what we do is secret

April 12, 2005 8:15 AM

Thought you knew the first wave L.A. punk scene? Knew Belinda Carlisle was a Germs drummer, Pat Smear became Nirvana's guitarist, Henry Rollins was not the lead singer of Black Flag? Think... Again. New book out today.
posted by gorgor_balabala (150 comments total)

here's that last link, minus the referral code. tsk!
posted by mcsweetie at 8:29 AM on April 12, 2005

Y'know something, I like punk rock music as much as anyone, but I'm getting really tired of the cliched "punk rock saved my life," story. Those cliches, the relentless "cred" falshing, pining for the golden years, kvetching at "kids today," and "punk's not dead!" have all convinced me that punks have become as bankrupt and spent as the hippies they once derided.

Time to move on.
posted by jonmc at 8:33 AM on April 12, 2005

This post is confusing - the info is cool (I didn't know Belinda Carlisle was in the Gemrs) but it reads like a press release for this book. Which sounds terrible from the description on Amazon.

Also, the main character in the book is named Rockets Redglare, who was also an actor (and a roadie for the Sex Pistols, according to imdb) Is the book about the same Rockets Redglare?
posted by drobot at 8:43 AM on April 12, 2005

I thought the first wave of punk started with groups like the Trashmen, Question Mark & the Mysterians, et al. ; )

Ironically enough, Van Halen be counted among the earliest El Lay punk bands. After changing their name from Mammoth, the group performed opening gigs at Godzillas and Mabuhay Gardens before hitting it big as an arena act.
posted by Smart Dalek at 8:43 AM on April 12, 2005

gorgor_balabala, heads up: There are some 404 errors you might want to have your friend fix on the site.
posted by safetyfork at 9:00 AM on April 12, 2005

I'm making a documentary about the LA Punk scene, focusing on Darby Crash and the Germs as a point of focus, but ranging across the spectrum of LA underground music, from pre-punk Hollywood glam scene, through "punk proper", to the harcore Orange County scene, and the mythologizing of Darby in the 20 odd years since, such as this new novel, I suppose. The documentary is loosely based on Brendan Mullen's fine Lexicon Devil - for which we have the rights.
We're looking for any primary material of the era - videos, recordings, photos, diary entries, anecdotes, etc.
If anyone has such stuff hidden away somewhere, I'd sure appreciate it if you contact me.
Thanks a million
Will Amato
Former staff writer, Slash Magazine
posted by yakcat01 at 9:01 AM on April 12, 2005

Is the whole purpose of this post to get your Amazon Affiliate link on the front page? Silly Gorgor.
posted by Outlawyr at 9:02 AM on April 12, 2005

You can add Theresa Kereake's excellent Punk Turns 30 to the list above.

jonmc, I think that pretty much any musical movement you can think of is guilty of spouting those cliches once its members start reaching a certain age, but that doesn't make the movement itself any less valid.

Punk was a reaction to the incredibly moribund and elitist musical scene of the mid-70s, and it did indeed provide an outlet for a lot of creative people who would've otherwise probably killed themselves out of anger, ennui, or alienation from society. Punk was egalitarian (at first), anyone could get up on stage at play, no matter what their skill level was. Some guys like Pat Smear barely knew what end of the guitar was which at first.

I'm not exactly sure what "relentless 'cred' falshing" means, but if you're talking about the fact that a lot of punks don't feel the movement got a fair shake from the music industry or the press, well...it didn't. There's a lot of bullshit being published about what was going on back then, and some of us would like to set the record straight.

Smart Dalek, I don't know where you got that info, but I saw Van Halen when they were first gigging around LA, and they were never...I repeat...NEVER considered a punk band by anyone who was actually a punk. In fact, when Van Halen played the Whisky in Hollywood a bunch of us went to see the opening act, The Quick, then wrote "Boredom" on our foreheads with Sharpie pens, and stuck around for Van Halen's show just to piss off their fans.

And btw, Mabuhay Gardens was a San Francisco venue.
posted by MrBaliHai at 9:04 AM on April 12, 2005

yakcat01 - Why don't they just hook up with the folks that did The Decline of Western Civilization?

I remember there being a lot of Darby in that movie.
posted by Raymond Marble at 9:09 AM on April 12, 2005

Sorry if it sounds like a press release...The author happens to be a friend of mine & i got to read the galleys. It's not a "glory days" or a history book. That's why it says "Think again"-- there's more to the book. If you read the author's last book, you might guess that.

The book has a starred review in Booklist, which i think is well deserved.

Um, Smart Dalek, it says "L.A." punk...
posted by gorgor_balabala at 9:11 AM on April 12, 2005

This is my first post. I didn't know about the affiliate thing. My bad.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 9:13 AM on April 12, 2005

Raymond - thanks. Yes, we are hooking up with a whole gob of the people (musicians, writers, hangers-on, etc) of the time, and interviewing many as well. Aside from Decline, and a couple of short grainy clips we've managed to dig up, there is little actual footage of Darby. ..which adds a bit of challenge to our documentary, and - ironically - might have added as well to the Darby Crash "myth".
posted by yakcat01 at 9:18 AM on April 12, 2005

Punk rock made me kill myself.
posted by eatitlive at 9:22 AM on April 12, 2005

that was "cred flashing," I meant to type. The whole "I'm punker than you," exclusivity syndrome, which I find repellent.

I don't deny that for years punk was all the things you mentioned, which is why I enjoy a lot of it, even though I was never an official member of the club, but 30 years down the line, it's become what it once opposed.
posted by jonmc at 9:24 AM on April 12, 2005

jon, you're correct that punk today is totally different than what it was years ago, but what musical movement isn't? Doesn't the cutting edge always become the status quo given enough time?

I'm not sure what your point of reference is for people copping "punker than thou" attitudes. 25 years ago we were getting the shit kicked out of us by frat boys and the police, so we stuck together for self-preservation and were mistrustful of those outside the scene. Sure, there were punks who tried to make everything confrontational, but they were mostly trying to shake up what they viewed as an utterly complacent society.

And yeah, most punks were probably a lot closer to hippies than any of them would care to admit.
posted by MrBaliHai at 9:46 AM on April 12, 2005

yakcat, I'd be interested to hear about your project. The author knew a lot of those slash people...I wanted to put slash stuff in the post but couldn't round it up in time.

As far as darby goes (i keep telling you people), as far as the book's attitude toward punk, you might be surprised...It's funny the assumptions people make about popular culture, as if they already know what to think.

All i can say about that is the punk thing to say: You're wrong. Too bad.

MrBaliHai--kereake's url is linked to in alice bag's excellent site ("first wave" link).
posted by gorgor_balabala at 9:51 AM on April 12, 2005

I'm not sure what your point of reference is for people copping "punker than thou" attitudes.

The people who tell you that you not really "punk," if you like old "classic rock"*/don't wear a mohawk/don't go to enough shows/don't dumpster dive etc. and a lot of people I know who were deep into the punk scene told me that there's always been a strain of that kind of thinking. But punk's hardly unique in that regard. I'm sure there were people saying that somebody wasn't "operatic" enough back in the day. But punk seemed to want to do away with that kind of shit, so it's especially disappointing when it embraces it.

*a term I still loathe.
posted by jonmc at 9:51 AM on April 12, 2005

jonmc, why don't you read the first line of the friggin' book, for a start? You know, i did link to the website for it. It excerpts the whole first chapter.

Read first, fume later. It's a good policy. Even for a burned-out punk.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 9:56 AM on April 12, 2005

(I removed the amazon code long ago, and will allow this post to stay, since people want to talk about music)
posted by mathowie at 9:58 AM on April 12, 2005

The myth of punk as something more than just a social community with catchy slogans has always bothered me. I've always thought that the punks that constructively tried to "shake things up" were the minority. For every punk that started a fanzine, put on shows, started a band, or took an active political approach to punk there were thirty kids that had funny hair and torn clothes and not much else. For most I think it was fashion dressed up something more important (yes, much like most of the hippies they so detested).

Punk was an influence on shaping my interests and outlook in highschool and college (the 80s), but for me it was mostly just a music I really enjoyed and shows I had a blast going to. I never expected much more form it and I look back on those days with great fondness. Although after punk I discovered the garage punk of the 60's and that meant much more to me.
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 10:03 AM on April 12, 2005

Whoa, something I just happened to stumble upon: a story about punk rock bands flourishing in Israel is coming to Frontline, of all places.
posted by mathowie at 10:05 AM on April 12, 2005

This Is Boston, Not LA

you dance the same
you dress the same
it won't be long til you are the same
you look the same
and act the same
it's nothing new and you're to blame
this is boston, not LA
this is boston, not LA
this is boston, not LA
this is boston, fuck LA
posted by Cassford at 10:19 AM on April 12, 2005

gorgorbalabala: the excerpt I read seems to confirm what I said, with it's long screed about all the people he hates. I get the distinct sense that I would not have been welcome on this scene of his, no matter how much I responded to the music or liked some of the individuals involved. And when that's what's happening, it's not a counterculture, it's a clique. People who have been excluded almost inevitably band together and exclude others. It's a sad fact of human nature.

Be a lone gunman, not another foot soldier in someone's army.
posted by jonmc at 10:31 AM on April 12, 2005

The thing about punk is that it has always been with us, and always will be with us. Its nature is as the Adversary of the bullshit parts of the mainstream. There will always be bullshit parts of the mainstream. The fact that you see 12 year olds with mohawks makes the movement less easy for an outsider to pigeonhole, but so what?

If anything, someone like jonmc liking the soundtrack but totally missing the plot is great -- maybe his kids will dust off a CD and actually Get It.
posted by felix at 10:39 AM on April 12, 2005

word.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 10:47 AM on April 12, 2005

I wasn't there at the time, but a lot of LA punk/hardcore doesn't really hold up anymore to these ears. Black Flag? One of the most overrated bands ever. Greg Ginn cannot write songs! X? Spoiled by tuneless singing. The Germs? Darby Crash was just awful. Best of the bunch were the Circle Jerks, but even their stuff could be wildly inconsistent.

As for the punk elitist thing, etc, surely this argument was really important in 1985 and you were working out which clique to join in high school, but to be arguing about this now when we're all grown adults seems a little stuck-in-a-timewarp, doesn't it?
posted by dydecker at 10:53 AM on April 12, 2005

If anything, someone like jonmc liking the soundtrack but totally missing the plot is great -- maybe his kids will dust off a CD and actually Get It.

Way to prove my point for me, felix.
posted by jonmc at 10:56 AM on April 12, 2005

jonmc said: Be a lone gunman, not another foot soldier in someone's army.


I'd rather be the general of said army and lead the ignorant masses to enlightenment. And make a lot of money doing it. And girls. And drukgz. Worship my ego, I am _cool_.


Welcome to humanity, check please.
posted by daq at 10:57 AM on April 12, 2005

jonmc, that's not a crack at you, it's a comment on cliques and leaders.
posted by daq at 10:58 AM on April 12, 2005

Because I'm special like that.
posted by daq at 10:58 AM on April 12, 2005

Greg Ginn cannot write songs! X? Spoiled by tuneless singing. The Germs? Darby Crash was just awful.

Musical competence wasn't the point, shocking people out of complacency by challenging their preconceived notions of what music should be, was.
posted by MrBaliHai at 11:03 AM on April 12, 2005

The unfortunate thing about shock value is it doesn't age well, alas.
posted by dydecker at 11:28 AM on April 12, 2005

The unfortunate thing about shock value is it doesn't age well, alas.

That means it worked.

What's unfortunate is that eventually you wind up running out of ways to shock people, short of blowing up cuddly animals with explosions calculated to resonate at certain steps of the Mixylodian scale.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to nip 'round to the pet store.
posted by MrBaliHai at 11:36 AM on April 12, 2005

Musical competence wasn't the point, shocking people out of complacency by challenging their preconceived notions of what music should be, was.

dude, you just blew my mind.
posted by destro at 11:39 AM on April 12, 2005

Also, by the time I was in high school ('85-'89), unless you lived in a major city or university town, participation in the "punk scene," as it were, required either lots of cash and leisure time, very indulgent parents or both. And I had none of the above.
posted by jonmc at 11:41 AM on April 12, 2005

jonmc, you claim I made your point for you, but apart from a generalized screed about how punk is bankrupt, you didn't have a point. So I guess I'm baffled. Could you elucidate?
posted by felix at 11:50 AM on April 12, 2005

jonmc, you claim I made your point for you, but apart from a generalized screed about how punk is bankrupt, you didn't have a point.

My point is that punk presented itself as a way of negating social and political boundaries and false judgements, and instead it wound up creating new ones of it's own. Your comment seemed to imply that any negative feelings I might have about this great amorphous mass called "punk," could only be because I don't "get it," which is the kind of bullshit I was talking about.
posted by jonmc at 11:53 AM on April 12, 2005

jonmc, if you were a teen between '85 and '89, whatever punk scene there was, if you thought it was for spoiled rich kids, you definitely DIDN'T get it. Maybe you felt it was a clique because you were looking for something to belong to. But that's not what punk was supposed to be about. Just because some people turned it into that doesn't mean that's what it was about. If you held onto the mainstream that you were comfortable in, you didn't belong in the punk scene. And it appears that you did exactly that. There is no judgment in it. It just means you're not a punk. If you feel a sense of failure around it, no one is making you feel that way except yourself. No one else cares.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 12:16 PM on April 12, 2005

Oh sorry jonmc, i just re-read your comment about your teen years. If you weren't in a city, you weren't involved in punk. Punk is about cities. Cities are not exclusive. All you have to do is go there.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 12:21 PM on April 12, 2005

I don't think this thread is punk enough. You guys are all posers.
posted by destro at 12:32 PM on April 12, 2005

I'm in a city now, gorgor, my family's roots are in the big city. But I still don't feel comfortable or welcome on the "punk scene," even though I like a lot of the music, a lot of the politics and other stuff surrounding it, and I've liked a lot of individuals who were self-desribed punks. But I've never felt completely welcome or comfortable in any scene, including the so-called mainstream, which I don't believe actually exists anymore, since society has become so culturally balkanized. Which brings me to:

If you held onto the mainstream that you were comfortable in, you didn't belong in the punk scene. And it appears that you did exactly that.


