An ode to those who enjoy the trappings, but know nothing of the culture

[Alan]

It might be arguable that a counterculture's style has a further meaning than a merely aesthetic one. It might be arguable that powerless or ineffective as it is, it tries to reshape society.

But a SUBCULTURE, by definition, embraces the status quo; it merely deviates a little in how it follows it.
This guy reminds me of that newbie that said

Originally Posted by Grimm

Believe me, nothing sends out a bigger FUCK YOU! to the mainstream like a studded leather jacket.

[Pineapple_Juice]

This thread is what makes goth embarrassing.

[Underwater Ophelia]

Goth is definitely embarrassing on its own.

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by JCC

Did you seriously just draw a parallel between the Civil Rights movement and being a goth?

I was speaking about nonconformist behavior and how it can serve as a catalyst for social change. I never said that all nonconformist behavior rose to the same level of social change. If you are unable to see that the difference is a matter of degree, I can see where this example might lead to some confusion on your part.


- Heretic

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Heretic

I was speaking about nonconformist behavior and how it can serve as a catalyst for social change. I never said that all nonconformist behavior rose to the same level of social change. If you are unable to see that the difference is a matter of degree, I can see where this example might lead to some confusion on your part.


- Heretic

Goth is not nonconformist behaviour. Even at the very beginning of the subculture, goth was a tamer, more middle-class offshoot of punk largely bereft of any of the revolutionary sentiment or political verve. Since it has now become a fashionable subculture with the self-perpetuating illusion of nonconformity, it is essentially the archetypal outlet for pseudo-rebellious establishmentarian teenagers, there is nothing nonconformist about being a goth.

[Lolly PopMuzik]

Originally Posted by Heretic

Horrifying amount of fail with the OP taking himself too damn seriously

Seriously, you should know better.

[Pineapple_Juice]

Originally Posted by Underwater Ophelia

Goth is definitely embarrassing on its own.

I stand corrected.

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by Alan

It might be arguable that a counterculture's style has a further meaning than a merely aesthetic one. It might be arguable that powerless or ineffective as it is, it tries to reshape society.

But a SUBCULTURE, by definition, embraces the status quo; it merely deviates a little in how it follows it.

It seems to me that you are taking more than a few liberties in describing the difference between a subculture and a counterculture. Both, by definition define themselves in relation to the majority culture. That definition can be as shallow as fashion and slang, or as deep as major behavioral changes. What differentiates the two is the level of direct opposition to the majority culture. A subculture exists but does not actively engage majority culture. This does not mean that it cannot still effect significant change. Youth cultures are a good example of this. A counterculture engages a majority culture in an active attempt to affect wider social change. The Hippie counterculture of the 1960s is a good example of this.

Originally Posted by Pineapple_Juice

This thread is what makes goth embarrassing.

This thread is an example of what drew me to the Goth subculture in the first place. Most subcultures cannot stand to have any of their core principles questioned or examined; they are studies in elitism. The Gothic subculture, by contrasts, seems to thrive on the constant questioning of how it is defined by those who identify as members of the subculture. This appears to me to be a primary reason some many different kinds of people find acceptance within it.


- Heretic

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Heretic

This does not mean that it cannot still effect significant change. Youth cultures are a good example of this. A counterculture engages a majority culture in an active attempt to affect wider social change. The Hippie counterculture of the 1960s is a good example of this.

So what you're saying is... just exactly as I said except with no clue of what I was talking about, right?

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by Lolly PopMuzik

Seriously, you should know better.

You might be better served taking your own advice, LPM, rather than insulting me in this way.

Please folks, if you insist on leveling personal attacks against me, rather than addressing the topic of discussion, could you do me the courtesy of quoting things I actually posted? I never posted the words LollyPopMuzik attributed to me anywhere on this or any other site. But don't take my word for it; feel free to click on the link that takes you back to the post this quote was supposedly taken from. I believe you will find that LollyPopMuzik's apparent indignation is unfounded.

Originally Posted by Alan

So what you're saying is... just exactly as I said except with no clue of what I was talking about, right?

I admit that I may have misunderstood your original intent; after all, the only thing I have to work with are the words you posted.

