Week Four
Mediating Subcultural Capital
Session Topics
Youth Subcultures
Subculture and Style
Sarah Thornton and ‘Subcultural Capital’
Clubbing and the Media
Youth Subcultures
One of the major strands of research on youth in Britain involves
the study of youth subcultures. Research on youth
subcultures was pioneered in the 1970s by a group of
sociologists in Birmingham who adopted a neo-Marxist
approach.
Their work saw class as a crucial factor influencing the
development of youth culture.
In the 1970s and 1980s the Centre for Cultural Studies (CCCS) at
Birmingham University started to study youth subcultures
which had developed from the 1950s onwards. The work of
the CCCS provides the starting point subsequent research on
youth culture. Even quite recent can be seen as a
development of, or reaction against, the views of the CCCS.
Youth Subcultures
In Resistance through Rituals (1976), John Clarke, Stuart
Hall, Tony Jefferson and Brian Roberts outline a
theoretical approach to the study of youth cultures. They
do so within a broadly Marxist framework, arguing that
material circumstances impose limits on the sorts of
cultures people can develop. These cultures are seen as
being closely related to class divisions.
However, rather than simply reproducing class-based
cultures, subcultures are seen as a creative response by
some young people to the class situation they finds
themselves in.
Youth Subcultures
According to Clarke, et al.:
“the ‘culture’ of a group or class is the distinctive ‘way
of life’ of the group or class, the meanings, values
and ideas embodied in institutions, in social
relations, in systems of beliefs, in mores and
customs, in the uses of objects and material life.
Culture is the distinctive shape in which this material
and social organisation of life expresses itself. A
culture includes the maps of meaning which makes
things intelligible to its members.” (1976: 10-11)
Youth Subcultures
Individuals are born into particular cultures and these
tend to shape the way in which they see the world;
their ‘maps of meaning’, as Clarke et al. term it.
However, these maps of meaning and their associated
cultures change as history unfolds and as members
of social groups actively create cultures and
innovate.
But groups cannot just create new cultures at will.
Cultures always relate to experiences and sets of
material circumstances and are always partly shaped
by pre-existing cultures.
Youth Subcultures
Furthermore, cultures exist in hierarchical relationship to one another.
The culture of dominant groups is always likely to be more powerful
than the cultures of less powerful groups.
Clarke et al. deny that a whole society’s culture will ever be dominated
by one ruling-class ideology. They draw on the theories of the
Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci. Gramsci argued that in order to
achieve political and ideological domination – which he called
‘hegemony’ – powerful classes always had to make compromises
with less powerful classes. Dominant ideology can always be
opposed and hegemony is never complete.
Subordinate cultures will generally try to win space, to make room for
their own distinctive lifestyles, values and institutions away from
the influence of more powerful classes.
Youth Subcultures
To Clarke et al., youth subcultures often represent creative attempts to
try to maintain or win autonomy or space from dominant cultures.
They win “cultural space in the neighbourhood and institutions, real
time for leisure and recreation, actual room on the street-corner”.
They are partly shaped by the parent culture of the class from which
they originate (for example, working class or middle class), but they
are distinct from it.
Youth cultures create their own distinctive style: for example, by
choosing a style of dress and listening to a particular style of music.
The styles adopted by individual cultures represent an attempt to
“solve, but in an imaginary way, problems which at the concrete
material level remains unresolved”.
Youth Subcultures
There tends to be a homology between the styles chosen
and the values and ideas being expressed. That is, objects
and styles are chosen by groups which fit the meanings
they are expressing. Elements of style might therefore
reflect class differences.
Youth subcultures emphasise the importance of
authenticity. It is seen as paramount that a subculture is
genuine and not a media creation. Once the media start
to portray a youth subculture, it becomes distorted and
influenced by ruling-class ideology.
Subculture and Style
Dick Hebdige was one of the contributors to Resistance through Rituals.
He then went on to develop his own approach to the understanding of
subcultures in Subculture: the meaning of style (1979).
Like the CCCS, Hebdige saw class as key to understanding subcultures, but
he also drew extensively on other theoretical approaches. In particular,
he used semiotics (see Week 3) in order to try to understand the
meaning of a number of post-war British youth subcultures.
The meaning of signs is based on contrasts with other signs: they are
defined in terms of their difference compared to other things. To
Hebdige, it was possible to understand the meaning of the quiff of the
Teddy boy, the safety pins of punks or the music of the mods, using
semiotics.
