NationStates Jolt Archive

Many of my friends are into punk rock and the whole culture of punk, but all of them have a different definition or aspect of it. Some people think it is all about the music. Some think it is all about the money. Some think it is all about anarchy or nihilism. And some think it is about believing that your work is the greatest work on the planet. Personally, I think that punk is about having hope and standing against, and undermining, corrupt regimes. My favourite band is the Sex Pistols because they are true, soulful punk. So what do you think? What is your favourite punk band? And, if you don't like punk, why?

"Punk is musical freedom. It's saying, doing and playing what you want."

- Kurt Cobain




That about sums it up. Punk is whatever you want it to be.

As for my favourite punk band, it's definitely the Dead Kennedys.

yeah i gotta agree.Its what you wan't it to be. My favorite Punk bandsare Discharge,Dead Kennedys,The clash and many others.

I suppose that's kind of right.
Man, this is going to be a short debate.
Anyone, like the Sex Pistols?

The Buzzcocks.

I suppose that's kind of right.
Man, this is going to be a short debate.
Anyone, like the Sex Pistols?

Yeah, as well as P.I.L. and the Professionals.

I like the ramones

Many of my friends are into punk rock and the whole culture of punk, but all of them have a different definition or aspect of it. Some people think it is all about the music. Some think it is all about the money. Some think it is all about anarchy or nihilism. And some think it is about believing that your work is the greatest work on the planet. Personally, I think that punk is about having hope and standing against, and undermining, corrupt regimes. My favourite band is the Sex Pistols because they are true, soulful punk. So what do you think? What is your favourite punk band? And, if you don't like punk, why?

It all started with the Mc5, they were revolutionaries, not little emo-kids rebelling against their parents.

*wonders quietly why this very specific question keeps popping up every few weeks or so*

X Ray Spex

*wonders quietly why this very specific question keeps popping up every few weeks or so*
Same here.

I agree with the Cobain quote given above.

It's not that hard to define. Punk is a style of music that originated in the seventies with bands like the Ramones, the Sex Pistols, and the Angels, as well as the youth subculture that goes with it. Both of them have traditionally gone for a DIY approach to music and fashion, as an extension of a broader anti-authority and anti-mainstream ethic that's traditionally been a part of the punk scene. They've also been bery big on shock for shock's sake, which is why they've borrowed fashion from such diverse sources as military fatigues to bdsm gear, as well as incorporating some of the look and philosophy traditionally associated with anarchy.

It's also, by and large, a subculture made up entirely of teenage wankers with no taste in music who don't appreciate the irony of paying mainstream retailers for merchandise with Anarchy symbols and pictures of Che Guevera on them :D

Punk is a style of music that originated in the seventies with bands like the Ramones, the Sex Pistols, and the Angels...

Am I the only one here asking 'the Angels?'?

It all started with the Mc5, they were revolutionaries, not little emo-kids rebelling against their parents.

Much as I love the MC5... for the most part the MC5 were more interested in rebellion and dissolute living for their own sakes: it was their one time manager John Sinclair that grafted a facade of a political edge to their music and dragged in the whole White Panther Party shenanigans. The MC5's prime concern was partying and playing loud rock'n'roll whilst wasted on whatever drugs they could get their hands on: although Sinclair tried to market them as real revolutionaries to further his own ends they were on the whole a pretty reactionary bunch during their glory years - for example the opinion on the place of women in the new order as espoused by the WPP was pretty much the same as that expressed by the Black Panthers - prone. The MC5 might have been the first pseudo-revolutionary rock band to pose with rifles, but in the end it was just the same kind of posing as they did with their guitars.

Punk is whatever you make it!
Thats the basic principle of it

My favourite punk band is nofx at the moment, goes between them, blink-182, Less Than Jake and Alkaline Trio

Punk is an oxymoron. It is an anti-solidarity movement. It is a culture of individuals. It is a group of nonconformists. Punks are people that have tried so hard to be themselves that they have turned into someone else.

It is an anti-solidarity movement.

Whence your belief that it is anti-solidarity?

It's tough to define, but I know it when I hear it.

what is punk
baby don't hurt me
don't hurt me no more

Whence your belief that it is anti-solidarity?

If one is stating that they are not like everyone else, it would follow that one cannot support the heard mentality, therefore one would reject any group, ironically, including punk.

If one is stating that they are not like everyone else, it would follow that one cannot support the heard mentality, therefore one would reject any group, ironically, including punk.

Ah yes, but there is a difference between a sheep like mentality and solidarity. It is possible to be a sharply defined autonomous individual and still co-operate with others. Dragging Nietzsche into it is to blur the issue here: working alongside others does not equate to the herd mentality if it is recignised that the only true authority that can claim dominion over the self is that very self. Realising ones own autonomy does not need to lead to a rejection of all groups, but instead a selectivity when it comes to which groups to ally oneself with, whether consciously or not. Aristotle's maxim that man is a social animal does not contradict his belief that individuals are ultimately self-governing.

Aside from which, punk is not about claiming that one is not like everybody else, but instead that one is distinct from them: there is a given commonality, but also an independence and (perceived) freedom of will.

Anyone, like the Sex Pistols?

Absolutely. My favourite band by a mile, absolutely love them. Also into The Clash, Buzzcocks, The Pogues, X-Ray Spex, The Slits, The Damned, The Adverts, The Jam, The Nipple Erectors, Public Image Ltd, Siouxsie and the Banshees, The Ramones, Subway Sect, Wire... ok, I'll shut up now!

Ah yes, but there is a difference between a sheep like mentality and solidarity. It is possible to be a sharply defined autonomous individual and still co-operate with others. Dragging Nietzsche into it is to blur the issue here: working alongside others does not equate to the herd mentality if it is recignised that the only true authority that can claim dominion over the self is that very self. Realising ones own autonomy does not need to lead to a rejection of all groups, but instead a selectivity when it comes to which groups to ally oneself with, whether consciouly or not.
So, essentially, conformity can be a choice rather than an imposition? I would say in that case, choosing to be a punk is no more an expression of individuality than choosing to be a conservative.

It may be that we are all punks rebelling against ourselves.

My favourite band is the Sex Pistols because they are true, soulful punk.

