Rethinking Subculture: An Interactionist Analysis

TLDR

The subculture concept is criticized for confusion with subsociety, lack of a clear referent, perceived homogeneity, stasis, and overemphasis on values and themes. The study argues that subculture must be tied to interaction processes to be maximally useful. Subculture is reconceptualized as cultural spread via interlocking group networks characterized by multiple memberships, weak ties, structural roles that facilitate information flow, and media diffusion, with identification motivating adoption of artifacts, behaviors, norms, and values. Youth subcultures illustrate how these interactional processes operate.

Abstract

Subculture, despite the term's wide usage in sociology, has not proved to be a very satisfactory explanatory concept. Several problems in previous subculture research are discussed: (1) the confusion between subculture and subsociety, (2) the lack of a meaningful referent for subculture, (3) the homogeneity and stasis associated with the concept, and (4) the emphasis on defining subcultures in terms of values and central themes. It is argued that for the subculture construct to be of maximal usefulness it needs to be linked to process of interaction. Subculture is reconceptualized in terms of cultural spread occurring through an interlocking group network charactarized by multiple group membership, weak ties, structural roles conducive to information spread between groups, and media diffusion. Indentification with the referent group serves to motivate the potential member to adopt the artifacts, behaviors, norms, and values characteristic of the subculture. Youth subculture are presented as illustrations of how these processes operate.