Subculture

Related Topics:
Subcultures

For the term in biology, please see Subculture (biology).

In sociology, anthropology and cultural studies, a subculture is a set of people with distinct sets of behavior and beliefs that differentiate them from a larger culture of which they are a part. The subculture may be distinctive because of the age of its members, or by their race, ethnicity, class and/or gender, and the qualities that determine a subculture as distinct may be aesthetic, religious, occupational, political, sexual or a combination of these factors.

As early as 1950 (p.361) David Riesman distinguished between a majority, "which passively accepted commercially provided styles and meanings, and a 'subculture' which actively sought a minority style...and interpreted it in accordance with subversive values" (Middleton 1990). In other words, subcultures are groups of individuals who, through a variety of methods, present themselves in opposition to the mainstream trends of their culture. If the subculture is characterized by a systematic opposition to the dominant culture, then it may be described as a counterculture.

Style is defined as fashions, mannerisms, and argot (Hebidge 1981). Therefore, the study of subculture often consists of the study of the symbolism attached to these affectations by members of the subculture, and also the ways in which these same symbols are interpreted by members of the dominant culture. Their specifics vary immensely.

Alvin Toffler saw the explosion of subcultures as a mark of the Third Wave.

Capital

Sarah Thornton (1995), after Pierre Bourdieu (1986), described subcultural capital as the cultural knowledge and commodities acquired by members of a subculture, raising their status and helping differentiate themselves from members of other groups. Roe (1990) uses the term symbolic capital.

Subcultures resisting commercialization

It may be difficult to identify subcultures because their style (particularly clothing and music) may often be adopted by mass culture for commercial purposes, as businesses will often seek to capitalise on the subversive allure of the subculture in search of cool, which remains valuable in selling any product. This process of cultural appropriation may often result in the death or evolution of the subculture, as its members adopt new styles which are alien to the mainstream. A common example is the punk subculture of the United Kingdom, whose distinctive (and initially shocking) style of clothing was swiftly adopted by mass-market fashion companies once the subculture became a media interest. In this sense, many subcultures can be seen to be constantly evolving, as their members attempt to remain one step ahead of the dominant culture. In turn, this process provides a constant stream of styles which may be commercially adopted.

Many people would consider that the most visible examples of subcultures are youth groups which identify themselves through distinctive styles of dress, activity and music. However, there is a certain difficulty in supplying examples, in that the process by which subcultural style is incorporated by the dominant culture provokes a state of constant evolution in many subcultures. Musical subcultures are particularly vulnerable to this process, and so what may be considered a subculture at one stage in its history (jazz, punk, hip-hop, rave culture) may represent mainstream taste within a short period of time.

However, many subcultures also reject or modify the importance of style, stressing membership through the adoption of an ideology which may be much more resistant to commercial exploitation. Indeed, the resistance to commercial exploitation may often represent a key part of this ideology.

Perhaps the best example would be the punk subculture, which has progressed through several cycles of revival and commercial appropriation in its history. Members of the punk subculture can often be identified by their distinctive clothing, hair, jewellery and tattoos. In contrast to its commercialised variant, many punks consider that the subculture also possesses a distinctive punk ideology which rejects commercialism and conformity. A similar philosophy may be found in underground hip hop culture, which has also faced mass-market commercialisation and dilution of its ideals.

References

Hebdige, Dick (1979). The Meaning of Style (Routledge, March 10, 1981; softcover ISBN 0415039495). Cited in Negus (1996).
Middleton, Richard (1990/2002). Studying Popular Music, p.155. Philadelphia: Open University Press. ISBN 0335152759.
Negus, Keith (1996). Popular Music in Theory: An Introduction. Wesleyan University Press. ISBN 0819563102.
Riesman, David (1950). "Listening to popular music", American Quarterly, 2, p.359-71. Cited in Middleton (1990/2002).
Roe, K. (1990). "Adolescents' Music Use", Popular Music Research. Sweden: Nordicom. Cited in Negus (1996).
Thornton, Sarah (1995). Club Cultures: Music, Media, and Subcultural Capital. Cambridge: Polity Press. Cited in Negus (1996).
Brodsky, Sasha (1994) "Punk and the Aesthetics of American Dystopia." an interdisciplinary journal, Department of the Comparative History of Ideas. University of Washington. http://depts.washington.edu/chid/intersections.php?article=1994e

Gourt Home::Gourt :: Subculture

Capital

Subcultures resisting commercialization

References

See also