Music Communities

Music Subcultures and Scenes

Subcultures were initially conceptualized as homogeneous, somewhat static, bounded cultural spaces where participants shared norms, values, style, and argot. The study of music subcultures originates from two traditions: first, in the work of the Chicago school of sociology with its ethnographic focus on the diversity of the American city, and second, with the Frankfurt school and theories critical of mass society. All recent inquiry into music communities and subculture must address the Birmingham school's work during the 1970s, since which time many scholars have made the case that subcultures are in fact not bounded and static; rather, they are heterogeneous and constantly changing through negotiations between members and nonmembers. This insight has led some to abandon the term entirely, while others have tried to recover its saliency. The term subculture is out of fashion, although it continues to be relevant for many scholars in the field.

Postsubcultural studies include several new conceptualizations of youth music communities. The modern participant in music communities can be seen as a free agent of sorts drifting from one music network to another, while never fully defining oneself in terms of the subcultural group. Arguing that subculture has become ineffective analytically, Andy Bennett proposed that subcultures could be more accurately understood as “neotribes” where actors are loosely bounded temporally and spatially. Those who study subcultures are seen to elevate it as a tool of classification and impose labels on flesh-and-blood actors. Others argue that what matters is not their stylistic presentation of the actors but [Page 560]rather their actual practices as they relate to scenes as independent actors. And finally, some choose to focus on the role of media as groups known to be subcultural who constantly negotiate a sense of themselves in relation to media sources intent on co-opting or incorporating their meaning. Sarah Thornton adds that the mainstream media plays a decisive role in making subculture real in a way that surpasses the conceptions put forth by participants. All of these perspectives can lead us to assume that there may no inherent bounded entity known as a “subculture” existing in the world, but more accurately, loose associations of individuals coming together in groups that are tenuously bound at best.

With music scenes, place is injected into the study of subculture. Emphasis is on the common, shared context, where producers, fans, musicians, and others make meaning and attempt to distinguish themselves from others. Where subculture often assumes that participants equally share—to a great degree—certain specific norms and values, the study of music scenes assumes that participants' adherence to norms will vary. An important aspect of scenes is the need for participants to differentiate themselves from outsiders, whether that be the mainstream or other scenes. Within scenes, a local economy must be maintained. Networks of performers, promoters, fans, and producers must have a shared interest in being able to pool their resources. For scenes to grow and be sustainable, they must also have a shared space or spaces where participants can freely gather. For many scenes, such spaces include basements, warehouses, fields, private homes, or clubs and bars where the management is aligned in some way with the goals of the respective scene. Scenes are often local in the sense that one can speak of a Long Island “emo” scene, but one can also speak of the “emo” scene that is nationwide and includes the collective networks of all who consider themselves “emo.” What follows are some examples of music communities.

...