The Sex Pistols were never true, soulful anything. They were the original punk boy band. Put together by the music industry for image more than anything else, they are roughly on a par with the Spice Girls when it comes to being true and soulful. And the music sucked.

*prepares to duck*

So, essentially, conformity can be a choice rather than an imposition?

Allying yourself with like-minded people is hardly conformity.

The Sex Pistols were never true, soulful anything. They were the original punk boy band. Put together by the music industry for image more than anything else, they are roughly on a par with the Spice Girls when it comes to being true and soulful. And the music sucked.

*prepares to duck*

Not true one little bit. 'Boy band'? Hah, laughable. How exactly are they a boy band?

Other than Lydon, they were already a band before Malcolm came along and suggested they get a new singer. THAT'S WHAT MANAGERS ARE FOR! Managers help the band out, not just by booking gigs, but by giving them advice. Malcolm was their friend and told them they should get a new singer, so they did. John Lydon.

Nothing 'boy-band' like about them at all.

I shudder to think what you consider a real band. If anybody says Crass, please jump off a bridge.

Other than Lydon, they were already a band before Malcolm came along and suggested they get a new singer.

Someone is forgetting Sid Vicious. Recruited for the image, despite his very limited abilities. Didn't actually play on the recordings, and had his amp off at gigs. Just there to look the part. And sell records.

Half the band only recruited for the image? Talentless? Concentrating on PR stunts rather than music? Sounds like a boy band to me.

Yay for metal!

Punk is:

Retarded. Overrated. Hypocritical. Filled with teenage boys that have hormonal problems. Filled with teenage girls who think said teenage boys actually have feelings of love and sentimentality and try to go out with them but eventually have their relationships end up as a flaming airplane falling from the sky which gives rise to the "emo movement" where said boys get out their acoustic guitars and whine and cry about suburban teenage life and just generally piss me off.

Oh yeah, and it's dead. I'm being generous in saying that; I'd like to hope it wasn't alive in the first place.

Someone is forgetting Sid Vicious. Recruited for the image, despite his very limited abilities. Didn't actually play on the recordings, and had his amp off at gigs. Just there to look the part. And sell records.

Half the band only recruited for the image? Talentless? Concentrating on PR stunts rather than music? Sounds like a boy band to me.

The Sid Vicious era was quite pathetic, I agree. But no real Sex Pistols fan will count Sid Vicious as being the bass player. Glen Matlock was the bass player for the Sex Pistols, end of story. Malcolm wanted him for his look, yes, but ultimately it was John who said yes he wanted Sid too. John wanted Sid in the band so he had an 'ally' as Steve and Paul were a unit, and he didn't have anyone to side with. So no, it's not boy band like for the lead singer to want a new member at all. Especially since Sid initally was learning the bass very well.

Half the band recruited for the image? No, they chose John because of his insane singing style above all else. He audition to Alice Cooper's "I'm Eighteen" infront of a jukebox, and that was when they knew they had the man they were looking for.

All bands audition for members, nothing boy band like about that either.

Oh je-sus, not more then a day and already we have a pro-anti sex pistols argument going.


Does it really matter? Are you somehow less punk (you anti-sex pistols kids) if you don't attack the poor little souls of those who support the sex pistols? To you pro sex pistols kids, why bother supporting them, why do you care what anyone else thinks about the music you listen too?

Christ, I can see how this might be relevant if it was the 70's/80's, but come on people, grow up, move on.

Punk is:

Retarded. Overrated. Hypocritical. Filled with teenage boys that have hormonal problems. Filled with teenage girls who think said teenage boys actually have feelings of love and sentimentality and try to go out with them but eventually have their relationships end up as a flaming airplane falling from the sky which gives rise to the "emo movement" where said boys get out their acoustic guitars and whine and cry about suburban teenage life and just generally piss me off.

Oh yeah, and it's dead. I'm being generous in saying that; I'd like to hope it wasn't alive in the first place.

That is the worst description of the punk era ever written. Try checking out 1976, it might show you otherwise.

Oh je-sus, not more then a day and already we have a pro-anti sex pistols argument going.


Does it really matter? Are you somehow less punk (you anti-sex pistols kids) if you don't attack the poor little souls of those who support the sex pistols? To you pro sex pistols kids, why bother supporting them, why do you care what anyone else thinks about the music you listen too?

Christ, I can see how this might be relevant if it was the 70's/80's, but come on people, grow up, move on.

I don't care if people dislike the music, thats their choice. But when they clearly put the band down for pathetic and erroneous reasons thats when they need to be sorted out.

... and had his amp off at gigs.

This bit isn't true, although it might have been better if it were.

That is the worst description of the punk era ever written. Try checking out 1976, it might show you otherwise.
LOL. Because I really care about the history of music. I think music as a whole is overrated. Why is everyone so obsessed with it? Because it can "speak to peoples' souls"? I can get that from a good book. But who am I kidding?: most people are too lazy to read a book.

I don't care if people dislike the music, thats their choice. But when they clearly put the band down for pathetic and erroneous reasons thats when they need to be sorted out.
For the love of pete, why? Does that make you less "punk" if you don't act elitist? Why do you even care what someone else thinks is punk or not?

punks were and are young male homosexuals... that's where the movement got its name... blacks often still use this definition, when they call you a little punk bitch they don't mean you have a mohawk and listen to crass, they mean your the guy in prison who can be bought for half a pack of newports.

For the love of pete, why? Does that make you less "punk" if you don't act elitist? Why do you even care what someone else thinks is punk or not?

I'm not a punk. This is 2005, punk happened in the late seventies. Nothing I say or do will make me a 'punk', I can simply be inspired by the era.

It's simply this... if someone is saying things about the band that are totally false, then they should be told they are wrong. Simple as that. I care because I hate the blatent ignorance of that previous poster.

I'm not a punk. This is 2005, punk happened in the late seventies. Nothing I say or do will make me a 'punk', I can simply be inspired by the era.

It's simply this... if someone is saying things about the band that are totally false, then they should be told they are wrong. Simple as that. I care because I hate the blatent ignorance of that previous poster.
If you've spent any time on this board, or on any message board that has this topic, you know damn well that the issue really doesn't have an answer and comes down to subjective opinion.

If you've spent any time on this board, or on any message board that has this topic, you know damn well that the issue really doesn't have an answer and comes down to subjective opinion.

Yes, a lot of issues do... but not this one. This one is based on simple fact. The Sex Pistols were not brought together by a corporation, the Sex Pistols were not in any way a boy band. FACT. No opinions needed thank you very much.

...of course, the irony here is that like it or not, as we witness here the Sex Pistols continue to be a charged issue even after all this time...

(not bad for a band that when it comes down to the wire only had two or three stand-out songs and the rest of their catalogue filled up with a mish-mash of half-baked ideas and pretty straightforward rock'n'roll tunes which were saved from the dustbin of history by the production on them alone)

(not bad for a band that when it comes down to the wire only had two or three stand-out songs and the rest of their catalogue filled up with a mish-mash of half-baked ideas and pretty straightforward rock'n'roll tunes which were saved from the dustbin of history by the production on them alone)


See, that is this mans opinion. This is completely fine for him to say, as this is a subjective matter.

While I disagree with him and think every song is a classic, he hasn't shown any ignorance, so he's alright by me. See, there's a difference.

The Sex Pistols were not brought together by a corporation...

Nor were Take That.

on this entire thread...not one person has brought up the Misfits....come on people....punk rock and no Misfits....that's like saying Green Day and Good Charlotte are punk...it doesn't make sense...

Glen Danzig and Jerry Only have pretty much shaped what i prefer in my life...black and white horror movies...my style...

That said...my favorite punk band (Misfits...go figure) can eat your favorite punk band...

Nor were Take That.

I never said they were. But the user who posted earlier said that the Sex Pistols were, which is a blatent lie.

While I disagree with him and think every song is a classic, he hasn't shown any ignorance, so he's alright by me. See, there's a difference.

Lonely Boy is a classic?

on this entire thread...not one person has brought of the Misfits....come on people....punk rock and no Misfits....that's like saying Green Day and Good Charlotte are punk...it doesn't make sense...

That said...my favorite punk band (Misfits...go figure) can eat your favorite punk band...
the misfits are and were more of a metal band... sure they were popular with punks and they had goofy punkish haircuts but they were really just freaky headbangers.

Lonely Boy is a classic?

You consider the Swindle album as the Sex Pistols? First person I've ever known who does so. That is basically Malcolms waste of space. The Sex Pistols had one true album.

the misfits are and were more of a metal band... sure they were popular with punks and they had goofy punkish haircuts but they were really just freaky headbangers.

well i'm not going to deny that...but is that such a bad thing?

well...they are punk in some aspects...having the basic music down...single chord progressions, not alot of fancy stuff, not really singing about anything serious...but yeah...i won't disagree with the more metal part...

You consider the Swindle album as the Sex Pistols? First person I've ever known who does so. That is basically Malcolms waste of space. The Sex Pistols had one true album.

The Sex Pistols were a legal identity, and didn't end when Lydon threw in the towel - aside from which the tune actually predates his departure IIRC (although without lyrics).

LOL...music snobs...

not that I am in the 'punk culture' anymore but when I was it seemed to be about being who you were, without apology. Not trying to be someone else or being ashamed of who you were. but you know it has been years since I was even remotely considered 'punk' so maybe things changed, I know there is a lot more eliteism now, and looking down on others who are not "punk enough". maybe it was there then too and I just ignored it.

well...they are punk in some aspects...having the basic music down...single chord progressions, not alot of fancy stuff, not really singing about anything serious...but yeah...i won't disagree with the more metal part...

Never been such a fan of the Misfits, but I can see why people into punk rock might like them. They're a fun kind of band it seems, a bit of a laugh.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not too clued up on them.

well i'm not going to deny that...but is that such a bad thing?
naw but it was still funny when that guy from the north side kings completely pwned danzig.

The Sex Pistols were a legal identity, and didn't end when Lydon threw in the towel - aside from which the tune actually predates his departure IIRC (although without lyrics).

Ok, then I shall change my original statement to 'every Lydon-era song was a classic'.

Never been such a fan of the Misfits, but I can see why people into punk rock might like them. They're a fun kind of band it seems, a bit of a laugh.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not too clued up on them.

oh yes...quite the laugh...that is what i have always thought of punk as...not being all political as some of these pop-"punk" bands are like Green Day and even NOFX...i mean...Misfits sing about Zombies, Aliens, Zombie Aliens....

just to hear Glen Danzig or Michale Graves yell "DIE" at you just to have some woah-oh's right after it is funny....it's just always been appealing to me...thing's like "every day is halloween"....what can i say...Fiends rule

The Sid Vicious era was quite pathetic, I agree. But no real Sex Pistols fan will count Sid Vicious as being the bass player. Glen Matlock was the bass player for the Sex Pistols, end of story.

But the fact remains that Sid Vicious did play bass for them, and even today he is regarded as the main driving force behind the band (not by me, I hasten to add).

Malcolm wanted him for his look, yes, but ultimately it was John who said yes he wanted Sid too. John wanted Sid in the band so he had an 'ally' as Steve and Paul were a unit, and he didn't have anyone to side with. So no, it's not boy band like for the lead singer to want a new member at all. Especially since Sid initally was learning the bass very well.

Point is, it was Malcolm's idea originally. I agree that its not boy band like for the singer to want a new member. Its happened in a lot of bands which I wouldn't class as boy bands. And learning bass very well? Maybe, but any decent non-manufactured band would have hired someone who could play bass already.

Half the band recruited for the image? No, they chose John because of his insane singing style above all else. He audition to Alice Cooper's "I'm Eighteen" infront of a jukebox, and that was when they knew they had the man they were looking for.

And he was miming along to it. Thats a real test of his abilities. Anyone can jump up and down and lip-sync. If I could put in the time and effort, I could probably train a monkey to do it.

But still, maybe calling them a boy band was a little harsh. Should I just call them "manufactured with the express purpose to sell records to a new market segment" instead?

oh yes...quite the laugh...that is what i have always thought of punk as...not being all political as some of these pop-"punk" bands are like Green Day and even NOFX...i mean...Misfits sing about Zombies, Aliens, Zombie Aliens....

just to hear Glen Danzig or Michale Graves yell "DIE" at you just to have some woah-oh's right after it is funny....it's just always been appealing to me...thing's like "every day is halloween"....what can i say...Fiends rule

Exactly. Punk doesn't have to have anything to do with politcs. The Buzzcocks were a great punk band and they weren't political. In John Lydon's own words, the Sex Pistols album is "hilarious from start to finish... hilarious, but pointed, and therefore useful".

naw but it was still funny when that guy from the north side kings completely pwned danzig.

hey it happens...what do you do?...well...turn into a zombie and keep on rockin'

It really all started with the Fugs.

But the fact remains that Sid Vicious did play bass for them, and even today he is regarded as the main driving force behind the band (not by me, I hasten to add).

No he isn't. Sid isn't thought of as being any sort of driving force behind the band. Maybe where you live, but not here in England at least!


Point is, it was Malcolm's idea originally. I agree that its not boy band like for the singer to want a new member. Its happened in a lot of bands which I wouldn't class as boy bands. And learning bass very well? Maybe, but any decent non-manufactured band would have hired someone who could play bass already.

Who cares if it was Malcolms idea? If the band didn't want it, they'd have said no. They certainly didn't give a damn about Malcolm's opinions on 99% of matters, so they would definitely have had to approve of this. It'll have been down to Lydon wanting Sid in the band that did it.


And he was miming along to it. Thats a real test of his abilities. Anyone can jump up and down and lip-sync. If I could put in the time and effort, I could probably train a monkey to do it.

Hmm, thats one point I think you've got me on. I couldn't remember if he mimed or not. I'm still not sure he did, but my head is stumped for info on this one

But still, maybe calling them a boy band was a little harsh. Should I just call them "manufactured with the express purpose to sell records to a new market segment" instead?

No, that would still be wrong. They were four kids who wanted to make the music they wanted to hear and have fun doing it.

i've never really been a big fan of the Sex Pistols....i've thought of them as starting the punk "attitude"...but i've always given credit to the music to the Ramones....either way though...i'm a Fiend....Misfits could eat them all

i've never really been a big fan of the Sex Pistols....i've thought of them as starting the punk "attitude"...but i've always given credit to the music to the Ramones....either way though...i'm a Fiend....Misfits could eat them all

Ah, The Ramones. Great band. Although, to be honest, I can only listen to three or four Ramones songs before I get a bit bored and need to switch it up.

Fantastic group, but in moderation.

I can't tell you what punk is...because punk is dead...But I can tell you what it was, it was music that was at its best loud, brash, obnoxious, and made you dance and think all at the same time it had the ability to unite cultures, and cause clashes with authority, individuals questioned government all because of a musical movement. My favorite punk bands of all time have to be The Ramones, and The Clash, but The Sex Pistols, NoFx, Bad Religion, The Circle Jerks, The Queers, The Dead Kennedys are all great...

The Dead Kenndys kick ass.

The Dead Kenndys kick ass.

I'm not keen on American bands, or 80's 'punk' bands, but I agree with you here. They are the only band of their type that I enjoy, and enjoy them quite a lot I do!

Their vocalist was by far their best asset.

Of course the Mc5 I don't know how I could have possibly forgot about the Mc5 and the White Panther party, that is the birth of punk rock as a mainstream music source...While it is completley ludicrious if you want to know what punk rock at its core really is look at the philosophies of the White Panther party

I'm not keen on American bands, or 80's 'punk' bands, but I agree with you here. They are the only band of their type that I enjoy, and enjoy them quite a lot I do!

Their vocalist was by far their best asset.
Yes, he was, damn shame about that though.

Yes, he was, damn shame about that though.

Yeah, don't they tour without him now? Bands need to learn when enough is enough and to move on.

not that I am in the 'punk culture' anymore but when I was it seemed to be about being who you were, without apology. Not trying to be someone else or being ashamed of who you were. but you know it has been years since I was even remotely considered 'punk' so maybe things changed, I know there is a lot more eliteism now, and looking down on others who are not "punk enough". maybe it was there then too and I just ignored it.

Now that 'punk' has become more mainstream, with places like Hot Topic (who are owned by the Gap) and whatnot selling 'punk' clothing and punk music labels, there is alot of elietism, which I find to be bullshit and ignore. I enjoy punk music, I am not an anarchist, but close, I have worked with punks at rallys and actions against Bush and the IMF, punk is my favorite variety of music (although I like pretty much anything that sounds good, other then country), but am I am punk? The answer, I really don't care. I try to ignore the whole more less punk shit, because it is different for each person. I do find the growing conformity and hypocracy very 'un-punk,' though. As one person pointed out, you shop at Hot Topic and buy a Che shirt from the mall and get your chucks from Nike, while at the same time claiming to be what most punks claim to be, you got another thing comming.

I just like the music, hate the government, and love slaming around in a good pit (or riot) :)


i've never really been a big fan of the Sex Pistols....i've thought of them as starting the punk "attitude"...but i've always given credit to the music to the Ramones....either way though...i'm a Fiend....Misfits could eat them all

Dude, Leftover Crack. They would completely eat the Misfits.

Fuck World Trade is currently my favorite album

The Dead Kenndys kick ass.

Here here!


One more question, who here likes Flogging Molly, and what do you think of 'Irish Punk' in general?

Do they have punk in Ireland? Does it sound anything like Flogging Molly or Dropkick Murphy?

Many of my friends are into punk rock and the whole culture of punk, but all of them have a different definition or aspect of it. Some people think it is all about the music. Some think it is all about the money. Some think it is all about anarchy or nihilism. And some think it is about believing that your work is the greatest work on the planet. Personally, I think that punk is about having hope and standing against, and undermining, corrupt regimes. My favourite band is the Sex Pistols because they are true, soulful punk. So what do you think? What is your favourite punk band? And, if you don't like punk, why?

pot-smoking armchair anarchist conformity punks think they are better smarter or more "enlightened" than everyone else becouse they fit into a conformity same clothes same ideaology came everything

No he isn't. Sid isn't thought of as being any sort of driving force behind the band. Maybe where you live, but not here in England at least!

I'm typing from England! I've also lived here all my life!

And among people I know who like the Sex Pistols, Sid is thought of as being the driving force (like I said earlier, I disagree, but there you go).

But I'll agree with you on one thing. Dead Kennedys rock.

I'm typing from England! I've also lived here all my life!

And among people I know who like the Sex Pistols, Sid is thought of as being the driving force (like I said earlier, I disagree, but there you go).

But I'll agree with you on one thing. Dead Kennedys rock.

The only people I've met who think Sid is the driving force behind the band are about 14. Everyone else knows he basically didn't do anything and that Glen was the bass player (they might not know Glens name, but they know who he is).

Oh well... hurray for the fact we at least agree on one thing.

As far as I can tell Punk died with it's birth. Punk was about being yourself, but it became about being part of the movement, which officially killed it. I'm a big fan of being non-conformist, but I think Punk's ideals died when Punk began to exist.

Beyond that, please stop trying to define punk actively. The very idea that you can define a non-conformist movement is nonsense, because it should be without definition.

As to the Pistols... I dunno about their members, but Malcom McLaren was crazy as far as I can tell, and I have a lot of trouble trusting anyone who he controlled.

Good book for reading: England's Dreaming by John Savage

I'm typing from England! I've also lived here all my life!

And among people I know who like the Sex Pistols, Sid is thought of as being the driving force (like I said earlier, I disagree, but there you go).

But I'll agree with you on one thing. Dead Kennedys rock.

Well, with a name like Taldaan you sound like an Iraqi or Islamic terrorist, not a Brit!

Do they have punk in Ireland?

Most certainly so - msotly current bands in no particular order... Runnin Riot, Dangerfields, Easpa Measa, 1000 Drunken Nights, The Hypocrites, Complan, Cold War, Twenty Bulls Each, Serpents, Pocket Billiards, Dropping Bombs, xKnifedx, No Less My Life, Langdon Beck and many more too numerous to mention. Older bands - Brawl, Paranoid Visions, Sledgehammer, FUAL, Wheel, Tension, Cuinas, Pink turds In Space, Stalag 17, Radiators From Space, SLF, Undertones, Bleeding Rectum, Toxic Waste... plenty more that I'm currently blanking on

Does it sound anything like Flogging Molly or Dropkick Murphy?

With the exception of Blood & Whiskey, who were doing that kind of thing pretty much before the bands you mention, no.

The Buzzcocks were a great punk band and they weren't political.

"Ever Fallen In Love With Someone (You Shouldn't've Fallen In Love With)?" wasn't political? The Undertones are a better example of an apolitical punk band from the early days.

"Ever Fallen In Love With Someone (You Shouldn't've Fallen In Love With)?" wasn't political?

No, never heard that one said about the song before.

Even if it was, you can't deny that the majority of their musical catalogue has nothing to do with 'politics' in the traditional sense.

Well, with a name like Taldaan you sound like an Iraqi or Islamic terrorist, not a Brit!

Um... thanks.. I think...

*sigged*

But the fact remains that Sid Vicious did play bass for them, and even today he is regarded as the main driving force behind the band (not by me, I hasten to add).

What? Among dumbfucks, maybe. Everyone I know who's listened to them considers Glen Matlock the driving force behind them. Also, it's not about opinions: Glen was the bassist on all their recordings. He was paid as a session musician, because Sid rarely showed up for recording sessions and rehearsals.

Point is, it was Malcolm's idea originally. I agree that its not boy band like for the singer to want a new member. Its happened in a lot of bands which I wouldn't class as boy bands. And learning bass very well? Maybe, but any decent non-manufactured band would have hired someone who could play bass already.

1: It wasn't Malcolm's idea. I don't know where you got this load of bollocks (actually, I can name a hundred ways and places you got it, but let's not go there), but it was Steve and Paul who were looking for a vocalist, because they'd been sitting around for almost a year, doing nothing but rehearsing after dumping Wally Nightingale (the original vocalist/guitarist). And, it was Glen Matlock who spotted John Lydon (well, not really "spotted"... he'd seen him in the shop for the past week). Glen told Malcolm, Steve, and Paul that he had the right "look" (green, spikey hair, leather bondage pants, and a Pink Floyd t-shirt with "I hate" written on it). That settles this argument.

2: Hahahaha. John and Sid had been friends for years (they were squatters), and Sid really wanted to join. He was learning bass at the time (Glen was teaching him), and he was progressing. He was accepted because he had potential, and he had the mindset (listen to some interviews when he isn't stoned or baked. he was quite intelligent). It wasn't about any "image", despite what McLaren says.

And he was miming along to it. Thats a real test of his abilities. Anyone can jump up and down and lip-sync. If I could put in the time and effort, I could probably train a monkey to do it.

But still, maybe calling them a boy band was a little harsh. Should I just call them "manufactured with the express purpose to sell records to a new market segment" instead?

1: He was miming, as in moving and dancing to it. He was singing to it, also. Pulling things out of your ass must be fun.

2: No, maybe you should do a little research before you make yourself look like the village idiot of this discussion.

No, never heard that one said about the song before.

Ah - its about gay love, not just fancying someone who is already taken. Such things were rare in the pop world of the UK in '78.

Even if it was, you can't deny that the majority of their musical catalogue has nothing to do with 'politics' in the traditional sense.

Agreed, even when the 'personal is political' card is played.

Potaria, glad to see someone is clued up on what they're talking about.

Also;

Ah - its about gay love, not just fancying someone who is already taken. Such things were rare in the pop world of the UK in '78.

In that way, I see where you're coming from. But you know what we all meant by political didn't you? :P just nit-picking! haha.

In that way, I see where you're coming from. But you know what we all meant by political didn't you? :P just nit-picking! haha.

I know what you meant by political, but I still consider a chart single by an out performer singing about homosexuality in the UK in the 70s a political piece. It may not be as directly or as immediately apparently political as Glad To Be Gay, but it is still political, even if often mistaken as just another pop-punk love song.

2: No, maybe you should do a little research before you make yourself look like the village idiot of this discussion.

...but they were "manufactured with the express purpose to sell records to a new market segment".

...but they were "manufactured with the express purpose to sell records to a new market segment".

You're kidding, I hope.

You're kidding, I hope.

Nope. What else was McLaren doing when he made them change their name from The Swankers, drafted in two new members and draped them in the cast-off vestments of The New York Dolls? He was creating a marketable product, not engaging in some kind of conceptual artwork.

Let's face it...

Any band who make a living out of being a band HAVE to make money. Plain and simple.

Any band who have no aspirations to be successful are just pathetic.

Let's face it...

Any band who make a living out of being a band HAVE to make money. Plain and simple.

Certainly, but if we compare the Sex Pistols to a band like The Damned* we see that some bands come together by chance and are shaped by the members, rather than by an external manager and his vision of what the market needs.


* ...of course, if the Damned had a more focused manager in the early days then their history might not have been quite so checkered, and not the precarious rollercoaster ride that we all know.

Nope. What else was McLaren doing when he made them change their name from The Swankers, drafted in two new members and draped them in the cast-off vestments of The New York Dolls?

Hilarious. Another one of

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1480000/images/_1480925_sheep300.jpg

These.

1: Made? Ahem... Steve and Wally changed the name from "The Swankers" to "The Strand" in 1974, because it fit their grittier edge. After Lydon was in, Malcolm named them the "Sex Pistols", taken from one of his t-shirts. Yes, Malcolm actually did something good for the band. That was when he was still "a great mate", as Lydon put it.

2: Drafted, eh? Vestments of the New York Dolls? *laughs maniacally*

A: As was said before, Lydon wasn't "drafted". Read my reply to Taldaan's idiocy.

B: John and Sid had been dressing that way since they were 14 (actually, Lydon started when he was 11, with his hair, anyway). And as for wearing Malcolm's clothes, that's all they could afford. See, they were never paid the money they earned from gigs and record deals. Malcolm hoarded it, and paid each of them 40 Pounds a week for "allowance". This is the main reason they filed a lawsuit against him, and eventually won it (it was never a question whether they would win or not, it was a question of how long the case would take).

You have no idea what you've gotten yourself into, man. No idea...

Certainly, but if we compare the Sex Pistols to a band like The Damned we see that some bands come together by chance and are shaped by the members, rather than by an external manager and his vision of what the market needs.

Heh, The Damned formed in very much the same manner the Pistols did... Though it was more immediate. They didn't come together by chance: They all knew each other. They formed after seeing the Pistols play. That was their inspiration.

As for your clinging to Malcolm's ridiculous twisting of history... I really don't know why you would. You seem to be much more intelligent than that.

Also... I do believe Malcolm gave them the clothes for free.

Who wouldn't wear free clothes? That just leaves you more cash to spend on having a good time.

1: Made? Ahem... Steve and Wally changed the name from "The Swankers" to "The Strand" in 1974, because it fit their grittier edge. After Lydon was in, Malcolm named them the "Sex Pistols", taken from one of his t-shirts. Yes, Malcolm actually did something good for the band. That was when he was still "a great mate", as Lydon put it.

'pologies. Minor slip there - 'from The Strand to The Sex Pistols', for some reason I was thinking that the name 'The Strand' cam before 'The Swankers'. I was probably linking it to the fact that they covered 'Do The Strand' in their very early days.

2: Drafted, eh? Vestments of the New York Dolls? *laughs maniacally*

Sylvain's guitar didn't exist then?

Sylvain's guitar didn't exist then?

I'm not saying it didn't, but why wouldn't Steve take a free guitar? It was a fucking 1976 White Gibson Les Paul Classic, for crying out loud.

Like I said, they took things Malcolm gave them because they had no money. And, remember that Steve and Paul stole a shitload of equipment from David Bowie.

What? Among dumbfucks, maybe. Everyone I know who's listened to them considers Glen Matlock the driving force behind them. Also, it's not about opinions: Glen was the bassist on all their recordings. He was paid as a session musician, because Sid rarely showed up for recording sessions and rehearsals.

I already said that Glen was the bassist on all their recordings. Like I said many times already, I never thought that Sid was the driving force. I simply decided to use what people I know said about them- they're Sex Pistols fans, I'm not, so I thought that they might know.

1: It wasn't Malcolm's idea. I don't know where you got this load of bollocks (actually, I can name a hundred ways and places you got it, but let's not go there but it was Steve and Paul who were looking for a vocalist, because they'd been sitting around for almost a year, doing nothing but rehearsing after dumping Wally Nightingale (the original vocalist/guitarist). And, it was Glen Matlock who spotted John Lydon (well, not really "spotted"... he'd seen him in the shop for the past week). Glen told Malcolm, Steve, and Paul that he had the right "look" (green, spikey hair, leather bondage pants, and a Pink Floyd t-shirt with "I hate" written on it). That settles this argument.

Indeed it does. He was originally chosen for his look.

2: Hahahaha. John and Sid had been friends for years (they were squatters), and Sid really wanted to join. He was learning bass at the time (Glen was teaching him), and he was progressing. He was accepted because he had potential, and he had the mindset (listen to some interviews when he isn't stoned or baked. he was quite intelligent). It wasn't about any "image", despite what McLaren says.

Well, judging by the music it sure wasn't about talent.

1: He was miming, as in moving and dancing to it. He was singing to it, also. Pulling things out of your ass must be fun.

Ooh, get you. Maybe this goes down well with the guys at Hot Topic

2: No, maybe you should do a little research before you make yourself look like the village idiot of this discussion.

First, I did do some research. Second, is this the way that you respond to everyone who disagrees with you? You must be really popular.

Heh, The Damned formed in very much the same manner the Pistols did... Though it was more immediate. They didn't come together by chance: They all knew each other.


The accidents of history that lead to such potentially talented musicians knowing each other is an example of chance. I'm not suggesting that they formed as a result of a game of spin the bottle or anything.

As for your clinging to Malcolm's ridiculous twisting of history... I really don't know why you would. You seem to be much more intelligent than that.


I'm hardly clinging to the McLaren story here - the ex-members of the band all complain of having been manipulated by the man. I'm not claiming that he had some cunning masterplan, but rather that he shaped them and prodded them until they no longer wanted to be another 60s influenced pub rock band and instead to adopt not only the guitar poses of Johnny Thunders, but also his musical legacy.

I'm not saying it didn't, but why wouldn't Steve take a free guitar? It was a fucking 1976 White Gibson Les Paul Classic, for crying out loud.

And in what way is this not being draped 'in the cast-off vestments of the New York Dolls'?

Well, judging by the music it sure wasn't about talent.

This is opinion, not fact. I happen to think it's the best music ever made.

What IS fact is that the Sex Pistols most DEFINITELY could play their instruments and play them very well. That's something that far too many people ignore.

What IS fact is that the Sex Pistols most DEFINITELY could play their instruments and play them very well. That's something that far too many people ignore.

Musical competence on a technical level is pretty much irrelevant here: the Sex Pistols (pre-Vicious) could all play - two of them very well, while the Beatles had a distinctly ropey drummer. Neither of these factoids particularly affect the quality of the music they produced. I have seen far to many dazzlingly proficient, but utterly banal, players in my time to consider pure technical ability an important factor in making music. Once a moderate level of competency is reached people can make music which is either fantastic or dreadful.

This is opinion, not fact. I happen to think it's the best music ever made.

Cool. If you like punk, go ahead and like it. After reading Potaria's post, I have a hell of a lot more respect for you. Thanks for arguing, but I can't stay around for long. :)

LOL. Because I really care about the history of music. I think music as a whole is overrated. Why is everyone so obsessed with it? Because it can "speak to peoples' souls"? I can get that from a good book. But who am I kidding?: most people are too lazy to read a book.

First off, I am highly into all forms of 'entertainment', meaning movies, books, music, and anything else along those lines. My favorite thing is to have some awesome music playing while reading a book of some sort or the other. And anything that can be inspiring. Anything that can be taken as something that draws emotion, something that builds your imagination and allows you to do something that in real life you can't do. That would be "escape". As soon as you have a media form that would allow that freedom, you automatically have something to touch someone else.

This whole conversation is getting out of hand in my opinion. Punk isn't a type of music, or a style, it's a way of life. Being a 'punk' has had different meaning, though general coinage refers to a way a person is rebellious against what he/she considers anarchy and breaking out of the norm. It's being free from what the general populace considers as proper behavior, doing your own thing, and anything else along those lines.

Yes, the type of music/et cetera that a punk listens to is a common deroggative of the style. Those who listen to punk music can be anyone though, and regardless of what they would be considered, punk is only another media of expressing yourself. Taking the fact that I am a more 'dramatic' prep that is regularly asked to be a cheerleader and whatnot (though I openly disavow such request), I can't say I fit into one type of person or the other. I am extremely varied, and as of saying that, I wouldn't fit the type that could directly state what is "punk" or not. But human nature classifies itself, and seeing as I am an avid fan of generally any type of music, you can't characterize a person by what sort of music they do in fact like.

Musical competence on a technical level is pretty much irrelevant here: the Sex Pistols (pre-Vicious) could all play - two of them very well, while the Beatles had a distinctly ropey drummer. Neither of these factoids particularly affect the quality of the music they produced. I have seen far to many dazzlingly proficient, but utterly banal, players in my time to consider pure technical ability an important factor in making music. Once a moderate level of competency is reached people can make music which is either fantastic or dreadful.

Maybe so, but my point was that too many people go on and on about how 'the Sex Pistols couldn't play', when it's totally false. The producers of the album, Chris Thomas and Bill Price, have catagorically stated that the band were great instrumentalists.

I already said that Glen was the bassist on all their recordings. Like I said many times already, I never thought that Sid was the driving force. I simply decided to use what people I know said about them- they're Sex Pistols fans, I'm not, so I thought that they might know.

They're probably your run-of-the-mill MallPunk posers, then. That, or they're quite young.

Indeed it does. He was originally chosen for his look.

Yes, but not by McLaren.

Well, judging by the music it sure wasn't about talent.

Sure wasn't, but Steve, Paul, and Glen were very good musicians, anyway.

Ooh, get you. Maybe this goes down well with the guys at Hot Topic

Hahaha, Hot Topic can lick my balls. Wait, scratch that --- I don't want something I avoid like the plague licking my balls.

First, I did do some research. Second, is this the way that you respond to everyone who disagrees with you? You must be really popular.

1: Must've been those dubious websites, then. You know, the ones that say they're "Hardcore" this and "Real" that, but they don't know shit, really.

2: No, I just do this to people who are unreasonably stupid.

Cool. If you like punk, go ahead and like it. After reading Potaria's post, I have a hell of a lot more respect for you. Thanks for arguing, but I can't stay around for long. :)

Adios.

Cool. If you like punk, go ahead and like it. After reading Potaria's post, I have a hell of a lot more respect for you. Thanks for arguing, but I can't stay around for long. :)

Oh no! Somebody doesn't like me! Oh, my whole life's been ruined. The horror.

And in what way is this not being draped 'in the cast-off vestments of the New York Dolls'?

Glam is different from grit and grime.

Steve and Paul were huge fans of the New York Dolls, though, so it's a no-brainer that Steve would take a free guitar that used to belong to them.

They're probably your run-of-the-mill MallPunk posers, then. That, or they're quite young.

Quite young, mostly. Probably not the best source of information.

Yes, but not by McLaren.

Makes very little difference.

Sure wasn't, but Steve, Paul, and Glen were very good musicians, anyway.

Well, I'll try listening to them again. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.

Hahaha, Hot Topic can lick my balls. Wait, scratch that --- I don't want something I avoid like the plague licking my balls.

Balls? I thought you were a girl... Still, at least we agree on something.

1: Must've been those dubious websites, then. You know, the ones that say they're "Hardcore" this and "Real" that, but they don't know shit, really.

I can see it now... Wikipedia- Hardcore Real Edition. :rolleyes:

2: No, I just do this to people who are unreasonably stupid.

Oh noes, a wannabe anarchist poser insulted me! I will now have to go and cry and slice my wrists! Oh, the pain and suffering and mental trauma!

In case you didn't notice, fuckwit, that was sarcasm.

Quite young, mostly. Probably not the best source of information.

Probably not. *laughs*

Makes very little difference.

No, it really does. You were implying that Malcolm was the one who set everything up --- Now you're not. Again, I shall simply laugh.

Well, I'll try listening to them again. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.

