The Coincidence of Ya's and Goths - In The Arts Together?

This message board is for discussing anything in any way remotely connected with St Andrews, the University or just anything you want. Welcome!

The Coincidence of Ya's and Goths - In The Arts Together?

Postby Biologist on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

Something rather weird has occured to me in the last 5 minutes. You must excuse my haste (?!)
I have met an awful lot of people who (claim to) know personally the likes of Cunters Davis and other KK folk. I'm sitting here thinking I am obviously a social recluse or unclued about life in St Andrews because I dont recall ever talking to the likes of them.
Then I discovered why! Its cos I do biology and there are NO FUCKING YA's in my class! Oh the joy of putting wellie boots on and wading through a stream to pick up flowing insects without a YA in sight! Are all YA's in the Arts Department? Nice and Safe? No need to get a proper job once finished University?
That said though, I was extremely offended when discussing the varieties of freaks and goths that occur in St Andrews. My friend, an Arts student, said
'No offence, but they are all Science folk!'
But pause for thought. There are ABSOLUTELY NO goths or weirdos in my class either! They are all in the ARTS department! What an uncanny coincidence.
Anyone got any mind blowing theories?
(Ironically, being a science student I am stumped for once)

Yahs and Goths - A Study

Postby ScienceStudent on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

There are plenty of goths in the sciences at other unis, and there ARE some here, just not so many.

Goths do Arts because they are frustrated poets (frustrated by their lack of talent, ususlly) who like to think they are far more creatibe than other people, so they wander around in PVC and chains in an attempt to attract the attention of people they hope will say "Ooh, that person is SO individual, I admire them. I wonder if they will shag me?" The skateboardy ones are the same.

Yahs dominate the Arts faculty for several reasons:
1) No need for a proper qualification to get a proper job. Normal people doubt Arts degrees unless they want to gon into academic or a particular proffession like journalism.
2) They did it at school. How many state schools have the resources to teach Latin, philosophy and other such shit? And why the fuck would they WANT to - how many plumbers do you know who need to speak a dead language? (Yes, that's right, state schools are there to teach you how to READ. In ENGLISH.)
3) They think it's a skive. Which it is.

science people are stupid?

Postby arts monkey on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

I'm sorry I did not realise that Arts was just comprised of latin and dead languages.

I think all science people should stick to the classroom because they lack the ability to converse
arts monkey

duff monkey

Postby Elvira P. on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

i think you should stick to banana peeling and bog off
Elvira P.


Postby Anonymous on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

I found that Biology was well placed with Yahs when I did it. That said, Biology is virtually an Arts subject - no chance of a job in your field once you've finished. I suppose that was what attracted the Yahs - a real science degree that they could take to daddy's company, so that when they got their pointless job in middle-management they could claim that the reason they fucked up is 'cos they don't have a management degree. Biology is also piss-easy, so all the happy little yahs can get desmonds without having to interrupt their all important social lives.

As for Goths, there are really very few of the poetry writing types, and they all do some form of history or another. The chain and leather types aren't real Goths at all, and the Skatepunks are just the same - deluding themselves that they are individuals choosing an alternative lifestyle. That said, once you've got passed the "I'm different, me" bullshit, they all hate Yahs as well.

You are an evil bastard

Postby Anonymous on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

OK, so you maybe did Biology in first year ('there were plenty of YAHs when I did Biology'). First year biology to english people is quite easy, yes. But to scottish people, who have done one year less at school, its not as easy. In addition, the level of first year biology CANNOT be extrapolated to the difficulty of the other years. Anyone who does biology will back this up. I dont know ANYONE who has as much work as me to do (apart from my class, of course.)
Your point about the YAHS and how biology was littered with them -I agree. They all do 'red biology'; the biochemistry, pathology, neurochemistry etc. etc.
There are NO YAHS doing 'green biology' or environmental, evolutionary or ecological science. And this point I firmly agree with you: It is because our work load is very high, and it would disrupt the YAH's social life. This is why all the YAHs are in RED biology.
Please dont make this mistake again. Although it is an easy mistake to make, you have insulted me.


