In cultural studies, a subculture Is a group of people within a culture that differentiates themselves from the larger culture which they belong to (Hebrides, 1979). The study of subcultures often consists of the study of symbolism attached to clothing, music and other visible appearances adopted by members of a subculture and also how those symbols are interpreted by the outsiders (Hebrides, 1979). Subcultures are usually opposition to the mainstream culture, so society feels a sense of uncertainty towards these minority groups.
Thus, they look down upon the subculture group and hold them to the outskirts of society (Tiffs,2010). However, members within those subcultures groups do not care about the opinions of dominant society and enjoy their distinctive position of outskirts by specialize themselves through their “dress, music choice, mannerisms, and recreational activities” (Tiffs,2010). The dominant society, in return, is inspired by subcultures groups In some aspect despite the uncertainty and shunning (Tiffs,2010). In this way, the dominant society try to find a way to access to the special subculture elements ND that is consequently-consumption.
As any kind of consumption is conducted by a person or a group of person, it inevitably relates to the issue of consumer behavior. While people always pursue the Identity and a sense of belonging to a certain kinds of society, so cultural marketing become a popular trend nowadays. The centralization of American west is a typical example of this marketing method. As we all know, one of the most Important purposes for marketing activities Is to reach as many consumers as possible, thus when business trying to marketing a subculture, the paradox will comes out.
That is, in order to marketing a subculture successful, it must firstly being accepted by the mainstream society. But, most subcultures suggest some kinds of autonomy and rebellion which are reluctant by the mainstream world. Thus, the original meaning of subcultures cannot be passed to consumers exactly through consumption, to some extent, the process of centralization of subculture can be seen as mainstream culture’s assimilation and appropriation toward subcultures. As result, Just some superficial Images of the subculture are reflected in the products.
In this article, the author try to identify two questions by demonstrate the centralization process of graffiti subculture. First, why such a subculture which symbolizes rebellion, anarchism and even vandalism can be commercialism, and more important, the cultural authenticity problem during the centralization process. To begin with, the author will first give a review of former academic work, then Introduce the graffiti subculture and Its centralization process as well as discuss the authenticity problem. Finally, a summary of this article will be given in the very end of this article. Literature Review Subcultures Theories
Subculture Is consisted by a group of people wealth the larger culture but often navels Deletes or Interests at variance Walt ten larger culture teen Delano. DICK Hebrides (1979) argued that “subcultures bring together like-minded individuals who feel neglected by societal standards and allow them to develop a sense of identity’. Members of a subculture often signal their membership through using distinctive and symbolic objects and things which includes cloth, accessories, music, mannerisms, and other visible affectations or Just using daily object in a completely different way from the intentions of the manufacturers (Frank, 1997).
The affectations itself and the way they using common objects are hard to be understand and maybe interpreted differently by members of the dominant culture. Thus, subcultures are always seen as subversion to normalcy. People in the dominant culture tend to link it with uncertainty and the dark side of society because they do not share the same value with subculture members. Dick Hebrides (1979) wrote that “subcultures can be perceived as negative due to their nature of criticism to the dominant societal standard”.
In term of graffiti subculture, the meaning of wieldiest writing on the walls f New York City subway system is very simple, mostly Just a person’s name, but it seems like a foreign language to most New Yorkers. Thus, they perceive threatening from the writing not only become they could not decipher it, but also because someone else could (Claudia Barnett, 1994). But nowadays, it may be difficult to identify certain subcultures because their style (particularly clothing and music) may be adopted by mainstream culture for commercial purposes.
Businesses often seek to capitalize on the subversive allure of subcultures in search of Cool, which is valuable in the selling of any product in current society (David 1996). Along with that trend, academic studies of subculture have turned from emphasizing on negotiation or rejection of dominant (middle class) ideologies to consumer research studies on marketplace based sub-cultures (Shank ,2006). Consumption-oriented Subcultures is first introduced to consumer research by Stouten and Necromancer (1995).
They define it as “a distinctive subgroup of society that self-selects on the basis of a shared commitment to a particular product class, brand, or consumption activity’. These distinctive subgroups have their own “identifiable, hierarchical social structure”, shared beliefs and values, unique ethos” and “unique Jargon’s, rituals, and modes of symbolic expression”. (Stouten and Necromancer, 1995). The characteristic of consumption-oriented subcultures can be made clear through brand communities. Both of the two are bound communities based on a structured set of social relationships (Chalmers, 2008).