Subculture and Style
Each youth subculture developed its own style and each took
everyday objects and transformed their meaning. For
example, Teddy Boys (‘Teds’) in the 1950s transformed the
meaning of Edwardian suits and pointed boots – originally
worn by ‘upper-class dandies’ – hoping that some of the
status of the group would rub off on them.
In the 1970s, Punks transformed the meaning of safety pins and
ripped jeans to detach symbols from their conventional
meanings, while disappointments with that stemmed from
high unemployment began to be conveyed in the clothes and
subcultural style of Rastafarians. British Rastafarians expressed
their alienation from British culture by adopting simple
clothes with and African sensibility. Army surplus stores
provided garments able to express ‘sinister guerilla chic’.
http://eddyteddy.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/tedsaaventine.jpg
http://www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/punks-271x300.jpg
See also: www.toptenz.net/top-10-youth-subcultures.php
http://www.ukrockfestivals.com/Eleph-83-Zephaniah2-350.jpg
Subculture and Style
Each subculture defines itself in opposition to
‘mainstream’ culture. It is a self-conscious
repudiation of the widely shared lifestyle and
taste of the wider population. For example,
subcultures reject pop music and conventional
clothing. Each subculture is also spectacular: it
creates a spectacle and is intended to get
noticed.
These styles signified membership of particular
subcultures and became gestures of defiance
against society.
Subculture and Style
According to Hebdige:
“The subcultures with which we have been dealing
share a common feature apart from the fact they
are all predominantly working-class. They are...
cultures of conspicuous consumption – even when,
as with the skinheads and the punks, certain types
of consumption are conspicuously refused – and it
is through the distinctive rituals of consumption,
through style, that the subculture at once reveals
its ‘secret’ identity and communicates its forbidden
meanings.” (1979: 102-103)
Subculture and Style
The work of the CCCS (including Hebdige) was
important in two ways:
- It developed a neo-Marxist approach to youth
subcultures;
- It encouraged sociologists to take youth
culture seriously. Even those who are highly
critical of this work often use it as a starting
point.
Subculture and Style
However, the neo-Marxist elements of their
approach have fallen out of fashion. Some
have seen these theories as exaggerating the
importance of class at the expense of other
social divisions such as gender and ethnicity.
The CCCS assumed that the subcultures they
discussed were almost exclusively working
class. They did not carry out extensive primary
research to identify the economic status of
their members.
Subculture and Style
The CCCS placed little emphasis on ethnicity and
locality as influences on the formation of
subcultures. For example, researchers in the USA
have examined the crucial role of ‘race’ and
ethnicity in the development of subcultures
based on hip-hop and other African-American
musical styles.
Some youth culture theorists, like Andy Bennett
and Keith Kahn-Harris, not only deny that class
plays an important part in subcultures, but even
question whether well-defined subcultures even
really exist.
http://asianconnection71.com/AfricaFistZm.jpg
http://nikeshoponline.com/images/airmax/rare%20Air%20Max%2095/air-max-95-rasta.jpg
Subcultural Capital
One of the most influential studies of youth culture in
this area of research since the CCCS is Sarah
Thornton’s Club Cultures (1995).
Thornton carried out an ethnographic study of dance
music, clubs and raves in the early-1990s.
She acknowledges that she was influenced by the
Birmingham research but points out that her work
differs in a number of ways.
Subcultural Capital
Thornton does not see club cultures as primarily oppositional to
dominant culture.
She does not emphasize the importance of class in shaping club
culture.
Clubbing is not characterized by close-knit groups who hang around
much of the time united by their common culture. Rather,
clubbers come together at specific times at specific dance
events.
Club cultures are therefore more a scene which people take part in
on a part-time basis rather than a complete lifestyle.
Thornton does not draw upon the theories of Gramsci in
developing her ideas, but instead gets most of her inspiration
from the work of Pierre Bourdieu.
Subcultural Capital
Bourdieu was influenced by Marxist theory and argued that there are
different forms of ‘capital’ – economic capital, social capital and
cultural capital – which can be used to obtain wealth status or
power in society. Thornton uses the term ‘subcultural capital’ to
show how inequality within club culture itself is maintained.
While subcultural capital can sometimes be used to gain economic
capital – for example, if you become a DJ in club culture – its main
value is in providing status to the clubber.
Thornton argues that the most important aspect of club culture is the
way it is used by the young to differentiate themselves.
Thronton sees dance club cultures as taste cultures in which the
demonstration of good taste, or hipness, gets you social approval
and recognition.
