fun, fraternizing in art/music/film scenes that they've insinuated to be uncompromised + unwashed (therefore -> 'realer'), leading lives unbothered by hangups or guilt or consequence, living free from the rotten tyrany of 'overanalyzing'.

i'm sure some readers who secretly (or not so secretly) *want* that for themselves allow themselves to be bullied by vice's "what's one more?" con job. the (flawed) logic being: "i am a certain way, and this is my life. they are a certain way, and that is theirs. if i want elements of what they have, etc etc etc"

from where i stand, vice is a bunch of pretty and insanely charismatic (but ultimately vacuous) people using their assets to play against the desires of anyone else is who *not* definitively those things.

― mark p (Mark P), Sunday, 13 October 2002 15:39 (10 years ago) Permalink

haha mark i think you've pretty much nailed momus' aesthetic right there.

(except maybe replace pretty with Clever.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 13 October 2002 15:57 (10 years ago) Permalink

what they say:

"I said "at least they're white" about Williamsburg because it was funny."

"We’ve always felt that PC attitudes always hurt the people they’re trying to help. We believe words like “African American” and “East Indian” are just excuses for white, middle class, academic, liberals to patronize the working classes (of all races) and tell them how to speak."

"At worst it incites an angry debate on the power of words and what prejudice is really about."

― Mitch Lastnamewithheld (mitchlnw), Sunday, 13 October 2002 16:34 (10 years ago) Permalink

did you ever notice how it's middle class, slumming academic liberals (i hesisitate to use "white") that foist the argument back onto us that PC speak is repressive/regressive (and it also conflicts with their creative uses for nihilism.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 13 October 2002 16:42 (10 years ago) Permalink

dude, stop being so gay.

― mark p (Mark P), Sunday, 13 October 2002 16:51 (10 years ago) Permalink

ps. "Ryan wears a shirt by Ben Sherman, pants by Dickies, shoes by Nike."

― mark p (Mark P), Sunday, 13 October 2002 16:54 (10 years ago) Permalink

And the irony of it is that so-called politically correct language is repressive/regressive for the exact same reasons that co-opted hate speech is. "Spic" or "dyke" (said with one's tongue firmly planted in one's cheek) is neither more nor less decisive than bandying about hyphenated terms peppered with a sprinkling of "heritage". Or, for that matter, wearing an inverted pink triangle, reclaimed from Hitler's death camps. Either way one is reinforcing the concept of "racial" differences.

― , Sunday, 13 October 2002 18:02 (10 years ago) Permalink

i love vice, its really funny and they like good music

― s trife (simon_tr), Sunday, 13 October 2002 20:58 (10 years ago) Permalink

― Mitch Lastnamewithheld (mitchlnw), Sunday, 13 October 2002 21:20 (10 years ago) Permalink

ethan your ability to vacillate between genius and idiocy astounds me.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 13 October 2002 22:01 (10 years ago) Permalink

Gee, Momus. Have you been around the art schools, man? I've got a feeling you have. There's about a bazillion people doing the exact same thing Ryan's doing. Ryan is aggressively mediocre at it, no less. The whole Tillmans/Goldman thing is a fucking yawn. It's no-talent no-vision scenester snapshot crap. This shit's got to die, and Vice is just feeding it. That's enough of an argument against Vice as it is, before you get into their dubious politics.

Let's get to the heart of the matter with Ryan McGinley: he's a cute guy and he knows who to pal around with, and who to sleep with. He's a clever and ambitious guy, and a total hack of an artist.

― franky, Sunday, 13 October 2002 22:29 (10 years ago) Permalink

So are we to take it, Jess, that your position here is that words are *not* changed by context? That they have an intrinsic, objective, unchanging power to offend?

What makes me cringe is the "some of my best friends are [oppressed minority], therefore it's OKAY for us to use the word [epithet]" card the Vice guys try to play. And of course the reportage about being on the scene with Actual Real Live blacks/gays/dwarves makes the magazine seem so very real and trenchant. < /sarcasm>

I have to wonder how their "best friends" feel when Mr. Badass Vice Editor uses these epithets to their faces at a party or something -- I mean, mileage varies, but I wonder if they're perfectly cool with it, or whether they just grin and bear it while secretly feeling offended. All I know is how I'd feel -- uncomfortable.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 13 October 2002 23:42 (10 years ago) Permalink

man vice even isnt about this shit, you people need to chill

― s trife (simon_tr), Sunday, 13 October 2002 23:46 (10 years ago) Permalink

ethan, shut up.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 13 October 2002 23:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

And maybe their defense is "Well, why do they feel offended? Aha! See, we're making them think!" But that puts Vice in a weird position of assumed superiority, as if they're saying "We're gonna use your word and if you're offended you're just a reactionary fool, so if you know what's good for you, you'll stay in your place and shut up."