Dentin (2001) argues that power and ideology could circulate through consumption, it also endows power and liberates consumers, but we need to notice that consumption can also demean and disenfranchise customers (Detent, 2001). Cultural appropriations and the centralization of cool The acculturation or assimilation of a subculture is usually explained by cultural appropriation. Cultural appropriation is a concept which used to describe the adoption of some specific elements of one culture by a different cultural group (Shaw, 2006).
The common sort of cultural appropriation usually stays at the adoption of the superficial iconography or symbolic element of subject culture. People within the appropriating culture do not have any real understanding nor interest in unreasonable ten Orlando cultural coalescence, teen Just use ten multilingual symbol of the subject culture as common goods as same as a plastic cup. Cultural appropriation often involves the appropriation of symbols artifacts, aesthetic standards, rituals, and behavior from other cultures.
It has always been a controversial concept due to the negative connotation it may have. When the subject culture is a minority culture while the appropriating culture is a dominant culture, it tends to imply a negative view towards the minority one. The dominant culture regarded culturally significant elements of the minority culture as objects that “look cool”(Thomas, 1997), and then turns it into mass-produced cheaply consumer kitsch which are completely different and less nuanced than they originally eave had.
For example, many young people adopt London punk music subculture simple by imitating their style of cloth or makeup. Another very interesting perspective to interpret the centralization process of a certain kinds of subculture is the centralization of Cool (Thomas, 1997). In his book “The Conquest of Cool” (1997), Frank Thomas examined how subcultures style is used by the mainstream as mainstream fashion. He comments that “since Corporate America first realized that cool could be incredibly profitable, it has been increasingly difficult for authentic cool to exist (Tiffs, 2010).
On the way round, cool was used by merchants to mass-produce and by advertisers to advertise in ways which lead people to believe that they can buy happiness through consume cool and thus buy their product in a never endless way (Tiffs, 2010). Furthermore, the communication of cool things (most time are symbols and styles which used to signify membership of a subculture) encourages a new bunch of people called “hangers-on” to buy mass produced subculture goods.
Hebrides (1979) acknowledges that being different with dedicated members of a subculture group (adhere to the values and lifestyle as well s the images associated with the group) “Hangers-on” (adopt the styles while do not adhere to the values and lifestyle of a subculture) offer varying degrees of commitment to the subculture. Many of them do not understand the subculture they “want” to be in and even do not spend time to accessories themselves for the appearance. They Just buy the mass-produced “safety pins” to indicator subcultures belonging.
Ironically, this act is seen as an offence rather than appreciation to the subculture not only because the mass-produced product but also because the person paid money for it. Authenticity Authenticity of subculture is an issue which becomes even more important than ever in the centralization process of subculture. The centralization of subculture makes the authentic members of a subculture feel offensive or feel their culture is damaged by the business activities. Thus, they are extremely sensitive about the authenticity issue. To understand how the issue raised, we must first understand what authenticity is.
The original meaning of the word “authentic” is real, actual, genuine, original, not false or copied. But it not enough for us to understand authenticity’ when related to subculture. In past subculture study, scholars have come up with some more usefully meaning on this term. Shaker (1994) defined authenticity as the ability to resonate with member’s common desires, feelings and experiences In a snared puddle language. He states Tanat “authenticity Is unrepeated by a series of oppositions: mainstream versus independent; pop versus rock; and commercialism versus creativity.
In culture study, authenticity is about a kind of specialist which are owned by a certain group of people, it is seen as highly subculture-specific. By this specialist, authentic members of community construct and express the same values which constitute subcultures identity. We can understand authenticity through the example of “hangers-on” (Hebrides, 1979). Hangers-on purchase subculture commodity to disguise themselves as member of a subculture, this act is seen as without authenticity. First, the product the hangers-on bought are not authentic because is Just the outcome of mass production.
