NationStates Jolt Archive

So here's the list. (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/8877914/blacksabbath?pageid=rs.News&pageregion=double1&rnd=1133203747637&has-player=true&version=6.0.11.847) What do you think?

I have to admit, I'm not up on the qualifications for the R&R Hall of Fame, but I'd be willing to concede that most of these picks probably deserve entry. Vote for the ones you think deserve it, and give me an idea why or why not. I'll do the same.

I guess I'd have to say Sabbath and Skynyrd

Black Sabbath!!!

Definately Skynard, probably Miles.

I've never been a Sabbath fan, but I concede that they probably deserve it. Miles Davis deserves it just based on weirdness alone, but his fusion music was groundbreaking in its way. Blondie was also pretty groundbreaking--her inclusion of Fab Five Freddy in "Rapture" was one of the first crossovers between pop and rap.

I've always thought the Sex Pistols were overrated, and that both The Clash and The Ramones were far more influential, but I wouldn't be pissed about their entry.

I just don't understand the Skynyrd pick though. If I never hear "Freebird" again, I wouldn't shed a tear.

Blondie is a no brainer as is Miles Davis.

Skynyrd I don't get whatsoever, but I am from the south so I probably have to put up with it a lot more than most.

Black Sabbath, okay, they can get in. (mostly because when I was 4 I wanted to marry Ozzy)

I've always thought the Sex Pistols were overrated, and that both The Clash and The Ramones were far more influential, but I wouldn't be pissed about their entry.

Doesn't matter what you think. Fact is, the Pistols influenced far more bands than those two put together.

Blondie is a no brainer as is Miles Davis.

Skynyrd I don't get whatsoever, but I am from the south so I probably have to put up with it a lot more than most.

Black Sabbath, okay, they can get in. (mostly because when I was 4 I wanted to marry Ozzy)Is it a southern thing? I'm southerner too, and I can't stand the guys. Besides, wouldn't there be a fire hazard at the ceremony--I'm thinking about 100,000 Bic lighters all going up at the same time, somebody's mullet getting whipped into the flames, and all hell breaking loose. :D

Is it a southern thing? I'm southerner too, and I can't stand the guys. Besides, wouldn't there be a fire hazard at the ceremony--I'm thinking about 100,000 Bic lighters all going up at the same time, somebody's mullet getting whipped into the flames, and all hell breaking loose. :D

A southerner thinking the Sex Pistols are overrated? Imagine that.

Is it a southern thing? I'm southerner too, and I can't stand the guys. Besides, wouldn't there be a fire hazard at the ceremony--I'm thinking about 100,000 Bic lighters all going up at the same time, somebody's mullet getting whipped into the flames, and all hell breaking loose. :D
There are some of us southerners that actually have an ear for music.;)

Most of the fans of skynyrd that I have met think it's "country rock", they are the big pickup mullet redneck types, that really like it, you can play the first 5 measures or so of "Sweet Home Alabama" and they will come running and yelling and looking for beer. :rolleyes:

A southerner thinking the Sex Pistols are overrated? Imagine that.
btw, I agree that they are overrated, maybe they had talent and forgot how to display it? I never heard anything coherent from them at all.............

btw, I agree that they are overrated, maybe they had talent and forgot how to display it? I never heard anything coherent from them at all.............

One word.

Bullshit.

Sabbath most of all out of the list. The Pistols probably deserve it, but I think I like the Clash more.

A southerner thinking the Sex Pistols are overrated? Imagine that.
Hey--just opinion here. Of course, I do wonder why The Ramones and The Clash are both already in the Hall if the Sex Pistols were so much more influential, but hey, this isn't my area of speciality.

Hey--just opinion here. Of course, I do wonder why The Ramones and The Clash are both already in the Hall if the Sex Pistols were so much more influential, but hey, this isn't my area of speciality.

Influence and musical ability have nothing to do with being in the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame... Just look at Rush.

It's all about how much the judges like you.

One word.

Bullshit.
so I am going to guess you are a fan, one of those fans that takes things way too personally...........

I've never been a Sabbath fan, but I concede that they probably deserve it. Miles Davis deserves it just based on weirdness alone, but his fusion music was groundbreaking in its way. Blondie was also pretty groundbreaking(...)
Wait! Blondie was also on the poll? http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/uhoh.gif

Oops. I only saw Black Sabbath...

Ozzy!!! :D

so I am going to guess you are a fan, one of those fans that takes things way too personally...........

I'm a fan, but there are quite a few other bands that I like much more. I just love to call people on blatant bullshit.

Would you like me to show you a tab of Anarchy In The U.K.? God Save The Queen? Pretty Vacant? Holidays In The Sun? I'll show you "coherence".

Jeez man, relax. I'm not that much of a fan of punk, they were alright- but its not the they were the collective Messiah reborn!

Jeez man, relax. I'm not that much of a fan of punk, they were alright- but its not the they were the collective Messiah reborn!

What's all this, then? I can't call somebody on total bullshit (which it was) without being accused of being a fanboy?

I like Husker Du much more than the Pistols, man.

Sabbath and Davis.

Skynyrd can have the Outhouse of Fame, though.

Sknyrd really weren't that influential when you look at it. Plus, they are still making music, so lets wait and see how their career winds down. I think they shouldnt be inducted, at least not yet.

Sex Pistols are overrated and not very influential at all despite what the fanboys might say. So, I dont think they belong there.

Blondie I dont know much about, so I wont comment.

Black Sabbath....its about time!

Miles Davis, I have no problem with that.

Sex Pistols are overrated and not very influential at all despite what the fanboys might say. So, I dont think they belong there.

Excuse me while I laugh my ass off.

I think I can make a better argument for Sabbath being more influencial than the Pistols. Punk has never really caught on, despite the efforts of the Pistols and others. Metal, however, is more popular.

Miles Davis is a shoo-in. Skinnered can rot in the pits of hell for all eternity, doomed to listen to Yanni. :)

I think I can make a better argument for Sabbath being more influencial than the Pistols. Punk has never really caught on, despite the efforts of the Pistols and others. Metal, however, is more popular.

Miles Davis is a shoo-in. Skinnered can rot in the pits of hell for all eternity, doomed to listen to Yanni. :)

You think the Pistols only influenced other Punk Rock bands, eh?

Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

Sex Pistols were an awesome band. Probably one of the best punk bands in my opinion. Unfortunatly, I've always been caught up in metal to really explore punk. All I know about punk is that all the bands that call themself "punk" today are lying sacks of shit. And they are a disgrace to the bands that really gave punk a name.



Anyways, GO SABBATH!

I think I can make a better argument for Sabbath being more influencial than the Pistols. Punk has never really caught on, despite the efforts of the Pistols and others. Metal, however, is more popular.


You're kidding, right?

