I think these videos can start an excellent discussion in regard to the visual aspects of goth subculture versus the actions, thoughts, and motivations. What does it mean to be goth? Then again, a more important question may be whether or not the meaning really matters.
First, from a more baseline standpoint, like she mentions in the video, everyone's definition of goth is going to be different. What she thinks goth is may be different from what someone else thinks. So, when someone puts himself or herself out there with the "goth" label, he or she is projecting a perception of self, and when people decode the message, it goes through another round of interpretation. The one communicating will send out a message based on the experience and knowledge he or she has gained over time, and the one receiving the communication will be interpreting the message based on a different set of experience and knowledge. As such, there can be a breakdown in communication. To put it more simply, if the person who claims he or she is goth has a different definition of what goth is than the person who he or she is talking to, then that automatically causes conflict. It's perfectly OK for people to have different opinions on what "goth" is, but some people don't quite seem to get that.
Furthermore, goth subculture has so many different branches and related subcultures that being able to draw a definite boundary is incredibly difficult. For example, cyber goths are a fantastic example of how boundaries get completely obliterated. A cyber goth has the goth label, but also incorporates a lot of futuristic aspects to his or her style. On a club night, it's not uncommon to see the cyber goths dancing hard to futurepop and aggrotech beats. There are a number of goths who would roll their eyes at the idea of letting KMFDM or Skinny Puppy within their sphere of influence, as there are a number of rivetheads who would groan at Bauhaus or Siouxsie and the Banshees. Likewise, there are people within both groups who shudder at the idea of VNV Nation or Funker Vogt.
But in the end, what is goth? Does someone have to be just goth? Is it unreasonable to think someone can be part of the goth, industrial, punk, and whatever other subcultures at the same time? Many musicians themselves intentionally try not to be genre-specific, because they don't want their music to become tired and irrelevant. Why would it be any different with people in their everyday lives? If people try to prescribe to a functionalist ideal of fitting into neat little boxes, they end up intentionally cutting themselves off from a significant portion of the world without a second thought.
Also, and individual's scene tendencies develop and evolve over time. People aren't going to like exactly the same things they liked when they first got into the scene, and people will behave differently. For instance, what got me into the industrial scene was listening to a lot of KMFDM and Chemlab, but then I got into the more danceable stuff like Covenant, VNV Nation, and The Crüxshadows. Then, I hit a bit of a lull, and now I'm heavily into I:Scintilla, Unter Null, and Tying Tiffany. Things change over time, but although the subtle nuances of how I self-identify may change, I still consider myself to be part of the goth-industrial subculture. (And I'm fully aware, like I implied before, that some people will completely have a fit over the idea of a goth-industrial mesh. Considering the tone of my post, I think my readers can get a good grasp of how much I care about those people's opinions on the matter, too.)
In summary, I feel like when people try hard to compartmentalize others within the scene, we end up causing lots of problems and solving none. Why should it matter how people identify? And in the end, do the opinions of those who are more goth/industrial/punk/whatever than thou really matter?
No comments:
Post a Comment