I've been doing some pretty heavy lifting recently (the death penalty in the US, the fall of Mosul and the IS "Caliphate"), so I wanted something that was a lighthearted and entertaining read. I came across the author on YouTube a while back, and I was curious to see how the "Goth" subculture has changed, or endured, since I was in high school, back in the last century (!). I have a Gothic streak (honestly, I hate the term "Goth," personally; it's too "trendy" and flippant for me) a mile wide, albeit one which is carefully concealed, so I'm just curious about the material.
I think this had a lot of potential, and I get that it's supposed to focus on the etiquette aspects of being Gothic, but I think there was a lot of lost opportunity. I also agree with several of the other reviewers who have likewise reported that the book is highly repetitive and talks a lot, but doesn't say much. I think the current content could have been condensed into one or two chapters on actual etiquette, but it could have gone far beyond that. This could even have been something of an "instruction manual," discussing some "how to's" of being Gothic. I also get that there are many, many subcultures within the umbrella-term "Gothic" subculture, but there are certainly some common elements.
I would also have really liked more of a history, or, at least, incorporating some of the history of the subculture into the material, which would give the added benefit of understanding why this particular group of people gravitate toward particular cultural elements. A more in-depth discussion of the types of things Gothic-identifying people enjoy and are passionate about, and why, to me, would have been far preferable, as opposed to an almost incessant plea to be nice to them. Actually humanizing these complex people would have been far more effective in terms of making them less "scary" and more fascinating (and, hence, worthy of courtesy and respect, which seems the author's primary purpose) than just reiterating for several chapters: yes, they dress weird, but please just be nice to them.
For example: Gothic literature, something I'm passionate about and most people who identify with this subculture are as well. What are some of the most well-known works, and what do actual Gothic persons think about them? Why do they identify so strongly with particular elements? In fact, that's really the missing dimension overall: what ACTUAL Gothic people think about anything. It may not have been the point of the book, but there are very few instances of real people actually being represented. I think I would have featured this type material front and center, because it really adds the highly important human dimension. For example, if people are into Edgar Allen Poe, or Algernon Blackwood, or M.R. James, or Mary Shelley, for that matter: why not have a representative talk about their work (briefly) and why it it appeals to persons who identify with this subculture. The same goes for art, music, food/cuisine, decor (it goes SO far beyond than just bats and skulls).
I'm going to include below a passage from the editor of a volume of Late Victorian Gothic Tales, Roger Luckhurst, who hit the proverbial nail on the head. It's also why I think discussing some of the history behind the Gothic subculture would have enhanced this book greatly. To sum up generally, Gothic involves, at its deepest levels, transgression: transgression of the boundaries between life and death, social mores (i.e., its embrace of the morbid), and, particularly, dress and outward appearance, which typically involves rather outlandish elements representing a throwback to the nineteenth century - As Luckhurst states, profoundly, "the insidious leakage of the pre-modern past into the skeptical, allegedly enlightened present. The Gothic, Robert Mighall suggests, can be thought of as a way of relating to the past and its legacies."
I did enjoy it, but as I stated above, I think it was something of a lost opportunity. Even the etiquette material would have been greatly enhanced by some real-world examples and experiences. It didn't need to be a history book, but I think I was disappointed that it didn't have more depth. I know there are other books that do, but, I think I was hoping for something more.
-------------------------------------
"The Gothic repeatedly stages moments of transgression because it is obsessed with establishing and policing borders, delineating strict categories of being. The enduring icons of the Gothic are entities that breach the absolute distinctions between life and death (ghosts, vampires, mummies, zombies, Frankenstein's creature) or between human and beast (werewolves and other animalistic regressions, the creatures spliced together by Dr. Moreau) or which threaten the integrity of the individual ego and the exercise of will by merging with another (Jeckyll and Hyde, the persecuting double, the Mesmerist who holds victims in his or her power). Ostensibly, conclusions reinstate fixed borders, re-secure autonomy, and destroy any intolerable occupants of these twilight zones.
"The most successful monsters overdetermine these transgressions to become, in Judith Halberstam's evocative phrase, 'technologies of monstrosity' that condense and process different and even contradictory anxieties about category and border. Some critics hold that the genre speaks to universal, primitive taboos about the very foundational elements of what it means to be human, yet the ebb and flow of the Gothic across the modern period invites more historical readings. Indeed, one of the principal border breaches in the Gothic is history itself- the insidious leakage of the pre-modern past into the skeptical, allegedly enlightened present. The Gothic, Robert Mighall suggests, can be thought of as a way of relating to the past and its legacies.
We can think about this in fairly abstract ways: the ghost, for instance, is structurally a stubborn trace of the past that persists into the present and demands a historical understanding if it is to be laid to rest. Similarly, Sigmund Freud defined the feeling of the uncanny as the shiver of realizing that modern reason has merely repressed rather than replaced primitive superstition. 'All supposedly educated people have ceased to believe officially that the dead can become visible as spirits', yet Freud suspected that at times 'almost all of us think as savages do on this topic.' This return to pre-modern beliefs was itself the product of thinking of human subjectivity as a history of developmental layers that could be stripped away in an instant of dread, returning us to a 'savage' state.
I'm a little sadden by the reviews of this book. As a proud goth, I see the humor in this. I applaud her for giving some insight on the history of goth and a lot of the references she uses.
To me, I see Venters's message in 3 parts.
First, for up and coming kinder goths {baby bats} on how their behavior does indeed affect 'goth stereotypes'. Such as, that we're all devil worshipers out to cause havoc as the media suggests. But this isn't the case. In fact, she does go into how this isn't true and even refers some positive media to look into so the 'gothling' can decide for themselves.
Second, for well established goths from the 80s {Trad goths}who are very much set in stone with everything being traditional as the scene started. The stereotype being that they are annoyed in pretty much anything that's called 'goth' today and will flip out on 'goth sub-genres'. This in particular, Venters's being the age range of said group, does mention that diversity in the goth subculture can be a good thing.
Third, for parents/friends/room mates of goths. She explains that there are something we do normally like everyone else and then there are just somethings that others may be disturbed by. Like graveyard picnics for example. Although, that would vary upon the goth and goth type. lol
As for the third person thing, it's only a reflection of Jillian's personality in text. All goths are creative in some fashion, it's just of her many talents is being flamboyant as a lady of a neo Victorian does. Plus, she does mention that classic theatrical themed books pulls at her heartstrings, it doesn't surprise me that it would be present in her writing. But rest assured, Venters's does take a break from third person and properly introduces herself.
Lastly, this makes a lovely introduction to goth to new comers. But I would also suggest reading more books along the roots of music subculture as well as d.i.y. ethics, and social aspects. "Paint It Black" and "What Is Goth" by Voltaire, "Goth Chic" by Gavin Baddeley, "The Goth Bible" by Nancy Kilpatrick, and pretty much any book Mick Mercer ever wrote.
