Stereotyping From Within The Subculture And Inclusivity: Part 1 - Financial Snobbery.

Firstly, happy Independence Day to my American readership. Have fun, enjoy barbecues and pyrotechnics if you are into that sort of thing!

I was reading ::this:: post by Fee over at 'An Honest Drug' and the posts she linked to - Nicolette Mason writing on IFB ::here:: it got me thinking about inclusivity in the Goth subculture in general, and about how I think certain stereotypes are being perpetuated within the online Gothic community. I think how Goth represents itself online is very important as a lot of Goths, especially younger Goths who don't have access to the clubs and gigs of the adult Goth scene, rely on the internet for a connection to the broader Goth scene.

I am going to try and avoid simply repeating what has already been said about those who blog commercially having various pressures around them to adopt mainstream values and deviate from their image (basically, a pressure to 'sell out' to some degree, like with any creative industry) partly because it is too general for the audience of this blog and my interests, and partly because I simply don't like repeating what others can say better.  

I have tried to debunk mostly stereotypes imposed on Goth from the outside, such as Goths not being a subculture of depression (to be found at ::this:: post) and Goth not being an inherently middle-class subculture (to be found at  ::this:: post) to my being an example of the fact that Goths are not all teenagers and we do grow up and get proper jobs while remaining alternative. What I have not spent much attention to, though, are the stereotypes perpetuated within the subculture.

The first one I would like to debunk is that you have to spend lots of money on clothes, trinkets and generally applying the Goth aesthetic to your entire lifestyle, and that the flashier, more ornate clothes you have and the amount of times you can go to Gothic festivals (especially if you're travelling across Europe and America to go to them) can somehow dictate how Goth you are. I have mentioned this tangentially in various past posts about being a Goth on a budget. (::Here::, ::here:: and ::here::, for example) but you do not need to be rich to be Goth any more than you need to come from a middle-class background or be middle-class (as these are all tied to socio-economic status).  This is basic snobbery, and Goth is not run by the Goth oligarchy, because Goth has no leaders.

I am tackling this first, because as followers of my blog may well know, I am not very well off - my job is part-time and barely covers the rent, and to contribute towards utilities, taxes and bills I have to busk in my local city (followers of the Domesticated Goth page on FaceBook will know I do this). Currently money is very tight, and as I have mentioned before, I may well have some big life changes ahead, and I am not feeling that financially secure at the moment. I certainly feel a little left out when I see the beautiful gowns from WGT showcased on Viona Art, for example, or when I get the newsletters and FaceBook updates from my favourite alternative craftspeople and sellers and would like to purchase their wares and know that I can't even afford the sale items right now.

Nobody has been obviously and outwardly snobbish towards me, but I can't help but feel that I and my Gothy endeavours get more than slightly less attention than that of some of my wealthier comrades in Goth who get photographed seemingly endlessly in their finery at festivals, seem to be constantly updating their blogs and FB feeds with haul posts and product reviews and always seem to be slightly better dressed and slightly fancier than I can be. I cannot be honest without saying that I am a tad jealous, and I don't like being a jealous person, or feeling like there's a climate within the community that is contributing towards that jealousy.

I think it is important for me, and for other Goths not to get too caught up in this sort of materialism and commercialisation of the subculture. Independent craftspeople are certainly the lifeblood of the subculture, and buying their wares is certainly far better than buying mass-market stuff aimed at our demographic by large businesses who are not part of the subculture and don't care about it, but we shouldn't judge each other or ourselves on how much we buy, regardless of where those things come from. Your spending power is not a mark of dedication to the subculture. In some ways, I guess the percentage of one's income spent on the subculture could be seen as mark of dedication, as it shows the level of investment of one's resources, but compared to the time spent on and within the subculture, and one's contribution to it, even that sort of monetary marker is largely irrelevant.

Another factor is that having more money allows for a more polished internet presence - better quality photographs taken on cameras rather than poor-resolution phone cams (like on my old smart-phone), a larger wardrobe of more expensive and fancy clothes, and often less pressures on time for those who earn enough from one job to not be running about between various sources of income, etc. Some have even paid graphic designers and professional photographers, etc.

If you have money it is easier to produce higher quality content, but it is not the only way. I am lucky in that I can get Raven to photograph me sometimes, and the difference between his work, even on an off day, and my best selfies is staggering.  I know a little about web-design, and sometimes have days where I can spend days tweaking the Domesticated page, so I hope that my blog here is good from a design perspective (although comments and critique on this are always appreciated, and I know I need to update both the photo gallery and the site map) so while I don't have money to spend on high-end cameras, and while I'm not paid to model, I still have a few good images here and a relatively aesthetically pleasing blog.

