Show description

I put my share in my glass and drink. I’m not a personal fan of drugs—I worry about my brain cells. When the author is out researching, she claims to be both participating and observing, but can only account for the latter activity. Thornton’s intention here is to demonstrate salient experience—to prove that she has done the work—yet her attempt to make light of the epistemological imperatives of sociologist discourse seem awkward. Thornton’s references to having taken Ecstasy become an anomaly.

The existence of strata of distinction within the consideration of the agency and activity of those processing and using the objects and practices of popular culture has, Thornton suggests, only recently been acknowledged. Writers on cultural audiences and modes of reception have commented on the ways in which fans differentiate between active and passive modes of reception,97 and discriminate between those who seem likeminded, who share the taste choices that are made all the time, who are in possession of sufficient cultural capital—and those who fail to make the grade and are sometimes excluded as a result.

Punk bridled at the notion of becoming a youth movement and derided those who attempted to shape themselves to its blueprint. The élitism within such a culture did not entail scorning just the ‘plastic punks’, but scorning all those behind the times, those who were not party to their particular cultural dislocation or their sense of sardonic ennui. In its adherence to codes of exclusivity and value, punk appeared no different from previous youth cultures that invoked cachet by fiercely guarding their marginality.