Talk:Goth subculture

Archived discussions: ARCHIVE 1

PR for the article

Once Adrift*'s issues are dealt with to everyone's satisfaction, I think we'll have a pretty stable and rather good article here. It may not yet meet the high criteria for featured article status, but I think it'll deserve a bit of PR on Wikipedia. Any ideas? I'm thinking of nominating it for "good article" status not too far in the future. I am a bit worried about the ideology, etc., section, not because I'm still concerned about the word "ideology". But it does seem very thin on references to support some of the claims such as those that Adrift* highlighted. Metamagician3000 07:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't find any easier way to deal with the contentious portions of the subheading but to delete them. I might be in the wrong for that and feel that maybe the sentence tieing into the themes of Romance and Neoromance, specifically, could have been dealt with in another way. I have no problems with other editors either reverting or reediting the sections i've deleted, but feel there's need for discussion before doing so. At any rate, I agree with Metamagician3000 that, at this point, this is a fairly stable article and deserves at least "good article" status. We really need more citations, and that's something i think i can work on a bit in the future.--Adrift* 07:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Things to maybe change

The pictures don't bring much to the article and are kind of lacking. We need some pictures of contemporary goths; elder or mallgoths or whatever. This was attempted before but fell short, though i'm still unsatisfied with the current choice of pictures.

This article needs to be re-organized. I don't know how many would agree, but I think the order should be History/Origin, Idealology, popular intolerance, cultural influences, music... then the other three should be combined into the other sections.

This article is good except that it's very messy. We're not trying to write a book; a lot of things seem superflous and defiant of NPOV. It needs to be more uniform and easy to browse.

Whatcanuexpect 22:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

The photos that are there now were added because the previous photos were disastrously bad representations of the Goth scene. I think the photos that are there with the exception of maybe the seemingly random Naked and the Dead photo fit the article just fine, but I also agree that more photos of regular non-rock star Goths should be added to the article as well. I may be adding some personal photos eventually if nothing decent comes up. As far as the order goes, I don't really see any problems with it. I'm not whole heartedly objecting to a reshuffle, but I don't really think its absolutely necessary. I do think that everything below the Ideology section seems sort of tacked on, but it always seemed to me that those sections just needed to be filled out a bit (possibly group some of the bottom sections together). Just out of curiousity, what parts do you find "defiant of NPOV"?--Adrift* 03:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Religious Elements

I'm wondering about the need for this line at the end of the Religious subheading: and so on, creating a demand for religious goth arts and literature, as illustrated by such websites as GothicChristianity.com and GothsForJesus.com. Now, I'm a Christian, but seems to me that 2 links to Christian only sites is a bit um... I don't know, it feels a bit biased maybe? There used to be a Jewishgothic.com webpage, but looks like it doesn't exist anymore. Furthermore, I'm not sure what it means that there's a "demand for religious goth arts and literature...". Most traditional gothic art and literature is heavily religious anyways... The only thing i can see this refering to is faith based musicians. I'd like to either trim the second link or get rid of this whole half sentence altogether. Seems to me there's no reason these links couldn't just be linked further down as Externals as the point is already loud and clear in the rest of the heading.--Adrift* 03:53, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I dunno. Why not just remove the second link and see how it looks? It probably doesn't need two examples to make the point, but having an example here gives a sense of documenting what the article refers to. Anyway, that would be the cautious approach. I'll go and do this. See how it strikes you when you see it. Metamagician3000 04:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah good point about using at least one for documenting. I wouldn't mind seeing another example other than the Christian one, but so far there's not much out there for other faith oriented websites. I also went ahead and removed the section that went on about a demand for religious art and literature.--Adrift* 05:24, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Cyber link

I vote for the removal of the link to Cyber (Subculture). The article blatantly says that Cyber and Goth are two different things, and that members of both often dislike being associated with the other. 68.38.192.116 07:54, April 4, 2006

i strongly disagree. cybergoth is a large part of the uk scene. --MilkMiruku 08:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

As much as hate to admit it, I also strongly disagree. Even if it is just Techno Rave dressed in black latex there are probably enough tangible links to the traditional scene to make it stick.--Adrift* 09:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I also Disagree. Liks to exist to goth culture, and although the links may not be set in the blackest of obsidian stone, they are there. Perhaps put a section of links "Related" to goth culture separate from "Directly related links" Darkpowder 17:42, 11 April 2006 (GMT)

Disagree. And maybe I've missed it, but where does it say they are two different things? It says that cybergoth grew out of goth, hence they are related at least on that note. Mdwh 22:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I also disagree. Being a Goth myself, and maybe one of the few that can admit it without tongue in check, I see Cyber as just another form of a vastly diverse group. There are also many forms of Cyber-brethern, such as Gravers and Neo-Goths. While I do not instist that Cyber is in any way a Gothic convention of solely the younger members of the Goth scene, I do insist that even the offshoots of Cyber can not be denied as Goth in and of themselves. Cyber may very well have developed as an afterthought of fashions brought to the attention of the masses in movies such as Bladerunner, and while most Gothic fasions borrow from time periods of the past, Cyber Goth fashions "borrow" from the future. --Inten Rael 04:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

"gothic" taste

That sounds very vague. Specially in the article that is trying to define goth.

What part of the article are you referring to specifically?--Adrift* 08:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Improvements

The Punk article I started is in a wretched state, but, if you take a look at it, there are some ideas which I think may be helpful to the Goth article, especially in the the structure of the "Culture" section and the content of the "Lifestyle and community" section of the Punk article. A clear outline of goth culture would do wonders for this article, and a description of the prevalence and structure of goth as a community would also be a major improvement. Also, it seems strange to have a section entitled "English usage" and another "Current use of the term 'goth'". That seems redundant. Those sections should be merged or differentiated. Ecto 09:25, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The "English usage" and "Current use ..." sections are doing different jobs (one is talking about the actual meaning in contemporary parlannce, the other warning against solecisms such as "a gothic", which is a quite different issue), but I agree that more thought needs to go into how they are related in the article, so as to avoid any confusion.

Also, the lead is currently rather weak. It is only one para, and says very little. We really need a lead of three paras which gives a good summary of the total article. The lack of a good lead is the main weakness that I see at the moment if the article were submitted to the Good Article process (or the Featured Article process), except the continuing need for a whole lot more detail in references. Metamagician3000 10:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

They are different issues, but they both pertain to goth as a word, and I think that warrants them being put into one section. But then again, I am not sure if we we even need the "English usage" section at all. In its current state, it belongs in a dictionary rather than an encyclopedia. Ecto 14:34, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it's a point I made back in Feb. [1], but nothing came of it.--Adrift* 16:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

It all seems like good information to me. I see it as a presentational issue. Metamagician3000 23:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that we have a choice of several options here:

• Change the "Current use of the term 'goth'" so that it is not based on goth as a word. Basing it on goth as a word is not neccessary to the content, is it? I think this option would be the best choice.
• Move the content of "English usage" to the Wiktionary. I think this option should be done in conjunction with the first.
• Leave it as is. This option would not really satisfy me at all.
• Merge the content of "Current use of the term 'goth'" into "Engish usage". I could live with this choice.
• Merge the content of "Engish usage" into "Current use of the term 'goth'". This option would leave the "Engish usage" content out of place.

Are there any other options? Ecto 00:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I vote for option 1. The bit called "Current use of the term 'goth'" isn't really about the word "goth" at all. Not in substance. It is about who is or is not commonly, or correctly, considered part of the subculture. Put another way, it is about the subculture's boundaries. Metamagician3000 01:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

There are some long, learned digressions that don't seem to do much to advance the article. I'm deleting some of them, in the spirit of being bold. For example, I've just deleted this: The word "gothic" in the literary sense is a broad term. It is hard to predict which direction gothic literature will take in the twenty-first century, but there is interest in many to adapt the old gothic influences and renew them. Gothic fiction before Edgar Allan Poe, Algernon Blackwood, and H. P. Lovecraft was not generally seen as frightening, particularly by today's gothic standards, though there were major authors who showed gothic sensibilities, such as Charles Dickens with his ghost story "A Christmas Carol."

