Radio & Popular Music - Week 6 Response

This week we explored the concepts of subcultures, fandom and audiences. The set reading by Blackman gives an insight into the interdisciplinary development of subcultural theory and selected paradigms, whilst my complimentary reading ‘My Generation: Identity, Consumption and Fandom’ by Shuker investigates popular music consumers, fandom and self-identity. This draws links to Blackman’s explanation of fluidity and individualism attached to post-subcultural theory.

Blackman understands that each trend in subcultural theory has value, although I disagree. Early theorists such as A.K. Cohen suggested that those committed to subcultures were ‘understood as a social and moral danger to civil society’ (Blackman 2014: 508). I think this is definitely an out-dated and precarious theory to follow as it portrays those participating in subcultures as outcasts, although it rationalises why people deviate from society.

From this evolved the more liberal CCCS theory (from the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies). Blackman explains that deviance became detached from subcultures, which were seen in a wider political, social, historical and economic context. Consequently, the CCCS theory became relevant to subcultures worldwide. Moreover, they were viewed instead as a resistance to those in power and the bourgeoisie, and therefore valuable to understand the behaviour of young people. Similarly, Shuker argues that loyalty to a particular music genre can be a way to ‘distance oneself from the parent culture, community and social authority’ (Shuker 2016: 177). Making an independent choice opposing the mainstream exhibits resistance.

Our lecture also covered the concept of a passive media audience who simply receive media without actively engaging. Shuker abandons this idea. He emphasises the relevance of post-subcultural theory and individualism, claiming there is a ‘tension between musical audiences as collective groups and…as individual consumers’ (Shuker 2016: 178). I agree, as individual participation through the digital realm via streaming and social media is now the norm. Individualism has become centralised as someone can drift between subcultures more easily, and forge their own identity. As a result, subcultures are far more difficult to form as increasing individualism has fragmented these groups. Blackman agrees with Shuker on the significance of recent developments and their consequences; claiming post-subcultural theory offers ‘emphasis on consumer choice to buy into subcultures’ (Blackman 2014: 508).

This discussion has opened up multiple potential topics of research. You could investigate the post-subcultural trend of ‘hipsters’ who flow between different subcultures. You could ask a self-professed ‘hipster’ focus group how they choose to ‘buy into’ a certain subculture (e.g. purchasing hard copies) and which they feel is the most valuable or authentic. Thus, you could simultaneously ascertain how subcultural capital is constructed and how individuals independently choose to consume.

Bibliography

Blackman, S. (2014) “Subculture Theory: An Historical and Contemporary Assessment of the Concept for Understanding Deviance”. In: Deviant Behaviour, Vol. 35 (6), pp. 496-512

Shuker, R. (2016) “My Generation: Identity, Consumption and Fandom”, In: Understanding Popular Music Culture, Fifth Edition. pp. 177-195