This is the kind of thinking that frustrates me. However much you protest, there is a value judgement in that statement: I'm brave enough to strike out on my own*, you are a coward who finds comfort in the mainstream**.

*never mind that these "individuals" immediately seek comfort in packs of people like themselves and exclude those unlike themselves (as groups, on an individual level people tend to bemore tolerant. it's the lack of group pressure, I guess)

**never mind that I hold many tastes, ideas and opinions that fall outside the mainstream and have spent much of my life being considered a complete weirdo and crank by most people I know.

But, I posit this: being a middle of the road type person is only a bad thing if it's done unthinkingly and exclusionarily. If you explore the world and still find out that you fall somewhere in the middle of the road (and most importantly, can still respect and enjoy those who do not) then more power to you. It's the blind adherence to it that's bad.

But I'm digressing all over the place, hopefully I've made my point. But I'm 34 fuckin' years old, I'm way past all this. I mainly just want my beer and my recliner and my PC.
posted by jonmc at 12:35 PM on April 12, 2005

I repeat: No one else cares.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 12:41 PM on April 12, 2005

Sure they don't. That's why the first page of that book is a long screed against everyone he despises, because he dosen't care so much.

I just find it ironic that people who claim adherence to such an "iconoclastic" movement get so defensive when someone (even gently and affectionately) attacks their icon.
posted by jonmc at 12:44 PM on April 12, 2005

what icon
posted by gorgor_balabala at 12:51 PM on April 12, 2005

tangent: Musical competence wasn't the point, shocking people out of complacency by challenging their preconceived notions of what music should be, was.

A lot of these bands were very musically competent, actually. Plus, music is for everyone, not just "professionals."

/tangent

Now, on to my main points: I'm right. You're wrong. It's good, not bad. You don't know anything. I'm cooler than you. No you're not. And on and on and on.
posted by scratch at 12:51 PM on April 12, 2005

Punk itself.
posted by jonmc at 12:51 PM on April 12, 2005

no
posted by gorgor_balabala at 12:56 PM on April 12, 2005

gorgor_balablah: I repeat: No one else cares.

Actually, the discussion above seems more interesting than the few pages excerpted from the book.
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 12:57 PM on April 12, 2005

But but but surely you are accepted in buttrock circles, jonmc?
posted by dydecker at 12:58 PM on April 12, 2005

no it doesn't
posted by gorgor_balabala at 1:00 PM on April 12, 2005

whatever. you were a member of a subculture that had it's little fling in the limelight. You want to believe that makes you some kind of magical woodland creature, you go right ahead.

But but but surely you are accepted in buttrock circles, jonmc?

at about the same level I was accepted in punk circles, dydecker. The fact that I liked punk stuff as well as but buttrock (NTM a whole lot of other stuff) and other factors kept me from being a full fledged member of that fuckin' club, too. I just defend it more around here...well, because it's under attack more around here. If I was at a website full of closed minded buttrock fans, I'd probably be defending punk/alt.rockers, simply because someone would have to.

In a way, not being overly involved in scenes was good for me. I didn't have to worry about what my scene was doing and just do whatever the hell I felt like which was more rewarding.
posted by jonmc at 1:04 PM on April 12, 2005

A lot of these bands were very musically competent, actually

I never said that they weren't. I said that their competency (or lack thereof) wasn't what we cared about.

You're wrong. It's good, not bad. You don't know anything. I'm cooler than you. No you're not.

Shut up, all of you!
posted by MrBaliHai at 1:05 PM on April 12, 2005

MrBaliHai, please be gentle when attacking. Do not alienate me.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 1:09 PM on April 12, 2005

The book is very annoying from what I've read of the excerpts on the website. Maybe it's not my thing. What bothers me the most is that (at least in the excerpts) the book seems to be about name dropping and writing in what I'm guessing the author thinks is a 'punk' style. Interesting for a few pages, maybe? It sounds like a gimmick to me. Just an author cashing in in the same way so many bands now are regurgitating that sound for mass consumption. It's like the book version of the Strokes. And the author relies pretty heavily from the start on knowledge of the LA scene, so in one sense, it's about selling nostalgia to people who already know the stories and bands and long to have been there. People are so whistful for this stuff right now, it drives me crazy. When we are in our sixties, instrumental versions of Richie Dagger will hum from elevator speakers.

Anyway, Is it punk to write a book about being a punk? Especially one published by Random House?

gorgor - Is the book about Rockets Redglare? or did he just use the name for his character?

Having been somebody who was into punk music as a kid in a small city big enough to have a scene (mid to late eighties), and somebody who still goes to shows and buys records, I would say that it's always been the case that 95% of punk rock has been about haircuts. Sure there have always been a handful of cool people involved in 'the scene', but I've met just as many hippies, skateboarders, artists, writers, hip-hop fans who shared a common 'punk' attitude but didn't or don't care about the music or the fashion.

As Jello used to say, punks not dead, it just deserves to die, when it becomes another stale cartoon...
posted by drobot at 1:38 PM on April 12, 2005

drobot - you are so damn punk rock! You hit the nail right on the head across the board.

And I for one am sort of looking forward to hearing Richie Dagger with strings in the elevator while I'm going to see my doctor for that old "skanking knee" injury that I'm sure will be acting up when I'm older.
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 1:56 PM on April 12, 2005

I was in my early teens in Manchester in the late '70s and the most punk thing we could do was to start a band. We were totally crap, but I think we got the basic message of punk.
posted by thatwhichfalls at 2:03 PM on April 12, 2005

drobot, it may mean nothing to you or to anyone, but the author has got high acclaim for his work from major writers. this may be for several reasons, from language use to story construction. i am surprised that no one has professed familiarity with his work.

it's funny how everyone just assumes i'm a punk. i don't even know. but i do know one thing: punk is not about attitude. and to me, it does not make any sense without the music. words are another ballgame.

so in answer to your other questions:

no, no, maybe, maybe.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 2:06 PM on April 12, 2005

A lot of shitty writers receive acclaim from major writers. A lot of major musicians probably like the Strokes, but I think they're terrible.