It's all very interesting, but it belongs in an article about gothic literature. This article does not need so much peripheral detail about the literature (actually, I'm not convinced that everything here is even true; I suspect that some of the early gothic literature was intended to be frightening). Metamagician3000 04:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Again, I've just deleted this: One reason "gothic" is such a broad term is because its content and themes can vary greatly. For example, as aforementioned, some gothic writers like Brite and Rice utilize erotic themes while other writers, such as Rod Serling, do not use an erotic undercurrent at all. Works that vastly differ from one another in these and many more ways still share the category of gothic literature, such as Serling's Night Gallery, Macey Baggett Wuesthoff's Sacrifice, Washington Irving's "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow" and Joseph Armstead's Darkness Fears and Moon-Chosen series. Once again, it's all interesting, but no actual connection is made to the subculture. As the article stands, it is just a distraction. Metamagician3000 04:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I've just done a ruthless restructure of the article. I think the material is now in a better logical order. If you don't like this structure, could you please try to improve it rather than just reverting. I'm certain it's an improvement on the old structure, even if it's not perfect. Metamagician3000 04:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Leave the references to HP Lovecraft out and you risk your sanity! Keeping past reference in (especially references to cinema and the goth pioneers) with dearly loved authors is something essential to this article. Darkpowder 17:46, 11 April 2006 (GMT)

By all means put in something about Lovecraft or how Lovecraft is regarded in the goth subculture. But the sentences I removed don't really do that. They just make tangential and dubious points about when gothic literature's possible future, when it became scary, etc. I'm sure you could improve on what was there. Metamagician3000 23:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Good job changing the "Current use of the term 'goth'" section! So, what are we to do with the "English usage" section? I'm tempted to delete it. The more I think about it, the less it works for me. Ecto 18:43, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

GA Failing

.... was recently nominated to be promoted to good article status, but has unfortunately failed. Reasons for failing GA:

• Intro
  • "prevalent" should be replaced with widespread/popular/common
  • "around the globe".. are they tiny goth people? This paints a somewhat confusing picture, do 3rd world nations have goths?
  • " traces its origins to the United Kingdom of the early 1980s" should be reworded to "in the early 1980s", unless you have a time machine :P
  • Prose 2nd paragraph for generalities, remember this is an intro; keep it BROOAD.
  • Move 3rd paragraph to the end of the first.
  • General clean up and prosing paragraphs
  • Swap image from "Origins and influences" with the one in the intro, it gives a better view of the style

• English usage
  • Move Wikitonary link to External links
  • Remove the examples.. please
  • List what it IS used for, not what it ISN'T
  • Move this further down the article, this isn't the most important thing about goths is it?

• Origins and influences
  • Add a introduction before going into subheaders, or simply remove the first subheader
  • "group or movement" Be Bold and choose one!
  • "in July 1982 might be seen as" Be Bold!
  • No brackets!
  • Don't leave random web links in parapgraphs, see WP:CITE on how to reference articles

(Apply the above points to the WHOLE article, that's the idea of it)

• Other points
  • Improve prose in the 2nd half of "Etymology and Gothic horror literature"
  • Summarise and/or make "Early influences from Gothic literature and cinema" its own section
  • Avoid brackets
  • "Local scenes also contributed to this variation." = incomplete sentence-merge
  • " Melbourne playwright Sai Ho is " should be "Melbourne playwright, Sai Ho, is..."
  • Merge "Elder goths", "Corporate goths" and mentioning of "baby goths" to its own section
  • "Image:The Hunger film poster.jpg" requires sourcing
  • Add a photo of a goth band
  • Summarise, prose and cleanup the music section

• References
  • Cut down "See Also"
  • Read WP:CITE to find out about how to reference
  • Clean up External links, leaving professional sites only

A good start, but needs cleanup. Asking for a copyedit from an admin would be useful, good luck Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 17:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Well it looks like we have some work to do. (jeez in the time it took him to write this up he could have cleaned up the article for us lol).--Adrift* 23:19, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Still, this is a useful outside opinion, so it has my thanks. IMHO the nomination was premature. Compared to the articles I've recently nominated or passed, such as Stregheria and Hong Kong action cinema (which make nice examples of the standard to aim at), Goth is still at least a few weeks away from meeting the GA standard, I think. Hopefully, Highway's comments will help.

I've made a couple of small changes this morning: linking the poster for The Hunger directly to the main image, which has all the details; and adding a few extra words about the movie, in case there's any doubt as to whether we provide sufficient discussion to justify illustrating it. I'm not sure if that really satisfies the point that was made, but it seems to me to strengthen the case for using the image. Metamagician3000 23:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Heh, reasons 1, 2, 3, 5 for the intro were introduced by an edit just a couple of hours before your edit, and after the GA nomination! I've reverted it back now.Mdwh 01:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I nominated it now on purpose. Goth is such an important sociological development of the past 25 years, that I thought if a kindly critical eye took a look at the article at this stage, then it would help the process of the current editors polishing up this very good diamond in the rough by allowing an outsider's viewpoint. - Davodd 04:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

No worries. The outcome of the process has prompted me to do some quite ruthless pruning and restructuring. Hopefully the others here will also have bold responses. Metamagician3000 05:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your nice comments, I've received a slightly less than warm welcome from other articles (I'm still hiding from the Queen editors. :P) It is a good article, it just needs some fixing with the grammar and the wording, which is much easier to fix compared to other nominees such as Perfect Dark, which has about 12 copyvio images, and Scarlett Johansson which has a section about her chest :S. If you need any of the notes expanded, or you need any help just leave a message, Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 19:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

About the introduction...

Goth is not a modern subculture. Modern subcultures are subcultures that started between the World Wars. Goth is a post-War subculture. And it’s still around. So goth is a contemporary subculture.

I pointed this next thing out in my original edit summary in case this would happen. Goth is not widespread, popular, or common. Goth is not pop culture. If it was, it wouldn’t be a subculture. It is widespread, popular, and common ‘’enough’’ to sometimes be reflected in pop culture. That’s what ‘’prevalent’’ means: “common enough to be encountered, but not ubiquitous”. In this case, the goth subculture is common enough to be encountered by pop culture, which is Wikipedia’s ideal audience. Is there some reason for changing this word?

Geography is important. The introduction should answer the question, “’’Where’’ is the goth subculture?” “Many countries around the globe” is an accurate answer. There are goth scenes in North America, South America (Brazil), Europe, Australia, Africa (South Africa), and Asia (Japan and Russia). Something that spans two hemispheres of the planet is “around the globe”. There are goth scenes in all four hemispheres. And yes, there are goths in some third world countries, such as Mexico and Russia, and they are about the same size as regular goths. The article should cover the subculture’s geography in a paragraph. The introduction should cover it in a sentence.

The sentence “The Goth subculture has associated "gothic" tastes in music and fashion” should be kept as close to a description of those tastes as possible.

This introduction is worthless without a brief description of gothic music. That’s the basis of the entire subculture.

If anyone thinks there are any problems with my edits to the introduction, please go ahead and make changes. Reverting my edits wholesale is fine with me, just as long as it doesn’t negate obvious improvements along with what is viewed as wrong. Thank you. Ecto 16:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I was mostly teasing, I agree with Meta that Highway, rightly, brought to our attention some very rough spots. And I also agree with Davodd that this article is highly deserving of the attention we're giving it. Looks like Meta did some intensive reediting.... excellent. I haven't gotten around to reading all of the reedits, but i'll voice my opinion and do some follow up edits (if there's need for them) as soon as I have the time.--Adrift* 20:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

There's still a lot to do, most of it beyond my expertise, but I hope there is now a cleaner, clearer base to work from. I haven't necessarily handled everything in the way Highway suggested, but it did prompt me to restructure the article in a way that made better sense to me, rework a lot of the relationships between sections (which meant rethinking what they were really about), prune away peripheral material and just plain wordiness, and generally clean up all the prose as best I could. I'll now hand it back to Adrift* and others. The main thing the article currently needs is a whole lot of references. There are many claims in the article that need to be substantiated, but I'm not qualified to do that - I've more or less taken all the factual claims on faith. Metamagician3000 00:54, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

do 3rd world nations have goths? yes, they have. --Eltitoskate 19:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Recent University of Glasgow study

