"What was once rebellion is now clearly just a social sect": Identity, ideological conflict and the field of punk rock artistic production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I advance a sociological reappraisal of the Western punk rock youth cultural artistic form. Contrasting prevalent perspectives correlating punk rock culture with adolescent rites of superficial social rebellion, I argue that the art form often exudes an underappreciated level of sophistication. I argue for the presence of two dominant strains of punk artistic logic, and demonstrate how each correspond with popular trends in neo-Marxist social theory. However, I also note that these competing logics promote contradictory forms of punk artistic conduct. Incorporating the perspectives of Pierre Bourdieu, I link this imperative for ideological division with the punk artists’ placement within fields of cultural production. Drawing from the artistry and testimonies of historically significant punk artists (and artistic consecrators), I argue that notable instances of punk ideological debate simultaneously function to allow punk artists to compete amongst one another for claims to artistic distinction and authority. I consider significant case studies wherein ideological debates double as tactics through which artists bolster their own claims to distinction in striving to delegitimize the authority of their ideological competitors. I question whether the primary function of ideological punk artistic debate stem from sincere ideological imperatives, or concerns surrounding the processes of accrediting individual claims to artistic legitimacy within the punk artistic field. Critically considering the interaction between collectivist punk artistic ideologies and the individualistic imperative of asserting personal claims to authoritative punk identity, I conclude that movements toward internal differentiation ultimately undermine punk rocks’ capacity to serve as a substantive counter-hegemonic artistic movement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.075 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".