Now, i'm not sure what the biggest selling metal album is (Black Album by Metallica? Sabbath's Paranoid?), but i'm willing to bet that classic punk bands, and those influenced by punk music (including the first-wave of grunge bands) have overall been a whole lot more popular, particularly in terms of sales figures, than most metal. Not an argument either way for the quality of both genres, but I really doubt metal has been more popular, especially in the mainstream.

You're kidding, right?

Now, i'm not sure what the biggest selling metal album is (Black Album by Metallica? Sabbath's Paranoid?), but i'm willing to bet that classic punk bands, and those influenced by punk music (including the first-wave of grunge bands) have overall been a whole lot more popular, particularly in terms of sales figures, than most metal. Not an argument either way for the quality of both genres, but I really doubt metal has been more popular, especially in the mainstream.

Never Mind The Bollocks, Here's The Sex Pistols reached #1 in the U.K. charts, and stayed there for seven weeks. It remained in the charts for a total of 52 weeks.

Preorders reached 260,000+, and it hit gold status before it was even released. It was the first album to do that since the Beatles were around (it's still one of the few albums that has that distinction).

Every one of their singles had a chart position. Anarchy In The U.K. hit #38, God Save The Queen hit #1 (the wiki article says #2, which is incorrect. British authorities changed its chart position from #1 to #2, and they also stripped the name from its position), Pretty Vacant hit #6, and Holidays In The Sun hit #8.

I know a fair bit about punk, and the movement.. but as I wasnt around - I'll let Potaria do the defending..

Blondie & Sex Pistols got my vote...

I know a fair bit about punk, and the movement.. but as I wasnt around - I'll let Potaria do the defending..

Blondie & Sex Pistols got my vote...

I wasn't around then, either. I just know my shit. :D

Never Mind The Bollocks, Here's The Sex Pistols reached #1 in the U.K. charts, and stayed there for seven weeks. It remained in the charts for a total of 52 weeks.

Preorders reached 260,000+, and it hit gold status before it was even released. It was the first album to do that since the Beatles were around (it's still one of the few albums that has that distinction).

Every one of their singles had a chart position. Anarchy In The U.K. hit #38, God Save The Queen hit #1 (the wiki article says #2, which is incorrect. British authorities changed its chart position from #1 to #2, and they also stripped the name from its position), Pretty Vacant hit #6, and Holidays In The Sun hit #8.

Yeah, and if you throw in stuff like Nirvana as being punk influenced, it seems metal is left in the lurch in terms of sales figures.

I know a fair bit about punk, and the movement.. but as I wasnt around - I'll let Potaria do the defending..

Neither was he :p

I voted for everyone BUT L.S. I just don't think that any band that has the capacity to talk shit about Neil Young, and say good things about George Wallace in the same song deserves any kind of reward.

I voted for everyone BUT L.S. I just don't think that any band that has the capacity to talk shit about Neil Young, and say good things about George Wallace in the same song deserves any kind of reward.

*hands you the biggest cookie ever*

*hands you the biggest cookie ever*

Mmmmm, cookie :D

I voted for everyone BUT L.S. I just don't think that any band that has the capacity to talk shit about Neil Young, and say good things about George Wallace in the same song deserves any kind of reward.
You forgot the Watergate mention, to top it all off.

You forgot the Watergate mention, to top it all off.

Oh, right! The hat trick of bad music! Man I hate that band. It's too bad that the "classic rock" station on the mainland is the only FM station that comes in with no static on the island I live on...

The Pistols and Blondie. I hate Black Sabath with a passion unsurpassed by my hatred of any other music (except emo), and I couldn't bring myself to cease retching at the thought of acknowledging. Lynnard Skynner. Not my cup of tea, but probably still a major influence on rock and roll, I suppose.

Of all of them... The Sex Pistols should have gone in the moment they were eligable (which would have been, what, eight years ago? Do singles count as first "album"?), if only for being the sound that influenced punk (their status as first "punks" is questionable, but their influence on the sound of punk is completely obvious. The Clash used an older music style again, with a new message obviously, but the Pistols created most of the modern sound of Punk, taking bits and peices from the Ramones and their own creative genious.)

Oh, right! The hat trick of bad music! Man I hate that band. It's too bad that the "classic rock" station on the mainland is the only FM station that comes in with no static on the island I live on...
Seems like someone ought to get you a satellite radio for Christmas.

Sabbath is more influential than Pistols.
Metal is pretty much Sabbath and Led Zeppelin.
Punk is Pistols, Ramones, Clash and a bunch of bands about the same time.
Why are the Ramones and Clash in already if Sex Pistols are better?
So I would say Sabbath and Metal outweigh Sex Pistols and Punk
Besides most 'punk' sucks. The Clash is the only 'punk' I would pay for.
However since this is 'fame' and not musical ability or influence, all of them will probably get in eventually.

Besides most 'punk' sucks.
:eek:

oh wait, most of what passes for punk these days does suck maybe you are just inexperienced with real punk, it is kinda hard to find sometimes (I mean you can't just go to wallyworld and pick it up)

See, this is the problem with the Rock and Roll hall of fame...I mean, come on folks. I love miles, he was a great musician, but he was a defining voice in Jazz, not Rock. Why not just change it to the "music hall of fame?" Then theres Blondie, aside from the fact that they don't really fit into a genre, are they really a hall of fame act? I mean, they were a blip. Also, the Sex Pistols?! Come on here! This is a hall of fame, there needs to be standards. One of them should be some modicum of non-suck. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the Sex Pistols released one album of crappy songs. They weren't the first punk act in the UK, nor the first to cut an album, or the first to have a hit single. They were a follow-up act put together by a hipster who owned a boutique and wanted a punk act to manage.

That leaves us with Skynyrd and Sabbath, which leaves me with a question. WTF took so long? These two bands are the defining voices of their genres that produced their best work 20 years before the founding of the Rock and Roll hall of fame. Useless tourist trap, utterly useless.

:eek:

oh wait, most of what passes for punk these days does suck maybe you are just inexperienced with real punk, it is kinda hard to find sometimes (I mean you can't just go to wallyworld and pick it up)

No, there's no excuse nowadays in this age of internet file sharing. Burn the heathen! :p

Sabbath deserves it far more than the others.

Miles Davis, although I have a world of respect for his music...was not rock and roll......and its the ROCK hall of fame.

The Sex Pistols....had ONE album.
"Nevermind the Bollocks..."

It did have a big influence on punk...but ONE album, does not really make you hall of fame worthy.

Skynrd probably deserves it too, but never totally changed, or invented a genre, like Sabbath did.

No, there's no excuse nowadays in this age of internet file sharing. Burn the heathen! :p
who said anything about internet file sharing, I have an awesome little record store in my area, and by little I mean it's like 300sq feet of music piled disorganized (to the untrained eye) up to like 5 feet high.