Then, the act of buying it is also seen as unauthentic because they do not care the identity which belongs to the subculture. Currently, lots of subculture has been commodities, or example punk subculture, hip-hop subculture, taboo and graffiti subculture and so on. Some of the subculture even become the mainly consumption of people’s daily life, like the hip-hop style music. Thus, “the problem of authenticity is really the issue as to what constitutes proper or genuine membership” (Megaton, 2000). Another argument about authenticity is made by Chalmers (2008).
He argued that there are two types of consumers among consumption -oriented subcultures according to the degree of authenticity, which is hard-core member and peripheral members of subculture. For hard-core members, “the subcultures activity is the dominant aspect of their lifestyle”, whereas, for peripheral members, “the subcultures activity is only a minor part of their lifestyle” (Chalmers, 2008). Graffiti VS. Centralization An introduction of graffiti The word “graffiti” is derived from the Italian word graffito which means scratched.
Another origination of graffiti was the Greek word grapheme with the meaning of “to write”(Figured, 2010). These two originations properly describe the different creation forms of graffiti. Dating back to ancient times, graffiti were carved on walls with a harp object while now it usually is painting in the wall with acrylic paint. Graffiti has existed for a very long time. It can be dating back to Ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, and the Roman Empire. In that time, graffiti is a display of existence or a represent of human desires for communication (Orientations, 2010).
In modern time, graffiti is perceived as writings or drawings that have been scribbled, scratched, or sprayed illicitly on a wall or other public surface (Oxford Dictionaries). It is a combination of place, style and purpose. The rising of modern graffiti happens in sass to asses, during that time, the phrase “Killjoy was here” “Bird Live” and “Boredom is counter revolutionary” is popular in its origin and even widespread to other part of the world due to the use of American troops, the death of the highly influential Jazz soloist Charlie Parker and the general strike of May 1968 in Paris.
In this time, graffiti appears as words phrases by which people use to express their feelings or attitudes towards social phenomenon and to cherish important things. For example, in the May 1968 strike, people are so eager to express their dissatisfactions hat they decorated Paris by painting revolutionary, anarchistic, and situations slogans all over the city (Ihram, 2010). In asses, graffiti writers who are different from daggers appeared, teen are more experienced, taking grammar as a serious part AT tenet life and working on refining their styles in order to move simple tagging into building more elaborate pieces.
They grow up very fact by tagging on the New York City subway system and then tried to tag across the city. In this stage, graffiti combined with hip-hop, rap and punk culture then quickly evolve into an emerging subculture. As consequence, the widespread of graffiti raised attentions of authorities. They regarded graffiti as vandalism and began to suppress graffiti and graffiti writers. On the other hand, the ‘legitimate’ art world-?gallery started taking notice of this deviant street art. The centralization of graffiti The centralization of graffiti involves two phases.
First, the masterpieces of graffiti artists was moved from subway station and massy streets to the art galleries, exhibited and sold out. In the early asses, Fashion Mood in Bronx and Now Gallery in Manhattan became the first art galleries to show the works of graffiti artists. A typical example of this type is Bank’s, a very successful pseudonymous graffiti artist. His works are sold out at a range of price from as cheap as around GAP to as high as 452,GABBY. More important, the other form of centralization of graffiti is the communication of graffiti elements.
This form shows even less respect to the authentic meaning of graffiti subculture. For example, in Novo 2005, SONY launched an advertising champion by hiring a bunch of graffiti writers to draw “a collection of dizzy-eyed urban kids playing with the SSP” (Wired, 2005) in public place to marketing TTS upgrading product. The activity is called as “sign painting” which describes graffito’s presence in cultures outside of its origin, typically where graffiti can be traded for monetary gains (Data, 2007). In sign painting, the graffiti do not have any relation to self-expression nor conform to the authentic meaning of this subculture.
Graffiti writers are act as employers, they are grant permission to create graffiti on a public place, and the content and place of their painting is predetermined by the company. Thus, the painting is Just a pure business activity. But for SONY, the advertising champion is a big success so that many followers adopting this marketing method including famous names like Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, and Toyota (Patrick, 2009). Consequently, sign painting become serious business. Companies specialized in hiring graffiti writers to paint legal advertising was founded and they may require for up to $12,500 for live performances. Gregory, 2009). Another example of communication of graffiti is the 2007 graffiti themed fashion show by Viviane Westwood. She combined graffiti subculture with high-fashion, in order to sell product and this is a well demonstration of centralization of cool. Actually, due to mass produced, we can find the elements of graffiti subculture in many objects in our daily life, t-shirt, sneakers, decorations or even mugs. After thousands years, the graffiti subculture finally overwhelmed by today’s consumption obsessed society and failed to escape the capitalism’s effect of cool (Tiffs, 2010).