Yes, this might attract readers, but it is the product of handwork, careful investment and a lot of hours, and not of a large budget, and as I have mentioned in my various posts on being Goth on a budget, there are plenty of ways to apply "time and effort" as a way to get a polished Gothic lifestyle in real life, and not just the internet, and as I would like to re-iterate, I think it is time and effort that prove real dedication the subculture, not how much one spends on it. There are many teens who have gone through a Goth phase that has not lasted who amassed lovely collections of Goth things because their parents bought them these things - and while there is nothing wrong with Goth being a transient phase for some, and I am not bitter towards those whose parents could buy them such things, to them Goth was not going to be a factor in the rest of their lives. I am quite grateful for the existence of these people, for when they leave Goth often they sell their things cheaply on eBay or donate them to charity, and I then end up with them at a price I can afford!

As Goth is a subculture with many of its own values being outside of the parent cultures, yet being influenced by them, we should try and be self-aware of how much we adopt the more negative values of the parent cultures when, in having our own subculture, we have greater freedom to adopt our own. Any kind of materialistic snobbery is something I think we should avoid, especially when younger Goths feel like they cannot participate because they cannot buy or have bought for them elaborate clothes and masses of black candles.

Yes, the dark and macabre have become more commercial and mainstream, and in some ways this is a sign that we are gradually becoming more acceptable to the mainstream (that itself is another topic for debate) but just because these things are available does not mean we have to buy them, and it does not mean that our subculture should stray too far from its Punk, working-class roots, and from the DIY attitude that spawned a lot of it. Early Goths may have had to be resourceful and thrift-shopping DIY-ers out of necessity, but even if we have everything from Hot Topic to Lip Service and Hell Bunny via Hysteria Machine, ::Kambriel:: and ::Merimask:: but that does not mean that the resourcefulness and craft skills of early Goths are not things to embrace and inherently worthwhile and valuable. I admire a Goth (or Lolita, or whatever) who can sew their own finery more than one who can simply buy it.  

I have noticed that DIY and crafting blogs tend to be especially popular if they have budget projects, and many of those are written by people who DIY due to financial constraints, so while the bloggers must have at least access to the internet (although that could be a friend's internet or library/municipal internet access), there is a space for poorer bloggers in the Goth blogosphere and I am glad when people are reasonably open about being on a budget, because I think it makes other poorer Goths feel like they are still part of the subculture and they're not alone or shameful because of this. Class and wealth is a HUGE divide in the wider world, and an insidious part of many other prejudices, and I feel like it is the sort of insidious thing I do NOT want to see take hold within our subculture.

An aside: I tend to avoid discussing politics and on my blog because it is off-topic and could easily derail what I am trying to do here, but the financial and resource inequality of our world is something that makes me vastly angry, and how all sorts of other prejudices are spread by those who wish to perpetuate that inequality for their own gain. I see too much "divide and conquer" perpetrated by those that see it as a means to profit and power, and too much advertising fosters a sense of self loathing to create a market for products that remedy made-up flaws.

We should be proud of our own creations, show-case them on our blogs, and when we see other Goths online and in real life, use their resourcefulness, ingenuity and creative skills to be fabulous and interesting, mention that - not in a patronising way, of course - because it is the sort of positive thing that ought to be reinforced and often the sort of thing that is quite admirable in many ways. I know I do my best to be a resourceful and creative Goth and to help others with that, but there are many who out-do me by far. Remember that Goth came from Punk, and that poverty is not shameful for the poor  -especially in a world where many countries have gone into recession in the last 5 years and where so many people have fallen beneath the poverty line. The only people who should be ashamed of poverty are those in power, both financial and governmental, that have allowed and encouraged such a world of inequity. 

You do not need a huge wardrobe of the fanciest anachronistic Goth clothes, three pairs of New Rock boots for every season, every Goth album ever on MP3, CD and vinyl, and to go to every club night and festival in a thousand mile radius to be a 'proper Goth'. You just need to love what is macabre, dress spooky, love some music from a more sombre sort of rock and see the beauty in darkness - spending power is irrelevant. 

Goth, Sub-Genres and Boundaries

I don't think Goth should be cliquish, or that it is at all wrong to use 'Goth' as a label if you like things that are outside the scope of the original 1980's subculture as well as things that are. If you're into commonly overlapping groups like Cyber/EBM, Japanese fashion, Metal, etc. or into completely not-usually-associated-with-goth hobbies like rambling, cookery, various sports, etc. it does not mean you should suddenly have your ability to call yourself 'Goth' revoked, after all, if someone is trying to fit themselves in a narrow box by avoiding all activities outside it as well as actively doing all those things within it, they are not being themselves at all, and being yourself is far more important than being Goth or not being Goth. 

