4 ms·
But if subcultures are dead, and the author was a young person in their heyday; would they not be perfectly qualified to write a postmortem of sorts?
by vermilingua 7y ago
But if subcultures are dead, and the author was a young person in their heyday; would they not be perfectly qualified to write a postmortem of sorts?
- Avamander 7y agoBut they're really not dead, they're just different. Writing a postmortem on something that isn't dead is difficult.
- paganel 7y agoFurther down the author acknowledges that subcultures are not in fact really dead, but that they’ve lost the cultural importance they had between 1975-2000 (to use his time interval). Which I think it’s a fair point to make.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoThey're not dead. The author just outgrown their own, and doesn't notice current subcultures, which target contemporary youngsters.
- nyolfen 7y agothey're 'dead' in the sense that they have a lifecycle that is predictable and eventually peters out into meaningless consumerism; they still arise but they aren't seen as a potentially liberating or revolutionary social mode in the way that they might have been in eg the 80s, because we see them follow the same course every time.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y agoAnd I'm sure that when we were living through our own youth subcultures, all the people who remembered greasers and beatniks thought the same way.