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 13 October 2002 23:56 (10 years ago) Permalink

Okay. Let's say you're Billy. You're young, pretty and gay, you make records and you live in NYC. You want coverage.

Magazine A decides to pass over your orientation in discreet silence, because 'it's about the music, man.' Mag A is read by some people for whom homosexuality is actually not an acceptable lifestyle option. And we don't want to put them off buying your records, do we? Because you might influence them towards your decadent metropolitan views if you don't push their faces in them. So shut up already and you might get somewhere, boy.

Magazine B is militantly liberal. It tries to feature as many 'minority' artists as it can, and push their 'agendas'. It wants to talk about you as a 'new gay voice' in music. All its questions seem to angle for anecdotes about how you've been discriminated against and beaten up. The article will be a form of cultural reparation. Hardcore queer activists will ask you to speak at rallies after reading this piece. Whoopee!

Magazine C -- written by people you see all the time around town, some of whom you may even have had casual sex with, you can't remember -- calls you an 'art fag'. Actually, that's what you call your boyfriend too.

― Momus (Momus), Monday, 14 October 2002 00:16 (10 years ago) Permalink

How is this a defense of the magazine, though? All you're saying is that there's one hypothetical guy out there who doesn't mind being called an art fag if it'll help him sell records.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Monday, 14 October 2002 00:32 (10 years ago) Permalink

Words change their meaning in time, according to who speaks them, to whom, with what degree of irony, and with what general context of affection or opprobrium.

Vice magazine is run by people who have set their watches to the correct time, in terms of what words have what meanings to what people. This is why people who make money from trends are buying into them, and have been for a while. They are not affectionately calling, say, Larry Clark, 'pedo' in their articles. But they are calling people, affectionately, 'faggot'. This should tell you something about the word 'faggot' in the year 2002.

Resistance to the 'decriminalisation' of words like 'faggot' can be conservatism disguised as 'sensitivity'. Vice magazine is not conservative. Some people on this thread are.

― Momus (Momus), Monday, 14 October 2002 00:42 (10 years ago) Permalink

vice is worth every penny. if vice is so awful, why are you haters giving it lip service? just ignore it and leave it around for those of us who like it to pick up.

― felicity (felicity), Monday, 14 October 2002 00:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

vice is worth every penny.

Well, it's free, so there ya go.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Monday, 14 October 2002 00:56 (10 years ago) Permalink

not to put too fine a point on it

― felicity (felicity), Monday, 14 October 2002 01:03 (10 years ago) Permalink

nick the real difference between you and i isn't politics. it's that i've a. actually taken it in the ass from another man and b. never tried to play the Art Fag. i don't find the word faggot Hilarious or Disarming coming from a bunch of snotty, slumming middle class post-grads anymore than i do coming from a passing pickup truck. (i know this is hard to understand from your seat atop the ivory irony stick, but rednecks still don't like fags...i know, i know...i'll let you digest that one for a moment.) perhaps in a world where people don't get assaulted outside gay themed festivals in small "liberal" college towns the word faggot can bring us all closer together. this is quite the utopia, i'll admit.

felicity, do you like goebbles?

― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 14 October 2002 01:07 (10 years ago) Permalink

given that I'm jewish, not especially, but I will defend your right to invoke him. I'm not afraid of words.

― felicity (felicity), Monday, 14 October 2002 01:10 (10 years ago) Permalink

anyway, this is ridiculous. arguing with momus = pissing in the wind, and i'm hungry.

felicity, you know i was joking (since i am talking to you about it right now ha ha.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 14 October 2002 01:18 (10 years ago) Permalink

Two things.

1. One of Vice's contributing editors, Amy Kellner, a lesbian, DJs at an event called Art Fag Mondays in the Meat Packing District. She even named it.

2. We (and by 'we' I mean fags, non-fags, art fags and Vice readers) are a lot quicker and more creative when it comes to messing with language than Bushites in pickup trucks. So let's put the word 'faggot' more and more in a friendly context, and hear hostile uses of the word sounding increasingly lame. Eventually the hostiles will be forced to come up with a new term. It'll take them about ten years. Partly because they're not too smart. And partly because they believe that words do not change their meanings, and that the word 'faggot' is -- and will always be -- intrinsically insulting. They're wrong.

