Thu, 13 Oct 1994 08:28:06 -0700 for Date: Thu, 13 Oct 1994 11:21 EDT From: SCOTT BLAKE Subject: Conformity (was: malls and more) To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU I think that we may be missing at least par tof the point by focusing on the humor and pathos of individuals who buy expensive "grunge" clothing instead of "real" grunge clothing. We have here a bona fide sociological phenomenon in addition to the snicker fodder we have been talking about. Those of us who consider ourselves radical (for former radicals) remember (fondly?) our days of grunge (or punk, hippie, beatnik, or whatever). Many of us continue to live with cheap clothes, baggy pants, or whatever else is cheap down at second-hand stores. I suggest that the clothes and the appearance are not what is at issue here. Youth movements have very intereesting histories and are (at least possibly) good studies in the power of our society to co-opt and de-fuse potentially revolutionary groups. As I mentioned in my last post, I personally remember what it was like to watch my rebeliousness turned into nothing more than a fashion statement. Way back then (it wasn't really that long ago), we lashed out the only way we could (or thought we could). In a very short time, however, the media/culture split us into criminals/drug dealers and misguided/ cute teenagers. I'll never forget the day I saw a street vendor in Greenwich Village selling mass-printed t-shirts with the anarchy symbol on them (the same vendor also had bumper stickers and really cool fingerless gloves). We're all sociologists here, can we have some analysis? Or is it just veyr obvious that this is what happens to any movements and therefore we don't need to talk about it. I would like to think that while the punks were unique in some ways, we also reflected a larger society even as we opposed it. scott (Sorry about all the parentheses (I've been flashing back to my programming days (mostly LISP and FORTRAN (yucko)))) =:)