Monday, November 3, 2008
hebdige and subcultures
I found Hebdiges anaylsis of subcultures to be very interesting because he incorporates many theorists ideologies first, then goes on to describe how they fit into his definition of what subcultures are. He says that, “the emergence of such groups has signaled in a spectacular fashion the breakdown of consensus in the post-war period,” (151). As generations of pop culture have shown us, subcultures come out of nowhere and are first rejected or accepted. People begin to identify with them, until they eventually turn into a normal commodity and have lost most of their initial shock. Hebdige uses the best example that I can think of to describe this term- the punk culture. He says that subcultures form as a result of someone challenging hegemony. In the punk culture people began to challenge authority and go against the order. He refers to this as “violations of authorized codes” and “power to provoke and disturb” (153). As the punk culture gained popularity, more people began to believe their ideas and identified with them, thus making the culture more and more acceptable. The media begins to latch onto these trends, and thus they become more familiar. In the punk culture, this was when the 80’s when it was “trendy” to be punk and listen to punk music. As they gain so much more acceptable they turn into a commodity, and eventually become “frozen.” Companies capture onto the popularity of these groups and produce products for them, thus making them a commodity. Once there are so many commodities for them and the ideas are less “shocking” they begin to loose their power and become normal. In today’s world we do not see the punk subculture as “shocking” as it once was. The market has been flooded with so many products that we are used to seeing punk clothing and hearing music that was once unconventional to us. I believe that subcultures serve a valuable part to our society. It is through them that we get new ideas and new product. I do find it a bit sad that like in the case of the punk culture, something that was so new and challenged authority, turns into a commodity and becomes very common place instead of “new.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This post reminded me of a recent South Park episode about the popularity of the “Goth” style incorporating itself into the mainstream via vampires, and more specifically, the teen novel series Twilight. At South Park Elementary, there are a group of kids who classify themselves as “Goth”—they smoke, drink coffee, wear all black with black make-up and hair, and are generally apathetic. The visual key signifiers become threatened when “vampire” kids, or kids imitating characters from the Twilight books start to dress in all black with black make-up and hair. Although the “vampire” kids look like the Goths, they do not share the same mental or social characteristic traits of the Goth kids. For example, the vampire kids do not smoke because it would “be bad for them” and because their parents would disapprove. They do no drink coffee because their parents think they are too young, and consequently drink orange juice.
The Goth students feel threatened by the gaining numbers of “vampire” kids because people start to associate the Goths no longer as Goths, but as “vampire” kids—with an apathetic appearance, but without the mental and emotional traits of rejecting society. The Goth students begin to aspire to destroy the popularized and fake vampire versions of themselves, which leads them to one of the most interesting name-brand stores today, “Hot Topic.” “Hot Topic” is a mall store where Gothic-looking clothes are sold at excruciatingly high prices, thus it is a place where the Goth look becomes commodified. Because the vampire kids ties to the Goth are only visual, the Goth students decide them must destroy “Hot Topic” and light it on fire, thus obliterating the vampire community and preventing more students from becoming superficial Goths.
Post a Comment