Subcultural Capital
“Subcultural capital conveys status on its owner in
the eyes of the relevant beholder… Just as
books and paintings display cultural capital in
the home, so subcultural capital is objectified in
the form of fashionable haircuts and wellassembled record collections (full of wellchosen, limited edition ‘white label’ twelve
inches and the like). Just as cultural capital is
personified in good manners and urbane
conversation, so subcultural capital is embodied
in the form of being ‘in the know’, using (but
not over-using) current slang and looking as if
you were born to perform the latest dance
styles.” (1995: 10-11)
Clubbing and the Media
In electronic or ‘underground’ dance culture (EDM/UDM), keeping up
with latest trends to maintain subcultural capital is very important.
Scene members must guard against continuing to enjoy music
which is too popular or which has become too mainstream to
provide subcultural capital.
By the middle of 1989, media coverage had made acid house culture
too popular to be ‘underground’. Acid house fans came to be known
as followers of media trends, rather than trend-setters.
Since then, we have seen similar changes when the popular rave form
jungle transformed into the more exclusive, underground style of
drum ‘n’ bass; when the ‘feminine’ UK garage into the more maleoriented grime and dubstep; when mainstream, club-oriented
house turned into the more localised and scene-centred
progressive, minimal, etc.
Clubbing and the Media
Thornton argues that EDM cultures cannot be seen as a form of rebellion
against ruling-class dominance, as CCCS theorists claimed for the
subcultures they studied.
Club culture also fails to challenge dominant power relations in its
attitude to the media. Although hardcore clubbers reject the musical
styles that get the most airplay, subcultural capital is still a product of
the media. Local micro-media such as flyers are used to bring clubbers
together, and niche media, such as parts of the music press, are key
arbiters of ‘hipness’.
Without the media, there would be no way of communicating the degrees
of subcultural capital associated with different clubs, DJs or musical
styles. Therefore, despite the apparent rejection of the media by the
hardcore, the media are integral to the production of club cultures.
The tastes of the hardcore are as much a product of the media as the
mainstream tastes of those they look down on.
Clubbing and the Media
Comparing his findings on goths with the claims of the
CCCS, Hodkinson (2004) found major differences:
- There was more fluidity in participation in the goth
scene than in the subcultures of the 1970s.
- Contrary to the CCCS approach, there was no clear
relationship between Goths and a particular class –
they came from a variety of class backgrounds.
However, Hodkinson also found no evidence that goth
culture supported particular middle-class values.
- The development of the style was closely linked with
its promotion through the mass media. Goths did not
see this as undermining the authenticity of the goth
scene.
http://nickgilmartin.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/acid-house-party.jpg
Clubbing and the Media
According to Hodkinson:
“…the extent of the links with the media and
commerce, and the lack of any absolute meaning,
function or class identity simplified by the style
would invalidate the use of the structuralist slant
placed on the notion of subculture by the
Birmingham theorists (the CCCS).” (2004: 139)
http://jacketupload.macmillanusa.com/jackets/high_res/jpgs/9781859736050.jpg
Clubbing and the Media
Hodkinson found that despite all the above
points, Goths had considerable subcultural
substance. By this he means that they
retained crucial features of subcultures,
including:
“…consistent distinctiveness in group values and
tastes, a strong sense of shared identity,
practical commitments among participants,
and a significant degree of autonomy in the
facilitation and operation of the group”. (2004:
139)
Clubbing and the Media
Goths are consistently distinctive because, despite
individual variations, they and others can easily
distinguish members of the subculture from nonmembers. Members had a clear sense of identity as
Goths.
Respondents also expressed a sense of shared identity
with other Goths who lived elsewhere and they did not
know personally. Therefore, Goths had a trans-local
sense of identity; that is, a sense of identity that
transcended local boundaries.
There was a clear sense of insiders and outsiders, which is
typical of subcultures.
References
Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, T., and Roberts, B.
(1976) ‘Subcultures, Cultures and Class’, in
Resistance Through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in
Post-War Britain, Hall, S. and Jefferson, T. (eds.),
London: Hutchinson.
Hebdige, D. (1979) Subculture: the meaning of style,
London: Routledge.
Hodkinson, P. (2004) ‘The Goth Scene and
(Sub)cultural Substance’, in After Subculture:
Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture,
Bennett, A. and Kahn-Harris, K. (eds.),
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Thornton, S. (1995) Club Cultures: music, media and
subcultural capital, Cambridge: Polity.