Dark Romanticism and Goth

I'm more aptly a 'dark Romantic' than a Goth.

Photograph by Raven, Editing by the HouseCat

Maybe I've always had a broadly Romantic attitude, but one that was not really cultivated into anything productive until I started reading about the philosophy and literature of that time period. I started finding that I agreed with a lot of it and that the rest of it was taking me down new and exciting avenues. Some of these ideas became building blocks of my personal philosophy (which constantly evolves) and some of them fell by the wayside, but my way of thinking and my creativity were far more influenced by things that happened over  150, even 200 years ago than by what happened in the 1980's. My head was full of Clare, Keats, Wordsworth,  of Beethoven, Paganini, Weber, Liszt, Chopin, etc. long before it was full of Ian Curtis, Siouxsie Sioux, Robert Smith, Andrew Eldrtich, Patricia Morrison and Dave Vanian. Mary Shelley, Edgar Allan Poe, Bram Stoker, etc. were my transition between the two, with a large dash of Arthurian poetry and art, Pre-Raphaelites and Tolkien. 

Photograph by Raven, Editing by the HouseCat

Romanticism informs far more of my world-view than Punk thinking - even my tendency towards anarchism is rooted more in centuries-old political philosophies than 1970s political philosophies. My search for experience is core to my way of life, to the point where I think the purpose of life is to experience as much and as richly as possible. A lot of my art is based on direct inspiration from nature; I see strong emotion as an authentic source of aesthetic experience, with a decidedly Gothic emphasis on such emotions as apprehension, horror and terror, including the feelings that come around contemplating the inevitability of our own demise and decay. Awe, to me, is the emotion upon which I build inspiration, especially that which is experienced in confronting the sublime glory of untamed nature - the awe experienced while looking into the raging storm, or at wild currents of a river's rapids - and I'd go storm-chasing at white-water rafting if I could. On one hand I embrace medievalism, Gothic revival architecture and Arthurian myth, and on the other I look to the exotic (relative to my culture), to Japanese culture and ancient ruins. I empathise with William Blake as he talks of 'dark Satanic mills" in reference to early industrialisation, and see it continue in the smoke-stacks of coal fired-power stations, and in the seemingly unstoppable increase of materialistic consumer culture and all the factories thousands of miles away that feed it. 

Photograph by Raven, Editing by the HouseCat

In feeling like an alien amongst mainstream society I went looking for philosophies I did agree with - somewhere other people had to see things the way I did, and it did not seem that I was mad - and unfortunately found them to be an anachronism in relation to modern life, but then, as I read and experienced more about the various counter-cultures and subcultures from Arts & Crafts and Pre-Raphaelite era women in 'artistic dress' through Hippies and Punks to Goths -especially Goths- I saw the ideological tendrils that began with Sturm und Drang and revolutionary France were still bearing fruit. I did not set out to become a latter-day Romantic, albeit one with a fondness for black and the macabre, it just suits my personality down to the ground. 

Photograph by Raven, Editing by the HouseCat

My interests are broader than the Goth subculture, my perspective has not grown out of punk or of rock, but out of philosophy, literature and art, and I'm often a bit of a walking anachronism in more than just my fashion choices. Talking of fashion choices, stylistically I am fascinated by an aesthetic, not a subculture, and will wear things from Visual Kei, Elegant Gothic Aristocrat, Lolita and other Japanese styles as much as I'd wear Goth things, and will also wear vintage things or "hippie" things, or whatever else takes my fancy. I am more interested in anachronistic styles, luxuriously textured fabrics and an almost theatrical appearance than in what particular subculture you could attribute a garment to. My eclectic approach to fashion is not something I disguise, and where possible, I do try to accurately describe my various subcultural influences. 

Photograph by Raven, Editing by the HouseCat

My not-Goth interests predate my interest in the Goth subculture, and have not really wained in interest, only in time to spend on them. I am into the music, the fashion, the broader creative endeavours and the attitude that comprise the Goth subculture, but that only represents a small facet of who I am, and I feel that "Dark Romantic" encompasses a far greater amount of who I am than "Goth". Goth is still part of my identity, I still think the label applies to me, just it does not cover everything. 

Fashion Advice for New Goths and Babybats

I was discussing the topic of Babybats, and it inspired me to write some advice for people starting out in the subculture on assembling a Goth wardrobe. 

