Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Punk is dead?

Discussion in 'Music, punk scene & subcultures' started by punkdude, Aug 27, 2009.

  1. NGNM85

    NGNM85Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    459

    0

    0

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    I have always hated that album title.

    As for you're asessment on punk rock I'm going to have to disagree with you a little bit. Green Day came about organically, they played at the Gilman street venue and they were influenced by the Dead Kennedys, and other classic punk rock bands. They came just after Op Ivy, who also played at that venue. (Not to mention they were an awesome political punk band.) They released several indie eps and records before signing with the majors for Dookie. They also opened up for Bad Religion, etc. I've been into Green Day for 12-13 years now, and I think they maintained a certain amount of credability until American Idiot, but mostly just because it (And the following album.) were just so fucking bad. They have given a lot of money to charities and political organizations, though, and thats' definitely cool.
    Offspring also formed from the Cali punk scene. They were a little older than Green Day, they formed met at a Social Distortion concert in '84. Offspring released two full albums on indie labels before hitting it big with Smash! which was fucking great, with indie label Epitaph. I don't know if it still is, but for several years Smash! had the world record for biggest selling indie album. I know it went platinum more than once. Then they released Ixnay on the Hombre, which was also fucking great, but for some reason didn't do as well commercially, THEN they released they're first major label album; Americana (Which was also fucking great.) after they'd been playing in a band for more than a decade. Blink you can say what you want, but Green Day and Offspring deserve credit where credit's due.
    Of the three hugely popular albums that made 1994-95 "the year punk broke" Smash!, Dookie, ..And Out Come the Wolves, two out of three were on indie labels. It really goes back further than that to Nirvana, which came out of punk and hardcore. Anyhow, the point I was intentionally trying to make is theres' a fundamental difference between selling out and selling records. Nirvana, Offspring, and Green Day got big because they played good music. The term sellout gets dropped wayy too frequently.
     
  2. jarek_M-F

    jarek_M-FExperienced Member Experienced member


    50

    0

    0

    Sep 28, 2009
     
    OK, maybe Green Day have given a lot of money to charities, and so what? Many other bands did. And they started on diy punk scene (where else could they?!), and so what? As far as I know, they don't give a fuck about diy punk scene anymore, so I don't give a fuck about'em as well... They play good music? No offence, but definitely you haven't heard enough then... I believe, this site is about supporting diy punk activities, not music industry... right?
     
  3. (A) timmy (E)

    (A) timmy (E)Active Member Forum Member


    35

    0

    0

    Oct 12, 2009
     
    oohoh if you had lived in russia you'd have known how mad this term is. All walls are painted with 'punx not dead' while being a punk had become a fashion long long before i was born. now there's lots of 'modern punx' who doesn't know what the anarchy means- they say 'anarcgy is chaos' -how stupid they fuckin are!!!!!! so i think when punk became fashion it DIED.
    but anarchy is not i think
     
  4. vermine

    vermineMember New Member


    7

    0

    0

    Oct 13, 2009
     
     
  5. (A) timmy (E)

    (A) timmy (E)Active Member Forum Member


    35

    0

    0

    Oct 12, 2009
     
    sex pistols weren't punx i mean real anarcho punx they just earned money on what was fashionable
     
  6. vermine

    vermineMember New Member


    7

    0

    0

    Oct 13, 2009
     
    okay here please describe which "punk" your talking about, culture movement, anarcho-punk, unpolitical-pûnk, music, or ideology, fashion, etc...

    We can actually say that sex pistol were part of the fashion movemement in the 70's. But escuse me, any dude that take fuking 8 hour of his time dying is hair and making hole in his jean is a fashion victim. So are the casualties and rancid. Any dude that spend 80 $ for a pre-painted leather jacket is a sissy and any girl that buy fancy doc marten that worth 130$ miss the whole point.

    Punk is not a way to dress for a street ballroom, it's a fuking way to think.

    For the music, who can kill music? If punk is such weak that green day and blink 182 can kill him, maybe he deserved to die. You're make me feel like if you have to born with a good taste in music and a mowak. It's something you fuking learn and discover. The best that band like green day and blink can do is actually give a clue to people who don't know about the roots of the punk scene, and making them see how those band are soft and out of the track.

    And anyway I don't see the point to pay 60$ to go see rancid, those are "real" punk, yeah....green day was 60 too ?Somebody or something is making real punk money here.
     
