Why Goth Isn't.

[BrassFusion]

I have no problem with people who call themselves goth. I really like a lot of people who call themselves goth. There are people who call ME goth.

I have a problem with calling an item of clothing or a piece of music "goth."

When you do that, you automatically exclude the opposite styles as being "non-goth," for example: If wearing black vinyl and corsets and goggles is "goth," someone wearing khakis and Izods is not "goth."

In an arena where "goth" is a positive, it's shallow to say that people are or are not "goth" based on what music they listen to and what clothing they wear, especially when no one can agree on what constitutes "goth" in the first place. If it were more specific and definable, I wouldn't have a problem with the labeling.

[Fierce Critter]

I think you have to look at the context of the useage of the word/label.

If people are talking about a style of dress, I can see where it makes perfect sense to say "corsets and goggles fall into the goth description, but khaki pants and izods don't".

Likewise it's pretty obvious that bands like Bauhaus & Fields of the Nephilim fall into the goth category, and Bobby Vinton doesn't.

If, however, we're talking about people in general, you still can be pretty general with the term. A vast majority of the people who go to City Club fall into the goth category in some way. But the vast majority of people who go to my local sports pub do not.

If you're talking about SPECIFIC people, however, less ambiguity does come into the equation. Then we have to move beyond descriptions of dress/musical interest/decor preference into mindset.

And that's where I find your argument to be somewhat valid. Just who/what determines the avatar of a "goth" person where mindset is concerned? Do I personally think a person can be "goth" if they don't dress the part or listen to the music? I think that's stretching things, but technically, yes.

But don't ask me to define exactly what that mindset is. Because I do not profess to be the person capable of or in a place of authority to do so. Frankly, I don't think anyone is 100%.

[Fierce Critter]

By the way, I think this better belongs in "sociology".

[BrassFusion]

I thought about it, it seemed more "fashion" to me.

You mentioned that it's obvious that Bobby Vinton isn't "goth" and that Bauhaus is. HOW is it obvious? I'm sure you know that it's a big, bad logical fallacy to define something circularly like that:

"Well, Item A is goth because it's like Item B which is also goth. Item C is not goth because it's not like Item A or Item B." That still doesn't address what "goth" is. And I'm not asking you to provide a definition, because like you said, no one is 100% qualified to be the judge of what is and is not goth. That's because it's a meaningless label and 80% of the time it's bandied about, it's excluding a group of people who are seen as non-goth, or "uncool," or "not part of the scene," or however you want to word it.

That's why I feel defining "goth" through parameters of fashion and music is misguided and wrong. My definition of what "goth" should be, emboldened for emphasis, follows:

Any person who appreciates nonconformity of culture, in spirit or in practice.

I just tossed that off, but I really like it right about now. It allows for people to be "goth," but not their fashion or their taste in music, because that's denigrating toward the tastes of many other people. And I think if "goth" needs a definition, nonconformity should be its very root. That means not being afraid to wear khakis to city club, and not being afraid to wear spikes and vinyl to the supermarket.

I guess I would find it far too limiting to call yourself "goth" and force yourself to dress the same way all the time and to avoid sports bars (not unlike the Red Apple).

[Fierce Critter]

I think the difference between your way of thinking and mine is I don't see using a label like "goth" as exclusionary in a negative sense.

I happen to like Bauhaus and Dean Martin. And it's generally obvious that one is goth and one isn't.

But by saying Dean Martin isn't, typically, "goth", I don't see that as somehow saying something negative about Dean Martin.

Like it or not, saying something is "goth" does bring to mind a certain style, be that style of dress, music, decor, whathaveyou. I think your definition is too broad. It's like saying all noncomformists are goths. That's like saying all Christians are Catholics. I'ts just not true.

Goths are a subset of noncomformists. But they're different than punks, emo's, Skas, etc.

I think your seeming frustration comes from wanting to hard-core label things, rather than be comfortable with a bit of soft focus generality.

