It strikes me that most "thinking people" have affinities to bohemianism. It is curious that so many of us are materially comfortable people to the extent that we are in a position to disregard our material needs (relatively limited as they may be). We believe that materialism poses the greatest danger to our world, yet it is our material comfort that allows us to look at materialism from outside. This has provoked nagging judgments of hypocrisy from conservative critics, which are almost impossible to evade. That is not to say that the materialists are always materially uncomfortable, but (with the exception of some exceptionally creative people) non-materialism comes more naturally to the most materially comfortable (especially young people among this class, who do not associate their own comfort with the hardships endured by their parents and grandparents). This feature points Maslows hierarchy, tired as it may be, in another direction: while self-actualization may be a laudable place to find oneself, the self actualized person has little in common with the rest of the pyramid (and therefore looses the point of reference) unless there is some shared external factor.

Humans differ from other animals in the detachment we have from natural circumstances due to our social relationships. I do not need to gather food, I don't even need to have a relationship to the person who produces my food, I just have to pay for it. Our social systems, our market, is our "natural" source of survival and therefore materialism is just an extension of the animal obsession with survival. Obviously animals have other needs beyond survival, but for us these are also informed by our market participation. The point I am getting at is that the human for whom gaining social or material advantage is not a priority is the most unusual kind of animal.

Here are some more thoughts, but less of interest:

Where did the concept of "bohemian" come from? I understand that the term was popularized in the mid to late 1800's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemianism), but HOW did that lifestyle and identity emerge? This theme and its history has permeated both liberal lifestyles and how those lifestyles are interpreted.

I am sure that urbanization, migration, mass cosumption of art/culture, and the mechanization of labor all played a role in the emergence of Bohemianism, but for each to what extent?

My feeling is that while the first three factors where more important as the identity arose, while the third and fourth factors were key to its persistence through time. I will look further into the history of this theme.