Subcultures and Contemporary Music
The study of music subculture and subculture itself has been greatly debated since the Birmingham School first began to explore the subject. The Birmingham School emerged in Britain after the industrial revolution. It drew its conclusions from studying subculture via anthropology, history, literary criticism and media studies. The school of thought was greatly influenced by the Chicago school and the Frankfurt school(Mattelart and Neveu 2006) The Chicago school itself was born out of the study of urban social behaviour, deviance and subcultures. With this the Birmingham School made four key judgments of subcultures ; bricolage, recuperation, authenticity and homology. These theories were pioneering, influencing sociologists such as Dick Hebdige to produce works studying subcultures based on these theories, The Meaning Of Style. However in recent years criticism has began to occur, for example David Muggleton’s book Inside Subculture suggests that the theories were produced after studying a niche audience, for example young white working class males, and therefore subcultures that are not formed by this group of people cannot be analysed using the Birmingham School of thought. The social unrest present throughout the 1960’s and 70’s is not present today, with feminism, class consciousness and racial issues not entering the political climate.
One the biggest problems with the Birmingham School of thought is that it is time dependent. This can be seen in the materialistic and consumerist society of Britain. One of the vital aspects of a subculture is that of authenticity, however this is stolen from subcultures through mass culture reproducing their Bricolage. The Recuperation of subcultures; them moving from being niche audiences to being part of mass culture, happens regularly today. Therefore the authenticity is taken away. (K.Gelder, S.Thornton 1997)For example the indie rock movement in Britain was quickly moved from being a subculture to being mass culture in a matter of years.
Recuperation and authenticity in terms of today’s society, are great examples of how the Birmingham School of thought is time dependent and how it ignores the individual subcultural themselves. (D.Muggleton 2000). Many of the subcultures that emerge today are quickly seen to be ’cool'and are therefore adopted by mass culture. This in turn takes away their authenticity as the media begins to abuse the subculture producing merchandise, bands and fashion that are not unique, not authentic and are man made. (D. Hebdige 1979)
Indie music hit Britain in the early 21st century in a rush of CD packaging, with bands such as the Strokes(CD Track 1). They gained a massive following and mass culture began to imitate their style. This can be seen through fashion, for example Kate Moss opening up a clothes line for the high street. She has been a large and influential celebrity through recent years, also having dated indie rockstar Pete Doherty has given her great ’indie'status.(CD Track 2) The status she has achieved and the consumerist society we live in today has been used to make a profit from this subculture. This can also be seen in the influx and constant demand for retro clothes, for example the clothes store Beyond Retro. About five years ago before retro clothing was in vogue one could purchase a 1950’s style jacket for £20 however the same coat now is fetching up to £100. The shop, one of which is situated in very bohemian Brick Lane is now visited by the likes of Kate Moss, David Beckhamp and Kylie Minogue, giving the shop a new status amongst the public.(L.jones 14/11/07) This is a perfect example of recuperation and how authenticity is taken from today’s subcultures.(D.Hebdige 1979)
However people such as David Muggleton suggest that authenticity is not of vital importance to subcultures. He wrote Inside Subculture which greatly criticizes the Birmingham school of thought. Muggleton speaks of how he was part of the punk movement, yet he never experienced or felt the hardship of unemployment and class consciousness, he states that he merely joined the punk movement because ’personal freedom and the search for experience’(D. Muggleton 2000) were very important to him at the time. Punk originated in London and then spread rapidly across England with bands such as The Sex Pistols and The Ramones.(CD Track 3) These bands are seen to be authentic Punks being born out of social struggles, however bands such as The Stranglers would fail to fit in to the Birmingham School’s definition due to bands members being middle class and educated. (CD Track 4)(B.Edge 1977) He then goes on to suggest that had he ’been born several years earlier I might have been a hippy’ (D.Muggleton 2000) This therefore shows how the authenticity of subcultures fails to be important to the individual subculturalist’s themselves. (D.Muggleton 2000) Muggleton’s book shows how the recuperation of a subculture is not a negative thing and that it does not die merely because the media incorporate the subculture in to main stream society. (Mattelart and Neveu 2006)
However it can be suggested that Muggleton can be criticized, for example the Birmingham School would state the reason Muggleton became a part of the Punk culture was because recuperation had already occurred, therefore the media and the majority of the public promoted this culture, leading to ’non authentic'Punk following. Therefore meaning he would not feel the angst of the working classes or the economic stresses as the authenticity of the subculture had already died due to the media incorporating the minority in to the majority.
