Scan barcode
otterno11's review
1.0
I recall finding this slim humor book slightly entertaining while flipping through it at a Barnes and Noble not long after it had been published. Being a sucker for a pseudo-field guide, I recently checked it out from the library to revisit it. Unfortunately, I have found that, unlike Lanham's [b: The Hipster Handbook|150790|The Hipster Handbook|Robert Lanham|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1320538172l/150790._SY75_.jpg|145536] this one has not aged well at all. While both are dated artifacts from an earlier period of pop-culture, the “Field Guide” feels a lot more mean-spirited and has less of an understanding of the topic. Even for it's time, "Field Guide" seems super-dated.
Ostensibly, the book explores the various “species” of young hip urban dwellers, but seems to lack focus as to what exactly this constitutes; I mean, since when have Ex-Frats ever been considered hip or urban dwellers, let alone Outlaw Bikers? Do "Mods" even actually still exist? The author only clumsily affects the language and tropes of true nature guides, (complete with fake Latin scientific names) and relies mostly on stock stereotype in its mocking of such groups as hippies, academics, punks, goths, etcetera. In spite of a couple of amusing descriptions here and there, most of the jokes you could already imagine for yourself. Also, the entries come off as condescending and misogynistic to boot, particularly the entries for Urban Moms and Performance Poets. The art, while cartoonish, is fun, though. It is not enough for me to recommend spending money on this.
Ostensibly, the book explores the various “species” of young hip urban dwellers, but seems to lack focus as to what exactly this constitutes; I mean, since when have Ex-Frats ever been considered hip or urban dwellers, let alone Outlaw Bikers? Do "Mods" even actually still exist? The author only clumsily affects the language and tropes of true nature guides, (complete with fake Latin scientific names) and relies mostly on stock stereotype in its mocking of such groups as hippies, academics, punks, goths, etcetera. In spite of a couple of amusing descriptions here and there, most of the jokes you could already imagine for yourself. Also, the entries come off as condescending and misogynistic to boot, particularly the entries for Urban Moms and Performance Poets. The art, while cartoonish, is fun, though. It is not enough for me to recommend spending money on this.
More...