“‘We’re Dominated, So What’? We Don’t Give a F**K: Punk Stylistic Spaces, Social Classes and Political-Artistic Ageing”

While establishing itself over time, punk music was the subject of very few sociological studies in France before the mid-2000s (Cf. Samuel Etienne, “First & Last & Always”: les valeurs de l’éphémère dans la presse musicale alternative”, Clermont-Ferrand, Mélanie Séteun, Volume! vol. 2, n°1, 2003, pp. 5–34; Éric Brun, “Filles, garçons et musique punk”, Agora débats/jeunesse, n°41, pp. 50–64, 2006; Denis Férey, “Free Money: L’entrée libre paradoxalement coûteuse dans la carrière de musicien punk en 1976” in Gérard Mauger (dir.), L’accès à la vie d’artiste. Sélection et consécrations artistiques, Broissieux, Ed. Croquant, coll. Champ Social, 2006, pp. 177–198; Anna Zaytseva, “A la scène comme à la ville”: engagements multiples des musiciens underground”, Ethnologie française, tome 38, 2008, pp. 129–134; Pierig Humeau, “L’hexis corporelle punk et les effets de socialisation”, Regards Sociologiques, n°35, 2008, pp. 55–64; Pierig Humeau, Yechezkel Rachamin, “Quand le chercheur est one of the boys”, Regards Sociologiques, n°37–38, pp. 45–66; Fabien Hein, Ma Petite Entreprise punk, Sociologie du système D, Toulouse, Kicking Books, 2011). Based on a PhD thesis (Humeau Pierig, Sociologie de l’espace punk « indépendant » français: Apprentissages, trajectoires et vieillissement politico-artistiques, Thèse de doctorat Sociologie, (dir. B. Geay), Université Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, 2011) and a complementary survey, (Humeau Pierig, A corps et à cris. Sociologie des punks français, CNRS Editions, coll. Culture et Société, 2021, 368p.) the objective of this chapter will be to specifically question the links between punk music, the evolution of social classes in France and the elective affinities between popular habits. From prosopographic analyses, we will first show that the social origin of punks in France has not always been “popular”, in the sense of “blue collar” or socio-economically disadvantaged social categories. Far from it. Indeed, if we were to describe the first French generation (the “proto-punks”), we could speak of young people mainly from the upper classes or from fractions of the declining petty bourgeoisie. But, at the turn of the 1980s, the alternative scene recruited a large majority of its members from working-class backgrounds. Finally, in a more contemporary manner, our survey of 636 individuals clearly shows the same socially disadvantaged origins and trajectories. This chapter seeks to document these changes in terms of social recruitment. In particular, we will question the way in which ways of doing and thinking about the “Do It Yourself” ethos are transmitted and reappropriated. Why do some young people develop an affinity for punk music and its lifestyle while others turn to other genres? How do they distinguish themselves from other members of the working classes? What strategies of distinction are put in place? In this perspective, the appeal of punk lifestyles must be re-examined from the perspective of individual trajectories, collective histories and socio-economic struggles, without losing sight of the attempts through attempts at socio-political “resistance”. Our survey materials (quantitative and qualitative) present the topography of the contemporary French punk space. The social trajectories, the learning by body and the incorporation of the esthetic tastes that lies at the core of the punk hexis make it possible to show how the careers of punk-rockers are supported, in practice, by specific modalities of politico-artistic ageing. This leads us that argue that DIY brings into play, in practice, the extreme porosity of the borders between the space of the producers and the space of the receivers, as well as between musical engagement and political front for a fraction of the French working class.