Ted Polhemus

Tuesday 22nd January

Ted Polhemus

After the first day of the Level 5 History of Art Symposium we received a talk from Ted Polhemus, photographer and author specializing in youth culture style. I thought the talk was interesting, and his presence as a speaker was great. But I didn't really think what he was saying was anything new, or anything that most people don't really know - it was essentially just hip things and style through history. At the end of the talk he seemed a bit miffed about the fact that no-one was buying his book, but I sort of thought to myself it's fair enough really, anyone can watch Blow Up and read up on the history of Punk - anyone who is genuinely interested already has done. There's such a wealth of information out there already on these subjects.

I also didn't especially like the focus on the fashion of youth culture. For me, subcultures like Punk and the Beats especially aren't necessarily about an aesthetic, it's about an attitude. They rose out of dissatisfaction or craving satisfaction. There was, of course, a certain "D.I.Y" style adopted by The Clash, The Pistols and The Slits (the latter two being orchestrated by McLaren, so their genuine "style" has to be questioned), but this style wasn't punk. It became a characture. Polhemus said that if you walked down Kings Road in the '70s there was people dressed in bin-bags, but everything I've seen or heard says that this is a myth, that there weren't that many genuine punks. What about Buzzcocks? They just wore ordinary clothes and played Punk music. I think the style enhances the ethic, but it isn't really about that. Similarly, Beats were about lusting for life desperately whilst being completely aware of the spiritual or futile prospects this holds, or steals. When Polhemus referenced Beats he said something a long the lines of "there was this guy Kerouac wearing jeans. This had never happened before. And he went off on the road for a year". He was famously on the road for around 7 years and the fact he was wearing jeans doesn't really make any difference. It's the fact that he was desperate to live and to experience something, something human or above human. I think by claiming "he wore jeans" as part of his revolution demeans the actual revolution he started. It's not necessarily about a community style, but a community ethic or feeling.

He spoke about there being no new youth movements recently, the most recent one was in Japan. But the Japanese adoption of punk styles was completely aesthetic. It wasn't about the underlying ethics, so for me, I would consider that empty and pointless. It was the adoption of Western styles and whereas punk was an original look, if it was a look at all, it wasn't just stealing a style from another group.

I thought it was an interesting talk, but I found myself disagreeing with a lot of things.