Is most all "alternative" subculture rooted in romanticism?
Lately it seems more post-modernist, despite this kind of culture never having embraced modernism in its own right.
Emo was romanticist, punk was modern at first but became pomo
you're generalizing
>>343057
>>343057
Post modernists are even more against romanticism than modernism.
The fault with modernism is that it failed to be truly "enlightened" it was never self-critical and always had an unshakable faith in progress.
Romanticism only regresses us further, post-modernist seek to fix the issues of modernism, not to end the project.
All "alternative" subculture is post-modern, because they use a confused mish-mash of pre-existing symbols and ideology to craft a new identity for themselves
>>343462
Goth, Emo, and New Wave are all inherently Romanticist.
>>343057
>Is most all "alternative" subculture rooted in romanticism?
I think you're playing a No True Scotsman with "alternative" and "romanticism".
>>343057
subcultures belong to edgy middle schoolers
>>343166
lmao i read that as porno first
What was the last true subculture?
Punk? Skinhead?
Possibly British Football Casuals early 90's?
>>346046
>true subculture
And what do you mean by that?
>>346053
A subculture that sort of had a check-list of criteria
Certain music
Certain clothes
to an extent certain political views
>>346122
Not sure why you're going back in time then. We've got Williamsburg-esque hipsters and London grime thugs today. Subcultures are springing up all the time.
hippies were proto-pomo
mods were the most modernist subculture
>>346346
>hippies were proto-pomo
hippies believed to much in things to really be pomo.
>>346387
walk into any present day graduate anthropology or sociology or geography seminar, and it will probably be taught by a pomo neo-hippie
>>345520
a lot of subcultures, like EDM, ravers, or club kids, gravitate toward nightclubs. Not the kind of places you'd expect to see many middle schoolers.
>>347262
Goths as well.
It's a style of dress, music and a social scene. Politically speaking, they're a microcosm of society which is REALLY weird.
>>347278
>they're a microcosm of society which is REALLY weird.
Its all consumerism bro. Purely cyncile capitalistic shit. People view identities as almost cookie cutter forms that they can just buy. Highschool movie cliches, jock, punk, nerd ect. If you want to reinvent yourself (which young people tend to do a lot) you do it in a very shallow way of just buying different clothes and other bullshit.
Im starting to think that everything is about fashion. People chooses shit based on what they think looks best and they will defend it to the grave, but if you stripped them naked and made it just them, they would all pretty much be the same mush
>>346122
Juggalos are the last truly non-self aware subculture. They can't be commodified because they're so damn disgusting and they can't be commercialized because they're so damn undesirable and white-trash niche.
>>347343
They're pretty commodified, as any Hot Topic or Spencer's Gifts exec could tell you
>>347278
Politically, they're a subculture that's all over the map. There's a lot less of a unified political identity among them than punk rockers, hipsters, or hippies, but still a bigger than normal portion of fringe loons
>>343057
I think it's absolutely romantic through and through, not only with respect to the music, the texts, aesthetics and so on, but also with respect to the emphasis on "authenticity" as in against selling out, the priority of live performances, importance of belonging in a scene, etc...
With regards to your other point I also think romantic is a modernist (or rather, modern) movement and is impossible to disentangle from modernity. So there's really no issue here.
