Alice franklin cop2 essay final

Alice Franklin

Have we seen the last of Youth Sub Cultures in Britain?

Youth subcultures have been a major part of Britain’s culture since the 1950’s, beginning with Teddy Boys then, Rockers, Mods, Hippies, Skinheads, Soul Boys, Punk, Two Tone, Football Hooligans and initially ending with Ravers in the 1990’s, ‘These classical subcultures obtained their potency, partly through an ability to shock and dismay, to obey prescribed confines of class, gender, and ethnicity’, D. Clark in D. Muggleton & R. Weinzierl (2003:223). Although people claim there have been and still are subcultures since the ravers, none have been as significant as the classical ones. I am going to explore the reasons to why subcultures have faded into a memory of the past and how, overtime, the social environment has made it somewhat difficult for another subculture to now be as influential as they were in the 20th Century.

Subcultures have all derived from the working class society, ‘I do not think the middle class produces subcultures, for subcultures are produced by a dominated culture, not a dominant culture’, P. Cohen in K. Gelder (1972:92). There are many reasons to why they have formed, all are which from the surroundings and circumstances they have been accustomed to. The working class adolescents of 19th Century Britain had a lot of reasons to why they wanted to go against the social norm. After World War II, the conditions of society were poor, the working class lived in slums or were moved into other areas, ready for redevelopment (1950’s East End London); families were split up and due to the finances in the country, public services, like youth clubs, pubs, and community services were unaffordable. This created a lot of animosity within the community, leading to even bigger class divides and revolts. The younger generation wanted to pull away from their ‘parent culture’, hoping to live a life in which they could live happily, away from the constrains of the suffocating social norm previous generations had become accustomed too. ‘Mods, Parkas, Skinheads, Crombies all represent, in their different ways, an attempt to retrieve some of the socially cohesive elements destroyed in their parent culture, and to combine these elements selected from other class fractions, symbolizing one or another of the options confronting it’, P. Cohen in K. Gelder (1972:89). These factors are what are missing from today’s so-­‐called subcultures, times have changed over the past years and the social classes aren’t as divided as they once were. Facilities are a lot more available to people who are struggling and the classes don’t seem to affect it as much as it did. Throughout my research into modern day subcultures, I have not yet found an argument in which they are fighting against, a social class divide which they are trying to rectify, but only style over substance.

P. Cohen in K. Gelder (1972:89-­‐90) then writes on to explain that there are three types of analysis of subcultures; historical analysis, the problems in the social class; structural or semiotic analysis, the way the subcultures articulate and transform into different movements; and the third being the phenomenological analysis, how the subculture is lived out. The lifestyle for youths at that time was quite bad, being a working class teen; there was often violence in school, at home and even from the police. At the crucial period of being a teenager and leaving school to progress into the adult world, job opportunities where very hard to

Alice Franklin

come by in this time in Britain, due to social class and political issues within the country, especially in the 1980’s ‘the young are more likely to become more vulnerable to the consequence of increasing unemployment than are older workers’, P. Cohen in K. Gelder (1972; 99), an escape from this was to be with others in the same situation and rebel, resulting in the formation of subcultures.

Cohen (1955) stressed that working class children that didn’t do well in schools, joined gangs in their own time to develop self-­‐esteem from elsewhere. Joining these groups/subcultures gave them a sense of self-­‐empowerment, standing up for what they believe in, and going against mainstream society. The main ‘subculture’ of today, which seems to be recognized most is the ‘hipster’, a subculture that not a lot is known about it and calling someone a hipster can be seemed as offensive to some. When searching to find a description of what the hipster culture is, there was just a lot of open ended questions and discussions online but from what I grasped a hipster is someone who is trying to be individualistic, non-­‐mainstream, someone who wears old clothes because ‘they can’ and claim to have ‘done it first’, but I am yet to find a reason to why they are wearing different clothes and doing different things to normal society. Like I said previously, I see this subculture, like all of the modern day subcultures as a style without context, without a fight. Although they believe they are going against mainstream society, and in some ways they are, they still lack a passionate reason for why they are doing so.

Hipsters, Skaters, Goths and so forth all share the same problem as a subculture, as they lack meaning. They might have specific trends that start out as being unique, but to me, they seem to be just trends. Everyday society in which subcultures are supposed to dislike, are not shocked by them, they don’t look at these groups and see them as a threat or are sticking up for a particular belief.

They have become normal in our society, they blend in and in big cities full of students, and I would say that they have larger numbers than they everyday working class person. Even shops like Urban Outfitters are renowned for their popularity with the younger generation, known for selling hipster fashion to the millions. Of course, an argument against my point would be ‘SEX’, the famous punk boutique, but they openly stood for a cause, they were anarchists, radical and anti-­‐capitalists, formed by alienated youth, even feminist ideas were put to power, they hated corporate capitalism and the society, which helped them in no way.