  7. (A) timmy (E)

    (A) timmy (E)Active Member Forum Member


    35

    0

    0

    Oct 12, 2009
     
    i'm talking about fashion not about the idea,when any movement becomes fashionable many people appear who don't know real roots of the movement so the movement itself begin dieing , i mean society begin to think that punx are dirty stupid rats- and its very hard to prove that its not true or fascists name themselves skinheads- so society thinks that skinheads are racists.
    discussion on this topic won't reach any conclusion there are a lot of things worth speaking about i can say
     
  8. vermine

    vermineMember New Member


    7

    0

    0

    Oct 13, 2009
     
    society always though that the punks were stupid rat that deserved to die. It's simple when you fight against society that society don't love you much. A bunch of the society think that democracy works and it's the best political in the whole world, does that make democracy more suitable...I don't think so. If society had always labeled the punk as dirty rat, and the skinhead as racist, is that this society like to belive what's on the paper.
    That doesn't kill the punk movement, cause the punk movement take his roots in controverse. (and i'm not speaking of "anarcho-punk" I'm talking about the punk movement).
    You don't need the whole society to agree with you, just a couple of thousand of intelligent people who search deeper the answer to their question.

    Well that's what a like to belive.
     
  9. GEO HC

    GEO HCMember New Member


    6

    0

    0

    Oct 16, 2009
     
  10. NGNM85

    NGNM85Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    459

    0

    0

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    So, …that means they have a social conscience, which is a very good thing. Also, the term “sellout”, the meme, if you will, includes a sort of materialism which would preclude such philanthropy. Therefore, I think the term is misused.

    Is this you’re sole barometer for judging music? It shouldn’t be. I have to speculate what you mean by DIY, it’s sort of nebulous. “Smash” and “Out Come the Wolves” were both released on indie labels. Second, you have to realize that when a band reaches a certain level of popularity they can’t function in the same way as small-time local bands, it’s just impossible.

    Taste is subjective, to a large degree. Although, I think it’s fair to say “Smash”, “Dookie”, and “Out Come the Wolves” are all fantastic albums, and judging by sales alone, it would appear I’m hardly alone in that.
    As for the site, I was under the impression it existed for communication/networking between individuals interested in punk rock and Anarchism. While the music downloads may all generally fit into a very thin slice of the musical spectrum, I was under the impression that the website is open to anyone with an interest in the aforementioned topics.
    The point I was trying to make is simply that the word “sellout” is applied far to carelessly and thoughtlessly. This was prompted by David-N’s previous statement. Offspring had been together for over ten years and released four indie albums before releasing a major label album (Which was also an awesome album.) in 1998 well after the explosion of fake, punk-styled pop bands. Also, while recording with a major label, Dexter Holland owns his own indie label Nitro which puts out some great punk records by The Damned, TSOL, The Vandals, and X’s Exene Cervenka’s side project band; The Original Sinners. Or you could take the example I mentioned earlier of the Clash, who signed to the majors but kept themselves in debt for, like, ten years because the forfeited royalties to keep record prices down, while performing benefit shows, and spreading awareness of political issues, like fascist oppression in Nicaragua, etc, as well as choosing really interesting up and comers for the opening slot, like Bad Brains. So, I’d say it’s a lot more nuanced. It’s really a shame that the minute a band gets a hint of success, the self-appointed punk rock police immediately shit all over them and label them “sellouts.” I’m just calling for a little reason, here.
    As a final thought, what ultimately matters in terms of buying a record is the music. I have no qualms about purchasing “The Queen is Dead” (Which was actually initially released on indie Rough Trade.) because it’s great art. That’s what matters.
     
  11. Carcass

    CarcassExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    143

    0

    0

    Oct 12, 2009
     
    One word answer: Fugazi.

    Multi-word answer: bands don't reach the level of popularity that Green Day and the Offspring attained just by being good bands. It takes millions of dollars in advertising and distribution deals that put their CDs in every Wal-Mart across the country. If Green Day and the Offspring really wanted to fight the sellout label they would use their fame as a platform for explicit radical political advocacy. But they won't because they'd rather just keep slinging the same boring marketable dance music that has made the millionaires.