Am I personally goth? Yep. In ways beyond dress/music tastes. But I am also goth-a-billy, punk, "normal", retro, dowdy, classic, old-fashioned, neo, etc.

Would I call myself JUST goth? No way. But I definitely fit the general category in many ways.

[Fierce Critter]

Oh, by the way, I also don't personally have a huge problem with "exclusion".

I'm actually for a gentle "dress code" for City Club. Does that make me elitist? Maybe. I prefer to think purist.

I frankly don't care to party or club with people who are there to gawk at me and consider me some kind of freakshow there for their benefit. Fuck off and go to the zoo, not my club.

If I'm wearing a "typical City Club" outfit to the grocery store or Big Boy restaurant, duh. I fully expect to be gawked at. And it doesn't bother me. I don't care what others think.

But I consider CC a haven of sorts, a gathering of like-minded individuals. I'd be perfectly happy if it was made an exclusive club. I don't apologize for this unique preference. In most things, I'm open minded and against segregation. But I have my limits.

[BrassFusion]

No, no, no, a thousand times no, Critter. You're not "goth" until you can define it, and you haven't done that so far except to say that some things are "obviously" goth and some are "obviously" non-goth.

I realize that some people never look at "non-goths" in an exclusionary or negative sense, but so many people do. That's why I adopted a broader definition. What's YOUR definition?

[BrassFusion]

Oh, by the way, I also don't personally have a huge problem with "exclusion".

I'm actually for a gentle "dress code" for City Club. Does that make me elitist? Maybe. I prefer to think purist.

I frankly don't care to party or club with people who are there to gawk at me and consider me some kind of freakshow there for their benefit. Fuck off and go to the zoo, not my club.

If I'm wearing a "typical City Club" outfit to the grocery store or Big Boy restaurant, duh. I fully expect to be gawked at. And it doesn't bother me. I don't care what others think.

But I consider CC a haven of sorts, a gathering of like-minded individuals. I'd be perfectly happy if it was made an exclusive club. I don't apologize for this unique preference. In most things, I'm open minded and against segregation. But I have my limits.

Yes, it does make you an elitist. I'll wear whatever I want to "your" club. I don't gawk at people dressed like you, because I have an appreciation for nonconformity, whether in spirit or in practice.

To exclude people based on dress alone is simply shallow. And to wear "goth" clothes to Big Boy just to be gawked at hints at some masochistic insecurity I don't even care to plumb.

[Fierce Critter]

No, no, no, a thousand times no, Critter. You're not "goth" until you can define it

Says who? Who is this authority? Where is it written? Is it you? If so, what are your credentials?

you haven't [defined goth] so far except to say that some things are "obviously" goth and some are "obviously" non-goth.

Right. Because I am comfortable with a more generalized "feel" for what does and doesn't fall into a certain category. And I do not consider myself the authority on the "absolutes of goth". So I don't put myself into a position to define it absolutely.

I know it when I encounter it.

I realize that some people never look at "non-goths" in an exclusionary or negative sense, but so many people do. That's why I adopted a broader definition.

So, and??? I don't get why this is a problem for you. Some people never look at "non-Christians" in an exclusionary or negative sense. I don't see how that puts anyone in a position to then determine how to define what it is to be "Christian".

What's YOUR definition?

Frankly, I don't have one set definition. Again, "I know it when I encounter it". And it differs, honestly, depending on what we're talking about. And who you're talking to.

That's one thing I love about things like "goth" or "punk" or "non-denominational agnostic", etc. The "not necessarily 100% defineable" that people can be comfortable with, and just "know".

I don't need everything in my life to be absolute and concretely defined. But I'm also comforatable with generalized labels.

I find it interesting that those who rail against labeling insist everything has to have a concrete definition. Very curious.

[Paper Hearts]

Lots of people can define a movement in music. http://www.scaruffi.com/history/cpt40.html

You're speaking as if there has only ever been one style of painting or one style of fashion or poetry. Would you really talk about a mission style piece of furniture as if it were Victorian?

