November 14th at 4:30 in Harugari 229
Understanding the basic character of a subculture should in theory be relatively simple, in practice the attempt proves more difficult. In attempting to do so, one immediately encounters a range of diverse and conflicting claims that make a simple description all but impossible. However, these difficulties may be of unexpected value. Crucial insights can be gained by examining the conflicting accounts themselves—rather than treating them as obstacles barring the way to a fuller understanding of the subculture in question. In this chapter, I propose an approach to understanding conflicting subcultural representations that is rooted in the nature of storytelling and retrospective accounts. This is premised on the idea that while facts matter, so do beliefs. The things people believe—whether tentatively or whole-heartedly—have real consequences regardless of whether the precipitating belief is based on fact. I therefore argue that representations of punk—whether found in the media or in scholarly reports —can be fruitfully understood as a sort of ‘legend’. Among folklorists, legends are ‘accounts of past happenings’ told as though they could be true regardless of whether they actually are. Different legends can thus provide competing or even contradictory claims about the same subject. Frequently, people may react to a legend as though it was true. The ensuing action might be intended to mitigate a legend’s perceived threats, test its veracity, or even act it out and so enable the individual to become a part of the legend themselves. Because the legend sparked belief, the outcomes of that legend become real—become fact—through people’s actions. This can occur even if the legend itself was not true to begin with and even if there are contradictory versions of the same legend in circulation.
