RECONCEPTUALIZING PUNK THROUGH IDEOLOGY AND AUTHENTICTY Philip Lewin University of Georgia plewin@uga.edu J.

Patrick Williams Arkansas State University subcultures@gmail.com ABSTRACT Over the past seventy years, scholars have studied subcultures through a number of theoretical paradigms. In the classic literature, functionalists construed subcultures as dysfunctional reactions to the strain experienced by those unable to achieve mainstream cultural goals, and neo-marxists viewed them as class-bound vehicles through which working-class youth resisted dominant ideological codes. While functionalists never considered the authenticity of subcultural identity, neo-marxists did so in a rather primitive way, assuming that subcultures were authentic only at their moments of conception, being commodified and sold back to young people through a hegemonic culture industry thereafter. Two problems characterize both of these early approaches. First, scholars assumed the objectivity of authenticity, taking the view that one either was or was not a real subcultural member. Second, scholars, particularly those working from the British tradition, overemphasized style as an objective marker of authenticity, which has drawn focus away from non-material aspects of subculture. In recent decades, symbolic interactionists and other cultural sociologists have problematized the boundaries between subcultures and dominant culture by explicating identity and nonmaterial culture as key analytic dimensions of subcultural research. Our chapter furthers this approach to the study of authenticity through an ethnographic investigation of punk subculture. We study the meanings that participants attach to their own behaviors, emphasizing how authenticity is developed through ideological and moral commitments that are couched within the larger cultural milieu of modernity. Our work seeks to move beyond an analysis of how subculturalists construct authentic identities, instead exploring how the broader cultural goal for authentic selfhood orients subcultural participation. We find that what has ensued from the culture industrys appropriation of punk style is an attempt by some young punks to come together in order to share in a project of selfrealization in which authenticity (as punk and as a human-being) is developed through commitment to three ideological tenants: resistance, self-actualization and reflexivity. Drawing from Taylors (1992) discussion of the modernist preoccupation with authenticity, we extend the possibility of reconceptalizing punk as a subculture of authenticity at its core rather than one in which authenticity is merely a status position for which participants vie.

Lewin 2

BACKGROUND An extensive literature in the sociology of culture considers why young people enter into subcultures as well as what it means, both subjectively and objectively, to participate in them. Over the past seventy years, two theoretical traditions have tended to dominate this debate: functionalism and neo-marxism. The functionalist perspective emerged from attempts to understand and explain deviant behavior during the early 20th century. Seeking to challenge the then-dominant psychological notion that an inherent criminal personality accounted for deviant behavior, scholars at the University of Chicago contended that deviance should be understood as result of life in cities determined by cultural norms, and not a symptom of psychological deficiency (Frith 1984, p.40). Working from that logic, proponents posited that a dominant ideology, primarily emphasizing the achievement of financial success, permeated mainstream cultural value orientations. Those in lower class positions lacked access to the means required for the realization of such a cultural goal, resulting in various types of responses to the problem (Merton 1938). The problem initially became apparent in the school system, where disenfranchised young people fail to achieve status due to the dearth of resources that they possessed (Baron 1989). Merton (1957) introduced the argument that in order to overcome this means-goal discrepancy, disenfranchised youth evolved adaptations in order to cope with problems of adjustment. Adaptation manifested in four ways: innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. Subculture represented a rebellion adaptation, whereby youth rejected both mainstream cultural goals as well as the socially accepted means for achieving them. Participants replaced dominant goals with ones that could more readily and easily be achieved, which allowed them to develop status in a way in which participation in mainstream culture

Lewin 3 precluded (Cohen 1955). Matza and Sykes (1961) fleshed out this conceptualization with the intent of further mitigating the pejorative connotations typically assigned to subcultural participation, arguing that while subcultures offer nonconformist routes to pleasure and excitement, they are not necessarily anti-social and do not challenge or disrupt society in ways that others had previously believed. Overall, then, the Chicago perspective conceptualized subculture as a means of understanding deviance within socially situated contexts. Subsequent work, however, criticized particular aspects of the Chicago Schools theoretical explanation. First, critics contended that the perspective artificially imposed a divide between subculture and dominant culture, given that, in reality, continuities exist between both social worlds. Careful examination of subcultural ideologies reveals that mainstream cultural goals are never fully rejected. While subculurists oftentimes modify them, dominant and subcultural objectives are not fully incompatible. Second, Fine and Kleinmann (1979) suggest that upon developing a subcultural identity, participants do not actually leave dominant culture; rather, they regularly and fluidly move between each social milieu. To participants, subcultures are but one of many social networks to which they belong, most of which consist of weak ties. In a word, then, scholars have critiqued the functionalist explanation for suggesting that both subcultural and dominant cultural participation are mutually exclusive in a way that does not hold up in reality. More routinely employed to explicate the presence of subcultures, perhaps, is the neomarxian tradition, represented by scholarship emerging from the Center for Contemporary Culture Studies (CCCS) at the University of Birmingham, UK during the 1970s. The publication of Resistance through Rituals (Hall and Jefferson 1976) shifted the focus of subculture studies away from an investigation of how young people coped with local social problems to a macro

Lewin 4 perspective on class, in which youth subcultures were conceptualized as spectacular indicators of ongoing class struggles in British society. For the CCCS, subcultures indicated a series of collective reactions to structural changes taking place in post-war Britain, which symbolized perpetuating class division (Bennett and Kahn-Harris). As such, CCCS researchers viewed subcultures as class-bound vehicles through which young people struggle[d] over cultural space (Brake 1984: 4). Positing them as a phenomenon of the working class, they theorized that through subcultural participation, children of working class parents overcame in a magical way the structural contradiction of residing in a system of cultural values that did not reflect the circumstances of their lives or their material interests. Drawing from Gramsci, CCCS scholars theorized that subcultures were centered around a hegemonic struggle involving the attainment of space for the development and expression of alternative ideas to bourgeois ideology and the challenging of taken-for-granted authority (Bennett and Kahn-Harris). Subcultures became positive reference groups through which participants worked to formulate counter-ideologies. They accomplished this by engaging in symbolic acts of resistance, which manifested primarily as style. Style, they contended, reflected the ideological values of members, though the homology between the two was oftentimes ambiguous. Moreover, as a mechanism of social organization, their writings suggested that style cultivated group solidarity by fostering internal homogeneity and external differentiation, oftentimes striving to reconvene working class communities that were dissolving in the wake of post-war economic expansion, which enabled lower class citizens to take part in the hitherto unaffordable conspicuous consumption activities of middle-class culture. In a bittersweet assessment, the Birmingham school concluded that subcultural participation functioned only as a magical solution for escaping the material trappings of social

Lewin 5 class. While subversive style offered an unsettling critique of extant social relations, it lacked the capacity to upend the institutions which maintained an unequal distribution of power and privilege throughout society. In other words, symbolic resistance could not alter the class-based order of society and did not disabuse the concrete problems of working-class youth unemployment, a future of alienating labor, educational disadvantage, and so forth (Clark et. al 1976). Perhaps more problematically to those in subcultures, styles proved readily susceptible to appropriation and co-option by a powerful culture industry. Its agents standardized it in order to achieve efficiency and mass-production while concurrently striving to change and/or create temporary trends in order to artificially induce new demands (Clark 1976). They further argued that mass marketing campaigns generalized the styles of subcultures, which weakened them as local sites of resistance. Eventually, the ideological origins of style were lost in the process of commodity production, exchange, and creative appropriation (Muggleton 2000). Muggleton explains this process in depth. As commercialization of style occurs, participants come to understand subcultures through media representations. Since the media visualizes styles as opposed to contextualizing them, fashion becomes correlated with identity. Culture producers appropriate elements from unrelated subcultures, as well as the mainstream, and combine them in order to create new avenues for consumption, which precludes their meanings from stabilizing. Pastiche transforms into the primary means for achieving stylistic innovation, as subcultures feed off of one another stylistically. This blurs cultural boundaries and meanings and also bars participants from developing new ideologies, given that the technique relies solely on replication (Muggleton 2000). Moreover, the culture industry removes the symbolisms once contained within styles in order to render them more amenable to consumption. The overall process defuses styleacceptable elements are maintained, while

Lewin 6 contentious one are eschewed (Clarke 1976; Hebdige 1979). In the end, identity ceases to entail stylistic prescripts. At the point when mass media leaves participants with only images of style because their ideological origins are lost, identity devolves simply into fashion. Subcultural innovations are generalized to represent a holistic youth culture, which destroys resistance, social-consciousness of status, and the subcultures former potentials for emancipation. While the CCCS approach, rooted in a Gramscian analysis of power and hegemony, has tended to dominated the extant literature and discourse on subculture studies, scholars have levied a variety of cogent critiques against it. First, McRobbie and Garbger (1976) criticized CCCS researchers for failing to account for girls involvement in youth subcultures. While empirical evidence has revealed that most subcultures tend to be male dominated, there has certainly been no dearth of female participation in them. Rather, since CCCS scholars conceptualize subcultures as magical solutions to the structural economic problems of working class men, women are presumed to occupy only a peripheral role in them (Baron 1989). Further, critics charge scholars in the tradition of equating youth consumerism with working-class resistance in an unqualified manner (Bennet and Khan-Harris 2004). Many have found the contention that young people make use of consumer goods for the express intent of resisting dominant ideology hard to believe. This component of CCCS theory also relies on the essentialist notion that subcultural participants comprise exclusiveor at least predominantly working class youth. Field studies, especially in the post-subcultures tradition, demonstrate that subcultural participants come from a variety of socio-economic backgrounds, and that consumption activities are directed toward the project of developing unique identities and having fun as much as, if not more so, than at resistance.

Lewin 7 What undergirds all of these criticisms is a problematic with respect to CCCS methodology. Birmingham scholars relied primarily on semiotic analysis to explore the meaning of youth subcultures, concentrating on the symbolic aspects of subcultural consumption in lieu of the actual meanings that young people attach to their own behaviors (Miles 1995). Accordingly, studies rooted in this paradigm have failed to consider local variations in youth responses to music and style, assuming the uniformity of subcultural meaning. Emphasizing spectacular behaviors and images conducive to semiotic assessment, they also neglected to consider the everyday, mundane aspects of subcultural participation. Thus, while offering many contributions to our understanding of subculture, the CCCS locked the study of subculture within the parameters of a rather narrow discourse. It offers only a very rigid, essentialist and rarely empirical portrait of what it means to participate in a subculture. (Bennett and Kahn-Harris 2004) In more recent decades, however, subcultural research conducted through a microsociology lens has been advanced. The microsociology perspective views subculture a set of understandings, behaviors and artifacts used by particular groups and diffused through interlocking group networks (Fine and Kleinman 1979, p.18). Heeding this perspective, they have problematized the assumed divide between subculture and dominant culture, deemphasizing the Birminghams concentration on class and resistance. Instead, they have identified identity and authenticity as key analytic dimensions of subcultural research. A wealth of work (e.g. Williams 2005, 2006; Andes 1998; Widdicombe 1998) approached through this lens reveals that subculturists strive to construct authentic identities. Our notion of authenticity entails a metaphysical concern with being versus doing in relation to ones self concept, manifesting in the strategic utilization of argot, style of dress and behavior (Williams 2006).

Lewin 8 Three general problems, however, have confounded prior attempts to develop a dynamic conceptualization of authenticity and to understand the processes through which subculturists achieve it. First, many researchers assume the objectivity of authenticity, uncritically assigning typological qualities to both those who are deemed authentic and inauthentic (Williams 2006). The origin of this problem seems to rest with CCCS writings concerning mass media incorporation of subcultural style. Hebdige, as well as others in his theoretical camp, took the view that subcultures are authentic only at their moments of conception. As soon as agents of the culture industry co-opt and commodify their styles, thereafter selling them back to participants, authenticity, which is tied to class-based subversion, is forever lost. This theoretical position, in fact, has inspired a new lens through which to examine subculture dubbed postsubcultural studies. Scholars heeding this line of argument suggest that the concept of subculture has essentially become outmoded. As the culture industry has wrapped its tentacles around all possible avenues for stylistic resistance, it has also doomed contemporary subcultural participants to an inherent state inauthenticity. Drawing from the microsociology, however, we argue, that authenticity possesses no concrete properties. Rather, it is a socially constructed concept negotiated by subculturists through interaction--a claim made by those involved in subculture that is either legitimated or denied by relevant others (Peterson 2005). By assigning concrete properties to those considered authentic, we risk privileging and subsequently reifying dominant conceptions of authenticity while marginalizing the voices of those on the so-called periphery of subculture, who may harbor divergent notions of it. Additionally, we obscure the processes of negotiation and construction in which subculturalists partake when objectifying authenticity, instead assuming that it constitutes something which participants merely have or do not have. Such confusion warrants a more

Lewin 9 critical exploration of the concept in order to understand how various qualities become authentic to subculturalists and why they come to be defined as such. Second, many researchers have attempted to define and understand subculture through an exploration of style, and, as a natural result, their work has tended to frame authenticity in terms of style. Style, articulated through music, dress, ritualistic behavior, and argot, serves a means to confer group validation and coherence as well as to make a statement with respect to for what a groups stands (Gelder 1997). The CCCS, as noted above, viewed style as a symbola sign, in essence, of something elseand hence made heavy use of semiotics in order to interpret it. Consequently, its scholarship has built up a tradition that has over-emphasized the study material culture to the detriment of non-material culture. Indeed, subcultural style, so salient and intriguing to the sociological eye, has become the most commonly analyzed dimension of subculture studiesscholars have framed, interpreted, and defined subcultures through it, choosing to gauge concepts such as commitment and authenticity vis-a-vis stylistic conformity (e.g., Fox 1987). Given that elements of subcultural style are routinely co-opted and consequently distorted by the profit-driven culture industry, however, style, as discussed above, is rapidly becoming marginalized as a resource from which subculturists may draw in the quest for authenticity. Furthermore, ethnographic work by Williams on straightedge subculture reveals that notions of authentic identity generally possess two dimensions social and personal. The social dimension of authenticity refers to how individuals make claims for insider status within a social category, while the personal dimension refers to how individuals attempt to frame their subcultural participation as part of a larger life project that is independent of external influence. Establishing the personal dimension, he observed, involved articulating a personal commitment to

Lewin 10 straightedge values that predated exposure to the subculture; identifying as straightedge in response to peers, on the other hand, was spurned as artificial (Williams 2005). The extant literature on subculturalists, similarly, demonstrates that participants regularly claim to be real while charging that others merely speak or dress in certain ways in order to appear cool or to fit in with a group (Widdicombe and Woofitt 1990); those dubbed inauthentic are branded as poseurs and relegated to the periphery of subcultural participation (Fox 1987). Hence, it appears that actively working to evoke images through style displays with the perceived intent of representing a social category is repudiated in lieu of allowing such categories to fit into and reflect a pre-existent genuine self. Given these findings, further inquiry into the ideology and values representing the personal dimension of authenticity as well as how subcultural boundaries are constructed through nonmaterial components of culture is in order. In other words, reason exists at this point in time to prioritize the study non-material aspects of subculture over their sartorial dimensions. However commercialized and commodified they may be, many participants contend that deep-rooted, meaningful ideologies remain vested within them. Claiming to possess authenticity, members of several subcultures proclaim that in their true forms, subcultures emphasize ideology over style. Third, and lastly, no attempt has been made to understand or place the quest for authenticity among subcultural participants within the larger social context of modernity. Authenticityor the quest for freedom of self-expressionwe will argue, reflects a more general modernist preoccupation with self realization that Taylor (1992) describes in his work The Culture of Authenticity. This ideal of authenticity, according to Taylor, has diffused through much of contemporary society, staking roots in the ideology of 18th century Romanticism, which proposed that human beings are innately imbued with moral codes that

Lewin 11 must be explored and clarified in order to actualize their potentialities. In the culture of authenticity, as such, humans are construed as beings with inner depths; being in touch with oneself takes on independent moral significance and comes to supplant prior efforts to attain connectedness with God. This framework owes much to Rousseau, who influentially advocated that individuals should follow their inner-voices and resist the pressures and callings of society in order to recover intimate moral contact with themselves. Rousseau also largely founded the notion of self-determining freedom, which suggests that individuals become free only when they autonomously decide their own concerns rather than allowing themselves to be shaped by external influences (Taylor 1992). Extending this line of argument, Herder posited that all people possess original ways of being human, and that failing to locate or actualize those unique modes of existence banishes them to conditions of inhumanness and incompleteness. Viewing the self as an instrument, according to this philosophical stance, such as when individuals subvert themselves to higher, transcendental powers is believed to confound discovery and actualization of the inner voice, defeating ones life purpose and undermining the attainment of moral purity. Notably, this metaphysical orientation has been thoroughly critiqued and denigrated as a malaise of modernity (see, for example, Lasch 1979; Bell 1996), with theorists contending that centering concern on the self narrows individuals lives by making them poorer in meaning and less concerned with others and society, pejoratively labeling it as a culture of narcissism and the me-generation. We will return to address these arguments later in the paper; the point for now, however, is that a profound concern with self-realization was ushered in with the modern era that values self-exploration and individuality over profuse social engagement and conformity.

Lewin 12 The ethos that Taylor describes is saliently reflected in the ways that many subculturists attempt to articulate authentic identities; his commentary on the culture of authenticity offers perhaps a new conceptual framework through which to understand subculture. If nothing else, his observations, and reactions to them, reveal that the concept of authenticity mattersboth within subculture and outside of it. In this paper, we attempt to further the theoretical and empirical advances in the study of subculture and authenticity through an ethnographic investigation of punk subculture. To preface an articulation of our specific objectives, a brief historical account of punk rock is in order. Accordingly, most scholars date the genesis of punk subculture to the mid-to-late 1970s, where it developed primarily among children of working class parents throughout Great Britain and the United States. Due to changing social, political and economic conditions occurring during the time, many young people began to experience feelings of alienation, angst and, in some cases, fatalism (Gaines 1991). Consequently, punk subculture quickly became known as an outlet for expressing discontent with such conditions, which included the inequities associated with capitalism, deindustrialization, political corruption, and a creeping cultural shift toward conservatism (OHara 1999). In addition to taking a strong stance against social injustices, punks also expressed frustration with problems situated in local contexts, such as the authority exercised within the institutions of school and family. In general, participants sought to problematize the idea that other people had the right to determine how they should live and the values to which they should adhere. Most participants, hence, fervently rejected conventions that limited self-expression, developing a style that emphasized the profane. This punk style abided to eccentric, obscene standards that took a crude and oftentimes vile form, seeking to deliberately offend mainstream conventions and

Lewin 13 sensibilities. Specifically, it manifested in conduits like public vulgarity, mohawks, studded leather jacks, and self-destructive acts like drug-use. In performing such activities, punks claimed to cast rage against the system in a creative way, reject conformity, question prevailing modes of thought, and, as noted, disavow the multiple forms of authority felt to be shackling them. With respect to our research, some extant empirical work speaks to the need for a project which provides further consideration for subcultural ideologyespecially in the case of punk. This is because many people identify as subcultural but choose not to conform to its stylistic norms (Andes 1998; Widdicombe 1998). Andes argued that punks achieve authentic selfhood through ideological commitment, undergoing a developmental process that ends in the transcendence of style. Eventually, punks, in actualizing their identities, come to reject style commitments; one becomes his or her own reference group, at which point punk simply involves pursuing individualistic creativity and anti-authoritarianism. In a different vein, Widdicombe studied how punks, goths, and other subculturalists avoided or rejected the style-based stereotypes associated with subcultural identity and instead focused on the development of an authentic self rooted in individuality and ideological freedom. This ultimate advancement toward ideology in place of style leads us to question how punks construct, express, and articulate authentic identities after they have revoked constraining, stylistic mandates. Moving away from the tradition of emphasizing style in subculture studies, we work to identify and clearly conceptualize the ideological components of punk and the manner in which members attach themselves to its subculture. Perhaps more significantly, in light of styles demise as a meaningful form of resistance, we illuminate the processes through which punk identities are sustained and negotiated on sublimated levels by considering how ideology

Lewin 14 functions in the construction of identity. By taking this approach, we explore how individuals who identify as punk develop authentic selfhood outside of the sartorial realm. We also contribute to the academic understanding of punks social dimension of authenticity by investigating how participants develop credible subcultural status through the strategic use of ideological cues. Furthermore, our approach evinces the strategies that punks use to maintain the integrity of their ideological identities in the face of subcultures changing, commonly understood, postmodern meaning, which participants describe as one that is superficial and stylistically-oriented. And lastly, our strategy allows us to better understand the link between ideology and the construction of boundaries within subcultureour work, thus, casts light on the ideological basis for making distinctions between insiders and outsiders. Hence, overall, in our study of punk subculture, we examine the meanings that participants attach to their own behaviors, emphasize how authentic selfhood is developed through ideological and moral commitments, and explore the linkages between punk ideology and the larger cultural objectives of modernity. In so doing, we address the shortcomings noted above with respect to conceptualizations of authenticityall of which have plagued prior empirical research on punk culture. Our works thus seeks to move beyond an analysis of how subculturalists construct authentic identities, instead exploring how the broader cultural goal for authentic selfhood orients subcultural participation. Ultimately, we seek to extend the possibility of reconceptalizing punk as a subculture of authenticity at its core as an alternative to a one in which authenticity is merely a status for which participants vie. We will also, in a later section of the paper, reassess claims made by CCCS scholars, as well as those in post-subculture studies, who contend that punks counter-hegemonic potential has been successfully undermined by the culture industry. By reexamining resistance to understand how symbolic acts of subversion bear

Lewin 15 upon participants feelings of dignity and selfhood and structures of domination, we problematize the sweeping dismissal of subcultures capacity for affecting social change by the theoretical camps above mentioned.

DATA AND METHODOLOGY Over the course of five months, the first author engaged in ethnographic field research, tracking, observing and analyzing the behavior of a local group of self-identified punks with whom he had become acquainted. During this period, he undertook intensive participant observation, which included taking part in the spectacular rituals of punk, such as concerts and political activity, as well as taking part in mundane social outings in order to address the empirical gaps for which CCCS work is commonly critiqued (Clarke 1997). After each outing, he crafted self-reflexive field notes, recording and analyzing what he saw. Having a personal history of participation within the subculture for several years, the first author also deployed auto-ethnography as a strategy to compliment our analysis, objectively examining his own experiences and reactions to the group in order elucidate our research questions. This mostly took the form of heavily bracketing field notes with personal experiences at shows and personal interactions that transpired. However, he obtained the lions share of our data primarily through in-depth, semistructured interviews (n=13; n will =20 at completion). In order to recruit participants, he contacted local punk bands, made postings on a local community bulletin, approached people at local punk shows, and also made heavy use of snowball sampling. Interviews lasted from 45 minutes to two hours and covered a range of topics, which included: the experiences of participants before becoming punk; how they became involved with the subculture; what values and beliefs they associated with punk; what personal meaning it held for them; what role they

Lewin 16 believed style to possess for punk; how they distinguished insiders from outsiders; the meaning and outcomes of acts of resistance that they had engaged in; and a series of questions with respect to their overall social world and political views. All interviews were fully transcribed after completion. Additionally, some participants, outside of this research, had crafted personal memoirs and journal entries in which they considered their punk identities. These subjects offered to contribute these entries to our stock of data. Sampling was based on convenience and the theoretic necessities of the project. While subjects did not represent the subculture as a whole and are not randomly derived, all were insiders who held valuable, meaningful knowledge. Furthermore, the data is robust, since members of the particular group with which the first author interacted oftentimes did not heed stylistic elements of punk and regularly repudiated and distanced themselves from them, which uniquely informed our inquiries. Furthermore, participants were quite diverse in social background and ideology, which also, in our view, strengthens the data. We employed an emergent strategy of analytic coding as our primary technique for data analysis. Using interview transcripts, field notes, and the personal journal entries and memoirs contributed by subjects, we actively searched for patterns and themes that cut across all of the data garnered from subjects (Charmez 1994). We used continual and repeated abstraction in the attempt to truly understand what was going on and utilized a triangulated methodological approach at all levels of our research (Massey & Walford 1999). THE NARRATIVE OF BECOMING PUNK Our research pointed toward a definite set of social contexts and social-psychological states that prime and later draw individuals into punk subculture. While our data prevents us from extending a causal argument, given that we do not make cross-group comparisons, in this

Lewin 17 section of the paper, we will reveal the rather ubiquitous narrative of becoming punk that emerged from our research. This, we feel, will compliment the reconceptualization of punk and subculture that we will offer further into to the paper. It also helps to contextualize and explain the ideological values that punks espouse. According to subjects in our research, individuals do not become punk; they do not make volitions at particular moments in their lives to identify with and participate in the subculture. Rather, subjects contend that they have always possessed the essence of their punk identities within themselves. In fact, while subjects identify as punk, they strongly and consistently contend that their self-concepts are personal and not social ones. To write that subjects believed that they possessed intrinsic punk identities, thus, is somewhat of a misstatement. Rather, individuals believe that they are imbued with inner beings that become manifested through participation in the subculture. In other words, punk does not constitute selfhoodit reflects it. Before participation in punk subculture, subjects express a sentiment of having always felt different from their peers. While this feeling weighs on participants to different degrees, it appears to be present for all, arising from two different origins, neither of which are mutually exclusive. The first involves a distaste to some extent for the prevailing social conditions in which one exists. By social conditions, we mean the norms, beliefs, values, and social expectations that prevail in a given environment as well as the social institutions that regulate and enforce them. Typically, these institutions constrain the capacity for self-expression and ideological freedom in significant ways, governing ones time and space, and, most prominently, striving in some manner to condition ones values. Participants often cited school systems, parental units and religious institutions as examples. The framing impact that these structures

Lewin 18 carry varies with the environment in which subjects live and the perceived immediacy and invasiveness of the institutions in question. Punks in our study expressed great disdain for the socialization that such institutions attempt to impart during childhood and adolescence. For them, the idea of mindlessly internalizing values and obeying authority proved exceptionally problematic and unsettling. In contrast to their peers, who they believed acquiesced to and accepted this process without much hesitation, punks describe possessing a questioning, inquisitive attitudea disinclination to accept what others offer as truth and a desire to discover it for themselves. They feel that they have always held that mentality, which primes them for immersion into punk subculture. Henry, a 22 year old male who works full time, attends community college and plays in a local punk band, describes this sentiment when reflecting on his experiences during middle and high school, before getting into punk rock.
Interviewer: You said you had that attitude before you got involved with punk; can you elaborate on that a little bit? Henry: Yeah, you knowI would have teachers say you cant do this, and Id say whywhy why cant I do this? And some things you just cant do, like you cant set the trash can on fire, of course thats stupid, butsomething like you cant talk when youre doing somethingwhy cant I talk when Im doing what Im doing? And just basically any rules that didnt seem to apply to the safety of others or yourself, you know, why cant I do this, why cant I do that? There were certain teachers who had power struggles. Theyd been teachers forever, and I guess they figured that [school] was their stomping ground, so they would sort of use their pull to maybe make things a whole lot more difficult for people, so I really wouldnt like that. Id make a point to kind of mess them up a little bitnot real bad, like I wouldnt slash their tires or nothing, but just little things to kind of tick them off. That was the kind of mentality, and as I got older it got more and more defined. Interviewer: So you kind of questioned figures of authority as opposed to, I guess, just obeying what you were told to do? Henry: Right. Anything with a ruleevery rule has a reason behind it, but some reasons arent good reasons, and I just wanted to distinguish between which ones were the good reasons and which ones were the bad reasons, because then I can decide which ones to follow, or which ones not to follow or at least try not to follow.

Lewin 19 Thus, Henry describes a desire to come to his own conclusions as opposed to allowing a system of beliefs to be imposed onto him. He reacts against the authority of teachers not because of an anti-social impulse, but because by questioning the motives of their rules, he develops the ability to distinguish between those that are arbitrary and those that are moral. This enables him to formulate a personal code of ethics by which to adhere later in his life. In a similar way, Trevor, a 21 year old high school graduate who holds down a fulltime job and also plays in a local punk band, relates the following:
Trevor: I guess I started out not really knowing what I wanted to do; I was inquisitive, always very inquisitive. I asked a lot of questions in schoolteachers were always pissed at me. Elaborating on his school experiences, later in the interview he goes on to say: it seems that most of the time there are rules that are set in place that dont have any weight to methey dont make any sense, and it feels like I cant do anything about it becausethen well get into politicsevery vote doesnt count kind of feelingbut on a broader scale, it feels like every rule is only meant for a certain class of people, and so it just kind of gives you that urge to want to rebel against all authority. [Resisting authority] is kind of like just figuring out who you are and what it is your morals are. Instead of somebody else telling you what your morals should be, this is how you should feel about things, you kind of push it a little bit, and you push it until you feel uncomfortable and then you back off.

Trevor views himself as having been inquisitive in a way that others were not during middle school and high school. Much like Henry, he resisted figures of authority in order to figure out who he was. He was able to construct his own ethical system by pushing rules and limits. He believed that discovering that which is pious from that which is impious through personal experienceby suffering feelings of guiltwas more meaningful than simply taking anothers word for it. In addition to possessing an ostensibly uncommon predilection to ask questions for the purpose of discovering personal truth, punks also expressed a sense of feeling uncomfortable within their given social milieus during childhood and adolescence. Either harboring different sets of beliefs or simply shouldering reservations about particular norms and conventions

Lewin 20 running throughout mainstream culture, they could not accept the means of doing things that others in their social settings took for granted. This feeling of unease perhaps amplified the need to question authority if not fully accounting for it. Having distaste for prevailing social conditions among subjects occurred for different reasons and was oriented toward different foci, but the underlying sentiment of somehow not fitting inof being an outsiderappeared to hold constant. Charlie, a 23 year old former army enlistee who works in a restaurant, plays in two punk bands, and thoroughly partakes in the local DIY community by booking concerts, maintaining a show space, and participating in direct action political groups, describes this feeling while talking about his adolescence.

Charlie: I grew up in Maine in a mill town. The mill was subsequently shut down and it became a ghost town and kind of a yuppy suburb since I left. My dad got a job in [a southeastern state], so we moved to [an affluent, suburban county] for high school, and thats where the real seeds of anger were sown (laughs). It was a total cultural vacuum. And thats where I started developing ideas that I didnt associate with punk, but I was already relating to it without even really knowingI was just kind of a woodsy, outdoors kid my whole life and then to go into the suburbs and everything is named after trees but there are no trees; it would get me fired up, and it kind of came out in irresponsible ways as a kid I was just pissed and that was pretty much led up to [becoming punk]. When probed about his middle and high school experiences, he goes on to relate: Middle school wasI had two or three friends, and we kind of stuck with each other. I wasnt a very popular kid or whatever. I didnt really get made fun of more than anyone else; it was just kind of aI just didnt really talk to people, and it wasI dont know. I dont have much to say about middle school; it was just kind of a blurhormones and (laughs). High school was rough. Nobody was rich where I grew up, and then I moved to [the southeastern suburb] where status came into play. It wasnt even a part of my mind until I went there, and so I didnt fit in there. There was a lot of hostility toward me, and I reacted with a lot more hostility back then, and it seemed like it was constant friction the whole time I was there; it was a rough time.

Charlie expressed feeling culture shock upon moving into a new place. The social setting in which he found himself did not reflect his prior upbringing. In addition to holding a different set of value orientations, Charlie also lacked the financial means required in order to achieve status. The combination of these problems caused him to feel socially alienated during adolescence.

Lewin 21 Greg, a 26 year old college graduate, librarian and social activist, describes feeling aloof from his peers as well, but for different reasons:

Greg: I was raised to believe that it was fundamentally wrong to discriminate against people because of their race, because of where theyre from, because of their sexual orientationvery literal things my parents told me, which Im not sure that most kids growing up in the 80s were taught like that; I would hope that they would be, but I certainly know, like, a lot of my friends werent taught that. They were probably encouraged---or led by example [to discriminate]. Interviewer: The liberal upbringing that you had compared to othersdid that ever cause any tension between you and other people growing up? Greg: Yeah, yeahsure. I think theres an assumption that some people haveif you appear to be a middle class, white man, then they will also assume that youre a misogynist, theyll also assume that youre a racist, theyll assume that youre homophobic. Thats just an assumption that a lot of people have, you know, Ive always kind of refuted that. But always, from being little up until today, guys come up to you and dropracist bullshit on you. I remember one time in middle school, this guy who I thought was coolsomething had happened, some kid had been acting up in class, and he came over to me and just whispered this extremely racist thing in my I ear, and I was like thats not cool; thats not okaythere was this constant assumption when I was growing up that you cant be overtly misogynistic or racist, but if its between white guys, well its okay. And I think some of the best punk music addresses that directly. Greg, due to his progressive upbringing, took exceptional issue with the prejudice that he felt openly ran throughout his adolescent environment. The alternate set of beliefs that his parents had passed down to him gave him a different reference point on ethics compared to many people in his school. This caused him to feel different and to resent that aspect of the social milieu of which he was a part. Both Charlie

and Greg, then, evince how a sense of difference arising from the possession of an alternative set of values or norms prods adolescents into exploring alternative sources of identity or interpersonal interaction. In line with this process is a second potential mechanism that pushes individuals into subcultural participationinvoluntary social estrangement facilitated by peers. In above examples, subjects questioned the common sense world of everyday life in their environments, fundamentally oppose prevailing social values within them, and intentionally removed themselves from most of their peers. In the case of the second process, however, the individual,

Lewin 22 while not uniformly accepting all facets of dominant culture, expresses at least a limited desire to achieve a meaningful, embedded identity within it. Those maintaining power and status within the environment deny and undermine this desire, however. More specifically, social institutions and actors disable the individual from attaining a meaningful roll within the environment/community through verbal or even physical assault and routine castigation. Consequently, the individual fails to develop a meaningful identity, feeling very alienated, as though his or her life carried little meaning and held no worth. This rejection by mainstream society, according to interviewees, was associated with nonconformity to the values and/or social expectations of the dominant culture as discussed above, or because one possesses limited social status and cultural capital. Cooper, a 23 year old college graduate and restaurant manager, for example, claimed to have suffered from constant ridicule, never fitting in. He was mocked for his unpopular music tastes as well as for his meek physical appearance. While being interviewed, he explained how he felt ostracized by his mainstream peers.
Interviewer: Do you think any previous experiences or feelings led you to connect with [punk music] in the way that you did, when you did? Cooper: Definitely. I had that world of suffering; I always got picked on, I never fit inand I remember this vividly. I was in like seventh grade, on the school bus, and I remember Jennifer Smith (pseudonym) making fun of me because the only radio station I listened to was Fox 97 (an oldies station), which is what my mom always had [on]. I had no real identity; I was just out there and a total loser. Nothing made me different except that I was so different. I remember those things; I always do. I was completely disempowered at that point in my life. Punk gave me a tool to change that, a way out, a brighter futureso I embraced it.