Postby Anonymous on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

No insult intended, and I did biology at honours as well. The work load was heavy, and the fact that I did A-levels had no bearing on the work in honours (despite the claiming that I was studying Animal Biology, at least 1/3 of the courses I had to do were plant based (and I did Zoology A-level). That said, going into 6 week courses where on the first day the course organiser declares that there will be no questions in any exams that are not fully covered in the lectures suggests perhaps that they are not expecting the students to apply themselves properly to the work. I did no outside reading after I realised that all the references we were given were the same ones that the lecturers had taken their notes from - and I got a 2.1. In fact virtually everyone in biology got a 2.1 that year, with one or two 1sts, a couple of 2.2s and 3rds. That suggests to me a department that is molly coddling its students even if they have a fat workload.


Postby ChungleCharlie` on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

I do agree that most Ya's seem to do arts because I never see them in lectures, although its possible that they just don't go to lectures and pay someone else to go to their lectures for them. However as far as goths are concerned, everyone that I've ever met is doing physics, astro physics and maths and not science subjects.


Postby Anonymous on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

Dear biologist,
There are yahs everywhere. I do biology too and there's plenty of them. Your wittless wittering makes me want to choke to death upon a big gout of camel shit.


Postby Anonymous on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

The Yah quotient in St Andrews will soar next year, due to the Wills factor.

And I shall not be here to suffer these superficial, pointless people.

Thank fuck.

University is like a box of chocolates

Postby Oceana on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

Welcome everybody to the revival of this thread. Having just registered (instead of revising) I thought I would take a brief excursion to the very last page of threads and pick one to be revived as my gift to the world.

What a blessing it was too as I found something that I have been crying out about for some time now; something that, given enough time to ponder, I would have noted myself (indeed I have done so in private but not in public lest I get lynched or 'cursed' by the Physics Pseudo-Goths)

In fact as the ground was covered in true science faculty style with little wittering and ill informed ramblings (and also the biologists-trait of accessibility of information) that I have little to say.

That doesn't mean I won't write much however as I have lots of work to avoid doing...once I get the notes.

I am going to make some inflammatory generalisations now under the guise of observations made during my tenure here as a semi-professional waster (I'm going pro soon, fingers crossed).

The Arts Faculty, like a woman, is a fickle beast. It is torn between the people who have a genuine talent and are here to make something of their lives, the Yahs who are here because travelling round Nepal/India/South America/... would mean that their pink shirts would not be properly starched thereby causing their collars to become flaccid and unable to stand up to the rigours of drinking endless cappuccinos in (for example) Peru's El Westporto.

The science faculty is a simpler creature by far or so we are led to believe...

Chemistry: The lecturers in this school (this is not an Americanism I assure you) tend to be quite shy and retiring while the students are a little quiet themselves - it seemed to me that there was a greater prevalence of Scottish and hence younger (certainly in appearance in 1st Year) students. It was also a mainly male preserve but not to any great extent, say 60:40 at a guess.

Geography and Geoscience: What can I say? If I were changing degree to any other subject I'd want to be in here. A good mixture of males and females. Little evidence (though there is one girl who springs to mind) of the telltale Yah features (pink shirts, upturned collars, tank tops, loud donkey-like hee-hawing laughs, constant talking throughout lectures (if they are in the afternoon, otherwise complete absence...there may have been some there after all, who knows.).)

Biology: My Home.

Apart from AMH.

Or my actual home.

Not my home at all in fact but good none the less. Mostly a solid bunch of guys especially those going down the aforementioned green paths. There are, I believe, more females than males in the school of Biology (in first year anyway) which is unusual for a science (for an (note: not THE) explanation to this see Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus but not all of it - it gets tedious.) No Yahs as such though there are a couple of posh lads and ladies kicking about the place trying to correct this - particularly in the Red side of things. I guess they don't want to get muddy from doing actual research (somewhere that is muddy obviously).

Maths: Not an actual science. Trust me. If you can do it as an arts degree then it's not ever a science (except Geography - then it's merely like Red and Green Biology only more clearly delineated by virtue of it being a different degree. Clever that.) Tends to attract oddballs or people who didn't know what they wanted to do/didn't want to go to University. When I say oddballs I mean it in an affectionate way - like you're affectionate about a Labrador that keeps running into glass doors. Of course there are the occasional few people who chose to do maths deliberately and who seem completely normal. May I remind you that that's what people say about serial killers and other such fruitloops.

Physics: Ah yes. My little hobbyhorse. My horse that, though dead, I firmly believe will get up and take me for a ride if I use my crop enough. First of all I should make it clear that there are exceptions to the following but they are few and far between.
Mostly guys. A very small first year class littered with empty seats where people have dropped the module due to the (in my opinion) poor quality of teaching - education is not the staff's priority it seems. (Remember I said there were one or two exceptions before reading on.) This class is littered with people filled with an all-consuming bitterness. The largest collection of 'Goths' (for Goths read wannabe hard men with a penchant for black leather jackets and trenchcoats, bandannas, chains...)
They tend to posses such arrogance (and this is based on the lecturers too...mainly in fact) as I have never seen before - they display such contempt for Engineers for the simple reason that engineers actually do something useful with the theories and research - i.e. computers. Perversely this insistence on everything being purely for researches sake means that many of the lecturers and to a lesser extent the students, are self loathing, yearning to be a maths bod.

As I've said several times there are exceptions - in fact the exceptions are more prevalent than the picture drawn here but are less conspicuous to the point of invisibility.

So there it is. The Physics department is dominated by, well, wanks if not populated by them. Chemistry is the home of the lab scientist, shy but nice. Maths is the home of the disenfranchised, the indecisive and the serial killers while Biology and Geo(graphy/science) are where the personable scientists are.

As for Artists - I would say more but I live in fear of my girlfriends wrath - mostly nice enough but with a little too much arrogance than is pleasant (though less than the all-in-black brigade in physics). The nature of the arts is subjective therefore it is your opinion that is too often taken into account (knowledge too but it is your interpretation of this knowledge that garners grades). In this way it is approval of yourself that you gain when you get a 19. The potential certainly exists for this to cause an inflated sense of self-importance.

Divinity I'm going to steer clear of as I only know two guys studying it - one of whom is a really solid guy who I respect greatly, especially his quiff and his way with the ladies. The other is a twat.

Science - search for fact
Arts - search for beauty (plus a lot of historical and political phooey)
Divinity - search for truth

Thank you and goodnight.
I'll be here till Thursday
Enjoy the veal
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am


Postby triple ? on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

how do you all feel about social sciences - like economics,

it's not nuclear fision, but then again it's not poetry, you can do it in either faculty
triple ?

the goth bit

Postby charlie on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

i cannot really remember the goth demographic from this time last year, but i have helped run rocksoc (a focal point for most 'goths') for at least half of my uni career and i can tell you what i know, which should theoretically be fairly informed. i hope. :)

the three/four very much outwardly-of-traditional-goth-appearance people i can think of did arts, science and medicine - a wide variation. i don't think goths focus particularly on one faculty or degree subject, as taste in music (and to a lesser extent in lifestyle) do not determine either level of intelligence or talent in or tendency towards a particular field, and such a debate becomes irrelevant in discussions based on such broad definitions like 'arts' or 'sciences', which comprise myriad disciplines.

in addition, rocksoc alone has over 250 members and it can not and does not represent _all_ rock (and associated sub-genres) music fans in st andrews. it is therefore most likely unjust to label everyone who wears black clothing all the time a goth, as they could be a fan of a different type of rock music, or indeed no fan of the genre as a whole whatsoever.
equally, there have been people very into goth music yet who do not appear outwardly goth - the demographic could therefore be a lot higher (or still the same :)) than previously supposed by earlier posters.

before i get grossly off-topic again, what i'm trying to say is that you can't really attempt to equate faculty/subject with music/lifestyle choices and outward appearance.


Postby The_Farwall on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

Can I just ask why every fucker that considers themselves to be part of some 'normal' social group seem to think that goths and skatepunks are only pretending to be different.
Is most of the world populated by clones who know themselves to be completely identical, so that when they see someone who doesn't seem to be sticking to their social rules they're obviously just 'pretending' to be different?
Do people (such as who ever made the anonymous post below the 'Duff Monkey' one) really think that people who think they look good in pvc and leather or baggy trousers and wallet chains are 'deluding themselves'?
Can you guys not see how utterly imbesilic saying things like that actually sounds?

No, of course goths, and punks, and metallers, and rockers, and grungers, and club kids, and skin heads, and hippies and who ever the hell else doesn't go around dressed in beige slacks and topman sweaters (or wherever it is that one buys smart-casual wear from) really should just fall in line, slip into the state-provided brown loafers or Nikes or whatevers and blend in with the rest of the crowd.
They obviously just want attention, they can't seriously have THAT taste in music and fashion, can they?
No, of course not, I mean OBVIOUSLY they actually hold exactly the same opinions as you pricks do.
But then seeing as that is the case, who can blame us for wanting to distinguish ourselves from the kind of people who say things like this (Quoting from the post mentioned above):-
"The chain and leather types aren't real Goths at all, and the Skatepunks are just the same - deluding themselves that they are individuals choosing an alternative lifestyle. That said, once you've got passed the "I'm different, me" bullshit, they all hate Yahs as well."

Well fuck you, I am different! And the point I'm trying to make here is that I'm not saying, hey everyone look at me! I'm different! I just am. So what!?
I suppose the native tribes that wander around rain forests, nude with wood stuck in their lips are deluding themselves too. They're really just middle class, predjudiced arse holes from the home counties as well.
[s]Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way.[/s]
Posts: 1628
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Defence of the arts

Postby medea on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

So we are fickle beasts are we? You are soooo right to live in fear of my wrath.

Arts subjects require independence of thought and a higher level of thinking quite unheard of in a scientist. Lets be honest - any trained monkey in a suit can learn facts and figures and pass them off as 'The Periodic Table.' And I'm quite sure that its much easier to get higher marks in a subject where answers are 'right & wrong' (ie Science) rather than the blessed arts which require intellegent and coherent argument.

Oceana - I'm gonna kick your ass for this. Be ready!


Postby immunodiffusion on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

How about Medics?
Not quite an art, not quite a science...
Posts: 312
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

The Monkey was Gunter I assume.

Postby Oceana on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

My my Farwall, aren't we angry at the world.
It should be pointed out that at no point was taste in music ever an issue - it is not someone’s taste in music that makes them a Goth or a Yah or, god forbid, "middle class, prejudiced arse holes from the home counties."
It's not even their clothes though I'll admit that society as a whole usually takes what a person wears - even looks like (in the wonderful world of comics for instance) - on the outside as an indication of what is inside. As far as appearance goes this is fallacy but as to choice in clothes...well that's a difficult question. I wear clothes I feel comfortable in and my appearance (yes, my smell too (I love my footwear despite it)) comes second to that and I would not claim to be alone in this. However how many young ladies do you see standing outside the Union on a Friday night wearing shoes that will permanently damage their backs, give them varicose veins, increase the likelihood of them spraining/breaking an ankle...all for the sake of making their calves look better defined. As to their apparel or lack thereof, is it really worth showing off the naval piercing when you’re shivering to the point of hypothermia? I would say no but they would disagree and more power to them - I'm all for freedom of expression no matter how damaging it is to someone’s person or character.
The point that was trying to be made was that there is a higher degree of diversity than perhaps people appreciate (and that this is good) and that it is focused in different areas of the University. It is not such a ridiculous idea either - if you like big city life you go to London, Manchester, Edinburgh, New York, Cupar (oh ho! The Wit.) You don't come to Sunny Sanny Anny. The clubber scene is very much intertwined with the big city life and ethos - plus it's hard to get a suitable alcohol license outside of a true city (as opposed to The City of St Andrews or Briechan.)
It is also true that different types of subject are taught at varying levels and by varying numbers and qualities (if such a thing can be uttered) of University. So people of different educational tastes, social tastes, locality and background go to different places.
St Andrews, for instance, attracts more than it's fair share of Marine Biologists because it has an excellent reputation for it, very good facilities and it's really handy for getting live specimens (i.e. from the Sea which, as I'm sure all of you have noted, is not too far from Gatty).
People who want to do Marine Biology tend to have an interest in the environment, the sea and watersports (of the non S&M type). This means that we tend to be fairly mellow to the point of being remiss in our responsibilities (like studying).
This is not always true - nothing in the corporeal world is *always true* but it tends to be so.
I am a little confused by whether The Farwall is saying that his (? - sorry, I don't know, please adjust any gender discrepancies to suit) clothes are to say, "I'm different! I just am. So what!?" or whether it's just what he likes to wear and So What!?
So what indeed. It should not be a cause for contention - infact at last reckoning it wasn't.
Now I don't wear beige slacks (they're stone - I assure you) nor do I wear brown loafers (Medea wouldn't hear of it) preferring instead to be a bit of a smelly lad. My foot odour (Oh how I love degrading myself publicly) is offensive to other people - I know this - yet I still wear the same pair of Merrel trainer-type-things because that's what I am comfortable in.
Now if people are offended by what a Goth wears then that *is* *their* problem. If a person is offended by what a Goth listens to (be it Marilyn Manson or a proper Goth artist) then again that is their problem. That doesn't mean that it's wrong to not like that music or those clothes (as stated too often for me to bare thinking about - there is a big difference between a (statement of a) persons opinions & beliefs and a (statement of) general fact).
What bothers me (and bare in mind that this is a subjective statement of opinion) about Goths is that they tend to be so overwhelmingly hostile to other people for not conforming to their brand of individuality (on a related note there is a paper on the wall outside Dr. Peter Cundills (sic?) office in the Irvine Building talking about how the perceived liberal attitude in Holland (? again I'm not sure) has created a superior attitude so that now they are intolerant of outsiders for their intolerance...perverse (the logic) isn't it.)
I'm also more than a little frightened by the suicidal looks and looks of hatred that they tend to don to walk down the street with - these disappear when talking to someone and their expression is 'normal' once again (What is normal? It's an abstract concept. It does not exist yet it is what we base our perceptions of people (and places and things) on. In this case I mean that they look happy or even just that they don't appear to be planing to kill anyone.)
I think what needs to be pointed out considering The Farwall's (and this is not intended as an attack or an inflammatory remark - I just want to clear it up) statement of individuality is that we are all individuals (even clones - like identical twins). If you want to express your individuality then fine. If you feel you have nothing to prove and don't wish to express it - merely be comfortable then strap on those loafers and enjoy yourself. If you want to let everyone else know how much better than him or her you are then by all means tell them how rich you are and how large your fathers yacht is.
If you want to share the feeling of love and security you have with god in your life then go do it.
No matter what you share with the world though there will always be those who will misrepresent you. You can always expect your beliefs and views to be hijacked and distorted from well meaning but ill informed (or even just mentally ill) individuals. Sectarian violence in NI is not representative of the Christian faith, Osama bin Laden is not representative of the Islamic faith - indeed when it comes to religion the only representative of faith is you - there is no mandate that you sign up to - there is a relationship with God/Nature/Des Lynham/Gary Lineker...

We should treat each other as individuals and agree to differ on matters of personal taste.

Anyway...there are more Yahs in the arts faculty than the science faculty. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Medicine is just simplified Biology (but happens to be full of people with a penchant for alco-mo-hol). Divinity, Economics and the like I cannot comment on and beseech you, pray, inform us if you know.

(Medea, Medea, Medea...whatever are we going to do with you. My name is not gay, I assure you. Infact I, being a sad bastard, named it after the game of Kings. (I'll leave you that to ponder on for when you're REALLY bored). Incidentally, I think you'll find that the trained monkey in a suit you are referring to went to business school after dropping out of a 20th Century History Class...window.)
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am


Postby charlie on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

"If you want to express your individuality then fine. If you feel you have nothing to prove and don't wish to express it - merely be comfortable then strap on those loafers and enjoy yourself."

i don't really know whether you meant to put the "nothing to prove" bit in there, as it seems to contradict your general message of tolerance in this section... but then this isn't my argument so i'll shut up.


Postby Oceana on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

Oh just a quick note - "right or wrong"? What about Schrodingers cat? Or Fuzzy Logic?
It's not all about right or wrong - it's about what is and what could be.
None of this rehashing of other peoples opinions and passing them off as somehow more valid than your own or anyone else’s just because they managed to get published. They only sell well (one version of validity involves the book being widely read) because that's what lecturers make the set texts (in particular books they or their friends have written).
Does anyone actually think that analysing Jane Austen will contribute anything that hasn't already been said or that actually matters? Does anyone even like Jane Austen?
Why read the Iliad, the Odyssey or the Aeneid if not just for enjoyment - you're not going to say anything new unless you cheat and use a mistranslated version.

How do you like them apples?


(Me? Trying to provoke you Medea? Never!)
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Quagmire of Doom - starring Bruce Campbell

Postby Oceana on Mon Jan 01, 1990 12:00 pm

Quite right.

I didn't mean to say that anyone else has anything to prove.

I was trying to show that that this 'I have nothing to prove' argument is used by people trying to defend their tastes (and as The_Farwall had decided to call 'loafers' clones, and as nobody else had been insulted (this year) then I felt it applied to them in particular) but should really have included it for the others or not at all.

I was also being a mite contenscious and petty (I'm afraid I let myself slip after writing such a huge posting).

My bad. (So to speak)

Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am


Return to The Sinner's Main Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests