BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


The cutesy goth aesthetic - who is to blame?

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
No star here laces
07:47 / 22.07.03
So I saw some girl at the bus stop with a handbag which said "evil needs candy foo" on it.

And I suddenly realised just how widespread the baby talk/cutesy/goth crossover thing had gone.

And I saw that it was a joke gone too far.

And I thought "Vasquez, much as I love you, are you to blame?"

I don't want it to be Jhonen's fault, but it seems likely...
 
 
sleazenation
08:02 / 22.07.03
we can blame Roman Dirge instead...
 
 
C.Elseware
13:09 / 22.07.03
See also
Emily the Strange kinda cute, bitter and stylish. The kind of cute that bites if you get too close.

 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:40 / 22.07.03
If we're gonna look at who started what, I think Neil Gaiman must be credited as one of the originators. He practically trademarked that whole cutesy-kooky-childwoman thing back in the day (sorry, night).

There are worse trends though, 'Laces. Let the Cutesigoths snog people with terrible beards in peace.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
14:02 / 22.07.03
I've always sort of assumed it was a manga thing.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
14:38 / 22.07.03
I think Gaiman was himself influenced by a subset of Gothdom.

Where to start, where to start... People will insist on putting on this stupid affected fear: "Oh, no! Look at the big scary Goth! It's wearing lots of eyeliner! And hair extensions! Kill it before it forces our children into fishnets!" It's fun to play with that. Ooh, I'm scaree. Flee my Hello Kitty handbag, stupid people. Run from my purple pigtails and heavily graffitied Pokemon t-shirt. Fundamental incongruity of concept & percept, blah blah Schopenhauercakes.

There again, there's the girly look popularized back in the Ninties and still floating round the margins of pop culture. Wouldn't be the first trend that's been appropriated and vandalized by Gothdom.

Plus all the Goths you see around nowadays are about 12. They've taken over our clubs and I can't buy black nail varnish from Claire's Accesories anymore without having to elbow several prepubescent Slipknot fans in the head.
 
 
Ex
18:42 / 22.07.03
Can I namecheck GloomCookie? And say "oogie"? And run, run from the infantilised childsexwaifs?
It's a bit chicken and egg, though. Vasquez and Dirge and the Cookies all garner a vague sense of authenticity from drawing (on) their local goth crowd. Then life cannibalises art. Or - Did Valentino and Naifeh not actually have that local subculture, and just hallucinated what they wanted to exist? And thus brought it into being? Or have we got beyond the "who started it" and are heavily into "who's recirculating it"? (Sorry, that makes it sound like an STD).
I think Goth's always tried to access the troubling underbelly of that which is idealised as innocent - I'd say childhood and dolls have long been fair game. Especially with the Victorian tie-in to infant mortality.
And if the subculture's going at it from both ends, which is more disturbing - aging goths like myself squeezed into kiddy costume, or sexed-up kinderwhore spookykids?
 
 
Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo
19:48 / 22.07.03
As a friend of Serina, (who does Gloomcookie) I can safely say that she IS like that, and it shows a subculture of Goth that she is a part of. Many (if not all) of the Gloomcookie characters are either her friends or people who correspond with her on-line.

In a way, I see it as an outgrowth of such writer/artists as Gorey, Charles Addams and Gahan Wilson, who mixed the macbre and children's images often in their work.
 
 
*
16:38 / 23.07.03
And if the subculture's going at it from both ends, which is more disturbing - aging goths like myself squeezed into kiddy costume, or sexed-up kinderwhore spookykids?

Children will always play at being adults-- it's a natural and healthy part of growing up. What's disturbing to me is that 1) they don't know they're playing and 2) the ideas they've been presented with about what it's like to be grown-up.

Likewise, what adult wouldn't want to play at being a kid again? once again, if it bleeds from the realm of play into an all-consuming obsession, or a fake personality trait, it can be annoying for other people and make the rest of one's life difficult. I am thinking of the 52 y.o. male seen recently at a club in my area wearing one of those teensy little gothic lolita dresses. That does not fly. As an androgyne I can't object to anyone wearing clothes that don't fit their gender assignment, but as a person with eyes I can sure object to that. I'd have objected just as strenuously to a 52 y.o. woman or a 52 y.o. otherperson in similar physical condition wearing the same outfit.

However, it can be done tastefully, or at least in a way that provokes sympathetic rather than painful laughter. A high-school-aged girl I encountered once selling girl scout cookies in black fishnets, kneehigh black riding boots, a black leather mini, and a biker jacket, sporting a costume bullwhip and a fuzzy ladybug backpack-- that was tolerable. And I joined her in laughing behind my hand at the people giving her nasty looks as they went to do their yuppie grocery-shopping. Sometimes it's good to give people something to be shocked about.

And anyway, I'll bet she sold a lot of cookies.
 
 
Ray Fawkes
13:20 / 24.07.03
Not to stir up a hornet's nest, but who are you to say what is and isn't tolerable? One man's poison, etc...
 
 
*
14:38 / 24.07.03
Actually, "tolerable" is an entirely subjective term. It means that which is able to be tolerated. If I can't tolerate it, to me, it isn't tolerable. But your point is taken.
 
 
Ria
19:33 / 25.07.03
so, like, teenagers and other young 'uns can engage in stereotype noncomformity but 52 year olds can't? did it have that much to do with his physical shape...
 
 
Ria
19:34 / 25.07.03
I guess in his case it turns into real nonconformity. not allowed.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
22:15 / 26.07.03
Hmmm. I have to say, I'm with Ria on this. Personally I find the aging sissy look rather endearing, but even if I didn't I'd hesitate to get all judgy about the bloke's choice of frock.
 
 
Ex
11:16 / 28.07.03
Apologies for accidentally prompting some aging-lolita bashing.

Edward Gorey is indeed fantastic. Friends grow weary of me giving the Gashlycrumb Tinies out at Christmas. And the Lemony Snicket illustrator sometimes seems to take partial inspiration from him. The eldest Baudelaire orphan - rock and role-model.
 
 
sleazenation
15:32 / 28.07.03
oddly enough a work collegue was looking for alternative entertainments (as in alternative to the pub) and came across a lesbian/gay/bi/goth website... it strikes me as very... for want of a better word, wrong when a fashion subset seeks to identify itself as a sexual identity...
 
 
*
05:28 / 29.07.03
so, like, teenagers and other young 'uns can engage in stereotype noncomformity but 52 year olds can't? did it have that much to do with his physical shape...

Actually, no, it probably had more to do with the way he was following young females around and attempting to rub his genitals against them, but that isn't strictly a fashion objection and so doesn't belong in this thread. That's not real nonconformity, it's just disgusting and rude.

I have nothing against older people wearing whatever they want, even if I find it personally distasteful. This particular person's outfit I did find personally distasteful, largely because it left far too little to the imagination, and I suspect that many people who are objecting to my "being judgemental" would have as well. The use of terms like "intolerable" were meant to be taken tongue in cheek, and not as indication that I really wished the person would be shot on account of being an eyesore.

I mean, look at me! Well, you can't, but still. I am not a fashist. I am one of the people who gets spat upon by the fashists. But I thought this thread was discussing personal tastes, and when we get right down to it "to each tai own" while a beautiful sentiment isn't conducive to discussion.

I think it worth noting that it is well known (or at least much rumored) that the reason this person comes into the goth club is because it is the only club which won't throw him out or deny him service on the basis of dress, and the few times he has been asked to leave is due to conduct. I'm not in favor of denying anyone anything on the basis of dress or personal taste.

Okay, enough of that business. I'll stop aging-lolita bashing, if that's what I was doing. I'm sorry I failed to mention the other few members of the 40-50 year old set I've seen pulling off a youthful gothic look with aplomb, mainly because I can't remember details. I'm also sorry the counter-example happened to be young. On To New Subtopic.

Sleaze: Could it have been more like lesbian/gay/bi; goth? Goth having a tendency to be an open and accepting subculture (contrary to what some would believe from my unintended "bashing"), many lesbian, gay, bi, and also transgender/gender variant people feel somewhat of a kinship with it. On the other hand, apparently, there is also a "goth fetish", or at least sites marketing themselves to "goth fetishists" (as opposed to people who just find the goth look fairly attractive in one form or another, I suppose), and if the website was of an adult nature it may have been more geared toward that crowd.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:25 / 29.07.03
it strikes me as very... for want of a better word, wrong when a fashion subset seeks to identify itself as a sexual identity...

This is the kind of statement that sounds very reasonable and correct at first, but who wants to say where you draw the line, you know? Is being into leather a fashion thing, or a sexual thing?

Personally I suspect the problem here is that too many people still think of "fashion" ONLY as some kind of shallow, superficial affectation, whereas sexuality is perceived as being something more integral and "authentic". Whereas in fact what we choose to wear, how we choose to express ourselves through the aspects of our appearance that we can control - that's a pretty fundamental part of our identity.

That's before we get onto how sexuality and 'fashion' always overlap - like, hipster hair gives me the horn, and proud.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
13:42 / 29.07.03
'Gives me the horn' is a statement that is biased against goats. It presents them stereotypically as sexually driven creatures with no natural intelligence thus I feel my duty is to ask you to remove it.

I'd like to take it a bit further and suggest that fashion is only about identification. It is about identifying sub-groups whether they may be goth, feminist, lesbian, golfer, builder, mother. Clothes invade every area of our lives- a nudist identifies not through their nudity but through their reluctance to wear garments. So fashion may not be separated from sexuality or from people's expectations of a subset and every fashion subset is in some way linked to sexuality.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
21:51 / 29.07.03
Would it be off topic of me to mention that I really, really need that handbag?
 
 
bjacques
22:23 / 29.07.03
And soon enough, say 30-40 years on, sex changes will be reversible, so biological gender could also follow fashion. And just like boys affected androgyny in the glam '70s (in hopes of getting some plain ol' hetero sex), kids will go hermaphroditic for a similar reason.

Call me Criswell
'cos none of his predictions came true either (except the one about whole cities of gays)
 
 
sleazenation
22:27 / 30.07.03
Personally I suspect the problem here is that too many people still think of "fashion" ONLY as some kind of shallow, superficial affectation, whereas sexuality is perceived as being something more integral and "authentic". Whereas in fact what we choose to wear, how we choose to express ourselves through the aspects of our appearance that we can control - that's a pretty fundamental part of our identity.

Well this is the interesting area of discussion since fashion is necessarily cyclical, constantly changing completely and renewing itself in a way that sexuality generally isn't especially amongst lesbians and gay men. that is to say that the the is a difference between wanting kitten heeled boots and trainers is different to and as fewer political and personal ramifications than deciding what gender you are attracted to.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
08:01 / 31.07.03
difference between wanting kitten heeled boots and trainers is different to and as fewer political and personal ramifications than deciding what gender you are attracted to.

I totally disagree with that, I think that's an entirely 2003 western orientated statement and loaded with assumption. Dress is ridiculously important, it's the window to the political and the personal. It's totally and completely tied in with these things. 1970's feminism was all about the clothes that women were wearing, it came about in part because of the trend for mini skirts.

A muslim woman fighting against covering her face would tell you that clothing is totally symptomatic of the problem. It can affect everything that we do, the way that we live and is far more pressing and obvious than who she might want to sleep with. A nun rejects sex entirely whatever her preference and takes on a certain mode of dress.

Do not underestimate the power of clothes, it leads you to the stupid side.
 
 
No star here laces
08:30 / 31.07.03
Also, like, how would gay men meet each other if it wasn't for ribbed vests and short haircuts?
 
 
sleazenation
10:00 / 31.07.03
Anna -isn't there an important difference between an imposed or adopted uniform, such as the hajib or the habit and the western pursuit of different clothing now encapsulated in the world of fashion?

Don't get me wrong i'm not trying to belittle politics of clothes, but beneath their clothes lesbian, gay and bisexuals seem to share.. and here words are failing me... cetain sets of experiences, discriminations and a cultural identity that is very different in origin to goths.

To put it in a way that (i hope) makes sense while all four groups express through clothes - what is being expressed is so different that i'm not sure the comparison between goth identity and sexual identity is valid.
 
 
_pin
19:18 / 31.07.03
Hm... First of all, I'd say that, of all sets of tastes, goth is the one that could be most clearly linked to sexuality- isn't it? In that, as an athsetic, it seems to be the most inate (am I being a tosser here?) although it does demand a high disposable income to really work...

However, aren't we being a bit binary about sexuality here? This might all get a bit quetrosexual, but can there not legitimately be said to be more then one kind of gay man? The kind of which will (probablly) be expressed through the adoption of a uniform, or indeed lack of it (SEE: male Conservative backbenchers who happy to fancy other men wearing suits as opposed to anything particularly "queer")

And I don't think fashion is as seasonal as it, um... is. Sure, the neophilic industry does indeed arange itself around predetermined divides, but how many people do? To a certain extent, high street stores are taste makers not through a slaveish devotion to the brand on the part of (for want of a better word) the consumers, but simply because WHAT ELSE IS THERE TO WEAR??

As horribly vacuous as it no doubt sounds, and I don't think it is as shallow (or atleast as evilly, corruptably shallow) as it does, even if people cahnge their wardrobes every six months, and this is just buying into a brand, an pre-fabricated identity that they didn't have before, does that mean that the feeling they have wearing those clothes of having that dientity that they've brought into, is this feeling really invalid?

For what it's worth, and going back to what I said earlier, don't most people who are more clothes-concious see their wardrobe as a big dressing-up box, with the items in it all having some effect on them as people and saying something about them to everyone else? And if they wear different things each day, and wish to say different things about themselves every day, does that really make them bad people?

Oh yeh, and hair = hott.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
09:18 / 01.08.03
isn't there an important difference between an imposed or adopted uniform, such as the hajib or the habit and the western pursuit of different clothing now encapsulated in the world of fashion?

To an extent there is but our culture has only just outgrown imposed clothing and certain parts of our culture still use clothes to differentiate themselves- schoolchildren, paramedics, the people who work at McDonalds. These things may be culturally imposed and necessary simply because of our society but that doesn't mean that they are any more escapable than our individual sexuality. Certainly in some ways I can deny my dyke half far more effectively than I can the roles that clothes demonstrate everyday.

lesbian, gay and bisexuals seem to share.. and here words are failing me... cetain sets of experiences, discriminations and a cultural identity that is very different in origin to goths.

This I agree with but I think that there is something in the choice to be a goth that is very important. Goths tend to be people who have made their decisions to exist in a certain way. L, G's and B's are lumped together because of their sexuality... not a bad thing, it's nice to have some common experience but two goths are just as likely to share the same experiences- as manufactured as those might be through their choices.

i'm not sure the comparison between goth identity and sexual identity is valid.

Well it is a pretty weird way to approach the world. Goth identity is constructed and sexual identity, I believe, is slightly more internal. Goth identity comes about through wilful creation and sexual identity can only really be denied. Fundamental differences that do appear to invalidate the comparison.

don't most people who are more clothes-concious see their wardrobe as a big dressing-up box

Well yes and an awful lot of those clothes conscious people create a personality each time they put on a piece of clothing but I don't think this is an argument against the importance of clothes. It mostly shows the importance of expression through physical appearance.
 
 
pixilated
04:36 / 02.08.03
isn't there an important difference between an imposed or adopted uniform, such as the hajib or the habit and the western pursuit of different clothing now encapsulated in the world of fashion?

To an extent there is but our culture has only just outgrown imposed clothing and certain parts of our culture still use clothes to differentiate themselves- schoolchildren, paramedics, the people who work at McDonalds. These things may be culturally imposed and necessary simply because of our society but that doesn't mean that they are any more escapable than our individual sexuality. Certainly in some ways I can deny my dyke half far more effectively than I can the roles that clothes demonstrate everyday.


hmm, what's important to keep in mind, i think, is the distinction between clothes, as opposed to fashion. i think people would be hard-pressed to say that clothes don't have political ramifications -- sorry, but until the day i see men wearing dresses and skirt suits in the office as freely as women, i think it's very difficult to ignore the politics of clothing (and their inextricable link to race, gender and sexuality). the very heated politics of clothing can include (i'm overgeneralizing cuz it's late and i'm tired): men in skirts, cornrows/ dreads/ dyed hair in the office, "ethnic" dress, "symbolic" clothing in school (whether it's armbands, offensive words...), "revealing" clothes in schools... people have been fired, shunned, sued over this stuff.

i think what sleazenation and others were getting at -- and correct me if i'm wrong -- is that the politics of "fashion," on the other hand, have more to do with mass culture, consumerism, branding, spectacle, etc. it's so tied up with money, mass production and the mass manufacturing of desire, that a discussion about fashion is very different from a discussion on clothing generally...

so, the fact that i can open up my "big dressing box" and choose between kitten heels and trainers one morning, isn't that big a deal... but the fact that, as a woman, my dressing box contains both skirt and pantsuits, while my boyfriend's dressing box doesn't, plus the fact that my office (like many other offices) has a dress code that definitely doesn't afford men the option of wearing skirt suits... well, that says a ton.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
08:55 / 02.08.03
[fanboy]

Solitaire Rose- As a friend of Serina, (who does Gloomcookie)

Can you tell her it rocks?

[/fanboy]

There's a cutesy aesthetic to pretty much anything. Punk, metal, fucking hippies... somewhere there's always a cute version. Even pirates and giant monsters. Even Cthulhu. It's just something that happens. Why this should be so is another question entirely...

'cmon, huge bears never used to be considered cute back when the only contact people had with them involved being eaten. Now, they're practically GUARANTEED to be cute. Unless, of course, you're being eaten by one. In which case you'd be justified in thinking otherwise.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
21:11 / 03.08.03
i think what sleazenation and others were getting at -- and correct me if i'm wrong -- is that the politics of "fashion," on the other hand, have more to do with mass culture, consumerism, branding, spectacle, etc. it's so tied up with money, mass production and the mass manufacturing of desire, that a discussion about fashion is very different from a discussion on clothing generally...

Yet fashion emerges from the political and reflects the social environment. Consumerism is the whole basis of our society and fashion being such a big part of it controls social status blah blah. The goth aesthetic is sub-cultural, it exists partly as a rebellious commentary on the consumer ethic and goths very much deal with the spectacle. Depending on the type of goth (I know little about them but if we're looking for definitions I hear Haus is the knowledgable one!) you might find a cutesy aesthetic, something a little Victorian or perhaps a cyber thing going on. Each of these shares common ground in the notion of protest against the generally accepted forms of dress that fashion dictates. In this culture fashion and clothes can only be separated so far until they relate to one another.
 
 
bjacques
03:33 / 04.08.03
Some people just have a morbid outlook (and/or sense of humor) and like archaic clothing styles. They're more fun to wear when society isn't forcing you to.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
14:41 / 04.08.03
I assume you're referring to Victoriana?
 
 
Quantum
10:06 / 05.08.03
Sorry if this is referenced already and I didn't notice it-
little goth girl was created specifically because Mata suddenly knew dozens of cute goth chicks all called Sarah. Self aware cute doom mongering, love it.

(Vasquez is a symptom of gothchic, not a cause, remember the goth chick in JTHM? He hates 'em)
 
 
bjacques
16:29 / 06.08.03
Yes indeed, though I understand even the (late) Victorians fetishized corsets. And surely cute goth is a way of having fun with all those hyperfeminine commercials girls were (and still are) exposed to.
 
 
ephemerat
22:58 / 06.08.03
Vasquez is a symptom of gothchic, not a cause, remember the goth chick in JTHM? He hates 'em.

I don't think that's strictly true. Vasquez clearly loves goth culture and its aesthetics - he's a part of it. His satirising is largely affectionate and his savage wit is clearly directed at himself as well. That's part of what makes Johnny et al so enjoyable to read.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply