Punks relation to politics

[cockandbull]

Hey all,

My first post in this forum so go easy...

the above is the title of a dissertation i'm having problems with. the general concept involves talk about the subculture and alot of the theory at the moment revolves around how the notion of postmodernity affects authenicity and commitment.

Any ideas...

Thanks

Harry

[NotInchoateHand1]

Check out AK Press---the title you want is The Philosophy of Punk. Ignore larger-scale social histories (a la Lipstick Traces) because they tend to be crappily retold anecdotes, devoid of cultural and political context.

That said, I'm not really sure what your thesis is--the umbrella term "punk" comprises a plethora of political stances and expression.

If you mean to examine it more directly through the lens of cultural theory, I would suggest hitting up ye olde Frankfurt School, rather than their many spawns--particularly look at Adorno's reflections on Jazz, I think you may find many valuable insights into the way a "dominant" culture is active in the production of subcultures, and further, the cooperation between the two in the realm of economic production.

For more subculture specific work, I can't rattle any titles off my head, because so much of this scholarship rightly deserves the epithet of "comparative lampshade analysis."

The major titans of the field are always a good place to start--take your own working knowledge of punk, as you understand it, and try to read it through a filter informed by Bataille and his original association with "The College of Sociology"--perhaps some of the best early thoughts on countercultures/subcultures. Then interrogate "punk" from the angle ofde Certeau's The Practice of Everyday Life.

Equally, you could trace its (conventional) dual roots--dissatisfied, disenfranchised working class youth in Britain, and urban intelligentsia in the US, where it quickly migrated to suburbia.

Failing all of this, you are welcome to a horribly written paper by me, written some eight years ago, on the exact same topic. Though I suggest you do your own work.

[37offsuit]

Could you be a little more clear on what you're looking at? There are many ways to take the phrase "how the notion of postmodernity affects authenticity and commitment."

How are you defining each term?

Also, late 70's UK punk is completely different from late 90's US punk-lite.

[cockandbull]

firstly, thanks for the quick response and I’m look into your suggestions
Sorry my original post wasn’t very clear.
I'm interest in the contemporary punk culture and its relationship to politics; I became interested in this subject after reading about www.punkvoter.com (http://www.punkvoter.com) and its republican rival www.conservativepunk.com. (http://www.conservativepunk.com.)

I’m approaching it through a cultural studies angle and the books I read so far have been concerned with the structure of subcultures. They are Dick Hebdige’s Subcultures: The Meaning of Style and some other work of the CCCS (which I understand has been, until recently, seen as the orthodox way of understanding subcultures), plus David Muggleton’s Inside Subculture: The postmodern meaning of style.

As a brief summary (I don’t want the post to be too long) the CCCS’s view of subcultures is that they are homogeneous, highly defined groups that resist the dominant hegemonic culture and that movement between subcultures is impossible due to high levels demarcation. Muggleton argues that subculturalists can be understood as postmodern in their identification with fragmentation and heterogeneity but modern in their commitment to individual freedom and self-expression, and therefore as a group they are apolitical. What I’m hoping to do is conduct some interviews and focus groups with subculturalists to see whether or not they show characteristics inline with the CCCS or Muggleton. Plus how these theories relate to the subcultures capacity for political expression

I am interested in providing a brief summary of how punk started and has evolved into its present state in both America and Britain. I have an understanding about the late 70’s British scene after reading John Savages book England’s dreaming, however, I only have a vague idea about how and why it evolved in America. If anyone could point me in the right direction concerning this I’d appreciate it.

Still very vague I know. I’m still searching for a defined question

Cheers.

[NotInchoateHand1]

I think "postmodern" probably contains the right problematics to approach this--rather than "apolitical," as if such a thing could exist, you might get more milage out of exploring ostensibly mutually exclusive identification--ie conservative punk, etc., in ways that stress the particularization-cum-homogeneousization/totalization effect---the way certain political and cultural discourses produce a homogeneous body at the same time as marketing and producing an expanding number of heterogenous identities, thus allowing for the fragmentation/contradiction exemplified in this sort of subculture. That is just general, inchoate ramblings, but once you post a bit more of your angle, your critical sympathies, etc., perhaps I can give some sort of further insight. If nothing else, we can talk theory and intellectual onanism is my favorite sport.

[hunterking]

[ QUOTE ]
late 70's UK punk is completely different from late 90's US punk-lite.

[/ QUOTE ]
yes, completely