Cooper described himself as having no real identity, being very different and a total loser, expressing severe feelings of powerlessness due to social alienation. In the case of Blake, a 22 year old college student, both his values and his socio-economic status converged, producing a

Lewin 23 character that seemed fundamentally incompatible with that of his community, especially his high school. Elaborating, he related:

Blake: Before I ever [identified as punk], I already possessed the ideas and values that I now feel comprise that identity. Basically, I always felt like an outsider mostly in high school. I hated high school; I despised 95% percent of the people there, I didnt like a lot of teachers, I hated how it structured and controlled my life, I hated having to get up early every morningit was just oppressive. Most of all though, I think it involved the other kids, and how I viewed them. I lived a very affluent area our football stadium had a hugeI cant think of its namethose screens, parents purchased their children 25 thousand dollar cars upon turning 16, everyone dressed fashionably, with single outfits costing hundreds of dollarsEveryone was rich, and everyone acted rich pretentious, bombastic, judgmental, unaccepting, elitist, and so forth. I, on the other hand, wasnt rich. My parents were divorced, my household, the vast majority of the time, was dysfunctional, and I wasnt even from there originally we moved from the northeast, which was radically different. I was different, and people treated me accordingly.

Instead of primarily valuing sports, Blake participated on the debate team, for which he was constantly slighted. He also came from a less affluent background than his peers and an appreciably dysfunctional household, as well as staking nativity in a different geographical region. He had not forged the social networks that others had through years of schooling and sports together, nor did he really want to, later characterizing those in his school as socially unconscious and politically apathetic. His lack of financial resources also precluded him from fitting in materially. As such, he cited feeling relatively unaccepted, and aside from a small circle of friends, he enjoyed little social interaction with peers before turning to punk. As these individuals are unable to procure meaningful identities in the normative cultures through which they navigate everyday life, they begin seeking outlets elsewhere. Such outlets are sought for two reasons, which compliment one another. The first simply involves social acceptanceestablishing a niche in which one can build a network of friends to fulfill the innate need for social interaction and human communication. An accompanying reason regards fostering feelings of empathy with others. Individuals harbor many feelings and experiences resulting from social alienation and the suffering that it entails, which they seek to resolve and

Lewin 24 release. This, they express, can only be accomplished through interaction with those who understand such experiences. David Kinney (1993), in his study of socially ostracized high school nerds, found that such a supportive peer groups is the primary social arena in which adolescents develop a healthy sense of identity as they experiment with various social roles and make decisions about their present and future lives, (p.22). In his study, youth experiencing poor self-concepts, a lack of social interaction and stereotyping by peers suffered low self esteem and negative selfevaluations. Gaining access to a group of similar, supportive others, however, lessened their concerns with popularity, offered an alternative frame of reference in which to construct their identities, and generated positive self-feelings that resulted in their transformation into more competent social actors. The commentary provided by interviewees also mirrors findings contained within the functionalist work of Albert Cohens (1955) Delinquent Boys as well as the research by Merton (1957)discussed above. Cohen, like Merton, posited that subcultures emerge as rebellion adaptations to goal-means disparities. In this case, punk subculture comes to emerge as a solution to the collective problem of social alienationof youth not being able to fit in and also maliciously being left out. Punk handles this dilemma more effectively than conventional institutions by providing an environment in which status can be achieved in ways not possible within dominant culture. Cohen wrote that the development of group norms and boundaries supports the effort to resist dominant ideology during the construction of an alternative frame of reference. Our research in this area, discussed later in the paper, certainly corroborates this position.

Lewin 25 Continuing with the point at hand, though, the second major purpose involves finding a forum in which one can explore his or her alternative ideas. As discussion of personal ideology and values becomes impossible in an environment that diametrically opposes them, individuals aspire to find a cultural space in which they can clarify nascent and inchoate ideological paradigms through critical exploration to achieve self-discovery. As discussed above, interviewees emphatically insisted that possession of such alternative ideas, in some form at least, predated their exposure to and subsequent exploration of the subculture. In so doing, they also articulate their authenticitythe notion that they were acting out their genuine selves rather than performing roles. This is exemplified in the following excerpts:

Interviewer: do you feel that the music introduced you to [your ideas about punk] Cooper: [no]the music was my epiphany; I didnt notice it if it was there before, but I noticed it afterward. Arthur: the music was reflective of how I felt about a lot of different thingsand when you see it for the first time, you kind of fit into ityou found this music that reflects a part of you that hadnt really been seen before; so it was already there, its just that this was the particular avenue that it was shown inthere were plenty of ideas in me that existed before Id ever heard any punk music

Such responses, we will argue, rests at the core of their attempts to convey that authenticity; subjects contend that they are punks; they do not simply perform the identity by utilizing style. While we will further develop how punks use subcultural space as a means to cultivate an authentic identity, our emphasis for now rests in two points. First, subjects cited the absence of a meaningful identity before becoming punk, emphasizing their low status and labeling themselves as outsiders. And second, while claiming to lack a meaningful identity, subjects also stressed that they possessed within themselves latent, inchoate ideas awaiting discovery and actualization through interaction with others. Charlie gives an excellent account of how through participation

Lewin 26 in the subculture, he was able to explore different ideas, indulge his curious nature, and further his personal project of ideological clarification and the pursuit of authentic selfhood.

Charlie: I joined the army when I was 17, and I was always going to hardcore shows and punk shows the entire time, and it was always a music thing for me. I can remember a lotlike I was always back and forth on my ideology from here to here until I went to BaltimoreI was going there for what they call AIT, which is school and training for what your job will be in the military, and I really wanted to see a show, and I was really unhappy with the decision Id made, and I went to this place called the copy cat, which was a sixth floor squat that had power and water, and there was a show going on there, and people were just coming up to me because I was a new face, and they were just being real nice to me. And they were like what are you doing here, and I was like I joined the army, and they were like oh man, you fucked up. And they gave me a bunch of really coolactually, the first bookI got a free book from my friend Scott, which was Hegemony or Survival, which is a Noam Chompsky book. The fact thatI felt like a total freak, and I felt bad for being there just from being in the army, and they were all just trying to help, and I think right around thenthat was 2002, 2003 I want to say, which is kind of recent, thats when I was likeoh I knowthis is the first time I feel comfortable in my own skin. And it was the first point where I felt like I was in the right frame of mind, where people were just letting me do what I wanted to do, you know. Interviewer: Is that what kind of drew out that feeling of belonging [in punk], that you felt embraced? Charlie: Well I just feltit wasntyeah embracedand it was such an ambiguous community, liketheres likethe punk scene there, as any punk scene, had so many different facetslike wastoids and people who are actually making it happen, but it just seemed like everybody was there becausethere was some unified thing that I still havent figured outbecausethere are so many different ideas in punk rockbut theres likeeverybody is rejecting the same thing, you know what I mean? And I was reallyI was given room to grow as a person; I didnt feel like it was indoctrination or anything at all. I just felt like it wasdo you know anything about this war; do you know anything about likeanything. It was reallyyeah, I would say I felt embraced.

Punk appealed to Charlie because it enabled him to grow as a person. He had many questions about the world and was striving to develop a coherent world view. Punk served as a forum in which he could interact with others, ask questions and explore ideas in a non-hostile environment in which the pursuit of knowledge and meaning was actively encouraged. Perhaps most saliently, it gave him an opportunity to resolve his struggle with respect to his choice to join the army, which he eventually abandoned.

Lewin 27 While a degree of social alienation and social disdain seemed to prime subjects for immersion into punk, a major subsequent step implicated in developing a punk identity, according to subjects, involves exposure to punk music, which Cooper describes as the primal force around which the subculture revolves. All whom we interviewed claimed to have developed initial interest in punk this way. Through some means, whether intentional or fortuitous, one is exposed to punk music. When one hears and experiences this music, there is an immediate and mounting interest in it, because one is able to empathize with both its tonal quality and lyrics. Arthur, for example, cited being introduced to the music and subsequently finding it interesting because it was reflective of how he thought about much of the worlda source of empathy that he had hitherto not encountered. In more detail, Cooper recalls his initial exposure to punk music:
Interviewer: How did you come to identify as punk; what drew you into that world? Cooper: I was just there one day, in Blisss car actually, and he was friends with this girl named Jessica who was all I cut my wrists gothy, and she had an old AFI [punk band] tape and thought it was so terrible that he gave it to me, so I put it in his tape player. I was hooked immediately; I mean AFI was saying shit that blew me away. Dont Make Me Ill was the first song I ever heard, about how no one is going to tell you what to do, youll do things your way, if you dont like it, tough. [These were] new ideas to me, so I did some research one day at the mall. I listened to a million CDs and stumbled across Against the Gran. I bought that album. One day Sam came over to my house, Sam and Kat actually, and I put this Bush CD in and Kat said she couldnt listen to it for blah blah reason, and then I put in Against the Grain, and Sam was like weve got to get you off this Bad Religion shit; punk sucks. And I just kind of smiled; I think that is when I became a punk. I always listened to bands, Green Day many years before, some AFI, but Bad Religion made me feel different; I felt like there was something new there that day. When Sam said thatI dont knowit grew into something vast, changed my life.

Cooper recalled the first punk song that he had ever heard, in which the lyrics involved how no one is going to tell you what to do, youll do things your way, if you dont like it, tough. He said that these were new ideas to him, and that upon further exploration he found that the music had reinvented his life by modifying his thinking and offering fresh social space, all of which he

Lewin 28 could uniquely heed because they arose from the experience of suffering and alienation that he had previously undergone. Ian, a 24 year college graduate, high school math teacher, and player in a local punk band, describes this in a similarly poignant way:

Ian: the one band that I heard who absolutely just drew me in for sure was Minor Threat. When I heard those recordings and I heard about the Straight Edge philosophy; I was like Oh, thats it for me; I love the idea of the rebellion to the rebellion. Its like we dont have to do all these things; you can still be a strong person. I mean, were still going to be just as loud, were still going to be just as strong, as passionate, but were not going to do any of these things that society holds real up highyou know, that just got meit was all about the energy and the passion, and justall about, you know, being yourself and fuck the rest. Youre your own independent person; if youre going to take on the world, do it in the clearest state of mindgo for it, anyone can do it. You just have to be willing to fight for it. And that was just fantasticI never saw the point in smoking or drinking or, you know, promiscuous sex, or any of that stuff that a lot of my friends had gotten into during the high school years. I never really saw a point to it; it never seemed like something I would do. And I always felt like that made me not only an outcast in the whole high school culture or high school setting but also made me an outcast with my friends, because whenever wed hang out theyd be drinking and smoking, and Id just be therebut then I heard that, andyou know, it was perfect. It was like, you know whatno, I dont have to do that stuff. I can still be a good person, I can still keep going, I can be a strong, passionate person; I dont have to do any of the stuff that they do. And it just absolutelyit was perfect timing for itIt was pretty much what I was looking for, because you know, during high school and middle-school youre always like what I am doing; am I doing this right; am I going in the right direct? And then I heard that, and I was like fuck yeah I am; fuck em all; I am going in the right direction. It was really, really a good time for me [it was] exactly what I was looking for. I was looking for someit may seem sillybut I was looking for some sort of sign. Should I be drinking; should I be smoking; should I be doing all these things that everyone wants me to do? And then they came around, and they told me, no; you dont have to do that shit. You gotta do what you want to do. And I have been ever since.

Becoming exposed to punk music had a profound effect on Ian. Existing in a state of confusion with respect to his identity and lifestyle choices, the music resonated with him on several levels. First, its energy and passion appealed to him. Second, and more importantly, it spoke to many of the personal and social problems and issues with which he was grappling. Hearing Minor Threat served as an epiphany, which provided him with the fortitude to be his own person and live according to his own set of beliefs in a social milieu that opposed them. Punk music, then, became a vicarious social support system; that support system would become more corporeal as

Lewin 29 he transitioned into actual participation in the subculture, which would come to supplant his former friends as his primary reference group. In Blakes case, as he listened to more punk music, he found that it reflected many feelings within him; the fast, aggressive song structures recreated the angst and fury that rejection in his high school had inspired, while the lyrics, especially those of the most political punk bands, offered a sense of empowerment and also captured his ideas about how life and society should be structured.

Blake: As I listed to punk moreI came to empathize and identify with it. The fury, angst, and intensity appealed to methats how I felt every single day when I walked into first period. And the lyrics attested to that once I actually deciphered them. And Bad Religion, the first punk band that I really came to love and appreciate, took this a degree further. They sang of wordly affairs, rectifying global injustices, reacting against tolitarian governments [and so forth], the same topics that I researched, debated, and fervently believed in for debate team. My appreciation for punk music began to really burgeon there More specifically, Blake claimed to have made a connection between punk and the high school debate social world that he highly valued at the time. He emphatically felt that the social justice themes about which he debated were uniquely and exclusively embodied in punk music, which drove his interest and connection to its subculture. Thus, finding music, which happens to belong to the punk culture and reflects ones ideology, was the second leg identified vis-a-vis forging a punk identity. The third major step in the process toward developing such an identity, after social ostracizing and discovering punk music, involves introduction into punks dynamic social world, which comprises personages and ensuing interactions in addition to ritualistic behavior, as well as, but somewhat less prominently, normative aspects of style, like dress and argot. Through participation in cultural elements of punk, individuals find a social niche in which they are accepted, are able to explore and act upon their ideas, and are able to sooth the pangs of prior

Lewin 30 social alienation. All of the above quoted passages attest to this. Within the group, empirical empathy is uniquely possible, and participants find space where group solidarity and camaraderie, needs of which they have long been deprived, become uniquely possible. Additionally, other social benefits were cited, primarily manifesting in the cultivation of alternative forms of empathy and camaraderie enabled by ritualistic behavior, such as the ardor of existence, urgency, and shared experience of survival arising from concerts and political activity. We will develop this further in the section to follow. At this point, though, ones identity as punk and commitment to its ideals is seen as fully realized. The final phase that subjects appeared to undergo in the development of their punk identities was withdrawal, which is consistent with Andes (1998) findings that punks undergo, eventually, a process of dissolution, becoming their own reference groups. Through subcultural participation, one generally accomplishes two things. First, the perceptually flawed social paradigms experienced in dominant culture, according to Cooper, are viewed as having been undone. In other words, one gains the ability to think and exist outside of dominant values and norms. Second, and more saliently, one subjectively realizes his or her genuine self-- facilitated through subcultural participation-- which offers eschatological guidance and purpose. When one has clarified and refined his/her values, procured a meaningful, permanent identity, and overcome the immature need for social acceptance, the culture of punk ceases to hold a purpose. At this point, while perhaps maintaining an association with the culture, the individual virtually ends active involvement in it. Since one has internalized and accepted his or her identity, there no longer exists a need to refine or test it. Such testing, before self-actualization, serves as an important component of subcultural participation.

Lewin 31 Thus, at this stage in the biographies of subjects, personal identity comes to transcend social identity in primacy. In other words, self-designations and self-attributions borne out of dialogic production (Kinney 1993) come to supplant identities that are imputed by a more salient generalized other, existing, perhaps, as a generalized other representing dominant culture. To put it yet another way, subjects no longer feel need to claim insider status to a social category in order to invoke positive affect (Williams 2005). Cooper, for example, explained that he attended concerts in order to discern whether the punk identity that he had assumed was a correct choicewhether or not, essentially, it reflected his true self. He further asserted that the subculture loses purpose at the point when no further knowledge or self-understanding can be gleaned from it, since such purposes drive its existence to begin with. He also felt that the nature of the culture could potentially confound ideals of self-reflexivity, since groups will always, to an extent, constrain freedom through social norms. And lastly, after self-actualization, pangs of alienation no longer throb, freeing participants from strong and continual dependence on group comfort, support and empathy through active subcultural participation. Similarly, Ian, quoted above, explains that he no longer searches for truth and meaning through the subculture; he has found, and is happy with, what he was looking for:

Interviewer: as youve gotten older, has your involvement in punk changed in any way since you first heard the Descendents, Minor Threat and so forth? Ian: Well, I dont look up as many punk bands any more; Ive sort of stuck with a few just for nostalgic reasons, I guess, and I just stick with those few that I grew up with. Every once in a while Ill hear a couple of bands here and there, and Ill check them out, butfor right now, Im really content, Im really happy, with the music that I grew up with and the bands that I grew up listening to. You know, I try to listen to new bands here and there, but I dont keep up with it as much anymore its still great to go see a punk band live, but really no, I think just researching a lot less is really the only thing thats changed. Every time I put the Descendents on, I still get that feeling of fuck yeah and whenever I hear a goodlike one of those punk bands, like whenever NOFX is coming around or Strung Out, Bad Religion, any one of those I try my best to go and

Lewin 32
check them out, but if its not a band Ive heard of right now, I probably wont. I will probably will lose touch with it and wont keep up with it. Interviewer: So youre not searching for something anymore, maybe, you found what you were looking for? Ian: YeahI think I found my notchand I think Im pretty happy with where I stand, and Im not looking for anything new anymore, you know, Im pretty happy with what I found.

Hence, our empirical findings with respect to participating in punk subculture are consistent with some aspects of extant theory, but they also modify and add to these perspectives. To begin with, much of our research corroborates Cohen and Mertons takes on subculturethat subcultures form in response to cultural strain experience by those unable to meet mainstream cultural goals. Our subjects lacked the ability to gain status during adolescence. This was sometimes caused, as Merton posited, by a lack of financial resources. For example, Henry, Blake and Erika (not quoted above) were all reared in working class families. Erika, especially, expressed that her limited financial means prevented her from taking part in the consumption rituals of those at her schoolshe could not afford the clothes and activities required for popularity. However, this was not the only cause for maladjustment or lack of status; some participants in our study, in fact, came from upper-middle class backgrounds. More often, it seems, moral and ideological disparities prevented from realizing them. It appears, thus, that the functionalist perspective cannot fully account for why young people enter into subcultures. This is perhaps because it does not consider the drive for authentic selfhood that contended by Taylor to permeate the culture of modernity. In addition to financial success, authenticity is also held high as a cultural objective. We believe that this drive pushes individuals into subcultural participation. While the classic functionalist literature defines subcultures as rebellion adaptations to social problems, our research suggests that subcultures are actually innovator responses, which, according to Merton, occur when individuals

Lewin 33 internalize the cultural goals of a society but reject the legitimate means for achieving them. Those in our study were profoundly concerned with becoming an individual and actualizing their natures, but they could not, or chose not to, follow typical paths for achieving those ideals. As opposed to developing authentic selfhood through the attainment of financial success or conspicuous consumption, punks do so by making ideological commitments. We will discuss these specific commitments in the follow section of the paper. Similarly with the CCCS, our research confirms that punks do indeed contest dominant ideological codes, entering into subculture as a means of facilitating a project of social resistance. However, resistance alone did not account for why subjects identified as punk. Moreover, their resistance was not immediately related to goals of recreating waning working class communities or upending existing class relations. Of relevance as well, many punks with whom we spoke did not come from lower class backgrounds. Departing from neo-marxian theory, what instead seems to be the case is that punks challenge dominant ideology in order to achieve authenticity, which ensues from the romantic notion that ones inner essence is developed by undoing societal influence in order to realize ones unique way being intrinsically encoded into us. While punks use the subculture as a forum for exploring alternate ideas, doing so does not necessarily seem to be related to class-based subversion. Rather, punks seem to challenge the common sense world of everyday life, question everything existing in order to locate their inner selves and clarify their worldviews. While social justice is important for many of them, as we will see in the next section, they generally prioritize the pursuit of personal truth over it. Hence, while resistance perhaps reflects subcultural participation, it does constitute or account for it.

Lewin 34 Overall, we take the belief that there is a strong drive for achieving authentic selfhood in modernity. This drive manifests itself differently for various people over their life courses relative to the social settings in which they reside. While we cannot make a causal argument, we suggest that a definite set of social conditions encourages individuals to realize that drive through participation in subculture. This occurs when the value orientations of young people do not accord with those of their prevailing social environments, when they are to some extent socially alienated from their peers, and when they become exposed in particular ways to subcultural ideology and style (especially music). This cultural form seems to uniquely resonate with such individuals, opening up the subculture as a conduit through which to achieve authentic selfhood. CONCERTS AS VALIDATING RITUALS Field notes taken during participant observation at punk concerts, complimented by interviews, provided valuable insight with respect to the function of concerts not only as groupaffirming rituals, but also as tools in developing authentic selfhood. In the above section, we discuss how the overall subculture serves as a forum in which participants exchange and explore ideas in order clarify their worldviews and self-concepts. In this section, we will argue that the interactive nature of punk concerts, during which participants exchange emotional energies with one another in order to develop effervescent feelings, abets these self-development projects. Specifically, at concerts, new subcultural participants work to facilitate and explore emergent understanding of self while more seasoned participants reaffirm existing ones. This is because going to concerts confers and reaffirms feelings of self-worth and identity among punks, constituting them as real. In the following passage, Cooper describes how concerts allowed him to engage in self-expression and to, in essence, test the validity of new found self.
Cooper: Shows were very important to me, experiencing bands was something I needed to prove to myself that I was a punk. There was no pride here; I had to categorically decide for myself if I was real and if that is what I wanted to be, and the only way I could do that was to see if I could

Lewin 35
experience the same intensity of feeling that I felt others could feel...in reality, I determined I was a punk, because I lived it. I bled at Face to Face, I froze at NOFX, I screamed at Bad ReligionI was there man, I identified and I participated and I experienced...[it was how] I expressed my identity.

Exemplifying our above analysis, by regularly attending concerts, Cooper engaged in a process of self-discovery. Having found appeal in punk upon recognizing that it reflected aspects of his pre-existent persona, Cooper made attempts to cathetically affirm his identity. The intense emotions that he experienced during shows served as confirmation in relation to the authenticity of his selfhoodconstituting it as real. Had the experiences failed to register, he would have ventured elsewhere to acquire that elusive state of truth. Additionally, Ian described how he vied to receive all of the emotional energy that bands emanated while playing, which also, it seems, works to confer authenticity and validate experience.
Interviewer: Can you speak a little bit to the experience of going to a showwhat its like and what you get out of it? Nick: Oh man. If its a band that you know, you always have to be the one right up front. Thats a must. Awwwyou will do anything to get up front; you will push people around, and you will beat the fourteen year-old kid in front of you that you dont know why hes there, but youre going to beat the shit out of him because you want to get right up front, because you want to be there. That way, when they come on the small stageawwwand theyre singing, you can feel the spit on your face. And you see the sweat, all of it. You want to be there, you want to try to grab that energy that theyre letting lose; you want to try to be there to be the first one to grab it. Andyouve got your hands in the air, youre singing songs that you dont even know the words to, but youre there. I mean, the guy next to you, you start pushing each other around, moshing a little bit there, but youre still right up front. Its like takingthe band is letting loose all this energy, and being the first one up front, youre the first one who gets it, and thatsthats where you want to be. Thats where I always push to be. Even in somewhat larger venues like the Warped Tour, I mean, I was up there on that stage every show. I was like the first one up there, and I pushed and fought my way up there, because I wanted to be the onethe first one there to get that energy they were about to release. You want to be the one there to get, and you dont want to miss a thing. Sothats the best place to be; its the greatest feeling in the world being there. Especially when its one of your favorite bands, and you know all of the words, and youre singing along, youre grabbing the poor guy next to youwho knows what his name isbut youre hugging, and hes signing along with you, you know..its great, it really is, thats just one of the greatest feelings in the world.