[BrassFusion]

I find it interesting that those who rail against labeling insist everything has to have a concrete definition. Very curious.

If you want to label something in a way that excludes or hurts others, you need a rock-solid definition. Otherwise, you're just being an asshole.

[BrassFusion]

Lots of people can define a movement in music. http://www.scaruffi.com/history/cpt40.html

You're speaking as if there has only ever been one style of painting or one style of fashion or poetry. Would you really talk about a mission style piece of furniture as if it were Victorian?

I've never heard one rocker say that another person isn't a rocker because they don't dress the part.

[Fierce Critter]

Yes, it does make you an elitist. I'll wear whatever I want to "your" club. I don't gawk at people dressed like you, because I have an appreciation for nonconformity, whether in spirit or in practice.

To exclude people based on dress alone is simply shallow. And to wear "goth" clothes to Big Boy just to be gawked at hints at some masochistic insecurity I don't even care to plumb.

I find your need to constantly apply a negative spin to things curious.

Where did I say I wear goth clothes to Big Boy "JUST" to be gawked at? Your take on it, not mine. Which hints at your own prejudicial-separatist view of people who "dress different" in public.

I wear what I want, when I want, where I want. If I feel "goth" that day, and plans are to go get a burger at Big Boy, I do so. If I need to go into Noir Leather on a day when I am wearing a ratty t-shirt and flip-flops. I do so. Not to "get a certain reaction", as you would spin it. Just to go where I need to be, no matter what I'm wearing. If others have a problem with it, well, that is their problem, not mine.

Am I being elitist when I say I think a certain dress code should be enacted at City Club? Maybe. But I more see that I'm protecting a "safe haven" for those of us who are smart enough to know that if we dress a certain way publicly, we will get certain reactions. But that we like to have a place to go where, for a while, what we do is "normal" and that if any conformity is called for, it's a conformity of mutual respect.

To enact a mild dress code would be basically asking that "if you are entering this establishment, you understand that the 'norm' is different here, and commands a certain respect". If you don't respect that norm, you don't get in. Simply said.

[BrassFusion]

I find your need to constantly apply a negative spin to things curious.

Where did I say I wear goth clothes to Big Boy "JUST" to be gawked at? Your take on it, not mine. Which hints at your own prejudicial-separatist view of people who "dress different" in public.

I wear what I want, when I want, where I want. If I feel "goth" that day, and plans are to go get a burger at Big Boy, I do so. If I need to go into Noir Leather on a day when I am wearing a ratty t-shirt and flip-flops. I do so. Not to "get a certain reaction", as you would spin it. Just to go where I need to be, no matter what I'm wearing. If others have a problem with it, well, that is their problem, not mine.

Am I being elitist when I say I think a certain dress code should be enacted at City Club? Maybe. But I more see that I'm protecting a "safe haven" for those of us who are smart enough to know that if we dress a certain way publicly, we will get certain reactions. But that we like to have a place to go where, for a while, what we do is "normal" and that if any conformity is called for, it's a conformity of mutual respect.

To enact a mild dress code would be basically asking that "if you are entering this establishment, you understand that the 'norm' is different here, and commands a certain respect". If you don't respect that norm, you don't get in. Simply said.

1. Your expectation to be treated disrespectfully while wearing "goth" clothes in Big Boy implies masochism on your part. I wear "goth" clothes to places like Big Boy sometimes... but I don't expect negative treatment. And I've never received it.

2. It is disrespectful to deny people the right to dress in a nonconformist manner, whether at City Club or Big Boy or in court or church. When wearing my khakis to City Club, I am the nonconformist, and if you don't like it, you can have a party at home and enforce your own dress code.

I guess that's sufficient.

[Fierce Critter]

If you want to label something in a way that excludes or hurts others, you need a rock-solid definition. Otherwise, you're just being an asshole.