This study investigates the high proportion of goths who admit having self-harmed or attempted suicide - but BEFORE they became goths! It suggests that identifying with a tolerant, distinctive subculture is of real psychological benefit to children/teens with emotional or social problems. I think that a sentence or two on it would fit well into the second paragraph of the 'Ideology' section, but I'm new to Wikipedia and would really appreciate some advice on how to word it. I know, I know, BE BOLD and all that, but it's such a sensitive subject and I don't want to unintentionally be offensive or POV. Bottlegreen roses 01:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

i read about that, but check some of the number crunching here. --MilkMiruku 23:54, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm yeah ok point taken. A sample of 25 people isn't really much of a study, is it? Thanks for pointing that out! Bottlegreen roses 23:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, the study does not indicate something that I thought stuck out like a sore thumb: Isn't it possible that the percentages are equal amongst all sections of our culture, but that my Gothic community is less redisent about reporting it? I believe that all groups and sub-cultures have this... problem, shall we say, but because the Goth community is so much more open about pretty much everything, we are the only ones comfortable enough to admit it in mass numbers. "Mass" being loose term, based on the sample size. It could also be that some people, trying to fit in (especially those of a lesser age), will attempt anything, even SI. --Inten Rael 04:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Contemporary gothic literature

I see that someone has deleted the material on Poppy Z. Brite. Someone has also added a block of material which now reads (after some copyediting:

"Then within the newer developments in the gothic literary medium one will see authors named Macey Wuesthoff, who call to mind the works of Stephen King with her novel Sacrifice along with the vampire novel written by Joseph Armstead named Darkness Fears which takes an accurate look at a goth nightclub. Their works depict the more brutal side of the gothic subculture, which shows its kinship with dark metal. Gothic films such as Psycho, inspired by the Robert Bloch novel of the same name, bring to mind the aspects of the gothic being more psychological. Richard Matheson's novel, I Am Legend is about vampires spawned from the apocalypse. Followers of Matheson include authors Terry Lloyd Vinson and Nicholas Grabowsky. Their works will have more in common thematically with bands Iced Earth and AC/DC; nonetheless, a gothic element is evident."

I don't know whether I'm in agreement with these edits, and I am not clear what relationship is claimed between these various works and the goth subculture, but I have not tampered with the para beyond copyediting it. (I'll do some more of this, as some of it still needs fixing.) Nor have I reinstated any of the Brite material. I'd be interested in responses from other editors here. Metamagician3000 09:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I would reinstate a reference to Brite, but only a small one: she no longer identifies with the subculture, and was never universally popular within it, though she did create a few goth characters in her earlier novels and is popular in some circles. I didn't notice this paragraph about Wuesthoff in the main article, but I'd suggest that if it's still there it be removed: it smacks of self-promotion and I don't believe she is a writer deeply associated with the subculture, except in her own mind (nor have I heard of the "followers" mentioned in that paragraph). Both Brite and Caitlin R. Kiernan are, along with a few others. And the goth scene didn't have much "kinship" with dark metal until pretty recently (past wearing black clothing); many goths consider metal fans a different breed and don't want to be lumped in with them. Some goths do like some metal, though. 4.225.130.185 09:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

English usage

I am being bold and deleting this section for the following reasons:

• Wikipedia is not a dictionary.
• The usage of the word goth is not the most important thing about the subculture, yet the section dealing with it is at the top of the article. Simply moving this section anywhere else in the article would only make it more obvious how out of place its content is in an encyclopedia. It cannot stay where it is, and it cannot be moved, so it should be deleted.
• This content delays the reader from reading about the things which actually make goth interesting. Putting the most boring thing first is not good writing. Keeping boring things out if you can is.
• Anyone who reads through the rest of the articles sans "English usage" should have just as good an idea of how to use the word as someone who read that section, only they would have learned how to use the word in a much more lively, natural way.
• The examples of usage kind of make me cringe for some reason.
• Goth is a slang term, so there is really no standardized usage to begin with, and I do not agree with the entirety of the description given. From the looks of things, neither do some of the other editors, as...
• The usage of the word within the rest of the article itself contradicts the "English usage" section several times. It’s fine by me to refer to the goth subculture simply as the noun ‘’goth’’.

If you disagree with me, please feel free to restore the section, but please also respond with your reasons for doing so. Ecto 21:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I haven't restored the section, though I'm tempted to do so, as I find it quite interesting. This might be a matter of taste. I find discussions of word usage and so on more interesting than a lot of other stuff in the article, like the long lists of bands, some of them seemingly not even notable, and all the detail about elder goths, etc. Whether the section gets restored depends on whether people really make the sorts of errors that the section warns against. I'm not sure they do. Without that knowledge, I can't make a strong case for it. I'd like to see some comment on that. In the absence of such comment, I'll go along with the deletion of the section.

But do you really think it's okay to refer to the subculture that one might belong to as "goth" ... as in, "She's a member of goth"? I don't see where the article does that. What I'd agree is that it's okay to refer to a style, or a social phenomenon, as "goth" ... as in , "Goth has gone from strength to strength over the past twenty years." I would have thought that that is what the article does. Metamagician3000 00:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and I still think that what is holding back this article is referencing. Almost nothing is properly referenced. Metamagician3000 00:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I find the discussion of word usage interesting, too, but that is the purpose of Wiktionary, not Wikipedia. I come to Wikipedia for encyclopedia entries, and I got to Wiktionary for dictionary entries. Since goth is a subculture, it is also a community, and, as such, a group of people. I have no problem with someone saying "She is a member of goth" beyond the fact that "She is goth" is more terse. I have heard the former in conversation and it has never crossed my mind to "correct" it. Since goth is slang, there is no real standard behind its usage. Some people capitalize the word as Goth when referring to the community, and keep it uncapitalized when referring to goth as cultural phenomena. Some even go so far as to use the word gothdom or Gothdom to refer to goth as a group of people. Some always capitalize it, others always leave it in lowercase. You cannot lay down any hard and fast rules. ‘’Goth’’ is not the spawn of a single source in academia, but rather informal slang, so it is impossible to justify placing it in such a certain usage. The only thing you can do is choose the usage you prefer, use the term that way in your own writing, and keep its usage consistent throughout the article. Even if saying “She is a member of goth” is illogical, well, language does not always follow logic, now does it? It seems that my deletion of the section in question was viewed as “vandalism” and reverted, so if you really want to keep the section I am not going to go against your opinion and delete it again. Please tell me if you still want to keep it. And yes, I agree that a lack of referencing is this article's main problem, but the 'English usage' section does not help, in my opinion. Ecto 16:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't me who reverted it, and nor did I consider what you did vandalism, especially as you gave your reasons here. Whether the section stays or goes is best settled by discussion. Speaking for myself, I think what you're saying makes sense, though I'd like to see some more opinions. Metamagician3000 11:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and deleted it again. I think the majority of us agree its unnecassary.--Adrift* 16:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh no, I didn't think it was you. Ecto 01:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, let's keep it like that, then - at least until such a time as someone gives a good reason to the contrary. I'll join in the consensus, at least for now, because Ecto's reasons did make a lot of sense. Metamagician3000 00:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The reason "She is a member of goth" is inappropriate is that "goth" is not a noun referring to an official group, or an unofficial one. "goth" is an abbreviated adjective (short for "gothic"). Thus, if you want to say that someone is a member, you say that they are "a member of the goth/gothic subculture" or that someone "is goth." If you use "goth" as a noun, it solely refers to a person, not a group. Got it? Parts of speech. "Gothdom" is someone being clever and is understood in the scene as a vaguely witty way to refer to the subculture.

As I said below, a LOT of terminology related to the subculture was coined on alt.gothic sometime in or before the mid-1990s; some of the rest of it was in use in the UK before that, and popularized via alt.gothic (as many of the most prominent early posters, like Pete Scathe and Sexbat, were British goths who have been involved in the scene since the 1980s).

Ecto's initial reasons may have made a lot of sense, but the more recent ones (at 16:59 on 9th May) do not, and are not correct at all w/r/t common usage of the terminology by literate and informed people (people saying "X is a member of goth" are usually either not one or not the other, and you can tell if they're literate by reading the rest of what they've written).

4.225.130.185 09:08, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

sentances that possibly need altering or deletion

Here are some sentances I personally have problems with, and was wondering if we could see some discussion on.

From the top of the article: Its imagery and cultural proclivities show influences from nineteenth century Gothic literature, mainly by way of horror movies (particularly cinematic depictions of vampires).

I more or less agree with this statement, except the part in parenthesis. When I think of Peter Murphy, Robert Smith, Siouxsie, Nick Fiend, Captain Sensible, Johnny Slut, Rozz Williams, etc. where the Goth LOOK undeniably came from, I never think vampire.

Goth after post-punk The 2003 Victoria and Albert Museum Gothic exhibition in London furthered a tenuous connection between modern goth and the medieval gothic period.

It did? How? why?

Over time, the gothic subculture has developed its own "goth slang", with regional variations.

It has? If it has, its not nearly as prevalent as hip hop slang...

