So what then are these boundaries or rules, is the next logical question. I'm going to list what I believe to be the 5 elements of goth, which happen to also be what I use as the definition of goth. All of them I believe are strict enough to keep goth a subculture rather than something with more fluid identities and an ephemeral nature like neotribes, but also broad enough to allow for variation and personal meaning and application. Case in point, #3 the embrace of darkness, this is often stated as being intrinsic to goth yet it is able to have a plethora of meanings, being manifest in music, clothing aesthetic, artistic expression, emotionally, or even philosophically.

1. A social departure from the mainstream

2. An aspect of morbidity

3. The embrace of darkness

4. A sense of mystery, madness, or the arcane

5. an active pursuit of making these things part of one's daily life

-credit goes to Nephilim Incorruptus



While all of these must be taken in unison as the play off of each other, I believe the individual it is free to make whatever element you hold dear the center of goth for them. I would point out that while things like aesthetic, and music are not explicitly stated, they do fall under these categories.

So why gatekeep? I feel like my earlier comments covered that. No, we can not remain static. We've seen over the years, as a new generation joins goth (from what I've seen this comes about every 10 years) the scene changes. The mid 80's to 90's we saw goth move from just music and fashion to incorporate more aspects of a lifestyle, from the 90's to 00's we saw industrial/cybergoth/electronic become popular among goths, and now we have the more superficial fashion trends popping up. The key, again, is to balance the roots and constrictions of the subculture with future growth and evolution. The fear then, is the blending of subcultures to the point of transitive, post modern identities, where fluidity between each subculture is so common and accepted, the barriers and definitions between cultures collapse and they are no longer distinguishable from one another, therefore neutering their power to enact change, to be meaningful, to be unique, and even to exist.

However through all of this, goth has retained the spirit in which identifies it as obviously goth, even if you can't put your finger on it. From a sociological perspective, a subculture, or any culture, must have identifiers and boundaries to exist. Punk disappeared partially because of comodification by the mainstream. This is something that is avoidable with goth for many reasons, one of which is that goth is not a counter culture, but is able to exist congruently with mainstream culture. Mainstream constructs such as consumerism line up with goth ideals, however goth is still able to stand opposed to cultural imperialism, homogenization, patriarchy, mindless consumerism of mass produced low quality goods, etc.

I want to make clear, that boundaries on a subculture do not place restrictions on individuality of adherents. Yes, certain things are and are not goth, however that does not limit the interests any one individual may have outside of that culture. Take Indian culture for example, that has specific boundaries that make it unique, does that mean you can't be part of that culture and also wear blue jeans? No, however that alternatively does not make blue jeans part of Indian culture. Individualism in the goth subculture is a bit of an oxymoron when you really look at it, as individuality gets to a point where it is no longer goth, and that's OK. The entirety of your being does not need to be exclusive to goth, just as any other culture you can be an individual while still having membership within a group, however that doesn't mean every whim or interest you have should be labeled as such. All subcultures must be exclusionary to some extent by their very nature, however an individuals interests does not require that boundary.