    I happen to agree that signing to a major label doesn't necessarily make you a sellout, but Green Day and the Offspring absolutely are sellouts. Donating a fraction of their obscene wealth to charities (none of them radical) ought not buy these millionaires any respect; philanthropy is not the least bit anarchistic. Throwing money at charities is a non-solution preferred by rich liberals who wish to rationalize their largesse while still keeping most of it.

    Also, even when Green Day was DIY they still sucked. :lmao:

    :|

    Pro-voting, pro-vivisection and now pro-third wave punk revival? I don't know, man. I just don't know.
     
  12. NGNM85

    NGNM85Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    459

    0

    0

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Fugazi did do a remarkable job practicing their philosophy such as it was. However they were also not remotely as popular, or as enjoyable, musically, at least from my perspective. I own Smash and 13 Songs, but if I had to choose I'd choose the former. If Fugazi had been as huge as Offspring or Green Day, I think they would have had to change tactics, just from a logistical standpoint.

    Not quite. Green Day did a lot of touring, and playing music festivals, and going on tour with Bad Religion, which really helped them out. Not to mention they had a fantastic sound, and two solid indie albums on Lokout! which did pretty well. They were hardly manufactured. As for Offspring, they had been together for ten years, playing gigs, etc. They were covered in Flipside and MaximumRocknRoll, and they got the producer who'd done work with the Vandals and the Dead Kennedys for their debut. They did do some political shows, I know Noodles got stabbed at an anti-nuke show. Ignition, which was even better than the self-titled was with Epitaph, started by Bad Religion's Bret Gurewitz, which had just started, and they toured with No Doubt and Pennywise, this is around the time of In Utero/Kurt's suicide, so it was the beginning of the alternative explosion of the 90's and they just sort of fell into it. Between the touring, and the zines, and the previous album, they had a fanbase, and Smash was just such a fucking incredible album, it took off like a rocket. It actually nearly killed Epitaph because they couldn't keep up with the demand, they weren't set up to do that kind of business. So, for Offspring especially, it happened very organically.

    Thats' sort of like "guilty until proven innocent."

    I don't refuse to listen to music that isn't political, thats' not the test for me. Obviously, I wouldn't listen to music that was explicitly fascist or right wing, like hate rock, but I'm willing to allow for a zone outside of politics. Politics also does not always make good music. Sandinista! was an incredible album, The Feeding of the 5000 is almost unlistenable, it's actually worse than the Casualties. I don't mind distortion and rough edges, I love the Pistols, the Germs, (Early) Black Flag, Dead Kennedys, etc., but some stuff is just bad. Thats' sort of subjective.

    Also, just because a person is not explicitly promoting Anarchism doesn't mean they aren't doing anything worthwhile. Thats' tunnel vision. For instance, Green Day raising a shitload of money for Save Darfur. (Or Offspring's anti nuclear shows, or support for the Innocence Project.) Saving lives doesn't need justification. It may not change the fundamental sociopolitical structure which enables that kind of a disaster, but it's still very important.

    Why do they HAVE to be radical charities?

    Thats' sort of a throwaway statement, not to mention beside the point.

    In some cases, yes. It also does end up saving lives. For the desperate people in need I don't think they give a shit where it comes from.

    Again, although there definitely IS bad art, taste is pretty subjective. I thought 1039/Smooth and Kerplunk were great albums, to each his own. It's really beside the point, anyhow.

    I've posted lengthy expositions on my position, and why it's the only moral and logical one in the Vote & Elections thread. You can read everything I posted, if you think I missed something, feel encouraged to address it. if you just dislike me, or my opinion, I don't care because feelings are meaningless, I'm only interested in logical arguments.

    Thats' for the Veganism thread. Again, I expounded at length, I added some stuff, we can debate that, just not here. Although, just as as stray thought I find it hard to believe if you needed a heart transplant that you'd rather be dead.

    It's infinitely better musically than a lot of crust punk or street punk. I don't listen to any of the manufactured stuff like Blink 182, or Good Charlotte. However, I am quite partial to Green Day's older stuff, the Offspring, Rancid, Again, the older stuff is better, NOFX, and related bands like Screeching Weasal, the Queers, and the Muffs. (Incidentally, I also like The Varukers, Vice Squad, Social Distortion, X, Anti-Heros, 7 Seconds, and hundreds of other bands, also.)
     
  13. DrunkSquid

    DrunkSquidExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    167

    0

    0

    Oct 11, 2009
     
    Well I actually enjoy the Crass beat...
     