Yes, it has. In fact, a book of subcultural slang for writers called Talk the Talk was recently published, and goth was one of the subcultures included. Unfortunately, many of the definitions given by the author, Luc Reid, are at least slightly incorrect. It appears that he only used a handful of forums for research.

The fact that "goth slang" hasn't been appropriated in mass culture doesn't mean it doesn't exist: "babygoth/babybat," "eldergoth," "mopeygoth," "graver," "doom cookie," etc. Another thing is that, although it's technically slang, it's probably immediately apparent what most of it means. Most of these things were originally coinages on alt.gothic.

And there are indeed regional variations: see the Australian terms, and think of things like "PonyGoth" - which meant a goth, usually female, who had multicolor hair extensions, like a My Little Pony doll! This originated in the UK in the early 1990s and does not seem to have caught on extensively in the US, though it was used on some forums for a while when the look itself started to catch on here. I think it eventually merged into "cybergoth," since that was the fashion identification of many of the American girls who adopted the hairstyle.

4.225.130.185 08:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

PS, I believe I may be able to put you in touch with the person who actually coined the term "babygoth" (now sometimes seen as "baby bat" - as "goth" and "bat" are sometimes interchangeable when used as suffixes on descriptive terms). It did not originally mean "someone with potential" (to grow into a valuable scene member). The goth scene proper - the music/dance/fashion scene - is VERY club/bar/pub-centric, and most clubs are age-restricted due to their drinking licenses, and many adult goths do not like all-ages clubs or club nights. (Anecdotal? Use Google News to read as much of alt.gothic from about ten to twelve years ago as you can. It's documented there. I can't stress enough that SO MUCH of what we know as goth today is related to or documented by alt.gothic in the early-to-mid-1990s.) A babygoth or babybat was simply a goth too young to go into a regular club or pub night, or many concerts (usually under 18 or under 21), and thus unable to participate completely in the scene. One reason it was coined was that many of the events at the earliest Convergence goth conventions were age-restricted, leaving some high school and college students who were able to go to the con barred from some of its events. A few took it upon themselves to create their own events specifically for the younger set and referred to them as "babygoth events". 09:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Current boundaries of the subculture Sai Ho, a Melbourne playwright, is particularly scathing about what he terms baby goths.

Who is he, why should we care, and so what?

The original Goths and gothic horror Certain elements in the dark, atmospheric music and dress of the post punk scene were clearly "gothic" in this sense, exemplified by the names of such post punk bands as UK Decay and Southern Death Cult.

I think this is contestable. The name UK Decay strikes me as having more to do with the political nature of UK Decay, even the song UK Decay is more about politics than about anything "gothic", and Ian Astbury labeled Sexgang Children's fans goths, it doesn't appear Southern Death Cult was influenced by gothic literature when naming their own band.

Influence on the subculture In particular, the imagery surrounding male and female vampires, witches, sorcerers, and spies, had a significant influence on the evolution of gothic fashion.

Spies? the rest makes goth style seem like it was influenced by Lord of the Rings or something.

A newer development in the gothic literature is the author Macey Wuesthoff, whose novel Sacrifice calls to mind the fiction of Stephen King. A vampire novel written by Joseph Armstead, Darkness Fears, takes an accurate look at a goth nightclub. These works depict the more brutal side of the gothic subculture, showing its kinship with dark metal.Gothic films such as Psycho, inspired by the Robert Bloch novel of the same name, bring to mind the aspects of the gothic being more psychological. Followers of Matheson include the authors Terry Lloyd Vinson and Nicholas Grabowsky. Their works have more in common thematically with bands Iced Earth and AC/DC; nonetheless, a gothic element is evident.

Some of these books and films seem to have a tenuous connection to the goth scene if any. I've never read Darkness Fears, but even if it does take and accurate look at the goth nightclub how accurate is it if it shows a "brutal side of the gothic subculture", what brutal side? And where praytell is the kinship to dark metal? lol. When did Psycho become a gothic film? Maybe it is, but why drop it in this article? Why not drop in every horror film since film began? Why not Night of the Living Dead, surely that movie has more to do with the scene than Psycho. And I've never read Vinson, or Grabowsky, but if their works have more to do with Iced Earth and AC/DC how is that gothic? I think this section would be far more accurate if we just delete this whole paragraph.

Popular intolerance and media characterizations as well as another school shooting that took place at the hands of Red Lake, MN teenager Jeff Weise, who was obsessed with a dark form of hip-hop music called horrorcore.

I've personally never heard of this shooting, and have to wonder how relevant it is to the article. I'm not saying it didn't happen of course, simply that I doubt it had as much of an impact in the goth scene as did the Columbine shootings.

Mental Health Issues This whole section is really confusing, from the statistics down to the individuals tested, even the end of the article that sort of counterpoints the statistics doesn't seem to make much sense to me. It either needs a big cleaning up or deletion.

So what do you folks think? --Adrift* 04:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay:

• Vampires - I defer to you on this, though I do tend to think a bit of vampires.
• 2003 exhibition - I have no idea what this is about.
• Goth slang - it's new to me, but what do I know?
• Sai Ho - never heard of him and whoever said this didn't think he was notable enough to create an article.
• UK Decay - what you say sounds plausible.
• Spies - God knows what that is about. The rest doesn't seem wildly implausible to me but I'd defer to your judgment on what should go here.
• Westhueff etc - I have no idea what this is all about.
• Red Lake - no idea. I'm prepared to say not notable.
• Mental health issues - I'd be glad to see it go, much as it's interesting.
• Generally - The more unverifiable or dubious claims bite the dust the better. I was fairly conservative when I did my big layer of revision. I'd be happen for someone more confident in their knowledge of the culture to really clean up some of these dubious claims that have crept in over time.

Metamagician3000 15:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok well I'm gonna be bold and start editing, I'm also adding some more photos to make the whole article more visually appealing. Go ahead and let me know if you folks have any problems with my edits.--Adrift* 17:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Reply to above (before Adrift): Everyone thinks of vampires now and then, but I'm a little nervous to find research using this page. Usually Jeff Hardy (a former WWE superstar) and Bam Margera (a skateboarder that plays pranks on his parents and friends) come to mind to me when the word "goth" is in play by the news media whenever there's a school shooting, or when there's a creepy teenaged character on a teen drama (Joan of Arcadia, Degrassi, etc.). And most recently, my mind added a new word to its vocabulary when "goth" comes to mind: Patrick Flueger (mostly because of his dark and shady character on Law & Order: Special Victims Unit that gave me the creeps on Memorial Day). As a young adult (I'm 20), I don't find goth to be that scary. In fact, most goths (teenagers) can be seen at malls and movie theaters, as I saw two years back. Oh, and I hope you do well in cleaning up this article. I have faith in your ability to succeed. Hope all goes well!

Wow... none of those things has anything to do with goth at all. The only well-handled goth I've seen on a TV drama is Abby on NCIS. Ellie and Ashley on DeGrassi were both, indeed, also goth for a while, albeit teen-goth (when are we going to stop pretending that goth isn't really two different subcultures, one more associated with teenagers and the other more associated with adults?). But pro wrestling is pretty much diametrically opposite to the goth scene, and Bam Margera is a guy who does stunts on MTV. There may be some self-styled teen goths who also like those things, but those things are not elements of their "gothness" - any more than "sushi is goth" because there are plenty of goths who like sushi. It's incidental. 4.225.130.185 08:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Adrift: I don't see anything wrong about this article. You keep doing what you have to do to this page. I highly appreciate your work. Like Metamagician3000, I have faith in your ability to succeed. Once again, hope all goes well!

D.F. Williams 22:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Didn't see this reply till just now, so thank you for that.--Adrift* 06:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Photos added

As you can see, I added a few new photos. Hopefully I jumped through all the right hoops for fair use of these. I plan on adding a picture of The Batcave night club further up the article, a picture of a modern Darkwave/Goth band like Cruxshadows in the music section, A picture of an "elder" goth and one of a "corporate" goth, as well as maybe some sort of picture for the media characterization section (maybe a picture of the Columbine school or something). I'm sure there will be a bit of shuffling and what not with the pics, feel free to do what you all see fit. I think it really does help bring the page to life when you have good pictures of real goths, and this being such a visable scene its a shame that we haven't done more sooner. Ok let me know what you think, and I'd still like to hear what you folks think about my other edits... I plan on eventually adding more citations to the article too some where down the road and cleaning up the article for Good Article status.--Adrift* 19:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

• I've done fair use rationales for the two images that I introduced to the article - the poster for The Hunger and the Bauhaus promo shot. Someone else might want to have a look at these to ensure that what I have done is about right, and fix it if not. We'll need to have fair use rationales for all images. Metamagician3000 11:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Where would we add that? In the Summary section of the photo? Adding photos to Wiki is such a pain, i wish it was all spelled out better than it is now.--Adrift* 13:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The word on the street, as it were, is that Sunset Blvd. (1950 film) is a good article to imitate in terms of its handling of fair use issues. We should right click on the images in that article, follow the links, and see what happens. You can do the same thing with the two images that I had a go at in this article (which, however, I may not have done especially well). Transhumanism is the only article I've worked on heavily which has received FA status. A couple of other people recently had a go at its images to get it through the process. Metamagician3000 13:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

"popular intolerance"?