However his views are supported by Mattelart and Neveu who suggest that, the Birmingham School of thought treats subcultures as homogeneous entities in a fixed temporal and geographical framework, however this view neglects the changes inherent in culture and the production and consumption of it. They felt that the structural approach to subcultures fails to acknowledge the nature of the cultural process, for example the movement from the minority to the majority. (Mattert and Neveu 2006). This in turn is supported by Gary Clarke who suggests that the way in which the Birmingham School refer to subcultures connotes them as “Rigid and static anthropological entities”however the nature of culture is to change, grow and progress. Which is why it has been suggested there is a convenient gap in the studies of the Birmingham School on the discussion of how “pure subcultures are sustained, transformed, appropriated, disfigured or destroyed.”(G. Clarke1981)
Dick Hebdige’s book Culture: The Meaning Of Style was one of the first to explore the Birmingham School of thought on the subculture. Punk appeared in Britain in 1976 and was seen as a youth reaction to the government. It explored the angst felt amongst white male working class youths during this time in Britain, especially referring to the unemployment that swept the country. (D. Hebdige 1979) Hebdige not only recollected this socially and politically charged time he changed the view of subculture. Before studies by people such as Hebdige and Hall subculture was defined as “A Set of people with distinct behaviour and beliefs within a larger culture”however Hebdige sees subcultures as very similar to the dominant culture of which they were part of. Subcultures are therefore the reworking of mass cultural style and values. (D.Hebdige1979). “Subcultures cobble together styles out of the images and material available to them in the effort to construct identities which will confer on them relative autonomy within a social order.”( S.During 1999)
Although Dick Hebdige’s work was incredibly influential, it can also be criticised. Muggleton suggests that his theories fail to take in to account the subculturalists themselves, denying their freewill. Suggesting that the behaviour seen in white working class youths in the 1970’s was merely an effect caused by an economic situation.(D. Muggleton2000) Another criticism of Hebdige’s book is that it specifically deals with post- war youth subcultural styles in England. Hebdige and his influences, The Birmingham School, appear to deal with subculture with a cross cultural view however this cannot be found with The Meaning of Style. Nor can this be related to the Birmingham School as they exclusively produced findings on white working class males. (K.Gelder S.Thornton1997)
Another criticism of the Birmingham School comes from Gary Clarke. He suggests that subcultures are seen to be a way to solve problems, such as economic, ideological and cultural problems. (S.Cohen 1972 ) For example the Punk subculture could be viewed as a way to solve the problem of unemployment and the inequalities between classes. However how and why would the crystallization of these issues solve the problems. There is little evidence to answer these questions, therefore suggesting that the Birmingham School’s theories cannot be supported by hard evidence, due to there being parts of their theories that have not been fully explored.
However the problems seen with the Birmingham School can be counteracted. HIlary Pilkington suggested that the criticism felt by the Birmingham School is merely due to it being popular to criticise them. She suggests that no sociologist can thoroughly explore the subject of subcultures because they have already taken on their role in culture, therefore are subjective. Pilkington is supported in her views by, Lovatt and Purkis who suggested that much of the research in to subcultures is being performed by young academics “Many of whom are already immersed in their chosen culture prior to intellectual engagement with it”. (D.Muggleton 2000) However Featherstone suggested that criticising the Birmingham School is in vogue not because of fashion, but because of the shift in the balance of power in the academic world. (D.Muggleton 2000).
The theories of the Birmingham School’s theories can still be applied to a subculture of todays society, Rap. Although the music type is of African-American roots it still greatly fits in to the theory. Rap was born in the Bronx a working class area populated by ethnic minorities. The music style began as a way for those in political, social and economic stress to express themselves. They adopted a certain bricolage, for example gold, over exaggerated jewelry (Bling), oversized clothes for the males and scantly clad women. A certain style of life is promoted by rap, for example the gangster life style, money, cars, women, drugs and violence. However the subculture became uncontrollably popular, the media began to exploit this, causing the recuperation of this subculture. The authenticity was lost in terms of mass culture. However their are still Rap artists that are underground, for example London based Klashnekoff, Darren Kandler(CD track 5). Although among his fans he is a ’Real Hip Hop'artist, he has not got a record deal and is not recognised as a promising artists as major record bosses fail to see his potential to bring valuable skills to the industry. Although the Rap culture follows the Birmingham School’s template of subcultures there is one key problem. The subculture was born out of African-American struggles, therefore cannot fit the Birmingham School of thought as their theories were merely based on White males.
Subcultures of today, such as ’emos'and ’new rave'are not political or social reactions, they are not a means for the public to speak out about class, race or hardship and are not purely associated with young, working class, males. The Birmingham school aimed to locate subcultures in relation to the ’working class or the parent culture, the dominant culture and mss culture.’(Ken Gelder Sarah Thornton 1997) This narrowed the Birmingham Schools interpretation of subcultures. This class consciousness and divide between genders, does not feature in todays subcultures, in terms of what makes someone new rave, it does not matter whether you are male or female, working class or upper class or white or black, as long as you conform the bricolage of this group and listen to their music you are part of their subculture. Maybe in terms of the Birmingham School and writers such as Dick Habdige and Hall ’New Rave'and ’Rap'are not subcultures, due to the lack of authenticity and the recuperation of the culture. However as D.Muggleton has suggested the authenticity and recuperation of a subculture has no significant importance to the subculturalists themselves. Todays society itself is a criticism of the Birmingham School of thought, for example the magnitude of different cultures, the shift in political climate and the consumerist views of the public.
Comments are closed!