« Morning market roundup | Main | Belgium no longer exists »

White people are, like, soooo funny

19 Mar 2008 10:30 am

All right, let me add myself to the list of white people who don't like Stuff White People Like. Leave aside the arrogance of declaring "white people" to be equal to a rather small group of self-satisfied, overeducated, affluent poverty-vultures. And I actively applaud its purpose--my demographic is a rich vein of humor. One that should be strip mined.

Unfortunately, SWL just isn't very funny. How can you take a target as rich and inviting as people who deliberately buy ugly shoes and produce . . . a dull thud?

Compare it to David Brooks, for example. Yes, David Brooks, the master of the mild funny, is more amusing than a 29-year old hipster who aspires to be a comedian. From Bobos in Paradise, his thoroughly amusing books on the annoying new elite stuffing themselves and their Restoration Hardware shopping bags into every Starbucks in the country:

Rule 1. Only vulgarians spend lavish amounts of money on luxuries. Cultivated people restrict their lavish spending to necessities.

Aristotle made the ancient distinction between need--objects we must have to survive, like shelter, food, clothing, and other esesntials--and wants, which are those things we desire to make us feel superior to others. The Bobo elite has seized on this distinction to separate itself from past and rival elites. Specifically, the members of the educated-class elite feel free to invest huge amounts of capital in things that are categorized as needs, but it is not acceptable to spend on mere wants. For example, its virtuous to spend $25,000 on your bathroom, but its vulgar to spend $15,000 on a sound system and a wide-screen TV. Its decadent ot spend $10,000 on an outdoor Jacuzzi, but if you're not spending twice that on an oversized slate shower stall, it's a sign that you probably haven't learned to appreciate the simple rhythms of life.

Similarly, it is acceptable to spend hundreds of dollars on top-of-the-line hiking boots, but it would be vulgar to buy top-of-the-line patent leather shoes to go with formal wear. It is acceptable to spend $4,400 on a Merlin XLM road bike because people must excercise, but it would be a sign of a superficial nature to buy a big, showy powerboat. Only a shallow person would spend hundreds of dollars on caviar, but a deep person would gladly shell out that much for top-of-the-line mulch.

You can spend as much as you want on anything that can be classified as a tool, such as a $65,000 Range Rover with plenty of storage space, but it would be vulgar to spend money on things that cannot be seen as tools, such as a $60,000 vintage Corvette. (I once thought of writing a screenplay called Rebel Without a Camry, about the social traumas a history professor suffered when he bought a Porsche.) In fact, the very phrase "sport utility vehicle" is testimony to the new way Bobos think about tools. Not long ago, sport was the opposite of utility. You either played or you worked. But the information age keyboard jockeys who traffic in concepts an dimages all day like to dabble in physical labor during their leisure time, so hauling stuff around in their big mega-cruisers with the four foot wheels turns into a kind of sport.

Or try James Wolcott, who is ten years older than David Brooks:

After watching Barack Obama's searing, soaring, grandiloquent, angel-summoning, devil-dispelling speech about race in America, a speech that had Andrew Sullivan and Chris Matthews emptying the silver drawer for superlatives, I ankled it ot the elevator, headed down to the lobby, and walked with my arms outstretched toward the bus stop on the corner to hug every black person waiting for the 104 and do my bit to close the gap of suspicion that divides us. You'd be surprised how many Upper West Siders of all persuasions aren't interested in receiving a hug from a stranger at a bus stop on a chilly day, and how many of them carry canes that they wield with striking force, even after one hugs the sidewalk and achieves the fetal position. Oh well, live and learn.

Or this blast from the past:

These are people who know how to make fun of a demographic. Reading Stuff White People Like is like waiting for a sneeze that won't quite come--I keep thinking I'm about to laugh, but I never do.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/20102

Comments (28)

Are you certain that it is meant to be funny? CLander may want it to hurt.

Leave aside the arrogance of declaring "white people" to be equal to a rather small group of self-satisfied, overeducated, affluent poverty-vultures.

That's the very thing that makes it funny. It targets the hip urban crowd that likes to pat itself on the back for being racially tolerant and inclusive, and highlights the fact that nearly everything they do involves hanging around other white people (or token minorities).

John Doe is correct.

I know an overabundance of such people, even out here in the hinterland known as southwestern Connecticut.

Thank you! after years of Hipster burnout (which inevitably became near-hatred) on Capitol Hill in Seattle, I now come across it on an off here in Berlin (click to read apathetic Salinger-lover rant)
amazinghow one day a person is notmal, and the next they are a self-absorbed too-cool-for-school effing hipster, like they caught a fast-acting brain-eating virus or something... grr.

I agree that the people he is targeting are hilarious. It's just that he isn't.

Thank you, finally someone speaking the truth about SWPL! I can't tell you how many people have been like, "You have to check this out, it's hilarious." But here's the thing, these are for most part the demographic that SWPL is trying to mock. It appeals to them because it really doesn't do a very good job of actually mocking them (well I guess us since I am one too). The point is it's satire light, allowing hipsters to feel like they are poking fun at themselves, when, in fact, there is no segment of the population that takes itself more seriously.

Well, there's no disputing over humor -- what some people find funny, others don't.

That blog is somewhat inconsistent in its level of humor. But some entries had me laughing:

White women have a lot of fantasies about idealized lives, and one of them is living in Europe and riding around an old city on one of these bikes. They dream about waking up and riding to a little cafe, then visiting bakeries and cheese shops and finally riding home to prepare a fancy meal for their friends who will all eat under a canopy with white Christmas lights. This information can be used to help gain the trust/admiration of a white woman, especially if you can pull off a lie about how your mother told you about how she used to do all of these things when she was younger.

And of course, it goes without saying that white people who ride bikes like to talk about how they are saving the earth. If you know a person who rides to work, you should take them aside and say “Hey, thanks. Sincerely, The Earth.” Then give a thumbs up. That white person will ride home on a cloud.

Or this:

When a white person you work with is feeling sick or says they have no energy, ask them to tell you more about their problems. After pretending to listen for a little while, tell them that in your culture/home country “we cured that using a special herbal powder from [insert made up tree] root.”

Then the next day bring them a small bag of basil or oregano and tell them to boil it in a tea (white people love to believe in magic teas) and see how they feel in the morning. One of two things will happen. They will either wake up feeling great because they want to feel great and they’ll thank you profusely. Or they will wake up feeling like crap, and when you confront them at work, they will lie and say they feel good.

Either way, you did them a favor so now they owe you a favor.

Again, though, I can't really argue you into thinking it's funny.

I think its more of a dose of self-awareness, honestly. Seeing many of my habits and interests or my sub-conscious tendencies lampooned so accurately, even though the prose is inconsistently clever, is what I find funny and, frequently, cring-inducing.

Here's why I love it:

I spent awhile reading it yesterday and thought it was mostly accurate and mildly funny.

I sent a link to a well-heeled liberal friend who said she thought it was OK but didn't much describe her. She also mentioned that she's busy working to organize a farmer's market in her small town.

Wow, farmer's markets are #5 on SWPL, I emailed back.

Well, she admitted, maybe the people doing all the organizing WERE white, but they were adamant about locating the market where people in the impoverished area - all black! - could easily walk to it.

Funnily enough that very example is in #62 on SWPL - knowing what's best for the poor - and SWPL gives the very example of setting up a farmer's market for them!

A great way to make white people feel good is to tell them about situations where poor people changed how they were doing things because they were given the ‘whiter’ option. “Back in my old town, people used to shop at Wal*Mart and then this non-profit organization came in and set up a special farmers co-op so that we could buy more local produce, and within two weeks the Wal*Mart shut down and we elected our first Democratic representative in 40 years.” White people will first ask which non-profit and are they hiring? After that, they will be filled with euphoria and will invite you to more parties to tell this story to their friends, so that they can feel great

I find it pretty funny. Not every word, but much of it. It's less about stuff all white people like and more about stuff that only white people like.

I say that at the risk of inviting anecdotes about how posters know non-white people who have dinner parties, watch The Wire, eat expensive sandwiches, etc.

It sounds more like it's mocking itself and the genre than its supposed target. Then again, naybe that's not intentional and it's just clumsy.

You say you will "leave aside the arrogance of declaring 'white people' to be equal to a rather small group of self-satisfied, overeducated, affluent poverty-vultures."

You did understand that the author knows he is not actually writing about all white people, right? He is only writing about the particular white people you are competing against for mates and homes and jobs and friends.

Between the Dinner Party, the Women & Bikes, Organic Food, Living Abroad, Indie Music, Whole Foods, and Gentrification, maybe you need to declare a conflict of interest? (In the interest of comity, I confess that I am going to have re-evaluate a few of the things I am still doing long after college, like shorts in winter.)

And not funny? It's as funny as the Onion. Plus, it's just a guy, not an entire slightly-trying-too-hard-multi-media venture.


I'm surprised at the "Stuff White People Like Isn't Funny" backlash. Not since Family Guy have I seen so many hipster bloggers defending the world's right to be amused.

1) It's funny in some parts, about as funny as a Dilbert strip. It works on the same principle - humor of recognition rather than of surprise - and it's about as offensive as Dilbert was, back in that first year where everyone thought it was hilarious.

2) The Onion and The Daily Show are good similar examples. I have had that Samantha Bee marital press conference forwarded to me about a dozen times, and it always looks to me like something written and perfomed by earnest high school students, or even worse, by Mad TV or the Capital Steps. But I don't feel the need to write angry blog posts about how not funny it is.