All classical subcultures portrayed a form of message through style; Teddy Boys used Edwardian elements of clothing and dressed them down to make them more inferior. Mods also dressed up, wearing very smart clothes; Skinheads dressed down, trying to portray the ‘proper’ working class man, reflecting their anger and loss of what ‘should be’ working class, a lot of skinheads lived in poor working class environments, a long with West Indian Immigrants and some of their style, especially when it moved on to two tone, came from the different backgrounds merging into one subculture. Arising at the same time as the Vietnam war, the hippy counter-­‐culture derived from the mods, they wanted to express nature, peace and harmony; their style was all about re-­‐using old clothes, fixing things creating thrift shops. The Punk subculture used style more

Alice Franklin

so than any other subculture, their outlook was very radical, and anything went.

They were accepting of anyone and anything, hairstyles were crazy and adventurous and spikey; and their clothes were eccentric, big boots, leather studded coats and supported by crazy makeup and hair colour. Style to subcultures was very important, it stripped them away from mainstream culture and made them unique, almost like a uniform, ‘through dress, activities, leisure pursuits and lifestyle, they may project a different cultural response or ‘solution’ to the problems posed to them by their material and social class position and experience’, P. Cohen in K. Gelder (1972:95).

The styles of the modern subcultures, definitely fit in to the same category as the classical ones as without a doubt they do go against the norm, but each classical subculture had a reason behind each style, they conveyed their message through the style itself. Goth’s are the nearest to this, they acknowledge the evil in life, that death is imminent, along with many other beliefs and show this through their fashion and music. But although their dress reflects their beliefs, there is still nothing they are fighting against, only showing what they believe in, just like wearing a cross if you are a Christian.

Due to all these ‘radical’ ways in which these subcultures tried to pull away from mainstream society, they were often given bad press and were used to scare people, ‘Violations of authorized codes through which the social world is organized and experienced have considerable power to provoke and disturb’, Hebdige (1979:91), or it could have been a way for the press and government to keep people in line and support corporate capitalism.

‘Subcultures represent ‘noise’ (as opposed to sound): interference in the orderly sequence which leads from real events and Phenomena to their representation in the media’, Hebdige (1979:90). Subcultures were portrayed badly in the press; not normal and criminals. The media is big contributor to our views on subcultures, even nowadays with ‘hoodies’, hip hop stars, Muslims, it is all portrayed with a tinted view; bias, and swaying our opinion to what is right, wrong, scary or popular.

The further time went on, subcultures were reported more and more. In my opinion, this is one of the reasons for the downfall of subcultures. Subcultures didn’t want to be a part of mainstream society, they wanted to be exclusive within the confines of their group, and they weren’t interested in opinions of others. At first, they were reported as deviants and rebels, as time went by, they were followed more. Part of this was because of the music that went along side subcultures.

Each ‘tribe’ had different genres of music, which became famous and popular through the time of their reign. The popularity which came along with the music from these groups, provoked media attention, which in tern boosted media coverage for these subcultures. The media would now portray the subcultures as being cool and it started to appeal to children, this would initially be the beginning of the end for most of these groups, ‘All these articles served to minimize the Otherness so stridently proclaimed in Punk style, and defined the

Alice Franklin

subculture in precisely those terms in which it sought most vehemently to resist and deny’, Hebdige (1979:98).

The media would also cover the style of subcultures, they were becoming more and more popular within the community and it was a great opportunity to capitalize on that. Diagrams of Skinheads and Mods were issued, with details of what you needed to look like to be one and what you needed to wear, stripping away the important message the subcultures stood for, and describing them as something anyone could be, not relaying the class or the issues the name and the uniform reflected. This was pulling subcultures in to the mainstream in which they despised, with no control over it. Fashion industries picked up on the trends, issuing articles advertising similar styles, ‘models smouldered beneath mountains of safety pins and plastic (the pins were jeweled, the ‘plastic’ wet-­‐look satin) and the accompanying article ended with an aphorism – ‘To shock is chic’ – which presaged the subcultures demise’, Hebdige (1979:96). This leads on to the other contributing factor the subcultures’ demise, consumerism.

Nowadays, modern subcultures thrive from mainstream culture, celebrities are seen sporting the fashions and it is seemed to be normal. Mainstream shops sell the goods without the subcultures failing, they live off the popularity and don’t seem to end because of it, this is because there isn’t any underlying reason for the subcultures, they are just style, so mainstream consumerism isn’t a big threat.

Punks, Skinheads and other subcultures, which were so publically recorded in the press, were eventually commoditized due to popularity. Such public outbursts of non-­‐conformity like the Sex Pistols swearing on television grew on easily influenced youths. The media did nothing but help the consumerism of subcultures, especially the music that came out with each group, it grew on people and in turn did the style and ways of the subcultures, ‘Emerging as the antithesis of the conservative musical climate of the 1970’s, punk was quickly absorbed and exploited by the very elements against which it rebelled’, Henry (1989:115-­‐116). Corporations, using the styles of the groups, which hated them, all cleverly capitalized this to earn more money; which initially creates a vicious circle between the two, ‘Youth cultural styles may begin by issuing symbolic challenges, but they must inevitably end by establishing new commodities, new industries or rejuvenating old ones’, Hebdige (1979:96).

