Apple. Coca-Cola. Google. Louis Vuitton. BMW.
The power of these brands is not just in the number of people who consume them. It's also a matter of excellent image management and careful attention to semiotics--the study of meaning-making.
This blog provides a public place to write about how mass culture and branding can be explained by examining what it is that they signify. Texts deal with dinosaurs, Cosmopolitan magazine, zombies, pornography and Nazis--among other things.
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Timothy S. Brown: “Subcultures, Pop Music, and Politics: Skinheads and “Nazi Rock” in England and Germany”
This article combines history and theory in an exploration of how an originally-English subculture was transformed through its contact with German social, cultural and historical traditions, there was a shift from the previously feminine skin head in England which focuses on love, peace, social drinking, listening to reggae music to a more masculine skinhead movement which emphasizes on violence and anti-racism, The 1960s skin head in England, was just like the hippie movement.
It is very interesting how much the term “skinhead” has evolved over the past decade. The range from British “mod” listening to American soul music to hippies listening to reggae to what I remember a “skinhead” being when I was a child, which is more of a punk music listener. It is not just the music that is tremendously surprising, but the clothing that the “skin” wore as the definition changed. From what we might refer to as “preppie”, when they wore Levi’s jeans and tennis shirts to wearing military jackets, boots, and tattoos later on. I don’t think I have ever read about a group with the same name changing so much over a relatively short amount of time. As the trend continued, I found it fascinating that original skinhead style people eventually began to separate themselves intentionally from “punk” style people who did not dress like the original skinhead did. It was considered a bastardization of the original style when people did not dress fashionably and extremely frowned upon in the subculture. Someone that does not understand the philosophies or values of the original “skinhead”, but dresses the part, would be considered a “poser.” It is safe to say that after so many different definitions of what a “skinhead” is over the last decade, that when you see one, you cannot draw any kind of immediate conclusion of what their values and philosophies are. This is true for any type of person, and you certainly cannot draw conclusions of what a person is like based on what they look like on the outside. The S.H.A.R.P. tries to define what a real “skinhead” is, and tries to make sure that the outside world has a clear understanding of what the ideals are.
I had to Google what skinheads were to understand the article. Unfortunately, I did this after I finished reading or at least mid way and so I did not grasp much of what the author was trying to get at. However, what I did notice was the author’s focus on the original style and ideals of skinheads when they were first introduced and how they have drastically changed over time, in a negative way. It sounds like the author is trying to protect and help other better understand the identity of skinheads by challenging the stereotypes bestowed upon this group of individuals. He does so by focusing more so on the origin, style and what they represent than the music. I think he does this in order to explain to those that are unfamiliar with the subculture that there is more to skinheads than the music they listen. It is not the music that defines them nor is it the music they identify with but rather its the symbolism and ideals that come with being a skinhead in which they relate to that allows them to self identify as a skinhead because they feel strongly about what they represent. From my understanding these people represented a form of professionalism and masculinity, however that quickly changed throughout the years. This change is what the author is trying to address. He is saying that due to the change the origins of being a skinhead have been lost because they have been misinterpreted.
To be honest, before this reading written by Timothy S. Brown, I wasn’t quite familiar with the term “skinhead”. I assumed that it was just another group of hardcore, punk rock fans who engage in some daring behavior. From the reading, I realized that my assumption was wrong. The skinhead community was instead a group was a “hard, masculine, working class group” that centered on the appreciation of black culture and upheld uniform characteristics of style that held symbolic meanings. I found the latter quite interesting. For example, the original skinheads used drugs so they can remove themselves from society, and relate to the world in a new context. What an interesting motive to get high/intoxicated. An important theme that really stuck out to me, however, was the schism, or split, of the skinhead community that had comprised a group that continued to uphold/ embrace black appreciation, and another group who dismissed it. The new skinheads, changed not only the physical appearance of the group, but most importantly its content, and were deemed racist. What a phenomena!
This article has really changed to definition of the word “skinhead” for me. I always thought a “skinhead” was someone who was bald and always listened to punk music. This article teaches me otherwise. Being a “skinhead” is more about looking the part more than anything. This article also shows talks about the evolution of the “skinhead” look. At the beginning, being a “skinhead” was all about looking masculine, hard and working class. They wanted to look like a model working man. Then their look gradually changed to having facial tattoos, wearing union-jack T-shirts and having very high boots. Liking a certain kind of music was also very important to being considered a “skinhead”. Enjoying a certain kind of music and dressing a certain way showed taste and authenticity. It was amazing to read that this group is much more concerned about style than a certain issue. The change in style and thoughts have really made it hard to identify what a “skinhead” is and what they represent.