I could see people really loving the book, mainly those who long for that time period. Sort of like Little House for wanna-be punks. From what I've read of the excerpts, the author seems to be hopping on the punk rock nostalgia bus to appeal to the recent sentimentality for that era. His bio on the website sort of suggests that too, that his interest in writing about subculture is more important then telling good stories. But I don't know, I'm just going on the website. The book just came out - tell you what, I'll head down to the library and read couple chapters. Maybe I'm wrong.
posted by drobot at 2:26 PM on April 12, 2005

I thought no one liked the Strokes.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 2:38 PM on April 12, 2005

Do what you want. You are wrong--all wrong--but i'm sure you have redeeming qualities that are appreciated by your mother.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 2:43 PM on April 12, 2005

haha, good response. No, YOU'RE wrong. You're really helping your pal sell books.
posted by drobot at 2:46 PM on April 12, 2005

Isn't that what a true punk does?
posted by gorgor_balabala at 2:50 PM on April 12, 2005

ok, so jonmc is lashing out at a subculture because he wasn't accepted. Now I get it.

Well, that's sad and all, but there could be a number of reasons. Most likely, given the posts here, I'd wager that it's because, yeah, you don't get it, jonmc. For some people, there's a dark, cynical fire that burns in their belly, born of embittered idealism. If you have instead a mainstream republican consumer mentality, hooray for you, but that doesn't mean punk "is dead", it means you "are dead to punk."

There are thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of people for whom punk is very much alive, not a pose, not a sham, and not 'bankrupt' or 'spent'. For millions more, there's posing, shams and vacuousity easily mistaken as encompassing bankruptcy by people who don't know any better. But, that doesn't mean the people who don't know any better are right.
posted by felix at 2:51 PM on April 12, 2005

I like the Strokes.
posted by dydecker at 2:54 PM on April 12, 2005

Isn't that what a true punk does?

I don't know, it's your post! I said that the post read like a press release for the book. I assume you included a link to Amazon to encourage people to buy the book. You even started out with your affiliate info in there so you'd make some money out of the deal.
posted by drobot at 3:02 PM on April 12, 2005

So do i, dydecker, like the strokes, so do i.

As a barbecue meat.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 3:06 PM on April 12, 2005

drobot, matthowie deleted the affiliate. it was my mistake. this is my first FPP.

i posted it because it's a good book, not to sell the book. the book will sell itself, or it won't. neither i nor the author cares two farts about it. ask him yourself if you don't believe me.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 3:10 PM on April 12, 2005

I don't believe you. The artist doesn't care if people buy it? Or read it? If that were true, the author would have at least gone with an indie publisher (Soft Skull or Akashic?), photocopied the book and handed it out himself, or posted it to a website, or not published it at all. He wouldn't have published it with Random House, he wouldn't have set up a website to promote it, he wouldn't be doing all the things he's doing to clearly try and sell the book. I think he wants people to read it. There's nothing wrong with wanting people to read your book, I just dont think you can claim that the author doesn't intend for it to sell.
posted by drobot at 3:17 PM on April 12, 2005

i said ask him yourself. don't ask me, i don't know anything about the publishing business.

on an off-topic, it's weird about soft skull, how they moved away from the side of tonic and then tonic started to go under, i wonder if it's connected, and somebody who worked there also used to live in the apartment below me in brooklyn. he and his pals would play this sweet folk music. he had the greatest voice, reedy, young. a real commie too. "the company" was the name of the band.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 3:26 PM on April 12, 2005

I like punkakes.
posted by hellbient at 3:30 PM on April 12, 2005

That's why it says "Think again"-- there's more to the book.
You should have said it was because of the Minor Threat song...what kind of punk are you?
posted by hellbient at 3:36 PM on April 12, 2005

Most likely, given the posts here, I'd wager that it's because, yeah, you don't get it, jonmc. For some people, there's a dark, cynical fire that burns in their belly, born of embittered idealism. If you have instead a mainstream republican consumer mentality, hooray for you, but that doesn't mean punk "is dead", it means you "are dead to punk."

Are you really as full of shit as you sound?

Sure, the world is divided into fire-in-the-belly idealistic punks and mainstream consumer republicans. How old are you, 12? You've managed to personify every criticism I made. Kudos, you myopic twit.
posted by jonmc at 3:44 PM on April 12, 2005

Everybody's right
Everything I've done is wrong
You know I've tried to keep it short
I know it took too fucking long
Too much has been said
You think it fucked my head?

Think again

Ignorance, it set your standards
Intelligence, that don't work in your brain
You're an adult, so you act like a child
Don't even try to explain
This stupid shit, it's been done
You think you're the only one?

Think again

A hand to your mouth
A performing yawn
I guess you know
What the fuck is going on
You're on top
You're on the ball
You think you've seen it all?

Think again

Before you take another crack
And slap yourself on the back
Before you tell me what you heard
And sum it up in one word
Before you start talking shit
Before you throw another fit

Think again

--Minor Threat
posted by gorgor_balabala at 3:54 PM on April 12, 2005

thass good musics
posted by gorgor_balabala at 4:00 PM on April 12, 2005

Everybody at your party
They all look depressed
Everybody dressin' funny
Color me impressed

Stayin' out late tonight
Won't be gettin' any sleep
Givin' out their word
'Cause that's all that they won't keep

Put the monkey on the mirror
Won't you pass the bill to Chris?
Intoxicated lover ending our french kiss

Can you stand me on my feet?
Can you stand me on my feet?

(Everybody)

Everybody at your party
They don't look depressed
And everybody's dressin' funny
Color me impressed

Color me impressed
Color me impressed
Color me impressed
Color me impressed
I call it out

--The Replacements

now thass good musics.
posted by jonmc at 4:03 PM on April 12, 2005

And be honest, dude, when the punk version of Freedom Rock comes out, you're gonna be the costumed pitchman on the commercial, right?
posted by jonmc at 4:06 PM on April 12, 2005

Your rebelliousness is laid out for you like the portions of a TV dinner. You ape the powers that be with every clove-scented breath you take. You are nothing more than socioeconomic ectoplasm, a target market, a file folder at Central Casting. You exist as a parasite, because without an Establishment for you to oppose, you'd shrivel into cellular waste. Try as you may to avoid being absorbed by the mainstream, you remain trapped under its microscope, an amoeba with a nose ring.

--Jim Goad "The Underground Is A Lie"
posted by jonmc at 4:14 PM on April 12, 2005

but i do know one thing: punk is not about attitude
Then why was it labeled "punk"? Have you ever heard the way the word was used by the older generations before you? There use when labeling someone with it fits the bill perfectly.

All the comment that were fighting words back seem to be punked too.

Maybe you're confusing the new way punk is today, you've been punked; I pulled a fast one by you...ha ha.
posted by thomcatspike at 4:48 PM on April 12, 2005

"I'll tell you about punk rock. Punk rock is a word used by dilletantes and heartless manipulators about music that takes up the energies and the bodies and the hearts and the souls and the time and the minds of young men who give what they have to it, and give everything they have to it. And it's a term that's based on contempt. It's a term that's based in fashion, style, elitism, satanism and everything that's rotten about rock'n'roll.

