Fun Stuff > BAND
Okay what the fuck.
Garcin:
--- Quote from: Flaming Ostrich ---useless indie knowledge
--- End quote ---
Redundant.
. . .
Redundant.
Rubby:
--- Quote from: mookers ---aw man that site be tight.
--- End quote ---
You wanna fight? I just might. Despite what might be right.
Houdinimachine:
Guys guys, I think I get your differences. Tommy seems interested in the culture and movement of Punk, while Khar seems more interested in the actual music itself.
Meanwhile, I am more interested in those punk kids on my lawn.
Houdinimachine:
If it's all about the music, why do you even include the manufactured nature?
KharBevNor:
I like the culture as well, I'm just saying that the 'DIY' nature didn't really get codified in the popular (or should that be unpopular?) consciousness till after the Sex Pistols got big, so it's kind of unfair to judge them by that. It's nothing like Dimmu Borgir and Cradle of Filth compared to real black metal: you're talking about The Sex Pistols as if, musically, they were a pop-punk band, which they weren't. Given that the Bromley contingent gathered round them, they were pretty much essential to the old 'spirit of 77'. Few punk bands can escape the direct or indirect influence of this clique. Also, comparing them to the Monkees is a bit steep, as they were actually together in a form when McLaren became their manager, and also McLaren was hardly some faceless record exec: he was the manager of a rock and roll clothing store, and an International Situationalist. He held an audition for Johnny Rotten but, if my music trivia memory holds, he was already a regular at McLarens shop and the audition consisted of singing along to 'I'm Eighteen' on the Jukebox.
I do think the Clash are rubbish though. Or at least severely over-rated. And I don't consider the Sex Pistols to 'define' punk, I just consider them to be pretty damn important to its history.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version