Humans are a social species and have a very real need to belong. It doesn't matter what it is that we wish to be a part of, we desire connection. At one time in our existence it was necessary for survival, so it's programmed into our very DNA. Throughout our entire existence things have come and gone that gave us this sense of being part of something bigger than ourselves.
I think this nails the dynamic behind them.
Pet rocks, hula hoops, food fads,
But sometimes we're talking fads here, and sometimes styles, mostly personal style.
What I think is interesting is style, a reflection of personal statement, for those who both want to be a part of something, and yet also see it as a statement that puts them
genuinely outside of the norm.
Or else they already are, and they find something that suits them.
The archetypes ones came along with the social creation of adolescence, a stage of life that wasn't recognized prior to the 20th century.
Before that, you were a child, and then you worked.
Or in the early industrial age, you worked as a child.
These styles, movements, both want to be a part, and yet also reject it at the same time.
Sometimes it wasn't just fashion.
They had to hold it genuinely, because there were social repercussions.
Now anything goes.
I wonder what that says about any true stance against the norm.
Seems there no real correlation with
any style and being alternative.
Maybe there is no real alternative anymore, everything is co-opted and made a commodity.