Talk:Goth subculture/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Comment

This problem is being looked at from the wrong end of the binoculars. The modern expressions of the 'Gothic' as a cultural phenomenon dates from the end of the 18th century. By the 1830s in Britain, France and Germany, and even America, almost everything we associate with that term had already come to existence. French bohemians were eating and drinking out of skulls, dressing in exotic pseudo-Renaissance style, hanging their rooms in black velvet and tinting their windowpanes purple, and decorating their walls with human and animal skulls and antique weapons. This current of dark, sinister Romanticism was known as 'Gothic' fairly early, and never really went away. Even when not fashionable it persisted as an undercurrent, beloved of certain sensibilities. It is a cultural tradition that has had many twists and turns and varieties of expression, while still remaining recognizably 'Gothic' over the nearly 250 years of its existence. So when 'people of a certain age' (over 45) insist that the term 'Goth' apply only to a certain form of post-punk music from the 80s, they are running counter to cultural history. Even in rock music, the emergence of a gothic sensibility predated the formal recognition of 'Goth music' by several years with Black Sabbath and Pentagram. A very solid argument that these bands, and the Doom Metal they inspired in the 80s and 90s, are much more representative of The Gothic Aesthetic than any post-punk band. This is where the 'Trad Goths' fall into a terrible error. The 80s New Wavy drum-machine music they champion is is representative of only a very small and narrow expression of the entire Goth Aesthetic, and they are, without justification, trying to make their preferred music and the scene of their youth paramount, which is absurd, and a mere act of poignant mostalgia for aging Goths ( please understand i am not denigrating this music; many fine albums came out of it).

I believe this can be solved by a change in nomenclature, with 'The Gothic' representing the general aesthetic of this dark romanticism, and its various trends in various arts ought to bexplaced under sub-headings. Thus those who were influenced by 80s Goth are best called either Batcavers or, if American, Death Rockers. Those who melded the influences of Black Sabbath and the Batcavers/Death Rockers can best be described as Gith Metallers or Doom Metallers interchangeably. Those who lean towards Dark Wave and Dark Ambient are Darkwavers, etc. Etc. ALL are 'Gothic' because all draw from that same cultural, artistic tradition in their own way. But the thing to remember is that this tradition, this aesthetic is greater by far than any pop-cultural embodiment-of-the-moment of it. Another source of confusion arises from regarding it as a 'subculture'--which has very specific sociological implications--rather than an artistic aesthetic that one makes one's own. It is far more if an artistic and cultural phenomenon than a sociological one.

Is the Gothic culture dead?

Today, we have many people which aren't listening to Gothic music. Consequently they're not goths. The same with fashion. Many people in the dark clubs aren't really dressed in Goth clothes. They look like cyber people, metalheads or "normalos". In my opinion, we're living in a post-goth period.

There is no Gothic band in the charts... without the popularity of Gothic music and without the figureheads of Gothic rock, the Goth culture is dying. --Diluvien 20:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the Gothic culture is dead, Netcraft confirms it. --Stormie 22:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

My question is not a joke. Today, many people who use the term "goth" aren't not really goth. They're not listening to goth music and they don't look like goths. The goth subculture is inseparably connected to Gothic music and fashion. --Diluvien 23:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't the place for personal opinion on whether goth is "dead" or not. Mdwh 23:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a logical and scientific place. And logical to me is, that the Goth subculture is dying. THIS IS important to the article. --Diluvien 23:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The goth subculture of the 21st century is certainly not the same as the goth subculture of the early 80's. Two possible points of view on this are: (a) the goth subculture is dying/dead; or (b) the goth subculture is changing/has changed. I have my personal opinions on the topic, I'm sure you have yours - but a Wikipedia article is not the place for them. --Stormie 00:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The goth subculture of the 21st century is no goth subculture. It's a derivative form, that's all. No goth subculture without goth music. And this is absolutely logical to me. How can you define this new culture without typical gothic characteristics? There is no common Gothic ideology. There are hundred of ideologies. The ideology is no typical characteristic. --Diluvien 01:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

See the unwieldily-named section "Relationship between goth subculture, gothic architecture, gothic novel, romantic movement, gothic aesthetic, gothic rock, gothic fashion and the sublime" above for my thoughts on this. But basically: the goth subculture is an aesthetic movement. Music is a major but not the only facet of that aesthetic. Music with a gothic aesthetic is not solely limited to gothic rock. And even if it was, definitions even of gothic rock have shifted over time, e.g. the introduction of drum machines into gothic rock in the mid 80's. imho, everyone is perfectly happy to accept that subcultures shift over time to absorb other influences, until they absorb something that you personally don't like - and then "it's not the same subculture any more!!". --Stormie 06:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

p.s. I agree that ideology is not a defining characteristic of the goth subculture, I don't think it ever was. --Stormie 06:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The gothic culture was a horror movement. The first goths look like corpses with white faces, occult symbols etc. There was no aesthetic or romantic thing. This romantic thing is a phenomenon of the 1990s or an influence of the new romantic movement and has nothing to do with the traditional gothic subculture. The same with Gothic architecture, Gothic novels etc. The name of the Gothic subculture came from the Gothic music, a dark, punky music genre, related to death rock and horrorpunk. There was no relation to the Gothic architecture, but a preference for dead and old buildings in ruins, cemetaries, symbols of decay, etc. It was a "death romanticism". The term "gothic" means "dark, gloomy, spooky". I agree, that there are new developments. But now you have a culture without any relation to the roots. Metaller are listening to metal music, punks are listening to punk music, but goths are listening to futurepop, metal and techno? Bullshit! They're not goths! They're derivatives or parallel movements.

Btw: Do you have any reliable, scientific source that definitions of gothic rock have shifted over the time? A drum machine was in use since the early days of gothic rock. It's not a mid-80s thing.--Diluvien 09:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Like most people making grand pronouncements on what "real" goth is, you don't provide any sources. The use of the word "goth" gained currency slowly; where do you define the beginnings of the gothic culture, and where is your proof that those people dressed as corpses with occult symbols? The pictures I've seen from the Batcave show me plenty of people who weren't wearing corpseface and didn't deck themselves out in ankhs, pentagrams, and what have you. Furthermore, WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A MESSAGE BOARD for you to give us your opinion on the current state of gothic subculture. If you have some factual, supported information to add here, great, but no one cares if you're mad at teenagers listening to My Chemical Romance.--Halloween jack 19:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Must confess I was misremembering how early the Sisters of Mercy were active. But there is a school of thought I've encountered that "true" gothic rock died with the introduction of the drum machine. If it doesn't have a human drummer doing the "tribal" style drum sound, it's not goth. I mention this only as an example of the fact that the line can be drawn in a lot of different places. And as an example of why personal opinions as to what is or is not goth enough to be labelled goth are not particularly useful. --Stormie 03:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

diluvian, this article specifically destiguishes between the Metal subculture and the goth subculture. And no where does it say that futurepop or techno is goth. I'm not exactly sure what the point of this entire discussion is. There are many oldschool goths and there are even young oldschool goths (most being shy to "label themself", yet they are goth nonetheless). So if it is miniscule compared to its size historically it doesn't really amount to being "Dead". Its full of poseurs (as it was always)... This is nothing new. the degree of ignorance amongst non-goths about what goth is, may be at a new high, but this doesn't define the subculture, it only defines what outsiders think is the subculture. The idea that you can define something into or out of existence with mere words is one of the things the gothic romantic movement rejects, so that could never actually influence it. If goths believed that, then I guess the goths believed that the nobility really were more noble!TheDarknessVisible 21:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Goth has not died, it has diversified. Zazaban 20:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

"Goth" as it once was has certainly died. I don't think subculture of twenty years ago resembles what is going on now at all. Change isn't always a good thing when something mutates beyond all recognition.Just my opinion.Crescentia 22:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it has simply changed to a point where it may not resemble what it once was. Zazaban 22:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of all this, subcultures change and mutate, such is the nature of our society, it has happened to a lot of genres, look at stuff like punk and metal. The original punks were nothing like the 80's punks and then again the 90's punks were nothing like the 80's or 70's punks. We evolve rapidly in terms of fashion, goth is the same. In effect it has become a popular term that many people who wouldn't actually be considered goth are labeling themselves as that, rather than calling themselves something else. It has become a broad term now, and is now more readily associated with metal culture. Should be included in the article? maybe, but it is what Goth is now today, this is an encyclopedia so maybe it should be briefly mentioned in a time line, going through developments and changes in the subculture. However this artcile should be based around modern day term goth, with a mention of its previous roots.

-Some dude with crap opinion —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.200.223 (talk) 15:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Metal? No not really, at least not from more than a very few people, I've never seen that association, and it's usually refuted by everybody else present. Zazaban 21:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Industry kids and Spooky kids. A handful of metal kids, influenced by the music industry, which markets Metal music acts such as Nightwish, Cradle of Filth and other crap as "Gothic music". They're irrelevant for the article. --Breathtaker 23:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure not an expert on Goth, but it seems to me the original Goth subculture roots didn't have to do with the supernatural or the occult. I don't know whether the original Goths tended to be interested in those things, but it seems to me like those things kind of got added on later to what's usually associated with Goth. Seems to me more like originally Goth could be loosely defined as this clique of people who liked a certain variation on punk fashion that was a little toned down from the punk and focused more on wearing black, hung out together, had a certain insiderish, cynical, counter-culture attitude, and listened to a few specific bands that were a little less thuggy, a little more toned-down than the punk bands in general, but who had a common kind of more melodic/mellow sound, that was a little evocative of the mysterious ambience. Seems to me connections of original Goth to the supernatural or occult are made out of ignorance or bad faith. But then, I'm not expert or afficionado. 67.85.225.175 (talk) 05:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC) Swan

Try Dead Souls by Joy Division, Hollow Hills by Bauhaus, Bela Lugosi's Dead by Bauhaus, Release the Bats or Hamlet(Pow,Pow, Pow) by Birthday Party, Spellbound by Siouxsie and the Banshees. Magic by Alien Sex Fiend. The supernatural/occult connection was firmly entrenched when the subculture was born. What immediately preceded that was not called the goth subculture by anybody at the time, even if some of it was appropriated by the goth subculture. The movie The Hunger is about vampires, and it is associated with the birth of the goth subculture.TheDarknessVisible (talk) 20:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Goth is not about horror (as in popular culture, film, etc.), it's not about music, it's not about black clothes or whiteface. Well, it is, but obliquely. It's certainly not about supernatural or occult crap. Most Goths are intellectuals and are much more likely to be complete cynics and atheists than to be fooled by anything like that. Listen: It's about DEATH. It's about the acceptance and celebration of death. If you want to bring up anything at all that is related to Goth, I can poinf out how it references death. Spooky Kids and the like are just that: kids. They probably vaguely relate to it and maybe will grow into Goths--that's why we call them babygoths--but most will give it up. And Goth is certainly alive and thriving. Just listen to Rasputina. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcuspierce (talk • contribs) 07:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Criticism Section

It appears the whole criticism section is just a "don't blame me, he listened to heavy metal" when it really should just say that they were not gothic, and their tastes in music have no influence on their actions. ≈ Maurauth ^(nemesis) 08:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The media reported certain individuals as fans of goth music and part of the goth subculture, therefore since there is reliable verifiable criticism of this reporting it is neutral to report the type of music verifiable sources indicate that they listen to and what the authorities actually concluded (say the columbine shooters were not goths and held goth music in contempt). The article does state that "Mercer emphasized that he was not blaming heavy metal music for Gill's actions and added "It doesn’t matter actually what music he liked."" It is not encyclopedic for an editor to simply report their own personal opinion that music was not what caused the tragedies. I'm sure most metal fans and goth fans are 99.999% in agreement that music doesn't cause this behavior. But the media opened this can of worms by their shallow reporting, not wikipedia. the article reports on what the media says and what the authorities and music experts say. Blaim the media for sensationalizing such an irrelevant factor in the acts of these individuals. If there is a reliable study of somekind which can actually make some kind of authoritative conclusion that music can not possibly influence someones actions then that source can also be included. But short of that we can not include a statement such as "their tastes in music have no influence on their actions.". It would be simply someones personal opinion. As it stands I believe the article gets pretty much the best that we can accomplish from a neutrality perspective.TheDarknessVisible 16:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

It's really not fair or accurate to lump in scenes with Goth that look the same to people who aren't part of the subcultures. Seems to me a lot of these problem kids aren't even too acclimated to the subcultures anyway- they are posers/mall goths with one or two friends who don't know a lot about or particpate much in the subcultures, listen to more mainstream bands that they mistake for subculture bands, and then go berzerk. Kids from the middle of nowhere who are hundreds or at least tens of miles away from any subculture kids shouldn't get their actions ascribed to the subculture kids. Last I checked, the mainstream media isn't a great source of, for example, what music is goth and what music is death metal, so they're actually a poor source to repeat for the proposition, "This kid who killed a bunch of people was big into goth music." For all they know, he was into one band, and it was a band all the members of which hate goth and wouldn't in a million years considers themselves goth, but the kid is wearing black in a family photo and some kids they talk to say he was into goth, so that's good enough for the news reporters to say he was big into goth. Maybe this is how it happens, or maybe it's not even in the news reports and some people are just taking some news reports about metal, throwing them on Wikipedia and saying "they're saying this has to do with goth"-- but I can't recall hearing of any goth-kid suicides or murders. 67.85.225.175 (talk) 05:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC) Swan

first paragraph of critisam

While reading this i look at the reference and in the article i read at thougth to myself that it was poorly writen and got its fact wrong.First it was taken from the cbc about the kemmear gill case,which we know form the previous section that he was a fan of nu-metal not goth.Seconded,this story was writen form a person in calgary i bet because it was so conservative and was rearshered poorly.So i am going to take it out.

Something about Goth rock

How does the Goth rock section have the 1st-2nd-3rd wave Goth in it but mention Dark Wave (Industrial Goth)? Also why is there Gothic Metal but no subculture in that division? Should think the 1st-2nd-3rd wave Goth trend or style section is in the wrong place (prolonged in Goth Rock) and certainly believe if Goth metal even exists that something of a followers would be goth. Who'd argue Gothic Metal has not got subculture? Band members in Nightwish wear Trench Coats, Black Eyeliner and have MEAN as GOATEES so last time checking wasn't those items considered gothic or just scene. --ForsakenPoppet (talk) 16:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Mention Strobelight Records?

I made an article for Strobelight Records. Given that they're one of the few (perhaps only) sizable record labels specializing in gothic rock/death rock, would it be appropriate to include a mention in the article? I notice that Cleopatra is mentioned.--Halloween jack 17:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Is industrial a goth music genre?

I don't personally think so, but a lot of goths listen to it, and an anon recently changed it to such. Please don't turn this into a debate about what is and isn't a goth, this is about the music and not the people. Zazaban 03:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I reckon the two lists in that section, instead of being labelled "The goth subculture developed very closely with certain forms of music" and "Also, the following genres have often been misattributed with goth culture," should rather say "The last person who edited this page is a fan of these genres of music" and "The last person who edited this page thinks that these genres of music suck." :-)

I added those lists and can ssure you I listen to all genres on both lists. :P No, that wasn't the intention, just that the general public often is under the impression that's the music goths generally listen to. Zazaban 05:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

In all seriousness, though - no, I agree with you. The word "goth" does not appear anywhere in the Industrial music article. Therefore imho, if someone considers it to have been closely involved with the development of the goth subculture, they should say so there first, and provide reliable sources. --Stormie 03:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, we'd need sources to say that it is an influence - but we also need sources to say that it isn't an influence, and that people falsely claim it is. Mdwh 17:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

In the 80's/early 90's industrial music was played alongside goth music in clubs. It wasn't until the early 90's that the genre had it's own exclusive scene. However, the two genres are not really related to each other musically.Crescentia 05:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Though note the current wording talks in terms of influencing the culture, not styles of music, which would suggest it means things like clubs and the scene, rather than being related musically. Mdwh 17:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I think this section is rather bad - whilst industrial and electronic music are not related to gothic rock, whether genres of music are related to the goth subculture very much depends on your opinion, and definitions. For example, plenty of "goth" clubs play much, or in some cases mainly, industrial and EBM. What does it mean to say "misattributed"? Who attributes them, and why are they wrong?

I'm sure at one time we had a goth music list article which eventually got deleted because it was hopelessly full of original research and POV, with people trying to claim that X were or weren't "goth". This list looks like it's heading in the same direction.

The article already mentions music and bands, whilst this list tells the reader no useful information, and seems just there to push a point of view - I think it's better to remove it altogether. Mdwh 02:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

So are there answers to my questions, or sources, rather than simply reverting? Note, there is a difference between "gothic rock" (which is a specific genre), and "music associated with goth subculture" which is a much broader and harder to define thing (as I say, plenty of "goth" clubs play more than just "goth rock"). Can sources be provided that (a) people claim that these genres have influenced goth subculture, and (b) they are wrong? Can this be expanded into saying something actually useful, rather than what at the moment seems to be just a POV-pushing list which tells us nothing? Mdwh 17:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I know this probably shouldn't be here but....

Are they're any goth userboxes that don't assume the user is female? I KNOW I saw one a while ago! Zazaban 05:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

BDSM

It seems to be an influence to me. The word bondage is even used. Zazaban 00:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not about what it is to us, it's about verifiable sources. What does the reference given actually state?

Bondage pants are just a single item, and I'm not sure it really counts as borrowing from BDSM culture - according to the article, they were popularised in punk subculture.

This certainly doesn't seem strong enough to be in the lead of the article; it suggests that BDSM culture is one of the main influences on goth subculture, which seems dubious to me. Mdwh 02:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but it is properly referenced and totally justified. BDSM is an important influence in the goth subculture, just look around and take notice. Trencacloscas 02:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You've just repeated your assertions - can you answer my question please? What does the reference say? "Look around and take notice" is original research (what am I supposed to be noticing, by the way? Why are bondage pants significant enough to mention in the lead, and not all the other millions of things that people wear in the subculture?) Mdwh 02:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Nobody's repeated any assertions. That's a different person. :) Zazaban 06:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I mean "repeated the assertions". Is anyone going to answer the questions then? Mdwh 10:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I'd move that BDSM reference down into the "Styles of dress within the subculture.." sentence in the second paragraph, since that's where the disparate elements that can be found within gothic fashion are listed. As an aside, what exactly is "cultural proclivities" meant to mean in that opening paragraph? --Stormie 03:36, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I think this would be fine. A lot of the problem for me is that it appears in the first paragraph, before the later mention on styles of dress, suggesting BDSM subculture is a major influence on goth subculture. Sure, some goths wear things like bondage trousers, but these are one of many styles of clothing worn. Given that we already have a list of influences for styles of dress, I'm not sure why BDSM gets mentioned up in front.

Whilst I'm at it, I'm not sure about the addition of "horror movies" either? Some have had an influence, but this is a wide genre, much of which has nothing to do with goth subculture. We mention vampires later in the article, but I'm not sure what apart from that is a major influence? Mdwh 10:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted the reference again because it simply doesn't belong there. Bondage pants were a punk subculture fashion statement and had nothing to do with the goth subculture. Plus basing the inclusion on just bondage pants is ridiculous.Crescentia 15:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Plenty of goths wear bondage pants. That was only one example anyway. Zazaban 19:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

If you mean the kids who call themselves goth who wear those baggy bondage pants with all of the chains on them that listen to Korn then you are right. However, it is a fashion statement and does not have to do with the development of the subculture.Crescentia 20:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Funny. I distinctly remember me and my friends wearing similar clothing in 1986, without any "Korn" in sight.Theplanetsaturn 20:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want to play the age card, I was around at the same time and I only remeber punks wearing them. There wasn't even a 'goth' subculture back then, because the term didn't come into widespread use until around 90. People who were weirdos in the 80's were usually called alternative or mod. That is until the word 'alternative' got stolen and used by the mainstream recording industry to describe Nirvana and grunge. That is how things were on the West Coast of the US where I lived. By the way I was talking about those ugly wide legged ones that kids wear these days, not the tight ones. They didn't even have the baggy ones back then.Crescentia 22:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Age card? Coming from the person who says "If you mean the kids who call themselves goth..." The age card is already well in play by YOU. And there wasn't a goth subculture then? That's absurd. Maybe where you were it was nonexistent, but it certainly did exist elsewhere. And yeah, the pants were tighter then. But subcultures reflect popular fashions. Popular fashions NOW are these god awful baggy pants. Hence the counter culture equivalents. You keep saying that these fashions were the domain of the punk subculture. But as you should know, the difference between the two subcultures was more loosely defined in that era.Theplanetsaturn 22:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I lived in a very large metropolitan area, and I went to the 'alternative' clubs back then, and I tell you that people did not use the word 'goth' like they do now. There was a subculture but it wasn't coined as 'goth'. If you don't believe me that's fine. Yes, the fashions were more combined back then, BUT bondage pants started out in the punk subculture, and did not make an important contribution to the gothic subculture. Do you honestly think that bondage pants are important enough to be used as the single reference for the inclusion of BSDM in the first paragraph? Because that is what this discussion is about.Crescentia 02:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

And I tell you they did. By the mid-eighties, there was a subculture and it was referred to as "Goth". In fact, many of the participants were completely put out by the term "Death Rock" that was being used in replacement by the late eighties. I'm sure you believe in what you say. But you are 100% wrong on this count regardless of what you believe. As for the rest, no, I do not believe it is important enough to include in the opening paragraph. But you are supporting the exclusion on erroneous logic and a condescending tone. "If you mean the kids who call themselves goth...". I mean seriously, you expect to throw around crap like that and not get called on it? And then you suggest someone else is throwing around the age card? Regardless, yes, bondage pants were first seen within the punk subculture. This happened to be at a time when the entirety of the goth subculture and fashion was still an offshoot of punk, so the distinction is both irrelevant and misleading The fashion is (and always has been) accepted across both subcultures no matter how you try to pigeon hole it into one exclusively.Theplanetsaturn 03:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Crap like that? How was saying that playing the age card? Also, why are you 'calling me out' on it? Is this topic so important to you that you 'call out' anybody who disagrees with you? If it is then I suggest that you reavulate your life, because this is the internet. I'm not going to argue any further with you because, to be quite frank, what you say holds no importance to me and you are going to believe what you are going to believe regaudless of what anybody else tries to explain to you.Crescentia 13:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's follow your dismissal to the logical conclusion. It's the internet. NONE of this matters. Yet you have edited dozens upon dozens of pages in the last couple of weeks. You can pretend you didn't drop the age card yourself, that you weren't acting in an elitist manner in your justification for the removal of this information. But it's obviously just the world of make believe you're indulging in. Your logic and argument were flawed, regardless of the fact that I agree with your overall intent. You argue for the right thing in the wrong way, you deserve to be called on it. Because frankly, I'm left to wonder how many pages you disrupt with your inaccurate perspective on history. The subculture wasn't called "goth"? That is one of the most absurd rewritings of history I have ever witnessed. Do some research. Educate yourself, and stop using your inaccurate perspective to justify your edits.Theplanetsaturn 18:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I left you a message on your talk page that you obviously haven't read. If you wish to insult me take it there instead of here. Stop the personal attacks.Crescentia 19:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

How can I stop what doesn't exist? You keep insisting I'm insulting YOU. I'm not, I'm taking issue with your fallacious argument. There is a difference. As for when and where I respond to you, as long as YOU keep leaving messages for me HERE, I will continue to respond to you HERE. This isn't exactly a chicken or the egg scenario, now is it?Theplanetsaturn 19:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem there is that you are now trying to define goth, which I personally think is an impossible task, one often riddled with elitism and opinion. Zazaban 21:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that exactly what you are trying to do? It should be under an influence under the fashion catergory, but not under the subculture. The two are different.Crescentia 22:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually I'm trying to not define it, which is an extremly difficult task, one involving a great deal of oddly shaped cookies. But the cookies don't have much to do with Wikipedia, so I'll just leave it at it being difficult. Zazaban 22:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You reverted it again without answering questions. I removed it again because you have not proved your case. It could possibly go under the fashion influence section, but not as BDSM. Instead it should be called fetish. If BDSM influenced the goth subculture wouldn't a lot of people in the subculture be into pain and domination? Because that is what BDSM is.Crescentia 16:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Plenty of goths wear all sorts of things - I think we need something stronger to cite it as a main influence. Otherwise we'll have a neverending list of "things which at least some goths wear". Also it's not clear to me that bondage pants really came from the BDSM subculture, despite the name - they seem to be more a fashion thing.

Better examples might be collars. Also it might be more accurate to state fetish clothing than BDSM - for exereample, PVC and boots. Though it's not immediately obvious how the subcultures influenced each other - it may not be as simple as goths borrowing from existing fetish subculture. Mdwh 21:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if some people don't care to consider the point here. The point is that the assertion of Fetish culture influencing the Goth subculture is duly referenced and a real source is quoted (I can provide many more). That should be enough to end any discussion for now. Please provide sources and quote them properly or just leave the edit wars for something more productive. Trencacloscas 01:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

What does that reference say? What other references do you have then? You are the one engaging in edit wars rather than responding to the questions on the talk page. It's not up to us to provide sources - you're the one making the claim. And currently the article states BDSM, not fetish. Mdwh 03:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Mdwh is correct. You and Zazaban keep putting it back up without any additional information. I am taking it back off. Before you add it again come up with some more references. I also agree with Mdwh in the fact that BDSM is mentioned instead of fetish. BDSM is a behaviour, right? It's being into pain, domination, etc.... I really don't see what that has to do with the development of the the subculture. In a fashion sense I do think that fetish attire has influenced things a little bit, but not to the extent that it gets mentioned up at the top of the article. If you want to add it as an influence put it in the fashion section because that is where it should go. Please stop reverting. Also, I just took a look at you discussion page and I see that you have a real history of doing the same kind of thing on other pages as well.Crescentia 15:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree actually, wait until there's some concensus. Zazaban 20:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem is you are giving no references at all. I can give plenty of references involving influence of the BDSM culture (in fashion or in ideology) in the Goth subculture (if you want to call it 'fetish', it's ok by me, but 'fetish' is not necessarily a culture or an ideology, just a fashion term, and thus incorrect), but it's useless since you don't offer any elements to support any opposing points of view. The creators of the Goth subculture were involved in BDSM, the attires owe plenty to the BDSM scene, Goths and BDSM people buy clothes in the same shops, Goth parties include oftenly BDSM shows.... That's what I meant with "look around and take notice". Stop edit wars by fundamenting your opinions properly, please. Trencacloscas 22:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

No, you give one reference. I'm not going to change it back again because I'm tired of this. Somebody is bound to do it soon anyway.Crescentia 22:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I gave the reference of a book totally devoted to the topic of Goth Subculture. Even the pages. Want exact quotations? Cool: "The relation between Goth and BDSM is not recent, but rather something that happened from the beginning" (page 207). "There is not a plain consensus in the gothic community about sexual practices in the same level that there is about disciplines typically artistic: cinema, music, literature, plastic arts in general, and even fashion. But it is undeniable that gothic esthetics are tributaries of the fetish and BDSM scene, and beyond individual preferences of sex and seduction, parties and events, from the beginning and each time more oftenly, include BDSM shows..." (big etcetera follows, page 207). There is a whole chapter about the subject, but I won't transcribe it for you. This should be enough to stop your senseless edit wars without the intervention of an administrator.Trencacloscas 03:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

You still only give one reference. The same reference. Here is a link that says fetish fashion has influenced goth fashion...NOT the subculture: http://www.sfgoth.com/primer/parentFAQ.html . Want another? Here: http://www.penddraig.co.uk/pen/g_gloss.htm This one says that MOST BDSM people have nothing to do with the goth subculture. Want yet another? Here: http://gothic-charm-school.com/charm/?p=71 She says that Goth and BSDM are two seperate things. STOP REVERTING. You link still makes no sense. Just because a goth night has a BDSM show then the entire subculture must be influenced by that?The author is calling artistic endevours 'disciplines', so that means that they must be linked to BDSM? That also makes no sense. He gives no proof that the two are linked, he is just stating an opinion, and a wrong one at that. How did the link between the two happen from the beginning? He gives no proof. In that book he also links gothic metal to the gothic subculture, even though the two have nothing to do with one another. That author is just perpetuating myths about the subculture. Mick Mercer, who has participated in the gothic subculture since the beginning, mentions nothing about BDSM being linked to the subculture in any of his books.Crescentia 13:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

A crucial part of that quote is "There is not a plain consensus in the gothic community about sexual practices in the same level that there is about disciplines typically artistic: cinema, music, literature, plastic arts in general, and even fashion." I'd be a lot happier if that was conveyed in the text, but it is not, and putting it in the lead, before the mentions of music and fashion, and especially cinema, conveys that there is a consensus. I would suggest either a reword to state this, and/or moving it to later on in the article. Mdwh 13:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit - though I'll accept that naming the sources explicitly implies that it is not a consensus. So I think I'll accept what we have there now. Mdwh 13:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

First of all, are you aware that the first link you provide totally supports the relationship between Goth and BDSM? Your second link does not say anything about the subject(which is the influence of BDSM on Goth subculture). Here it is the exact quote: "Although Gothics tend to appear to be familiar with the practices of bondage by their apparel, most of those people wearing vinyl pants and bondage bracelets don't know the first thing about BDSM and are following a fashion trend. The majority of BDSM practitioners have nothing to do with gothic, and they view bondage gear as a tool, not an accessory". The third one is just a forum-like opinion and it is not even clear; it mentions the crossover between fetish, BDSM and Goth scenes but doesn't say anything about influences. PLEASE GET REAL!!!! I can also provide many internet casual links and references: http://www.nycgoth.com/more/sadomasochism or http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A473924 at a simple query. But I quite prefer books, here's another one: Carol Siegel "Goth's Dark Empire" (pages 8-13 and more too numerous to quote), and also take a look at Corvis Nocturnum "Embracing The Darkness" which points almost the same. By the way, did you ever care to read the expression "to a lesser extent". Since I', tired of attitudes like yours I will rephrase the assertion in a manner that will be incontrovertible. Hope it ends the argument by now. Trencacloscas 21:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Your reference is in SPANISH so how can anybody here read it ? This is an English language Wikipedia artricle. I mean seriously, if I wanted to read the book I, and others here, couldn't. I stand by the fact that your source is dubious. Somebody else will just revert it again. You are the ONLY person who thinks that it should be included at this point, and instead of waiting for an agreement you just keep on reverting. Also, I would rather trust the judgement of a source such as Mick Mercer, who actually particpated in the early "scene", than a reporter or professor who has no inner knowledge of it.Crescentia 22:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem with using Carol Siegel as a reference is that she's an academic who seems to be really mostly interested in gender and transgression. (That is, she's one of the academics who is way more enamoured of PZB's Lost Souls than most goths I've known have ever been, and she seems to be interested mostly because of the gay themes.) Not the only academic who's slightly overemphasized the importance of that book to the subculture. (Yes, there are plenty of goths who like it, but I don't believe it's had much influence, if any, on the subculture itself. And it didn't accurately depict every local scene, either.) 4.224.228.113 10:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not the only person, there's Zazaban over there too, and of course I'm just calling a neutral point of view if there is more nonsense on your side. I just included too more quotes right in English. By the way, if Mick Mercer says something about the subject, why don't you quote him? It is totally imposible that he never touched it. Oh, wait, I read "Hex Files: The Goth Bible" some time ago and guess what?... there was an entire section dedicated to Fetish. A pity I don't have the book with me, do you? Trencacloscas 00:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

He also included vampire and pagan sections and yet not all goths are into those things either. He said I quote,'...these are relevent now.' He did not say that the BDSM scene influenced the development of the subculture. He said that some people in the goth subculture partake in it NOW, but that others, including himself, aren't interested in it at all. Yes, I do have the book and it is sitting right in front of me. Oh burn.....Crescentia 04:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, and there are goths that don't dress in black. Mick Mercer is not the only expert or the only one who made researches on the subject, so it doesn't matter in the end. Anyway, I wonder why would he put an entire section about fetish in a Goth book. If he actually wrote that fetish and bdsm never influenced the Goth scene, that would be relevant. But I quite remember it is not the case, and I intend to recover my copy of his book just for the sake of doublechecking. Trencacloscas 13:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Fetish fashion as a fashion influence

I have no strong opinion one way or another on the above discussion as to whether BDSM has been an influence on the subculture. But I think the following paragraph, on the fashion styles, should mention fetish fashion.

The most obvious examples would be leather collars (with O-rings, etc) and PVC clothing (well, more usually polyurethane in reality). You'd be hard pressed to walk into any goth club without seeing examples of both of those. Roy Badami 12:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a recommendation from a non-Goth

The Ideology section goes to relatively great lengths to say that there is no real Goth ideology. So why is there an Ideology section here? I won't remove it, because it's not something I'd bother returning here to keep up with, but the whole article needs serious trimming, and it would be a good start for a "regular" here.

MarkinBoston 03:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

One of the reasons is that a great number of non-goths believe there to be an ideology and quite often their ideas involve satanism and white supremacy. It is needed to explain that that is NOT so. Zazaban 20:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I used to know some people who identified themselves as goth, and their ideas did involve satanism, violence and, if not white supremacy, certainly not tolerance. I know they were not representative of all goths, but I think it's best to leave that section out since it has nothing to do with goths, really. It should be enough to just state in one simple sentence that goths are not associated with any one ideology.--80.86.74.135 14:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

They sound like metalheads, a lot of them think they're Goth. I have yet to meat a Goth who holds those ideas, but plently of Metalheads who self-identify as Goth and are generally regarded as pillocks. Zazaban 23:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Who are you to say who is goth or not? The only information you had to base your assumption on that they were not true goths on, was their ideology, while at the same time you maintain that there is no ideology associated with goths. They identified themselves as goth and in many ways they matched the description of goths in this article, including fashion and music taste. Does this not make them goths? If it is their ideas that disqualify them from being goths, the ideology section has to be revised, because in that case there clearly is ideology associated with goths.--80.86.74.135 23:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Calm down, I never said they weren't Goth, I only said what they sounded like to me. I of course, was wrong. Zazaban 23:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Jhonen Vasquez

I think he's given way too much prominence in the criticism section. Either add a few sources and other critics to balance things out, or he should go. Zazaban 21:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Bzzt! Wrong! A former version of the article had too much info about that boring internet humor dude Maddox, and posited that a page he'd written making fun of goths was criticism. He wasn't a scene member, so the "criticism" wasn't very astute. Vasquez has been a scene member, and his criticism (mostly in the Anne Gwish strips) has been spot-on. It should stay. Most other "criticism" of the subculture is based on misapprehensions by conservative parents, etc. 4.224.228.113 10:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Noctívagus

This Portuguese band keeps getting re-added with no explaination. Is it notable enough? Zazaban 19:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

No. It should be deleted.Crescentia 22:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

This band is not notable enough, and the person who keeps adding them is doing nothing more than spamming them. If they are reading this I would encourage them to stop doing so.Crescentia 13:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course, it's absurd. --marcus —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcuspierce (talk • contribs) 22:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Fashion WikiProject.

Does this article really qualify or should it just be gothic fashion? Zazaban 02:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Anti-fashion is also fashion. I know there is some intend to avoid commercialism and mainstream, but in doing so a new fashion appeared. Alejandro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.127.137.125 (talk) 17:18, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

'See Also' links that do not belong...

I removed 'underclass' and 'intercultural competence' because neither have anything to do with the goth subculture. The term underclass denotes a socio-economic level that some people live in, not a subculture in which people CHOOSE to join. Intercultural competence, according to the Wiki article, has to do with people of different national cultures getting along,etc... The goth subculture is not a national culture based upon a specific country's long history. Rather, it is a recent subculture based upon music.Crescentia 04:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Comparisons and analogies, never heard of those? And do not reply to me, 'cos Im likely leaving this site. Doktor Who 05:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow.Crescentia 05:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed them. They were far to general, we would have to split internal links into a seperate article if we added stuff like that. Zazaban 05:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed.Crescentia 05:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh what a coincidence, today everybody is against me, it seems that after 2000 edits, (700 in the main spoace), I deserve retirements, in 1 year i've never seen something like this, everybody against me just in a few hours. Doktor Who 05:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You are taking things way too personally.Crescentia 14:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I don't even know you, it's not personal.

Zazaban 07:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Gothic metal has nothing to do with the gothic subculture so it shouldn't be included. It is a metal subgenre, not gothic. Even the article says that they are not the same.Crescentia 14:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

It MAY be debatable since it is a metalised version of Gothic Rock, but it isn't really an influence. Zazaban 20:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Gothic metal is metal, not gothic rock. Back in the 80's, when I was in high school, the metal crowd hated the goth/punk crowd, so it's really ironic that people try to lump gothic metal into the gothic rock camp. Metal has never really been an influence at all in the gothic subculture. The whole gothic subculture came from punk.Crescentia 01:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, to be fair, gothic metal is not an 80's flavour of metal. You'll certainly find a lot more crossover between the metal crowd and the goth crowd now than you would have then. --Stormie 04:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I never said it was gothic rock, I said it was a metalised version. Like a fusion genre? Zazaban 05:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

No, like gothic metal is related to death metal which is in no way related to deathrock or gothic rock except for the NAMES. Crescentia's comment from 23:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

below is correct... stop trying to shoehorn "Gothic Metal", which has appropriated the NAME goth, into the subculture. The "goths" who listen to gothic metal are gothic metal fans, not related to the long-term-existing goth subculture. 4.224.228.113 10:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't get it. Gothic Metal is a rock style that combines elements from Metal and Gothic, most Goths today listen to Gothic Metal and any Gothic club these days plays Gothic Metal for the people. It doesn't matter if it is an influence or not, it is a fact. Trencacloscas 21:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Give some proof that most goths listen to gothic metal. Facts please. None of the goth clubs I went to recently played gothic metal so your statement is not universally true.Until you provide facts that mose goths these days listen to gothic metal the link is gone.You are stating your opinion and nothing else. PLUS the GOTHIC SUBCULTURE WIKI page states: QUOTE: Mick Mercer, author, noted music journalist, and world's leading historian of Goth music[17][18][19] stated, of Kimveer Gill, that he was "not a Goth. Never a Goth. The bands he listed as his chosen form of ear-bashing were relentlessly Metal and standard Grunge, Rock and Goth Metal, with some Industrial presence.", "Kimveer Gill listened to metal", "He had nothing whatsoever to do with Goth" and further commented "I realise that like many Neos this idiot may even have believed he somehow was a Goth, because they're only really noted for spectacularly missing the point." Mercer emphasized that he was not blaming heavy metal music for Gill's actions and added "It doesn’t matter actually what music he liked.". What Mercer said is that just because you listen to gothic metal doesn't mean that you are a goth. In fact he is stating that gothic metal isn't goth at all. That means that listing gothic metal as an 'also' link is going against the Wiki page itself.[20].Crescentia 23:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, if gothic metal is so important in the subculture than why isn't that mentioned in the page itself?Crescentia 17:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It is mentioned, in the bit that states why it is not important in the subculture. Zazaban 17:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep, here is the quote: "This is a common misconception(RE:metal being associated with gothic subculture). Individual goths will listen to any music they like, but as a subculture, heavy metal music is not an associated musical style.[7]" That just proves the point that the gothic metal link shouldn't be included.Crescentia 18:20, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

( this however, is incorrect as goth is a pacifist subculture).

The gothic fascination with the macabre has raised public concerns regarding the well-being of goths. The mass media has made reports that have influenced the public view that goths or people associated with the subculture, are malicious ( this however, is incorrect as goth is a pacifist subculture). Some individuals who have either identified themselves or been identified by others as goth, whether correctly or incorrectly, have committed high profile violent crimes, including several school shootings. These incidents and their attribution to the goth scene have helped to propagate a wary perception of Goth in the public eye.[10][11]

I think you are misunderstanding the whole thing. If these people were involved in these crimes, it was not because they were goths, but because they were disturbed or mentally ill people with psychological unbalances, like black criminals, who are not criminals because they are black. When a criminal he belongs to a minority group, that group becomes the target of accusations that should be directed towards the criminal and not the group. Yes, goths do have a fascination for the macabre and darkness in four main ways (or some combination of those four ways):

1. A fascination for darkness and death of spiritual origin. It has nothing to do with grey evil (terrorism, racism, etc), but with the metaphysical evil, which is called the black evil, that is related to deities like Lucifer, Shiva, Odin, etc., who in myths have a sometimes chaotic rôle. But they are archetypal figures. In esoteric traditions, when one emulates their deity, they do not do it in the Christian way, which is to do some things their god did in the very way they say it was done. In esoteric traditions, one symbollicaly does this. So if Kali killed Shiva, it doesn't mean that women have to kill their partners, instead in this case they will have an active (and not passive) rôle in their sexualities, symbolically killing their partners. See http://www.dragonrouge.net/english/philosophy.htm#2.

2. A fascination for darkness and death of ideological origin. Of the "If God is mysogynous, homophobic, ethnocentric, in favour of death penalty, war, animal cruelty, the holocaust, etc, then I'm a satanist", springing from the grey evil so often found in religious organizations, particularly Christian ones.

3. A fascination for darkness and death of emotional origin. People who feel dead because of disgraces that have happened to them, and sometimes, -in a manner of Stockholm Syndrome, fall in love with their sadness, and even sometimes addicted. They feel they need that negative energy, which has replaced positive one.

4. A fascination for darkness and death of egotistical origin. They lean towards the grey evil. In reaction of them has appeared the almost unheard of subculture of the lumen, who are some sort of "white goths". Alejandro

How can one say it is a pacifist subculture? It is apolitical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.14.100 (talk) 02:49, August 25, 2007 (UTC) Pacifist doesn't necessarily imply politics. It's simply is a fancy word for non-violent. Zazaban 02:59, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It's more like apathetic. Unlike the punk subculture, which has always had a politically mided contingent of people, the gothic subculture has never really been involved with causes. I think it is due to the fact that many focus on their status within the subculture, rather than on what is going on outside the subculture. Sad but true. During the whole time I was involved in it I maybe met only a handfull of people who went to protests, etc... Every time I hear the word 'pacifist' in connection with the gothic subculture it makes me think of the passive agressive behaviour that is prevelent in the subculture. It's not that people are non-violent, it's more like they would rather gossip like hell about people and then pretend to be friends with them the next moment.Crescentia 03:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep. I agree with this. And I think that "Non-violent" would be a more accurate word than "pacifist." But articles about the subculture written for a mass audience never touch on the emotional violence factor, all that passive-aggressive behavior. Most goths, at least those who go out a lot, seem to concentrate on various aesthetic pursuits: what status in the subculture is conferred through fashion, musical knowledge, hanging out at clubs and dating all the other "hot" scene people, art projects, home decor, etc. I think the cause goths are most likely to be involved with is animal welfare, but usually more in an "I'm vegan" way than an "I foster homeless animals" way. 4.224.228.113 10:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Every single time that I have mentioned the passive agressive thing in forums people get all pissy and say,"The 'scene' isn't like that!". People are in a whole lot of denial about it. There is a huge amount of emotional warfare that goes on in the "scene". I have lived in four different areas of the US and it happens everywhere.Crescentia 14:47, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I've reinstated this claim in (hopefully) more NPOV language, with a reference. Rightly or wrongly (I would say rightly, but then I'm a goth so you might regard me biased :) the goth scene is regularly described as peaceful, non-violent, etc, and that tallies with my experience. I just added the most authoratative reference I could quickly find, but it wouldn't hurt to have maybe one more. Roy Badami 21:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and to comment on the emotional thing (sorry, made the edit before noticing there was a talk secion on it - my bad): By all means write a section on the emotional 'drama' that seems to be a frequent occurence in some parts of the scene. But in the context of a section talking about accusations of mass murder, I think it's reasonable to comment that physical assualt is rare in the Goth subculture, and I think it's clear from context that that's what 'non-violent' means here Roy Badami 21:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

One of the pillars of gothic subculture is a heavy emphasis on individualism. Gothicism is not political or apolitical, it is just not concerned with that issue in an ideological level (if there even is such a thing). That is not a contradiction, because being apolitical is also a political stance, just as atheism is a religious belief. Politics and religion are not a part of the subculture, just as engineering and football are also not part of this. Gothicism, more than an ideology, is an aesthetic tendence involved with classicism (hellenistic antiquity, dark ages, middle ages, reinassance, baroque, romanticism, modernism, victorian, elizabethan and edwardian eras, and finally, post-punk), which in turn extends to all arts. So it can be said that to be a goth, one must fulfill some characteristics that have nothing to do with ideology. This means that a goth can be conservative, communist, anarchist, -and sadly- even a nazi (which is in fact more related to black metal). Does this mean that gothic subculture endorses any form of fascism or racism? Of course not! See the story about Siouxsie and the swastika. Fascism and racism are just things that have nothing to do with it. You can't blame a glass of water for being nazi just because it shows no signs of being against it. Get it? That a goth is not likely to dress like a member of the Masai tribe or believe in the same deities the Melanesians do, does not make her/him racist (And believing otherwise is a serious issue). What a goth believes about how a state should be organised is completely apart from his/her involvement with the subculture. That he wants to "gothicise" his believe in order to embellish it, is also something unrelated. And after having said all that, I must say, however, that there was some liberal-nationalist political tendency amongst 18th and 19th century romanticists that in their age would have been considered leftist and revolutionary, which nowadays, -kidnapped by the punk subculture- have been mixed with imagery and attitudes very undesirable for many goths. Even nowadays we have Liv Kristine (although not directly related to romantics) campaigning for animal rights and (if I remember well) against VIH/AIDS. Again, that is no prescribed gothic behaviour, but there are some political and ethical beliefs a goth is more likely to have. Alejandro

Associated music

Alright, this section is getting really ugly. I think that our definition of what can be called Goth is highly conservative, and is trying to exactly conform to what it was in 1982. Can't we update a bit? Even other language Wikipedias are way more liberal than us. Zazaban 22:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This has all the same problems as Gothic music (previous version) which was redirected after an AfD and List of non-goth musical artists popular within goth subculture (which was deleted after a prod). The sources only cover punk rock being an influence, and metal not being an influence (and I don't think either of those are controversial - the issue is things like industrial or electronic music). I'd rather get rid of it - we already cover the music in the article text, and in Gothic rock; no need for a list that's just going to attract random people's opinions of whether X is goth or not. Mdwh 09:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

The reason why you say this is because you want things like gothic metal and BDSM added, when neither of those things are practiced/liked by a lot of people in the subculture in the US or even in England. Maybe this one is more conservative because the things you want added aren't as popular in the countries where the subculture started, which happen to be english speaking countries. If you want those things added then put them in your country's Wiki article on the subject.Crescentia 23:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I removed it, we can put it back if we can ever agree on a version that is not a snapshot of Goth music a quarter of a century ago. Zazaban —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zazaban (talk • contribs) 07:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the statement of the person who added it back again, without gothic rock based music there wouldn't be a gothic subculture to begin with.Crescentia 23:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Gothic rock is mentioned in the article, multiple times. We also have it in the "See also" (if people think other genres should be listed, feel free to put them in the "See also" too, and/or work it into the article text). It is unnecessary to repeat it in list form. At least there seems to be consensus on removing the "misidentified" section. Mdwh 00:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. This topic is very well covered in the main article.Theplanetsaturn 00:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Where is the problem? It's a simple music section. Music, which is strongly associated with the Goth subculture. --Breathtaker 00:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

If nothing else, it's redundant. In the case of regional variations, it appears to be trivial.Theplanetsaturn 00:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Which is already covered in the article. Prose is generally preferred to simple lists (see Wikipedia:Embedded list) anyway, and I see no point in repeating it. Furthermore, we already have a place for such lists - the "See also" section, which already lists gothic rock. I have no objection if we make a music subheading and put those other genres such as Punk rock and Dark wave. Do you object to removing Regional variations, by the way, or has that just got caught up in the reverting? Mdwh 00:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The music section is an important part of the article. Since the end of the 90s, the term "goth" has been misused by the music industry for every kind of metal, rock or techno music. new subcultures developed on the foundation of this term abuse. A seperate music section (in addition with references) helps to define the original goth subculture and their music. --Breathtaker 00:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, friend, that's it. My 3 cents: I am not usually much involved in such discussions, becuase I really don't have enough time (I enjoy a BIG amount of styles/genres of music), however with regard to gothic rock/dark-new-wave, I wrote the article Danse Society, so, please do not remove that section. Thank you.Doktor Who 00:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Can I ask your reasons for wanting to repeat the information already in the article? Mdwh 02:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

There is a link to the gothic rock article in the first sentence of the gothic subculture article. Yes, music is an important aspect of the subculture. So much so that it has it's own page. Clearly, that's where the bulk of this specific information belongs. Also, you've been re-adding the "regional variations" section as well. How is this section justified by your argument?Theplanetsaturn 00:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

1.) The first part of the article is an introduction, nothing more. There should be a short music section within the main section of the article.

2.) If you delete the link to the Toronto goth scene, no one can find the article of the Toronto goth scene. That's logical, hmm? --Breathtaker 01:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

1.)You're ignoring the point. There is a direct link within the first sentence to an article that is completely dedicated to the topic of gothic music. That is the appropriate section for this information

2.)And again, you're ignoring the point. What reason is there for a "regional variation" section if the only example is Toronto? It seems trivial. Incorporate it into the main body if it's relevant.Theplanetsaturn 01:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

An article introduction is a synopsis of the article contents, nothing more. And that is the point. --Breathtaker 01:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Ignoring the point again. The point is not the introduction. the point is to the link. There is an entire page dedicated to gothic music. that is the appropriate section for details on the information you wish to include. I suspect you understand this. And you still ignore the topic of the regional variations". Please address this.Theplanetsaturn 01:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

This is beside the point anyway - it's not only mentioned in the introduction, it's also mentioned multiple times in the article, and it's listed in See also. The issue isn't whether it should be mentioned, because clearly we all agree that music should be. The issue is whether to repeat the information in list form, that is likely just to attract an increasing number of genres (as it has in the past). Lastly, please read WP:3RR. Mdwh 02:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to start handing out 24-hour blocks for Wikipedia:Three-revert rule violations if people don't stop edit warring over inserting and removing that section. --Stormie 02:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

And now, to throw in my two cents. I entirely agree with User:Mdwh that a prose section is much more desirable than a "list" section. I simply do not think you can cover the shades of meaning sufficiently without prose. It needs to describe the fact that there is music that was associated with the birth of the subculture, music that sprang up within the subculture, music that did not develop within the subculture but has become associated with it via the club scene, and music that is reckoned to be wrongly associated with the subculture by outsiders.