― Momus (Momus), Monday, 14 October 2002 01:22 (10 years ago) Permalink

momus you may have a kernel of a point in there, somewhere, i'll admit. but the fact that you call them "bushites" and think that the word faggot will lose its power or its appeal as a slur in ten years just reinforces how divorced from reality you actually are.

a lot of young black men call themselves niggers. would you walk into a room and do the same? even 10-20-30-40 years after the initiation of civil rights?

― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 14 October 2002 01:34 (10 years ago) Permalink

and can we - at some point - stop pretending that new york has anything to do with the rest of the u.s. except in a sort of geological time lag sense. (and somehow i dont think gay clubs in the meat packing district will be one of its great cultural exports to the heartlands in 10-20 years.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 14 October 2002 01:36 (10 years ago) Permalink

One of Vice's contributing editors, Amy Kellner, a lesbian, DJs at an event called Art Fag Mondays in the Meat Packing District. She even named it.

First of all, and I don't know how apropos this is but I'll say it anyway, "contributing editor" is often just a vanity title given to famous writers and other "cool" people whose butts senior editors smooch in order to look hipper by association. Occasionally they'll write an article or something.

As Jess already stated -- just because a subculture has adopted an ironic usage of an otherwise loaded word DOESN'T MEAN that the word is inoffensive anymore. YES there are gonna be some "fags" here and there who don't give a shit how the word is used, but it's not really fair to use those people as proof that IT'S OKAY to go around using hot-button words like that.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Monday, 14 October 2002 01:53 (10 years ago) Permalink

The real reason to hate Vice is not because of its politics, but because some dumb cunt named Abby has her bootleg Canal Street ear rings showing up in the next issue. Fuck that fucking cunt ass bitch fucking slut twat fucker. Fuck her and her horse. I hope she dies and never has children because if she does I will fully doubt any possible existance of a benevolent god.

― Fuck You Abby, Monday, 14 October 2002 01:56 (10 years ago) Permalink

I don't know, it seems like the same old hipster-posing-as-fratboy crap that's been around for years, like Punk Magazine, Don't Be a Faggot-era Beastie Boys, Forced Exposure. But with more money and a better fashion sense. Whooptie doo. Occasionally funny and I love all the pictures of the cute kids out at clubs, but most of the writing is just obnoxious. And yes, they seem a bit too impressed with their anti-PC shennanigans. Yawn.

In other words, Michael Daddino was absolutely right.

That Albini quote is so WRONG it's, I don't know, cute. "Anyone involved"? Like, did he ever go to a Bad Brains show? Were the gay and punk subcultures really intermingled anywhere outside of NY, London and LA, especially after the first couple of years?

― Arthur (Arthur), Monday, 14 October 2002 02:01 (10 years ago) Permalink

momus, stop being such a crazy faggot.

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 14 October 2002 02:17 (10 years ago) Permalink

(yup. looks pretty harsh to me.)

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 14 October 2002 02:17 (10 years ago) Permalink

Shift, which came out of the same Montreal scene as Vice, is also a good magazine. I certainly don't say that Vice is the only magazine anyone should read. Balance it out with a whole bunch of other stuff, by all means.

Personally, I find the insistence on skate culture in Vice and Tokion and some other mags a little silly. But that may be a generational thing.

On the question of 'the revaluation of all values', nobody has made the smart objection to my argument, which is that recontextualising insults is a reactive stance, and allows the enemy to set the terms of the debate.

And the answer to that is... but I'm typing this in a computer store in Ginza. Must dash.

― Momus (Momus), Monday, 14 October 2002 02:34 (10 years ago) Permalink

Skipping 980 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

I never really thought of Vice as anything but an assemblage of like good zine writers until one started writing the second most popular TV show on my Twitter feed and now I think I p much wasted my life

― la musica de harry frogbs (Whiney G. Weingarten), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 13:07 (11 months ago) Permalink

rest of your twitter friends still can't let go of mtv cribs?

― mh, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 13:29 (11 months ago) Permalink

the second most popular TV show on my Twitter feed

― diamanda ram dass (Edward III), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 13:56 (11 months ago) Permalink

(I'd also like to say add that putting 'Original Pirate Material' out in the US itself qualifies Vice for the Nobel Prize in pop.)
― Momus (Momus), Sunday, October 13, 2002 12:57 PM (9 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

― one dis leads to another (ian), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 14:07 (11 months ago) Permalink

(I'd also like to say add that putting 'Original Pirate Material' out in the US itself qualifies Vice for the Nobel Prize in pop.)
― Momus (Momus), Sunday, October 13, 2002 12:57 PM (9 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― one dis leads to another (ian), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 14:07 (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

.. an annual award?