"I don't know Johnny Rotten but I'm sure he puts as much blood and sweat into what he does as Sigmund Freud did. You see, what sounds to you like a big load of trashy old noise is in fact the brilliant music of a genius, myself. And that music is so powerful that it's quite beyond my control and when I'm in the grips of it I don't feel pleasure and I don't feel pain, either physically or emotionally. Do you understand what I'm talking about? Have you ever felt like that? When you just couldn't feel anything, and you don't want to either. You know, like that?"

- Iggy Pop
posted by basicchannel at 4:49 PM on April 12, 2005

Did Iggy write that before or after he was doing sneaker commercials?
posted by jonmc at 4:51 PM on April 12, 2005

Before?
posted by basicchannel at 4:53 PM on April 12, 2005

Whatever. I'm just gagging on all the pretention, sanctimony and hubris in this thread.
posted by jonmc at 4:55 PM on April 12, 2005

I think he's supporting your points, jon. Music is music, but the fashion of "Punk Rock" is nauseating and exploitative. Maybe it makes more sense when you can hear him say it, than reading it here.
posted by basicchannel at 5:03 PM on April 12, 2005

sorry, if I misunderstood you, basicchannel. gorgor falala's arrogance has me a mite infuriated.
posted by jonmc at 5:05 PM on April 12, 2005

actually, felix's comments were even more annoyingly obtuse than gorgor's. Must spread bile around fairly.
posted by jonmc at 5:15 PM on April 12, 2005

jonmc writes: "Sure, the world is divided into fire-in-the-belly idealistic punks and mainstream consumer republicans."

Huh? No, I just accused you of being a mainstream consumer republican. Enjoy your recliner!
posted by felix at 5:28 PM on April 12, 2005

No problem, jon.

For some people, there's a dark, cynical fire that burns in their belly, born of embittered idealism.

Nursing one's cynicism in order to maintain a worldview that does not agree with observation (especially a problem as one matures beyond the embittered ideals of adolescence) is the bane of all jovial internet "discussions".
posted by basicchannel at 5:32 PM on April 12, 2005

And at night the house is quiet, you might wonder why
But punk's not dead, she's just gone to bed
Punk's not dead, she's just gone to bed

gorgor falala's arrogance has me a mite infuriated.

For me it's his/her inarticulate 'no! you're wrong. durrrr' that annoys. But we agree on the ARGH factor, at least.

I've written oceans of words about this before, so I'm not going to bother again. I will say, though, that youthful anger at the oldman status quo, the liberating energy of rock music played loud and sloppy, the fusion of politics and power chords, all of these are and were great things when informed by intelligence. When not, they are reduced to pantomime, to tribalism, and to all that is worst about human nature.

Like every umbrella label for a disparate group of people -- think hammerhead simplifications like 'liberal' or 'conservative', to give you a hint of where I go with this -- 'punk' is so vague as to be meaningless when applied to tribes. I may have been a punk, at one time, perhaps, though I never bought into the fashion aspect, but I thought most self-described 'punks' I knew were dumbasses and clueless Sid-emulating nihilist doofi. Even at the time, self-identification with a tribe seemed a Bad Idea.

The music, though, now that was something else. Something sometimes great.


Oops. I kinda went on a bit. Sorry.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:33 PM on April 12, 2005

Huh? No, I just accused you of being a mainstream consumer republican. Enjoy your recliner!

And you base this accusation on what exactly? That I find the hubris of many punk fans/political radicals etc. annoying and self-contradictory? my taste in music? that I like drinking beer in my recliner?

Get over your inflated self-regard and you might begin to learn something.

on preview: my freind stavros, as is often is wont, articulated what I said batter than I managed to. Although, I find myself indentifying with the grumpy old men as often as I do with the angry young men these days, since their anger is at least leavened with some honest humility.
posted by jonmc at 5:36 PM on April 12, 2005

if you thought it was for spoiled rich kids, you definitely DIDN'T get it

that doesn't mean punk "is dead", it means you "are dead to punk.

punk is not about attitude. and to me, it does not make any sense without the music

Punk is about cities. Cities are not exclusive.

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?
posted by Sparx at 5:37 PM on April 12, 2005

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

Judging by the excerpts from that book, if you buy it, you just might.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:20 PM on April 12, 2005

you come in spouting that punk is "dead" and "spent" because you've observed a few cliches and you demand that other people have humility?

Are you still wondering why someone might think you're a passive republican consumer tool yet?
posted by felix at 8:51 PM on April 12, 2005

you answer every criticism with self-congratulatory insults and you're wondering why someone might think you're a sactimonious, arrogant shit-for-brains?
posted by jonmc at 8:55 PM on April 12, 2005

Really, it's just too much for you to handle that someone might have observed the same thing as you and come to a different conclusion.

GET. THE. FUCK. OVER. YOURSELF.
posted by jonmc at 8:57 PM on April 12, 2005

And just for your elucidation, I showed this thread to a couple freinds of mine, one of whom has been in various punk bands for the better part of two decades, the other who's spent most of his life working as a sound engineer and roadm manager on the indie music scene.

They came to the same conclusion I did.
posted by jonmc at 9:00 PM on April 12, 2005

yeah bitch!
posted by Satapher at 9:06 PM on April 12, 2005

jon, I commend you for holding your cool as long as you did. You have a valid viewpoint that felix and gorgor don't seem to want to accept, which is more their loss than anybody else's. They seem to make your point by having an idealized and non-moving boundaries as to what punk is and what it's about. The sad thing that they don't realize is that you're both right. Music and what it represents is supposed to be relatively fluid in meaning: you take what you want from it. Harassing somebody because their idea of what it is is different from your own is just stupid, gorgor and felix.

Are you still wondering why someone might think you're a passive republican consumer tool yet?

Trust me, felix, you're barking up the wrong tree.
posted by ashbury at 9:25 PM on April 12, 2005

ashbury: if you thought the debate is about music, you missed the point. "Punk Rock" (raaaawr you dilletantes!) was always about self-destructive nihilism, until Ian Mackaye was "Punk" enough to take it to the next level by enforcing a sort of "Punk's Covenant" of fashion fascism that exists to this day in the form of the Yeah Yeah Yeah's (and many others', sorry Karen) form of corrosive irony.

In the end it's all just bad teenage poetry. Except the Descendents... fuck you Milo's cool!


