Over the past couple of years, as a high school student, I've noticed myself and my peers forging identities like youth always do. Our interests diverge and emerge, and pretty often, they end up placing us within subcultures or stereotypes.
When I was younger, I wanted to belong to an identifiable group based on personality, and the idea still holds a certain appeal, but at the same time, there's an unfortunate simplicity to it. Subcultures can divide people, and limit people too, and as a young adult, I'm worried about falling victim to that. I figure there's a line, so I'm hoping some of the people who have walked it can offer up some advice here.
In the 1950's consumer products were only differentiated by quality. You could buy the suit everyone else has, or get a higher quality one tailored for more money. The sixties rebelled against this. Marketers figured out that consumers liked to create their identities, with the products they chose. Manufacturing was also moved overseas, to make up for the smaller profit margins. The concept is called psychographics. People choose the uniform of the group they feel the most drawn to. It has nothing to do with being unique, or individual. I know many people who even as adults, spend ridiculous amounts of money on their appearance. It sometimes puts them in debt, or stops them from doing the most fun, or important things. Shop at a resale shop with someone honest and fun. Wear what you like, spend your money on the things you really care about. Ingore social pressure from people, that would make you go broke. I can give you links or suggest books, if you are interested.
Groups are not homogenous: even within a single political party there are different views on different issues while all of the members agree on some of the bigger things. To say that belonging to a group has nothing to do with individuality is to say that belonging to a group does not express us in a way or a few, which isn't true. A supposed person may not conform to the stereotype, but they still feel like they are a goth, a Christian or a university student - thus, they associate themselves with those groups. Naturally, to say "I'm a goth" is as meaningless as saying "I'm a person who drives cars", for it doesn't define you whole - but if you say "I'm a goth, among other things", you describe yourself without giving your full self to that description, trying to fit in. If a person is completely individual, they're alien to the rest of the humanity. While they can live on their own for as long as their whole lives, they won't do so happily. We're wired to belong and look for the belonging, not by our culture but by our nature; the culture you're talking in terms of only exaggerates the already existing issue for its benefit. It provides us with the feeling of security that goes with social connections and the structure of survival the society has built (one hunts, another prepares food, you eat; in exchange, you make tools to build houses, someone else buys and builds houses for themselves and others, and so on). Belonging doesn't mean you aren't you, or you aren't what you think of yourself really being - it means acceptance and being accepted for what you are. Craving it and bending yourself to get it is unhealthy and unbeneficial. Besides: From my experience, it isn't fully true: it's the characteristics that we're drawn to, not the group. I see myself wearing official clothings in a less than official manner, both because I'm a serious person and a person who doesn't want the strictness and rigid borders. I'm fairly certain that no such group exists - at least, not in the way they can be easily described with a word or two and be understood for what they are/appear to be. It neither invalidates my tastes nor implies that I have nowhere to belong. It only says that I like the style of clothing that some other people tend to wear which describes them, vaguely, as this and that.People choose the uniform of the group they feel the most drawn to. It has nothing to do with being unique, or individual.
People choose the uniform of the group they feel the most drawn to.
Companies don't invent culture, they just sell it back to people. An expressive person makes a statement, that people follow, because they have similar feeling. Companies will make expensive clothes to profit from them. Marketers invented the idea of things being an extension of the self, not the things.
I'm ready to propose an experiment to prove this wrong. Let us both surround ourselves with different things. For example, let me have everything pink and fluffy, and you - everything official and strict (unless it's already your style, in which case we'll change it). Let us have a year among these things, wearing them every day and having them on our working desks and so forth. Twice - before and after the year - let us take personality tests to see how much it affects us. I'm willing to make a bet of... I don't know, three digitally-distributed video games on that we're going to be different after the year - exactly because those things were in our lives. My point is - they didn't invent it, but, rather, use it to their benefit - which, no doubt, works great. It doesn't substract from that we came to express ourselves through the things we own. It's appealing to think that we can be independent of the society or the culture we're in, and - maybe we can, alienating ourselves in the process - but we can't stand independent of the idea of ourselves. I'm willing to bet that you won't buy items of clothing that you don't to see yourself wearing everyday because they have one more pocket - which is to say, I don't believe you're going to exchange small increase in utility for the appealing style, most of the time, which is completely fine.Marketers invented the idea of things being an extension of the self, not the things.
Yes, you are right they did not invent how people tend to identify with their possesions. The comparison was between wheather they cooked subcultures up, or figured out how to sell organicly developed subcultures. What they invented was a type of psychological manipulation. Children raised as Buddhist monks are conditioned to not have a strong self, or attachment to material things.
The honest person part is important. It doesn't have to be a peer, it could be your grandma, or a fun aunt. It takes time and digging. The prices are much lower, so it is much less stressful than the mall. Find things in colors you like. Stand next to a mirror to see if those colors look good on you. I have a pink face. I stay away from pink, and red. I like dark grays and greens. If you like black, but are tired of things fading, and being too warm outside, try dark gray. Try everything on and use the buddy system to tell each other how things look. I used to get so mad at my Mom, when she told me something didn't work. Don't get too hung up on a garment, that doesn't fit. You will find plenty of things that you like, and that fit well. If not, go to a different store. My favorite thrift store was right across the street from the mall. People like people whose clothes fit well. Confidence is important, I have bought things, and never been brave enough to wear them.
I think the used to be, because they divided people. I was a very angry young man, I wanted to reject pretty much everything. The subculture I joined was largely free of the things I wanted to escape from. The people didn't make me angry, the trappings were cool, and having a place where I wasn't pissed off all the time gave me room to figure out what I wanted to embrace. I'm not sure they can fulfill that purpose anymore though. The borders seem too thin now, with the handful of centralized social networks being media subcultures spread through. Either the outside is going to find its way in, or your subculture is too tiny to escape into. I fear I'd have ended up an Angry White Guy, instead of just an angry white guy, by default if I were growing up today.
From what I understand, subcultures are there because they allow for people of certain characteristics - whether they're fringe or simply uncommon among the general population enough to not be seen as "normal" - to feel appreciated, to belong with others like them. They give what others failed to - the idea that those people aren't foreign or alien, that they are "normal" in their own way, which is very important for people who didn't feel like they're among the right crowd (the right crowd for them, that is) for long enough. Subcultures are just bigger, more prominent or publicly-known groups like this. If the ideology within the person in a group is strong enough or if the person prefers to stay in their crafted bubble instead of facing the world, they'd rather isolate themselves rather than be open to all experiences - which, interestingly enough, unbounds them from the labels their preferred (or, seemingly preferred) companies might lay upon them. Your crowd defines you as much as you define your crowd. You might be partly a goth, but if you also climb mountains, play some exotic musical instrument and write meaningful replies in one of those online forums, you're not defined by being a goth - nor have you allowed yourself to be so. I guess this is how you don't fall into those nasty isolationist traps: by belonging to what defines you best, and crafting your own if what world gives you is not enough.Subcultures can divide people
Honestly? No. To me, subcultures is a step backwards as to where we should be. But then again - here comes the one speaking of an utopia where we're all a big community/culture that is based around accepting and relating to how different yet similar everyone is, instead of all trying to actually be similar and live similar things.
Me, I was just suggesting they didn't spend too much money joining a high school subculture. A kid can choose to be clean cut, or goth without name brands. You can still be authentic, if you can afford to do more fun events, or know more. You don't want to be friends, or date people, who only accept people who look like them. I will always identify as a hippie. If I don't have to, I don't wear clothes. If I do it is loose peasantry stuff. I have always bought my clothes used, instead of having some children making me new ones. Adult subcultures are very different, and important.
I still disagree, though. Subcultures in teens tend, from what I've seen, to stun psychological growth and make the development of an independent personality harder (then again, this is purely anecdotal and coming from someone who doesn't really have a personality either because of depression, so take this with a grain of salt). Adult subculture is even more dividing.
Well, homogeneous culture - as far as not having that much strict traits a culture can be.