Again, I don't see the connection between labeling something and it being exclusionary or hurting to others.

I really don't see how saying something is "gothish" is automatically saying, "being non-goth is BAD!!!!"

And again, you're putting a negative spin on my choosing not to give it a hardcore definition. You just said that I want to label somethign in a way that excludes or hurts others - which I never said, your view, not mine - and that makes me an asshole.

Where is this rancor coming from? I really don't get it.

[BrassFusion]

Again, I don't see the connection between labeling something and it being exclusionary or hurting to others.

I really don't see how saying something is "gothish" is automatically saying, "being non-goth is BAD!!!!"

And again, you're putting a negative spin on my choosing not to give it a hardcore definition. You just said that I want to label somethign in a way that excludes or hurts others - which I never said, your view, not mine - and that makes me an asshole.

Where is this rancor coming from? I really don't get it.

For the above definition, I was using the general "you." And heck, Cam, you were just talking about excluding people from City Club based on rules of fashion. That would be grade-A assholish. I don't think I need to explain why.

And before now, I'd never heard the term "gothish." I assume it has no more of a definition than the word "goth." Henceforth, I shall refer to myself neither as goth, non-goth, or anti-goth, but... "gothish." And I shall be the authority on all things "gothish." Thank you.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

On this subject the adage "Opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one... " holds very true but here we go:

I view goth as an adjective not a noun or a title. Its not something to be afraid of or be viewed as "all it is."Its just an "aspect" of something not its basic nature. A bird is "big, small, white, blue... whatever" but these terms just describe an aspect of the bird , not the thing itself as a whole.

When i say something is "gothic" its meant to describe one part of it. It might also be funny, odd, insightful, bad, good or whatever else.

A song (actually the majority of so-called goth music) may not be "all goth" -whatever that means. Hell many musicians that make what most of us consider goth music are scared to death of the term. Many avoid it like the plague, while making money of the scene they supposedly have nothing to do with

Nonetheless many musicians are "gothic" or make music that is "gothic" despite them not wanting to be called such.

Just as some examples:

It might be a oldschool rock & roll song (The Monster Mash) but its "gothic" , that doesn't mean its ONLY gothic.

I like "dark" literature in that sense i'm "gothic" but that doesn't mean that i'm ONLY gothic.

I like "goth" music, but that doesn't mean that i'm "A Goth" nessisarly. (although i have no problem with being called that)

I like star trek (you didn't read that shssh) but that doesn't mean that i'm "only" a trekkie.

When i say that DGN is a "gothic / industrial community" i mean that people here tend to like things that are "gothic" and/or "industrial" but thats not the sum total of what it or they are about.

[Fierce Critter]

1. Your expectation to be treated disrespectfully while wearing "goth" clothes in Big Boy implies masochism on your part.

No, it only implies that I have the experience of having been treated disrespectfully while wearing goth clothes to typically non-goth locations. Otherwise, I would have had to have said, "I put on some goth clothes and went to Big Boy so the non-goths there would have something to gawk at and make fun of." I didn't say that at all.

I wear "goth" clothes to places like Big Boy sometimes... but I don't expect negative treatment. And I've never received it.

And I am 38 years old, versus your what, 22? 25? And I've been walking into non-goth, non-punk, non-cyndi-lauper-wanna-be locations for decades now, and have recieved negative treatment. From open-mouthed stares to being laughed at to being challenged to a fight to actually being asked to leave. Give yourself a little time and opportunity, child, and you'll know why the expectation is valid. It's called experience.

2. It is disrespectful to deny people the right to dress in a nonconformist manner, whether at City Club or Big Boy or in court or church. When wearing my khakis to City Club, I am the nonconformist, and if you don't like it, you can have a party at home and enforce your own dress code.