― Mark G, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 14:17 (11 months ago) Permalink

the second most popular TV show on my Twitter feed

assume we will be seeing this line in the ads

― a hauntingly unemployed american (difficult listening hour), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 14:24 (11 months ago) Permalink

i didn't really have a problem with that Leave Hipsters Alone article except that it exists

― a hauntingly unemployed american (difficult listening hour), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 14:25 (11 months ago) Permalink

is there anything out there that's a good alternative to vice? i think about the only thing you can say in their favor is that there isn't, in the same way there isn't a good alternative to their favorite sponsor, american apparel. in both cases, i do think on balance the world is better off without them existing.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 18:48 (11 months ago) Permalink

you can say that about everything though

― carly rae (flopson), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 18:51 (11 months ago) Permalink

once upon a time, there was Arthur :(

― a dense custard of infinity (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 18:52 (11 months ago) Permalink

haha you can't say that about fixie bikes. the opposite is true for fixie bikes.
are there good alternatives to fixies? yeah tons! a lot of them are cheaper and better, and you can get them anywhere.
is the world better off without them existing? nope, not really.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 18:55 (11 months ago) Permalink

a good alternative to vice is your local library.

― one dis leads to another (ian), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 19:02 (11 months ago) Permalink

you don't have to go highbrow all the time but you don't need to read vice either. there are a billion other places for you to read about indie rock bands and look at tits.

― one dis leads to another (ian), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 19:03 (11 months ago) Permalink

andrew wk doesn't arrive in a stagecoach throwing out free energy drinks at my library.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 19:05 (11 months ago) Permalink

there was so much i found odious about vice (and american apparel, for that matter) in the aughties. (i realize it's been around since the nineties but i associate it with that particular decade for whatever reasons)

howev i always thought the do's and don'ts were pretty great. i even bought the book at one point

― dell (del), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 19:08 (11 months ago) Permalink

Hipster Runoff > Vice

― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Tuesday, 19 June 2012 19:50 (11 months ago) Permalink

That Grass Widow review is just...really bad.

― Trip Maker, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 19:58 (11 months ago) Permalink

"there are a billion other places for you to read about indie rock bands and look at tits."
does anyone rep for suicide girls over vice? these things all seem bad. i suspect there's something structurally wrong with the kind of economies that let vice and american apparel thrive, but they seem especially culpable in that they had a hand in creating and shaping those economies. if it were divorced from how shitty they are, i'd find them really inspiring in that they created new channels for themselves when everyone else flopped around dying (vice is apparently taught in business school as a case study of how to succeed in publishing/media), but it seems that being shitty and gross is part of that model, like if you tried to do the same thing they did, but not be shitty and gross, you'd be shut out.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 20:10 (11 months ago) Permalink

not a Vice fan, but I actually find Hipster Runoff to be even more hateful/mysoginistic and all-around nihilistic in a suburban gamer kind of way, and think the kid usually really means it. he seems to have utter contempt for artists or anyone that actually creates anything too, from what I can tell. xxp

― Chris S, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 23:58 (11 months ago) Permalink

*misogynistic

― Chris S, Tuesday, 19 June 2012 23:59 (11 months ago) Permalink

I think the "really means it" and "utter contempt" are pretty much the joke?

― mh, Wednesday, 20 June 2012 01:35 (11 months ago) Permalink

isn't the joke that he doesn't have utter contempt but is actually really enthusiastic? the truth is that he thinks it's all shit.

― Mordy, Wednesday, 20 June 2012 01:40 (11 months ago) Permalink

feel like i don't even know what a "joke" is anymore

― Number None, Wednesday, 20 June 2012 01:41 (11 months ago) Permalink

I got the impression he didn't necessarily give a shit either way or liked some things and disliked others but wrote about them all the same

― mh, Wednesday, 20 June 2012 01:42 (11 months ago) Permalink

i imagine you've gotta be somewhat invested in this stuff to write a prolific blog about it, but is he really celebrating browavecore?

