any wannabee goths?! - Page 4

DarkHeartedDemoness · 10-19-2006, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 789

i think of goth as a way of expresing yourself! you don't dress black because all goths do ,cuz if u do that it becomes conformism! you dress black because that's how you are inside. your black eyed because you have been punched in the face by life oh so many times. you make poems as a way to cry. you read to forget the world and your own problems. you love scary animals because they are the only creatures that feel as sad as you cuz they are missinterpreted. goth is not a fashion statement, but a way of life and each and one of us have to say something in our own ways. at least that's how i see it.

What? Cicero, why aren't you picking on this kid?

Normally I would pick apart the idiocy of the above post, but right now I have to pee, and I don't really care that much about this kid.

789 · 10-19-2006, 10:04 AM

i just see the goth stile from another angle. ok, so i'm not so good in choosing my words, but i mean no harm and if you feel ofended in any way by what i said then ignore me. i just find goth more of a art than a fashion. and everyone knows art is all about feeling it. i don't desagree with your criticism but i have the right to say what's on my mind.

DarkHeartedDemoness · 10-19-2006, 12:49 PM

You have every right. I never said you didn't. I also have every right to criticize you. If you're going to play the "free speech" card, just remember it goes both ways. Don't be an idiot and a hypocrite.

Splintered · 10-19-2006, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cicero

Now I'm not picking on you when I say this, I'm just picking on the fact that this is not the first time I've seen this explanation for wearing black, and it still confuses me terribly.

You see black certainly isn't how I am inside. I'm red and purple and gooey, with green tinges here and there, and the layer of fat directly beneath my skin is... why it's bright yellow! Do I lose my goth points now? Or perhaps I should just buy some yellow clothes... you know... to match the lovely lipids. What will be far more stressing, however, is finding clothes to match my brain, since it's a purply-pinky-greeny-off-white colour that I suspect will be quite difficult to find in most clothing stores. There's always the possibility of dying my innards black though. Then I wouldn't have to replace my current wardrobe, and the goth points earned would be phenomenal. I'll do it on the same day I get "Cut Here" tattooed on the inner wall of the left ventricle of my heart

Now, hold on a minute. You have a valid point biologically, true, but it just seems like an arrogant attempt at bashing someone for a metaphor. Like, if I were to yell at someone who said, "I'm filled with rage", because they weren't chock full of the word rage flowing around their blood like little platelets.

It just seems unneccesary.

Godslayer Jillian · 10-19-2006, 03:41 PM

Yah, but she made a joke to express how Goth doesn't mean "feeling dark inside".
Just as well, poems aren't a way to cry. I don't cry except in the movies, and I write poems anyway. I can give this guy twoscore hundred poems that are in no way depressive; ergo, they're not another way to cry.
Hell! Even Poe sounds gaily merry when you read The Bells.
And, you cannot say Goth is an artform and not a fashion statement. It began as a musical conglomeration of different style of bands. What did join them together (save from the awesome lyrics, of course) was the image they had; there you have style.
The gothic artform as he thinks it came much later than the music and fashion.
Now then, I know that there was an architectural style called Gothic, as well as a painting form; but I didn't see him talking about flygin buttresses, colorful and well-lighted edifices, or drawings that show a sequence of biblical related events.
Let's see... what else can I say?

....

Oh, yeah, since when are sharks "missinterpreted"? More than that, since where are sharks Goth?

Cicero · 10-19-2006, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splintered

Now, hold on a minute. You have a valid point biologically, true, but it just seems like an arrogant attempt at bashing someone for a metaphor. Like, if I were to yell at someone who said, "I'm filled with rage", because they weren't chock full of the word rage flowing around their blood like little platelets.

It just seems unneccesary.

Jillian is correct. It also happens to be a metaphor I'm sick and tired of reading everywhere.

Oh and also note the sarcasm in it... The tone wasn't meant to be 'bashing', hence why I explained that I wasn't picking on 789 himself, just the statement he made (which wasn't originally his anyway).