The first thing I will say is "Do not panic!" You do not have to immediately look like a Gothic model in gorgeous Romantic finery or a really intricately layered Deathrock-type ensemble (yes, I am aware that Deathrock is not the same as Goth, a case of parallel evolution in America that later cross-polinated with Goth, etc.) and that it does not make you 'less Goth' if you don't have fancy clothes. You cannot judge how Goth someone is by their clothes. You certainly cannot judge how good or interesting or fun a person is by their clothes! Do not forget that a lot of models are being paid to wear a certain brand or designer's clothes - those are not necessarily the clothes they actually wear every day! Also, those who do have vast wardrobes of finery have probably acquired them over a very long time, often a decade or more.

If you have a passion for the music (Goth started out as a music-based subculture, and music is still its beating heart), the mindset, and taste for things dark, the reasonable amongst us will understand that you are new and may not know a huge amount about the music, the literature etc. Fashion is really a superficial concern, although I know how much looking the part can help a new person feel like they will fit in more with other Goths and how important it can be to those establishing this newly discovered facet of their identity. People who are mean to you for being new are unreasonable and silly; don't let them put you off the subculture when there is so much you might miss out on enjoying! 

The second most important thing I can say is that creativity is more valued in the subculture than your ability to afford expensive things. If all you can afford are charity shop clothes and craft supplies, but you spent hours carefully painting and sewing patches or adding lace trim, you will earn a lot more respect than if you have bought the latest offerings from Lip Service or Retroscope Fashions or whatever, because you will have shown creativity, individuality, a desire to make things for yourself and to customise and make something your own, and you will have put in the effort. 

Do not be daunted by the prospect of DIY, even if you are not hugely crafty - a lot of things are a lot easier than they look, and with a little practice even the least dextrous person can turn a plain garment into something interesting and aesthetically pleasing. There are a huge amount of tutorials and step-by-step craft projects on the internet; browse through them and pick out things you really like and think you can manage and then work your way up to more complicated projects. You might find out that you have a knack for a craft after all, you just hadn't encountered it before - it turns out I am rubbish at knitting, but I'm rather good at making my own wigs, but if I hadn't tried to make my first braid wig (project ::here::) I would never have found that out or had the confidence to make more complicated wigs (like my neon green and black cyberdreads). 

As to what to actually wear? Start with looking at the musicians, going back to the early '80s and late '70s, and then look at the models, and other goths. Then look at lots of other things - clothes, costumes, even interior design and artwork. Consume visually, create for yourself a scrapbook and digest all that visual information, analyse how the shapes work, how the textures work, look for why clothes look good together (here is where a physical scrap-book where you can write and draw has an advantage, but I like scrap-bookign and am therefore a bit biased), and then aim for what  inspires you, what you think looks nice, and what suits you. 

When shopping, try to aim for a few items that look good with each other, rather than just going for the things you think are prettiest first. If you must buy something that you don't have other things to make an outfit with, because it's one-off bargain or something, it is not the end of the world that you can't wear it out right away because nothing you own goes with it, and it is better to wait until you have gathered enough to incorporate it into an outfit where it will look really good than to try an combine it with garments that just do not look right together - it won't show off your new find to its best, anyway. Your new find will not vanish, and unless your weight and shape fluctuate greatly, it you will still be able to wear it a few months later or so. Also, to begin with, buy things where you can try them on first, instead of ordering off the internet, so you get a feel for what does and does not suit you before you've actually spent any money.

The most important, biggest piece of advice I can say is "Be Yourself" - wear what you think is beautiful, wear what you feel beautiful wearing. Goth isn't something you should have to try to become, it should be a natural extension of your own tastes. It is more important to be yourself than to adhere to any subculture, although if you do land between subcultures, try to describe yourself accurately - it is perfectly reasonable to say "I am a metalhead that likes Goth fashion" or "I like Goth music, but I like a Gothic take on Lolita and Aristocrat fashion" or "I like lots of things, a bit of Goth, a bit of Punk, a dash of Hippie" or whatever, but trying to say, for example, that Sweet Lolita is somehow Goth generally does not go down well. Also note that Cybergoth is not a subsection of Goth, it is a hybrid of Goth, Rave, Industrial and a few other things. 

Anyone can be a Goth, it doesn't matter if you're disabled, or dark skinned, or larger,  shorter, blonder, ruddier, manlier, more girly or any other deviation from the stereotype. There already are Goths-of-colour, Muslim Goths, Goths in wheelchairs, Latin American Goths, Asian Goths, really short Goths, blonde Goths, freckly Goths, skinny Goths, large Goths. All sorts of people are Goths. And I've met at least one of all the above.