Furthermore, as we've all seen, a list of styles has led to the most common edit to this article being someone either adding their favourite subgenre of music to the list, or removing genres that they personally dislike. I'd like to think that people would do that less often if they had to write a sentence of coherent prose around it.

I would actually say that the section "The goth scene" is a pretty solid starting point for a replacement for the list section. It's almost entirely about music anyway. --Stormie 03:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

"I'm going to start handing out 24-hour blocks for Wikipedia:Three-revert rule violations if people don't stop edit warring over inserting and removing that section."

There's only ONE person here who has been in violation of this rule, and that's Breathtaker. Address those culpable and leave the rest out of it.Theplanetsaturn 04:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The Three-revert Rule rule is an admonition against edit-warring. It's not a license to edit-war as long as everybody on your side only reverts once or twice each. But relax, since blocking people will prevent them from contributing to this talk page too, I'll just protect the main article if edit-warring continues. --Stormie 04:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and if you investigate, you'll see that when it became apparent that Breathtaker would not relent in his reversions, everyone else (long before your general admonishment) ceased and continued with polite discussion on either this talk page or elsewhere. So please, address those responsible only.Theplanetsaturn 04:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Zazaban has been doing the exact same thing so it isn't just one person.Crescentia 16:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It's absurd to comapre Zazabans after the fact edit (you'll notice that his reversion was time stamped well after my comments anyway) with Breathtakers half a dozen.Theplanetsaturn 19:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Some thoughts on reordering the article

Currently, after our introductory section, we have "Origins and development," then our disputed "Associated music" section and "The goth scene" (primarily about music). Then we head off into "Historical and cultural influences", then back to "Ideology" and "Fashion".

I would propose that Music, Fashion and Ideology should be together, since they're what the subculture is "about", and that origins, development, history, cultural influence and the like should all be together, since they're "about the subculture". Perhaps like this:

1. Music
2. Fashion
3. Ideology
4. Origins and development
5. Historical and cultural influences
6. Controversy
7. Criticism

(followed by references/see also/links)

What does anyone else think? --Stormie 12:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I think, it looks like the German goth article. *rofl* But it's a good article structure. A main characteristic is, that the Goth subculture originally existed within the post-punk and dark wave movement. In many European countries, such as Germany, France, Italy etc., all the original Gothic bands, e.g. bauhaus, cure, siouxsie, sisters etc., were called "Dark Wave". There was no Goth with metal music and there was no Goth with Manson music. Metal, Manson and their fans are definitely no part of the goth subculture. The Goth subculture is associated with Gothic rock, Gothic rock is the life elixir of this culture. It's like the Metal culture. Without Metal music there would not be a Metal subculture. A Goth is listen to Gothic rock and a handful of other genres of the dark wave movement, such as ethereal music from the Projekt records label. Sure, besides this music he can listen to other genres, but Gothic rock and Dark Wave are the most important music movements in connection to a Goth. And on the foundations of this music, the Goth subculture developed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.32.134 (talk) 20:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I would propose somehow emphasizing Bauhaus. I'm an old-school goth. I just think that their influence was a lot more substantial than the others, considering (and I'm not even going to argue this) that the whole Goth movement is based on musical influence. You know it is--speaking directly to any old Goths out there. We have many influences, Baudelaire to Sarte, but it was always about music, and Bauhaus was that music. I'll bow out gracefully if you disagree, but be sure you know what you're talking about. I'm from the San Fancisco late 80s Goth scene. Berlin? Toronto?

A proposal for the revised music section.

Have both the original muisic (As we've always had,) Newer music, and music often mistaken for Goth, Including both Genres like Metal and Emo, and a few bands like Marilyn Manson and maybe The Misfits. Mention that some newer genres status as Goth is disputed by some. Also, perhaps a history section for the evolution of 'Goth' music. Zazaban 15:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

You stated in an edit change that the music section doesn't represent what music goths listen to. It shouldn't be about that because people who identify themselves as 'goth' can listen to anything. I listen to classical, hardcore punk, etc... but I wouldn't call that music 'goth' because it isn't. Rather, the music section should be about what music has ALWAYS been considered 'goth'. The recent 'evolution' of goth music is more about how the genre is being misrepresented by the mainstream press, and people believing them, than anything else.Crescentia 16:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I think this is covered well by "By the mid-1990s, styles of music that were heard in venues that goths attended ranged from gothic rock, death rock, industrial music, EBM, ambient, experimental, synthpop, shoegazing, punk rock, 1970s glam rock, indie rock, to 1980s dance music.", as well as the surrounding paragraphs. This gives a list of genres, and gives something more well-defined (i.e., what is played in venues) than simply "music that goths listen to".

Either way, that list we are edit-warring over needs to be integrated into the main text - and it's not clear what in that list isn't already covered by the main text already? (Apart from possibly the references.) Or is it that Breathtaker prefers it in list form?

I haven't seen anyone address the criticisms we've raised in talk - as far as I can tell, I've only seen people argue that we need to cover goth music, but that's not in dispute - we already do cover goth music in the article. Mdwh 22:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The ..styles of music that were heard in venues that goths attended.. sentence is key, imho, since this article is about the goth subculture, not about gothic music. I would argue that "music associated with the goth subculture" is: styles of music played in clubs and gigs organized by and targetted towards people within the subculture.

I'm not sure how one goes about finding reliable sources for what music has been played in goth clubs over the years, sadly. My personal experience (which of course is not good enough for a Wikipedia article reference) is that most of those styles indeed have been played in goth clubs, and frequently (not sure about "1970s glam rock" though!). Marilyn Manson, much as I'm not a fan, is certainly an artist who I've often heard getting played at goth clubs. --Stormie 04:00, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

What it's about is what influences Goth, Mainly Post-punk and Gothic Rock at the beggining, then Industrial and EBM more recently. Zazaban 05:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

EBM is a totally different thing and more related to the rave movement than to gothic rock.Crescentia 18:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Whatever, could you please stop that stupid edit war? --Buxbaum666 08:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

This is a fallacy. Gothic clubs aren't really existent. The most events are Independent music events. Different genres are played and different subcultures are a part of the club scene. Beside the Goth subculture there is a Rivethead culture and a Cyber culture. In the 1980s and early 1990s different subcultures, such as Punks (Pistols, Ramones), EBM-heads (Nitzer 242), Crossover-heads (Ministry, NIN), and New Wavers (Depeche Mode, Anne Clark), were a part of the club culture. Pure gothic events are rare. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.50.138 (talk) 12:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I find it debatable whether they're all different subcultures, they all intermingle and are called and often self-referred to as 'Goth.' I personally find that most changes on this page seems to be based on nostalgia and not current information. Zazaban 15:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Try telling a rivethead that they are part of the gothic subculture. I don't think they would like that very much.Crescentia 15:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... Met some that think that. Zazaban 19:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Try telling a goth that they're not a goth, but a rivethead, because they listen to NIN ;)

Try telling a goth that they are a goth, and there's a fair chance that they'll say, no, they're not, they're dark alternative, or whatever :-) The scene is diverse and not well defined. Roy Badami 22:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of the problem is that few clubs that play these different genres actually advertise themselves as a "goth club". E.g., Slimelight advertises itself as "alternative club dealing in industrial, power-noise, cyber-synth, ebm, cyber-goth, darkwave, trad + modern goth, plus crossover and related alternative sounds." They still seem to be full of goths, and are often known as "goth clubs", but the problem is that we really need to go by verifiable references.

Even so, I'd say this situation supports the point being made - the subculture includes clubs which play a range of different styles, and not just clubs that play purely goth rock. It's not clear to me how we can view goth, rivethead and EBM as entirely separate, when there are many clubs that play the full range of these genres (although yes, I agree we shouldn't go labelling these other genres as "goth" or "goth music" - which is one of the reasons I oppose a "goth music" section). Mdwh 21:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

If the term "goth" has another meaning today and the Goth subculture article includes this new pseudo-goth meaning, i'll create a new big fat Dark Wave article including a section for the old Goth subculture. That's a promise! This new "pseudo-goth subculture" has nothing to do with the original Goth and Dark Wave movement! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.50.138 (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Goths still listen to Dark Wave, but also Industrial. Wikipedia isn't going to submit to POV, and thus we should potray Goth as it is now, not as it was 25 years ago. Zazaban 23:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Gothic is a subculture within the post-punk and dark-wave movement, nothing more. And this also includes parts of the post-industrial movement (a handful of goths listen to dark ambient or neofolk music). Metalheads, Technoheads and Rivetheads are not a part of the Goth subculture. They are foreign subcultures. A Goth is mainly listen to Gothic rock and Darkwave music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.43.163 (talk) 11:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Btw: Mick Mercer also thinks the same, the goth movement is connected with gothic music: Mick Mercer, author, noted music journalist, and world's leading historian of Goth music[14][15][16] stated, of Kimveer Gill, that he was "not a Goth. Never a Goth. The bands he listed as his chosen form of ear-bashing were relentlessly Metal and standard Grunge, Rock and Goth Metal, with some Industrial presence.", "Kimveer Gill listened to metal", "He had nothing whatsoever to do with Goth" and further commented "I realise that like many Neos this idiot may even have believed he somehow was a Goth, because they're only really noted for spectacularly missing the point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.43.163 (talk) 11:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I never brought up Metal. Zazaban 23:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Lots of the goths I hang out with listen to EBM. I'd make the distinction between trad goth (traditional goth music and dress) and bleep (synth-based music such as EBM or futurepop) and the associated cybergoth attire, but I would regard both as part of the goth scene. But YMMV depending on which part of the world you're in. (I'm in the UK.) Goth has been around long enough you can't expect it to be homogenous. Roy Badami 22:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, sorry, should have said explicitly: surely the very existence of the term trad goth (which is widely used at least here in the UK) admits the existence of other, non-traditional forms of goth? Roy Badami 22:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

There are no Cybergoths. The term is totally absurd.

• These people don't listen to Gothic music
• These people don't look like Goths
• These people don't represent any Goth ideology
• These people don't show any interest in old buildings, cemeteries, gothic novels etc.

In Germany, these people came from the Techno and Rave subculture. They're absolutely untypical for Goth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.56.75 (talk) 23:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

That is quite the generalization there. Somewhat POV as well. Not that I don't agree with you somewhat, it is POV. Actually there are Cybergoths, they seem to listen to both Goth music and Techno music, and dress in a fusion style. Zazaban 23:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Here is my theory about that. When the rave culture took off here in the states a lot of people who thought that the gothic subculture was dying buggered off to go to raves. When THAT scene died off they returned to the gothic subculture and brought rave type music with them. I agree that those type of people really don't have anything to do with the gothic subculture. From the way they dress to the music they listen to, to their very interests, they really don't have anything in common with trad goths.Crescentia 23:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds about right. But it would be POV to not include them. Zazaban 23:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

And yet, while cybergoths might (in your opinion) not be regarded as part of the goth scene in Germany, looking at last year's band listings for the Wave-Gotik-Treffen goth festival in Leipzig I immediately see that Front 242 (industrial) and Rotersand (aggrotech? I'm not very good at genres) were playing there. Roy Badami 09:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Forget the Wave-Gothic-Treffen. Nowadays, this meeting has nothing to do with Wave or Goth. The Original WGT has died at the end of the 1990s. I'm from Germany and the Cyber people are definitely no part of the Goth subculture. People of other countries think that Germany has the biggest Goth meeting. But that was a long time ago. The WGT is dead. Only the name stayed the same. In the last years, we used other events, such as Under Cover of Darkness Festival, Batcafe Festival or Gothic Pogo Festival. In the United States there are similar events (Drop Dead Festival etc.) --87.122.55.68 12:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I certainly know British goths who go to WGT but I'll accept for the purposes of the present argument that German goths may not regard it as representative of the German goth scene. But I have a question for you: do german "cyber people" refer to themselves as goths or regard themselves as part of the goth scene?

In any case, we all have to be careful not to be too regionally specific, here. It is perfectly possible that in some countries or regions cyber tends to be regarded as part of goth and in other areas its regarded as separate Roy Badami 13:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

They don't really think about the structure of the Goth subculture. They're party people, they're no "thinkers". On a German Gothic board you can read that Goths dislike Cybers and Cybers dislike Goths ([1]). Cybers hate Goth. They think that Goth is boring, outdated and ultra-weepy. Cyber people are looking for fun, nothing more. It's an outgrowth of the Rave culture, inspired through techno- and trance-inspired genres such as Futurepop, Hellektro etc.. They're more Rave- and Rivetheads than Goths. Only a few Cybers do refer to themselves as "Cybergoths". But the large part doesn't use any term. They don't care about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.55.68 (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Cyber people listen to Aggrotech, Futurepop, Power Noise and other crap... they don't listen to Gothic rock... they're no Goths and they're absolutely irrelevant for the Goth subculture article.

I'm sure the organisers of Infest would wish they had been informed that these entire genres of music are 'crap' - it would have saved them the trouble of having to book any bands :-) Roy Badami 09:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Eurocentricity

Regarding the accusations of eurocentricity, have a look at the Japanese-inspired goth fashions, inspired in turn by Japanese horror.... which is in turn itself inspired by the West... dammit. Corpman 12:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure that "Japanese-inspired goth fashions" are "inspired by Japanese horror." Most seem to be inspired by Japanese street fashion or traditional culture (in other words, it's either gothified kimonos or elegant gothic lolita). And most gothic lolitas in Japan do not listen to music that has much to do with the goth scene (except that it's visual kei and some goths from other countries have become interested in visual kei bands primarily through their images)... the actual Japanese goth scene, not synonymous with gothic lolita fashion, is very small and supposedly not popular. 24.223.151.194 (talk) 09:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

...But I would certainly not attempt to argue that EGL fashion is "not influenced by European culture" -- of course it is. I just don't think it or the "goth kimono" look are particularly influenced by J-horror. & I have a lot of books on both topics (Japanese street fashion and goth) and have never previously seen this connection made. That's what I was just trying to say! :) 24.223.151.194 (talk) 10:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Violence is common or Uncommon

Can we possibly refine the paragraph that says that violence done to goths is uncommon? Personally, all of the goths I know (myself included) have to avoid violence more in one month than most people do in a year.. - 99.250.73.234 (talk) 04:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what paragraph you're talking about, I don't see anything in the article that says "violence done to goths is uncommon"? --Stormie (talk) 10:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The word "sometimes" and the word "extreme" as in "Goths, like any other alternative sub-culture sometimes suffer intimidation, humiliation, and, in extreme cases, physical violence for their involvement with the subculture." could be interpreted to imply that the abuse and violence is uncommon compared to some norm. But this is reading something which isn't actually in the words. I think the paragraph isn't bad. I think merely mentioning the abuse seems to suggest that abuse is not unusual. Could someone propose an alternative that they think would be more clear?TheDarknessVisible (talk) 21:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Music

A goth is defined by music, clothes and ideology (or different ideologies). A Goth, which don't listen to Goth music and related genres, is no Goth. And this is a fact. Goth is mainly defined by the music. And the Goth subculture is a part of the post punk and dark wave movement. All the other is irrelevant.

Btw: a main problem seems to be that the english-language wikipedia doesn't distinguishs between the Gothic scene (Gothic rock scene) and the Dark Culture (there are also different dark subcultures besides the Goth culture, such as Rivetheads and others). In Germany, we call it Schwarze Szene, in Portugal and Spain it's called Cultura Dark or Cultura Obscura - and the Goth subculture is only a part of this big dark culture. Especially in Europe, there is also a Goth metal scene and a Neofolk/Industrial scene. They all are members of the Dark Culture, but they're no Goths, because Goth is a Post punk movement, not an Industrial or Metal movement. They are different cultures, but they use all the same music clubs (partly with Punks and Psychobillies). --87.122.13.226 07:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but your definition of what constitutes a goth is not notable or substantial. The goth subculture encompasses more than just music (literature, film, clothes, ect...) and an adherence to one particular taste or genre in music does not seem to be required in the definition. A consensus of the type you are suggesting requires a statistical evidence. Bare minimum, your source should be easily searchable and the relevant "proof" of your position available for examination. If you want to argue this point, you could start by providing a more accessible source.Theplanetsaturn 07:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Just a suggestion, you might like to register a username on Wikipedia. I'm assuming you're the same person who posted previously on this page from 87.122.* IP addresses? Would make conversation easier if you posted under a handle rather than from various IP addresses.

Anyway, in Australia at least, there is indeed no word or name for the broader "dark culture", but it is certainly understood that there is gothic rock, and that then there is the gothic subculture (which includes many people who are into the gothic fashion and aesthetic but not necessarily gothic rock, many of them like the more modern dark electro styles), and then there are people into other dark styles such as industrial and gothic metal who do not self-identify as "goths". I know there have always been people who feel, like you, that if you don't listen to gothic rock you're not a goth, and if you dress like a goth despite that, you're a poseur. Sorry, the scene has always been music + fashion + other aesthetics, and the music has always been changing, even in the early days - just look at the difference between the early Batcave bands and the "drum machine goth rock" of the Sisters of Mercy et al. --Stormie 09:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Dark electros are no Goths.

But yes, a Goth is defined by music, fashion and maybe an ideology. All three characteristics define the Goth movement. Without this there is no Goth subculture. Only the fashion is not a Goth characteristic, because the members of the Visual Kei movement use the same clothes. The same with the attitude or the interests. There are also Black metal and Doom metal scenes. There is a number of different subcultures with the same interests in dark themes. Important is the mixture between all these elements: music (Gothic rock) fashion (dark punky, victorian etc.) and an ideology/attitude (melancholic, spooky, whatever...). Without this, there is no Goth subculture.

And if a dark electro can be a goth, why not also a technohead? or a marilyn manson kiddie? a metalhead or hippie? In your opinion Goths can listen to every kind of music. OK. But important is only the music which a Goth lives so passionately for. And this is and was Gothic rock. In your opinion every kid in black clothes can be a Goth. And this is crap. The Goth movement was mainly a music culture, defined by Gothic rock. You cannot misuse terms which stood for a complete other movement. The Goth scene was a Goth rock scene.

just look at the difference between the early Batcave bands and the "drum machine goth rock" of the Sisters of Mercy. Bullshit. The guitars were the same. Moody slide, dark bass guitars and a post-punk and psychedelic sound. This is Goth rock, nothing more. Alien Sex Fiend was also a Batcave group and they used electronic elements and rhythms. All these bands had definitely a Punk feeling! Because Goth was a post punk movement, not a dark electro, metal, futurepop or techno movement. Goth was born in the cradle of the post punk/new wave era. It was a movement simliar to the New Romantic scene. And if the Goth rock or Darkwave music is dead, the Goth subculture will die. Take a look to Germany. There is the real future. And the future is mixture between metalheads, cyber people, emos and visual keis. In Germany, the Goth subculture dies out. It's only a remnant, which survived in a handful of clubs. --87.122.37.126 17:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

It's still just your POV. Reliable source please?Theplanetsaturn 20:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

This is a fact, you idiot! The name of the Gothic subculture came from the music genre! --87.122.27.101 22:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not getting the feeling that anything productive is going to come of this discussion. --Stormie 22:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

And i think the english Wikipedia is full of stupid assholes. POV against POV. --87.122.27.101 23:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course the subculture emerged from the music genre. And now that subculture encompasses more than just music. Really, this isn't a difficult concept. You can continue to lob insults or throw tantrums. But unless you can provide a source, the definitive statement of what music goths prefer remains a matter of your POV. And your POV alone is not relevant. Sorry.Theplanetsaturn 23:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I added sources. And you deleted these sources! The movement is definitely a post punk movement! The main music are post punk genres and dark wave! I had written specially! Not only or exclusive! Gothic music encompasses a number of different styles. This sentence is definitely POV. The only known Gothic genre which is evidenced by scientific treatises and books, is Gothic rock!. --87.122.27.101 23:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

At this point, I have to ask. Is English a secondary language for you? Your sentence structure in your reversion did not make a tremendous amount of sense and I'm beginning to wonder if difficulty with the language is responsible for your repeated reversions and hostility. Regardless, your sources are non-English and the relevant text within them impossible to discern. If a more reliable source can be provided I will happily concede the point. Furthermore, until you can settle on one ID and not use it to hurl childish insults, I really don't see the point in continuing this conversation.Theplanetsaturn 00:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggested compromise:

"The goth subculture has associated tastes in music, aesthetics, and fashion, whether or not all individuals who share those tastes are in fact members of the goth subculture. Members of the goth subculture might embrace music from many different genres, but are most commonly associated with music that can be described as lugubrious, with a mystical sound and outlook. Styles of dress within the subculture range from death rock, punk, androgynous, medieval, some Renaissance and Victorian style clothes, or combinations of the above, most often with black attire, makeup and hair."Theplanetsaturn 04:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I like the way that makes it clear that many different genres are embraced within the subculture, as opposed to the current wording which muddies the differences between goth music and the goth subculture by saying "Gothic music encompasses a number of different styles" (emphasis mine).

But, while I think the article covers the music situation quite well, maybe we do need to summarize a bit more of that into a sentence for the lead section. Perhaps something along the lines of the scene originally forming around post-punk/deathrock/gothic rock bands, but expanding over the years to embrace many other styles of dark music?

Lead sections are always the hardest thing to get right. Getting information into an article is easy compared to condensing it down into a few well-written sentences that give an accurate overview. --Stormie 04:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggested compromise:

Originally forming around post-punk/deathrock/gothic rock bands, the goth subculture has associated tastes in literature, film, and fashion. While members of the goth subculture might embrace music from many different genres, they are most commonly associated with music that can be described as lugubrious, with a mystical sound and outlook. Styles of dress within the subculture range from death rock, punk, androgynous, medieval, some Renaissance and Victorian style clothes, or combinations of the above, most often with black attire, makeup and hair.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

What if we make a separate article called "gothrock subculture" about the subculture which was based on goth rock. I dont know if you want to call it "goth", or you want to call it "dark romantic post-punk and gothic literature Rob Smith idolatry subculture" by whatever name you call it there is a subculture, or was a subculture based on gothrock, and there is no reliable source which says the subculture based on Marilyn Manson, or the subculture based on "Dark Techno/EBM/RAVE" is the same subculture (in fact, by definition it can't be unless the same human beings become raver mansonites). There are merely numerous unreliable sources ASSUMING rave and heavy metal to be gothrock based on the unsupported assumption that people who occasionally share the same brand of boots are part of the same subculture. If they merely happen to share a label and nothing more then that, it calls for a disambiguation page rather than assuming they are the same group of human beings. The only reason this argument ever happens is because certain people have a FETISH for the word "Goth". It can be documented that fans of gothrock commonly call themself "goth" and call gothrock music "goth", but that the word "goth" has been used to refer to other things in mainstream society. Certain editors are just trying to write an article about the gothrock subculture as it is, and leave aside all the other subcultures and things which have nothing to do with it. gothrock subculture should be documented somewhere (Even if it is now dead.. it once had a notable influence on contemporary society), it should not perpetually confabulated with unrelated things that someone out there calls "goth". This article and gothrock used to be the same article, and this article was specifically about the scene and the subculture which revolved around the gothrock music genre, its fans, performers, and their distinctive subcultural behaviors. But once gothrock was removed from this article it became an article WITH NO DEFINED SCOPE. Rather than being about the gothrock subculture, it became about gothrock mixed together with ALL subcultures anywhere on earth that anyone whatsoever has EVER labeled "goth". The article is not neutral in that it advances the unsupported idea that these separate subcultures are a single subculture. TheDarknessVisible (talk) 06:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think anyone is trying to say rave, Marilyn Manson and heavy metal are goth. But at the same time, it's not clear to me at all that the goth subculture is exclusively gothic rock. Can you link a version in the article history that you are referring to? Mdwh (talk) 19:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

You're really funny. Don't you know the both big waves of the Goth subbculture since the 80s? The first wave on the foundations of Gothic rock had begun in the early 80s in the UK and on the European continent (the first Goths in Germany developed about 1982 in Berlin). This first Goth movement existed until the middle and the end of the 80s, because the first wave of Gothic rock has died in 1983/84/85. In the late 80s/at the beginning of the 90s there came a second wave of Gothic rock with bands such as Love Like Blood, Rosetta Stone, Vendemmian, Mephisto Walz etc. All these bands were inspired by the music of Bauhaus, Joy Division, Siouxsie and Sisters. Especially in Germany, the Goth movement experienced a fresh impetus. And this second Gothic movement exist until the middle and the end of the 90s, because the 90s Gothic rock has died at the middle of the 90s. Both were definitely Gothic rock subcultures. At the beginning of the new millennium, a new wave of Gothic rock developed with bands such as Cinema Strange, Scarlet's Remains, Zadera, Bloody Dead And Sexy and many others. On the foundations of these new wave of Gothic rock, a third Gothic movement developed. This third Gothic subculture is small, but alive since a few years. They're the heirs of the first and the second Gothic subculture. It'a clear line from the beginning of the 80s until today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.10.165 (talk) 16:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I know that, and don't disagree. I still don't see anyone trying to claim that the goth scene is about Marilyn Manson or rave - those terms aren't even in the article. We don't mention metal either - except to say that they're not the same. You (assuming you are the same person as the earlier anon edit) acknowledge that there's "Goth music and related genres", and it's these that are covered in the article.

Which part of the article is talking about something that isn't part of the "gothrock subculture"? Mdwh (talk) 00:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm too young to have personal experience of the first wave of gothic rock, but I remember the second wave. In the early 90's, for sure bands like Rosetta Stone, Nosferatu, Star Industry, Merry Thoughts, Corpus Delicti, etc. were making waves. But within the subculture, those bands always rubbed shoulders with Ministry, KMFDM, Nine Inch Nails, Young Gods, etc. The clubs always played old goth, new goth, industrial rock, new wave, punk, etc., and the subculure was made up of people who liked some or all of these styles. And there's a clear line from that time to the black-wearing VNV Nation, Apoptygma Berzerk, Wolfsheim, etc. loving crowd of today - the clubs play a mix of that electro stuff with goth rock, industrial, retro, etc., and many of the club organizers and DJs are the same people who were playing the second wave goth rock ten years earlier. --Stormie (talk) 06:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Is there not a Rivethead or Electro scene in Australia? In the 90s, there were a handful of groups such as Snog, Black Lung and Severed Heads. In Germany, the Goth rock subculture hates VNV Nation, APB and other groups, because they're more Trance and Dance than Wave or Goth. Maybe in Germany, the Dark Scene is too big and tattered. There is a monstrous gap between the old movement and the new movement(s). In German clubs, the DJs play Metal, J-Rock, Hellektro, Futurepop etc. The old groups such as The Cure, Joy Division, The Garden of Delight and others are long forgotten. And this is why we don't call these club people as "Goths". They have nothing to do with Goth. Especially these Cyber people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.38.104 (talk) 11:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

It sounds like POV.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

What in your opinion is the Goth subculture? I wish, Mick Mercer would come and create a new article... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.47.120 (talk) 00:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Dear ThePlanetSaturn - Pete Scathe, a reliable source already cited in the article claims that goth subculture is about goth rock. What reliable sources claim otherwise? The only POV are people coming along with supposed a priori knowledge that no one in the world is a reliable source on what goth is. The rational solution is to have a disambiguation page, specifically have an article about gothrock subculture on the one hand and Goth(undefinable) subculture on the other. The undefinable version of goth can refer back to the gothrock subculture if there is any evidence it evolved from gothrock subculture. This avoids the problem with conflating everything under the sun that anyone in the world has labeled goth. It would remain for anyone wanting to introduce an edit to demonstrate that the material in question was referring to goth rock subculture and not some other kind of goth subculture such as the German Dark Scene. And nothing that 87.122.10.165 said is POV. He may have not cited sources but that doesn't make it POV unless you accusing him of saying something which isn't objectively true. TheDarknessVisible (talk) 23:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I never said anything at all to user 87.122.10.165 in my above comment. I was talking to you. As for Pete Scathe holding an opinion that is definitive, you and I have already had this particular discussion. As for creating two seperate pages, I don't really see the point. We already have a gothic rock page that can easily include information about the subculture and it's history as it specifically relates to music. This article should cover aspects of the goth subculture in general, including music, film, literature and fashions. If you want to argue that a particular element cited as belonging to the goth subculture actually has its roots somewhere else, you can make that claim on an individual basis here on the talk page.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 00:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes I know we had this discussion before. And you never did explain how exactly Pete Scathe is not a reliable source of information except I believe you said that no one can know for sure that every goth in the world listens to goth rock. His website is cited by published books. In fact his webpage is probably the MOST cited page on what goth is of any website whatsoever. I dropped the issue because I am too busy to make that issue a personal crusade of mine and you know way more about wikipedia than I do.TheDarknessVisible (talk) 22:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall saying that Scathe was not a reliable source of information. If he reports on an event he witnessed, that would be something that could be cited as fact. However, when he defines Goth subculture definitivly, it must be framed as his opinion, because that is what it is (though it is implicit that his is an informed opinion or it would have no place on a Wikipedia page at all). Something like a subculture cannot be defined definitivly, particularly as the term takes new meaning as it is applied in different ways by new generations, not to mention infinite regional variations.

So let's say that Joe Goth was a major player on the first wave of Goth subculture. And he comes out and says that anyone who didn't have black hair wasn't a true goth. Is he right? One could say he's a respected authority witin the community, sure. But does he actually have the power to definitivly define what does and does not constitute Goth subculture? He's not the Goth king after all. A subculture is simply an idea. One whose rules and guidelines shift dependent upon the needs and perceptions of those particpating from within.

So, we can say that "Joe Goth (notable such and such of the Goth community) is of the opinion that all Goths have black hair." The information is included and framed in a manner that allows the reader to look at the source and draw their own conclusion. And if the credentials of the source are sound, the source's opinion will carry more weight. However, we can't say: "All Goths have black hair." And we really can't say: "All Goths have black hair, and those that don't have black hair aren't Goth's."Theplanetsaturn (talk) 02:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

So which bit of the article is problematic here, and contradictory to what Scathe says? (I'm not saying the article is perfect as it stands, but we should be clear which part of the article is under discussion, before we get sucked into an endless WiG debate...) Mdwh (talk) 00:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I think the argument is whether or not it is POV to say goth is a music subculture about a specific genre of music called gothrock (also known as "goth"). I thought the easiest solution is to simply split the article into 2 articles. 1 for gothrock subculture and 1 for everything unrelated to the first but still gets labeled goth by somebody. There is no information saying that the people who composed the population of the gothrock subculture are the same individuals as the people who compose the EBM, futurepop, heavy metal and industrial subcultures and therefore they are not the same subculture. And documenting them in the same article is confusing at best and leads to strange circular definitions of goth subculture, and utterly weird sections on subcultural boundaries, that are the source of these endless debates. Personal Research Warning: in my scene no one in the scene calls people who listen to 0 gothrock a goth. It's understood, at the very least you must like some goth rock or else you aren't a goth, and the measure of "how goth" you are is nothing else but "how much do you like and know about gothrock". It is a virtual 1 to 1 correlation. You can wear blue jeans and a jean jacket, but if you know everything about gothrock, people will call you goth. But that is inside the scene... total POV. however this is a discussion page, not an actual article, so I can say it.TheDarknessVisible (talk) 22:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I think splitting the article would just get us into a POV nightmare, in trying to decide what goes under "gothic rock subculture" and what goes under "goth subculture that isn't part of the gothic rock subculture" (or whatever it would be called). Is the article suggestion that people who listen to 0 goth rock can still be goths? (I agree we shouldn't say that, but I'm not sure where we do say it, or where anyone is claiming we should?)

As for different subcultures, we cover this in "Current subcultural boundaries"; it refers to "New subcultures emerged, or became more popular, some of them being conflated with the goth subculture by the general public and the popular media." So it's implied they are different. And as I said, the article only mentions metal to explicitly say it is different, so I still don't see where the article is wrong. I don't think we can say things about them not including the "same individuals" without sources (obviously it won't be entirely the same - OTOH, I'm sure there will exist people in more than one subculture). Mdwh (talk) 23:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

"I thought the easiest solution is to simply split the article into 2 articles. 1 for gothrock subculture and 1 for everything unrelated to the first but still gets labeled goth by somebody" - Gothic rock and Goth subculture? --Stormie (talk) 00:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, that's absolutely absurd. This article should describe the original Goth subculture, because Gothic rockers were called Goths since the early days of the Batcave club. A Future Poppper is a Future Popper and he is defined by Futurepop. Mostly the fashion of a Futurepop fan is not Goth fashion, but Techno and Alternative fashion. I never saw a Futurepopper in Victorian fashion or punk clothes. A Rivethead is a Rivethead with a simple Skinny Puppy/Mentallo & The Fixer military outfit. And a Cyber is a Cyber, with a strong Techno/Rave influence. Absolutely different subcultures. And this is also what Mick Mercer says. Mercer defines a Goth by Goth music (see also the Kimveer Gill section). Goths listen mainly to Gothic rock and related genres. All the other is irrelevant. New subcultures should use new terms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.37.113 (talk) 10:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

So getting back to the point that was being edit-warred over: "Goths prefer to a number of different music genres" isn't quite so bad; I'm not sure it's POV (I mean, surely this is true?) but it's also rather vague (sure, it might be true that some goths also listen to classical music for example, but it's not clear that's a relevant or important point for the lead).

"Gothic music encompasses a number of different styles." has the problem of also being rather vague imo - what do we mean by "Gothic music"? It might be more specific to say something like "The subculture encompasses..." (this is what the article is about, after all)? Later on, we elaborate with "styles of music that were heard in venues that goths attended", so perhaps we could use something like that?

Also see discussion under Talk:Goth subculture#A proposal for the revised music section. - the key point here is music associated with the goth subculture, which should probably be defined as something like styles of music played in clubs and gigs organized by and targetted towards people within the subculture (as Stormie puts it). Mdwh (talk) 15:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I feel like I have to comment that Goth is not about music. It is an aesthetic and a philosophy. It can be applied to anything: art forms to religion to fashion. I could write this sentence in Goth style, if I so chose. BTW, are any of you actually Goth? Marcuspierce (talk) 23:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Sophie Lancaster

The Sophie Lancaster article has been listed as not meeting notability guidelines. As the deletion of that article would have an effect on parts of this article more input on this question would be welcome at Talk:Sophie_Lancaster. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Machenphile (talk • contribs) 15:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Fix some grammar, please

Hey, apparently there's an edit war or something, because the article is locked to changes. Early in the article, a few styles of dress are listed, and the sentence is phrased, "from a,b,c..." but there's never a "to D." Clearly the "styles ranging from" phrasing should be changed if there's never anything that the styles range to, in the sentence... you know? It would be cool if someone remembered to fix that when the page is unlocked again. 24.223.151.194 (talk) 10:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Gothic Lolita

I don't know if the Gothic Lolita fashion that exists in (mostly) Japan should be mentioned in this article, since I'm no Goth expert, and Goth culture is mostly western. Just thought I would mention it.Lijakaca (talk) 18:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Has nothing to do with the goth subculture. It's a Japanese fashion trend and that's it.. Crescentia (talk) 05:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Might be worth a mention in Gothic fashion (currently it's just on the "See also" list for that article), since it's an adoption of elements of gothic fashion by quite a different subculture, isn't it? --Stormie (talk) 06:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

No, it isn't. The shared elements are just coincidence, and one just tend to get mislead by the "Gothic" tag. No relation at all. Trencacloscas (talk) 21:13, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, if the Gothic Lolita article is accurate the style may well have predated western gothic fashion anyway. --Stormie (talk) 02:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

All the "gothic lolita's" I ever met, are into goth rock. so.... while the origin of gothic lolita is outside of goth (albeit influenced by goth)... I'm not so convinced that there isn't an influence back onto goth subculture again. Then again.. anecdotal information is meaningless... since .. there is probably a bias on my part as far as the types of people I meet. goths can dress like anything at all... TheDarknessVisible (talk) 23:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

"All the "gothic lolita's" I ever met, are into goth rock.", that just your point of view (please see WP:POV), as I said below, Gothic was actually a style of building, before anyone thought about bringing music into it!  Doktor  Wilhelm  23:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Two entire paragraphs on Sleepy Hollow?

Maybe it's because I'm not a goth, but it seems to me that whoever wrote the "20th century influences" section wandered kind of off-topic for a spell. Maybe consider editing that section or deleting the two consecutive paragraphs that fail mention goth once, but proceed to ramble about random movies? Kajmal (talk) 13:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

why the missconception that goth subculture started in the eighties? goth rock did, but some early examples of gothic music include faust, le symphonie fantastique, and le danse macabre, the goth subculture is at least several hundred years old, and the majority of gothic imagry and art is from the fourtienth centuary. and im pretty sure necromancers and "goths" are as old as civilisation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.240.229.66 (talk) 19:32, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

another example of why this article should be called the "gothic rock subculture". The term "goth" means "gothic" and yet while many things may be "gothic" they are not necessarily related to one another in a subcultural way. A particular kind of post-punk rock music happened to be gothic, and fans of that music happened to take the aesthetic association to the point of making a spectacle of themselves. then we don't need to worry about whether necromancers should be part of this article. no matter how awesome being a necromancer is... it isn't the same subculture.TheDarknessVisible (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Just a random comment: "Gothic" is a style of building! And not all people into the 'Goth Subculture' listen to Rock music!  Doktor  Wilhelm  23:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Scott Dyleski.png

Image:Scott Dyleski.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The image holocaust continues. At this rate, Wikipedia will be image free by the end of the year. Any new images will be instantly deleted over some obscure interpretation of an arcane rule. Zazaban (talk) 05:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

If an image is a valid example of fair use, it makes more sense to just fix it up rather than get aggreived over an "image holocaust". I have provided a fair use rationale on Image:Scott Dyleski.png. --Stormie (talk) 23:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

"Racism" in the article

I was just reading the start of this article (I guess this topics is linked to it so I don't have to link the article) and I got really dissapointed when I read this: "Also a common trait within goth subculture is crying themselves to sleep every night. This can be problematic as their makeup can get rather smeary at this time, leading to an even higher suicide rate amongst these poor, misguided individuals"

What the hell is that? It looks like some 14 year old boy wrote that because he dislike goths. It is in no way true and may be more associated with the sub-genre "emo". I don't cry myself to sleep, I don't wear makeup, but that bit of text still insulted me.

So please either remove it or explain why that crap is in there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.160.106.173 (talk) 11:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes Wikipedia articles get vandalised - I'd already removed that text when you wrote this, I don't know if somehow you saw a cached older version. It's gone now though. Mdwh (talk) 12:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

That make me crack up. I am not unusually unhappy, nor are any of the various goths I know. XD Zazaban (talk) 14:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

thats not racism in any way. Is any part of it true? Rds865 (talk) 21:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Strange sentence in the second paragraph

When I read the second paragraph, I saw: "Common to all is a tendency towards a lugubrious, mystical sound and outlook. Also a common trait within goth subculture is crying themselves to sleep every night. This can be problematic as their makeup can get rather smeary at this time, leading to an even higher suicide rate amongst these poor, misguided individuals. Styles of dress within the subculture range from death rock, punk, androgynous, medieval, some Renaissance and Victorian style clothes, or combinations of the above, most often with black attire, makeup and hair." However, when I tried to edit it, I saw: "Common to all is a tendency towards a lugubrious, mystical sound and outlook. Styles of dress within the subculture range from death rock, punk, androgynous, medieval, some Renaissance and Victorian style clothes, or combinations of the above, most often with black attire, makeup and hair." Is this vandalism? It seems to be a fairly biased comment with no actual new information. 131.111.8.102 (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is vandalism that was removed within minutes of being added, so it's a little odd that you're posting about it nearly a day later. --Stormie (talk) 21:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Gary Numan is not a founding gothic rock musician....so stop putting him in the article...

When has he been considered an originator of gothic rock? New wave? Yes. Synthpop? Yes. Electronic? Yes. Goth? No. Just because the guy influenced some darkwave/synthpop bands doesn't mean the guy has ever been goth. There is a difference bewteen New Wave and early deathrock/gothic rock. I could go on but you get the point.Crescentia (talk) 01:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Gothic metal

I am inviting editors from this article, the gothic rock article and the gothic metal article to engage is discussion on this. It was brought up a year ago whether gothic metal was part of the goth subculture or not and there was no consensus. There was a minor dispute on Template:Goth subculture whether to add it Gothic metal to the template and I need a consensus here so that the correct action can be performed. As I started this discussion, I am going to remain neutral on the decision made here, and I will not be actively participating on one side in particular (in general I will make a few comments, but I am not going to !vote). Please be aware though that the most credible arguments are given when reliable sources are given to back up their view. Your point of view isn't discouraged here, but please keep your personal beliefs and stance focused and again, provide credible sources if they are available to you. Thanks, — Κaiba 02:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

(Sorry for my english, I'm not a native speaker)

I'm into gothic metal (and I'm one of the moderators of gothicmetal.net).Frankely speaking even though I like this music, I'm not sure we can consider goth metal as a part of gothic subculture. I would say Gothic metal doesn't directly belong to the core of this subculture, but rather lies in the periphery of it. Well, I mean, if we only call "gothic" the original movement(of late 70s and 80s), then it is clear gothic metal doesn't belong to this original movement.

However if we consider that the original gothic metal bands took influences from original goth music, then maybe such bands can be considered as part of the gothic movement in a large sense. Actually the issue then raises the question: does taking influences from original goth music is sufficient to consider it as a real actor of gothic movement. I guess die hard fans of goth culture would say no. But I guess Goth metal saves many aspects of gothic culture though, even though their sound is quite distant from original goth music. For example Gothic metal saves the imagery and references to nineteenth century Gothic literature as well as horror movies. And original gothic metal displays clears references to gothic music.

But well, there's also a large confusion as to what gothic metal is (most particularly in the metal community). Hence a frequent misuse of the terms "gothic metal" and "gothic" by metalheads and people in general.

Originally in the 90s, gothic metal was associated with doom metal bands taking influences from Goth music. Gothic metal meant taking influences from Gothic music including goth rock and most particularly ethereal darkwave ("ethereal goth"/ "ethereal wave" as you want). Hence the fact such bands sometimes include ethereal female vocalists.

But here's the source of the confusion: many people then started to believe that to be goth you need a chick. and in this conception any female fronted metal is gothmetal, hence the amalgam female=goth...So the notion of gothic has been blurred in the metal world. Today many female fronted metal bands are called goth when they don't have any specific connection with original gothic music. These bands were seduced by the example of the original gothic metal bands but are perfectly ignorant of what goth music is supposed to be.

So now what people generally call goth metal has nothing to do with what original 90s goth metal was supposed to be.

So if we use in the term "gothic metal" in popular sense = any female fronted band. Then I think such a music cannot be considered as being part of the gothic culture. Because there's no more connection. Only metal bands which clearly aknowledge and display goth references could be regarded as gothic. Well, if you consider influences sufficients to be regarded as goth.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 10:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

My view is that it can be considered part of the gothic subculture. I think if you go to any gothic metal concert today, chances are you'll see a diverse audience consisting of both traditional metal fans and all those goths with their particular fashion ... --Bardin (talk) 17:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, there's no doubt that many goths appreciate goth metal. We can see many of them in concerts. That's a fact. But is this argument sufficient to consider goth metal as part of gothic subculture? You may think so, for my part I'm not so sure. Look, goths are also known to appreciate EBM, Industrial music, medieval music or classical music most notably. I even can assure you

I've seen Goths in concerts of JS Bach for example. Now do we consider these music as part of the gothic culture. No. So yes, you're correct about the public going to the goth metal gigs...But I doubt this is an argument strong enough to validate goth metal as part of gothic culture, even though not necessarilly irrelevant either.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not trying to argue against the issue. Here I'm rather considering the strengh of your your point, not the issue itself. I mean I don't necessarilly see any objection about Goth metal being considered as part of the subculture. But I tend to say Goth metal doesn't belong to the core of the gothic culture, but rather lies in the periphery of this culture.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 17:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the number of goths attending concerts of Bach music come anywhere close to the number of goths attending gothic metal music. --Bardin (talk) 01:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

You have a point. However, I don't think you could argue along the same lines concerning music like EBM or Industrial. The number of goths attending concerts of EBM or Industiral music music come close to the number of goths attending gothic metal music. So for the moment my main point remains unchanged.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 05:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Although people HAVE tried to argue here that EBM and Industrial are Goth. Zazaban (talk) 23:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Again...how do you know that those people are goth? Christ.Crescentia (talk) 03:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

How do you know they are even goth? I mean seriously....do you go up to people at a gothic metal show and ask 'Are you goth?'. You people are judging people just on the clothes that they are wearing. Anybody can dress in black clothes but that doesn't make them goth. There are a bunch of kids who listen to black metal who are dressing in goth type clothing because they don't understand that gothic metal and goth are two seperate things. I am not saying that they can't look like goths but dressing in black does not a goth make. Hell, I don't even dress in black very often any longer and I can bet that I know more about the history of the subculture than a lot of the people who attempt to say what is and what isn't goth who insist on wearing all black every day. GOTH MUSIC CAME FROM PUNK/POST PUNK. GOTHIC METAL CAME FROM METAL. BIG difference there people. I don't understand why you people can't tell the difference.Crescentia (talk) 03:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, Frédérick, who claims knowledge of gothic metal, states that "the original gothic metal bands took influences from original goth music". You say it's not true and that you "know more about the history of the subculture than a lot of the people who attempt to say what is and what isn't goth". Why should one of you be considered more of an authority than the other? --Stormie (talk) 04:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I keep reading on here that some gothic metal bands were influenced by gothic rock bands but I have NEVER seen proof no matter how many times I have asked people. So, if there is no proof of this then how can that be taken seriously. I have been listening to gothic rock for over 20 years, have been a DJ at goth/deathrock clubs,etc.... I think I know a bit more about the subculture than somebody who is into mostly metal. I'm not trying to sound like I am full of myself, because I am not. I am just saying that I have actually been in the subculture, while he hasn't. How can a guy who listens to mostly metal, and who doesn't know that much about the origins of the goth subculure be an authority on the subject? Judging from his posts he doesn't seem to understand that the two genres have always been seperate. Do you want me to tell you stories of goths/punks being jumped, threatened and teased about listening to deathrock/goth/punk by metalheads? I had it happen to me back in high school during the 80's. Also, that does not change the fact that gothic metal came from METAL and gothic rock came from PUNK/POST PUNK. You are not going to deny that, are you?Crescentia (talk) 04:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I remember back in the 80's metalheads beating up punks/goths. Blending the two together leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I think the only thing that the two have in common is maybe the color black. Priests and nuns wear black so does that make them goths? Gothic metal does not belong in the template since it came from METAL.Crescentia (talk) 22:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The amount of people who think Goth and Metalhead are synonyms are quite alarming. Zazaban (talk) 23:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

This happens every single time somebody wants to include gothic metal on any goth subculture/music page. People just don't get that gothic metal is METAL.Crescentia (talk) 03:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Here is a link to a LiveJournal post that Mick Mercer, who is a well known goth music/subculture expert, wrote. In it he states that gothic metal IS NOT GOTH AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBCULTURE. Case closed. http://mickmercer.livejournal.com/672571.html Crescentia (talk) 05:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, Mick Mercer does not once address the question of a tangential connection or shared origins of the music genres. The link you provide does not seem to contain the statement you claim. Unless you're going to quote something a bit more reliable, case re-opened.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 05:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

So, you are telling me that gothic rock didn't come from punk/post punk? Mick Mercer isn't a reliable source? You are just looking to argue.Crescentia (talk) 06:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, here is a quote from that entry 'The bloke was clearly a complete cunt, and no, not a Goth. Never a Goth. The bands he listed as his chosen form of ear-bashing were relentlessly Metal and standard Grunge, Rock and Goth Metal, with some Industrial presence'. The guy he is talking about was connected to the goth subculture by the press even though he didn't listen to goth bands. By that statement Mercer is stating that just because the guy listened to gothic metal, among other genres, didn't mean he was goth and that those genres are not goth.Crescentia (talk) 06:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Every time I have asked for proof that gothic metal bands are influenced by gothic rock not one of them has ever provided a link. Not a single interview, etc...that could prove that.Crescentia (talk) 06:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Crescentia wrote: "You love to follow me around on here don't you?"

It must be all about you then? As I recall, we're both from the SF bay area from the same age group and part of the same sub-culture. Gee, what a shock we have the same Wikipedia pages on our watchlist? But it must be me following you around, because it's soooo all about you, right? Now then, I reiterate: Your link does not contain the information you claim that it did. I am fully aware that the Goth subculture is an offshoot of the Punk subculture and have made that argument many times. Did I say differently now? Would you like to take the time to assign other opinions to me that I do not hold? Go ahead. It's amusing. However, if you have that kind of free time, how about you actually post links that contain the statements you claim? Again: Mick Mercer does not once address the question of a tangential connection or shared origins of the music genres. The link you provide does not seem to contain the statement you claim.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 06:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Crescentia wrote:"By that statement Mercer is stating that just because the guy listened to gothic metal, among other genres, didn't mean he was goth and that those genres are not goth."

One: You're inference. Two: So where exactly does he say: "In it he states that gothic metal IS NOT GOTH AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBCULTURE.". Because that was your claim. Please substantiate it.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 06:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

By reading the LJ entry one can easily see that he feels that the two genres have nothing to do with one another. I did not use quote marks for that 'quote' that you say that I wrote, I meant it as a summary of what he said. If I had meant it as a direct quote there would have been puncuation to show it as one.Crescentia (talk) 06:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Again, you are inferring meaning that was not explicitly stated. The two genres have NOTHING to do with each other? Nothing at all? He does not say this. And y'know what, even if he did, I don't consider any one individual to be the sole arbiter of what is and is not goth. It is a concept, and as a concept it as indistinct boundaries. That's the reality of it. Furthermore, where did I say you had quoted Mercer? Not once. Please try to pay attention.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 06:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Mercer has written more about the goth subculture and the music stemming from it than anybody else out there. If Mercer isn't considered credible enough on his own then who is? Please pay attention? You are really sounding pompous there, that is what has been bugging me about your writing style. If you want people to be civil then you really have got to drop the act. If I misunbderstood you it was a mistake, no need to chastise me.Crescentia (talk) 07:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

"If Mercer isn't considered credible enough on his own then who is?"

Like I've said, no single person is the sole arbiter of what constitutes the Gothic subculture. It's a subculture that has existed for decades across multiple continents. It is diverse. What qualifies as any sub-culture is a matter of perspective largely dependent on the larger culture the members of the sub-culture branch off from. Subsequently, the best method we have for defining it is through consensus. This is particularly true when attempting to create definitive histories for concepts that can easily spring up in multiple parts of the world independently.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 11:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

So....do you think gothic metal should be included? That is the question here, no need to focus on me.Crescentia (talk) 06:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Go back and read the chain of discussion between you and I. Guess who made it about you? Oh that's right. It was you! As far as your question goes, I believe denying a tangential connection between the two genres is absurd.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 06:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Give proof that there is a connection between the two then. Give a link, it's your turn. Every single time I have encountered you on WIKI you have had a certain attitude towards me, so if I am a bit defensive that is the reason why. Do you even realise what you writing reads like? I mean seriously, have you ever read you writing and wondered if people could construe it as being a bit over the top or pompous? Some people do not get along on the net and your writing style just rubs me the wrong way. I am willing to keep personal barbs out of future discussions if you would consider for a minute how you come across to others online. It's not fun trying to communicate with somebody on here when you feel like you are being talked down to. I mean the whole 'Please try to pay attention' quote that you did was totally uncalled for. I admit that I barbed you, but I actually deleted it right afterwards(within five minutes of writing it, go look at the edit history) because I thought better of it. In other words I didn't want all of this to be about me,and I am trying my hardest to be civil. If I hurt you in any way I am sorry and I apologize. I'm actually being sincere and not sarcastic by the way. Crescentia (talk) 07:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

"Give proof that there is a connection between the two then. Give a link, it's your turn."

If this is about me countering your link with one of my own, I really don't see the point. Your link is not substantial. And that opinion transcends my concerns over Mercer's reliability as a source. The information you claim Mercer definitively states is subject to interpretation.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 11:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Oookay. Ignoring the flame war, I'd venture to say that if an authoritative book on goth subculture like this one: Baddeley, Gavin (2002), Gothic Chic: A Connoisseur's Guide to Dark Culture, London: Plexus Publishing Limited, ISBN 0859653080 can devote several pages to gothic metal, then yes, we can have the goth subculture tag added onto the gothic metal article here on wikipedia. That's a reliable source. Much better than mere prejudice from one subculture to another. Nobody's saying that gothic metal and the goth subculture are the same thing or completely identical. There's no reason to jump to the conclusion that only goths listen to gothic metal just because the goth subculture template is tagged onto the article. I believe the point that most people will get from that is to realize that gothic metal has attracted a significant number from the goth subculture as an audience. Something that has been recognized, for instance, in this interview with Tilo Wolff of Lacrimosa. You do not need to be in a band to know this though. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Attend a gothic metal concert today and you'll see many people that clearly belong to the gothic subculture if only because of their distinctive gothic fashion. Last time I checked, metal fashion did not involve going all victorian with corsets and laces. As far as proof that the early gothic metal bands were influenced by goth rock acts, I'd simply point out the references cited in the gothic metal article.--Bardin (talk) 14:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Beginning with the slow transition of Paradise Lost and Anathema's musical style to a more gothic flavoured brand of metal, eventually transcending into a modernized form of Gothic rock in its own right, the emergence of Tiamat and the release of "Wildhoney", the collaboration between Atrocity and Das Ich, resulting in "Die Liebe", the groundbreaking success (in relative terms for that subculture) of Theatre Of Tragedy, and finally the existence of numerous bands utilizing lyrical concepts and stylistic elements (both visual and musical) borrowed from Gothic (think Crematory)...I think I have provided a sufficient number of examples to say that Gothic music certainly influenced part of the metal scene, which led to a fusion of two formerly separate genres. Gothic metal as a genre in its own right is definitely both part of Gothic and metal subculture, albeit located on the periphery of both (not being an original part of the core concept). Crossover is not only a musical term, but can be applied to the relevant subcultures as well, influencing ideology, social norms of said subcultures, fashion etc. Don't tell me that hasn't taken place. Social scientists have dealt with those issues, there have been a number of scientific papers on crossover of youth subcultures. The fact that 25 years ago it had been different and metalheads were beating up Goths doesn't change any factual situation we have today. Neither does your status as a Goth DJ for the last 15 years or anything make you an authority on that subject. Oh right, the things you have seen on festivals do not count - that is original research. Please refer to WP:NOR. Though, having said that, I wonder which festivals you frequent. I have seen immense amounts of Goths - yes, real Goths, not "wannabees" by Goth orthodoxy definitions - both at Wacken Open Air and Summer Breeze Open Air when acts remotely connected to the Gothic scene performed. Just like I have seen scores of metalheads on the Wave-Gotik-Treffen or the M'era Luna. In fact, the only festival where I haven't seen any "real" Goths is the Party.San, because the billing obviously hardly caters to that clientele...And hardly any of the Goths I met reduced the subculture to Batcave and acts like Bauhaus, Sisters of Mercy, Fields Of The Nephilim or Christian Death in musical aspects. Vargher (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

And how are you exactly an authority on the goth subculture yourself, and how are you superior to me in the regard? Just curious. Das Ich are not a goth band by the way, they are electronic/EBM/whatever, so maybe you are confused by what bands are considered goth and what bands are not. Hell, most of the people who have edited this article will argue amongst themselves at to what bands are and what bands aren't. If you are going to consider bands that only have a dark lyrical atmosphere 'goth' then that could include everything from Mozart to NWA. NWA sung about dark stuff like drive-bys...yet would that be considered goth? If you widen the boundaries too much then the whole meaning of the term is lost.You are going on again about 'seeing' goths at festivals. Again, I am going to repeat myself and say that anybody can go and buy the clothes, but just because they wear them doesn't make them goth.Crescentia (talk) 20:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I have neither claimed to be an authority on the Goth scene nor to be superior to you. The absence of credentials on my part does not make you an authorized source, though. ;) Please don't get it wrong: I am not trying to discredit you, merely saying that I think one should rely on more academic sources, i.e. people who studied the Goth scene from a scientific point of view (as far as I am aware, several social scientists published papers on that, though right now I got no time to dig on the Net). What I think might be the problem here is a difference in meaning attributed to the term Goth. As far as I can tell, you're from the U.S. (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm from Germany, and here "Goth subculture" is a rather broad term. Contrary to what was posted above, "Schwarze Szene" does not refer to "dark culture", although it is translated literally as "black scene", but to "Goth subculture". "Schwarze Szene", "Goths" or "Grufties" (a German term loosely translated as "Crypties" and used by the Goths themselves) are all synonymous. Das Ich definitely refers to itself as a Gothic band in the broad sense, becaues Gothic in the common definition here encompasses EBM, industrial, Neofolk, electropop/future pop, to some degree the darker aggrotech acts, and, yes, gothic metal, apart from horrorpunk, batcave, traditional gothrock etc. Gothic metal bands are refered to as being part of the Goth subculture by the authors of "Gothic", a German book published by Peter Matzke, one of the organizers / masterminds behind the Wave-Gotik-Treffen and thus definitely a reliable source. Since I can't verify whether Gothic only refers to traditional gothic music only in your understanding or whether that is the case of the definition in your country, I suggest that a paragraph be introduced into the article concerning just that: the differences in the definition of "Goth", and what constitutes the subculture according to different viewpoints. Vargher (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if gothic metal could be considered as a part of the music associated with the goth subculture.But a mentioning through the page won't be a bad idea because:

1. Gothic metal is a genre that first started as a mix between death metal and doom metal with strong influence from the goth rock/darkwave musical scene and aesthetics found in the gothic novel, which is seen as largely influential for the goth subculture.I mean, Paradise Lost have called their second album "Gothic"! (look in the article about gothic metal for further information)
2. In recent times, some gothic metal bands play on Wave-Gotik-Treffen, which is described as "largest event of the Goth subculture worldwide".
3. I would add that bands which have started as goth rock (e.g. Lacrimosa, Bella Morte and even Fields of the Nephilim) have later experimented with more metal-based sound.
4. And also in some regions (like Bulgaria, where I live) goths listen to gothic metal as well.

Xr 1 (talk) 21:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Italic textPlease don't get it wrong: I am not trying to discredit you, merely saying that I think one should rely on more academic sources, i.e. people who studied the Goth scene from a scientific point of viewItalic text

Yet you are doing just that. I have to ask you do live the culture of a Goth? Have you hug out with and talked with Goths as of late? No you have not people like you and Bardin have not right to clam or say you know what the Goth subculture is like until you live it. I don't give a damn I don't care what damn books and scientific point of view you have. You are insuliting those that live the culture and trying to tell them what there culture is really like. NEWSFLASH YOU don't know jack about may culture and the way I live. I'm both a metalhead and a Goth. And people like you are Bardin are hatefullied people going around trying to tell me what my culture is like. Why don't you try living it before you start telling others what is and what is not part of the culture. --98.224.211.86 (talk) 21:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Here http://www.youtube.com/user/tribalthunder93 now learn a thing or two about the subculture people like you and Bardin clam to know so much about yet really don't. I'm shocked that this site would even let people like you two edit and do other shamful acts like this. You don't know me you don't know my subculture. Stop editing it to fit that of the mainstream media. They do not live nor understand a thing about the Goth subculture. --98.224.211.86 (talk) 21:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Attend a gothic metal concert today and you'll see many people that clearly belong to the gothic subculture if only because of their distinctive gothic fashion.>>>

You don't have a clue about what my fashion nor any one else fashion is in are culture. So don't even play that card Bardin. Metalheads dress in black to. People who listen to Rap music dress in black. People who listen to Black Metal dress in black. Shopping at Hot Topic does nto make you Goth. And listening to Gothic Metal dose not make you part of the Goth subculture. It's something you live. And far more Goths don't listen or go to Metal shows. If they do they are called Metalheads. I'm in both worlds I live both worlds. So how dare you come up with these clams. You don't live my culture you never have and you never will.--98.224.211.86

The above diatribe was written by 98.224.211.86, the sock of a user that has been blocked indefinitely from editing on wikipedia. This sock cannot be blocked indefinitely too because it is a dynamically allocated IP address but it has been temporarily blocked repeatedly. --Bardin (talk) 14:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you know anything about the Goth subculture? No you don't so stop editing pages and telling other people what to do. Stop editing pages about other peoples Cultures that you don't know a thing about. You are rude and mean. And right know you have crossed the line and instulited me and others who are a part of the Goth subculture with you rude remarks. We know are own culture. You don't stop editing it to fit your narrow minded view of what the media tells you it is. They don't have a clue as to what Goths are like. They don't live it and neither do you. Grow up and stop telling others what there subculture has and does not have. Stop telling them what there fashion is and is not. You don't know them. All you know is what you read in the mainstream. If that's all you are going to do is offened people of a culture you don't know a thing about then stop editing there pages. Leave it to the people who are part of the culture. You are not part of the culture there for you have no say in what will go into the article. Leave that to the people who live the culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.211.86 (talk) 02:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, warming up dead threads that should probably stay dead, but what the heck...

An exceedingly rational and factual reply from whoever you are. In contrast to Crescentia, who refuted, or tried to refute, my arguments with counter-arguments on her/his own, you spew forth a range of broad accusations and dubious statements. For one, please explain how you know that I have NOTHING to do with the Goth subculture, being terribly ignorant about it. I do NOT "live" the subculture, in that you are right: I do not consider myself a Goth, as I posted above, I seldom frequent the Gothic festivals such as W:G:T or M'era Luna, and I surely am not connected to Gothic fashion in any way. Yet, I do personally know many Goths of different varieties, and myself listen to acts that must be classified as Gothic even by the original definition cited by Crescentia, namely The Sisters Of Mercy and The Fields of The Nephilim (being only two of my favorites), as well to "peripheral" acts from the EBM and industrial genres: and I once again tell you that the industrial/EBM crowd here largely self-identifies as belonging to the Gothic subculture - thus qualifying them as reliable sources in your own view, BTW ("Leave it to the people who are part of the culture"). So, if I may humbly state so, I consider myself to be knowledgeable to a certain extent on that topic.

As for the second point: the following statement:

"You are not part of the culture there for you have no say in what will go into the article. Leave that to the people who live the culture."

is, frankly, simply ridiculous.

If generalized as an editing philosophy encompassing other fields of research, does that mean by analogy then, that, say, a White professor in Sociology specializing in, say, social dynamics of the African-American working class minority, may not publish anything and must quit his research because he is a) White and b) belongs to the upper class? Or does that mean that an American historian specializing in German history in the 19th century may not publish anything in this field because he a) is not German and b) has not lived in that time and that culture, thus knowing nothing? Does that mean that I as an ethnic, secular Jew may not write anything about Judaism as a religion because I "don't live the culture"? Or, in the case of paleobiology, whom would you consider a reliable source that "lives the culture", in this case belonging to the species studied? Dinosaurs? Should one of them release a book?

That does not mean in any way that I consider myself an authority, as knowledgeable in that field as the examples I cited are in their respective fields. It is simply an allegoric answer to your statement, which I perceived as being valid for all topics in your eyes. And that, to be honest, is utter nonsense. No offense. Vargher (talk) 17:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Eurocentricity Pt. 2 and Ideology

• The article, in its current state, solely describes the Gothic scene in continental Europe and the Anglophone world. I seem to recall reports about Goth subculture in Japan (although Goths by the European definition are fairly rare, largely superseded by visual kei, they do exist), in Latin America etc. Perhaps we should introduce a paragraph on the worldwide situation of the Goth scene, provided it can be sourced? I for one would like to know whether there are Goths or members of an equivalent subculture in regions such as Southeast Asia, India, Pakistan or China, Central Asia or the Middle East, and, provided such groups exist, they are the object of repression by the authorities. Once again, I seem to recall reports about oppression and persecution of the underground metal scene in Iran and many Arab states...I wonder whether Goths are targeted?
• My second point is connected to the following sentence in the article: "Many in the media have incorrectly associated the Goth subculture with violence, hatred of minorities, white supremacy, and other acts of hate. However, violence and hate do not form elements of goth ideology; rather, the ideology is formed in part by recognition, identification, and grief over societal and personal evils that the mainstream culture wishes to ignore or forget." One should, in my opinion, however mention the controversy connected to specific aspects of the Goth subculture, such as: open advocation of far-right extremist policies by a small, but vocal minority in the Neofolk scene, which is generally viewed as pertaining to the broader Goth subculture; the utilization of philosophical concepts of philosophers who are generally discredited or seen as fascist such as Julius Evola by a small part of the Goth subculture (rooted in the tradition of tolerance and diversity, which entails acceptance of deviating views, be it good or bad); the presence of people like Josef Maria Klumb; and the usage of WWII militaria now considered fascist by the public (e.g. the Iron Cross, which itself is not a Nazi symbol, but perceived as such) or actual Nazi regalia / Nazi-styled elemnts such as pseudo-SS uniforms related to uniform fetish by a small minority in the industrial/electro/cybergoth sub-scene (on a side note, Soviet-style uniforms are popular as well: what is it about the fascination with totalitarian regimes?). Any thoughts? Vargher (talk) 17:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I have seen many arguments in which it has been said that the goth subculture has always been centered amongst mainly middle class white people. I mean go to any goth club and see how many minorities there are. In some parts of the US there may be some(as in a few) but in others none at all. Why is that? There is something to be said about it. If it was a subculture that attracted everybody equally then why isn't that represented? There is something to be said about the subculture being connected to middle class society and it's norms, behavious, and standards. I think that could be also connected to the small amount of people in the subculture that are into far right politics, etc.... If you were raised in a right wing atmosphere in an affluent suburb and then got into the goth subculture you are going to carry your beliefs on into it to some degree. You don't automatically become a left wing liberal when you get into the subculture. In fact people pretty much carry all of their pre 'goth' thoughts,and ideas into the subculture with them. I think things were a bit different 20 years ago, but what I described is pretty much what is going on now.Crescentia (talk) 21:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, you might have a point there. I'm not from the U.S., as pointed out in the last paragraph, but in general over here in Germany I have observed the same phenomenon: European, middle class people. I don't know whether the subculture attracts a specific segment of society based on likings and preferences. I think it's the other way around: because the Gothic music(now in the true sense as you define it, namely Gothic rock, evolved from punk) and the movement around it with specific ideological and philosphical connotations was founded and developed by mainly white people, it reflected their opinions and preferences, which differ from those of other classes. That would have also constituted the beacon for certain far-right elements: it's not that they shaped the scene, but that they believed the aesthetics and the philosophy of the emerging subculture to suit them or to be easily adoptable to their own use. However, you can't deny that on festivals (at least here in Europe) you do see Japanese goths and...let me coin a PC term...Afro-German goths (definitely exist). Although, to answer my own question, that is logical since the scene expanded and diversified. If I think about it, the development is pretty analogous to the metal scene, which started out as a subculture for white working-class youth in the U.K., and had been actually quite xenophobic and "anti-snobbish" in the beginning, but now incorporates people of virtually all ethnicities and social levels. To cut my rant short, we've derailed the purpose of the talk page, because we still have the question of the international representation of the Goth subculture - it says "in many countries" in the opening paragraph, so we should also explain it in the article, I think. And the controversy regarding certain aspects should be noted - I mean, we can discuss this thing here, but that is not the purpose of the encyclopedia. And the controversy definitely existes. I shall look for sources on both aspects, when I find the time, and expand the article a bit. Vargher (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I once found a blog by a saudi goth. But I can't remember the address now. Zazaban (talk) 21:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Blast. That would have been an interesting addition to the article ;) I tried to google it, but alas, no luck. However, I got this. What is relevant here is the last comment. Blogs are not RS, though... Vargher (talk) 21:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

That is a lie. There are goths and emos, although in probably small numbers that don't make it too clear in public. Zazaban (talk) 22:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Opening picture

Are we all sure that's the best representation we have? Zazaban (talk) 20:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion? Goth-p1020641.jpg from commons just typed in 'goth' to commons. Ashspirit (talk) 23:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Fille-goth.jpg

you may notice that the current picture comes firstin the 'goth fashion' search on commons. Ashspirit (talk) 00:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

good good, someone included them in both goth subculture and fashion articles, but the formatting's a little off... 5 mins of someone's time? i would, but i am useless at such things. Ashspirit (talk) 01:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Goth tribes

The Goths that sacked Rome were Arian Christian, not pagan. They were seen as barbarians and Arianism is a heresy, and their attacks did contribute to the beginning of the Dark Ages. Rds865 (talk) 21:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Wrong article. Zazaban (talk) 03:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

So I thought at first, but there is a mention of the original Gothic tribes in the Historical and cultural influences / Origins of the term section. 79.79.111.0 (talk) 11:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

According to our Goths article the Goths were involved in early attacks on the Roman empire well before they converted to Christianity, but Alaric I who sacked Rome was an Arian Christian. But regardless: this article says In some circles, the name "goth" later became pejorative: synonymous with "barbarian" and the uncultured due to the then-contemporary view of the fall of Rome and depictions of the pagan Gothic tribes, and the "then-contemporary view" it's speaking of is that of several hundred years ago. I don't see a problem here, the gothic tribes were thought of as barbarians and pagans at that time, were they not? --Stormie (talk) 06:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Gothic metal

Just so you know, the debate on whether this is goth or not has been brought up again. I've created this section for its discussion. This would be at least the third time this has been debated. Zazaban (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not interested in any debate. The personal prejudices and bias of fans matter not to me. There are more than enough sources on the gothic metal article demonstrating a relationship with both goth rock and gothic aesthetics. I see no reason not to include gothic metal in the goth subculture template given that genres like folk metal and folk punk are included in the folk music template even though those genres are obviously not real or authentic folk music. --Bardin (talk) 11:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Except that template is on folk music, not a 'folk subculture' Zazaban (talk) 15:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Ignoring the double negative of your sentence, I think I can safely assume what you meant. I can't say I find the distinction relevant though. The point of the analogy was that the relationship between folk metal and authentic folk music is much more weaker than the relationship between gothic metal and the goth subculture, aesthetics or goth rock. Once again, there are plenty of sources in the gothic metal article demonstrating that aforementioned relationship. --Bardin (talk) 16:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you found any sources in gothic subculture or gothic rock article or books? If the two are closely linked then I would think that goth metal would be mentioned many times in such things. Goth metal, in stylistic terms, is based on metal more than anything else. Some of Mozart's peices sound dark, should classical then be linked to gothic rock and the goth subculture then? This is a subculture page.Crescentia (talk) 13:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Baddeley, Gavin (2002), Gothic Chic: A Connoisseur's Guide to Dark Culture, London: Plexus Publishing Limited, ISBN 0859653080 --Bardin (talk) 13:50, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Please quote. Just because some bands of a subgenre claim that they were influenced by gothic rock doesn't mean that gothic metal should be included. Stylisticaly gothic metal sounds like metal, not gothic rock. Metal has always had dark elements that were evident well before gothic rock even came into being. Just because a subgenre, or genre for that matter, has some dark leanings doesn't mean it should be included. Country, rap, classical and the blues all can contain dark subject matter, but does that mean that they should also be included? Including gothic metal opens a huge can of worms.Crescentia (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Gavin Baddeley is an ordained Reverend in the Church of Satan. That has nothing to do with Goths, or Goth Music. I might as well ask a Jewish person about those who take part in Wiccan religion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.211.86 (talk) 20:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

He also has written books about satanic metal and Marilyn Manson which makes him kind of suspect in my book.Crescentia (talk) 20:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

A book (in French) Carnets Noirs (reprint 2006) dealing with gothic music and other cold music clearly identifies gothic metal as a gothic music (pp.211-225) while specifying however that metal and gothic have long been considered as incompatible genres before. (noting that none could believe that bands like Judas Priest could be associated with acts like Bauhaus.) Yes I don’t doubt some will reject this because it is French or something. But still Wikipedia rules don’t prevent to use sources in other languages.

Anyway I’m not as radical as Bardin concerning this issue, but I support his claims. I know why people deny gothic metal to be gothic music. I understand their logic. If by “gothic” we only refer to music descending directly from post-punk, then yes gothic metal doesn’t belong to that kind of music. However notion of gothic has evolved in popular use and it can be used in a broader sense. Get over it, “Gothic” is not a trademark; the use of the term has evolved to a broader sense.

Moreover I believe many people who deny gothic metal bands are often misinformed about gothic metal. Yes Gothic metal roots belongs to metal. No question about it, but it also takes clear influences from gothic rock and post punk, (and even darkwave btw). That’s a fact. None can deny that.

Gothic metal pioneer Theatre of tragedy was influenced by gothic rock and post-punk including bands like Joy Division and Sisters of mercy. Moonspell has always claimed that their first main influence was Fields of the Nephilim. Type o Negative has been influenced by the Sisters Of Mercy (among other different influences). Paradise Lost was influenced by Sisters of the Mercy too most notably.(as well as New wave acts and originaly darkwave bands like Dead Can Dance) Lacrimosa was a band of darkwave before evolving to some kind of gothic metal.(Yeah I know some purists may deny Darkwave to be gothic, however this music has often been associated with gothic culture) Extreme gothic metal band Cradle of Filth were influenced by bands like Sisters of Mercy and Christian death. They even collaborated with Christian Death on Born Again Anti-Christian album. Extreme gothic metal band Opera IX covered Famous Bauhaus song Bela Lugosi's Dead

Moreover note that first attempts to mix gothic music with metal were not made by metal bands but by gothic rock bands Sister of mercy (vision thing) and death rock acts Christian Death. If you need sources. I can provide some without any problems.

Anyway that’s just my two cents, I’m not ready to engage into a sterile debate. I really couldn’t care less if you include gothic metal or not.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 22:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Vision Thing doesn't sound metal at all IMHO, Joy Division were post punk not gothic rock, and Dead Can Dance were not darkwave.. A lot of bands have been influenced by Sisters Of Mercy, Christian Death and the older gothic rock bands but should every genre that those bands are in be included? If a rap band said that they were influenced by Christian Death, and yet they themselves were not gothic rock would rap be included? The 80's band Until December did a cover of Bela Lugosi Is Dead should then new wave/electronic music be included?Crescentia (talk) 00:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

If you would visit site the deal with The Goth Subculture you would note that A) Metal music is not to be found any where. A) They have more inside info as to what there subculture is about. It's like when a Christian tries and tells people what Wicca is about when they themselves are not Wicca. And picking up a book by someone who is not part of the subculture yet clams to know ever thing about it is full hearted at best.

I'm part Irish so if I want to get info on the Irish people and there culture I can either pick up a book written by a guy who's not even Irish or I can go ask someone who is Irish. Hmmmmmmm what to do what to do. Don't mind me but I'm going to go ask the person who is Irish and from Ireland. I know that is a really low blow for Bardin. But just because you are paid or not paid to write a book about someone else culture does not mean you have the final say in it. In fact you don't have a say in it at all because your not even part of the culture to being with. If you want to know about the Goth Subculture ask a Goth. If you want to know about the Irish ask someone who is Irish. If you want to know about the culture of Japan ask someone from Japan. They are the last and final say on anything that has to do with there Culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.211.86 (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Pov And personal theory of yours. I Consider books as more reliable than websites. So does Wikipedia. The book I refer to has been written by specialists of gothic culture. All these journalists work got gothic culture magazine. I don't see any reason why you could contest their authority with dubbious implicit ethnocentrist comparisons. Note that members of a culture could be blinded and not objective about themselves.Ethnocentrism that is. That's precisely why Sociologists are cautious about such ethnocentrist phenomena and their own cultural bias when studying foreign culture. Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:No original research. The last thing we should be doing in a Wikipedia article is accepting the word of "members of the subculture" (and I include myself in that label) as authoratative. --Stormie (talk) 01:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Then you are doing nothing more the race baiting and using blanket statements on whole groups of people. And that is hateful and wrong on so many levels. If that's the way you want and the rest of the people that run this site want to do things. Then look for for many groups to start protesting your Hateful race baiting, blanket uncalled for statements on other peoples cultures. The Irish people are the authorataive of there culture. Same thing with the people of Japan, Goths, people from Finlind, and so on. If you don't get that then you need to take a long look in the mirror. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.211.86 (talk) 01:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Being a member of a subculture is a bit different than being a member of a race of people. You are getting way bent out of shape.Crescentia (talk) 16:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

@Crescentia:

Vision Thing doesn't sound metal at all IMHO, Joy Division were post punk not gothic rock, and Dead Can Dance were not darkwave.. A lot of bands have been influenced by Sisters Of Mercy, Christian Death and the older gothic rock bands but should every genre that those bands are in be included?

1. Vision thing has nothing metal? Well, that's your pov, that's not what sources say. Carnets noirs credit Vision Thing as one of the earliest attempts to mix gothic with metal (p 211)

2.Furthermore,please before correcting me about Joy division being postpunk, may I ask you read me carefully: I said

"it also takes clear influences from gothic rock and post punk, (and even darkwave btw)"

"Gothic metal pioneer Theatre of tragedy was influenced by gothic rock and post-punk including bands like Joy Division and Sisters of mercy".

Anyway the referential book on Post punk Rip it up and start it again credits Joy division to be the very first band to be called gothic. Even though everybody agrees(including me) that Joy division is generally identified as postpunk. I refer to sources. You don't.

Concerning Dead can dance, their first album is considered as darkwave (I got sources, just ask) that's why I said:

"ORIGINALY darkwave bands like Dead Can Dance"

Thanks for reading carefully.

If a rap band said that they were influenced by Christian Death, and yet they themselves were not gothic rock would rap be included?

Give me examples of Rap band covering goth rock and then I'll reconsider the relevance of your example. For the moment it sounds pointless to me. But I may be mistaken.

Anyway, note, gothic metal pionners don't only cover gothic rock songs, they also claim THEY ARE INFLUENCED by them.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

No, Vision Thing doesn't sound metal. We can argue about this forever and my mind isn't going to be changed about it. Just because an album has heavy guitars doesn't make it metal. Old school punk bands, like the Subhumans and Black Flag, used heavier guitars in their music than what is on Vision Thing and they were considered punk not metal. Yeah, I don't read well sometimes. Sorry. I used the rap reference to compare with what some metal bands are saying. I was being theorhetical(sp?. Just because a band says they are INFLUENCED by another form of musivc doesn't mean that that bands are that form of music, or are connected to that form of music. I just read a translation by the authors of the book you keep referencing. It was a mission statement, and in it they admit to being biased with their opinions. Therefore it could be said that their book is heavily opinion based and not fact.Crescentia (talk) 15:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

The person that is not interested in any debate is me. Not Frederick. Pay attention to the signatures. You asked for a book on gothic subculture that discusses gothic metal and you have already been provided with not one but two. If you want quotes, go read the gothic metal article. --Bardin (talk) 16:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Pardon moi. One book was written by a questionable author who is a satanist more knowledgable about the metal subculture that gothic rock. He also metions in that book that Marilyn Manson is gothic , if I remember correctly. The other book is written by people who confess to be biased.Crescentia (talk) 16:50, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Crescentia is right on this: I indeed said I didn’t want to debate. Well, let’s say I’ve just changed my mind apparently. So what? I felt I need to clarify things since most of my original post has been misintepreted. Anyway my stance remains unchanged: I really don’t care if you save or delete gothic metal’s mention here. Because I understand both reasons to do so.

I just read a translation by the authors of the book you keep referencing. It was a mission statement, and in it they admit to being biased with their opinions.

I’m sorry but I failed to find anything like “we’re biased when classifying styles/ when identifying gothic metal as a gothic style” anywhere in the book. But if you're so sure, may I ask you to correct me and quote EXPLICITELY such a passage.I presume you're refering to the forewords of the book but all they say is specifying they’re just a guide, not a bible/gospel word and they invite people to judge by themselves ultimately. But this precaution actually concerns their choices of what they think the best and bad ALBUMS of each genre are. Because such a choice is always relative. But this precaution doesn’t concern the classification of the genres itself anyway.

Ultimately wikipedia doesn’t prevent guides to be used as sources; no matter they’re not bibles .

Just because an album has heavy guitars doesn't make it metal

I didn’t say Vision thing is a metal album, I just said it is credited by some as one of the first bands to MIX gothic sound with some metal elements. I got many sources mentioning this album as borrowing distinctive Hardrock/heavy metal hinges.

You disagree? Fine. Anyway I’m not planning to change your mind on this album. You are perfectly entitled to consider that Vision Thing has nothing to do with metal. You’re free to have your pov. Who am I to try and change it?

But your POV is just a pov not God’s word that can be used as reliable source in wikipedia. On the other hand Bardin and I have sources. Such sources respond to wikipedia policy, no matter you think they’re not reliable

Whatever…anyway the issue concerning this album is of minor importance in my claims. So I won’t discuss extensively about it.

Just because a band says they are INFLUENCED by another form of music doesn't mean that that bands are that form of music, or are connected to that form of music.

You’re perfectly correct on this. I couldn’t agree more with you. But that’s besides the point, cause I never claimed anything like this. Besides:

1. None pretended that gothic metal is the same form of music as gothic rock!
2. None said gothic metal and gothic rock have the same roots.
3. None said gothic metal descends from gothic rock.

So please forget your preconceptions and read carefully, you just can’t simplify things stating the obvious differences between Goth rock and goth metal and that the disagreement lies in the fact metalheads have no idea of what gothic rock is. Things are not as simple as you think they are. When mentioning these influences, I was just underlining the fact that they may be bridges between both genres. But my claim concerning gothic metal being gothic music doesn’t lie in the fact they take influences of gothic rock. Please read back what I’ve already said.

“If by “gothic” we only refer to music descending directly from post-punk, then yes gothic metal doesn’t belong to that kind of music. However notion of gothic has evolved in popular use and it can be used in a broader sense. Get over it, “Gothic” is not a trademark; the use of the term has evolved to a broader sense.

Besides let me remind you that this page concerns Gothic SUBCULTURE not gothic rock music per se. Gothic rock and gothic subculture are not the same thing, even though these two notions are necessarily bound with each other.

By highlighting gothic rock influences, I was just underlining certain bridges, that some of you have tried to deny blindly lately. But I never claimed BRIDGES were the same thing as a ROOT.

As the name “gothic metal” has been coined (loosely if you will) precisely because such bands drew influences from gothic music (gothic rock, death rock, dark wave and ethereal wave). But we agree this is not the same thing. AS ALREADY SAID gothic metal descends from doom metal, whereas gothic rock descends from post-punk.

But the term gothic has evolved with people’s use. Like it or not: the thing is popular use and musical influences extended the use of the word “gothic”. Hence the facts sources use this term this way nowadays. Fundamentalists may think this use of the word of gothic applied to such music is apocryphal. In a way, it is if we refer to their original conception. But anyway if you consider the term historically then you’ll realised that the term “gothic” applied to gothic rock is also apocryphal considering its historic origins anyway. The thing is the Gothic term has always evolved throughout history (ever since Middle age) and will continue. The term originally referred to barbarians tribes, then medieval architecture, then 19th century’s dark literature movement and neogothic revival architecture, then to music descending from Post-punk, then to metal music drawing loosely inspirations from such a movement.

The thing is Badin’s just referring to today’s broader popular sense of gothic term whereas you’re still referring to 80s original restricted sense. Here’s the origin of the misunderstanding.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 15:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Fuck metal. Metal is just riding another genre's coat tails... again. It needs to have it's life support pulled. Metal and Goth are in no way related.76.181.232.187 (talk) 02:16, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

If you paid attention to what is really said, you would realize that noone here (including fans of metal) is arguing that Metal and Goth are related. As already said gothic metal descends from doom metal whereas gothic rock descends from Post-punk. So currently your comment is beside the point. I strongly suggest you to read comments carefully before replying.

On a side note, may I ask you to take a look at wikipedia's rules of civility and to refrain using such an agressive and offensive language?Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 04:42, 9 June 2008 (UTC)