Splintered · 10-19-2006, 09:15 PM

It just seems like it's overly harsh, which I'm somewhat seeing more and more of around here. I mean, sure, you can say you're not attacking someone, but that doesn't neccesarily mean it isn't. As an example, I could say, "Jillian, I'm not picking on you when I say this, I'm picking that Goth explanation, and I'm sick of it. *Insert Long Grand Rant About Some Philosophical Bullshit Here*", and while I might still be saying I'm not meaning to pick on Jillian, deep inside, I could be experience such a rage that I have to vent my frustration on him. (Counter-Strike Anyone? ) [Warning. NSFW. Not perticularily related, but still funny. Atleast 'til the last scene. Then it goes to far IMHO.]

Quote:

Yah, but she made a joke to express how Goth doesn't mean "feeling dark inside".

It doesn't neccesarily mean that, but if I remember right, it can. One of the big things that have been touted, or from what I've read, is this "Goth With a Sledgehammer" thing. Even it mentions dark and morbid things specifically. (Don't believe me, look under 'How do I know if I'm Goth', look at the second one on the list. Then the 16th one too makes a reference to dark.)

Quote:

Just as well, poems aren't a way to cry. I don't cry except in the movies, and I write poems anyway. I can give this guy twoscore hundred poems that are in no way depressive; ergo, they're not another way to cry.

And when he can give you a counter forty that are depressive, then what? (Now, before you run screaming at me for a list, realize I'm not a poetry fanatic, so I'd actually have to take some time to find it. With that said, I'm going to run on the basis that I could. If you really want it, just do a search for "Depressive Poems".) This seems like a false dilemma to me, they're either a way to, or not a way too. I would purpose that they can be a way to express yourself, and be in a depressive tone.

Quote:

Hell! Even Poe sounds gaily merry when you read The Bells.

I'm quite sure he does. This can be constrasted with one of his most famous poems though, "The Raven". So, once again, while it can sound, as you put it "Gaily Merry", iit can also be dark.

Quote:

And, you cannot say Goth is an artform and not a fashion statement. It began as a musical conglomeration of different style of bands. What did join them together (save from the awesome lyrics, of course) was the image they had; there you have style.
The gothic artform as he thinks it came much later than the music and fashion.

The latter sentence is more an arguement to antiquity. Though it came much later, it doesn't mean that is is less "Gothicy" per se. Also, you can argue the difference between a fashion statement and an artform. A fashion statement can be argued as a current statement that has no practical, intellectual, or logical meaning. Meanwhile, an artform as potrayed by those in the musical conglomeration, can have an intellectual backing, making it an artform.

What I'm trying to get at, is I just think it's unneccesary. As much as "Goth is so so so so so dark" is present, I would contend there is just as much a presence of "You know nothing of Goth! Be gone fool!"

Cicero · 10-19-2006, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splintered

It just seems like it's overly harsh, which I'm somewhat seeing more and more of around here. I mean, sure, you can say you're not attacking someone, but that doesn't neccesarily mean it isn't. As an example, I could say, "Jillian, I'm not picking on you when I say this, I'm picking that Goth explanation, and I'm sick of it. *Insert Long Grand Rant About Some Philosophical Bullshit Here*", and while I might still be saying I'm not meaning to pick on Jillian, deep inside, I could be experience such a rage that I have to vent my frustration on him.

Since when did poking fun become harsh? And since when did 'harshness' become more common on these boards? In the old days posts like 789's would have been torn apart like an injured wildebeest on the Serengeti, leaving no remains. The only thing I meant to demonstrate was the ridiculousness of the metaphor (and perhaps also my own interest in human anatomy). 789's views aren't new to any of us, they're just the views of just about every babybat who hasn't learned enough about the actual goth scene yet, which is why I still don't consider my post to have been a direct attack on him. He doesn't deserve it just because he doesn't 'know' everything about oh-so-important-gothiness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splintered

As much as "Goth is so so so so so dark" is present, I would contend there is just as much a presence of "You know nothing of Goth! Be gone fool!"

Of course there is. Goth is a subculture that seems to neverendingly be mis-judged. zCat's thread is an example of this. Thanks to *some* people going about expressing their views on how goth is a subculture of depression and darkness, many people have come to the conclusion that we're no more than a bunch of whiny teenagers with a suicide wish. Because of this, plenty of gothy-types tend to leap on the 'incorrect definitions' of goth because of the undesirable opinions 'normals' make from them.

And I'll just say that I agree with just about everything dear Jillian's said at this point, aside from the statement about sharks... Sharks are goth as fuck, didn't you know that?

Godslayer Jillian · 10-19-2006, 10:32 PM

Why have a shark when you can have a manta ray?

Delkaetre · 10-20-2006, 03:50 AM

Manta rays are very pretty creatures. I would so love to have a pet one.
For the record- I haven't met any actual real-life face-to-face goths who say that goth reflects the blackness of their souls, with the exception of those being extremely sarcastic. Even the spookykids have never said it to me when I asked 'so why are you wearing that Bauhaus shirt if you don't listen to them?'

Splintered · 10-20-2006, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cicero

Since when did poking fun become harsh? And since when did 'harshness' become more common on these boards? In the old days posts like 789's would have been torn apart like an injured wildebeest on the Serengeti, leaving no remains. The only thing I meant to demonstrate was the ridiculousness of the metaphor (and perhaps also my own interest in human anatomy). 789's views aren't new to any of us, they're just the views of just about every babybat who hasn't learned enough about the actual goth scene yet, which is why I still don't consider my post to have been a direct attack on him. He doesn't deserve it just because he doesn't 'know' everything about oh-so-important-gothiness.

As I said before, that is how it seems. This is not to be confused with the state of how it is.
The thing is, you actually aren't demonstrating the ridiculousness of the metaphor, because so far there is no legitimate arguement the metaphor is ridiculous, which cant be countered. Even with Jillian's arguement that Goth wasn't founded in dark, death, and the like, it can still ultimately be countered, as I demonstrated above. So, while the views may not be new to any of you, there isn't really anything that says it's wrong, accept for your own assertions. This would even apply to what you labeled "The Old Days". He might have been ripped apart harsher, and from what I've read of older threads, I'm more likely not to doubt that. It doesn't mean I don't think it's wrong, or that I don't believe it's unneccesary.

Quote:

Of course there is. Goth is a subculture that seems to neverendingly be mis-judged. zCat's thread is an example of this. Thanks to *some* people going about expressing their views on how goth is a subculture of depression and darkness, many people have come to the conclusion that we're no more than a bunch of whiny teenagers with a suicide wish. Because of this, plenty of gothy-types tend to leap on the 'incorrect definitions' of goth because of the undesirable opinions 'normals' make from them.

This is what I don't understand. Sure the culture could be "never endingly mis-judged". I can easily see that, and I can actually somewhat agree. With that said, I would argue that Goth isn't really misjudged, more then any other subculture/culture out there, almost to the degree that it's the normal amount at which humanity will mis-judge it. People think "Rednecks" drive tractor trailors off their roofs, and that "Preps" just sit with their iPods and chat about how to spend their parent's money over a cup of espresso with a biscotti, "Gangstas" only want to bag women and drive around in tricked out cars. These stereotype is repeated often as well. Sure, I do not like it. But, in realistic terms, you'd think you'd have to expect it.

Godslayer Jillian · 10-20-2006, 06:31 PM

You know.
I don't remember ever hearing you say a statement that wasn't just arguing another person's own statement.
Tell me:
According to you, what is goth?

Splintered · 10-20-2006, 06:39 PM

Whatever someone wants to be. If they want it to be listening to Hawthorne Heights, and cutting themselves, then they can go ahead. Unless I can come up with some giant point that disproves them completely wrong and they have no defense, I don't really see how I can argue that their position is invalid. Sure, I can disagree and assert my point has more validity then theirs, but I really have nothing to say that they are completely and outright wrong. So, while I may personally believe that Goth is listening to Bauhaus, exploring different types of dress and fashion, and being omnilegent, I really have nothing to back it up. Even if I did have some outstanding point, that was rooted in logic, history, and fact, if someone can put a hole in it, I'm not right. I just believe my point has more validity. Knowing that my point simply has more validity then theirs, yet is not universally right, I have nothing left to conclude.

So, I would then leave it for someone to make up their own mind. If my arguement persuades them to believe that Goth is something different then what I thought, that's wonderful. Yet, if I don't, then I'm not really in a position to outright claim their wrong. Then, I have nothing left but to let them believe what they want to believe.