The owner knows where everything is and has heard of bands that no human could ever hope to find out about without his help, he travels the country in the summer scouting out new local talent and brings back whatever doesn't suck.

He is awesome, he's like 60 but can remember just about everything about you even if it's 6 months between shopping trips, he even keeps you in mind on his travels and if he sees something you like(or he thinks you will like) he will pick it up for you.

I haven't been able to purchase any music from him in about 3 years (broke) but I called the other day in search of something new and he remembered me:)

Life will be sad when he is gone, there isn't another place like this in the state (or maybe the world) and his kid is an idiot (when I say kid, please know his son is like 40, but bad bad taste in music)

Doesn't matter what you think. Fact is, the Pistols influenced far more bands than those two put together.

What, visually? Every single thing the Sex Pistols did musically had either already been done before by a better band or was universal to crappy garage bands through times (out of tune string agitation on an E power chord? Brilliant!) Or maybe it was their image that was influential. Wait. No. The Damned was there first and the Sex Pistols were just wearing what all the rest of the Brittish punks were wearing at the time. No, what made the Sex Pistols was marketing. That and a well publicised stabbing.

Would you like me to show you a tab of Anarchy In The U.K.? God Save The Queen? Pretty Vacant? Holidays In The Sun? I'll show you "coherence".

Coherance, yes, innovation, no. Now, I don't want to start a flamewar...but theres a reason most people's first bands are punk bands that cover a Sex Pistols song. And um, just an observation, but if Motorhead covers one of your songs and feels the need to dress it up, you weren't trying in the first place.

Now, i'm not sure what the biggest selling metal album is (Black Album by Metallica? Sabbath's Paranoid?), but i'm willing to bet that classic punk bands, and those influenced by punk music (including the first-wave of grunge bands) have overall been a whole lot more popular, particularly in terms of sales figures, than most metal. Not an argument either way for the quality of both genres, but I really doubt metal has been more popular, especially in the mainstream.

Thing is, the first wave of Grunge was heavily influenced by Sabbath, too. What made grunge new was that it was a blending of the early heavy metal and punk styles. I hear more Sabbath in Alice in Chains than I do on any Metallica album. In fact, theres a pretty strong punk influence on Metallica via Venom. American Thrash (and, to a lesser degree, NWOBHM) borrowed heavily from the punk genre. Beyond that, though, if were talking about lasting influnce, I think that 40 years out there will be alot more musicians still listening to early Sabbath than Husker Du or the Damned, especially if you're talking about musicians outside of genre acts.

Now, if you want to talk about pure sales, you can't forget hair metal. I mean, yeah, it's metal's equivilent to pop-punk (Blink 182 et al), but it was there and it sold. Motley Crew and Guns N' Roses alone probably outsold anything punk-related outside of, well...if ya wanna claim Good Charlote for the punk side..... ;)

Never Mind The Bollocks, Here's The Sex Pistols reached #1 in the U.K. charts, and stayed there for seven weeks. It remained in the charts for a total of 52 weeks.

Preorders reached 260,000+, and it hit gold status before it was even released. It was the first album to do that since the Beatles were around (it's still one of the few albums that has that distinction).

Every one of their singles had a chart position. Anarchy In The U.K. hit #38, God Save The Queen hit #1 (the wiki article says #2, which is incorrect. British authorities changed its chart position from #1 to #2, and they also stripped the name from its position), Pretty Vacant hit #6, and Holidays In The Sun hit #8.

Do you really want me to dig up billboard information of the Backstreet Boys, or 50 Cent, maybe some Michael Jackson. Or, since we're talking about "rock" would Bruce Springsteen be in order? Sales doesn't necessarily mean quality.

who said anything about internet file sharing, I have an awesome little record store in my area, and by little I mean it's like 300sq feet of music piled disorganized (to the untrained eye) up to like 5 feet high.

The owner knows where everything is and has heard of bands that no human could ever hope to find out about without his help, he travels the country in the summer scouting out new local talent and brings back whatever doesn't suck.

He is awesome, he's like 60 but can remember just about everything about you even if it's 6 months between shopping trips, he even keeps you in mind on his travels and if he sees something you like(or he thinks you will like) he will pick it up for you.

I haven't been able to purchase any music from him in about 3 years (broke) but I called the other day in search of something new and he remembered me:)

Life will be sad when he is gone, there isn't another place like this in the state (or maybe the world) and his kid is an idiot (when I say kid, please know his son is like 40, but bad bad taste in music)

That's cool, but not everyone has access to service like that. I know a few underground-ish places myself (though I have to travel some 40km to get to them) and a few people that deal in second hand stuff. If you live in a rural area, it can be hard, but like I said, there's no excuses with the internets around. :p

That's cool, but not everyone has access to service like that. I know a few underground-ish places myself (though I have to travel some 40km to get to them) and a few people that deal in second hand stuff. If you live in a rural area, it can be hard, but like I said, there's no excuses with the internets around. :p
yeah, I wish I had the $ to buy it from him so that I could keep it around, I mean it's like the only record store in the state, everywhere else that you can get music is like the walmart or the mall. It's all top 40 crap. :(

Thing is, the first wave of Grunge was heavily influenced by Sabbath, too. What made grunge new was that it was a blending of the early heavy metal and punk styles. I hear more Sabbath in Alice in Chains than I do on any Metallica album.

Of course they were...you don't have to remind me of that. I'm a grunger. :p Even so, i'd still say that the first grunge bands had a bigger punk influence than metal influence (AIC is a notable exception, and Soundgarden is about halfway). The line gets muddy sometimes, but I think that's a reasonable statement to make.


In fact, theres a pretty strong punk influence on Metallica via Venom. American Thrash (and, to a lesser degree, NWOBHM) borrowed heavily from the punk genre. Beyond that, though, if were talking about lasting influnce, I think that 40 years out there will be alot more musicians still listening to early Sabbath than Husker Du or the Damned, especially if you're talking about musicians outside of genre acts.

Probably, because Sabbath are a "classic", unlike Husker Du or the Damned, which remain relatively obscure within pop culture. If you look at the punk bands that became household names like the Clash, the Ramones, or the Pistols, i'd say it's about even.

Now, if you want to talk about pure sales, you can't forget hair metal. I mean, yeah, it's metal's equivilent to pop-punk (Blink 182 et al), but it was there and it sold. Motley Crew and Guns N' Roses alone probably outsold anything punk-related outside of, well...if ya wanna claim Good Charlote for the punk side..... ;)

I'd still beg to differ on that one. Unfortunately, sales figures are too hard to track down. :mad:

yeah, I wish I had the $ to buy it from him so that I could keep it around, I mean it's like the only record store in the state, everywhere else that you can get music is like the walmart or the mall. It's all top 40 crap. :(

I've had good experiances with Amazon.

yeah, I wish I had the $ to buy it from him so that I could keep it around, I mean it's like the only record store in the state, everywhere else that you can get music is like the walmart or the mall. It's all top 40 crap. :(

Eww.

The chain record stores here aren't so bad. They generally have a section for metal and punk, and occasionally i'll find something I want. I've pretty much cleaned out the local ones though :p

I've had good experiances with Amazon.

Ebay can be good too. There are also a fair few stores around on the internet that carry obscure stuff, and are willing to ship internationally.

Failing that, I guess you could always try the record label itself.

Ebay can be good too. There are also a fair few stores around on the internet that carry obscure stuff, and are willing to ship internationally.

Failing that, I guess you could always try the record label itself.

If you happen to be into metal, theres a store here in Chicago that does mailorders called Metalhaven Records. I know they have a website but I can't for the life of me remember the address. They're good guys with good stuff and amazing prices. Definately the place to go if you want imports.

Ebay can be good too. There are also a fair few stores around on the internet that carry obscure stuff, and are willing to ship internationally.

Failing that, I guess you could always try the record label itself.
I am not so worried about finding the obscure stuff so much as finding out about the obscure stuff, I mean how the heck am I supposed to get the LP from a local band in Minnesota if I never even go to Minnesota and they are on an indepentdent label. This guy makes the trip checks it out, and brings it back. ;)

If you happen to be into metal, theres a store here in Chicago that does mailorders called Metalhaven Records. I know they have a website but I can't for the life of me remember the address. They're good guys with good stuff and amazing prices. Definately the place to go if you want imports.

*googles*

Hmm...they have some stuff I want, but it's around the $20 US range, not including postage....a bit much to pay for one album. I can probably get it cheaper elsewhere anyway. Thanks, though. :)

EDIT- Actually, most of the things I want are "out of stock". Typical. I get the same problem with metal stores over here. :p

I am not so worried about finding the obscure stuff so much as finding out about the obscure stuff, I mean how the heck am I supposed to get the LP from a local band in Minnesota if I never even go to Minnesota and they are on an indepentdent label. This guy makes the trip checks it out, and brings it back. ;)

Yeah, good point. Fair enough. :)

I don't like most of the bands they've recently inducted. I'm just glad my two favorites (Beach Boys, and Frankie Valli The Four Seasons) got in years ago.

Frankie Valli The Four Seasons

http://image.com.com/mp3/images/cover/200/drf200/f250/f25088bv73v.jpg

Hahaha.

$10 in internets money to whoever picks what band did that.

http://image.com.com/mp3/images/cover/200/drf200/f250/f25088bv73v.jpg

Hahaha.

$10 in internets money to whoever picks what band did that.

Weird Al?

Still for group that sold well over 100 million, that ain't too shabby.

Weird Al?

Not quite. They are a comedy group, though.

$10 in internets money to whoever picks what band did that.

Not fair - I've seen them in concert. Good album though.

To answer the original question, they all deserve to be in the hall of fame, although I'd have questions about why Miles Davis is on the list. If the HoF includes rock influences, then fair enough.

*googles*

Hmm...they have some stuff I want, but it's around the $20 US range, not including postage....a bit much to pay for one album. I can probably get it cheaper elsewhere anyway. Thanks, though. :)

EDIT- Actually, most of the things I want are "out of stock". Typical. I get the same problem with metal stores over here. :p


Heh, thats means they only have one and its on the shelf.

Damnit ... once again Cat Stevens gets overlooked. Guess we'll keep petitioning.

Come on here! This is a hall of fame, there needs to be standards. One of them should be some modicum of non-suck.

*tee hee*

sex pistols are awesome.
They cant sing and cant play but were even better for it and they were the best on the list by far. You could have had a better selection and a harder choice.

Even though Black Sabbath isn't my kind of music, they've definitely made an indelible mark on rock music and for that they certainly qualify for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.

Lynyrd Skynyrd is about a LOT more than "Freebird" even though that's arguably their most famous song. They also have "Sweet Home Alabama," "Gimme Back My Bullets," "The Ballad of Curtis Loew," "I Know A Little," "That Smell," and a lot of great songs, not just in the years when Ronnie Van Zant was alive. They were a HUGE part of "southern rock" and helped define that sub genre.

The Sex Pistols may or may not have been overrated. I don't know their music enough to say, but they've influenced a number of punk rock-type bands from what I can tell. I'd have no problem with their induction.

Blondie came out of that CBGB's era of the '70s and their combination of genres like reggae, rap, rock/pop, punk, and new wave and they have a bunch of famous songs, "Call Me," "Heart of Glass," "Rapture," "Hanging On The Telephone," Tide Is High," and "Rip Her To Shreds," among others that have made their mark.

The one I question very seriously is Miles Davis. He's not a rock and roll guy. Period. If there were an overarching Music Hall of Fame, he'd probably deserve to get in. But this is rock and roll. Herb Alpert and Jerry Moss getting Lifetime Achievement awards for forming A&M records is a good call, point blank.

Damnit ... once again Cat Stevens gets overlooked. Guess we'll keep petitioning.

Wuss rock is always overlooked.

[] What do you think?

Vote for the ones you think deserve it, and give me an idea why or why not. I'll do the same.

I voted for ALL of them! :) I think they all deserve to get in, although Miles Davis probably never considered himself to be a rock & roller. Still, the influence of jazz on rock can't be denied.

Probably, because Sabbath are a "classic", unlike Husker Du or the Damned, which remain relatively obscure within pop culture. If you look at the punk bands that became household names like the Clash, the Ramones, or the Pistols, i'd say it's about even.

Thats the problem, the big problem, with punk music. Everyone goes back to the same three bands, only one of which wasn't complete theft (The Clash). What really gets me about the Sex Pistols is that they were barely even a band. Sure, everyone on earth has heard of them cause you can get a backpatch at Hot Topic, but goddamn they only released one album. Their one major tour (don't tell me about Filthy Lucre, it doesn't count, damnit) only got 3 out of 22 shows to actually happen. Hell, even John Lyndon later said "The Sex Pistols were a fiasco. A Farce." To make it worse, in a genre that was supposed to be all rebellious and antiestablishment, they were a pre-fab band on EMI (and later A&M). Its like people talking about how big a hand Elvis had in early Rock music when the man never wrote a song worth a damn in his life and stole his best material from his contemporaries. Sure, the Sex Pistols were when people first noticed, but that doesn't mean they were original or even influential.

What, visually? Every single thing the Sex Pistols did musically had either already been done before by a better band or was universal to crappy garage bands through times (out of tune string agitation on an E power chord? Brilliant!) Or maybe it was their image that was influential. Wait. No. The Damned was there first and the Sex Pistols were just wearing what all the rest of the Brittish punks were wearing at the time. No, what made the Sex Pistols was marketing. That and a well publicised stabbing.

First, let me pick your ass on your thinking The Damned being around first.

1: The Sex Pistols were already a band in 1972. Granted, they had a different lineup (Steve Jones, Paul Cook, Wally Nightingale), but they were the same band with the same sound (Did You No Wrong and Lazy Sod were written during this time). They changed their name from "The Strand" to "The Swankers" in 1974, and not long after that, Nightingale got the boot, and Matlock was in as a bassist soon after. They rehearsed for months, playing covers, until Matlock pointed out Lydon to Malcolm McLaren, who was their manager. Thus, in July of 1975, they were the Sex Pistols. The Damned started in late 1975, after they saw a Pistols gig.

2: Oh, really? Nobody wore that stuff before the Pistols. John himself had green hair and plaid bondage trousers (complete with his Pink Floyd t-shirt, with the words "I Hate" written on it) before the scene even started.

3: What made the Pistols was their sound and their message. They were getting a huge following even before the Grundy incident. Funny thing about the Grundy incident... Malcolm wrote a script for the band, thinking they wouldn't do something to get them in trouble. Needless to say, the whole thing exploded in his face. McLaren was very, very nervous after the interview.

4: The band had already imploded well before Nancy's death. The stabbing (most likely suicide) occured in late 1978, and the band had disintegrated in January of that year.

www.sex-pistols.net for info on all of this.

Coherance, yes, innovation, no. Now, I don't want to start a flamewar...but theres a reason most people's first bands are punk bands that cover a Sex Pistols song. And um, just an observation, but if Motorhead covers one of your songs and feels the need to dress it up, you weren't trying in the first place.

1: They weren't truly innovative, but they sounded different. They were completely anti-pop in their sound, extremely raw and aggressive. They were a reflection on how Rock 'n' Roll was when it started... Or, how it could've been without Pop.

2: Motorhead didn't "dress it up". The cover has missed lyrics and lower tuning. More like fucking it up, really.

Now, if you want to talk about pure sales, you can't forget hair metal. I mean, yeah, it's metal's equivilent to pop-punk (Blink 182 et al), but it was there and it sold. Motley Crew and Guns N' Roses alone probably outsold anything punk-related outside of, well...if ya wanna claim Good Charlote for the punk side..... ;)


You think I give a shit about sales? I'm just proving that they were a successful band because of what they were, and how they sounded. Pistols gigs and concerts have always sold out entirely (fuck, even their reunion concerts are packed).

Do you really want me to dig up billboard information of the Backstreet Boys, or 50 Cent, maybe some Michael Jackson. Or, since we're talking about "rock" would Bruce Springsteen be in order? Sales doesn't necessarily mean quality.

Like I said above, sales don't mean a thing. I'm just stating that their records sold because they were good. And they still are.

*I strongly suggest you back out of this. You don't want to get in a serious debate on this subject with me.

Thats the problem, the big problem, with punk music. Everyone goes back to the same three bands, only one of which wasn't complete theft (The Clash). What really gets me about the Sex Pistols is that they were barely even a band. Sure, everyone on earth has heard of them cause you can get a backpatch at Hot Topic, but goddamn they only released one album. Their one major tour (don't tell me about Filthy Lucre, it doesn't count, damnit) only got 3 out of 22 shows to actually happen. Hell, even John Lyndon later said "The Sex Pistols were a fiasco. A Farce." To make it worse, in a genre that was supposed to be all rebellious and antiestablishment, they were a pre-fab band on EMI (and later A&M). Its like people talking about how big a hand Elvis had in early Rock music when the man never wrote a song worth a damn in his life and stole his best material from his contemporaries. Sure, the Sex Pistols were when people first noticed, but that doesn't mean they were original or even influential.

1: The Clash, eh? Joe Strummer was a self-righteous turd who wouldn't even acknowledge the existence of Keith Levene, who was a much better guitarist than Mick Jones (though Mick's very good anyway). Remember the whole "Joe Strummer is missing!" thing? Yeeeeeah, that's the stuff... Publicity any way possible. Yep.

2: Of course they only released one album. They imploded before they could even record more material. Tentions were high and they hated each other (thanks to good old Malcolm). John had written new material for a second album (much of it on PIL's "First Issue"), but Steve and Paul'd already had enough as it was.

3: Excuse me, but they had a few major tours. Their first, "Anarchy In The U.K.", had 7 shows of the original 25. Their Scandinavian tour had 13 shows, none being cancelled. The S.P.O.T.S. (Sex Pistols On Tour Secretly) tour had 6 shows, their Dutch tour had 9 shows (1 having been cancelled to make it 8), their "Never Mind The Bans" tour had 9 shows (1 having been cancelled to make it 8), and their U.S.A. tour had 8 shows (1 having been cancelled to make it 7). Ignorance is bliss, eh?

4: Lydon says a lot of things when he's pissed off (which is often). He still has problems going on reunion tours, because, well, he hates touring. Touring's what made the band a fiasco in the first place.

5: Pre-fab band on E.M.I., eh? One wonders why they'd even write a song called E.M.I. Unlimited Edition (a total pisstake at the label) if that were true... :rolleyes:

6: Actually, he did write songs. Not all of them, sure, but he did write most of them. You really don't know your shit.

7: They weren't original, eh? Funny. I wonder how your ass feels right now, what with having so much stuff pulled out of it.

Thats the problem, the big problem, with punk music. Everyone goes back to the same three bands, only one of which wasn't complete theft (The Clash).

Tell me you didn't say that. The Clash were the ones who were using the most prepackaged sound of all the "origional" bands. The Pistols united a number of influences (after all, what music is truely origional to a certain extent, it's all been done before, all you can do is try to add a new twist) to create a sound that was uniquely theirs.

What really gets me about the Sex Pistols is that they were barely even a band. Sure, everyone on earth has heard of them cause you can get a backpatch at Hot Topic, but goddamn they only released one album. Their one major tour (don't tell me about Filthy Lucre, it doesn't count, damnit) only got 3 out of 22 shows to actually happen.

Well the Pistols were certainly unstable internally, but they were most certainly a band in their own right. Don't even involve Hot Topic in this, since it didn't even exist at the time. They only released one album because growing stress from the outside and inside of the band was causing it to splinter long before the San Fransisco show that ended things. In fact, they may well have written a new album during that time, had McClaren not been wasting time and energy on his movie plans. As to shows, Pot's already covered some of this, but before the Grundy issue they were also playing a number of shows in and around London. It didn't help them that they were banned in many if not most places they tried to play, and often in danger of physical violence after the Jubilee incident.

