Art and music are factors that both bring us together and set us apart. They create strong alliances and superficial enemies. We often identify ourselves in relation to the art and music we enjoy in comparison to the art and music we dislike. Subcultures, in particular, use art and music to identify themselves as collective entities. Many of these subcultures are based around comparable tastes and interests: “the crowds generally congregate on the basis of their shared taste in music, their consumption of common media and, most importantly, their preference for people with similar tastes to themselves” (Thornton 184). The congregation around art, music and the culture industry allows members of various subcultures to build personal capital, as well as acquire the motivation to become “pro-artistic” (185).
Although a subculture may not find economic capital as a common trait between members, capital or fortune is not only found within physical riches. Cultural capital, for example, is developed through one’s upbringing, education and occupation (186). Social capital is gained through one’s personal connections and contacts. Furthermore, subcultural capital can be measured by how much a person is immersed in the subculture: “being ‘in the know’, using (but not over-using) current slang and looking as if you were born to perform the latest dance styles” (186). However, this form of capital is always relative to the situation. “Hipness is not a single unified style, nor is it captured definitively by one scene” (188).
Sometimes, alternate forms of capital can lead to economic capital if they are used to acquire employment and fame. For example, in the 1983 documentary Style Wars, graffiti artists seek to find the balance between subcultural capital and getting paid for their work. Part of the lifestyle of these artists is to have their art recognized throughout New York without being caught by the authorities. In the film, when the idea of selling graffiti on canvas is brought to the table, some felt that it took away from the subcultural capital and authenticity, where others were more concerned with gaining economic capital. Some said that getting paid for one’s work is what classifies someone as being professional. Debates similar to this one often lead to the notion that certain artists “sell out” when their motives are no longer about being heard as a subcultural figure, but about making money.
In the realm of music, having that heroic, “amplified voice” (Laing 448) of a genre is so important for many subcultures. For punks, this is the voice of Johnny Rotten; for grunge fans, this is the voice of Kurt Cobain. Moreover, Cobain is rumoured to have taken his own life to prevent himself from being labeled a “sell-out” by his most authentic fans. After his death, the subcultural capital of this music hero has been heightened to the point that some considered him a martyr for the grunge movement. This instance shows just how important music has become in determining subcultural identity.
Music clubs and live concerts give subcultures a common location and reason to gather: for the love of music. According to Sarah Thornton, “clubs are refuges for the young where their rules hold sway” (186); and according to Dave Laing, “the only place for [total reception of the music] is the live concert” (450). These settings allow the music to become much more accessible for the people. In addition, “home-made taped music represented the virtual dissolution of the barrier between performer and audience” (456).
Image courtesy of: pankerijada.blogspot.com
As mentioned above, certain music artists become heroic figures and set an artistic example for others to follow. With the emergence of genres like punk, grunge and techno, and the advancements in recording technology, the audience was able to feel naïve identification with the artists. The mentality of “it could be me” or “anyone can do it” really appealed to these subcultures. The audience was encouraged to participate and pick up instruments of their own.
Consequently, some may argue that subcultural music is unjustifiable and, at times, derogatory. With an aim “to shock” (455), subcultural genres often upset mainstream ideas by “confronting an audience with unexpected or unfamiliar material which invades and disturbs the discourse to which that audience is attuned” (456). On the other hand, others may argue that music provides a creative outlet for troubled, subcultural youth: learning a musical instrument teaches patience, perseverance and innovation, and enhances one’s overall cultural capital.
In the end, art, whether expressed visually or musically, is such a defining factor of certain subcultures that if it were taken away, these subcultures would simply blend into the dominant society without being seen or heard.
Works Cited
Laing, Dave. “Listening to Punk.” The Subcultures Reader. 2nd ed. Ken Gelder.
London: Routledge, 2005. 448-459. Print.
Thornton, Sarah. “The Social Logic of Subcultural Capital.” The Subcultures
Reader. 2nd ed. Ken Gelder. London: Routledge, 2005. 184-192. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment