Goth Identity: The Elite and the Sovereign
Morphological Evolution of Elitism
Ah, the 80s-old archetypes of the elitist goth and the goth… and the goth what? The elitist and the inclusive? The elitist and the kind and informative? The elitist and the permissible? The elitist and the unassuming…?
It took me a while to settle on the correct word, and I initially dismissed it because of potential rank or hierarchical connotations. Sovereignty is (for now) the best fit for my purposes, because like the goth elitist, the goth sovereign is concerned with their own authority and autonomy over an interest, though they are distinct in where their power is centered. A goth elitist (any elitist) sources their self-worth from a place of insecurity and exclusion, whereas the goth sovereign takes control of their definitions and image to better understand the self and to share appropriately with others. An elitist wants to exclude, while a sovereign wants to conclude on a secure definition so that a thing or interest can be widely understood. Goths have unanimously concluded that their subculture is defined by the music they create, listen to, and love!
The sovereign is not necessarily the opposite of the elitist (though they can manifest that way behaviorally), since they often share some of the same qualities: confidence, niche interests, personal competence, and a well-informed knowledge base in their fields or spheres. Instead of creating yet another dichotomous structure of us vs. them, I prefer to initiate the integration of an age-old archetype and insult. Archetypes themselves are still studied and debated, but assuming that even if archetypes themselves are whimsy and fluff, our experience of archetypes is real, I hypothesize that the elitist is not a concrete opposite of an ideal, but a morphologically incomplete and mutable one. The elitist becomes the sovereign, responsible for and autonomous of their own definitions by incorporating humility, confidence in oneself and community, setting healthy boundaries, and making their information as accessible to others as possible. The elitist is always in a self-protective survival mode, holding on to internalized beliefs surrounding scarcity, whereas the sovereign is always in “shareable” mode, willing to communicate who they are and what they represent (with skill and with kindness) to others. The sovereign knows that there is rarely anything to be lost by increasing education, and they will create a firm foundation for others to benefit from and enjoy their interests. Sovereigns know that information can be increased and refined when shared, and the acquisition/realization of expansive and accessible knowledge can be facilitated by inspiring others to experience and share as well.
Elitists and Gatekeepers
For the sake of remaining relevant and comprehensive, I often use the term “elitist” when referring to undesirable coaching or exclusionary behaviors sometimes exhibited by veteran goths. When directed toward the goth subculture, this term takes on a life of its own and is practically redefined for the goth subculture in contrast to its definition in other fields of interest. For example, let’s say that someone plays hockey all the time, whether professionally or casually, fuels their passion for it by interacting with the hockey community, reads books about it, and engages with people well-invested in the sport. Even if this person displays traits of narcissism or elitism, their expertise will not be held in question. Nor will the person be asked to completely redefine their sport so that other athletes do not feel ostracized. In this instance, only the behavior needs to be corrected, not the person’s area of expertise or definition for hockey. Sure, the person will most likely receive criticism for their arrogance, but most of the time, they will not be labeled as someone who is limiting the game of hockey from becoming hockey-basketball or misdefining hockey as a sport utilizing pucks and balls to play. They will most likely not be accused of disallowing hockey to evolve into something that includes elements of basketball, softball, and volleyball (lest it be too exclusive). On the other hand, when a goth is being labeled as an elitist, it is not always because of their attitude (though that sometimes applies), but is often related to the fact that they are defining goth as a music-based subculture, rather than a subculture that includes a wide variety of darkly inclined interests. Goth is not a sport, and I am not saying that other subcultures have not faced challenges with their definitions, but goths are placed in a unique position as to be labeled elitists simply for having a definition for their subculture.
Elitism and gatekeeping are also not terms normalized within the goth subcultural vernacular. These terms are usually discussed in conversations with outsiders, rather than used as insults in the day-to-day inner movements of the community. If someone pulls rank on another goth, you most likely aren’t going to hear the recipient of the criticism shouting out, “Elitist!” More than likely, the person is just going to be labeled an asshole and will be relegated to their clique or corner of solitude until the behavior changes. I am not sure where the elitist label truly originated from, as it pertains to goths- inside or outside the subculture- but my bets lie with the external. Elitist was a label that spawned in response to (perhaps) the unsavory delivery of information essential to goth, and was erroneously founded on the idea that by defining something correctly, we are standing in the way of future progress and evolution. Almost no other field or subculture experiences this phenomenon, or at least not to the extent that the goth subculture does.
In my blog post called “What is Goth?”, I mentioned that some gatekeeping is essential to keeping the goth subculture afloat, but I also redefined what gatekeeping is, or perhaps just restored it to its original intention. Changing the definition of a word does not erase its history or impact and can be harmful, but it can also re-purpose rhetoric that is being used to misrepresent identity so that its future influence will be more effective in its characterization. Gatekeeping was originally used to dismiss goth identities and was later homologized to bullying, which is a grievous injustice toward the goth subculture. My purpose in separating out those definitions was to restore the definition of so-called “gatekeeping” to its original objective: Preserving the goth subculture and refusing to be redefined and erased by outsiders who want to make the literal “sound” of goth music more palatable. As stated in my previous article, gates (in goth subculture) are not meant to keep good people out.
In terms of elitism and musical exclusion, goth music is much more difficult to popularize than its (sub)cultural contemporaries because, unlike metal or rap, which have somewhat uniform sounds, goth music exists as more of a spectrum, with some bands or styles being heavily informed by Movement A, others by Movement B, and still others as a mix of Movement/Influence D,E, and F. Even though there are many subgenres of metal music, it is pretty easy to recognize that what we are listening to is metal fairly quickly. With goth that just isn’t the case all the time. Other subcultures and musical empires have been heavily influenced by movements that preceded them, but these effects are generally distributed across the genre(s) rather than within the genre(s) in localized places… at least regarding the “core” sound if it exists.
Goth is the love child of many parental movements, but like fraternal twins, triplets, quadruplets (and so on) that share some genetics with their ancestors, goth music can (in our case, audibly) express very differently from both the ancestors and its closest siblings (closest siblings being other subgenres of goth music). If you have the musical equivalent of “I don’t like it when my food touches,” navigating the complexities of goth music may be a challenge. Even if you don’t, developing discernment and cultivating your auditory sensitivities to distinguish between that which is goth and that which is not… and that which is kind of goth but also kind of not, takes time and dedication that is too much of a commitment for some people. (And believe me, I am not judging. The time and energy commitment thing is why I have not allowed myself to explore the Warhammer universe and many other fandoms. We have to pick and choose what we want to spend time on.)
Those who use terms such as elitist or gatekeeper as an insult are rarely involved in the goth subculture, but the terms are so ubiquitous that we (goths) are having to address them as if they are inner challenges we face amongst each other. There are always exceptions and anecdotal experiences, but more often than not, I hear the goth elitist label from people who are not being allowed to completely change the definition of goth than from those experiencing intra-community bullying.
Goth Identity and Countercultures
Is goth still countercultural? To really answer this question, we have to have a cohesive definition of what “mainstream” currently is since countercultures stand in opposition to mainstream ideals and beliefs. The problem with this is that goth does not belong to one ethnicity, race, country, geographic location, religion, political party, or belief system, but exists in all these spaces by myriad people who can embody or express any degree of difference they are capable of exhibiting across these spectrums. There is no clear-cut homologous value system across these planes that I can extract while maintaining cultural and geographic integrity or an accurate representation of cultural nuances. I do not think that goth is countercultural in terms of broadly manifesting as such globally, but that perhaps specific communities may use goth as a venue to express, say, anti-consumerism values in a capitalistic state or community. (This hybridizes Dick Hebidge’s and David Muggleton’s sociological work, though it leans more in Muggleton’s direction.) Perhaps in another community, the highlight could be on masculine-feminine balance as a localized value, which is easy to demonstrate given the (generally) gender-blended approach to goth hair and makeup aesthetics. You might think of me as an anti-structuralist goth when considering “goth philosophies” and whether philosophy even exists within goth as relevant to the subculture. I lean toward the no-philosophy camp and disagree with heavy structuralists who insist that goth can only have meaning if the subculture violates “mainstream” norms or shares a moral outlook. However, given some broad similarities in goth distributed across fashion, style, and musical interests, it can be expected that some degree of theme-based cohesion will be exhibited macroscopically.
Within the goth subculture, any arrogance truly holding us back is due to assuming that our deepest influences and values are not formed in mainstream spaces, when in fact, they most likely are. Subcultural spaces are usually safer incubators where we can express and analyze our relationship to these internalized structures and values through a preferred lens, but are not hereditarily distinct from external spaces. Bruno Latour, a French philosopher and sociologist, challenged the Western idea of nature and society existing as distinct spheres by positing his argument for “anthropological symmetry.” Basically, there is a big overlap between nature and society, and this redefines anthropology not just as the study of humankind, but as the study and interconnectivity of “existants” or living things.
I am not an anthropologist, and I am not here to muse on the deep inner architecture of modern society. However, with such a macro-representative perspective of demographic, cultural, and subcultural co-constitutions, we can conclude that (perhaps) it is far more important to explore the complexities of our relationships with the mainstream than push for any “countercultural” paragon. (And it would be productive if we WERE countercultural to perhaps examine how this is truly productive and for whom. Difference is not equivalent to meaningful purpose, and furthermore, it is not equivalent to multi-partisan beneficence.)
This is also possibly where the oversimplified (and mostly inaccurate) definition of goth as a lifestyle came from. Nothing is conjured. It arises from that which already exists (matter can neither be created nor destroyed, and I think that thoughts and ideas are almost always directly informed by our schemas… aka existing knowledge), so it is unfair to say that people who errantly think of goth as a lifestyle pulled it out of thin air. Even though the surface level of goth origins is intertwined with the idea of anti-consumerism, this is not broadly applied across all proto-goth communities and is an overgeneralization of “why” goth formed in the first place. The truth is that there was not a single, uniform reason “why” goth formed. Not everyone had post-consumerism in mind when they felt inspired by their punk and post-punk heroes of eras bygone.
If we continue operating and thinking on the premise that we cannot truly separate ourselves as purely oppositional identities from the mainstream (since the mainstream is far too broad and, in this article, is fairly undefined), because goth now exists internationally, where “mainstream” is a fluid construct, I do not think we can truly identify as a countercultural movement at this point. We are no longer attuned to a narrow smattering of origin points (such as hyper-specific UK singularities in the 80s) but are contingent on multi-cultural expression. We can, however, distinguish ourselves as an identity via fashion, music, literature, and other niche interests. Our greatest strength as people and subcultural identities is humility, and its sustainability lies in anthropological ecology and a basic understanding of inalienable inter-societal relationships in lieu of a purist dichotomy of goth versus outsiders. The power of goth and subculture is not relevant to an inessential war between dilettantes and elitists, but to our seemingly innate propensity for deeper connections and self-reflection.
Are Goths Born or Made?
Goth is a subcultural identity rooted in an interest in goth-defined music and is supported by the pillars of gothic fashion and gothic literature. As humans, we are all products of nature and nurture, which we cannot fully control, although most of us can eventually have some level of influence over our personal autonomy and choices. Without diving into a deep sociology or psychology lesson, it seems that most people live the way they do due to some relationship with biological determinatives but are also acting on external phenomena and influences simultaneously.
My personal position, which may or may not change as I gain life experience and assess scientific information, is that for the most part, our identities, sexuality, beliefs, values, and personal tastes are not usually intrinsic elements of our personhood but are much more fluid and dependent on a variety of factors (biology, nurture, anecdotal experiences, cultural exposure, and immersion etc.). We are not separate from everything else but exist as tangled and interconnected networks of our experiences and environments, and are also not uniform holograms exhibiting a fixed or static reality. Can our experiences and environments determine, to some degree, our proclivities and adapted tastes? Yes, I think so, but those things are formed over time. If we are sticking to our very rigid concept of what a goth is (someone who loves and appreciates goth music, whether by listening to it or engaging with it in another way), we can safely say that none of us are born goth. We cannot conceptualize what goth is or define what we are listening to or self-analyze to decide whether we are passionate about goth music or not when we are born. Therefore, the goth label is reserved for a state of development that can understand its definitions and nuances. A baby may feel happy when a goth song their parent or caregiver plays on the radio shows up in the middle of their day, but I do not consider superficial enjoyment on par with the ability to consciously appreciate something.
Determinative arguments get extremely messy and intriguing when we consider that (as in quantum physics and mechanics) particles may change their behavior simply because they are being observed. When someone is born in a human body, we also have no baseline to measure any intrinsic characteristics they may or may not have, because we do not even have solid scientific evidence that souls or humans “exist” before they incarnate! Our scientific baseline starts at birth and is measured against that of the general population and the majority within the same age and sometimes, demographic group. Goth is not a measurement of biological conformity, is not a mindset, is not a particular body type, and is not measured by our aptitude to connect with others. Even though there are many philosophers, psychologists, and sociologists who will take this much deeper, it is fair to say that, as of right now, there is no surefire way to measure “who we truly are” at birth. Even if we conduct brain scans that seem to predict societally preferred strengths or undesirable weaknesses, there are always outliers, exceptions, and varying expressions (which are hard to separate out from every other potential factor) that emerge amongst currently accepted “norms.” Either way, there is no way to measure “goth affinity” at birth. The humble answer here is that we do not know for sure how much of ourselves is born or influenced by outside factors (made), so until better information becomes available, I err on the side of caution and drift toward the goths-are-formed-as-a result-of-the-complexities-of-their-environments-and-experiences camp. What I can speak into, with greater clarity, is the goth awakening.