PUNK RAWK ANARCHY 666!!!!

sigh.
posted by basicchannel at 11:35 PM on April 12, 2005

"Punk Rock" (raaaawr you dilletantes!) was always about self-destructive nihilism

For you, perhaps. For some. But dismissive blanket statements like that obscure more than they reveal, I reckon.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:45 PM on April 12, 2005

All those who talk of punk rock in the present tense please give me an example of something from this century that doesn't completely blow.
posted by dydecker at 1:03 AM on April 13, 2005

I rest my case!
posted by dydecker at 1:04 AM on April 13, 2005

jonmc

I think by now we've all heard your critique of punk and indie music about a hundred times, as you seem to find a way of parading it in every single music thread on this site.

Perhaps it's "time to move on."
posted by johnny novak at 1:26 AM on April 13, 2005

hey, novak. Perhaps it's time to "ignore what you don't want to read and shut the fuck up." I always find jonmc's posts about music interesting, maybe that's because I pretty much agree with him and feel similarly, or maybe because he's insightful and stuff. Maybe he just has something to say man.

Either way, punk is dead. Whatever vibrant non-music parts of the scene/counterculture/clique (DIY, anti-authority,) exist and have existed in other forms, and "punk" is mostly a bunch of kids dressed up in costume like they were from 1977, or aging hipsters. Modern punk music? Some good, mostly hard to find, possibly not much around anymore, and in any event, different in many ways from the stuff made 20-28 years ago. The rest has this hermetic air, like poetry aping the style of the troubadours of the courts of love or something like that. Something no longer quite relevant today, and trying to mimic, or go through the motions, of something that is no longer really here.
posted by Snyder at 3:26 AM on April 13, 2005

Perhaps it's "time to move on."

I'll stop my critique when it's actually understood rather than simply reacted to.

Snyder, ashbury, thanks for listening and actually thinking.
posted by jonmc at 6:58 AM on April 13, 2005

What stavros said.

And: Scenes are what they are, and that varies from scene to scene. The punk scene in OC was different from the punk scene in Tempe was different from the punk scene in Tulsa was different from the punk scene in Binghamton (and yes, there was one). Sometimes people could be accepted without the clothes and right-behaviors; sometimes they couldn't.

What jonmc or stavros or basicchannel have said about punk could be said about goth or artcore or math rock or garage rock or any number of things. Sometimes it's about finding your way; sometimes it's just about the right clothes and the right tattoos. Or about attitude, whatever the hell that means.

And they know that. Step back, think about what they're saying. Give them some credit for not being idiots; consider the possibility that they might expect people to think about what they're saying.
posted by lodurr at 7:01 AM on April 13, 2005

"Y'know something, I like rock music as much as anyone, but I'm getting really tired of the cliched "rock saved my life," story. Those cliches, the relentless "cred" flashing, pining for the golden years, kvetching at "kids today," and "rock's not dead!" have all convinced me that rock n' rollers have become as bankrupt and spent as the hippies they once derided."

Kind of looks different yet it's the same argument that could be made for any musical movement. I keep hearing "punk/country/blues/calypso/reggae" or whatever is dead yet find evidence of a pretty lively music scene wherever I look.

And yeah Jon, punk did save my life, the little histrionic, adolecent drama queen that I was. Probably not in any scientifically measurable way but at the time it really meant something and kept me moving. At the time I didn't consiously know that but in retrospect, yeah. That shit kept me going. I'm sure there are examples of this possibly in your own life and others. Point being, yeah you can be sick of it all you want but your sentiments are pretty universal it seems.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 7:09 AM on April 13, 2005

On preview: Sorry Lodurr. I stepped on your coat tails as you exited the door.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 7:12 AM on April 13, 2005

Kevin, you know me well enough to know that it wasn't an attack on the whole genre or subculture, merely an open critique, an acknowledgement that punk isn't the key to universal harmony that people think it is. That a movement that set out to destroy sacred cows is now, to some, a sacred cow itself. Nor for that matter is any other musical movement. It was the reaction to what I said (by some, not you and balihai) that made this thread get out of hand.

I'll publicly acknowledge that a lot of great thinks came out of punk rock, both in my own life and in the world at large. But you could say that about a lot of movements, but none of that puts them above criticism, and the same has to go for punk, just to keep us honest.
posted by jonmc at 7:16 AM on April 13, 2005

Roger dat, Jon.
*extends pinky and forefinger skyward*
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 7:41 AM on April 13, 2005

ah, calling something 'bankrupt and spent' is not an attack, but rather now an 'open critique'! And those who laugh at your snarking are positing that it is 'the key to universal harmony'!

Combined with the plaintive tiny-fists-beating-on-the-table cry for help that is 'I'll stop my critique when it's actually understood rather than simply reacted to' (!!!), this could easily be the best meltafilter(tm) thread yet.
posted by felix at 7:44 AM on April 13, 2005

felix, the fact that you can't sustain an argument without resorting to personal attacks tells me all I need to know about you.
posted by jonmc at 7:48 AM on April 13, 2005

and every single one of your comments has contained personal attacks on me, or is being a bully a "true punk' thing now?
posted by jonmc at 7:50 AM on April 13, 2005

Can't we put aside the ego games and talk about music?
posted by dydecker at 7:53 AM on April 13, 2005

...or is being a bully a "true punk' thing now?

I don't know about "punk", but it's definitely "scene".
posted by lodurr at 8:06 AM on April 13, 2005

drobot : "95% of punk rock has been about haircuts."

And accessories.

thomcatspike : "Have you ever heard the way the word was used by the older generations before you?"

You mean to signify a young male prostitute?

What I can never understand is who gets the privelege of defining punk. Some of my amusing memories are of "drink, fuck, and fight" punks and "straight-edge" punks arguing which ones were "really" punks.

From my personal experience, punk was basically a musical genre defined by certain sound parameters, with lyrics refering to either politics, the human condition, anger, partying, or general topics, avoiding straightforward love songs, usually coupled with a fashion aspect with little monetary emphasis (there was expensive stuff, but DIY was given just as much approbation), an aesthetic sense (the types of things you'd draw on your notebook or what the front of your zine would look like), and a relatively strong DIY ethic. Past there, it commonalities ended, and individual punks would think that whatever they and their friends liked was "real punk", and folks who didn't agree were "posers".

And so it goes today. The kinds of punks that hang out on Mefi tend to be the holier-than-thou "punk is a movement" types, and they take it on themselves to define what all punk is and is not. The kinds of punks that hang out at the mall tend to be the "punk is about anarchy and getting fucked up" types, who also take it on themselves to define what all punk is and is not, but don't hang out discussing it on message boards.

Since we're all appointing ourselves arbitrators of "what is punk?", I'm going to go for the arrogant, nihilist, mohawk wearing "big hulking guy in denim jacket with backpatch and Doc Martin 16 hole boots" variety in saying:


gorgor_balabala, you're fucking wrong. Poser.

And that was the most punk think to say. If you try to disagree with that statement, you're just showing off how much of a fucking poser you are.
posted by Bugbread at 9:55 AM on April 13, 2005

"I created Punk for this day and age. Do you see Britney walking around wearing ties and singing punk? Hell no. That's what I do. I'm like a Sid Vicious for a new generation."

- Avril Lavigne
posted by basicchannel at 10:26 AM on April 13, 2005

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, jonmc. Next time I'll be a lot more considerate when someone calls me 'bankrupt' and 'spent', and not indulge in these hateful and divisive politics of personal attacks. *rolls eyes*

Philosophical-punks and philosophical-hippies are, for all their flaws, at least trying to fight the fucked up system we have in front of us today. Maybe we're not winning. But if you're going to try to tear us down, you are required to either: offer a solution which is going to achieve the goals better, or: take a boot up the ass.
posted by felix at 10:31 AM on April 13, 2005

felix : "But if you're going to try to tear us down, you are required to either: offer a solution which is going to achieve the goals better"

Ok. Stop thinking in terms of "in-groups" and "out-groups". Stop separating everything into "us" and "them". Stop deciding whether people are good or bad based on whether they own recliners or wear suits or live in junky apartments or wear safety pins. Stop idolizing groups and railing against those who don't.

There. Those should all help. I presume I'm now allowed to try to tear you down, but I don't particularly want to.
posted by Bugbread at 10:36 AM on April 13, 2005

jonmc, I think this says it all. There is a fascinating assumption in there.

Like you, I've always found labeling more limiting than liberating. That probably makes me appear to be different things to different people. I think my way is slightly better because it is my way, but on an intellectual level, I know that having no pose is a pose of sorts.
posted by Cassford at 10:43 AM on April 13, 2005

NTM, I made a comment (an admittedly cranky one) about "punk," not about felix. You don not represent the entire world of punk. Your comments were about me personally. There's a difference. I didn't get personal till you did.

take a boot up the ass.

Cause you're at the punker table in the food court, yo! Beware!
posted by jonmc at 10:43 AM on April 13, 2005

If you don't think there's an 'us' and a 'them', you haven't been paying attention.
posted by felix at 10:49 AM on April 13, 2005

You insult hundreds of thousands of people, and then get all weepy because one of them 'got personal'. Intriguing.
posted by felix at 10:54 AM on April 13, 2005

Stop thinking in terms of "in-groups" and "out-groups". Stop separating everything into "us" and "them".

Is this the same Bugbread that just spent eight paragraphs contrasting "real punks" with "posers" and calling someone a "fucking poser"? Pot meet kettle.

NTM, I made a comment (an admittedly cranky one) about "punk," not about felix.

Your very first comment in this threat is not about music at all, but about people: "bankrupt and spent punks". Your comments in music threads are often about the fans. Why not stick to the music?
posted by dydecker at 10:55 AM on April 13, 2005

so any criticism of "us" automatically makes me one of "them"?

that's logical.
posted by jonmc at 10:55 AM on April 13, 2005

You insult hundreds of thousands of people,

and they elected you their official spokesman, when exactly?
posted by jonmc at 10:57 AM on April 13, 2005

There really is no such thing as a poseur, and at the same time, that's all there is. We're all poseurs in that we're all full of it, in one way or another. The something that we are is, for the most part, the something we're pretending to be. We all have to pretend a little to be ourselves and when we move on and become something else, we tend to look back and laugh at how phony we were. The trick, I think is to never take yourself too seriously and always look at who you are with a sense of irony. I think kids today are especially good at that.
- James Merendino, SLC Punk
posted by Cassford at 11:07 AM on April 13, 2005

dydecker : " Is this the same Bugbread that just spent eight paragraphs contrasting 'real punks' with 'posers' and calling someone a 'fucking poser'? Pot meet kettle."

I think this is the same Bugbread who spent a bunch of paragraphs talking about how different punks try to define punk according to their own standards, and calling other folks posers. I don't think I contrasted "real punks" and "posers" at all, since I have no opinion which is which (or, rather, I consider the sXe kids, mohawk and denim kids, and Sex Pistoly leather and messy hair kids as equally punk, which means there are no posers for me to contrast with).

This is definitely the same Bugbread that did a four sentence piss-take of how a certain type of punk would respond to another type of punk. I am not in actuality a punk, and I was not in actuality calling him a poser.

That bit was clearly free of pot-kettling. Talking about what punks do or say may be somewhat pot-kettly, but they're a self-identifying group, and I certainly don't view the world in terms of "us" versus "punks". For that matter, if punks are the "them", who is the "us" for me?

Besides which, even if there is pot-kettling going on (and I hope there isn't), isn't good advice good advice? If a smoker tells you you shouldn't start smoking, does that mean his advice is bad?
posted by Bugbread at 11:16 AM on April 13, 2005

You mean to signify a young male prostitute?
No, my grandmother uses it for calling a male the worst of the worse on this land. Though she may call a male prostitute that too in her vocabulary describing his lifestyle. It’s funny looking at this thread and my life that an 80 year old person introduced the word, “punk” to me some 36 years ago.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:33 AM on April 13, 2005

Doc Martin 16 hole boots"
What ever happened to combat boots being worn since the name fits the punk profile label?
posted by thomcatspike at 11:38 AM on April 13, 2005

jonmc: the idea that one has to be the official spokesman of a group in order to speak up in defense of it is beyond daft.

You're one of 'them' because you self-identify that way. If you aren't proud of the label, work to change it.
posted by felix at 11:55 AM on April 13, 2005

felix : " You're one of 'them' because you self-identify that way. If you aren't proud of the label, work to change it."

Isn't that exactly what jonmc is doing? Punks (or, at least, some punks) identify people who own recliners or winnebagos as "them". Some punks identify someone as having a "mainstream republican consumer mentality" because they like recliners and beers, which is fucking insane. I know plenty of far-left wing antimainstream anticonsumers who like recliners and beers. Jonmc is trying (not very persuasively, admittedly) to point out that punk exclusivity is pretentious, sanctimonious and hubristic (?) (probably not a word). If punks who are pretententious, sanctimonious, and hubristic realized it, they might change, and have a better impression of "them".

So, whether he's successful or unsuccessful, it definitely looks to me like jonmc is trying to change the image of that label.
posted by Bugbread at 12:30 PM on April 13, 2005

If it makes you all feel any better, I bought the recliner for $40 bucks at Goodwill and the beer is usually cheap malt liquor.

You're one of 'them' because you self-identify that way.

Actually, no. The one identifying me as such is you. Where did I pledge allegiance to republican consumerism? My lifetime record of voting democratic, marching against the war in Iraq, trying to unionize my former workplace (and getting hauled into court for my trouble) would all seem to augur against that conclusion, but you choose to label me as what you want to believe I am.
posted by jonmc at 12:44 PM on April 13, 2005

Then I retract the label.
posted by felix at 2:09 PM on April 13, 2005

jonmc, I find it amusing that you had to show your creds to felix to show you weren't a 'them', but felix assumes he has the right to label anyone who disagrees with him a 'them' and he has no need to show his cred, if any, just because he self-identifies as a punk. Group association is not a substitute for identity.