― Mordy, Wednesday, 20 June 2012 01:44 (11 months ago) Permalink

I read Arthur more recently than I've read Vice

― Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 20 June 2012 01:48 (11 months ago) Permalink

I don't think that's the entire truth of it tho. like, he takes this ambiguous/ironic tone that compels people to give him the benefit of the doubt - lest they not be in on the joke... but to tolerate all his n-words and misogyny without any cognitive dissonance people project their own values onto him - maybe too generously... because obv he knows better, he's one of us, right?

but I don't really think that's the place he's coming from. he's more 4chan nihilist/misogynist gamer than urban liberal or hipster or student or whatever, he just blogs about that world because it's become one of the things people joke about

xxxp

― Chris S, Wednesday, 20 June 2012 02:06 (11 months ago) Permalink

and re: his investment... I think he's invested in the hits/attention, but even beneath all the jokes he clearly doesn't really know his shit

― Chris S, Wednesday, 20 June 2012 02:08 (11 months ago) Permalink

itt people try to explain HRO

― la musica de harry frogbs (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 20 June 2012 02:37 (11 months ago) Permalink

vice writer interviews danny dyer while she is on acid

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/shorties/danny-dyer-on-acid

― DX Dx DX (dan m), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 21:44 (10 months ago) Permalink

fantastic idea

― J0rdan S., Tuesday, 26 June 2012 21:47 (10 months ago) Permalink

wd prefer Danny Dyer in acid obv

― ENPBGIW (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 21:51 (10 months ago) Permalink

lmao @ whiney being all "what? vice is divisive and sketchy? i had no idea!"

― some dude, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 21:53 (10 months ago) Permalink

I'm like whatever about vice but that interview was funny. don't know why but I have a great fondness for ppl on acid.

― diamanda ram dass (Edward III), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 02:41 (10 months ago) Permalink

xpost i'm being like that?

― some dude nights (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 02:52 (10 months ago) Permalink

― la musica de harry frogbs (Whiney G. Weingarten), Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:07 AM (1 week ago) Bookmark

idk maybe i misread this?

― some dude, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 03:10 (10 months ago) Permalink

you did

― some dude nights (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 03:59 (10 months ago) Permalink

seeing that interviewer frying made me want to drop acid again, which is something I am quite certain I should never do again

― decrepit but free (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 04:23 (10 months ago) Permalink

sorry i thought you were saying 'i just thought this was a quality publication, didn't know people associated it with crypto racist creepiness until one of its writers started working in TV and that became their high profile baggage'

― some dude, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 04:41 (10 months ago) Permalink

i wasn't

― some dude nights (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 04:46 (10 months ago) Permalink

seeing that interviewer frying made me want to drop acid again, which is something I am quite certain I should never do again

― decrepit but free (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Wednesday, June 27, 2012 12:23 AM (54 minutes ago)

haha, I had an overwhelmingly strong taste memory when she took it, then my stomach started churning

I might be tripping right now tbh

― diamanda ram dass (Edward III), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 05:23 (10 months ago) Permalink

Danny "u should cut ur ex-girlfriend's face lol" Dyer cast as a guy who goes round slicing up women with a home-made shank? Sadly i can't even feign surprise.

― Temporarily Famous In The Czech Republic (ShariVari), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 07:29 (10 months ago) Permalink

I was very disappointed that it wasn't Dyer on acid after reading the headline.

― only NWOFHM! is real (krakow), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 07:46 (10 months ago) Permalink

"There are no bugs in here. This is a safe place."

Oh man, I know that feeling.

― the dave cool channel you are supposed to watch (how's life), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 09:30 (10 months ago) Permalink

i wasn't

― some dude nights (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, June 27, 2012 12:46 AM (8 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

did you waste your life because you read a magazine by one of the people who went on to make Girls or because you didn't try to write for a place that might one day be a springboard into working for HBO? i guess that's the part that really confused me

― some dude, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 13:45 (10 months ago) Permalink

posting on ilx, iirc

― mh, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 13:56 (10 months ago) Permalink

3 months pass...

Roffle:

https://twitter.com/rupertmurdoch/status/257196280781099008

https://twitter.com/greggutfeld/status/257196757291769856

― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 13 October 2012 19:15 (7 months ago) Permalink

"Damn, Myspace didn't work, hey I've heard of this new hip thing, get me the guy behind it!" "Uh, sir..."

― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 13 October 2012 19:17 (7 months ago) Permalink

to be fair, most of the media expansion and interesting stuff has come post-mcinnes

and he's on fox news, makes u think

― ɥɯ ︵ (°□°) (mh), Saturday, 13 October 2012 19:19 (7 months ago) Permalink

He was always going to end up there.

― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 13 October 2012 19:20 (7 months ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.