Honestly, I had no idea what the heck a “skinhead” was before reading this. I just assumed that it was a Nazi or something. It was interesting how in the beginning the article had to specifically point out that this was not about America skinheads, but rather British or German skinheads. Skinheads have a lot to do with politics, depending on which wing they are makes them a different division (or what have you) of skin heads, or at least that’s what I got from this. The article discussed the struggle over authenticity quite a bit. One of the struggles, personal style has a lot to do with fashion. They named a few specific brands from which the subculture originated from. The whole thing was supposed to be about being masculine, and straying from that business class and the uniform. But, it seems that they has created a new uniform for themselves. The different fashions and music styles created off groups like “bone-heads.” In Germany, skin heads originated from music and fashion, and transformed into a more political group.
Like many others on here, I also was sort of unfamiliar with the term “skinhead”. I was under the impression that it was all about Nazism and Racism. Initially, I was really shocked to see the article explain that the origins of “skinheads” has roots with Jamaican music and black culture, however as the article progressed my initial thoughts on what a “skinhead” was changed completely. I think it is very interesting how the original “skinhead” movement was not intended to be political but that after it had a rebirthing in the seventies, it took a hard turn to the right in political ideology. I also thought the comparison to the hippie movement was pretty interesting. From what I gathered, the “skinhead” movement was at first a movement promoting traditional male masculinity but that it evolved into two types of people trying to use the same name. The original “skinheads” who stick to that masculinity principle and the evolved “skinheads” who took the original movement and turned it into a radical, right wing group. All in all though, even after reading this article, the whole “skinhead” thing still confuses me.
When I think of the term skinheads I envision a pale white person with a short haircut most likely one that is near bald. Also, along with a short haircut I picture them with ridiculous tattoos everywhere. To be completely truthful, when I think of skinheads, I automatically think of Edward Norton in American History X. The reading really didn’t surprise me at all in which it was a typical ethnography much like the one I wrote for the first assignment. Brown introduces a subculture, in this case it is skinheads, and continues to inform to his readers the history of the group and how it changed over the decades. He ultimately makes the reader try to understand them. The reading kind of pointed me in a better direction for the phenomenology assignment. Originally I struggled with how to present the topic. I was so focused on presenting a problem with my topic and details to support it that I forgot the whole point of the assignment. Brown began the reading explaining how the whole skinhead subculture came to existence. Then he later explains how the subculture grew and changed over many years. This gave me an idea on how to begin the assignment and what questions to try and answer as I transition throughout the assignment.
Hearing the word skinhead I always think of the movie American History X. One of the best films I’ve seen is basically about a man who was a neo-Nazi and tries to prevent his younger brother from following what he did and the choices he made. This article portrays a completely different image as the one in the movie dd. This article shows a much more gentle approach of this term ‘skinhead’ and their cultures. This article shows how skinheads weren’t the enemies they were just a group of people. Their look consisting of tight Levi jeans, Ben Sherman button down, Fred Perry tennis shirts, work boots, suspenders, and either a Levi or Harrington jacket was not as intimidating or insane as many people made it out to be. These men were not supposed to be brutal neo-Nazis but instead were just trying to display how they were working middle class, masculine, and hard. Like every group of people there are some who take the look to far to intimidate other groups of people. These people who were ex-punks were known to take this look and portray it as scarier than it was in reality. They focused on the scary factor and made the boots higher, tattoos, would shave their heads to the scalp, and many other looks attempting to intimidate others. These imposters are what we know as Skinheads meanwhile in reality most of the actual skinheads, which would never get much attention from the media or anyone because of their normality, were harmless and just listened to a different kind of music and wanted to stick out from the crowd a little.
Interesting how the author connects the "skinhead" identity with both artistry and politics. It's not often you pay attention to a form of art or artistic culture, and you associate this art form with politics. It's also interesting how the author deems this identity as problematic and radical. This makes me think back about what we discussed in class a few weeks ago, about conformity. In this case, what it appears to me, is that these "skinheads" are not trying to achieve a political purpose, and they surely do not care much about conformity. It seems that they simply accept and believe in the notions of an "authentic identity." This culture can interpreted as a rebellious, or "problematic" as the author mentions because they are often involved in violent situations and participating in extreme activities, but again, it does not appear that they seek to achieve a political objective. The question that this article raises in my head is, what are these "skinheads" or people who identify themselves as "skinheads" truly looking to achieve?
