101 reasons why punk sucks

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (190 of them)

Yeah, grozart OTM. (Who are you, too? I lost track of everyone in nu-ILX.)

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 15:54 (nineteen years ago)

For all its revolution punk strikes me as the most capitalist of genres these days

you guys seem to be discussing british punk more than american, but i don't find this to be true today in america at all...most of the hardcore scene, at least here in minneapolis is really not looking to engage the mainstream at all...most "big" punk shows don't even happen in "proper" venues, it's mostly kids running house basement shows or weird art collective spaces...lots of times promoted through this bookstore called Arise! which sells leftie propaganda, etc etc...lots of CD-R, handmade artwork or still 7 inches...we have a non-profit store here called Extreme Noise that runs with all volunteer workers.

I have a lot to say about this, but I'm not sure I have time to write it out, and also I guess my viewpoint is way too Midwester and American for what you're talking about on this thread.

But, to be brief, punk means a lot to me, not because I'm still listening exclusively to like Dag Nasty or Circle Jerks records, but because it made me feel like making music was something accessible to me on a small, local level and that I didn't need to be a "professional" musician to do it. All of my friends (which is a lot) that play music here would agree, even if now they are doing techno music, or noise rock, or folk, or new wave, or weird math metal, etc etc.

I hate stupid crappy "street punk" junk as much as anyone, like shit like this:

http://www.angelcityoutcasts.com/

So...I guess I'm not going to be brief now, but I know a lot "first gen" older punk dudes here and they are by no means as stereotypically narrow in their tastes as this thread seems to claim...the older ones were already into Bowie and Alice Cooper etc etc before punk, and we often talk about weird obscuro 70s rock like Sir Lord Baltimore, Edgar Broughton, etc....they all seem to like reggae and synth pop and prog and (esp) krautrock and jazz and free jazz..

I guess I don't really know who people are talking about on this thread, because there's been some good discussion but none of it really rings true for me, at all. There are those knucklehead Social D worshipping dudes but they are a small, small crowd.

AND...there's also a ton of great stuff being made to day that does fall under the hard, fast, loud more trad punk or hardcore traditions.

people have brought up a ton of it on my Rolling Punk thread, which I'd encourage people to check out and see what's going on. It might surprise you.

― M@tt He1ges0n, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 15:56 (nineteen years ago)

OTM. i think we are talking about a mythical punk strawman and old punk in england neither of which i am familiar with.

<i>I think Scik Mouthy's more annoyed with the fact that since Punk broke it's become this de facto aesthetic that has to be adhered to to be cool. I.e. DIY, anti-establishment, anti-intellectualism, pro-simplification, conservative sound is cool</i>

my point still stands. this always happens w/everything.

<i>Excessive production, intellectual lyrics, prog guitar solos, weird instruments etc aren't seen as cool.</i>

yeah, but theres always been punks who thought this stuff was cool, too. didn't this all go down like the minute after punk happened?

sniffin glue--->alternative TV.

are sweeping generalizations are cool?

― artdamages, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:00 (nineteen years ago)

I think American and UK punk are totally different, but equally interesting. I think the geographical scale of the US means that things can exist on microcosmic levels, and that kind of local punk community thing you describe, people making their own music outside the business, is possible in a way it kind of isn't over here. It tries, but ultimately towns and cities are so small and so close and the country physically and population-wise so much smaller than the US that anything getting any kind of attention or making waves is suddenly national. Arctic Monkeys!

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:01 (nineteen years ago)

you guys didn't have a hardcore equivalent (unless you count 'ardkore i guess?). i will never understand british people.

― artdamages, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:03 (nineteen years ago)

Man, British music is so fucked up right now compared to the states it makes me sick. Matt's post makes me wonder what the fuck we're all doing lauding it over all the bullshit that comes out in the UK right now.

― the next grozart, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:03 (nineteen years ago)

or post punk. i guess that and hardcore officially ended around the same time. but yeah, different. (xpost)

― artdamages, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:04 (nineteen years ago)

hardcore exists in england nick! small scenes which have fuck all to do with 77 style mythologising.

― acrobat, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:04 (nineteen years ago)

Like I say, people have tried, but anything we have had has been filtered through from America, and our cultures and landscapes are so different it can't work in any comparable way.

Triple X.

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:04 (nineteen years ago)

Where, Paul?! I don't see them! I don't hear about them. Touches, yes, but not much.

It just struck me that a comparable might be something like the F-ire collective - Acoustic Ladyland, Polar Bear, Fulborn Teversham, etcetera.