... Is it just me, or does that phrase reek of POV?

.. And some of the criticism of the goth subculture has some level of validity, like the fact that many who "go goth" do so to set themselves apart from others, but really end up as "mallgoths", which is just another form of conformism.

The term "mallgoth" should probably also be merged with the goth article.

--Rober2 13:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Explain how you think "popular intolerance" sounds POV. Would you rather see something like "Public Criticism"? I don't see a problem with changing it to something like that. As far as the conformist issue is concerened, we've had that in and out of the article several times. The problem with previous write ups about that is that it doesn't seem to highlight how conformism is any different in the Goth scene than it is in any other subculture. It seems odd to me that critics of the goth scene always seem to point out the comformity issue, yet you see little discussion of the same issue in the punk article, heavy metal article, hip-hop article, etc. As far as the mallgoth merge goes. We do have a pretty big section that discusses mallgoths/Spooky kids further up the article. Seems redundant to merge it into the article, but I personally don't have Major problems with a merge if its done right.--Adrift* 16:26, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Spring Cleaning

I did some cleaning up today per the Good Article failure and also based on some of the recommendations of other editors. Look it through and tell me what you think. I still think that Elder Goth and Corporate Goth should be combined under a heading like Styles and Variances in the Goth Scene where we could also possibly summarize or merge other sub-goth related articles.--Adrift* 16:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Elder goth

Is this term really in common enough usage to warrant a mention by that name? 82.16.91.162 07:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd say it is used enough to warrant inclusion in Wiki if someone were to push the point. It does seem a bit alien in this article as it stands though. I believe it was merged into the article from it's own entry.--Adrift* 14:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

It is common, and describes something important in and to the scene, but this concept should not have its own section. 'Elder goths' and 'Corporate goths' should be merged into one section called 'Types of goths', and the various other goth types could be discussed there as well, perhaps in the context of a 'gothic lifecycle' or something along those amusing lines. Ecto 22:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

agreed -- i think the term would benefit from being nested in a 'types of goths' more linear outline-like structure -- as we know some are distinguished by decade, scene, musical allegiance or values (for example), and a defined grouping like this would show the distinctions and progressions in such a way that the relationships between types would be clearer. a lot of redundancy and exposition could be cut out this way. -- Denstat 05:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The term 'eldergoth' actually relates to why the subculture itself has not died out. Many of the influential 'old-school' goths are entering their mid-thirties and early fourties, and they are still making significant contributions to the culture through organizing clubs, DJing, producing music, etc. The term is used both as a self-deprecating joke and a substitute for 'old-school'. LadyK 19:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Removed Cosplay/Gothic Lolita from "Current boundaries"

...For the following reasons:

The 'goth look' comprises a significant portion of the cosplay subculture, particulary in Japan where the Gothic Lolita look is very popular.

First, this implies that gothic lolitas are cosplayers, which they are not. People do cosplay gothloli, but it is firstly a serious fashion, not a type of costume. In fact, gothic lolita cosplayers tend to receive a negative stigma from diehard lolita circles, much like "mallgoths" tend to be stigmatized by "real goths". Second, this implies that gothic lolitas are goths, which is debatable. Third, the concept of "gothic lolita" may be popular in the media, but you'd be hard-pressed to find a real one walking down the street in the middle of the day.

This look combines goth, with cute, and often includes exaggerated, cartoonish elements from Victorian and Edwardian culture.

This is misleading to those who are unfamiliar with gothic lolita. It is certainly "cute" on most occassions, but almost never "exaggerated" or "cartoonish", because this would contradict the commonly accepted lolita code of aestheticism. Gothic lolitas are girls in cute dresses, not clowns.

The cosplay aspect of goth subculture focuses almost exclusively on the clothes and makeup, and does not have a large crossover into the musical or social aspects that are common to the mainline goth culture in the west.

I don't deny that there seems to be a large amount of goth interest in the cosplay/anime community. Perhaps someone should re-write a paragraph about this? I'm not a part of it so I can't contribute, but it seems like it would be a useful topic. However, gothic lolita itself was largely inspired by Visual Kei bands in the '90s, and certain concerts still attract crowds of gothic lolitas. (This doesn't necessarily mean that all gothic lolitas like Visual Kei.)

If someone still feels the need to add something about gothic lolita to this article, please try to understand it better first.

--Kuroloki 03:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC

---

OK, I don't seem to understand what Gothic LOlita is then, If they have Gothic in front of the name itself? I've noticed that there are a few similarities, Lolita is supposed to be some pretty/Cute Style. These Girls & Guys(FEW but yes guys) Are made to look like Porcelain dolls and stuff, Don't get me wrong Malice Mizer was a Good Band and Mana is freaking Awesome(Too bad He's not doing the Rock thing anymore... Wish the band remained together). So, I mean, Goth themselves have trouble Identifying themselves and don't even know what they are(No offense to you Goths) but in Reality I feel that Emo and Goths have some serious Similarities... It's strange, An interesting and very interesting Topic of course but we're all lost, Goth has evolved in many ways and I can somewhat Consider Gothic Lolita to be in the same Category as Goth, I mean Goth Chick out here in the states do not dress like that and if there are that's interesting to know. I see alot of Cosplayers that Imitate the style, I see alot on other sites and it's kinda interesting cause alot do listen to Visual Kei and some are heavy Duty Anime Fans. I understand the Concept of the style and all but it's kinda odd that they call themselves Gothic Lolitas but have nothing to do With Goths. Gothic Lolita Colors are Black and white, Anything not Blank and white would be simply Considered Lolita.... Look, I do not wear No Gothic Lolita clothes nor do I Cosplay at all but I know several people who do and may I congratulate you on this interesting topic as well, Prety cool topic and I think we need some more articles based on this Topic.... BTW I'm a guy too LOL.

...Kanocode...

Emo and goth have nothing to do with each other in terms of the subcultures themselves, even if there are some common elements. Commonality is not causation. Emo did not grow out of goth; emo music is nothing like goth music. The only real connection is common roots in 70s punk, despite the fact that both subcultures can be moody and both seem to like black hairdye. 4.225.130.185 08:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

---

I'm a woman, a former goth, and very well-versed in the Gothic Lolita subculture as well. (I was buying Kera before they put out the first GL Bible, and also bought the first Bible when it came out... so I have watched the style develop.)

First of all, many Lolitas (gothic and otherwise) in Japan ARE essentially cosplayers, because they can only wear the clothes on weekends. Lifestyle expectations prohibit them from wearing the clothes during the week (many are still school-age and must wear school uniforms). This is not true of every Lolita, but it is true of many. Not many see this as a contradiction. In other parts of the world, people who identify as Lolita are probably more likely to try to make a daily lifestyle of it, not unlike Momoko from Shimotsuma Monogatari/Kamikaze Girls. "Cosplay" seems to be more looked-down-upon by American Lolitas who do not like to see Lolita style being cosplayed at a convention by someone who doesn't know the finer points of the style any more than goths like to see people who go as "a goth" for Halloween.

(In other words, there has also always been plenty of infighting in the goth scene about who is and isn't "really" goth: there are always people who are elitist and others who are more inclusive. Basing a definition only on the attitudes of the most elitist parties in any communities will lead to trouble, because it makes the definition inappropriately limited. I'd say "not all cosplayers who wear Gothic Lolita clothes are Lolitas, some are just cosplayers; some are simply people who cannot wear their preferred style 24/7, as with a Western goth who must conform to a corporate dress code.")

Also, cosplayers in "goth" clothes are often distinct from cosplayers in "gothic lolita" clothes.

Second, not every Lolita is a Gothic Lolita. There are many different types of Lolita, and only a handful of them look remotely goth.

Kuroloki's comment about "cartoonishness" is correct: that's not the goal, so much as childishness. Most Lolita looks are based around the idea of being a very refined and well-behaved Victorian child, though there is some 18th century influence as well. A relatively recent variation adds traditional Japanese dress elements to the typical Lolita shape. Cartoonishness is never a goal. (Lolita style is even connected to a nascent quasi-feminist mentality in Japan: grown Japanese women are generally subject to certain expectations, which bear some resemblance to 1950s American expectations for women, and some Lolis see their style as simply opting out of growing up, thereby subverting those expectations. Little girls don't have to be the perfect housewife and mother.)

Third, while not every Lolita or Gothic Lolita in any country is a member of the goth subculture, "gothic lolita" IS a recognized look within the goth subculture. The Lolita look has certain "rules," and is very codified, but similar looks existed within the goth subculture before the Lolita look arrived from Japan. (Goths of my acquaintance began to take an interest in Visual Kei around 1997; Elegant Gothic Lolita began to be bandied around as a term circa 2000, when most Gothic Lolita dresses were "maid style" or "Alice style" - the look has diversified quite a bit since then. Prior to that, goth people I knew - and not a ton of them - were interested in Mana as Mana, Who You Won't Believe Is Really A Guy, Because Of His Pretty Dresses, Makeup, and Curls.) There was no name in the gothic subculture for the look prior to the late 1990s, and it was not rigidly codified, but if you asked a girl wearing something similar at the time, she might have described it as "like a Victorian Doll." (I even remember wearing a similar getup to a concert in 1997.)

At any rate, I would consider restoring Gothic Lolita to Current Boundaries, if it hasn't been already - WITH THOSE CAVEATS. The Lolita look has become popular among goths, and some goths have migrated between the two subcultures, but there is a separate Lolita subculture where the rules for the look are more rigid and goths are only a small element. (I wouldn't describe it as a "serious" fashion - but it is a fashion, rather than a costume.) You will see goths wearing outfits they describe as "gothic lolita" that people in the Lolita subculture will decry, because the skirt isn't quite the right shape, or the girl is wearing a skin-tight fishnet top, or etc. So, there is a bit of a separation between "Gothic and other Lolitas" and "Goths in Lolita outfits."

4.225.130.185 08:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

'Origins and development' and 'Historical and cultural influences'

It seems to me that these two sections could be combined into a single 'History' section. Any thoughts? Ecto 12:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the two sections need to stay seperate in some fashion. The Origins and Development section is specifically about the origins of the current scene which is truly what the article hangs on, it documents the history of the scene, but only in as much as the term Goth is used today. On the other hand the Historical and Cultural influences is a truly historic look at where the concepts, look, and terms may have come from. It seems to me they are two very different topics that need to stay seperated. However, I wouldnt object to moving the Historical and Cutural Influences above the Gothic Music section, but the Gothic Music section obviously ties into the Origins and Development section, so any move seems sort of counter-productive.

--Adrift* 03:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Psychobilly

I'm not goth, but I like some goth music. On the psychobilly page it mentions that psychobilly is commonly listened to by goths. Why not a mention in the Goth Music Section?

Being goth music and being listened to by goths are two different things, but it could have a mention I guess.

Gothic Music

Should not The Smiths, Morrissey (of The Smiths) and The Cure not also be added into influencing musics?

I would even venture to suggest other groups like Skinny Puppy and Nine Inch Nails as being influential in North America.

I believe all those artists already are mentioned, excep for the Smiths, which aren't related to goth in the slightest. WesleyDodds 12:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was pretty surprised to only find The Cure in some reference description in an overview article over Goth culture. They are only mentioned via post punk bands, not directly it seems

Also the origin of "Gothic" as name of the subculture is not really explain. (I've no reference, but afaik it relates to Victor Hugo's roman "The Hunchback of the Notre Dame", the setting, Notre Dame de Paris being a Gothic cathedral)

80.127.115.114 13:00, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Find some people who were in the goth scene in the 80s - many used to post on alt.gothic - and ask them about The Cure. They will tell you that they are a good goth-friendly pop band, but not specifically goth (that is, not really a part of the original goth music scene, although they were around at the time). There was a period after Disintegration was released where new 13-year-old goth girls, probably the first mall goths, were coming out of the woodwork, and were almost as mocked at the time as Marilyn Manson fans were in the mid-to-late 1990s.

Many goths love The Cure. Many don't.

(Ditto The Smiths, but because The Smiths never looked goth, the label hasn't stuck as well. These are "bands that many goths might like" rather than "bands that came out of the goth scene.")

4.225.130.185 08:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation link

I restored the recently removed disambiguation link to Goths. Why? Because I typed in "goth" to the search box looking for the tribes, but got the subculture instead. I'm probably not the only one to do it, and having the link right there is better than having to think "OK, what is THAT article titled". GeoGreg 06:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Types of goths

Since there seems to be a potential edit war - should this stay? I think it should go, unless we can find notable reliable sources for it. It's turning into a list of unsourced non-notable goth-stereotypes, plus we already have a separate article for goth slang.

Having said that, I think the reference to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4828230.stm should remain somewhere, maybe put elsewhere in the article. Mdwh 23:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it should go. It seems to be the unsourced statements of goths, which violate WP:Original Research. CynicalMe 01:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow, kind of a short notice alter to the article... Seems to me that the topic headline had some relevance to the overall encyclopedic value to the article. Possibly the article could have been altered in a way that made the topic less subjective, but it's not like there are no "types" of goths... I could probably find several verifiable sources for "types" of goths, starting with http://www.waningmoon.com/corpgoth/and ending with the fairly recent Spin article on "types" of goths.--Adrift* 01:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, if its so easy to find verifiable sources, please feel free to rewrite the section. CynicalMe 01:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I've got nothing against a version with sources. And yes, there are "types" of goths, but it's not like this is some objective difference, rather, there are slang terms to refer to certain types of goths. I'm not sure anything more objective can be said about the different "types", but if there are reliable sources, then that's fine. Mdwh 02:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, give me a couple days... still think it was short notice... altering a major part of an article in a day or so, after all the work that's been done to it by previous editors, seems a lack of good faith. I don't think you were necassarily wrong in your edit, but next time maybe think of giving a few more editors a voice before making such drastic changes...--Adrift* 02:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Please don't use a mainstream music magazine like Spin as a source for info about goth; they're rarely right about anything. The journalists involved are almost never connected with the subculture, and the research involved is usually half-assed and anecdotal at best. They're good at covering the history of various bands, but not at covering insider scene aspects.

I didn't like The Gothic Bible by Nancy Kilpatrick - it was a little too "oooh we're so special and awesome" and not at all an objective view of the scene - but you can probably find something in there. Or in one of Voltaire's books, which are really tongue-in-cheek. Barnes and Noble tends to carry all these books in their Cultural Studies section.

4.225.130.185 08:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

School shooters and Goth

i don't think that the recent school shooting at dawson college and the shooter kimveer gill should be in the criticism and intolerance section. it's mentioned because of the shooter's espousal of aspects of goth, but without any context -- no evidence has surfaced that shows he suffered for being a goth whatsoever. i think it should come out. -- Denstat 00:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

nobody has responded -- i reworked the sentence to downplay the goth=shooter analogy, but i still think it doesn't belong. actually the whole criticism and intolerance section is weak, needs work. -- Denstat 07:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I just noticed that was in there...now I'm now toying with the idea of simply deleting it. I kept thinking of how it could be re-worded to make it "fit", but I just kept going blank. Hm. Unless someone else can edit it in such a way that it flows well with the article, or unless I can think of a better way of wording it, I'm gonna get rid of that section. It's not like this is the only other time a black-clad shooter has been claimed to be "gothic" by the media; I really don't see the need for the inclusion of this one particular case. CatZilla 22:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Whatever; I'm just going to delete it. If anyone wants to add it back in...feel free to do it, as long as you can make it belong. CatZilla 23:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

deletion of Criticism & intolerance section

User:Deltabeignet deleted this entire section as unsourced. it's been part of the article for some time, so did that express apathy or tacit agreement that the section belonged here? -- Denstat 05:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I just noticed that...should it be put back in? That is a somewhat important section in this article, especially considering that many people who lack knowledge about the goth subculture might come here for info. But were there any citations for it? I can't say that I've read any articles that tackle the particular issue of intolerance of goths, but there should probably be some sort of info on it here, clearing up the whole goth= troubled killer issue. Weren't there Columbine-related sites cited? My memory is a bit fuzzy.-- CatZilla 16:04, 05 October 2006 (UTC)

What the fuck is wrong with you people? Don't put the fucking critism and intolerance section back up again, it was just a load of pure bullshit. Whatever CUNT wrote that and connected it to the Columbine shootings, you have a fucking sick mind. If you bring that page up again I'll just keep deleting it. -The Powerful

Please refrain from making personal attacks. And the connection to the Columbine shootings was made by the media, not a Wikipedia editor. Mdwh 00:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I am deleting that section every time I see it, I will not have people mocking Goths like me. It is not nessecary to compare the Columbine Shootings to a brillant subculture. You fuckers think it's okay to talk shit and make every Goth look like stereotypes. Also, I'd like to add that whoever compared it to satanism is a complete ASSSHOLLEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!! I've been pissed off so much from seeing critiques of you wikipedians.