Solumina · 10-20-2006, 06:44 PM

Jil *hug* I've missed you!

oh and go add my 2 cents things are way more P.C. and nice than they used to be and it kind of sucks...I miss teapot and her bitchyness

Godslayer Jillian · 10-20-2006, 06:58 PM

Ok, then; let's follow that logic.
I'm a most definite devout Catholic:
-I cut a finger every year
-I violate an old guy every Day of the Flag
-I steal a toaster everyday and set it on fire
-I shit on the potable water system
-I serve lightbulbs for lunch and make people eat them, or they will have the lightbulb inside them one way or the other
-I call myself a devout Catholic.
(Pardon some of the rough language. It adds to the joke)

Splintered · 10-20-2006, 07:04 PM

Following that logic, there is nothing wrong with it.
The logic still stands. While your joke may be a bit ridiculous, if that's what you want to believe, go ahead.

Godslayer Jillian · 10-20-2006, 07:09 PM

That's not how society works.
There are almost absolute definitions, forged by the ones with power.
In the gothic subculture, those who believe Bauhaus, Siouxsie, SoM, etc. have more power than those who shop at Hot Topic.
Why is this so? Because we make them look ignorant when we talk about the beginnings of the subculture. Mallgoths, babybats, and such, are the majority, yet, lacking a consistent self-image (ergo the innaccurate labelling of goth upon themselves), they feel those who coined the term for a lifestyle must be the correct ones.

Solumina · 10-20-2006, 07:09 PM

but the logic doesn't follow since a devout Catholic wouldn't break commandments which that person did

Solumina · 10-20-2006, 07:10 PM

in case you can't figure it out my post was directed at splintered

Splintered · 10-20-2006, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

That's not how society works.
There are almost absolute definitions, forged by the ones with power.
In the gothic subculture, those who believe Bauhaus, Siouxsie, SoM, etc. have more power than those who shop at Hot Topic.
Why is this so? Because we make them look ignorant when we talk about the beginnings of the subculture. Mallgoths, babybats, and such, are the majority, yet, lacking a consistent self-image (ergo the innaccurate labelling of goth upon themselves), they feel those who coined the term for a lifestyle must be the correct ones.

Not so. Your arguement that the "Mallgoths, babybats, and such", lack a consistent self-image must be incorrect. They have a consistent self-image, otherwise how would you be able to identify them? Surely you can talk about the beginnings of the subculture like experts. I do not argue that. Simply because I can talk about the beginnings of democracy in Greece though, surely does not make me the most absolute in the arguement. It is also worthy to mention that you can argue the beginning of the subculture as you see it. Is it not plausible someone could argue the beginning of the subculture, or the evolution of the subculture, from a completely different perspective?

You also assume you're the ones in power. This is brought on by how you can make them seem ignorant when you talk about the beginnings of the subculture. Yet, I can be a master at firing a rifle, and still not be the one in power, because they all have a bunch of clubs and can gun me down by rule of the majority.

What I'm trying to get at, is that while you might be able to argue to the best of your ability that your theory is right, it doesn't mean that it's going to be accepted, or that it can't be smashed to bits by debate. So, then arguing that "It's not how society works", makes no sense to me. Who said society is right, or that the way society works is correct? If I am at odds with society as well, why should my correctness, and labels, be bound to what society dictates?

Godslayer Jillian · 10-20-2006, 07:34 PM

Never speak disrespectfully of Society. Only people who can't get into it do that.
You speak of your own oppinion as if it were the absolute. Yet, it can also be smashed to bits by a debate.
Both in your perspective of majority and my perspective of power, your oppinion is found in want around this parts.

Splintered · 10-20-2006, 07:39 PM

I know my opinions can be smashed into bits by debate, and if you want, I'll do it myself. This is the entire point I am trying to get across. As much as I can tear at my own arguement, I can tear at yours. Which is why I came to the original conclusion at the whole front of this: It's whatever someone wants it to be.

Godslayer Jillian · 10-20-2006, 07:41 PM

That would only work in a solipsistic life.
But people live in society, and character is not only made by personal choice.
It's made by the way you look at yourself, the way people look at you, and the way you look at yourself through people.

Splintered · 10-20-2006, 07:45 PM

But, Character is completely dependant on individual choice.
It is my choice to accept what society views me as, it is my choice to accept the way people look at me, and it si my choice to accept the way I look at myself through people. Also, if we want to dwelve into solipsism, then it is my choice to even accept that these people are real.

Godslayer Jillian · 10-20-2006, 07:48 PM

Well, then this is a matter of philosophy which applies to everything, not a societal definition for a certain subculture.