Even the music plays a big part in consumerism, what once was only for subcultures you can now buy ‘The Best of Punk’, in shops, making money and commercializing the culture.

Some music was banned for being played on the radio, as it was seen as too political and insensitive. The Specials wrote very controversial songs at the time, which some were banned on air, but Two Tone become very popular movement at the time. It brought people from different races together as like with Skinheads, it was people from the same social class that had grown up around each other. A lot of The Specials songs depict what life was like in that time for the working class, like ‘Ghost Town’, ‘Too Much Too Young’, this is why they become so popular, even with bans on certain songs. Although, the music wasn’t the whole subculture, the popularity of the music increased the interest into the

Alice Franklin

groups, overall, heightening the levels of consumerism leading to the downfall of the subculture, ‘As soon as the original innovations which signify ‘subculture’ are translated into commodities and made generally available, they become ‘frozen,’ Hebdige (1979:96). Today music still plays a big part in society, not just for subcultures, but the music that comes from specific cultures aren’t as influential as they were for skinheads and punks for example. Gothic and hipster music for instance aren’t made to send a message like the others, they are created specifically for mainstream culture, to gain profit, not to address the social and cultural issues that are happening today. This is an obvious difference between modern and classical subcultures, while one is to derive from mainstream although subsequently ending there; the other thrives from mainstream culture, using it as a platform.

The last reason I would like to express to why I think subcultures can no longer exist, at least not being as influential as what it was in the 19th century, is because of our society today. Britain’s society, which has been proved to be the cause of most subcultures, might be the reason for the death of them. Times seem to have changed a lot since the days subcultures reigned over Britain, people have vast eclectic tastes in music, to which is easily accessible over the internet, you no longer have to be in a group or travel for your required taste.

Also the communities have changed a bit, nowhere is perfect, but adolescents aren’t treat as badly as they were, at least not in schools, things have been put in place to help children in situations like that. I also think the social classes aren’t as detrimental anymore, although you can see differences in people because of where they come from, because of the economy since the 1990’s, people are generally better off than they used to be, with better job opportunities to suit.

Essentially, I believe that to start a subculture which is as influential as the ones I have spoke about, there needs to be struggle which a working class has gone through and experienced for a long time, something big enough to defy social norms and go against mainstream society, ‘They arise through definite struggles over time with other groups, institutions and tendencies’, Paul E. Willis in K. Gelder (1977:113).

I think there are definitely opportunities for there to be a new substantial subculture today, with all the current political and global issues that are progressing. Groups like ‘Anonymous’ could have the potential to start an uprising, for people to revolt against capitalism, they have an argument, a dress code in which coincides with it. This could be the start of a non conforming, revolting sub culture, but even so, in today’s society it would take a lot to manage a fully functional sub culture. The corporations and the government have too much control, people want and need jobs and education and although we may not see it, we are definitely controlled, not just through laws and police but we are constantly being monitored through modern technology, so radical movements against the social norm would be picked up on very easily.

Overall, I think that Ravers were the last Subculture that we will have. In my opinion media and consumerism work together in the roll of taking down subcultures, one could not work without the other and it just reinforces the subcultures ideologies of mainstream society, being that it does eventually rule

Alice Franklin

over everything else. As you can see, both factors definitely helped the outcome of which subcultures ended and even more so when you think that each subculture lasted for shorter period each time, due to publicity, ‘In the 2000’s subcultural style is worth less because a succession of subcultures has been commodified in the past decades,’ D. Clark in D. Muggleton & R. Weinzierl (2003:229). Now subcultures would no longer be shocking to us, as it is a recognizable part of our countries history, ‘People gradually became acclimatized to such subcultural transgressions to the point that, in many places, they have become an expected part of the social landscape,’ D. Clark in D. Muggleton & R. Weinzierl (2003:223). Although, there could be room for another subculture, with the current politics in Britain, and the rest of world, there is potential for an uprising, bur this depends on the generation of today and how strongly they feel. But I also think both style and function is a important factor to subculture and unless it hits all three marks, no attempts at subculture will ever be as memorable as the classic subcultures of the 19th Century.

Bibliography Chandler, D. and Ch, D. (2001) Semiotics: The basics. New York: Routledge.

Fred Perry presents Subculture (2012) Directed by Donn Letts UK: Channel 4

Gelder, K. and Thornton, S. (eds.) (2005) The Subcultures reader. 2nd edn. New York, NY: Routledge.

Greif, M. (2014) The Sociology of the hipster – essay. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/books/review/Greif-­‐ t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Hebdige, D. (1979) Subculture, the meaning of style. London: Methuen young books.

How the police have obliterated British youth cultures / VICE / United Kingdom (2014) Available at: http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/police-­‐vs-­‐british-­‐ subcultures-­‐302

Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1968) Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Selected Works.

London: Lawrence and Wishart.

Muggleton, D. and Weinzierl, R. (eds.) (2003) The post-­‐subcultures reader. New York: Berg Publishers.

Natalie Howell (2013) ‘Beneath the skin’ – skinhead documentary. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naQqtDlsbq8

Smith, M.K. (2016) Hipsterisms. Available at: https://vimeo.com/63631789