Nobody should try to be Goth, they either like that sort of thing, or they don't, and that is all that should be to it. A lot of people get pressure from outside the Gothic community to try and be "normal" and the last thing they need is to get pressure from inside the Gothic community trying to force them down someone else's definition of Goth. Nobody has the right to dictate another person's taste, regardless of decades in the subculture. Also, anyone who has been in the subculture since the 1980's should have the emotional maturity becoming to their age and know better than to mock people for liking bands or fashion outside their tastes, and even if they don't think it truly Goth, they should approach the subject in a positive way (e.g encouraging people to listen to Sisters of Mercy or Bauhaus) instead of a judgemental way. This is common politeness, and no matter how Punk you are, there is a place for it. 

Goth has changed over the last 30-ish years, and it has changed a lot, and become an umbrella term for a lot of darker forms of self-expression, and it has mingled with other subcultures, like Visual Kei/J-Rock, and Lolita, and Metal, and while all these groups are different subcultures in their own right, and always will be, they have had an impact on Goth, and personally, I think it is this diversity that is keeping the subculture alive. Goth has gone from being the fans of a small group of bands from the 1970's, 1980's and early 1990's and become a broad, vibrant movement, an umbrella under which people can be their own dark selves, and find avenues to explore. Goth has grown, and this is no bad thing - an influx of new music that doesn't sound like the Post-Punk or Deathrock of the 1980s does not mean that people will stop listening to the original bands, it just means that they'll listen to other things too. These new bands are not calling themselves Goth (not that the original bands called themselves that); they are calling themselves Gothic Metal, or Dark Cabaret or Industrial or EBM, and are making no claims on the original subculture. What they are, though, is influenced by the original subculture and influencing the current subculture as it grows. 

Goth, after all, is a mere label that summarises a person's tastes, fashion and lifestyle, it is a name for a broad subculture that is as diverse as its members, and it has never, and will never, be a line in the sand on one side of which is Goth and on the other side of which is everything else. The boundaries of what is and isn't Goth are different for every single Goth, and while there are some that are approximately agreed on, those areas are fuzzy and indistinct. 

A lot of people who from the outside are clearly Goth renounce the name, and I think it is partly from this pressure from certain sections of the Goth community to adhere to certain criteria. If you stop calling yourself Goth, you're free to like all the Goth things you previously enjoyed, and yet are at liberty to enjoy anything else too, as you are no longer under pressure to stay within the bounds of Goth. This situation, though, should not arise. Goth should not be a limiting pigeon-hole, it should be an accepting community of dark outsiders, individuals who are outside the mainstream and drawn towards more morbid and unusual artistic expression, especially music and fashion. 

There is also an external pressure on professionally Goth members of the subculture - Goth has been identified as a target market, a demographic to sell to, and therefore it is in the commercial interest to pander to an interpretation of that market (and it is only an interpretation because it is coming from outside) and so, as a professionally Goth person or group, for example a band, get more popular, they will come under pressure from those financially involved to stick to a certain brand (or band) image that they assume will be popular and keep fans loyal.  Unfortunately this can very easily lead to either selling out or becoming bland and thus being totally counter-productive, or switching target audience to babybats. 

What motivates people to be militant about the boundaries of the subculture mystifies me. Received wisdom is that it is fuelled by their own insecurities as regards their subcultural identities, but I'm not sure  this really true. I don't think that the arguments over what is and isn't Goth and the judgement of people as their status of Goth or Not Goth is that simple. I think some of it is to do with how broad the subculture has got, and how a lot of people who are very different indeed from the original subculture (e.g cybergoths) identify as Goth, and this isn't something that people who have big hair and danced to strains of The Sisters of Mercy in the '80s do not recognise as part of what they know as their subculture. One thing that should be noted when it comes to these less traditional manifestations of the subculture is that someone who is dressed up as a Cybergoth and dancing to T3RR0R 3RR0R might also be fond of back-combing their hair and dancing to Siouxsie and The Banshees - they are not mutually exclusive. 

One very important, and probably obvious point that I shouldn't have to mention but sadly do, is that just because someone doesn't like a band, brand, shop, item of clothing, etc. that does not impact whether or not it is "Goth" or whether or not someone else should like it or think it is good. Opinions are not absolute truth.