Subcultures in the new age

 ~ DK

In case you guys didn't know, there's this Spotify playlist called a 'Daylist', which factors in the kind of songs you listen to on all days of the week and makes a mix for each day, and the name of the playlist changes every day, and they're just so weird sometimes. Here are some of the names: 

Renaissance flannel Wednesday

90s pure air guitar Monday

Divorced 70s metal dad Saturday

Commiecore punk reggae Thursday

Vintage rock supernatural Sunday early morning

Bombastic melancholic English power pop new wave Tuesday

Not just 'Rock' or 'Pop', even though you toss the stuff I listen to into these huge boxes. There seems to be something for everyone, a micro - nichè (as if niches weren't small enough) for every listener, and this concept applies to a lot more than just music.

Take fashion for example. There's an aesthetic for everything and everyone. You like Doc Martens and flannel? You're grunge. Like tracksuits and sweatpants? That's athleisure. Oversized shirts and ice blue jeans? Softboy. Add a chain and leather jacket and you get Starboy. Old money. Goth. Hip hop. Cottagecore. Kidcore. Punk. Nerdlife. Whatever. There is something for everyone.

But what caused this explosion of personalities in the first place?

As humans, we have an innate tribalistic desire to form connections with people who hold similar beliefs, and that's nothing new. It only becomes interesting when we use those similarities to express the outcomes of our thought processes, ie, it's a way to make sense of the world around us and explain our actions and choices by deducing our reasons from groups formed from said similarities. This is better explained with an example.

Astrology seems to satisfy a lot of people's curiosity as to how people act. "I'm a Scorpio, so that's why I'm jealous." It's never the other way around, is it? You don't see all jealous folks coming together to form a fraternity.

Since we use these divisions of thought and appearance to see the world, we often prefer it be continuous throughout. Disco thinks disco, punk thinks punk, and you're wrong if you think otherwise. Your actions and thoughts are dictated by your clique. Corporations play a major role in the formation of these cliques because they're easier to sell stuff to. From vinyl records to sneakers, every product has its target group. It helps when this group is actively in discussion and coherent in ideas. It's easier to sell Harley Davidsons to leather metal lovers than to surfers or nerds, right?

In this new era of information, we now have a chance to explore everything from classic literature to Formula 1 with access like never before. There's virtually nothing you can't read or learn from the Internet.

One could argue that this cornucopia of culture is the perfect opportunity for people to find what makes them unique and seek new things to build themselves. You could develop your personality to your liking and not worry about fitting into a box. You could read about Kafka and be into Tupac and surfer culture at the same time.

Yet, the boxes that people put themselves in, ie, their online personalities, aesthetics or subcultures show that this is not the case. The need for subculture identification is stronger than ever. There are a lot more boxes today than before. This creates the illusion of greater self-expression when in reality, it’s stifled.

In a generation where kids are more concerned with their image and not actually delving into what the subcultures offer them, organic development seems to be rare. Somehow, corporations divorced the images of cultural movements from their principles to commodify their aesthetic because said movements hold cultural significance. People love to be cool, don't they?

Take thrift store culture, for example. Back in the 90s alternative rock musicians usually bought clothes from thrift stores because they were cheap and didn't care where they got their clothes from. They wore boots and flannel because they were comfortable and provided protection from the rain. In a deeper sense, the alt rock movement seemed to emphasize the importance of authenticity over image. They were anti-fashion.

In fact, the word used to describe the rock music of the early 90s, ‘grunge’, loosely means ‘dirt’. Today, however, Doc Martens boots cost a gazillion dollars, H&M sells torn jeans and distressed clothing, and band tees for what, 1,000-2,000 rupees? The whole point of ‘grunge’/thrift fashion is thrown out the window.

And these kids consider themselves so indie. Yeah, because buying a 2500 rupee Clash T-shirt and a pair of 5000 Levi's sooooo working class, right? It's cool to live in schmuck. And if you ask those kids what they think of labour rights they'll blink at you. Ask them to name five songs by the Clash and they'll have no answer (most of the time).

It's alright to not be from the hood to listen to hip-hop or be fairly well-to-do and listen to punk rock, okay? Just do some research on what you're getting into.

The bottom line is that aesthetics are way too commodified anyway, so don't fret if you don't fit in. True self-expression comes from exploring your interests regardless of what others think of you or where you come from. Breaking out of these boxes is how we as a society become more authentic, which in the age of social media, neoliberalism, and compounded loneliness, is more important than ever.