Hell, even John Lyndon later said "The Sex Pistols were a fiasco. A Farce." To make it worse, in a genre that was supposed to be all rebellious and antiestablishment, they were a pre-fab band on EMI (and later A&M).

Taking anything Lydon says (especially while he is doing legal battle with McClaren and the other Pistols) seriously is stupid. He had almost as large an ego as McClaren and had been frustrated with the band by McClaren, Sid, and a constant fear created by violence against him. They were not pre-fab band, they had made inroads long before signing with EMI. Had McClaren not been attempting to subvert the industry by taking it over from the inside, it is possible that a smaller label would have signed them. EMI also got rid of them when everything blew up in their faces. EMI, A&M, and Virgin (to a lesser extent) had no idea what they were dealing with when they signed the Pistols.


Its like people talking about how big a hand Elvis had in early Rock music when the man never wrote a song worth a damn in his life and stole his best material from his contemporaries. Sure, the Sex Pistols were when people first noticed, but that doesn't mean they were original or even influential.

While the Pistols were influenced by contemporaries, they had their own unique style, fasions (look at Pot's post for more on that), ideas, and songs. Unless you intend to call ALL rock and roll stolen, you have no argument here. If you don't hear the Pistols influence in the entire first WAVE of punk, then you aren't paying attention. Half of the major bands in the first wave of punk formed in RESPONSE to a Pistols show! The Pistols had a continuing influence on punk music in their politics, their performance style, their music (can you deny that all Punk after the Pistols was touched by their guitar and vocal styles?), and the culture they formed. Saying anything else is ill-informed on the subject.

-snip-

*claps frantically*

What were the choices again? Miles Davis? Hmm... Miles Davis was an accomplished jazz musician, but I must admit I don't think of him when I think of Rock and Roll. Skynyrd? Pffft. Why not include any of several dozen regionally-popular bands, then?

Blondie. Well, Debbie Harry was always better at being Debbie Harry than Madonna ever was. Black Sabbath. Yeah okay, but only for the original lineup. No Ian Gilliams or Ronnie James Dios slipping in the back door on that one.

The Pistols? Were they not already inducted? They certainly sell enough Pistols-related merchandise in their gift shop, or did while I was there, anyway. Stands to reason if you're shilling off 'em, you pretty much owe them an induction in any event.

*claps frantically*

*bows*

Whoda thunk reading 500+ pages on the Pistols would come in so handily?

*bows*

Whoda thunk reading 500+ pages on the Pistols would come in so handily?

I knew that it'd help me out some day. :p

6: Actually, he did write songs. Not all of them, sure, but he did write most of them. You really don't know your shit.

Elvis, huh? Actually his entire catalogue is noticeable for not having a single song where he gets sole writing credit. He had an actual hand in two or three songs, but in most cases his writing credit was a result of contractual maneuvers, where he had no real input in the pieces.

Does this matter in the big scheme of things? It just serves to show how much of a revolution the Beatles really were - a band who were consistently playing, singing and writing their own material on their scale were a new thing when they came on the scene.

Miles Davis is the only one out of that group that I actually like, and I don't know if he contributed that much to rock and roll.

Lynyrd Skynyrd is overrated trash, just like The Eagles. But they are ridiculously popular, so they get in for mainstream appeal. Black Sabbath was a good band and they were innovative, they should be in.

The Sex Pistols were poor musicians with poor songs who only released one album. They were revolutionary, however, and modern music would not be the same without them (maybe). They're in.

I hate Blondie.

* history snip*

The Damned still beat the Pistols to both a contract and a single. Beyond that, they have continued to produce (with varrying degrees of success) to this day. The Pistols had what, maybe three productive years? During that time they recorded around an albums worth of material, maybe two. If you want to give me a history lesson, thats fine, I just think they're massively overrated.



1: They weren't truly innovative, but they sounded different. They were completely anti-pop in their sound, extremely raw and aggressive. They were a reflection on how Rock 'n' Roll was when it started... Or, how it could've been without Pop.

2: Motorhead didn't "dress it up". The cover has missed lyrics and lower tuning. More like fucking it up, really.

They sounded different. So did Velvet Undergound. So what? They were raw and aggressive? Well, yeah. Again, so what? Aggression wasn't really new to rock. All they brought to the table was style and nihilism. I expect music in my music, thank you. As for Motorhead, its not so much lower tuning as bothering to tune. That and Lemme rewrote a few lines. You can take all the umbridge you want, but he gets to do that, he's Lemme, and he wasn't playing a tribute to the Sex Pistols, he was playing a song he liked. Truth be told, I've heard both bands do it live and I know which one I liked. Not entirely fair, considering that Filthy Lucre wasn't really the Pistols, but still.



You think I give a shit about sales? I'm just proving that they were a successful band because of what they were, and how they sounded. Pistols gigs and concerts have always sold out entirely (fuck, even their reunion concerts are packed).



Like I said above, sales don't mean a thing. I'm just stating that their records sold because they were good. And they still are.

Context, my boy, context. The comment about sales was a response to a specific comment in a previous post. Breathe.


*I strongly suggest you back out of this. You don't want to get in a serious debate on this subject with me.

Oooh. If you want a debate over the history of punk, you'll likely win. I don't consider punk to be worthy of much attention so I can only speak confidently on the few punk bands that stood above the rest. If you want to debate musical merits, I'm here.

1: The Clash, eh? Joe Strummer was a self-righteous turd who wouldn't even acknowledge the existence of Keith Levene, who was a much better guitarist than Mick Jones (though Mick's very good anyway). Remember the whole "Joe Strummer is missing!" thing? Yeeeeeah, that's the stuff... Publicity any way possible. Yep.

Hmm, pot...meet kettle. Tell me, were the Sex Pistols never shameless publcity seekers? Thats part of Rock.

2: Of course they only released one album. They imploded before they could even record more material. Tentions were high and they hated each other (thanks to good old Malcolm). John had written new material for a second album (much of it on PIL's "First Issue"), but Steve and Paul'd already had enough as it was.

Circumstances don't matter much here. Look at any other influential band and see how many albums they produced. Especially one that is a major genre player. Crafting a sound takes time, it takes effort, it takes growth. They imploded because, well, they were too busy being 'Punk' to be musicians.

3: Excuse me, but they had a few major tours. Their first, "Anarchy In The U.K.", had 7 shows of the original 25. Their Scandinavian tour had 13 shows, none being cancelled. The S.P.O.T.S. (Sex Pistols On Tour Secretly) tour had 6 shows, their Dutch tour had 9 shows (1 having been cancelled to make it 8), their "Never Mind The Bans" tour had 9 shows (1 having been cancelled to make it 8), and their U.S.A. tour had 8 shows (1 having been cancelled to make it 7). Ignorance is bliss, eh?

The '77 tour was scheduled for 25, 7 played, only 3 were completed. That was their only major tour. 7 or 8 dates isn't major.

4: Lydon says a lot of things when he's pissed off (which is often). He still has problems going on reunion tours, because, well, he hates touring. Touring's what made the band a fiasco in the first place.

*Shrug*

5: Pre-fab band on E.M.I., eh? One wonders why they'd even write a song called E.M.I. Unlimited Edition (a total pisstake at the label) if that were true... :rolleyes:

Publicity, my good friend. See, labels buy what sells, shock sells. Its why acts from Robert Johnson to Slipknot got play. If you pay attention, E.M.I Unlimited Edition was recorded after EMI dropped them in 77, A&M released "Never Mind the Bollocks...".

6: Actually, he did write songs. Not all of them, sure, but he did write most of them. You really don't know your shit.

Again with the ignoring context. Lets look at the playback:

Elvis had in early Rock music when the man never wrote a song worth a damn in his life and stole his best material from his contemporaries.

Did I say Elvis never wrote? No, I said he never wrote a song worth a damn. I stand by that. Elvis was a thief and Colonel Tom's puppet. He happened to be prettier than Johnny Cash, and less threatening than Jerry Lee Lewis, and whiter than anyone on the chitlin circuit, so he made it.

7: They weren't original, eh? Funny. I wonder how your ass feels right now, what with having so much stuff pulled out of it.

Ad hominem attack.

Tell me you didn't say that. The Clash were the ones who were using the most prepackaged sound of all the "origional" bands. The Pistols united a number of influences (after all, what music is truely origional to a certain extent, it's all been done before, all you can do is try to add a new twist) to create a sound that was uniquely theirs.



Well the Pistols were certainly unstable internally, but they were most certainly a band in their own right. Don't even involve Hot Topic in this, since it didn't even exist at the time. They only released one album because growing stress from the outside and inside of the band was causing it to splinter long before the San Fransisco show that ended things. In fact, they may well have written a new album during that time, had McClaren not been wasting time and energy on his movie plans. As to shows, Pot's already covered some of this, but before the Grundy issue they were also playing a number of shows in and around London. It didn't help them that they were banned in many if not most places they tried to play, and often in danger of physical violence after the Jubilee incident.



Taking anything Lydon says (especially while he is doing legal battle with McClaren and the other Pistols) seriously is stupid. He had almost as large an ego as McClaren and had been frustrated with the band by McClaren, Sid, and a constant fear created by violence against him. They were not pre-fab band, they had made inroads long before signing with EMI. Had McClaren not been attempting to subvert the industry by taking it over from the inside, it is possible that a smaller label would have signed them. EMI also got rid of them when everything blew up in their faces. EMI, A&M, and Virgin (to a lesser extent) had no idea what they were dealing with when they signed the Pistols.




While the Pistols were influenced by contemporaries, they had their own unique style, fasions (look at Pot's post for more on that), ideas, and songs. Unless you intend to call ALL rock and roll stolen, you have no argument here. If you don't hear the Pistols influence in the entire first WAVE of punk, then you aren't paying attention. Half of the major bands in the first wave of punk formed in RESPONSE to a Pistols show! The Pistols had a continuing influence on punk music in their politics, their performance style, their music (can you deny that all Punk after the Pistols was touched by their guitar and vocal styles?), and the culture they formed. Saying anything else is ill-informed on the subject.


Well, since you put it so intelligently, I'll admit you have me on a few points. To deny their influence on punk would be a bit disingenuous. I guess my problem is that I've always felt that influence to be destructive. Punk CAN be great music, its just that the aestetic the pistols pushed kinda strangled the baby in it's crib. I mean, we can go in circles forever on that point, but its my opinion. The Sex Pistols didn't do punk any facors, they just saddled it with the same problems that led killed their band.

I mentioned pre-fab because of McLaren.

I mentioned Hot Topic because, like it or not, its not 1978. The vast majority of the first wave of Pistols fans grew up, got jobs, and generally did what young turks do when they get old. At this point, the Sex Pistols are less a movement and more a brand name. Its unfortunate, a little bit ironic, and wrong (they do deserve better).

Well, since you put it so intelligently, I'll admit you have me on a few points. To deny their influence on punk would be a bit disingenuous. I guess my problem is that I've always felt that influence to be destructive. Punk CAN be great music, its just that the aestetic the pistols pushed kinda strangled the baby in it's crib. I mean, we can go in circles forever on that point, but its my opinion. The Sex Pistols didn't do punk any facors, they just saddled it with the same problems that led killed their band.

The ideology of the Sex Pistols changed Punk, but to call punk completely dead is disengenuous. What "killed" punk was popularity. In the long run, Punk follows two cycles that act vaguely like predator and prey charts for environments. If you see Punk as a series of movements (First Wave, Hardcore, Grindcore, and then, for lack of a better word, Skate Punk) you see that each movement was "born" in complete anonymity, but had the elements of punk in it. Each one then experienced a burst of popularity that created a new class of "punkers" who were just there because of the popularity. While that "generation" was at it's high point, another movement began to form underneathe it, and would follow the trend. Basically, what that means is that Punk's nature is to die from popularity and then resurge once it becomes a minority movement.

Even the Punkers'll tear me apart for that, probably, but more than anything it's what observation shows. Basically, if the Sex Pistols killed Punk, it was by making it popular.

I mentioned pre-fab because of McLaren.

The problem with that is that in a situation without McClaren, one can see the Sex Pistols making it big on their own, through a very different path, but espousing many of the same ideas (The problem with this scenario is that without McClaren, Lydon and Matlock would never have become Pistols). Much of the fasion they prefered had been used by members BEFORE McClaren, most of the songs reflect Lydon's politics as much as, if not more than, McClarens, and the "style" of the Pistols music was established by the artists (common sense pointing out that McClaren's taste for music falls somewhere in between awful and just plain blasphemous *See Great Rock & Roll Swindle Soundtrack* *shudders at "Anarchy" in French with Accordian in the background*

I mentioned Hot Topic because, like it or not, its not 1978. The vast majority of the first wave of Pistols fans grew up, got jobs, and generally did what young turks do when they get old. At this point, the Sex Pistols are less a movement and more a brand name. Its unfortunate, a little bit ironic, and wrong (they do deserve better).

Mostly, see my analysis of the patterns of Punk culture. It's ironic, in a sense, but Hot Topic would have been Malcom McClaren's dream business, in many ways*.

* Read this as my psycho (quite litterally) - analysis of McClaren's (rather twisted) brain, rather than as absolute fact.

Elvis, huh? Actually his entire catalogue is noticeable for not having a single song where he gets sole writing credit. He had an actual hand in two or three songs, but in most cases his writing credit was a result of contractual maneuvers, where he had no real input in the pieces.