3) On that subject, which of the following two things is so not-funny that it needs to be denounced: (i) Stuff White People Like or (ii) The Capital Steps? If you answered (i), you need to adjust your priorities.

4) Finally, SWPL does have one fundamentally funny and AFAIK original idea, which is shown in the excepts above. The conceit that it's a glorified travel guide - a way to earn the trust of white bobos and score with trust fund kids - is actually kind of funny, not least because most of the suggestions would probably work.

Again, though, I can't really argue you into thinking it's funny.

...or me.

In both of those passages you quoted, I see a lot of unmined gold. All of the right elements are there, but IMO it falls flat because the presentation is effectively an even-tempo monotone: no clever wording, no timing.

The conceit that it's a glorified travel guide - a way to earn the trust of white bobos and score with trust fund kids

Exactly . . . in the bits that I quoted, the blog is written as if one token minority is talking to another, about how to exploit the desires and guilt of stuffy white liberals who are anxious to prove to their token minority friends that they really are cool even though everything they do centers around trendy white people.

Megan said:

I agree that the people he is targeting are hilarious. It's just that he isn't.

For me that's the whole point...the premise. You can get most of your laughs by reading the titles of the posts and then thinking of examples you've experienced/observed.

Ummm....go read the entry for Study Abroad.

I have to say that from my rather limited perspective (professor at a School To Which Bobos Send Their Children) teaching abroad it rings all too true.

Other than that one I'm not so impressed.

Oh - Gay Friends. *zing*

I think it's pretty funny.

It's basically taking aim at all those conceited individuals and the elements of their life they hold unique which are really upper middle class cliches.

If you don't think it's funny, fine, but there's no need to harangue it with such vitriol. It seems like you are taking it way more seriously than the site actually is.

I don't read it regularly, but when I do, I read it like I read the Onion. The headline is enough for a quick laugh, but that article is pretty much a waste of time.

Megan,

You did notice, didn't you, that the David Brooks' excerpt, while insightful and a fine piece of writing, isn't actually funny?

Brooks's subject matter -- status-striving -- is borrowed from Tom Wolfe, but he only occasionally gets laughs with it because his style too often falls in between two stools:

In contrast, Christian Lander's Sitemeter shows he's getting laughs, and the reason is is because he goes to the opposite end stylistically from Wolfe's multiple exclamation points and writes a flat affect deadpan advice column for token minorities.

I am but a middle-class Oriental, but I lived amongst such people for years. Didn't really get along with them, I have to admit.

I found the site riotously funny.

I think it's funny because it points out stereotypes of white people, just like their companion, and much older site, Black People Love Us, points out stereotypes a lot of white people have about black people.

I don't see how you can be up at arms about one and not about the other.

Oh come on Megan, you're just upset about that big red bull's-eye on your forehead.

I LIKE the even-tempo monotone. The mild lecturing approach is part of the joke.

white people, like this author, sometimes need a sense of humor....don't take things so seriously

Perhaps a fresh perspective is needed here. I've actually been told (more than once), "Black people love hip-hop", "Katrina refugees can't manage free money, and "Mexicans don't bother with education", and so on (I'm not kidding).
Only until I joined the Army were my squinty eyes opened a bit more. My Hispanic friend from NYC declared, rather apologetically, that Rockefeller Center, Carnegie Hall Broadway were "White people stuff." I winced at the initial tinge, but it was followed by the thought, "I do like that stuff..it's OK..but I'm pretty sure Redneck people don't like that stuff.."
Anyone who's read more than one entry in SWPL knows it should be called, "Stuff Smarmy White Liberal Affluent Post-Yuppies ages 23-59 like", but it's not.
Therein lies the joke.

The unclever wording and the monotone is vital to the blog. It's supposed to be unpretentious; an instruction guide if you will, to being accepted by, and then exploiting, the "right kind of white people."

It's not supposed to have clever or sophisticated wording like you'd see in a master's thesis (#81 on his list). If it did, that would be a little too ironic (#50 on the list.)

I figured that was obvious. Throwing jabs at him b/c he left the thesaurus on the shelf tells me you are definitely, without question, no doubt about it, the type of person he - and a lot of people - are laughing at.

It's not supposed to be funny to you people. It's supposed to be funny to everyone else. And believe me when I say it is. Random House deal in 6 weeks. That says a lot.

It's funny to enough people. Including myself. It's fine for you not to like it, but I get the impression that at the root of your hatred is envy.

I mean the guy (unlike yourself) is not even a real writer, he's just writing a blog that took off. And if he's doing so well, who cares how well he writes compared to someone else's standards. Obviously a lot of other people like it, and your critique is probably just driving more people his way!

Good work!

Post a comment

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Atlantic does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.


Copyright © 2007 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.