Have fun, be beautiful! 

The Original 'Goth' Bands Are Not Goth

I am going to say something vaguely controversial here: Siouxsie And The Banshees, Sisters of Mercy, Joy Division and suchlike are not 'Goth Bands'.

They are, though, the people who produced the music about which the nebulous thing we now call Goth crystallised. The term 'Goth' was one applied to these bands by the music press, but it was more applied to their fans. Goth came from the fans of musicians, not from the bands themselves. Many of these bands produced music in styles outside of what is considered Goth, some of them starting as punk bands that evolved through Post-Punk into producing things in the style that became the 'Goth' style, some of them taking their music in directions outside of that style later in their careers.

Siouxsie Sioux is a musician whose career illustrates both of these aspects of these changes in musical direction. She started out as Sex Pistols fan who decided to have a go with a few friends, and whose first public performance involved her reciting the Lord's Prayer over an improvised instrumental, and her musical career evolved through punk beginnings to Siouxsie and The Banshees' Post-Punk work a was actually quite experimental and influenced by quite a variety of things (David Quantick called 'Peek-a-Boo' an "oriental marching band hip hop with farting horns and catchy accordion" in his review in the NME, published 23 July 1988, and that I think illustrates this eclecticism.). 

After the Banshees were reduced to Siouxsie and Budgie being 'The Creatures' their music took another turn in direction, partly because Budgie being a drummer and Siouxsie being a singer meant that outside of the studio their music was quite pared down to percussion and vocals, and this had its practical limitations, but partly because their creativity drove them to try new things - "Manchild" for example, is a story in song set in Ancient Meso-America about human sacrifice - a dark theme - but musically its inspirations clearly come from various periods and places. 

Siouxsie's distinctive sense of fashion, the often dark subject matter of the music she performed, the timing of her work coinciding with the nascent Goth subculture, and her links to Post-Punk made her an early Goth icon, despite the fact that stylistically she and the Banshees were highly varied and not always within the stylistic bounds of what is now described as Goth.;This is partly because in the early 1980s Goth was a lot less concrete.Siouxsi and The Banshees were not the only band to have a stylistically varied career and yet somehow become part of the (oft debated) 'canon' of Goth music. The Cure, for example, went decidedly pop for a while, before returning to darker rock, although their later work was certainly not as Goth as their earlier work such as 'A Forest'.

It takes a substantial body of work for a genre to become established, and it takes innovators being followed by the people they inspire, and that takes time. The later imitators are probably actually more Goth because they tended to stick quite closely to their inspirations, and therefore had an output that was more stylistically consistent and within the bounds of what is now termed 'Goth', though this does not mean they were necessarily as good because in being derivative some were not necessarily fulfilling their potential and may have done better allowing themselves more creative scope rather than trying to stay within a style.

Quite a few of the first wave bands - most notably The Sisters of Mercy (though they were late in that wave) - reject the Goth label, and I actually support this. Goth is not a term to label the bands themselves, more a description of individual pieces of music that they produced. The people themselves do not identify with the subculture. Some find the label to be constrictive, with both commercial concerns and creative concerns about such a label possibly resulting in aiming music at a target audience and therefore loosing some creative freedom. Some simply do not fit that label consistently enough to think it applies to them.

The original Goths are not the members of these bands - they are the fans who took inspiration in terms of fashion and music from these people and expanded it into something much bigger, pulling in influences from sources as diverse as centuries-old architecture, Victorian literature, early 20thC horror movies and futuristic science-fiction costumery. While we can thank people like Siouxsie Sioux, Dave Vanian, Patricia Morrison and Robert Smith for inspiring us, we should thank ourselves for the community we have built, for the vast amount of expansion and creativity that has come after that initial musical spark, and for basically building the subculture. Goth exists because of Goths, especially promoters, designers, organisers, musicians, artists and crafters.

❇✤❇~☥~❇✤❇

(I had an interesting debate in the comments of one of my posts about whether the Cure were Goth once - I LIKE these debates - feel free to debate this or any other post with me in the comments. I find reasoned arguments for and against my position, positive reactions where people expand on what they like and  most of all constructive criticism to be the most helpful and interesting comments! It is actually reading and responding to the comments that is the most enjoyable part of blogging. I'm in this subculture and have ties to others for the love of their various  facets and discussing them is fun!)

Cultural Appropriation, Eclecticism and Subcultures

Today I have been reading about cultural appropriation. It started out with reading ::this post:: at This Is Corp Goth, about how mainstream fashion appropriates outward signifiers of Goth sub-culture, stripping it of the meaning it has to market it to masses, especially to those who are looking to be "edgy" and distinguish themselves slightly from the mainstream in pursuit of a bought "individuality", not because it reflects their inner aesthetic preferences (if they have developed a core set of aesthetic preferences), but because it is the current trendy way of seeming interesting; they want to be seen as "different" and "interesting" and "individual", but dare not do anything that endangers them to being thought of as "freaky" and "weird" or "not normal", distancing themselves from the originating subculture and the roots of what they have adopted.

This is an issue that has been much talked about in the Goth community, but there is another issue that is not talked about, or at least that I have not seen talked about: do members of the Goth community appropriate things from other subcultures, cultures and traditions, and are our inspirations being used in a way that is cultural and subcultural hybridisation, or in a way that is simply adopting something because it looks nice or is popular amongst other goths, without thinking of the origins of these things.

I routinely see things aimed at Goths that are marketed as "Celtic", "Gypsy" and "Japanese" which are either based off stereotypes or have nothing to do with those people, or even worse are based off hugely erroneous romanticisations of those people with vast historical and anthropological inaccuracies. There is, for example, a difference between the interlace animal designs of the Vikings and Pictish crescent designs and ancient Bronze Age spiral designs, and the interlace designs of Irish monasteries, but all get marketed as 'Celtic knotwork', despite not all of them actually including knots, or being from a group called 'Celts'. This is taking a broad an inaccurate view of what the word 'Celtic' means, and ignoring a lot of history to market something to people who have only a vague knowledge of the term. Often this is pandering to those seeking something exotic, and conflating something being exotic with it somehow being better with what is usual simply because it is different. 

It is not wrong to appreciate the artistic styles of another race or nationality or culture, but to genuinely appreciate something you have to understand that more than just words and obvious symbols are signifiers of meaning, and that some things that we think are merely art or decoration have long and deep traditions as something deeply personal and meaningful to many people in their originating culture, and to them it as vexing to see us appropriate those signifiers and unintentionally strip them of meaning as it is for us to see non-Goth people wear obviously Goth-inspired fashion and then denigrate Goth and Goths.

That said, I do not think it is wrong to wear or have or make things inspired by other cultures and traditions, as long as the inspiring items/traditions are understood, and as long as it is not too direct a copy, more a new creation with artistic ties, because one is not directly copying a symbol or item, but appreciating the aesthetics and then combining them with whatever else lurks in the designers brain and producing something new and appreciative and therefore not taking a specific symbol or item and re-using it stripped of its meaning.  A lot of it comes down to understanding what a specific symbol or item means, and the context in which it is used in its originating culture, something that can easily be learnt with a bit of research, and avoiding using that symbol or item in a way that would be disrespectful to that culture, and if you do wish to use something outside of its proper context, changing it enough so it is clear that you mean no accidental insult or sacrilege, and are merely being aesthetically inspired. 

For example, walking down the street wearing a feather in a band in the same way a Native North American people would do in the context of a feather earned by a warrior would be a bit like walking down the street wearing a medal that would normally be earned by a soldier when you haven't earned it yourself, compounded by being from the people who fought against those who would have earned it, but wearing a different type of feather in a different way altogether would just show an appreciation for that feather. 

It is also important to remember that just because something happened a long time ago, it does not mean that the event or culture is no longer relevant to people today.  A lot of people are very proud of their ancestors, and very connected to their roots, and historical events that caused harm to large swathes of certain cultures have not been forgotten or relegated to the history books, so be careful when using symbols from times past.  A red ribbon around someone's neck meant something specific in the French Revolution, and there are definitely people around who still know what that means, and whose ancestors did end up killed on the guillotine. Even more pressing, there are cultures who still feel the repercussions of historic events, and if you happen to come from the culture they feel has injured them, wearing their symbols could be seen as a grave insult. 

I think this is an important issue for us to bear in mind as creative people and people interested in fashion, especially as people whose tastes are likely to be more eclectic and to draw on things outside of western culture, or from different historical periods. It is basically a case of being aware of what symbols and items mean before using them, and of doing the research. We are a magpie people, who spot something and want it, but sometimes we have to acknowledge that, no, we can't have that exact thing, and then use it as an opportunity to be creative and create our own thing, which will mean so much more as something made by oneself.