I recently came across a You Tube video (link below) that asked the question "Is Subculture Dead". Bliss Foster the vlogger in question has a very thoughtful You Tube channel that really deconstructs the world of fashion, from runway shows to narratives of fashion collections. This aforementioned video drew me in as subculture has been very important to me as a key influence in my music, fashion and politics. He does an analysis of what he thinks subculture to be and asks why did subcultures of the past seem more potent, have more impact. His analysis arrives at the conclusion that yes subcultures do indeed exist in todays culture but that they just look and feel different due to the presence of the internet. I found this conclusion to be somewhat lacking but an inspiration to dig further and uncover my own thoughts about what a subculture is.
Subculture by definition is something outside of culture at large. "Sub" tends invoke ideas of being below, underneath and one can see the concept of the underground being born out of this view. One of the reasons why people gravitate towards a subculture is that it reflects an attitude, style or way of being, one that is often not yet accepted by mainstream culture and in some cases even illegal. One of the key differences of subcultures of yesteryear is the lack of the internet, an obvious but important point and one which deserves some thought.
My own personal experience of subculture was in hip hop of the early 80s, UK Rave of the late 80's, Burning Man of the early 2000s and more recently in the Industrial Techno scene of London and Berlin. For the purposes of this piece I will focus mostly on UK Rave and the recent Industrial Techno movement to flesh out my points. One of the main developments of our culture today is the prevalence and ubiquity of the internet and more specifically social media. If we are to use the Fish In Water analogy the internet has become the sea that we all now swim in for good or for ill. However this is not a transparent medium and effects the way we both receive and perceive information. It is at the behest of corporations that are beholden to shareholders with visions of infinite growth.
In the late 80s the UK Rave movement was disseminated not by corporate controlled means of communication and promotion but by individual grass roots networks, flyers that would circulate at a pub, word of mouth where a cell phone number would get passed around. One would call the number for directions and when followed you would arrive at a field somewhere with a soundsystem and thousands of ravenous ravers. This the government considered to be highly illegal and outlawed in later years in the now infamous Criminal Justice Act of 1994 where police then had the right to confiscate equipment and imprison people at parties where music was being played characterised by......
".........sounds wholly or predominantly .....by the emission of successive or repetitive beats".
My point here is that mainstream society could not see into and therefore not control these events. They were hidden from the gaze of social media, free spaces that the theorist Hakim Bey would call "Temporary Autonomous Zones" where one could dodge surveillance. Modern subcultures tend to be enacted via social media and therefore part of the narrative and gaze of the mainstream. It is by definition included in and not outside of culture. Whether the movement is political or purely artistic (although in reality these terms overlap) the effect is to de-potentiate its impact and negates its claim to be a true subculture.
However in my recent experience Ive found what I would call the Berghain model to be interesting and efficacious. At the infamous Berlin club no photos are allowed inside as they wish to maintain a free arena of expressivity. This has powerful implications and one of the reasons why this autonomous zone has become a permanent fixture on the international club circuit. There is something about social media which extracts value via its gaze, and transfers it to the applications themselves. As mentioned previously they are not transparent modes of communication and yet we tend to see them as such, hence the fish and the water analogy. Yes social media connects people but there is a larger "meta" narrative at play and a subtle transferal of power.
There is a flavour and a fire to authentic subculture that is churned in the exchanges of glances, mingling of sweat, the intensity of the sound that is shared in group delirium, places where the personal and subjective is affirmed and celebrated on a collective level. One transcends the self and merges with the greater body in syncopated ecstatic release. This is something primal and I would argue necessary for our well being ....and to a certain extent it is this energy that mainstream society finds dangerous, dangerous enough to be outlawed in the 90's. I think its worthwhile to reflect and acknowledge just how subversive rave culture was.
In conclusion I think it's useful to be aware of the limitations of social media that it is in fact at the core of modern main stream culture itself. Maybe subcultures to come will move beyond social media in recognition of this fact. Any movement that has the fire and the force of a subculture will exist beyond the fringes of mainstream culture, invent new liberating ways of communication and collectivisation in full celebration of life.
Watch the Vlog on Subcultures by Bliss Foster: