Quote:
Originally Posted by MissMisa
Just out of interest, would you consider other subcultures to be 'costumes,' such as goth, emo, punk etc? If you don't, then what would you say the difference is between these subcultures and the Lolita subculture?
|
Often it depends on the subculture and how extensively it has been assimilated into the culture. It is also a matter of extremes. There are those who adopt goth or punk styles that are more a caricature and therefore costuming to me than style. Then there are those who truly understand the meaning behind aspects of the appearance and manage to turn it into what I would consider style. For me when someone copy cats to infinite detail, its costuming. When they integrate common attire and elements clearly conveying a message, then you have style. In other words for it to be style (as aoopsing to "styling") you must bring your own personality and creativity to the look. Otherwise you are simply mimicking someone and adopting their style as your costume.
I deal with that vague delineator all the time with the leather community. One person can be wearing full leather and be nothing but "styling", a second one be pure costume, and a third be a person who conveys key elements of the leather-S/M community with style. Its especially true where specific items are adopted by more than one subculture. A dog collar is a prime example of a piece that has multiple meanings and it all too often worn by the totally clueless as a mere, stupid, fashion statement.
Even the changing of elements of my leather wardrobe by one or two pieces can shift me between these levels, and only someone experienced with fashion and the community may see the difference. But if have my leather cap, labrys earring, bar vest and chaps on, the only place it would not look like a costume to someone would be in a very closed environment (leather bar, event, dungeon). If this array didn't fit me personally and my own style, it would look like a costume both in a leather bar and on the street.
I feel the same way about Lolita, Goth, Punk, and the rest. In a specified environment the intensity of a look that would be considered extreme and costume on a public street, would be style in the limited confines of a specific gathering of those with similar interests. And it works in reverse. Having only token symbol of one of the look while attending something specifically for that lifestyle would look like mere "styling" or a fashion statement if they were on a public street.
In the pic of the girl in blue lipstick, there were several elements that made it look more like costuming than someone truly part of a subculture. Yes, the PVC tends to conflict with Lolita. Though I have seen them combined well, its a very rare talent. The bright blue lipstick was a different trend than either Lolita or the PVC. The pastoral setting would have gone with the Lolita, but the PVC, bright blue didn't. And then there was the collar and leash. Sorry but it looked like an afterthought and I immediately wondered how soon it would damage the PVC (that stuff is not as sturdy as it looks). Her size had nothing to do with the effectiveness of the image, only the combinations.