I would have never guessed that the skinhead culture was originally derived from showing an interest to Jamaican reggae. It seems like the skinhead movement seemed to merge after the downfall of the hippie movement, which the author mentioned. The skinhead culture seemed to be completely different than hippies in which they had shorter hair and dressed in a more working class manner. The appearance of the skinheads seemed to only be possible because of the appearance of the hippies. Skinheads seeemed like they wanted to not be apart of the hippie movement so instead of the long hair that hippies are associated with, skinheads had short hair. The original skinhead culture that was heavily influenced by soul and reggae did not seem to be as big as the skinheads that was heavily influenced by punk rock. I think it's interesting to note how reggae was somewhat an influence in most punk rock music. So in a way, the new skinheads had some original skinhead roots to it. The fact that politics had plays a big role in determining the "true" skinhead identity is interesting. My assumption from reading this is that the extremist right wing Nazi skinheads seemed to emerge because of the new left wing skinheads who were apart of this culture for the music and style.
At first, what came to mind for me when hearing the word “skinhead” was just a person who has shaved their head. Also, how the original skinheads wore combat boots, I naturally just connected them to the military. However, Timothy Brown gave me a few things to think about when reading this article as I was surprised how Brown emphasized how problematic this subculture is in Germany and England. At first, describing how their looks changed by emphasizing the threatening aspects of the look and how it represented a type of resistance. I don’t entirely agree with the idea that that may be represented as a “rebel par excellence,” stated by Brown, but just how a subculture evolves with their looks and adapt to their society. Another thing that caught my attention was when Brown said, “…it is a community in which the primary site of identity is personal style.” This may bring about certain social concerns in which a percent of the community may not be fond of the appearances of skinheads, leading to discrimination. For example, not being able to get hired at certain jobs because or their appearance and how people may start stereotyping which may put some in a bad position; Brown said, “the skinhead ‘look’ is open to more than one meaning. That then creates another problem in where Brown doesn’t know how to take back skinhead identity from the extreme right. Overall, Brown’s theory is somewhat sound because no skinhead can truly be racist as stated because the skinhead originally came to rise due to the appreciation of the Jamaican culture.
This article combines history and theory in an exploration of how an originally-English subculture was transformed through its contact with German social, cultural and historical traditions, there was a shift from the previously feminine skin head in England which focuses on love, peace, social drinking, listening to reggae music to a more masculine skinhead movement which emphasizes on violence and anti-racism, The 1960s skin head in England, was just like the hippie movement.
ReplyDeleteIt is very interesting how much the term “skinhead” has evolved over the past decade. The range from British “mod” listening to American soul music to hippies listening to reggae to what I remember a “skinhead” being when I was a child, which is more of a punk music listener. It is not just the music that is tremendously surprising, but the clothing that the “skin” wore as the definition changed. From what we might refer to as “preppie”, when they wore Levi’s jeans and tennis shirts to wearing military jackets, boots, and tattoos later on. I don’t think I have ever read about a group with the same name changing so much over a relatively short amount of time.
ReplyDeleteAs the trend continued, I found it fascinating that original skinhead style people eventually began to separate themselves intentionally from “punk” style people who did not dress like the original skinhead did. It was considered a bastardization of the original style when people did not dress fashionably and extremely frowned upon in the subculture. Someone that does not understand the philosophies or values of the original “skinhead”, but dresses the part, would be considered a “poser.”
It is safe to say that after so many different definitions of what a “skinhead” is over the last decade, that when you see one, you cannot draw any kind of immediate conclusion of what their values and philosophies are. This is true for any type of person, and you certainly cannot draw conclusions of what a person is like based on what they look like on the outside. The S.H.A.R.P. tries to define what a real “skinhead” is, and tries to make sure that the outside world has a clear understanding of what the ideals are.