I don't really give a flying fuck if anybody thinks they're good musicians just because they've listened to Never Mind The Bollocks, Here's The Sex Pistols. That's really listening to far too little. You should look into their box set (which has lots of demos and rarities, plus a full live set from 1976), as well as the later ventures of all the band members (save for Sid): The Rich Kids for Glen Matlock (a true song craftsman if there ever was one), Public Image Limited for John Lydon (no other group was so diverse and experimental), and The Professionals for Steve and Paul (straight-up Rock 'n' Roll with blaring guitars).

Balls? I thought you were a girl... Still, at least we agree on something.

Come now, what was it? My signature, the way I post, or my name? I love confusing people.

I can see it now... Wikipedia- Hardcore Real Edition. :rolleyes:

Wikipedia, eh? No wonder your information is off... www.sex-pistols.net is your best bet for accurate info on the band, plus is has a link to Steve and Paul's site, which has some great info on The Professionals.

Oh noes, a wannabe anarchist poser insulted me! I will now have to go and cry and slice my wrists! Oh, the pain and suffering and mental trauma!

In case you didn't notice, fuckwit, that was sarcasm.

w00t! I hit a nerve!!

Im not a huge PUnk fan, more of a metal man, but GG allin>j00.
Yiou gotta dmire songs about necrophillia

Glam is different from grit and grime.

Where is the grit and the grime? As you and I know Matlock was famously obsessed by cleanliness...

Where is the grit and the grime? As you and I know Matlock was famously obsessed by cleanliness...

I can't speak for Potaria, but I assume he/she meant a metaphorical 'grit and grime' as opposed to actually being dirty.

Where is the grit and the grime? As you and I know Matlock was famously obsessed by cleanliness...

That's how they looked. The way they dressed. It was hardly the big hair and boots of the New York Dolls.

That's how they looked. The way they dressed. It was hardly the big hair and boots of the New York Dolls.

The only real difference was that while the NYD raided the dressing up box for the look of transvestites and hustlers, the Sex Pistols raided the dressing up box for the look of bondage fans and hustlers.

The only real difference was that while the NYD raided the dressing up box for the look of transvestites and hustlers, the Sex Pistols raided the dressing up box for the look of bondage fans and hustlers.

They "raided" it, now, did they... :rolleyes:

Oh, just throw away the fact that they always wore different clothes.

http://www.bobgruen.com/files/sexpistols/files/R.211%20SEXPISTOLS%20ROTTEN%20OFFICE.jpg
http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/fine_line_features/the_filth_and_the_fury/_group_photos/johnny_rotten2.jpg
http://www.johnlydon.com/images/jlc020.jpg
http://www.hartfordadvocate.com/binary/112310-273-2/cover-4467.jpeg

I strongly suggest you look before you leap. There are many, many, many more pics that show many other clothing "styles".

That was part of the beauty of the band, from a fashion standpoint.

They always looked so different, especially Lydon. He threw away his clothes on a REGULAR basis because he simply got bored.

That was part of the beauty of the band, from a fashion standpoint.

They always looked so different, especially Lydon. He threw away his clothes on a REGULAR basis because he simply got bored.

Yep. With Sid, though, there was favoritism (he gave his leopard shirt to some kids on their Scandinavian tour, so there's a reason he didn't wear it after that). He loved his studded biker jacket.

They "raided" it, now, did they... :rolleyes:

You seem to be having a consistent problem with recognising that figures of speech are metaphorical.

I strongly suggest you look before you leap. There are many, many, many more pics that show many other clothing "styles".

Yup - one part Dolls, one part Voidoids, one part Ramones, one part Warholian excess to one part Westwood/Westwood influenced home-mades.

You seem to be having a consistent problem with recognising that figures of speech are metaphorical.

Although in the case of the Pistols (a number of who had a habit of stealing their clothing and equiptment), the word might be ironically accurate...



Yup - one part Dolls, one part Voidoids, one part Ramones, one part Warholian excess to one part Westwood/Westwood influenced home-mades.

To be fair, deriving their own synthesis of the combination. Everyone's clothing is influenced by something (after all, if you wear clothes, you've already been influenced), and they managed to do something new, even if it's unique nature stemmed from combing aspects of the early CBGB groups and the Warhol tour.

To be fair, deriving their own synthesis of the combination. Everyone's clothing is influenced by something (after all, if you wear clothes, you've already been influenced), and they managed to do something new, even if it's unique nature stemmed from combing aspects of the early CBGB groups and the Warhol tour.

Certainly, but I'm just pointing out that their garb did not come ex nihilo as Potaria seems to be arguing. The Sex Pistols were not the new Year Zero that is oft claimed, and instead were a fusion of hippy, glam and traditional rock'n'roll influences, both musically and image wise.

Certainly, but I'm just pointing out that their garb did not come ex nihilo as Potaria seems to be arguing. The Sex Pistols were not the new Year Zero that is oft claimed, and instead were a fusion of hippy, glam and traditional rock'n'roll influences, both musically and image wise.

Don't forget Mod, Ted, and Skin. If anything, those three made up the majority of the 'punk' style. At least in the UK.

There is no way anyone CAN have a 'Year Zero' in a literal sense. Everything will be influenced by something else.

Don't forget Mod, Ted, and Skin. If anything, those three made up the majority of the 'punk' style. At least in the UK.

As far as fashion goes these kind of crept in somewhat later than 77 though, but only by a matter of a year or so.

As far as fashion goes these kind of crept in somewhat later than 77 though, but only by a matter of a year or so.

How so? The tight trousers, jackets, creepers, mohair jumpers etc were all sported by the Pistols from the early days. Maybe not the general 'punk population', but the Pistols always had it down.

Certainly, but I'm just pointing out that their garb did not come ex nihilo as Potaria seems to be arguing. The Sex Pistols were not the new Year Zero that is oft claimed, and instead were a fusion of hippy, glam and traditional rock'n'roll influences, both musically and image wise.

Changing your original meaning, now, are we?

You were simply saying that they were pretty much clones of the New York Dolls. I was saying that they were a mix of pretty much everything.

How so? The tight trousers, jackets, creepers, mohair jumpers etc were all sported by the Pistols from the early days. Maybe not the general 'punk population', but the Pistols always had it down.

Yep. Just look at the photos from their first gig in 1975 (on the God Save The Sex Pistols website). Even before then, "they" dressed like "that".