Using those words as the basis for my response, I specifically addressed this part of what I saw as an incorrect statement on your part:

But a SUBCULTURE, by definition, embraces the status quo; it merely deviates a little in how it follows it.

In my post, I stated that subcultures “define themselves in relation to the majority culture; the point you seem to be missing is your deviation from the actual, accepted definition of the word "subculture". A subculture is not defined by an action such as “embracing the status quo” or “following” majority culture. The whole point of a subculture, and the basis for differentiating them from the social norm when we talk about the nuances of culture, is the creation a new cultural space apart from the majority culture.

This is the difference I highlighted between the position I outlined and the meaning I derived from the words you posted. If I have misunderstood or misrepresented your opinion, please feel free to clarify your original meaning or point out where I made my mistake. Simply telling me I “have no clue of what you were talking about” does nothing to further discussion or correct any misunderstanding.


- Heretic

[Lolly PopMuzik]

Originally Posted by Heretic

Twist my words? This town ain't big enough for both us and the gauntlet has been thrown, missy

Dude, I do that all the time. No offense.

You got the facepalm o' doom because this type of thread is so overdone. It can be interesting, even fun, to examine where this gloom cookie monster has come from but it's been beat down into the ground. Not entirely a bad poem but still.

As you should know, we've all been down this road (Not just here but other goth forums since, well, forever now :P) many times. With threads like "Born a goth" and this, it just gets more annoying and if that shit won't stop, it should at least be more thought out.

TL;DR: Just repeat to yourself "It's just a subculture, I should really just relax."

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by Lolly PopMuzik

Dude, I do that all the time. No offense.

Ah. I hadn't realized this. Oh well; no harm, no foul.

You got the facepalm o' doom because this type of thread is so overdone. It can be interesting, even fun, to examine where this gloom cookie monster has come from but it's been beat down into the ground. Not entirely a bad poem but still.

As you should know, we've all been down this road (Not just here but other goth forums since, well, forever now :P) many times.

*sigh*

I suppose it's my own fault. I've identified as a Goth since high school (going on 25 years now) and have enjoyed examining the subculture, first as a student, and later as both as a journalist and as a cultural anthropologist/sociologist. I tend to forget that rehashing this sort of thing again and again can very quickly become tiresome to almost everyone else, especially to those within the subculture.

My apologies to anyone who may have rolled their eyes after reviewing the content of this thread. I meant no harm or ill will.


- Heretic

[ape descendant]

Contrary to popular belief, there are people who are exploring this topic and enjoying this conversation for the first time.

I definately understand being eye-rolly with a topic that you've exhausted previously. But that's no reason to stab Mr. Heretic in the eye over, save that for the quality of his poetry *wink*.

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by Saya

I just can't see "poseurs" being guilty of cultural appropriation. Be honest here, the most annoying poseurs aren't the ones who merely dress goth and don't listen to the music (and I can't see whats so wrong about that) but the ones who go on about how gothy goth they are and how proud they are of the "culture" like it consumes their identity. And then get butthurt when someone just isn't goth enough.

I have to agree. ^_^

[annwn]

If goths are guilty of any harmful excess, it's that of being sometimes absurdly pedantic about what constitutes 'the subculture'. Learned discussions on this sort of thing abound on goth sites and blogs, and no conclusions are ever settled on, because getting a group of goths to agree on anything is like herding cats!

This is supposed to be FUN, it's pop-culture [mostly] not a severe religious order.

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by annwn

This is supposed to be FUN, it's pop-culture [mostly] not a severe religious order.

Damn, I'm in the wrong joke. *wink*

[annwn]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

Damn, I'm in the wrong joke. *wink*

You too?!?!?!

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by annwn

If goths are guilty of any harmful excess, it's that of being sometimes absurdly pedantic about what constitutes 'the subculture'.

This is a very common reaction in any society when issues of identity are at issue. The same thing can be seen in every social group, whether it's a religious group, a corporation, or a sports team. A subculture isn't just a bunch of weird deviants; it is any group that identifies itself utilizing rules and cultural symbols in a way that sets it apart from society.