Does this matter in the big scheme of things? It just serves to show how much of a revolution the Beatles really were - a band who were consistently playing, singing and writing their own material on their scale were a new thing when they came on the scene.

Brian Wilson was better. The Beatles were just lucky to have an excellent producer.

Wuss rock is always overlooked.

Quiet, you! :p

Brian Wilson was better. The Beatles were just lucky to have an excellent producer.

Quite possibly, maybe this is one of those Euro/American things, but the late (post '69 or thereabouts) Beach Boys did end up relying on a string of cover versions, old folk tunes and songs written by people outside the group to an extent which was not there with the Beatles, they also much more often employed session musicians to play the core instruments on their tracks, whereas with the Beatles it would mostly be for orchestral instruments that session players were drafted in...

...not that I am actually a massive fan of the Beatles, but I acknowledge the major change in expectations that they brought about: prior to them it wasn't the norm for bands to write, arrange and play all their own material, whereas after them it was expected and perceived as somewhat 'inauthentic' if they didn't.

Anyhoo... anyone care to produce a tune where Elvis Presley has the sole writing credit? I don't believe that such a thing exists, and saying that is not to anyway lessen his qualities as a performer.

The Sex Pistols were poor musicians with poor songs who only released one album. They were revolutionary, however, and modern music would not be the same without them (maybe). They're in.

I hate Blondie.

1: Poor musicians? As if. Steve Jones is an accomplished guitarist (an underrated one at that). His post-Pistols works show off his uncanny skill with the axe, and sometimes, the sitar. Poor songs, hmm? I'll gladly direct you to some guitar tabs that prove otherwise.

2: Now that's just mean.

1: Poor musicians? As if. Steve Jones is an accomplished guitarist (an underrated one at that). His post-Pistols works show off his uncanny skill with the axe, and sometimes, the sitar. Poor songs, hmm? I'll gladly direct you to some guitar tabs that prove otherwise.

During his time with the Sex Pistols, his song writing and guitar playing was meager at best. Luckily for him the genre had not been explored so he didn't have to be too creative, listen to older songs, and turn those riffs into louder faster riffs.

As for the songs, I have heard them many times, so I am not interested in guitar tabs. But one man's trash is another man's treasure.

I had no idea this thread would get so heated when I started it. I really started it mainly to talk shit about Skynyrd. :D

The ideology of the Sex Pistols changed Punk, but to call punk completely dead is disengenuous. What "killed" punk was popularity. In the long run, Punk follows two cycles that act vaguely like predator and prey charts for environments. If you see Punk as a series of movements (First Wave, Hardcore, Grindcore, and then, for lack of a better word, Skate Punk) you see that each movement was "born" in complete anonymity, but had the elements of punk in it. Each one then experienced a burst of popularity that created a new class of "punkers" who were just there because of the popularity. While that "generation" was at it's high point, another movement began to form underneathe it, and would follow the trend. Basically, what that means is that Punk's nature is to die from popularity and then resurge once it becomes a minority movement.

Even the Punkers'll tear me apart for that, probably, but more than anything it's what observation shows. Basically, if the Sex Pistols killed Punk, it was by making it popular.

I definately hear you on the concept of cycles within punk (its the same in every genre movement and in music more generally), but I think you might have misunderstood my point. I wasn't really saying that punk is dead. A statement like that is clearly untrue as there has been a steady supply of bands for 30 years, not all of whom are simply incarnations of the current, or any, wave (not to mention that wonderful creature that is psychobilly). What I was saying is that I feel the Sex Pistols did real damage to what punk had the potential to be by thrusting their ideology not only into their music, but into the execution of their music. It isn't enough to have a statement or a look if you want to be a musician, you have to have tallent, drive, and a love of music. The whole "I'm too [cool/punk/high/depressed/fill in the blank] to bother" schtick always pisses me off when I see it in a band.

How many great punk bands were passed over because EMI, A&M, or Virgin (were they on any other labels?) either felt they had enough of this risky new punk movement on their roster or felt burned from the way the Sex Pistols imploded? How many potential great punk bands were adversely effected by the Sex Pistols because they grew in a culture where it was unpunk to care about craftsmanship(and don't tell me thats not the case because I've been playing music for going on a decade thats the attitude I've seen in ther majority of punk bands and fans I've encountered)? We'll never know what that first wave could have been because, to put it corsely, the Sex Pistols shit in the punchbowl.


The problem with that is that in a situation without McClaren, one can see the Sex Pistols making it big on their own, through a very different path, but espousing many of the same ideas (The problem with this scenario is that without McClaren, Lydon and Matlock would never have become Pistols). Much of the fasion they prefered had been used by members BEFORE McClaren, most of the songs reflect Lydon's politics as much as, if not more than, McClarens, and the "style" of the Pistols music was established by the artists (common sense pointing out that McClaren's taste for music falls somewhere in between awful and just plain blasphemous *See Great Rock & Roll Swindle Soundtrack* *shudders at "Anarchy" in French with Accordian in the background*

Yep, McLaren is a dick, so was Colonel Tom, but you can't really separate him from the Sex Pistols. He was integral not only to the early evolution of the band, but to their success (NEVER underestimate the influence of a manager, especially pre-1990). In the end, it wasn't his taste that mattered, it was his greed. Would the Sex Pistols have formed without him? Would they have survived long enough to catch a contract? Would they have played shows in big enough venues to get noticed? Would they have done all this before their egos caused the band to fall apart? Likely, without McLaren, if we saw the Sex Pistols we would have seen a very different band. Probably one I wouldn't be so critical of.

Mostly, see my analysis of the patterns of Punk culture. It's ironic, in a sense, but Hot Topic would have been Malcom McClaren's dream business, in many ways*.

Yes, yes it would have. The problem is, McLaren didn't have any respect for the Sex Pistols as a band, they were just another buisness venture to him. They were just a band he could use to make money off a group of kids he was too old to appeal to personally. McLaren is definately the villain of the story, but its hard for me to not look at the Sex Pistols and McLaren the same way I look at Elvis and Colonel Tom.

During his time with the Sex Pistols, his song writing and guitar playing was meager at best. Luckily for him the genre had not been explored so he didn't have to be too creative, listen to older songs, and turn those riffs into louder faster riffs.

As for the songs, I have heard them many times, so I am not interested in guitar tabs. But one man's trash is another man's treasure.

"Riffs" is being generous alot of the time. One of the innovations of first wave punk was the heavy use of string agitation as opposed to the strumming that leads to riffs. String agitation on big major chords.

And a note: Punks should never use tabs to talk about musical quality when headbangers lurk...we always have Samoth's late Emperor work to turn to. Or Jon Schaffer. Or Blind Guardian. Or Randy Rhodes. Or Zakk Wylde. Less Claypool. Steve Harris. And on and on. ;)