  14. B@UGHIE

    [email protected]Member Forum Member


    22

    0

    1

    Oct 11, 2009
     
    ask yourself the question........
     
  15. Ebola

    EbolaMember Forum Member


    12

    0

    0

    Oct 20, 2009
     
    [​IMG]

    Must get one of them for doing the shopping!
     
  16. Ebola

    EbolaMember Forum Member


    12

    0

    0

    Oct 20, 2009
     
    Just to get more serious for a moment: If anyone had been able to tie down any of the many flavours of punk or anarchism they would have done it by now. Punk and Anarcho-Punk continue to exist: but then again so do the Teddy Boys. The really important question is whether punk and anarcho-punk still represent some sort of counter cultural threat?
    IMHO anything that makes people think outside of the established societal norms can plant a seed… so if it was Greenday, The Pistols, The Clash, The DK’s, Crass, or Neanderthal that did it for you then great: but maybe for someone else it was Rancid.... does it matter?
     
  17. Rathryn

    RathrynExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    853

    0

    0

    Oct 21, 2009
     
    Whether punk is or isn't dead depends on your definition of punk. If we just look at the fashion... well we have emo to take over from that, their fashion seems largely punk-inspired, sadly IMHO.
    The music, well it changed there's aforementioned Greenday, Blink, Sum41, Bowling for Soup, etc... hell even Avril Lavigne was called punk at one point. Does that mean it's dead? Not really, I mean the Pistols were basically 'created' by McLaren as far as I know, the Pretenders were deemed punk, the Tubes, Talking Heads, Elvis Costello, all very diverse so why should it be any different now?
    As for the counter-culture, someone in the documentary "NWPunkRock" summed it up pretty well for me: in the 70s and 80s there was a lot of unrest and people wanted to rebel, in the years since then most people have been quite content and as such rebellion wasn't really necessary. Now with the financial crisis, the war on terror, rising unemployment etc, people have something to rebel against again and there have been quite a few shifts towards Hardcore and similar styles in my social circle as a result.
    If we look at DIY, well that has been passed on a lot to other styles of music as well if you ask me, especially Hip Hop artists seem to do a lot of work for themselves where I'm from, until they make it 'big', usually.
    Going on about art, which for some reason has also been a large influence on punk (Warhol for instance), I personally redirect that to any artist that thinks outside the box. A guy I know for example has produced 2 'photo-albums' where the photos he took aren't the actual art, but the medium to create art with.
    And last but not least, the political/a-political aspect of punk has always been up for debate anyway, so yeah not much to say about that.
     
  18. NGNM85

    NGNM85Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    459

    0

    0

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    This might not be as exact as the gravitational constant, but I think at least the rough concept of what punk is, fundamentally, can be pinned down pretty clearly. I think the Pistols essentially ended that debate.

    But punk is much more than fashion. It depends on the context. You could say something "looks punk", even though thats' sort of inaccurate, but it's just an appearance, a pose. Punk is a complex brew of social movement, art, music and culture. Emo is, at least presently, a disease. The original emotional hardcore bands were alright, a far cry from Fall Out Boy. I guess it's like the difference between Rancid and Good Charlotte.

    Green Day wasa punk, until they decided to try and become the Who and create rock operas. Blink were probably punks in high school, but not much longer. Avril was never punk, she just borrowed some of the trappings.

    I think I will spend the rest of my life refuting this misconception. You can check my earlier posts but suffice to say Malcolm contributed very little to the Pistols except a rehearsal space. They chose the name, they chose John Lydon as a lead singer, who already was wearing ripped clothes and dyed his hair green before he even met the band. John wrote all the songs. (Except the covers, obviously.) Malcolm, by his own admition virtually never turned up at their gigs. Vivienne gave them some free clothes once they got going, big deal. Malcolm's main contribution besides the rehearsal space was to rob them blind and squeeze every penny out of their image that he could. Thats' why they sued him. (And won.) Malcolm McLaren is his own greatest publicist but he's probably one of the worst managers in music history. The New York Dolls were falling apart but McLaren definitely hastened the bands' collapse, he was one of the main ingredients in the implosion of the Sex Pistols, he tried to take over the Ants, which became Bow Wow Wow, who did alright for about five minutes before imploding, and Adam had a much more successful career with his new band. The guy fucks up nearly everything he touches. For an excellent history of the Pistols the best resource (And the best book on punk in general.) is Jon Savage's "England's Dreaming." Even cursory research will show Malcolm was little more than a parasite.

