Do many Polish young people know the subcultures many of them so eagerly ape are created and systematically modified and expanded in Western corporate boardrooms and design studios to get gullible youth hooked on this or that type of pricey duds, music, artefacts and assorted gadgets for which they pay through the nose usually with their parents' money? Do they believe they are making some individualistic ideological, cultural or fashion statement? Or are they simply fulfilling a need to belong to some peer group and want to go with the flow?
How would you compare young people in the West with their Polish counterparts in this regard: more, less or just as naive?
How many of these were invented in boardrooms of multinational companies, and how many were invented on the streets, in the clubs and in teenagers' bedrooms before later being used for commercial advantage?
I see less different styles amonst the young people of today than I saw when I was younger, when I was supposed to choose between a variety of different subcultures (I chose more than one at the same time - new romantic crusty gothic raver mod - it didn't quite work). Myabe there are more that I just don't notice. Does Poland actually get any of the good ones?
Anarchy-punks, kibole, blokersi, body-piercers, heavy metal types, bikers, whatever, including the PGMs (just made that up) who will become super-cool and trendy a season or two from now and are already on the drawing board. Any fan group, subculture, cult or sect that requires commercially available goods and gadgetry fills the bill.
Someone must have made plenty of money out of all those fops and dandies spending half of their disposable incomes on handkerchiefs, canes and various new styles of hat worn at just the right kind of jaunty angle.
No marketing man could ever have created the crusty / squat party scene, though? Crusties and squatters don't really represent a target market with disposable income.
But then again, some scenes - like from goths and harajuku to sloney ponies and what I refer to as "The Clapham Set" all represent a whole lifestyle - from clothes, to restaurants, magazines to cars etc.
The gay scene has its own sub cultures - bears, twinkies, muscle cubs etc. and sure, each represents its own unique marketing potential.
OK, here goes (and this is purely a b1tchy observation mate by me and a guy that I used to work with):
Typically second jobbers living in Clapham or SW London, they to go watching the rugby at "Twickers" and go skiing in Mirabelle in Winter. They drive round SW London in a VW Golf Cabrio, and wear their sunglasses on top of their heads.
He is head to toe TM Lewin Monday to Friday, and Hackett at the weekend.
She is head to toe TM Lewin Monday to Friday and likes a bit of Karen Millen at the weekend. Usually "TV anchor" hair. And always a pale pink pashmina - no matter what time of year.
They listen to Coldplay and Toploader at dinner parties (recipes courtesy of Jamie Oliver or Nigella), and like to go out in large groups to restaurants, where they'll drink a few glasses of Pimms too many and start screeching hysterically about funny things that happened on their gap year in Cambodia....
I lived in Wandsworth for a few months when I first moved to London, 8 years ago.
I just couldn't identify with the crowds on Old York Road... and getting trampled on by sloaney pony wannabes with pink pashminas, pointy shoes and the ubiquitous Starbucks paper cup on the train from Clapham Junction into central London every morning.
Been living in my Shoreditch bubble ever since LOL! :P
Do they believe they are making some individualistic ideological, cultural or fashion statement? Or are they simply fulfilling a need to belong to some peer group and want to go with the flow?
Do you believe that individualism lies in what you wear and what you listen to? How about your mind?
And why spending money on alternative clothing is more 'naive' than spending money on brand mainstream clothes (which are even more expensive)?
Really, that's ridiculous. These are not the subcultures who make up an ideology to clothes - usually these are people who share some sense of aesthetics, so they like similar kind of clothing. And the non-subculture people desperately try to find some ideology in it, which isn' there. Why do so many people assume that the ones who dress differently do it in order to say some statement or prove something? Is it really so hard to understand that people wear alternative fashion BECAUSE THEY LIKE IT?
