Normcore: A Political Perspective

At this stage of time in political history, it has been widely recognised that the meritocratic ideal which today’s global population lives under, and suffers from, has been nurtured so to maintain the imbalance of power. We’re all familiar with the figures stating that the richest 1% own half the world’s wealth, but are largely impotent in our ability to change this hierarchical structure. It’s no secret that the wealthy are very comfortable where they are and harbour no desire of altering the current state of affairs thank you very much, so you may ask yourself, where is that large automobile? Where is my beautiful wife? But most of all, how is this maintained? 

The suggestion that hard-work and innate talent are the driving forces of success is not to be scoffed at in itself, that being said, this simplistic, formulaic approach to financial and social status suits some more than it does others. The ideology which keeps Capitalism alive, which the American dream and ‘aspiration nation’ are dependent on, delivers the message that if you are not #winning at life then it’s nobody’s fault but your own. This complete and utter disregard for the multitude of variables that come into play sets up the perfect environment for blame-shifting onto the average Joe rather than allow for those culpable few tax-dodgers to take on any responsibility of their own. 

This environment was long-fostered in many cultures prior to the 20th century, let’s not forget, human nature is a thing. Margaret Thatcher’s individualist agenda truly set the foundation in the UK, however, summarized well with her famous ‘there is no society’ comment. As the case often is, this dynamic was in part reflective of a large-scale movement in the global north. As we turned from being human beings into consumers we were increasingly fed the message that we must compete for resources. Neoliberalism was firmly established with the arrival of Tony Blair in 1997 and while many promising changes were outlined in his manifesto and made within his cabinet, such as increased female and racial minority representation, the truth was that these changes were only taking place so far as they could be implemented within and not disrupt the current business model.

The financial crash of 2009 is a clear contributor in the self-conscious move towards a projection of humbleness. A trend towards the rich elite marketing themselves in such a way that they play the role of regular guy-about-town or typical girl-next-door can be seen as a response to the rising awareness of the great divide in the distribution of wealth. The increase in celebrity centred reality TV shows in the recent past is a strong example of this. All of these actions are fuelled by the anxiety of appearing spoilt, snobbish, out of touch or worst of all, different and therefore, potential targets for resentment. The motivating force is self-preservation, the intended outcome is to give the impression of someone who is relatable to you, the viewer of this spectacle, rather than the participator. 

Performative normalcy is not restricted to the likes of Donald Trump, the Osbournes or the Kardashians, alongside these top-tier dynasties is the British monarchy, also the inheritors of considerable wealth. Whilst the Mountbatten-Windsors may not have their own reality TV show (yet), they are the main characters in many speculative and occasionally, research-based dramatisations, even comedies. Fascination is encouraged and often cleverly constructed via tabloids, or for the sake of British television. The thinking behind this form of representation is likely that it should counter criticism, putting an end to the decrease in popularity over the past few decades. The aim continues to be centred around coming across as ordinary to the general public, as opposed to regal. The usual presentation of late is regularly ‘bodenesque’ instead of extravagant, stuffy or eccentric. In cultivating the appearance of a middle-class lifestyle, the younger generations of the royal family have once again found a resurgence in positive public opinion which has, by and large, put critics to rest. 

Over time the implementation of affordable ranges created by luxury fashion houses into the middle market has lessened their rarity and value. In becoming mainstream they have decreased in desirability or at the very least, removed the illusory charm of exclusivity which company names have come to rely on. In this era it has become near impossible to stand out causing individuals to incessantly strive for uniqueness through constant reinvention in an ouroboros style cycle of over-exposure, only perpetuated by social media. We find ourselves constrained within a relentlessly, hyper-Capitalist nightmare which demands constant competition in exchange for self-worth. It was in this backdrop that the conditions for normcore were posited, a backlash against the pressure to participate. 

The term first originating in 2013, defines a style of dress which holds a paradoxical disregard for self-expression despite making a statement in itself. The statement being made is one of nonchalance with a nod back to the casual look of the ’90s. Sure, hoodies and items of branded sportswear may be worn as a display of normcore if only for the sake of comfort. In this case, any brand name logo is incidental rather than a status boast, or so it would seem. Normcore demonstrates a post-aspirational indifference fusing minimalism, self-effacement reminiscent of grunge and the casual comfort element of hip-hop rather than the egoic, bejewelled adornment. What can be found is a move away from the gender binaries of the past as a more fluid approach towards sex and sexuality becomes commonplace. During an era in which LGBTQ rights have been brought to the forefront of cultural consciousness, androgyny is increasingly being considered a non-performative manner of natural self-presentation. As the rigid dress code prescribed to the male or female and which most of us were brought up around, is now called into question, the ambivalence concerning gender stereotypes strengthens. 

Admittedly this is a somewhat idealistic stance on a situation where both our society and our technology no less than compels us to perform. It may seem odd to take such a political perspective on pop-culture but in doing so we can recognise a conversation which anyone is capable of understanding if they take pause to listen. The link between society en masse and the way in which we present ourselves is clear- there is a coherent correspondence! It’s important for us to look around and see for ourselves the way in which our current circumstances are shaping us, how we relate to grand-scale situations in our personal lives and to learn from the past so to prepare ourselves for our futures. Just as we label our drift away from labels, we can see another expression being commodified rather than heard. The second coming of the death of the brand may resurface if only for the next wave to drown this breakthrough symptom as has been the case so often before. How many times can we reject what is impressed on us only to find that this rejection has been turned into a subculture, made niche and as a result, downplayed in significance?       

Sources-

ed. By Holland, Samantha and Spracklen, Karl, Subcultures, Bodies and Spaces: Essays on Alternativity and Marginalization, ( Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley: Emerald Publishing Ltd., 2018) 

Klein, Naomi, No Logo, (Hammersmith, London: Harper Perennial, 2005) 

Littler, Jo,  Against Meritocracy, (New York: Routledge, 2018) 

Mackinney-Valentin, Maria, Fashioning Identity: Status Ambivalence in Contemporary Fashion, (London: Bloomsbury, 2017)  

Scott, Laurence, The Four-Dimensional Human: Ways of Being in the Digital World, (London: Random House, 2015)

Images attributed to "Acne Studios" by Moses Voigt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0