Goths Are Not Formed Under Laboratory Conditions
Both non-goths and goths have regarded people who emerge from other subcultures to join the goth world as posers or as the younger generations having an identity crisis. Ignoring whether these people join the subculture because they love and appreciate the music or not, there has been the nigh impossible standard that demands that goth identities emerge in a culturally uninformed or naïve state. Most of us do not magically encounter goth music at a young age, with a fully realized understanding of its significance sans any contact with other subcultures or darkly inclined identities.
Most of us discover goth through the lens of another identity, music movement, or an encounter with “dark” street fashion. This is not meant to imply that goth is on a pedestal and can only be accessed once one has ascended through the other levels comprising our cultural understanding of fringe identities, but we cannot deny that goth is much less accessible than emo, metal, and hip-hop music. This is not because it is necessarily physically inaccessible, but because goth is synonymized with these other identities or misconstrued as fashion-only. It is only after the “freaks” come out at night and self-actualize through different communities that we become more aware of the nuances and delineations among underground movements. In other words, goth is accessible for most of us via the internet, some books, YouTube, Bandcamp, iTunes, and many other platforms, but we do not have to be aware that goth is its own identity or understand when we are interfacing with its pillars to initially engage with it. A key thing to note as well is that accessibility is not synonymous with commercialization. In many cases, though not all, commercialization is the death of a subculture… In the goth subculture’s case, it has been the death of its foundational force and a reduction of its interests to a mere aesthetic. Even if we think of commodification in its most innocuous form, such as the “playing telephone” phenomenon (and this is the most shallow, brief approach to this issue I can take), we can recognize the distillable effects misinformed appropriation has on subcultural elements. However, many of us bleed into goth over time and only become aware of it as a distinct identity when we finally connect with the community. As I stated in my past article, when I discovered goth music, I had no idea what it was. To me, it was just a wonderful sound, and it had great lyrics that resonated with me. Had I been subjected to the rigorous standard of being fully goth-actualized while I was discovering the music, I never would have identified as a goth, but as a poser sentenced to the outskirts of subcultural purgatory.
If most of us are honest with ourselves, we recognize that we were not goths born under the purist, idealized conditions that are so romanticized in our fevered dreams of self-discovery. The fact is that most of us discovered goth through a messy conglomeration of (first) becoming interested in the fashion, browsing the early 2000s Hot Topic racks, or enjoying music from a more accessible music culture or subculture. Goth is almost always discovered via a different darkly inclined subculture or musical identity that paves the way for someone to become aware of goth spaces and music. In my last post, I spoke about how goth is sometimes hard to unearth because it is, and has always been, an underground music experience. What many of us have not failed to recognize in theory, but have failed to recognize in ourselves, is that goth is not a mindset or intrinsic inner identity. It is an alignment with the archetypes, ideals, sensations, thoughts, and experiences that have been presented to us as options. “Who we truly are” feels nearly impossible to discern sometimes, although we can be flippantly confident in our self-definitions, because we are all ordering from the social menu presented to us. The path that most of us must take is not going out to find ourselves but deconstructing the false personas and selves we have adopted due to our conditioning, anecdotal experiences, traumas, and culturally held roles and ideals. Goth is not fully deconstructing any of these things in and of itself, but is a space and experience that can facilitate either deconstruction or greater self-awareness. Yes, the music can reflect each individual artist’s values, but they, too, are part of the subculture, not just the hand-of-god outside of it, and there is no unified value system to unite goths across geography and demographics. Goth music can inform itself across bands and artists, but it is not just an echo chamber (thankfully) of itself. Every subculture is informed by the external spaces surrounding it, even if it is “countercultural” or created as a supposed opposite to mainstream interests. You cannot separate the people from the subculture. My point is that nothing exists in a vacuum, and subculture is as deeply influenced by everything it distinguishes itself from as other elements of our human experience are (e.g., gender), though I am not implying that subcultures are always direct results of their surroundings. This stance is supported by Dick Hebdige in his 1979 work Subculture: The Meaning of Style, where he helped define subcultural styles as bricolages. Bricolages are essentially repurposed “popular” or ordinary items rearranged or subverted to have new meanings or appearances… isomorphic configurations of their original structures and definitions. Hebdige was applying this term merely to style, but I think it is resonant across many features of subcultural identities.