I had to Google what skinheads were to understand the article. Unfortunately, I did this after I finished reading or at least mid way and so I did not grasp much of what the author was trying to get at. However, what I did notice was the author’s focus on the original style and ideals of skinheads when they were first introduced and how they have drastically changed over time, in a negative way. It sounds like the author is trying to protect and help other better understand the identity of skinheads by challenging the stereotypes bestowed upon this group of individuals. He does so by focusing more so on the origin, style and what they represent than the music. I think he does this in order to explain to those that are unfamiliar with the subculture that there is more to skinheads than the music they listen. It is not the music that defines them nor is it the music they identify with but rather its the symbolism and ideals that come with being a skinhead in which they relate to that allows them to self identify as a skinhead because they feel strongly about what they represent. From my understanding these people represented a form of professionalism and masculinity, however that quickly changed throughout the years. This change is what the author is trying to address. He is saying that due to the change the origins of being a skinhead have been lost because they have been misinterpreted.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, before this reading written by Timothy S. Brown, I wasn’t quite familiar with the term “skinhead”. I assumed that it was just another group of hardcore, punk rock fans who engage in some daring behavior. From the reading, I realized that my assumption was wrong. The skinhead community was instead a group was a “hard, masculine, working class group” that centered on the appreciation of black culture and upheld uniform characteristics of style that held symbolic meanings. I found the latter quite interesting. For example, the original skinheads used drugs so they can remove themselves from society, and relate to the world in a new context. What an interesting motive to get high/intoxicated. An important theme that really stuck out to me, however, was the schism, or split, of the skinhead community that had comprised a group that continued to uphold/ embrace black appreciation, and another group who dismissed it. The new skinheads, changed not only the physical appearance of the group, but most importantly its content, and were deemed racist. What a phenomena!
ReplyDeleteThis article has really changed to definition of the word “skinhead” for me. I always thought a “skinhead” was someone who was bald and always listened to punk music. This article teaches me otherwise. Being a “skinhead” is more about looking the part more than anything. This article also shows talks about the evolution of the “skinhead” look. At the beginning, being a “skinhead” was all about looking masculine, hard and working class. They wanted to look like a model working man. Then their look gradually changed to having facial tattoos, wearing union-jack T-shirts and having very high boots. Liking a certain kind of music was also very important to being considered a “skinhead”. Enjoying a certain kind of music and dressing a certain way showed taste and authenticity. It was amazing to read that this group is much more concerned about style than a certain issue. The change in style and thoughts have really made it hard to identify what a “skinhead” is and what they represent.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I had no idea what the heck a “skinhead” was before reading this. I just assumed that it was a Nazi or something. It was interesting how in the beginning the article had to specifically point out that this was not about America skinheads, but rather British or German skinheads. Skinheads have a lot to do with politics, depending on which wing they are makes them a different division (or what have you) of skin heads, or at least that’s what I got from this. The article discussed the struggle over authenticity quite a bit. One of the struggles, personal style has a lot to do with fashion. They named a few specific brands from which the subculture originated from. The whole thing was supposed to be about being masculine, and straying from that business class and the uniform. But, it seems that they has created a new uniform for themselves. The different fashions and music styles created off groups like “bone-heads.” In Germany, skin heads originated from music and fashion, and transformed into a more political group.
ReplyDeleteLike many others on here, I also was sort of unfamiliar with the term “skinhead”. I was under the impression that it was all about Nazism and Racism. Initially, I was really shocked to see the article explain that the origins of “skinheads” has roots with Jamaican music and black culture, however as the article progressed my initial thoughts on what a “skinhead” was changed completely. I think it is very interesting how the original “skinhead” movement was not intended to be political but that after it had a rebirthing in the seventies, it took a hard turn to the right in political ideology. I also thought the comparison to the hippie movement was pretty interesting. From what I gathered, the “skinhead” movement was at first a movement promoting traditional male masculinity but that it evolved into two types of people trying to use the same name. The original “skinheads” who stick to that masculinity principle and the evolved “skinheads” who took the original movement and turned it into a radical, right wing group. All in all though, even after reading this article, the whole “skinhead” thing still confuses me.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of the term skinheads I envision a pale white person with a short haircut most likely one that is near bald. Also, along with a short haircut I picture them with ridiculous tattoos everywhere. To be completely truthful, when I think of skinheads, I automatically think of Edward Norton in American History X. The reading really didn’t surprise me at all in which it was a typical ethnography much like the one I wrote for the first assignment. Brown introduces a subculture, in this case it is skinheads, and continues to inform to his readers the history of the group and how it changed over the decades. He ultimately makes the reader try to understand them.
