A case against being nonchalant

Nonchalance is defined by the OED as “calm and casual; (deliberately) lacking in enthusiasm or interest; indifferent, unconcerned,” and yet this is not what it seems to be connoting recently. Due to social media trends, it has become closely linked with attractiveness, and a sort of allure that allegedly comes with a lack of care. But this poses the question: to what extent are you living if your demeanour only reflects an internet buzzword? A performance for strangers?

We first need to ask why we are praising nonchalance? Some have argued that the pandemic impacted social skills, and thus this quietness is to be expected. Perhaps due to its commonality, it’s become accepted. It has moved to the standard, moving again to become placed on a pedestal. I personally feel as if this view is limited; we all experienced COVID in different ways, and to make generalisations of an entire generation is to diminish the individuality of perception. And yet, is there any other reason? Is there any reason at all? Or is it just the latest way social media polices us, like the rise and fall of skinny jeans, just on a more personal level?

There are two sides to ‘nonchalance’ that can deeply impact a person - nonchalance of opinions and of personality. And in the current climate, they are of equal - and high - importance. To be devoid of your own critical perception, in an age of political unrest and ChatGPT hyper-dependence, is to lose a part of yourself essential to living. If we act devoid of thoughts, passions, and opinions, it leads to an inability to stand up for and fight for each other's rights. Of course, a nonchalant act does not often represent a person’s true psychology. But if we act as if we don’t care, we foster a community in which nobody acts in a time where actions are functioning as a form of political resistance.

Voicing opinions, and acting like you care even when it isn’t ‘cool’, is essential not only to foster change but to create conversations. In a digital age, run by AI and algorithms, it is almost unavoidable to find yourself stuck in echo chambers of your own opinion. This can be on a large (the Andrew Tate right wing 4 chan pipeline) or small (Stranger Things extra episode) scale. Either way, discussions can broaden horizons and create nuances in opinions of your own and of others. The nonchalant trend may seem more surface level at the moment, but these are the true impacts it could lead to if the facade becomes embodied. 

The facade, currently, is operating mainly on demeanour and personality. It has become cool to be silent, mysterious, or intriguing. And yet, it has the opposite effect. If everyone is mysterious, there is no mystery. Nobody will care. And like all internet trends, it will pass. But when the trend is changing how young people act in their day to day life, it isn’t as simple as throwing out some clothing. It can have a long lasting impact on who a person is.

It is our passions that make us human, our devotions that make us dedicated. Nonchalance goes hand in hand with the popular social media phrase ‘aura farming’, and yet it does the exact opposite. An aura connotes colour, individuality, and a true sense of self unique to each soul. So, not only are we losing true meanings of spiritually loaded vocabulary, we are losing individuality. We cannot all be mystifying and esoteric in the same way, for it makes us the opposite. It makes us boring, basic, and predictable. 

To exist as a social media trend is to not live at all. To live fully is to care deeply and love intensely. To have passions is to be human - why deprive yourself of that to be perceived as cool for a single moment?