Thornton Critical Review

This chapter begins by pointing out flaws and discrepancies between the definition of "mainstream" in British club culture (and in general) especially along lines of class and education; then points out that most hard-and-fast dichotomies ethnomusicologists use are flawed and reductionist. Unfortunately, Thornton does not offer much of an alternative system, saying that no club she went to exhibited a crowd she would classify as mainstream, and her "exploration of the meaning of the mainstream" almost becomes an "invalidation of the term mainstream." She does say that "mainstream" is often a vaguely defined term that club crowds use to push against, and define their own crowd, which they claim is more heterogeneous. Towards the very end, she gets into some really interesting dynamics of how specific clubs, through marketing and door policy, delicately shape what kind of a crowd they attract.

Discussion Question:
Is there any middle ground between the binaries that Thornton despises and her totally fluid, "no-one is mainstream" take? Is it enough to admit that, though flawed, "mainstream" is a useful notion in and of itself, or is it only useful as something to be against?