Punk has to do with Robert Mertonās Strain theory.
Back in the 1950s as criminologists began to more seriously explore the sociological causes behind crime, Robert K. Merton put forth his perspective through strain theory. Merton argued that mainstream society holds certain culturally defined goals that are dominant across society. In a capitalist society, the dominant goal that most people aim for is accumulating wealth. Merton further argued that this goal of becoming financially wealthy was so powerful that the goal of getting rich itself had become more important than the means by which one attained wealth. In other words, whether you got rich via conventional/legal means, or via unconventional/illegal means, it didnāt matter, as long as you got your coin. For Merton then, there was anomie (normlessness) regarding the means.
Merton furthered this perspective by providing a framework by which sociologists could typologise criminals and non-criminals ā strain theory. Strain theory argues that one must consider if an individual rejects or accepts (1) societyās cultural goals (wanting to make money), as well as (2) the institutional means by which to attain those goals.
To this end, five typologies were established:
Conformists, who accept the culturally defined goal of financial success, as well as the institutional means society defines as appropriate to reach that goal (e.g., advancing oneās education, steadily working, saving money). Conformists follow rules and believe doing so will pay off financially.
Innovators, who also accept the culturally defined goal of financial success, but do not follow societyās rules (i.e., laws) in their pursuit of attaining wealth. Innovators may not have the means to attain financial wealth (e.g., not enough money to further advance education), and/or simply not believe in the law. Hence, innovators turn to crime.
Ritualists are those individuals who do not believe they can attain the culturally defined goal of accumulating financial wealth or who do not value this, but who continue to do so through societyās acceptable cultural pathways simply because they are supposed to (e.g., going to work and school, despite feeling such actions will never pay off).
Retreatists are people who reject the goal of financial wealth, as well as the means society deems acceptable to get rich. Hence people in this group escape, or retreat from society, often times through substance use.
Rebels are the last group who redefine societyās goals and create new institutional means of pursuing their unique goals. Rebels work outside of the established system.
Punks are either Innovators, Retreatists, or Rebels.
if you extrapolate the theory to be not just about financial wealth, but about any kind of currency (social, spiritual, etc), then this is doubly so, how ever cyber punk still tends to center around finance as its microcosm for all the societal issues that it explores using these five roles or strains.
in ghost in the shill, you could argue that Motoko and the rest of section 9 are Ritualists dealing with innovators and rebels.
they donāt really buy into the values that are thrust on to them by society, but they go through the motions anyways, because they feel like they have to, because its all they know, they canāt think of any worthwhile alternative.
this is thing that is funny about cyber punk, the main charectors donāt need to be the punks, so long as the punks (the innovators, rebels, and retreatists, are what the story is about, what you are supposed to contemplate)
a common motif in cyber punk, is to show the divide between the haves and the have nots expanding as corporatism expands through the use of society, as sky scrapers get taller, slums get wider.
this is where the confusion comes with āThe Last Nightā, it is absolutely a cyber punk story, but people are confused, because rather then relying on corporatismās interaction with capitalism to show case the values that culture puts forth and its flaws (as to be punk is to be counter culture, and to be counter culture is to criticism mainstream culture), it uses corporatismās interactions with socialism facilitated by technology. people think that the fundamental component of cyber punk is capitalism, because they confuse capitalism with corporatism, and because capitalism and corporatism are so regularly used in cyber punk. but its really just about societal critique of mainstream culture using cybernetic technology to exaggerate the societal factors that are present in the modern day to a lesser extent that you are criticizing.
The Last Night isn't necessarily saying that working for wealth and to survive is the only noble or worthwhile method to have meaning in your life, or even that it is noble or worthwhile at all, it is merely suggesting that perhaps, even if you didn't have to work to survive or to have wealth, that if you could instead just consume what ever you want, and live life like a game, that perhaps that isnāt so noble or worthwhile either. that there would be punks even in this world, who would resist and reject the mainstream gamification and consumption prevalent in society, and search for something else, that Innovators, Retreatists, and Rebels would still exist.
thats why wild wild west is not āsteampunkā, its just steam tech fiction. because there are no punks. innovation in this context doesnāt mean inventing things, it means not following societies rules, but the maincharectors do follow societies rules, and they believe in them, and they believe in the values that society puts forth, and the movie doesnāt put forth things intended to provoke you to question this.
anything with āpunkā in it is about Robert Mertonās strain theory, if it isnāt, then its not punk. cyberpunk without questioning societies value system and rules, is just cybertech fiction.
so The Last Night is cyberpunk, just not in a capitalist framework.
baratheonpilled
annaxmalina
discoholicmusic
ellievsbear
