Goth and Romantic Goals and Philosophies, compare/contrast (worship, religions)

[Flappycat]

From my reading, goth culture seems to be rooted heavily in the romantic and neoromantic movements. This makes sense to me in that one of their cheif characteristics, to some extent, honor those of romantic movement in arts, culture, and literature. This actually explains quite a bit to me in terms of their taste for outlandish fashion, odd religious interests, and apparent fascination with strong emotion and things tied to it. Aspects of the older movement seem to have survived.

How would you compare and contrast these two related movements in terms of their philosophies and goals? What were these movements attempting to acheive?

[Victor]

I have to admit that when I think goth, the word "romantic" has never popped to mind. I didn't even know there was a connection. Why do you think there is Flappycat?

[Flappycat]

Originally Posted by Victor

I have to admit that when I think goth, the word "romantic" has never popped to mind. I didn't even know there was a connection. Why do you think there is Flappycat?

Well, as far as I can tell, the Romantic movement was based upon the exploration of regional antiquity, something like a reversal of Romanization if you will. It was a part of the general cultural revival surrounding the Rennaisance, which would be more properly divided and subdivided into a number of movements with both similar and very different roots and goals.

One of the aims of the Romantic movement was to explore the extremes of human emotion and their importance to human nature. In fact, a prevailing wish to gain some degree of connection with nature is likely a cause of this, for getting in touch with nature meant getting in touch with the depths of our own natures, including that which we consider dirty, frightening, or overwhelming. Gothicism, I think, could be argued to be a subdivision of Romanticism in part because one of the aims of Gothicism is to get in touch with our "dark sides," if you will, also including the dark side of nature and the dark side of life (death). However, there are cultural elements to Gothicism as well, including a fascination with "occult" religions, even if not necessarily leading to worship of them, that has long been associated with Romanticism. However, the cultural aspect can also show up fairly often in their clothing, hair styles, etc.

I honestly think that, if seen for its redeeming aspects, Gothicism's roots in Romanticism are quite clear, though it is certainly a unique cultural movement in its own right.

Gotta get to class...bah.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Flappycat

Well, as far as I can tell, the Romantic movement was based upon the exploration of regional antiquity, something like a reversal of Romanization if you will. It was a part of the general cultural revival surrounding the Rennaisance, which would be more properly divided and subdivided into a number of movements with both similar and very different roots and goals.

One of the aims of the Romantic movement was to explore the extremes of human emotion and their importance to human nature. In fact, a prevailing wish to gain some degree of connection with nature is likely a cause of this, for getting in touch with nature meant getting in touch with the depths of our own natures, including that which we consider dirty, frightening, or overwhelming. Gothicism, I think, could be argued to be a subdivision of Romanticism in part because one of the aims of Gothicism is to get in touch with our "dark sides," if you will, also including the dark side of nature and the dark side of life (death). However, there are cultural elements to Gothicism as well, including a fascination with "occult" religions, even if not necessarily leading to worship of them, that has long been associated with Romanticism. However, the cultural aspect can also show up fairly often in their clothing, hair styles, etc.

I honestly think that, if seen for its redeeming aspects, Gothicism's roots in Romanticism are quite clear, though it is certainly a unique cultural movement in its own right.

Gotta get to class...bah.

Good post Flappycat. That certainly put things into perspective. I've had my share of Gothic friends and I can't say they embraced all that you speak of. If anything, it was mostly a style to them and that's it. From one Goth to the next ideas are completely different and varied. So I think Gothicism, is taking a different direction. But then again, I've been out of high school for 7 years now and could be wrong.

[Buttons*]

I LOVE the romantic movement... wish i'd been alive then...

...just thought i'd let everyone know...

[Flappycat]

Originally Posted by Victor

Good post Flappycat. That certainly put things into perspective. I've had my share of Gothic friends and I can't say they embraced all that you speak of. If anything, it was mostly a style to them and that's it. From one Goth to the next ideas are completely different and varied. So I think Gothicism, is taking a different direction. But then again, I've been out of high school for 7 years now and could be wrong.

No, there have always been posers and wannabes. During the Romantic movement, there were posers. When there were hippies, there were posers. Heck, every Richie Rich in the Western world, at one point, wanted to fool some chick into thinking him a "Renaissance Man," and hardly one of them had the slightest bit of intellect. Posers don't keep a movement from retaining its intellectual integrity, at some level, and they never have.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Flappycat

No, there have always been posers and wannabes. During the Romantic movement, there were posers. When there were hippies, there were posers. Heck, every Richie Rich in the Western world, at one point, wanted to fool some chick into thinking him a "Renaissance Man," and hardly one of them had the slightest bit of intellect. Posers don't keep a movement from retaining its intellectual integrity, at some level, and they never have.

Good point. But the movement becomes cloudy when you are surrounded by posers.

[Flappycat]

Originally Posted by Victor

Good point. But the movement becomes cloudy when you are surrounded by posers.

The thing is, the goths...aren't. The actual movement is staying mostly underground, really a private bunch. I've known a few actual goths, and they strike me as highly curious and intelligent people, really a bit more hyper and good-humored than you'd expect.

[ChrisP]

Originally Posted by Flappycat

No, there have always been posers and wannabes. During the Romantic movement, there were posers. When there were hippies, there were posers. Heck, every Richie Rich in the Western world, at one point, wanted to fool some chick into thinking him a "Renaissance Man," and hardly one of them had the slightest bit of intellect. Posers don't keep a movement from retaining its intellectual integrity, at some level, and they never have.

This is human nature and could be said of any movement. Every group has it's posers it's image driven people. This is true of a large majority of the population today, and can you blame them? Everywhere you look image is everything.

Your post above about the underground nature of this movement is quite accurate FC. Most goths seem to have an interest in the varied Occultist areas of study, and this is not taken.... well, particularly in the States. Although I don't dress up and never have, I consider myself a Goth. Image on the outside has little to do with internal interests.