Critical Review #6

Critical Review #6

In reading Back’s views, I was most interested in how he presents a cultural trend as a means to reflect a collective force-or entity- but still allows individuals the opportunity to maintain their own identities. Skinheadism is not only defined by music, but by its followers and how they react to their music. Whether through outward reaction (ie dress, dance style) or inward reaction (ie how they relate to the rest of the world and vice versa), “skin heads” are a part of a collective whole.  However, I come to question whether or not the individual sense of self runs the risk of being stifled by this overpowering collective force. In speaking of Skinheadism in its relation to fascism, Back states, “They provided a way for state authority to be embodied and a means by which individual conscience could be dissolved in the volkish reverie of mass art.” The notion of “mass art” is really interesting, for in just these two words, the individual becomes the subordinate element, thus submitting itself to the overall mass.

However, I feel as if this collective force only exists within the Skin Head culture and is less inviting to those who are on the outside of it. For example, in each of the personal accounts recorded in Back’s narrative, very specific language is used to describe the Skin Head “experience.” Back presents this inclusion among Skin Heads as “the complexities and ambiguities in the culture.” You have to be “in” in order for these “complexities” to be transformed into “normality’s.”  So, this leaves me wondering whether or not I am distancing myself from Skinheadism by deeming it reclusive from the rest of the world. Do you have to be a part of it to “get it?”