Findings and discussions The author thinks that, the most proper method to explain the centralization of graffiti and the authenticity issues raised in this process is consumption-oriented cultures tenure. As monumental In ten literature review part, Heeding Y) argues hat the degree of commitment to the subculture is different between Hangers-on and authentic subculture members. Consumption-oriented subcultures theory take a further step in study this topic. They hold the opinion that consumers of subcultures goods comprised of individuals who vary in their level of identification with the subculture collective.
Some of whom are defined as hard-core members are tied very closely to the subculture community and other, soft-core members, are only peripherally related to the community. (Fox, 1987, Skates, 2002, Sequester et al, 2006 cited in Shelton et al, 2010). This difference thus results in sub-groups among the subculture. According to this theory, people who write graffiti or related themselves to this subculture by purchasing graffiti-related products (artistic paintings, mass- produced product and related activities) can be divided into three groups.
The first group is the “diehard” who conforms to the very original intention of drawing graffiti (self-expression and anti-authorities). They don’t want to put graffiti into any business use which showing no respect to the culture itself. They want to keep authenticity of graffiti culture rather than be appropriate by mainstream business world. Artist Kidded said that: “l act in the moment, and it’s about a truth that’s not necessarily spoken, so I shout it and write it on stores.
At some point, all these shops have used graffiti culture as a commercial image, riding the trend without being a part in the least and for which the only point is to make some cash. All I say to them is “hello”; if these brands really like graffiti, I only give them what they like, so what if it’s beautiful or ugly. We goanna stop these brands from dictating a culture. ” People of this group believe that only members who really participate in can understand the authenticity f graffiti. They don’t want the culture be contaminated by any other forces and even do not rely on their works. The second group is opinion leaders.
People in this group have some knowledge about graffiti culture and very willing to convey the idea of graffiti to the mainstream society. For example, Vivian Westwood themed her important fashion show with graffiti. As deviant as she is, she may be truly appreciated graffiti culture but she also want to convert her knowledge into profit. In this case, when they broadcast graffiti to the mainstream through business activities, some of the authentic part will lose. That was because they do not have the ability to fully express this culture or because they Just unwilling to tell the truth at all.
As consequence, the culture always be distorted and perceived differently by consumers. It is exactly how the authenticity of a subculture lost through the centralization process. The last group is called “the ignorant”. It mainly constitutes by ordinary consumers who buy mass-produced graffiti-related goods from the department stores. Those people do not know much about graffiti nor do they care about it. For them, graffiti is simply a synonym for fashion which they can SE to show a sense of cool. The controversial issues often rise between the diehard and the opinion leader.
Diehard argues that they are the authentic member of graffiti subculture because they use graffiti as a personal form of expression and stick to use public site to draw graffiti. While, opinion leaders argues that there is nothing wrong with making money from their work with a conscience. What’s more, it even a better way to make connections between products and people’s identities so that graffiti subculture can be convey to the public more precisely. It is hard to tell which one is RL t, out ten autumn ay tank ten compartmentalize AT grammar Daring much good the bad influence to the subculture.
At least, the centralization process allows graffiti to approach the public and arouse their interests of exploring the real charming glamour of graffiti. Conclusion In modern society, the power of market is so strong that it is impossible to escape from it. Many subcultures have been commercialism and commodities in recent decades. Graffiti cannot be avoided too. The centralization of graffiti objectifies graffiti subculture through mass-produced merchandise. But, as images of graffiti came popular culture commodities, the authenticity of the underground communication is also contaminated by market forces.
Even though centralization of graffiti is regard as an unexpected method, graffiti artists think that the key purpose is achieved, which is allowing graffiti to approach the public. Through study the centralization process of graffiti subculture, the author find that the centralization of this rebellion subculture can be explained by consumption-oriented subculture theory as well as the centralization of cool. Three subgroups can be divided within the subculture itself according to the degree f commitment applied to the subculture.