Learned discussions on this sort of thing abound on goth sites and blogs, and no conclusions are ever settled on, because getting a group of goths to agree on anything is like herding cats!

This is the case with any aspect of society; any group of individuals will always have some level of dissent about what constitutes how the group is defined. The interesting thing about the Gothic subculture is that dissent is (usually) actively encouraged, rather than persecuted and stamped out.

This is supposed to be FUN, it's pop-culture [mostly] not a severe religious order.

A serious examination of anything, and the reduction of it to its component parts, can bleed all the spirit and romance of life out of it. But, of course, without that examination, how can learning and understanding be pursued?

For example, who wants to eat salt, flour, sugar, and raw eggs when they can have cake instead? If you are a cook, wouldn't the ingredients be of interest, regardless of how different cooks combine them, or what other ingredients are added? They may come in all shapes and sizes, flavors and textures, but everyone can agree that a cake is a cake. For those who make them, the variations can be an endless source of interest.


- Heretic

[annwn]

Originally Posted by Heretic

This is a very common reaction in any society when issues of identity are at issue. The same thing can be seen in every social group, whether it's a religious group, a corporation, or a sports team. A subculture isn't just a bunch of weird deviants; it is any group that identifies itself utilizing rules and cultural symbols in a way that sets it apart from society.


This is the case with any aspect of society; any group of individuals will always have some level of dissent about what constitutes how the group is defined. The interesting thing about the Gothic subculture is that dissent is (usually) actively encouraged, rather than persecuted and stamped out.


A serious examination of anything, and the reduction of it to its component parts, can bleed all the spirit and romance of life out of it. But, of course, without that examination, how can learning and understanding be pursued?

For example, who wants to eat salt, flour, sugar, and raw eggs when they can have cake instead? If you are a cook, wouldn't the ingredients be of interest, regardless of how different cooks combine them, or what other ingredients are added? They may come in all shapes and sizes, flavors and textures, but everyone can agree that a cake is a cake. For those who make them, the variations can be an endless source of interest.


- Heretic

Actually, your answer has a lot of merit and seems to make sense to me.

[badteccy]

Originally Posted by Underwater Ophelia

Goth is definitely embarrassing on its own.

Hahah...touche

[gothicusmaximus]

General wisdom dictates that to overdose on insipidity is impossible, but after reading this thread I'm already breathing really shallow, and I fear that one more goth subculture discussion might have me shitting blood. I'll just die of not caring, like a democrat soldier who didn't vote in 2000.

[KontanKarite]

anarcho-primitivism.

[Schazmyrrh]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

Silly gawfs. Giveth me thine spikes and black leather, for thou art not metal.

Oh, and gimme your back patched jacket, you stole those too.

Oh, and yea, the lace, the Victorians want that back.

I love this. Haha.

[KontanKarite]

The only thing that irks me about this thread is the constant reinforcement of the attitude of dis-allowance in personal aesthetic choices and behaviors.

In fact, it's that dismissive attitude that seems to give a mohawk and studded jacket some merit or ammunition as a threat to an establishment. If we were to actually see these as what they truly are, a simple choice of aesthetics that is HARMLESS, there would be no need to say that the problem of it can be solved by getting a haircut. Yes, that can solve the problem. But at the same time, we could also work as a society to abolish these social pressures of dismissive attitudes and uniformity.

Is it that big of a problem or should it even be moved up the list of social priorities? Surely not. BUT, the reality of it is, you still have to check with your employers about getting these certain things done, a change in hair color, piercing, or tattoo and to do so without checking actually runs a risk of you getting fired. All for something that was perfectly harmless to begin with.

A good example of this is that I actually had to check with my superiors at work about me getting a mohawk before I did it. NOW, I have to double check with them about getting the rest of my hair put in dreadlocks despite the fact that there are other employees with dreads. But because of that social pressure, it's prudent for me to ask for PERMISSION to change my outward appearance. Luckily, I can have my mohawk.

[alchemie]

Originally Posted by JCC

Even at the very beginning of the subculture, goth was a tamer, more middle-class offshoot of punk largely bereft of any of the revolutionary sentiment or political verve.

That's good enough for me, LOL.