(Oh, and hey, no need to thank me for the listening and thinking thing, you're one of my favorite posters on here, so it's a pleasure.)
posted by Snyder at 3:15 PM on April 13, 2005

Snyder: "felix assumes he has the right to label anyone who disagrees with him a 'them' ..."

Gosh, my mistake. Where do I apply for the right to call someone out for saying something stupid? Could you please point me to the correct speech licensing desk?
posted by felix at 3:45 PM on April 13, 2005

Snyder: "felix assumes he has the right to label anyone who disagrees with him a 'them' ..."

Felix: "Gosh, my mistake. Where do I apply for the right to call someone out for saying something stupid?"

Er...you labeled jonmc a "them" for liking recliners and beer...That's "saying something stupid"?
posted by Bugbread at 3:51 PM on April 13, 2005

felix, you are the one who got all aggressive, not jonmc. YOU are the one who resorted to personal attacks, not jonmc. You're welcome to your opinion, but when you flog that opinion from the pulpit and accept no other viewpoints, you're essentially talking to an empty room or a room of people who already share your viewpoint. If you want to debate, then fucking debate, man. If you want to put the put the boots to someone, why don't you try it on the real THEM instead of people who are sympathetic to your goals? Flailing away at everybody who shows the smallest sign of not agreeing with you just alienates, and shows a very narrow-minded world view. Try approaching the subject with a little maturity - you might find that you get your point across better and actually make a difference.
posted by ashbury at 4:01 PM on April 13, 2005

Ad hominem ahoy. Cover your ears, kids!

felix : you're an asshole. Which is punk as fuck, of course, but no less stupid and unappealing for that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:07 PM on April 13, 2005

This is the post to which I took exception. Maybe you should read it, ashbury, re: aggressiveness and attacks.

I've been debating. I've pointed out, repeatedly, the errors in argument, the weird assumptions, the strange demands, and the specious reasoning. And, when jonmc pointed out an incorrect assumption on my part, I corrected it. So apart from having a high user number, where am I the asshole?
posted by felix at 4:19 PM on April 13, 2005

to give felix a small amount of credit, I was probably a little aggressive in my initial comment. I was tired drunk and going through my usual midday back spasms, during which I'm liable to maim nuns and puppies if they rub me the wrong way.

What I was truly getting at is this: 30 years down the line, many punks* in many ways are starting to sound as anachronistic as a lot of hippies did in 1977. Not that this invalidates any hippie music or politics that came before, or that my criticisms invalidate what punk has accomplished. It's more that maybe the punks, like the hippies, should let someone else take the wheel for a while. Hip-hop seemed to be leading the charge for a while but it's a bit moribund at the moment. Electronica** seems to be the way for some but I don't know if it has the broad appeal to accomplish the job.


*we're also in the murky territory of punk as sound versus punk as attitude. I remember an interview with Joe Strummer where he talked about what happened after the initial of punk: "People were like 'we get it, punk, [makes grinding guitar noise] what else you got?" And punk as attitude can be found in all kinds of music. And most of the oldest instituionalized rockers [elvis, the beatles, even Led Zep] were once punk as fuck in their historical context.

**were you expecting a jonmc raver-bash? I've made my peice with electronica. it'll never be my main bag, but some of it's great. And I have a feeling I'd enjoy hanging with the people who make it more than the audience, since those guys seem to share my passion for digging for great sonic moments in the ost unlikely places.
posted by jonmc at 4:46 PM on April 13, 2005

*cranks the Dictators "I Stand Tall," as a benediction*
posted by jonmc at 4:47 PM on April 13, 2005

felix, in my opinion, your style of debate seems more like mud-slinging than anything else. But maybe I'm confusing debate with discussion, which is something completely different, isn't it? From what I read in this thread, jonmc put forth an opinion, backed it up with some personal observations that earned him some ad hominem attacks which caused him to respond in kind. Note that I said "opinion", not "fact", and "observations", not "feelings" (altho there certainly has to be an amount of feeling in any discussion about music).

Y'know something, I like punk rock music as much as anyone, but I'm getting really tired of the cliched "punk rock saved my life," story. Those cliches, the relentless "cred" falshing, pining for the golden years, kvetching at "kids today," and "punk's not dead!" have all convinced me that punks have become as bankrupt and spent as the hippies they once derided.

I think you took this far too personally. Me, I read this as one person's opinion on a musical style and movement, not as an attack, and definitely not that aggressive.
posted by ashbury at 5:06 PM on April 13, 2005

Felix: While I disagree with a lot you've said, please allow me to give you props for your retraction. That kind of mea culpa is far too rare in Mefi.

And jonmc, you should probably post less when you're drunk (or tired drunk). I like what you write, but every once in a while you seem to go off the deep end, saying the right things in the wrong way. It always seems like, inevitably, a few hours later, you say "Sorry, I was a little drunk earlier".
posted by Bugbread at 5:19 PM on April 13, 2005

I told you all to shut up!

Dammit...
posted by MrBaliHai at 5:22 PM on April 13, 2005

actually, looking at the time stamp on my comment, I was probably hung over rather than drunk, since I was at work after all. But some of my crankiest posts were made during a 7 month period when I was abstaining from alcohol altogether. It's just who I am. And as my aforementioned punk rock singer freind (she's also my supervisor) said today when I told her about this thread, nothing's punker than being yourself and letting others do the same.

And felix gets props for goingthe distance. Plenty of people have folded in less intense arguments.
posted by jonmc at 5:24 PM on April 13, 2005

for what it's worth, I agree with jonmc's clarification. Now can we all have a hug? And then go kill a republican?
posted by felix at 6:18 PM on April 13, 2005

how bout we merely buy him a beer, get him laid, play him Stooges and try to change his ways?

and don't sweat it felix. plenty of people I've tangled with (n9, soyjoy, mrgrimm, and alexreynolds come to mind), once they've gotten an inkling of where I'm coming from have become become respected buds, even when we disagree.
posted by jonmc at 6:28 PM on April 13, 2005

Some of my best friends are assholes....
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:59 PM on April 13, 2005

Wait, that came out wrong.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:59 PM on April 13, 2005

I'm sorry you guys--I kind of egged jonmc on because I found his pre-judging of the whole thing kind of stupid and (to use his word) myopic. I stopped responding because--who has time? But I think if anything, this thread established that 'punk' is still an interesting topic, and that the attitudes surrounding it still manage to mess with people's heads. jonmc's in particular is fun to mess with, and i make no apology for doing it.

For anyone still paying attention, the book to which this post refers is NOT a 'punk saved my life' book. And all the attitudes expressed above are like scribbles to its finely crafted painting. And the only way you can say 'no it's not' is to read beyond the author's generous excerpting and into the novel itself.

That is, if the topic is one that interests you.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 11:51 AM on April 17, 2005