DO NOT AND I REPEA DO NOT PUT THAT SECTION BACK!!!! FOR WHOEVER DOES, I WILL CONTINUE TO DELETE IT.

Take the time to read the section. It does not "mock" goths or tie them to Columbine. Instead, it exonerates them.Theplanetsaturn 04:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Some people may not take it the way YOU may.The Powerful

Which way you do think people may take it? Mdwh 16:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

@The Powerful: No... This is not about interpretation. Read the paragraph again. Note the qualifier in this relevant sentence: "the false conceptions that goths are evil.". The qualifier is the word "false". Here's another: "inaccurately linked to the goth subculture. " The qualifier this time is the word: "inaccurately". Then there is the closing sentence: "proven to have had no link to the goth subculture." This not about perception. This is about the literal meaning of words. Anyone who takes the criticism section as anything other than information that exonerates the goth subculture is at fault for failing to comprehend the basic structure of the English language. And frankly, if they are that far gone in their ability to comprehend, they are already a lost cause.Theplanetsaturn 19:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

"Which way you do think people may take it?" I think some may not read it carefully...I just don't like the fact you even bring up that kind of topic. I'm a Goth, and I find such accusations offensive.

What accusations, exactly? As for "some may not read it carefully", by that logic, we should delete everything on Wikipedia in case they misread and think it says something it doesn't. Mdwh 23:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

@The Powerful- There are no accusations in the section you keep deleting. In fact, the information in that paragraph is the opposite, explaining why accusations of that nature are false. As for you being a goth... So what? Theplanetsaturn 00:56, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm still deleting the section whenever it comes back.

So you're in favor of deleting information that exonerates the goth subculture, all the while bleating that you're just defending goths? That's just foolish. Delete it, it will be readded easily. You're just a vandal. Theplanetsaturn 19:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I have given up deleting the section, I added some nessecary material, some of the grammer and spelling is not correct. Please do not delete what I wrote, it is not trollish nor offensive. I am defending the subculture in which what I wrote yet did not write any articles in POV.

—- Greetings everyone, I am Holyguyver, also known as Jack Danya Kemplin. I have been editing at wikipedia for around a year or longer but I normally forget to sign in, & thus my edits are marked by IP numbers.
I am the one who originally returned the section Criticism & Intolerance to this article around two months ago (September). I am also the one who almost completely rewrote it an edit later. Thus I am one of the people that The Powerful was calling names.
I Promise The Powerful That this section is not meant to mock the gothic people & does not do so.
I greatly thank both Theplanetsaturn, & Mdwh for defending this section & reverting it, & trying to inform The Powerful to why this section is so important & needs to be in this article. My dearest thanks & gratitude goes out to the two of you.
Furthermore I would like to post here commentary to some of the statements made in this section so that The Powerful & any other user will know why I included each statement in this section.

• "Like many other alternative lifestyles and subcultures, the goth subculture has faced its share of criticism and intolerance." as is common knowledge that many alternative lifestyles (ie. gay, polygamous, fetish) & subcultures have suffered criticisms & intolerances, & the goth subculture also has do to Columbine & humanity' general fears of that which is little known to them.
• "Such intolerance ranges from looks of disgust to assaults." Shortly after the Columbine shootings there were also news reports of Goths being assaulted by people who wanted to avenge the shootings. It is also common knowledge that Goths just as any minority group are looked at by some intolerant people with looks of disgust, & also insulted & assaulted just as many minority groups.
• "The gothic fascination with the macabre has occasionally raised public concerns regarding the well-being of goths." as an earlier section on this talkpage points out many organizations including government, police, schools, medical & psychiatric groups have inquired on the well being of people interested in or claiming to be members of the Gothic subculture. Most of these inquiring instigated by mainstream society's concerns (&/or misunderstandings) over the common known fascination that most Goths have with the macabre & darker side of life. The mainstream people understandingly finding this fascination odd & out of place amongst their culture, thus becoming concerned because this is unfamiliar & strange to them, & something that they can not relate to. So forth they worry for the person or peoples mental health & their safety & that of others, thus they inquiry about it out of genuine concern for that individual, however misunderstood & misguided that concern may be.
• "Popular media has occasionally made reports that have reinforced the false conceptions that goths are evil, or have a connection with Satanism," Popular media (ie. CNN, MSNBC, Fox News) has at times(Columbine shootings & so on) made reports that have furthered the false conceptions in the minds of many people & mainstream culture that Goths are evil or Satanists, however these reports turned out to be snap judgments based on misconceptions do to above stated issues & were later retracted because they turned out to be false & inaccurate descriptions of the individuals who were in fact not goth but other things, (ie. Columbine turned out to be troubled youths who was bullied outcasts who had a slight fascination with white supremacy, RedLake turned out to be a troubled youth who was a Native American nu-metalist who was ashamed of his heritage & fascinated with white supremacy, Dyleski turned out to be a troubled youth nu-metalist drug addict, DawnsonCollege turned out to be a disturbed nu-metalist.) thus there is plenty of sources sighting that these reports suggesting a goth connection were misreports.
• "as exemplified by the fallout of the Columbine High School massacre, which was carried out by two students inaccurately linked to the goth subculture. This misreporting of the roots of the massacre caused a widespread public backlash against the North American goth scene; however, investigators of the incident later denied that any such link between the killers and the goth subculture had in fact existed [1]." Stating in the article what I just said in the commentary on this talkpage above & giving a source.
• "Other such false reports of killers having goth affiliation have been the Red Lake High School massacre, the Scott Dyleski killing, the Dawson College Shooting, and others, all of which have been proven to have had no link to the goth subculture." Stating that what applies to Columbine about the misreporting applies to all of these cases as well. Every statement & every referenced tragedy sourced either by my sources attached to the article, by their own wikipedia articles or sources attached to their wikipedia articles, thus every above statement is well sourced & if they wish to research each event more they can go & read the wikipedia article for each one.

Thus my commentary is complete & every thing stated in this section is ether common knowledge &/or well sourced, thus it is fully sourced & stated fact.
I apologize for my ramblings & hope that I was able to help out with anyone's questions. I hope that my reasons for wording it as I did have been made clear, as well as my intent with it.
I once again thank Theplanetsaturn, & Mdwh for their kind words a defense of this section, & hope that I have shown The Powerful that I was not mocking the gothic people , was not trying to say that they were what the misconceptions claim, & was trying to explain to the rest of the readers out their that Goths are not as they might have heard, & why they heard what they might have heard, & to see the sources that show that which they heard was in fact false. I hope this post has explained all reasoning & answered all questions. I am your humble servant Holyguyver 10:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)~

Interview with the Vampire

There is a lot of discussion here, so this may have been addressed: Movies based on her books have been filmed in recent years — notably Interview with the Vampire, which starred Brad Pitt, and the more recent Queen of the Damned, in which goths appear directly and indirectly. The first film, in particular, helped further encourage the spread of Victorian style fashions in the subculture (although period inspired clothing has been a recurrent trend in the gothic subculture).

The trouble is that I don't think that it DID have much to do with encouraging the spread of Victorian (later 19th century) fashions in the subculture, as the only notable "Victorian fashion" moment in the movie is really the part where Claudia and Madeleine are in the matching bustle gowns when they are killed. Much of the rest of the movie's notable fashion is 18th century (the frock coats and cravats on the men prior to and during the adoption of Claudia). There's a big difference - 50 to 100 years, but some people are so poorly versed in history that they assume that anything with a big skirt is "Victorian" (not necessarily here, but in the wider world).