In a similar manner to Cooper, Ian cultivates authenticity by attending shows, although he employs a slightly different strategy. While Cooper relied on experiencing the emotional

Lewin 36 intensity of ritual to validate his identity, which is also clearly important to Ian, Ian also strives to constitute himself as the first person to receive the energy that the show releases. Doing so, which requires knocking over young adolescents and struggling to make it to the front, proves his commitment to his own feelings and ideas while also supporting his self-concept. In addition to allowing participants to engage in self-expression and test themselves, concerts, as a whole, lend punks the fortitude needed in order to carry out with their quests for authentic selfhood to begin with. Cooper, recapitulating views relayed in the first section of the paper, relays that the quest requires defeating a chain of socialization that indoctrinates most people into mass culture. Evidencing this role for concerts, Charlie said the following of punk music and punk shows:
Charlie: I kind of separate punk into two different ideas: the music side and the ideological side. And the music side is kind of the party to keep us together and keep us motivated for the nitty gritty of the political side. I feel like its just there to remind everybody that we can still have fun even if were getting tased or searched every five minutes because we look weird or for whatever other reasonfor having a show[for] just trying to build as much as we can ideologically and physicallytrying to just constantly fight the alienation thats consumerism and to actually [be ourselves].

To Charlie, going to concerts provides motivation for continuing the process toward selfdiscovery and enacting his political ideals. The intense emotional experiences and empathy that listening to punk music bring about reaffirms and validates his goals. Gary, when interviewed, offered quite similar comments when asked about the role of music in the subculture: Gary: definitely in my formative political years [punk music] had a galvanizing effect. Going home and putting on a Crass record was pretty powerful, and it kind of got me through my day to day existence, confirming that these ideas I was playing with and kind of taking baby steps towards implementing in my life were valid.

Much like with Charlie, for Gary the musical dimension of punk served as a support mechanism that both confirmed his ideas as worthy while also signifying that he was not alone in holding

Lewin 37 them. Hence, at concerts, individuals come together in order to participate in an intense ritual, possessing the ability to empathize with one another given their common experiences as outsiders in order to produce an aggregate that symbolizes all for which both they and the overall group stand. The serves to reaffirm the meaning and purpose of the group, much as Durkheim contended long ago in his studies of religion. More specifically, our observations at punk concerts, especially mosh pits that develop within them, reveal the activity as a site of dialogical production and self-affirmation. Randall Collins theorizes that rituals are patterned sequences of behavior that bring four elements together: bodily co-presence, barrier to outsiders, mutual focus of attention, and shared emotional mood (Allan 20006). As those elements increase in intensity, so do the effects of interaction rituals. These effects comprise: group solidarity, group symbols, feelings of morality, individual emotional energy, and individual cultural capital. Punk concerts measure high on Collins indicators for ritual intensity. By attending them, participants thus increase their stocks of emotional energy and cultural capital, which Ians commentary above directly references. These effects enable participants to subsequently partake in more frequent and involved social interactions, as Collins posits that the likelihood of an individual seeking out interaction is tied to those stores. This works to directly mitigate the social alienation that many participants feel prior to fully involving themselves in the subculture, hence supporting the potentially positive, functional role of subculture proposed by Matza and Sykes (1961).. Moreover, by promoting the occasion and opportunity to interact with others, punks further their projects of self-realization by clarifying and exploring sentiments and ideas with similar others. This is significant, given that experiences of alienation tend to drain members of energy and capital in mainstream contexts. Perhaps more importantly, however, Collins suggests

Lewin 38 that we develop the senses of truthfulness associated with all ideas, statements, and belief systems through interaction chain rituals (Allan 2006). That is, we define particular things as true or real after having collectively imbued them with certain levels of sacredness. By attending punk concerts, which involve interaction rituals producing high levels of collective emotion, participants personally validate the authenticity of their identities as a consequence. The very articulate Cooper, in another passage, evidences this process through a journal article that he offered to us for content analysis.
We lived in a world that few others could experience, could ever understand. Yet in twenty years I could remember no other time in my life when I had felt so alive, so real. Yes, this was real. It wasn't the anesthetic that seemed to satiate the already deadened nervous system of our society. It was the ultimate embodiment of actuality. It was, in short, life...and it was ours. Further into his entry, he discusses leaving this particular concert in the company of his friends: Maybe 'left' is not such a great word to describe the situation. Maybe I should distinguish that by saying that we simply became mortal again. I could think of very few times in my life when I was ever as sore, when I was ever as exhausted, as when I left that mosh pit. As we walked away, there was no doubt who we were. One look into the eyes of any of us made it brutally clear that the band played for Sam, David and I only. They played knowing we would be there. Perhaps they even waited for us...the next few minutes were a blur

Cooper describes how the ritualistic experience of participating in a concert actualized the identities of he and his friends. The emotional and physical intensity of the show consecrated their senses of self as real by imbuing them with the awe-inspiring, effervescent qualities of the experience. The heightened emotional response that the show generated galvanized his notion self-hood, making it feel real and true in a way that the mundane events of everyday life could not offer or reproduce. Hence, developing a sense of personal authenticity seems to require that one emotionally and spiritually experience their identities as real by taking part in the ritualistic aspects of subculture.

Lewin 39 In commenting on concert going during interviews, Ian and Henrys answers also support this position:
Interviewer: So being that first person up there, that was meaningful and significant to you? Ian: Yeah, oh yeah; I had to be. I had to be the one up there. Thats probably the only time I was really hardcore about anything. I had to be the one up there. Awwwhen I first saw NOFX play, it was at a Warped Tour venue, but those were really the best times to catch some of my favorite bands in [my home city], andoh man. I stayedI saw the show listing of when they were performing, and I stayed up front for like three hours through like six different bands, a couple of whom I knew, a couple who I didnt, but I didnt care. You know, I was leached onto there, because I wanted to be like right there for them. Andit was just fantastic. Once youre done, you feel great. Because youre likeawwwI was there, and it was awesome. I got all of that. You know, you just feel so good, being the one right up there. And its reallyevery time I see a good band and I was the one up there, aww Henry: some people get older and more jaded, so they just want to stand in the back, maybe they get the same thing from doing that, I dont know, I know that whenever Ive gone to any punk rock shows, whenever Ive stood in the back, it could be a band I really like, lets say I just wasnt in the mood to get in the pit or to get up closeI dont leave feeling short-changed, the band mightve put on a good show, and thats good, but theres not a lot that I can really recall later on in timemaybe Ill remember when they played this song or that one, and thats cool, but youll always rememberaww man! Remember that one guy came up, and he like elbowed me in the face! Yeah! It really hurt, but it was cool because afterwards he picked me up and was spinning me around and it was awesome! So its just all sorts of unique experiences with people of all different backgrounds, and I mean, you know, punk rock was what they were into, but growing up just all the different things that theyve done, and you dont know them at all, but theyre like youre best friends for an hour

For both Ian and Henry, the feeling of presence constitutes their experiences of authentic selfhood through punk as real. The intensity of the experience lingers onward after the show ends, becoming deified in their memories. Henry, specifically, speaks to the necessity of actively participating in the environment in order to beget such feeling of truth and reality. The unique memories and experiences that accompany thorough participation indelibly imprint themselves into ones understanding of self, hence cementing identity concepts. Additionally, interactions within mosh pits transfer energy and capital among those present, which generates effervescent feelings. This occurs through slam dancing and mingling within the crowd, but it perhaps most saliently transpires through direct physical interactions, in

Lewin 40 which participants offer one another subtle emotional cues of affirmation or disapproval. Excerpts from field notes taken at a concert illustrate this phenomenon:
I felt tired, hot, and beat up...but alive and amazing. I felt like part of the group, and I also felt as though I had actualized some of my principles, beliefs, feelings, and emotions by participating in the experience. The group affirmed and supported this behavior. After another favorite song, 'Generator,' for example, a couple of people patted me on the backrandom people who I'd interacted with in the pit. Subtle measures of approbation and praise carry a long way, conferring respect and approval upon me.

Throughout the show, I, through both intention and inadvertence, harshly collided with others. However, and this held true in every case from what I remember, my collider and I would nod at each other after hitting one other. This, I think, acknowledged respect as well as the nature of the interactionfriendly and collectively driven.

Such cues, and the experience overall, validate the integrity of ones perceived self-concept. Additionally, as noted above, one comes to associate his or her understanding of self with the sacred process of ritual occurring during these outings. Given the fledgling senses of self that subjects hold before subcultural participation, the experience of concert going seems crucial for personally defining and confirming ones selfhood as true. In fact, while at shows, our data suggests that participants undertake specific strategies in order to bolster their self-concepts. Subjects described two means through which they explored and essentially tested their identities to determine if they were authentic. Such strategies or processes primarily manifest in the ways that individuals occupy physical space and dance with one another. First, participants strive to take an active role at shows. They go about this by situating themselves close to the stage/band and participating in the physical nature of the ritual. This tends to involve singing along, dancing, crowd surfing, helping others around them who fall or lose personal artifacts, and just generally interacting with others who are present. The following excerpts from my field notes illuminate the importance of engaging in this type of involvement:

Lewin 41
I never feel like I am part of the show unless I'm up front, where the action occurs. It is strange, I suppose; the pit/front area constitutes an entirely different world. There, people dance, mosh, scream, move around, etc., whereas people throughout the rest of the venue sort of idly stand around. I have always wondered why they do this; how can you enjoy the show unless you somewhat express or release [excitement]. Punk shows wield so much energy, it almost seems to mandate liveliness. It seems like you miss the entire experience of the show when standing in an inactive portion of the crowd; you hear the music, but the experience is something entirely different...the crowed makes of breaks the show; the nature of it essentially determines how and if you can express yourself.

My notes reveal that the nature of punk concerts is expressly interactive for many people. Those who attend do not passively receive music by bands that control the nature of the experience. Rather, punk shows exist as a dialectic, with interaction among attendees and the band mutually constituting the experience. In fact, surrendering oneself passively to the music becomes nearly impossible, as again demonstrated by my observations:
Generally, and especially at a chaotic, energetic show, I become immersed in the collective experience of the crowd, only sporadically, for brief moments, actually looking at the band. Others constantly slam into you and alter your orientation, precluding undisturbed observation of the band. The activity of the crowd also usually proves more interesting than watching the band.

The second strategy involves taking part in the mosh pits that develop at concerts. Ostensibly, the purpose of the pit involves fostering group solidarity. Their climates are incredibly draining physically and are also potentially dangerous. My field notes reveal their natures:
The nature of the pit, for the very most part, precludes individual movement. One may develop an individual style of dance, but the person, holistically speaking, is still subject to the collective will of those present. The pit moves in a vortex with which one must abide in order to avoid complete physical exhaustion or injury. Furthermore, rowdiness and lack of bodily agency create a climate a of potential danger and urgency, which serves two purposes. First, it symbolizes the social conditions under which participants formerly existed-- and still exist under for some. For our subjects, it represented the angst and fury under which they lived-- in isolation-- for so long. Thus, style of dance and music at concerts objectified experience.

Consequently, when a concert concludes, there exists a shared sentiment of survivalall those present collectively experienced a very intense phenomenon, such as a football team after a

Lewin 42 tough game or a platoon of soldiers after a bloody battle. This creates a unique conduit for empathy, which draws participants closer together and breeds intense solidarity. Furthermore, given this context, the chaotic nature provides unique conditions through which punks can engage in acts of camaraderie, which serve the whole and are by nature selfless. During one concert, I, as well as others, frequently fell down, were pushed around, lost shoes while dancing, and the like. In nearly every instance during which a participants safety was compromised, several others rushed to assist him or her; when someone fell, three people picked him or her up; when someones shoe fell off, people cleared space to allow for its reattachment. My field notes from a concert demonstrate this empirically:
The crowd members continued to act civilly and responsibly toward all; all of those who fell were picked up. At one point, someone lost a hat; another person picked it up, holding it in the air for minutes before someone retrieved it. I lost my shoe three more times; each time, several people urgently rushed to my aid, helping me fasten it. The energy and ardor never relented; in fact, it seemed to grow stronger with every song.

Several interviewees confirmed the importance of such manifestations of group camaraderie as well. These sorts of benevolent behaviors amongst strangers do not lend themselves to everyday occurrence. The pit, hence, provides for situations in which members, in order to sustain the concerts effervescent experience, must interact with one another in a meaningful way. This, thus, creates meaningful interaction that builds solidarity which would not take place in the realm of routine experience. Lastly, concerts build group solidarity in the traditional, Durkheimian sense, by bringing individuals together who hold mechanical similarities in an environment that inspires awe. Concerts are comprised of large numbers of people, who generally dress in the same fashion, heed many of the same beliefs, engage in the same behaviors, and reaffirm a seemingly sacred end, involving discovering the nature of the self and ending a process of social indoctrination within the dominant culture that is seen as heinously flawed.

Lewin 43 Our research, then, overall, suggests that concerts serve a far greater function than simply working to maintain subcultural cohesion and group meaning. While the ritualistic nature of punk concerts does appear to accomplish that task, it also appears to greatly facilitate the search for authentic selfhood. This is because shows offer members of the subculture an opportunity to engage in self-expression through the behaviors in which they engage during them. More importantly, though, they provide a forum in which to explore and affirm inchoate self-concepts. In this way, concert goers use the opportunity for testing their identities in two different manners. First, they attempt to determine whether or not their subcultural memberships fit with their inner depths by seeking out cathetic experiences while at shows. And second, they constitute their self-concepts as real and meaningful by grounding them social, physical and emotions experiences of extraordinary intensity. Lastly, punks attend concerts in order to support their overall modernist projects. By attending shows, as Collins theorizes it, they refill their stores of emotional energy. This allows them to overcome the socially estranged conditions from which they suffer to some extent and also seek out others for further interaction. And, as our subjects more directly articulated, concerts serve as a support system by reaffirming the validity of their personal projects. DEVELOPING AUTHENTIC SELFHOOD THROUGH IDEOLOGICAL COMMITMENT In this section, we further develop and explain the ideological meanings of punk and their implications. We term the first ideological facet identified simply as rejection. Punks reject what Cooper referred to as an ideology of acceptance. The ideology of acceptance refers to a perceived cultural framework into which individuals are indoctrinated throughout their lives, which works to perpetuate existing system of power and constrain the potentialities of the self.

Lewin 44 A common feeling exist that this paradigm is inherently flawed and unfair, as it maintains the positions of those who hold power, resulting not only in undue privilege but more noticeably in expressional and ideological constraint, as social norms work to promote a strict system of values that render most deviance harshly punishable. Punks believe that this system generates a reality that undermines ones aesthetic potential in terms of self-expression with the goals of establishing a sanitized culture that suits privileged others. After analyzing interview responses as well as much popular and academic literature in which social justice is routinely associated with punk, elaborating a humanist facet of its subcultural ideology is in order. The object of this mode of thought involves overcoming prejudices and modes stratification such as racism, classism and anti-Semitism, which are best unified under an umbrella theme of anti-authoritarianism. Our findings suggest, however, that such beliefs do not stem from a normatively conceptualized commitment to social justice. Rather, resistance to modes of prejudice is subverted to subcultural concern with self-expression. Commitment to social justice exists for punks in order to topple phenomena that promote existing power structures, which in turn preclude total self expression and actualization of the genuine self. Thus, punks do not necessarily carry these beliefs because they view prejudice as morally repugnant; rather, they wish to dismantle power structures to allow for self-liberation by universally ending a privileged process of socialization. Such positions toward social injustice, however, are certainly not mutually exclusive. Hence, in sum, the first ideological component of punk involves recognizing that a hegemonic process of socialization occurs in society. Punks view this system as being oppresively stifling, and they thus actively strive to overcome it. Blake and Arthur, a 23 year old college graduate and engineer, for instance, defined punk in the following ways:

Lewin 45
Blake: In terms of how I conceive punk[it] involves heeding a questioning, perhaps even skeptical, attitude, resisting social pressures and norms, rejecting undue and sometimes even just authority [] Essentially [it] involves living the life that I want to live without regard for how others perceive and judge me. Arthur: A punk isits somebody that doesntits somebody that does whatever they want to do, whenever they want to do it, without regard for consequences; so, whether that means doing the right things all the timeor doing the wrong thing, you know, doing the wrong shit and still being yourself and facing the consequencesthan yeah, I think thats pretty punkbeing whoever you want to be and not trying to be something you arent. So really its more like a selfrealization thing.

These conceptions, by nature, require rejection of the socialization process in order to discover ones person and actualize it. We call the next distinct but related aspect of punk ideology reflexivity. Reflexivity was by far the most recurring and broad theme uncovered during research. The notion of reflexivity regards conceiving an ideology and lifestyle that represents a perceived genuine self and enacting it through praxis. Our data reveals a strong distaste for, and resistance to, the eliciting of images that do not match a persons ideological framework and presumed genuine personality. Reflexivity, then, first involves a rejection of assumed identities. An assumed identity takes the form of a commodity; it is unoriginal, constructed by others and thus not personally reflective. In line with the ideal of authentic selfhood, punk ideology stresses the practice of active creation. Common punk sentiments such as anti-consumerism and anti-materialism lay roots here. Being a punk mandates that one, through life experience and self-realization, create his or her own identity in the spirit of a do-it-yourself ethic, as opposed to assuming ones that are manufactured in mass culture. Blake, for instance, stated that punk should be amorphous and undefinable. Additionally, he rejected consumerism, feeling that it exists as a means through which to acquire an identity through possessions. Possessions, he felt, did not objectify ones true image; rather, they are procured in order to evoke certain socially acceptable perceptions in

Lewin 46 others. Arthur, further, spoke of purchasing all of his clothes in thrift stores and only acquiring commodities that are necessary for survival. He reasoned that he did not care about possessions, which he views as empty, not reflecting his personal nature or ideology. Most importantly, the tenant of reflexivity emphasizes that individuals develop and abide by their own belief and value systems. While subjects expressed feelings of repugnance and frustration for a variety of issues related to inequality and social injustice, they by far hed the greatest disdain for an abysmal ignorance and apathy that they felt to be bleeding through society. Our findings, hence, suggest that punks tend to believe that individuals in mainstream culture take almost all norms, values and beliefs into which they are socialized for granted never questioning their purpose or validity. While feeling that the implication of such a susceptibility to group-think and mindlessness is dangerous, it seems that they view the squandering of human potential ensuing from such passivity as far more unsettling. In fact, subjects in our research suggested that punk ideology takes no inherent form. Rather, it merely involves staking out an informed individuality. Subcultural participants are recognized as authentic when they draw their own conclusions about life and adhere to them. What those conclusions are does not seem to matter, so long people do their own thing. For example, Henry relates this position in the following passage at length:
Henry: its kind of an oxymoron, to be punk rock and play by the rules (laughs), there arent any rules! ...you do things on your own terms there are some punk rockers in bands and theyre republicanstheyre doing their own thing, you know. You know, you may not agree with them on whatever level it is, but theyre doing their own thing and theyre not following a guideline that kind of stuff. I know punk rockers that are Christians, you know, theres no rules to that sort of stuff Interviewer: so just doing your own thing, regardless of what that thing is, is important in punk rockit doesnt really matter what that thing isif youre a Christian or a republican, just so long as youre being yourself? Henry: Absolutely. You do your own things on your own terms because of your own set of beliefs. And that is what punk rock is to me of course, theres the music, but theres even punk rock bands that [do not play] in the typical punk rock style, and thats even more punk rock in a

Lewin 47
sense, you know, theres bands that dont play super fast, because maybe they played at a show before, and they werent playing their fast stuff, and someone said play the punk stuff, play the fast stuff, and you know, they said screw this; were going to go in a different direction, were going to play this, and thats even more [punk][its] just doing something because you want to do it, and you know why you want to do it. The only motivation behind is that you know youll have self satisfaction from it. Interviewer: Makes sense. Are there any other values or beliefs that you think kind of accompany punkor is that the central thrust? Henry: That seems to me to be kind of the general statement, but it really is how I view it. You dont even necessarily have to question authority so much as justdo something, know why youre doing it, you know, understand why youre doing it, and if youre going to follow something, make sure you know what youre following, and make sure you know its because of knowing who you are and thats what you want out of it. And thats generally the whole punk rock thing for me.

Reflexivity, when achieved, carries a sense of efficacy for beholders. Arthur referred to his immersion into punk as self-realization, and Cooper wrote that upon discovering punk he felt empowered, finally connecting his self to a culture that reflected it. Trevor defined a punk as someone who holds true no matter what, and thereafter discussed the meaning that heeding such a mentality had generated in his life. Empowerment is derived from the liberation that rejection of dominant social conditioning entails. Striving to understand ones genuine self and demanding accountability to it, rather than conforming to societys prescriptions, brings meaning and understanding into the lives of punks. Since before identifying as punk, many participants suffer from senses of alienation and purposelessness, discovering the self and of what it consists allows for members to uniquely develop meaningful senses of direction. The concept of reflextivity, in addition to illuminating a central tenet of ideology, provides insight into punk sentiments vis--vis style. All subjects expressed in some form or other that style should objectify self image. This is accomplished, generally, in two ways. The first is through positive, inner-speculation, which involves utilizing a style that reflects ones unique, genuine self. The second aspect is negative, disidentification, which visibly manifests

Lewin 48 disdain for those things against which punks collectively rebel. Both aspects of style articulated here are consistent Clarkes (1976) semiotic analyses. Punks shoulder extreme distaste for those who employ styles that are judged to be inconsistent with their selves. During a concert, for example, Arthur encountered two teenagers who were, ostensibly, deploying images in order to appear punk, while lacking, to him, ideological authenticity. Arthur noted that each wore expensive clothing likely originating in expensive department stores. Furthermore, he critiqued their gait and speech when they castigated him for wearing earplugs, which reflected, to them, a lack of stylistic commitment to the concert. They also made efforts to mock those not situated within the pit area of the concert hall, attempting to draw maximum attention to themselves in the process. And they also, while waiting for the band to play, relentlessly spoke of popular bands and used shallow punky language replete subcultural references in order to demonstrate their subcultural membership. Arthur reacted very negatively to this, boldly condemning them. His reaction was precipitated by disgust for their attempts to project images of subcultural membership to which he suspected did not reflect their genuine selves. Furthermore, the teenagers, he said, symbolized the culture of high school that he fervently abhorred, because their trendy clothing represented materialism and superficiality. After this incident, the pair mocked Arthur for actually being punk-- for taking the subculture too seriously. This, even more to him, demonstrated their lack of reflectivity and commitment, as they relinquished and condemned the identity when it fails to conjure social acceptance. A final tenant of ideology that emerged in our research is deemed self-actualization. This prong of ideology involves a moral commitment to self-discovery and is closely related to the ideal of relfexivity. Self actualization is achieved, as prefaced above, through positive inner-

Lewin 49 speculation and negative disidentification. The end goal is to develop a self-concept outside of societal influence. In the following passage, Cooper illuminates that meaning of this component of ideology.
Cooper:Ideas of truth are really important; punks always search for truth, but they have yet to find that truth in these power relationships.the truth punks seek is the truth derived from withina truth that creates real change. It is what we as [individuals] learn through experience[punk] is a utopia that can be open to all, a heaven of sorts that anyone can attain if they simply participate in the process, the process has no boundaries, it is only the everlasting quest to find truth, objective truth in the self, even if that truth contradicts the truth of another.

Taken together with resistance and reflexivity, punks ideological tenants mirror the conceptual portrait of the authentic ideal that Taylor lays out in The Ethics of Authenticity. Tracing the origin of that ideal as well as considering how it has been represented in society, he contends that authenticity seems to involve: creation and construction, originality, and opposition to rules of society. That we could essentially substitute the terms that we have employed in findings for Taylors vernacular clearly evinces the extent to which punk ideology reflects the ethos of authenticity present within the larger social milieu. Furthermore, that punk ideology does not necessarily concern itself with social justicethat it rather rejects authoritarianism because it interferes with the quest for self-expression self-realization, also reflects the culture of authenticity about which Taylor writes. In his work, Taylor, reviewing many critiques of contemporary values, contends that philosophies of moral subjectivism and liberal neutrality characterize our current cultural orientations. In essence, these terms means that people believe that they should not interfere with the attempts of others to live life as they see fit, and that social institutions should remain neutral on questions of what constitutes the good life. Punk ideology certainly appears to have been influenced by these more widely circulated philosophies, given the reluctance on part of participants to take a firm moral or ethical stance on any concrete ideological position. Instead

Lewin 50 of doing so, punks, as noted above, contend that one is authentic and moral so long as he or she follows rules of his/her own making. These parallels and our finding with respect to ideology in general, thus support the proposition developed in our becoming punk section, which suggests that the subculture represents an innovation as opposed to a rebellion adaption to social problems. COPING WITH THE INAUTHENTIC: ODDS AND ENDS Now that we have identified punks primal ideological components and exemplified the negative reaction toward style that does not objectify self image, we will illuminate the coping methods that subcultural agents use to sustain cultural integrity, distinctness, and robustness in the wake of cultural incorporation. Punks employ their beliefs regarding reflectivity to distinguish between authentic members and posers. Those who maintain punk style but fail to heed its ideological components or understand the sublimated meaning and function of the subculture were considered inauthentic by those whom we interviewed, who interpret punk as ideology instead of style. Cooper asserted that posers have not removed themselves from the ideology of acceptance that dictates belief and behavior. They, thus, cannot search for or find the genuine self that allows for ideological objectification in style. For these people, he continues, punk is perceived to serve no sublimated purpose with respect to actualizing the self. Rather, it simply serves, like normative culture, power relations and the privileged, rather than oneself. As such, posers cannot empathize with punk, because they lack the experiences of alienation and suffering that so-called authentic punks understand through life history. This lack of empathy prevents group solidarity for fomenting, and ones self from blooming. Subjects of the study demonstrated grave concern for this. Martin, for example, claimed that stylistic

Lewin 51 commodification was beginning to destroy the credibility of punks quest for truth, prevent important social networks from forming, which assuage social alienation and offer social support, and desecrate the ideology behind punk by dislocating it from the style that it is supposed to reflect. Thus, in the face of seeming infiltration by posers resulting from creative appropriation by culture producers, we found that punks react in one of two ways. First, they potentially become disillusioned and prematurely withdraw from the culture, feeling as though it can no longer serve their unfulfilled desires with respect to cultivating self and community. In effect, commodification can hasten or perpetuate the dissolution stage of punk identity. When encountering many of those with whom one cannot empathize or for whom one carries a distaste, the person may realize that he or she has in fact achieved all that one needs to within the subculture and withdraw. Sometimes, however, as in Andys case, disillusionment strikes, and one becomes alienated within his or her own subculture. At this point, perceiving the ideology and reason for participation as dead, the subject withdraws, assuming that no further benefits, though not yet ready to leave, can be acquired. However, punks also develop coping strategies in order to sustain subcultural integrity. I call the first coping mechanism screening. In screening, punks seek to determine if one has achieved separation from the ideology of acceptance. This, simply, is accomplished through strict scrutiny of the person in question. First, one attempts to discern whether the persons values are in alignment with normative culture and whether or not he or she exhibits a critical, questioning attitude. Also, a search for empathy takes place, in which the individual attempts to connect to the person in question by appealing to shared experiences like suffering, disconcertment with popular culture, and collective pursuit of self truth. Cooper essentially

Lewin 52 described a process of testing for reference group loyalty. By circumspectly scrutinizing a persons behavior, he attempted to determine whether their loyalties lied within the subcultures ideological framework or in a conformity to normative social values that yield acceptance and public legitimacy. The next strategy involves localizing references groups. By rendering the intersubcultural members with whom one normally interacts smaller and more intimate, a person is better able to question, understand, and develop empathetic bonds with his or her associates. By increasing possibilities for communication and shared experience, the individual ensures that he or she interacts with an authentic punk and that his or her experiences serve his or her quest and provide meaning and support. This calls for decreased participation in larger forums, which, through public availability and marketing, are rendered more susceptible to infiltration by posers. Meaning is also sustained through the concept of mutual respect. Respect functions as a faculty through which authentic identity becomes recognized and awarded. According to Arthur and Thomas, this arises from encountering others who appear to be heeding their genuine selvesdoing their own things. Respect is conferred in subtle wayshead nods, pats on backs, deference, and the likes. For example, during a concert, whenever Blake collided with another participant forcefully, they would nod at one another, which affirmed their authenticity. Similarly, when Arthur saw people in the pit who appeared authentic, he deferred to them, facilitating their motions and dances by clearing space. If he viewed a person of dubious authenticity, he would check him with force in order to clear the pit. During interviews and participant observation, we noted that Arthur and Thomas continually acknowledged me as authentic by making in-group references, such as defining me as one of them. Such subtle acknowledgements are very important. Although not salient, they are able to communicate

Lewin 53 empathy and recognition. Hence, while group solidarity arose in the past more or less automatically from participating in ritualistic behavior, it now requires extension through subtleties, in which genuine, reflective behavior (perceptually, at least) is recognized and rewarded. Another strategy and coping mechanism is reorientation. Reorientation attempts to further distance the subculture from normative culture, attempting to repel members. It is assumed that rendering style more extreme will also render it less appealing to insincere newcomers. Also, methods to make style more extreme, at least temporarily, resist appropriation, as no immediate market in popular culture exists for a defused style of the scene in question. This observation is consistent with Muggletons (2000) theoretical observation vis-vis popular incorporation being resisted by stylistic observation through new consumer products. The final method of coping involves attempting to educate posers through ritualistic ceremonies. This possibility manifests in much of the field notes from a particularly rowdy concert. As concerts, in their chaotic atmospheres, for the most part, still objectify an image of the subculture, a possibility exists for those entrenched in normative culture to understand punk ideology through ritual, according to Blake. Experiencing a concert creates the potential for those who have failed to achieve ideological removal to develop shared experiences that reflect those of the ideology under which punk came into beingdanger, intensity and camaraderie. Thus, the fusion of style and ideology in ritual allows for potential understanding and empathy among those who were brought into the subculture through consumption patterns. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Lewin 54 Our findings, utilizing empirical analysis, provide insight into the ideological aspects of punk and allow for a reconceptualization of its subculture, in which it is portrayed as a lived, meaningful ideology as opposed to merely a style. Our findings, driven by an ethnographic approach, expand knowledge of subculturists and address frequently cited problems and gaps within the Birmingham tradition--namely its over-privileging of the spectacular within subculture, its refusal to look at mundane aspects of subculture, and its semiotic approach to study that ignores the experiences of subculturists, denying them agency. Our work also, notably, substantiates portions of their analysis with empirical evidence, namely that punks do, in fact, seek to objectify self-image through style and that, in some cases, punks do rely on stylistic innovations in order to cope with cultural appropriation. We offer other unique contributions to existing literature as well. Most contemporary research has moved beyond the study of ideology, primarily as a reaction to the listed critiques levied against the Birmingham tradition with respect to their interest in ideology over empiricism. By using ethnographic methods to study the meanings that young people attach to their behaviors, we are able to reclaim the exploration of ideology within subculture, which has largely been abandoned. We also reveal subcultures as sites critical for meaningful identity formation, community and socialization, which depart from conceptualizations that trivialize them as structural reactions to cultural contradictions, on part Birmingham theorists, or as inane, ephemeral fads among some contemporary scholars. Such meaningful communities and sites for interaction are ineffably necessary in our increasingly postmodern world that fails to provide many with direction, purpose, meaning, and empathetic, worthwhile interpersonal relationships. We also make further progress in filling the Birmingham traditions empirical gaps by cluing into of what punk ideology consists and what it seeks to accomplish. We also identify

Lewin 55 alternative strategies that punks use in order to combat the forces of cultural appropriation that dislocate ideology from style, rendering punk as a stylistic commodity that no longer rebels against normative culture or constructs a meaningful social niche, which provides outlets for self discovery, identity, and progress. Further research is, however, in order to explore more thoroughly how appropriation and popular appeal have impacted subculture. Most importantly, however, our work seeks to move beyond an analysis of how subculturalists construct authentic identities, instead exploring how the broader cultural goal for authentic selfhood orients subcultural participation. We find that what has ensued from the culture industrys appropriation of punk style is an attempt by some young punks to come together in order to share in a project of self-realization in which authenticity (as punk and as a human-being) is developed through commitment to three ideological tenants: resistance, selfactualization and reflexivity. Overall, we find that punk identity is constituted by the integrity of ones search and practice of their inner essence. Thus, we link punk subculture up to a broader societal trend in a way that prior studies have neglected to do. This Accords with theoretical scholarship advanced by microsociologists such as Fine and Kleinmann, who have problematized the subculture/dominant culture divide assumed by both the functionalist and neo-marxian traditions. REFERENCES Abrahamson, Mark. 1983. Social Research Methods. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Andes, Linda. 1998. Growing up Punk: Meaning and Commitment Careers in a Contemporary Youth Subculture. In Jonathan Epstein (ed.), Youth Culture: Identity in a Postmodern World. New York: Blackwell.

Lewin 56 Berg, Bruce. 2004. Qualitative Research Methods: For the Social Sciences 5th Ed. Boston: Pearson. Charmaz, Kathy. 1994. The Grounded Theory Method: An Explication and Interpretation. In Barney Glaser (ed.), More Grounded Theory Methodology. Mill Valley:Sociology Press. Clarke, Gary. 1997. Defending Ski-Jumpers: A Critique of Theories of Youth Subcultures. In Ken Gelder and Sarah Thornton (eds.) The Subcultures Reader. New York: Routledge. Clarke, John. 1976. Style. In Stuart Hall and Tony Jefferson (eds.), Resistance through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Postwar Britain. New York: Holmes and Meier Publishers. Gaines, Donna. 1991. Suburban Teenage Wasteland: Suburbias Dead End Kids. New York: Pantheon Press. Hebdige, Dick. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. In Ken Gelder and Sarah Thornton (eds.) The Subcultures Reader. New York: Routledge. Massey, A. and Walford, G. (Eds.) (1999) Explorations in methodology, Studies in Educational Ethnography, Vol.2, Stamford, JAI Press, 183-197 Morce, Janice and Lyn Richards. 2002. Readme First for a Users Guide to Qualitative Methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Muggleton, David. 2000. Inside Subculture: The Postmodern Meaning of Style. Oxford: Berg. Neuman, Lawrence. 2000. Qualitative Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods 4th Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Lewin 57 OHara, Craig. 1999. The Philosophy of Punk: More than Noise. London: AK Press. Stern, Phyllis. 1994. The Grounded Theory Method: Its Uses and Processes. In Barney Glaser (ed.), More Grounded Theory Methodology. Mill Valley:Sociology Press. Widdicombe, Sue. 1998. But You Dont Class Yourself: The Interactional Management of Category Membership and Non-Membership. Pp. 52-70 in Identities in Talk, edited by Charles Antaki and Sue Widdicombe. London: Sage.