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:06 (nineteen years ago)

uh also huge differences in perceptions and realities of enterpenurialism and capitalism in england and us (small biz=/capitalism or at least Capitalism or Late Capitalism or whatever). im really not into talking about it and being all serious and have to eat lunch now.

― artdamages, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:06 (nineteen years ago)

Well I'm about to leave work to go home, so there we go...

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:07 (nineteen years ago)

Nick: The Exploited, Discharge, GBH. We have metalcore nowadays instead. That's a good genre.

― Dom Passantino, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:09 (nineteen years ago)

most major towns have a DIY scene. i don't think you'd like the music but it's there. swygart knows people in leeds who are very into it all and yes it is very political, though it seems a bit libertarian for my tastes.

― acrobat, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:15 (nineteen years ago)

most

who the fuck listened to ska-punk anyway. oh yeah, everyone who wasn't on ilx.

wasn't isn't

-- the next grozart, Wednesday, April 18, 2007 11:25 AM (57 minutes ago)

Dear sir,

Please list forms of punk and their political agendas

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude ‫茄蕃‪, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:34 (nineteen years ago)

That's what I find interesting; the juxtaposition of punk being both entrepreneurial from the start, and also anti-establishment.

don't forget capitalism itself was pretty anti-establishment. by 1977 that establishment had largely been subsumed, but its image, its standing, its illusion, still loomed large. the deferent society! this was not a facet of capitalism, but internalized trappings of the establishment...know your place.

punk was against all this

so was capitalism. the deferent society...is not good for business!

― frankie driscoll, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:41 (nineteen years ago)

I'm thinking of comfortable British 40&50-something music journalists who would have considered themselves radical and revolutionary, etcetera, in their punk youths, now so content to write columns for The Times or bad lad-lit. or self-indulgent books about their relationship with Kylie Minogue? How is that punk?

As a 40&50-something who self identified as a punk in 77 let me explain the above phenomenon. These people are arseholes. Within their strident self-aggrandizement they may include their life-style choices as part of their definition of punk.

You don't need to include writing a column for the Times as being part of your definition of punk, most people don't.

― Sandy Blair, Thursday, 19 April 2007 06:42 (nineteen years ago)

who the fuck listened to ska-punk anyway. oh yeah, everyone who wasn't on ilx.

I listen to ska-punk. My wife and I had our first date at a Ska Is Dead show.

― Mordechai Shinefield, Thursday, 19 April 2007 06:48 (nineteen years ago)

The problem in the UK is that the definitions of punk that I've exressed above, those things ARE seen as punk, and that kind of punk is now seen as establishment.

― Scik Mouthy, Thursday, 19 April 2007 08:47 (nineteen years ago)

people are using 'capitalism' to mean 'money economy'.

do you really feel punk is that 'present' nick? it seemed worse during britpop. i guess i've unplugged a bit but the kind of punk signifiers you get from razorlight or babyshambles or donny tourettes are so far removed from the late '70s it's unreal. in a way i think those bands make it *easier* to like actual punk records.

― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 19 April 2007 08:54 (nineteen years ago)

"What is cool is driving a bimmer with your sunglasses pushed up on your head and drinking Moet with six nubile models squirming around in the back seat."

wish i was cool :(

― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 19 April 2007 08:56 (nineteen years ago)

We might be getting some snow over the May bank holiday.

― Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 19 April 2007 09:05 (nineteen years ago)

drinking while driving is NOT COOL

― blueski, Thursday, 19 April 2007 11:06 (nineteen years ago)

but is it punk rock?

― the next grozart, Thursday, 19 April 2007 11:49 (nineteen years ago)

Ask BBC 6Music, currently celebrating the 250th anniversary of the release of the first Clash album.

― Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 19 April 2007 12:09 (nineteen years ago)

Funny, I've been thinking of listening to that album again, I haven't heard it in centuries

― Tom D., Thursday, 19 April 2007 12:11 (nineteen years ago)

The classic Clash album which was played so much on BBC radio when it was new.

― Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 19 April 2007 12:12 (nineteen years ago)

I like the concept of punk, but find 90% of the so called punk bands just boring. And the first Clash album was of course punk, and I loved when I was 17, but now I'm over 30 and haven't listened it for years. So it goes.

― zeus, Thursday, 19 April 2007 14:34 (nineteen years ago)

No, "So It Goes" was Nick Lowe, also much loved on BBC 6Music.

― Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 19 April 2007 14:36 (nineteen years ago)

I like the concept of punk, but find 90% of the so called punk bands just boring

So 10% aren't boring? That's a pretty good strike rate!

― Tom D., Thursday, 19 April 2007 14:46 (nineteen years ago)

Erm... 90% of the punk bands I've heard.

― zeus, Thursday, 19 April 2007 15:04 (nineteen years ago)

When released in April 1977, The Clash reached #12 in the UK album charts.

Among the artists who kept the record out of the top ten were Barbra Streisand, Mr Acker Bilk, Smokie and the Muppets.

― Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 19 April 2007 15:09 (nineteen years ago)

I wrote a long intelligent post about a minute ago, but the internet ate it. The basic gist was: punk in it's ideal form didn't suck, but the repercussions of telling untold legions of special-ed students that "anyone can play music" are grievous.

I then found this snippet about the drummer from the Germs (underneath the Fallout Boy piece):

http://www.sdreader.com/published/current/blurt.html

It's the final quote that gets me. He sort of encapsulates the whole spirit of punk right there.

― kingkongvsgodzilla, Thursday, 19 April 2007 15:55 (nineteen years ago)

1. Because it's pop music, but too many of the people who play it pretend it isn't.

2. Because instead of being the bold new revitalization of rock music that it promised to be, it was really just a reductive reaction to the more ambitious rock acts of the time.

post-punk is a different story. But is post-punk just punk music by people who can play their instruments?

― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 19 April 2007 18:39 (nineteen years ago)

is no wave post punk

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude ‫茄蕃‪, Thursday, 19 April 2007 18:43 (nineteen years ago)

ts: ilm "debates" on punk rock vs. ile "debates" on gun control

― pretzel walrus, Thursday, 19 April 2007 18:59 (nineteen years ago)

ts: people posting generalities based on received "wisdom" about shit that happened 30 yrs ago vs. people that have actually been to an actual "punk" show in the last 5 years

― M@tt He1ges0n, Thursday, 19 April 2007 19:21 (nineteen years ago)

ts: people using quotes for no reason vs. people actually responding to the thread's title

― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 19 April 2007 19:23 (nineteen years ago)

people who say "ts" but know the answer

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude ‫茄蕃‪, Thursday, 19 April 2007 19:26 (nineteen years ago)

transsexual?

― pretzel walrus, Thursday, 19 April 2007 19:26 (nineteen years ago)

"people who say "ts" but know the answer"

vs. ?

― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 19 April 2007 19:28 (nineteen years ago)

mothra?

actually fake quotes are a bullshit tactic! i shouldn't have used them.

if anything, this thread to me just proves that saying any genre is "dead" or "sucks" is generally wrong...it always seems to me that most of the people that thing [Genre X] is "dead" are people that don't pay attention..like people thing modern country is some sort of vast wasteland, except all the dudes actually discussing it on the rolling country thread or my friend nate who just made me a mix CD of a bunch of good modern (not alt) country doodz that's actually really great....Jazz is "dead" except to everyone freaking out about the new Ornette Coleman record....metal "sucks" except to everyone who actually knows what's going on in the rolling metal thread...

so yep, punk sucks, except there's like 8 million punk bands making music now that DON'T suck and bunches of cool people doing cool things all over the US and around the world. The only punk that sucks is the punk that...sucks...and just ignore that shit and yr fine.

fuck, i just used a bunch more fake quotes, i gotta damn problem with that :(

― M@tt He1ges0n, Thursday, 19 April 2007 20:28 (nineteen years ago)

2. Because instead of being the bold new revitalization of rock music that it promised to be, it was really just a reductive reaction to the more ambitious rock acts of the time.

Isn't this a myth too?

In fact, punk was considerably more of a reaction against Stadium AOR than against progressive rock. Plus, to most punk fans, it was first and foremost an alternative to disco.

― Geir Hongro, Thursday, 19 April 2007 20:48 (nineteen years ago)

"alternative to disco"

I'm sure all those punks would be listening to Sabbath if punk wasn't around, not disco.

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude ‫茄蕃‪, Thursday, 19 April 2007 20:51 (nineteen years ago)

"In fact, punk was considerably more of a reaction against Stadium AOR than against progressive rock. Plus, to most punk fans, it was first and foremost an alternative to disco."

I consider stadium AOR and disco to both be very ambitious.

― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 19 April 2007 21:44 (nineteen years ago)

punk isn't a style of music, its a method of production

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 19 April 2007 22:31 (nineteen years ago)

six months pass...

gay

― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Wednesday, 14 November 2007 02:22 (eighteen years ago)

(directed at the thread, not the genre)

― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Wednesday, 14 November 2007 02:24 (eighteen years ago)

punk is gay too, though.

― pipecock, Wednesday, 14 November 2007 02:45 (eighteen years ago)

Only if you're Pansy Division

― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Wednesday, 14 November 2007 02:45 (eighteen years ago)

Skipping 90 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.