I don't think it's in any way arguable that those two bustle gowns had a huge effect on fashion in the gothic subculture, any more than any other bustle gowns (like Satine's red gown in Moulin Rouge), but the men's 18th century costumes may have had some effect on the more "romantic" end of goth male dress. An 18th century court/aristocracy look is still popular with goth men, but only the ones who are not concerned with looking too foppish. Others would disdain the look as kind of silly or pretentious.

Basically, what I'm really saying is, "Is Victorian really what you meant?"

I don't Believe that anything to do with the vampire chronicles should be included. They aren't really that goth,but i guess no one else sees it my way--Fiyero554 03:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)Fiyero554

Just read what you wrote, and...I agree. I changed it so it now says "romantic" instead of "Victorian". I also doubt if the books and movies really had all that much effect in the goth subculture, but I know the books are quite popular amongst many goths. I also know many people who disliked the movie renditions-- especially the Queen of the Damned (which, to me, seemed to give it more of a nu-metal twist). So for now I just altered it slightly, but I think I might edit it so it doesn't take up so much of the 20th cent. influences section in the future. -- CatZilla 16:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I could not speak of the book being particularly relevant to the subculture NOW, but at least in the Berkeley California area in the early eighties, I can vouch for it having had some impact. Judging what is relevant to a subculture that has spanned decades is not a simple task. Theplanetsaturn 22:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

GOTH FOREVER!

Goth forever —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.144.174.133 (talk) 02:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

"Later media influences" and a proposed addition

I noticed that in this section, Shadowrun is cited as an influence that made goth subculture more popular. As a Shadowrun player, I've never heard of this, and I never got any kind of gothic vibe from Shadowrun. (At least, much less so than, say, SLA Industries.) Should this be removed?

In addition, I propose a brief addition to the music section pointing out that "goth" itself is not a musical genre, offering a comparison to, say, "hippie music" which describes a link to a subculture, but includes bands from multiple genres. (You wouldn't say that The Grateful Dead and The Cowsills are part of the same genre, likewise Bauhaus and The Cruxshadows.) --Halloween jack 14:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not a gamer so I can't really judge "Shadowrun" (I'm assuming it's a game?). I'm extremely confused about what you mean when you say that "goth itself is not a musical genre", though. First of all...yes, it is. There's a decent wiki article, Gothic Rock, which goes into all this. Also, unlike your comparison to "hippy music", "hippy music" can be a rather vague term, because the hippy subculture wasn't as dependent on music as the goth subculture was and is.-- CatZilla 20:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Recent Media edit

I would not consider the SNL sketch "Goth Talk" to be a Goth show because it does not apply positively, if it is a stupid parody then it should not be under that catergory. I do not suggest putting that back up. In fact, Invader Zim is more Goth than THAT simple sketch, which should not count as 'television' show. -The Powerful

I'll take your word for it about Goth Talk - but as for Invader Zim, I have no idea why this would be here. You might want to edit its article to explain why, at the moment there is no reference to goth or the goth subculture in there. --Stormie 01:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I would have to say personally that there is, not that everything Jhonen does should be labeled automatically, but the refrences in the goth culture would be the following things:

• The dark and cynical humour used in the show.
• The charecter of GAZ, not being a bad depiction of the subculture but a flattering remark.
• The fact that so many disturbing and darkly macabre plots are used (example: rise of the zitboy, the halloween episode.)
• If FOAMY THE SQUIRREL is able to be in that catergory, why not Zim?
• Goth Talk is a very cruel and harsh parody that SNL did only to piss ones like me off. Invader Zim has not been cruel to the subculture unlike other Nickeleodoen shows.

Nice. But should we list every single "dark" show with blad-clad characters in the media section? Personally, I think we should really consider what should stay in the media section and what shouldn't. Is this a section for shows/books/movies that are popular amongst goths? Make direct references to goth? Influence the goth subculture? I think we need to set things straight as to what would/could belong.

And as a side note, the Goth Talk was a skit on SNL. SNL is a comedy show-- its skits are supposed to be jabs (light-hearted jabs, mind you, but jabs nonetheless). I don't think this is something most goths view as a personal attack of some sort. But Goth Talk may not something that belongs on the page (though hearing "Bela Lugosi's Dead" in the skit intro DOES get me cracking up each and every time). -- CatZilla 22:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd say you're certainly right about Foamy the Squirrel - I'm not sure why a Flash cartoon got filed under "Television", and I know that if we listed every cartoon or comic on the web with a goth character, the actual article would be buried by the list. I have removed it. --Stormie 21:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It's also worth pointing out that we have four separate goth oriented titles listed from Slave Labor Graphics in the literature section. Gloomcookie, Squee, Little Gloomy, Johnny The Homicidal Maniac. These all have a degree of relevance, but maybe it would make more sense to roll them into one blanket listing somehow? Or at least divide the comics and books out of the literature section?Theplanetsaturn 23:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps more Gothic Literature (such as Edgar Allan Poe, Sheridan Fanu, etc.) should be under literature and put a comics section up.

Gothic Literature and Goth subculture should be kept apart. That they both have the "Gothic" epithet, once used to describe Germanic tribes, is incidental. The Goth subculture stems from a movement of Post-punk, and Gothic literature from a Gothic "revival", starting with a cheesy novel written by Walpole, an architect and son of a British prime minister. They bear no significant relation to each other. Goths claim those novels because they seem slightly more cultured than the horror movies they adore. Furthermore, by grouping comics and 18th and 19th century novels together, you would debase the latter, which are far more distinguished. At best, you could write, "Goths like these novels, and strain their eyes to read the candlelit pages while listening to Marilyn Manson and Nine Inch Nails." You might as well say Byron was an unseen band member of the Cure. Rintrah 05:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, to talk about the subject at hand first-- I agree with you that Gothic Lit should pretty much be kept out. In fact, as I think I may have at least hinted in my previous comment, we need to establish some sort of criteria for what should go in the Media section. In my opinion, only media which has some sort of direct references should be there...and maybe media that had a very strong influence on the goth subculture.

But as someone loves literature and who eats up goth rock like Kobayashi at a hot dog eating contest, it makes me wince to read "Goths like these novels, and strain their eyes to read the candelit pages while listening to Marilyn Manson and Nine Inch Nails". Methinks you may be confusing goths with some other sort of creature.--CatZilla 23:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Please Remove (please)

I would just like to ask that maybe to reconsider some of the things you have written on the critisim and intolerance. Maddox is NOT a published author, the internet doesn't count. He is a rude, insensitive and snotty man. He is evil. Vasquez has not critized the subculture, he may not be fond of how some people do not know how to be a true Goth but he has never critized it. In fact, most of his artist friends (such as Roman Dirge and Voltaire) are highly active and defensful for the subculture. I am a Goth myself and I think that he is only using that humour to use self-mockery and irony. He has never denounced himself being Goth, perhaps some aspects of his work (which to me is silly) but never himself. Maddox is only be a trollish, foolish and arrogant coward. Just because he does not agree with our lifestyle gives him NO write to riddicule us. Please reframe from listing parodies or popular culture, maybe you should make another page that shows media presences of subcultures (such as hippie and punk as well) instead of placing them on this very page. Please reconsider placing Jhonen, because if he really WAS a critic of the subculture he would have been much harsher and not supportive of his audience, and there should not be a comparision with Maddox to him, because they're almost opposites. Plus, if I find the link, I'll post his quote: "if I made a comic about a sandwich, it'd be a goth sandwich," as well as the article from the Candian comic convention that clearly states he shares the same culture as his audience.

Also, the thing with Kilmeer MUST BE large exaggeration, it is extremely unnessicary to post that. In fact, I curse the man who did put that up on the page in the first place. For though he may have described himself as Goth (but gun-loving) his nearly impossible. A Goth quality is not be violent, sure there is a dark image but we do not have the potential to harm-even if he probably WAS it was GUNS that caused him to commit such crimes, not the Gothic subculture. Would anyone please give me permission to remove such critical nonsense and injustice? Please, I really would like to defend my lifestyle. Goth4ever. Thank you all-The Powerful

See also

Should we cut down on this section? It seems more like an exhaustive list than a proper "see also" section. We could work most of these links into the main body of the article or daughter articles. For example, most of the goth-related genres could be mentioned in the music section or the article on gothic rock. Ecto 08:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Criticism and Parody

In my most humble opinion, there should be a section about the cultural mockery and criticism the gothic subculture catches. E.G.: The Aquabats! song Fashion Zombies which generally mocks the entire concept of buying expensive clothes to look like "they crawled out of coffins". Kevin DuBrow 00:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The last section of the article is along those lines. Ecto 08:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)