7/17/25
There’s lately been a rise of the term ‘clean goth’. I think there’s two relevant sides of this term to analyze.
First of all, this label has certain implications related to the ‘clean girl aesthetic’, which is a mainly overconsumptionist way of life that implies the obsession with clean, neat beauty and capitalist unreachable beauty standards through the utilization of way too many beauty products, most of which are not at all necessary and essentially derive from the need of consuming. This idea is radically opposite to the anti-capitalist and anti-consumist ideology of alternative subcultures and, specifically, goth subculture. This clash mainly means that people who practice this lifestyle cannot and should not claim this label, as goth subculture is partly based in politic ideology. Besides, this neat, behaviored beauty contrasts with the chaotic rebellion of alternative counterculture.
On the other hand, the aesthetics of ‘clean goth’ are mainly plain, basic black outfits with mostly no relationship with gothic fashion at all, regardless of the prevalence of color black. Or, if referred to makeup looks, it applies to ‘no makeup-makeup’ or simple looks, which might be the ones true goths resort to when deprived of energy or time. In this case, no label should be needed to describe a common look, as it isn’t an aesthetic on its own.
We’ve been living in a world where over-specific labels are taking over our lives and perception of ourselves. We feel the need of fitting ourselves into some sort of boxes which include not only aesthetics, but behaviors. ‘Dark grunge fairy gremlin core’. What even is that? What’s the point? Sure, some kind of label might be useful when we’re shopping for clothes and are looking for something specific. Maybe. But, ultimately, the goal would be to find our style, right? And own personal styles come from what each individual person chooses to do with their pieces of clothing and accessories. Making them work for themselves and look good. And it isn’t relevant if they’re mixing different aesthetics or color palettes along the way. Not relevant at all.
At the end of the day, a person should be a unique mix of different aesthetics hobbies, have their own ways of talking, behaving and loving, and that’s what makes each person interesting and special. If there was a set of characteristics that came with each aesthetic, a rigid set of behavioral norms, then the world wouldn’t be interesting at all, there would be nothing new to come up with. But luckily this doesn’t exist. We’re free to do whatever we want with ourselves. And that’s what conforms an identity. That’s the wonder of human life. You’re an experience to other people: the way you look, the vibe you give off, the way you treat them. So worrying about finding what ‘core’ we fit in is, at the end of the day, just a way to give in, to enter the consumerist market, to limit what we think we can do or wear or look like. It’s also most of the time something we only think about regarding ourselves, a pressure on our own behavior; however, when we look at someone and perceive all of the aspects of their identity, we are not really worried about labels or zodiac signs or any other kind of rigid boxes.