    The Talking Heads played at CB's, but I don't think they were really considered to be in the same click, they were just kind of there. The Pretenders were most definitely punk, but I think as they got more popular Chrissie changed it into more of a standard rock band, but she was there in 77, she actually almost married both Johnny Rotten and Sid, but just to keep her visa.
    Part of the problem of definition is that punk, fundamentally, is an ethos, not just a genre.forThis is where the confusion comes in. People hear "Punk" and they think of genres, like hip hop, or metal, or country. These things have a look and sound that has become part of the collective consciousness and is easily recognizeable. Genres are defined by a particular look and sound. However, because it is an ethos, punk is mutable. Punk MUSIC incorporates rock, reggae, ska, rap, folk, rockabilly, even country. The songs will even be mistakenly attributed to these genres by the uninitiated. However, the common denominator is the community of THOUGHT. Operation Ivy might sound like ska, musically, X or Social Distortion could be mistaken for rockabilly or country, the Pogues could be considered Irish folk, Blondie, the Clash, and a number of others have borrowed from hip hop, etc., but at the end of the day, it's all punk. The problem is an ethos is invisible and intangible, so the unknowing public just go by what they can see and hear. Technically, you could form an a capella punk band, as long as you have the right influences and outlook. However, I can't garuntee a positive reception.

    Rap has been described as black punk rock." To a degree theres' some truth to that. However, hip hop lacks the unity, and embraces fame, while punk has always been somewhat uncomfortable with success.

    Punk is inherently rebellious, but not necessarily explicitly political. However, the personal can be political, in itself.
     
  19. Rathryn

    RathrynExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    853

    0

    0

    Oct 21, 2009
     
    @NGNM85:
    McLaren: hence me stating 'as far as I know'
    Lavrigne: I never said she was punk, I said she'd been 'called' punk.

    I just summed up some things that I think were all part of the punk movement and commented on each individually. I find it hard to define punk in any aspect and every regard. Therefore, to me it's such an interesting... well the best word I can think of is 'phenomenon'.
    Cheers for the correction on McLaren though.
     
  20. NGNM85

    NGNM85Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    459

    0

    0

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Wewll, first and foremost it bugs me because I'm just such a huge Pistols fan, and it's so completely baseless, but I hear it everywhere. It's like Nietzsche being tagged as a proto-Nazi, it's completely false, but because people don't do the homework it just gets repeated and accepted.

    I know, I was just weighing in. I hope I didn't come off as condescending or confrontational, when I'm being confrontational I'm much more hostile. I'm just very passionate about punk rock and it's something I like talking about because it means so much to me. I had noticed you mentioned being into Siouxsie and the Clash and the Pistols so from what I've seen you've got good taste. Nice hawk, BTW. :)

    It's very complicated. Especially because, as I was saying, it's a community of thought, and that makes it that much more complex and hard to follow. As a history major I've actually spent a lot of time researching punk rock, studying it. Not to mention 12 years in and around the punk scene and counting. Horrifying, really, when I think about that. If you'd like some advice, some solid sources, the best books that are out there, etc, I would be more than happy. I've done presentations on punk rock at my college with study guides and everything. I would be more than happy to offer any and all assistence. I really want everyone to be able to see punk rock as I do, to appreciate all the different strains and complexities, I really want to share that with people.

    No problem, like I said, Savage's book is the best, and will explain in much more detail.
    Yeah, theres' nothing like it. Punk rock was everything I had really wanted rock music to be, it actually surpassed rock. It might sound goofy but I think punk rock is actually beautiful, it inspires me.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - Punk deadForumDate
Anarcho-Punk bands with "cleaned" vocals? (Similar to: Dead Kennedys)REQUESTSOct 25, 2013
Electro Hippies - The Only Good Punk...Is A Dead One Lp - 1987 (UK)Anarcho-Punk music albums downloadsFeb 24, 2012
Anarcho Punk Dead?Music, punk scene & subculturesDec 5, 2010
punks not dead - the movieGeneral DiscussionNov 13, 2009
ANARCHO-PUNK IS DEADMusic, punk scene & subculturesSep 22, 2009