ReplyDeleteThe reading kind of pointed me in a better direction for the phenomenology assignment. Originally I struggled with how to present the topic. I was so focused on presenting a problem with my topic and details to support it that I forgot the whole point of the assignment. Brown began the reading explaining how the whole skinhead subculture came to existence. Then he later explains how the subculture grew and changed over many years. This gave me an idea on how to begin the assignment and what questions to try and answer as I transition throughout the assignment.
Hearing the word skinhead I always think of the movie American History X. One of the best films I’ve seen is basically about a man who was a neo-Nazi and tries to prevent his younger brother from following what he did and the choices he made. This article portrays a completely different image as the one in the movie dd. This article shows a much more gentle approach of this term ‘skinhead’ and their cultures. This article shows how skinheads weren’t the enemies they were just a group of people. Their look consisting of tight Levi jeans, Ben Sherman button down, Fred Perry tennis shirts, work boots, suspenders, and either a Levi or Harrington jacket was not as intimidating or insane as many people made it out to be. These men were not supposed to be brutal neo-Nazis but instead were just trying to display how they were working middle class, masculine, and hard. Like every group of people there are some who take the look to far to intimidate other groups of people. These people who were ex-punks were known to take this look and portray it as scarier than it was in reality. They focused on the scary factor and made the boots higher, tattoos, would shave their heads to the scalp, and many other looks attempting to intimidate others. These imposters are what we know as Skinheads meanwhile in reality most of the actual skinheads, which would never get much attention from the media or anyone because of their normality, were harmless and just listened to a different kind of music and wanted to stick out from the crowd a little.
ReplyDeleteInteresting how the author connects the "skinhead" identity with both artistry and politics. It's not often you pay attention to a form of art or artistic culture, and you associate this art form with politics. It's also interesting how the author deems this identity as problematic and radical. This makes me think back about what we discussed in class a few weeks ago, about conformity. In this case, what it appears to me, is that these "skinheads" are not trying to achieve a political purpose, and they surely do not care much about conformity. It seems that they simply accept and believe in the notions of an "authentic identity." This culture can interpreted as a rebellious, or "problematic" as the author mentions because they are often involved in violent situations and participating in extreme activities, but again, it does not appear that they seek to achieve a political objective. The question that this article raises in my head is, what are these "skinheads" or people who identify themselves as "skinheads" truly looking to achieve?
ReplyDeleteI would have never guessed that the skinhead culture was originally derived from showing an interest to Jamaican reggae. It seems like the skinhead movement seemed to merge after the downfall of the hippie movement, which the author mentioned. The skinhead culture seemed to be completely different than hippies in which they had shorter hair and dressed in a more working class manner. The appearance of the skinheads seemed to only be possible because of the appearance of the hippies. Skinheads seeemed like they wanted to not be apart of the hippie movement so instead of the long hair that hippies are associated with, skinheads had short hair. The original skinhead culture that was heavily influenced by soul and reggae did not seem to be as big as the skinheads that was heavily influenced by punk rock. I think it's interesting to note how reggae was somewhat an influence in most punk rock music. So in a way, the new skinheads had some original skinhead roots to it. The fact that politics had plays a big role in determining the "true" skinhead identity is interesting. My assumption from reading this is that the extremist right wing Nazi skinheads seemed to emerge because of the new left wing skinheads who were apart of this culture for the music and style.
ReplyDeleteAt first, what came to mind for me when hearing the word “skinhead” was just a person who has shaved their head. Also, how the original skinheads wore combat boots, I naturally just connected them to the military. However, Timothy Brown gave me a few things to think about when reading this article as I was surprised how Brown emphasized how problematic this subculture is in Germany and England. At first, describing how their looks changed by emphasizing the threatening aspects of the look and how it represented a type of resistance. I don’t entirely agree with the idea that that may be represented as a “rebel par excellence,” stated by Brown, but just how a subculture evolves with their looks and adapt to their society. Another thing that caught my attention was when Brown said, “…it is a community in which the primary site of identity is personal style.” This may bring about certain social concerns in which a percent of the community may not be fond of the appearances of skinheads, leading to discrimination. For example, not being able to get hired at certain jobs because or their appearance and how people may start stereotyping which may put some in a bad position; Brown said, “the skinhead ‘look’ is open to more than one meaning. That then creates another problem in where Brown doesn’t know how to take back skinhead identity from the extreme right. Overall, Brown’s theory is somewhat sound because no skinhead can truly be racist as stated because the skinhead originally came to rise due to the appreciation of the Jamaican culture.
ReplyDelete