Healing from the Gothquisition
Even though I spend copious amounts of time explaining why goths have been harmed by misappropriation of their subculture, the implication has never been to “attack” or publicly humiliate people who are representing an “inaccurate” version of goth. Thankfully, very few people seem to take it that way, but clarification on this point is most likely a fruitful venture.
As discussed above, there was a time when we were all misinformed or unaware of what goth was and is. Most of us had our Hot Topic days, Tripp pant days, thinking Type O Negative was goth days, and so on. Being a true “goth” is not defined by the route we take to get there, and is not erased by any other musical interests or preferences we may have. It does not matter whether someone came to goth from the emo movement or whether they like metal and goth music simultaneously, or if goth music was magically the first umbrella of music they deeply connected with. Goth is goth. Since many of us slid into goth from other subcultures and preferences, it can be expected that those lines sometimes became blurred and that we did not always understand each genre’s boundary (which can be hazy too!). None of us is perfect, and the fun and joy of discovering a music-based subculture is figuring out that our original perceptions had not fully prepared us for the bliss our future understanding contained. We need to be more symbiotic with baby bats, internet “goths”, and people who really do not know any better and recognize their humanity before we identify them with their error(s). I am not going to comment on call-out or call-in culture in this post, but no one should be harassing strangers on the internet for claiming to be goth or attacking someone else’s sense of worth or level of intelligence just because they “stole” a hashtag. Often, the people using goth hashtags when they are not goth have no idea what goth is or that they are doing anything wrong. In instances where we interface with others who are not as familiar with our subculture, and when it is appropriate, we need to handle them with humility and kindness.
Even though gentle correction of terminology is sometimes useful, I love to introduce people to goth rather than immediately trying to correct their beliefs surrounding it. Immersion is often a better antidote to ignorance than argument can be… But what if someone doesn’t want to be introduced or immersed? Leave them alone. Gatekeeping and bullying are two completely different things- one provides a definition and keeps safe spaces safe, and the other externalizes aggression and breaks down another person’s sense of self-worth. The latter is not ever acceptable. The best thing I can recommend for those who want to share and educate is to create via a platform: a YouTube channel, a TikTok account, a blog, a podcast, or a local event. The more we circulate the proper information, the more touchstones and venues others will have to connect with us and our interests.
An Open Invitation to Goth
Placing goth on a pedestal implies that it is an ultimate achievement or high ideal we need to aspire to, when this isn’t the case at all. Like anything else, subcultures and music are tools to better understand ourselves and experience the things we prefer. Right now, the internet has appropriated the goth label to imply that if someone is goth, they are a desirable girlfriend or they are into kink (those things have nothing to do with each other objectively). There is no one-size-fits-all, and for many, goth music and goth subculture are not useful or functional tools for self-discovery or enjoyment, even if a supposed “goth” appearance has been used as a mode for social acceptance. Goth is not a hierarchy, nor is it a measuring stick for maturity. I am not erasing the concepts of privilege, class, or wealth that can affect access to something, which then affects someone’s experience and perception of that thing, but I am stating that interests and personal tastes are not, as essences, built on staircases. Liking chicken nuggets more than oysters and caviar does not inherently predict someone’s maturity or state of development—these are culturally informed tastes where one thing is elevated above another in an arbitrary tug-of-war to create societal and (usually) wealth-protected self-image.
We can evolve even further from goth gatekeepers to goth ambassadors, representing our subculture with dignity and sovereignty without creating yet another toxic measuring stick for worth or significance. How one came to be goth is much less important than why someone identifies as goth. How transgressive a subculture is when juxtaposed to the “mainstream” has no governance over its validity. I speak to the goth community, the goth-curious, and the non-goths when I say that no subcultural identity or alternative “appearance” should ever be used as a predictor for desirability or sophistication. This creates a toxic and competitive environment for people in and outside of the subculture and encourages superficial engagement.
Goth is not an event, so it does not truly require an invitation to investigate or attend, but with the unfortunate mischaracterization of “elitist goths” and even my sometimes overly underground representation of goth, I want to extend the permission slip for anyone to be able to explore or engage with goth media and community. I am not insinuating that it is my place to be the “giver of permissions” or she-who-decides-who-may-access-goth, but for anyone who needs to hear it or read it, goth is for anyone who loves and appreciates the music. Defining goth has never been intended to exclude or segregate from others, but to crystallize who we are so that we can form deep connections with the music and people who align with our delights and preferences.