Jump to content

did the sex pistols kill punk rock?


PaulEdwardWagemann
 Share

Recommended Posts

b-f :bow:

seriously though, isn't it awful being stuck in a vacuum over on this side of the world? i don't know of anything that goes on in the big world of the USA.

Absolutely...I sometimes worry that if it weren't for American Idol, I'd never get any insight at all into what goes on over there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 179
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think you tend to overplay the "anti-commercial" stance of the early punks....Maybe their stance wasn't dictated so much by "anti-commercialism" as by the lack of a sympathetic domestic market?

I absolutely agree with that. If you're anti-commerce, don't sign a freaking record deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

b-f :bow:

seriously though, isn't it awful being stuck in a vacuum over on this side of the world? i don't know of anything that goes on in the big world of the USA. sometimes i find it hard being so cut off from the rest of the world

The thing is, we're so seldom exposed to any American culture. I guess maybe it's because their way of life is so much less "corporate" and commercialised than ours?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, how about this:

You mean my "dull-witted compatriots" who once banded together and essentially pushed your once-mighty, infinitely more equipped country back across the ocean, to its ultimate resting spot of our collective back pocket?

Better? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every body knows the settlers didn't actually win a war. The British got bored on the one hand, and had more important issues to resolve with those dastardly Frenchies elsewhere in the world on the other...

You Americans and your Americocentric view of world history....

Tee hee!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier in this thread you castigated The Sex Pistols for being choreographed like a boy-band, poseurs, and now you're claiming that "by commercializing Punk, the Sex Pistols basically undercut everything Punk stood for". So where do you stand on The Ramones? You don't think that having a band uniform, a gimmick (pretending to be brothers), a logo, etc. represent distinct elements of boy-band choreography, posing, striving to turn their schtick into something "commercial", or , in other words...uh, "commercialism". The Ramones were not "anti-commercial" in any respect. They and most of the other artists you mentioned would have given their right arms for something like the commercial profile achieved by the Pistols and The Clash. As it is, it required a youth explosion in the UK to generate interest in those bands, which in turn enhanced their profile "back home". Nobody denied the crucial influence of those US bands on the development of The Pistols/UK punk, but it's as well to recall that even in their own country they were perceived as "minority interests" and their popularity confined to tiny ghettoes. I suppose it depends whether you consider this to have been "by choice" or not,...whether you want to be elitist about it....Most of those who survived, when offered the opportunity to enjoy an enhanced public profile, took it gladly...and didn't ask The Sex Pistols permission one way or another... I think you tend to overplay the "anti-commercial" stance of the early punks....Maybe their stance wasn't dictated so much by "anti-commercialism" as by the lack of a sympathetic domestic market?

The difference between the Ramones and the Sex Pistols (well one of the differences anyway) is that the Ramones were original--authentic. The Sex Pistols were manufactured to copy what the Ramones, NY Dolls, Richard Hell, etc were already doing...The Sex pistols were part of punk as a 'pop movement'. The Ramones started out just making noise and leaving people flaberghasted. The leather jackets, the bowl-cuts, etc were all part of the fun, but also a way of expressing unity in any who opposed them (gang-mentality if you will), it wasn't about trying to be a part of a pop movement...

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Due to family commitments, I am unable to respond to your points just now. In any case, I may reflect upon whether to bother responding or not. If I fail to do so, please do not interpret this as indicative of your having "won the argument", so much as my recognition of your apparent intransigence.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...