Why do you feel such a strong need to go into a place like City Club and dress non-conformally? Do you seriously expect to be viewed by the general populace there as "noncomformist" versus just being a fish out of water? Do you not understand that a large number of people that go there, if not the majority, do so to get away from the "conformity" represented by things like khakis? What is your aim in doing so? Do you think your point is truly being made, or is it lost completely and your "point" meaningless?

You seem to be reveling in being an "upstart", which is what you're also criticizing those who use the "goth" label for. You're setting yourself apart by labeling yourself the "noncomformist", and putting yourself in the elite position.

I myself don't feel a need to label myself as noncomformist, any more than I feel a need to 100% label myself concrete as goth. To do so is to care about what "conformists" think about me, and I frankly don't give a damn.

But I also want a place to get away from that type of person. And that place, for me, is City Club.

And don't even get me started on the "gothier than thous" who judge people at City Club. That's a whole 'nother subject.

My point is, admittedly, somewhat convoluted and can be contradictory. But that's what happens when you try to give a concrete definition to something that's more abstract.

[BrassFusion]

Maybe my real problem comes in when people define "goth" as pertaining to genres AND individuals, but one or the other is ok. I think when you attribute it to genres and individuals at the same time, it introduces that element of exclusionary prejudice. Because if you call individuals "goth" without a context and freely admit you have no way to define what is NOT goth, it's not exclusive.

[Fierce Critter]

For the above definition, I was using the general "you." And heck, Cam, you were just talking about excluding people from City Club based on rules of fashion.

I have not given you permission to refer to me as "Cam". So I would appreciate it if you wouldn't take the liberty. Thank you.

The rest, I think I covered in a response given above.

And Jon is home, and I have to go. But this has been interesting.

[kellygrrrrrl]

I do not have a bunch of money to buy "gothy" clothes.

So, in order to get into City Club, I have to go out of my way, go get an outfit, spend money I don't have, just to go to a club?

To me it seems almost being two faced, or trying to be something I am not.

Why can't I have that respect, and just be myself?

Well, I don't know...there are restaraunts and clubs that do have dress codes...so I guess my point is nill!

Never mind!

[BrassFusion]

Why do you feel such a strong need to go into a place like City Club and dress non-conformally? Do you seriously expect to be viewed by the general populace there as "noncomformist" versus just being a fish out of water? Do you not understand that a large number of people that go there, if not the majority, do so to get away from the "conformity" represented by things like khakis? What is your aim in doing so? Do you think your point is truly being made, or is it lost completely and your "point" meaningless?

I wear what I want to City Club. Sometimes I wear "gothish" shit, sometimes I wear khakis and a hoodie. Take the bbq. I was wearing a hoodie and jeans and made fun of myself at the bbq for "not being goth." But I wore it to city club later anyway because it was comfortable and I saw no reason to change clothes. I don't wear clothes like that to make a "point," I wear them because that's part of my wardrobe and for me to dress SPECIFICALLY in all black for city club is to do it out of insecure conformity.

Taken on a regular day, I'm probably a whole lot more "conformist" than you. I wear jeans a solid majority of the time. But if I want to go somewhere to hang out with nonconformists, why can't I be myself?

[BrassFusion]

I do not have a bunch of money to buy "gothy" clothes.

So, in order to get into City Club, I have to go out of my way, go get an outfit, spend money I don't have, just to go to a club?

To me it seems almost being two faced, or trying to be something I am not.

Why can't I have that respect, and just be myself?

Well, I don't know...there are restaraunts and clubs that do have dress codes...so I guess my point is nill!

Never mind!

Your point is right on, g-friend. the clubs and restaurants that DO have dress codes are exclusionary and elitist and to me, that seems to negate the whole "goth" lifestlye.

[Onyx]

Hrmm....

but aren't goths elite and exclusionary?

If I'm going to a goth club it's much more fun to me if most everyone is gothed out. It's part of the atmosphere.

I'm SUCH a nonconformist that I'm not going to conform with the rest of you

I can't believe how *serious* this thread is getting. Dang!

[phee]

I would never be a part of a club that would have me as a member