h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Whenever discussing Punk, one has to take into account two points of discussing the subject: The first is to treat punk as a musical genre, just like any other. This approach defines punk within the timeframe of the late 70's, and can also include the evolution of the 'genre' from then till now. The second is to treat punk as an attitude, i.e. an ideology for music making. What this entry does is confuse between the two - you either talk about Punk as a genre, that has been coopted by the music industry more than 10 years ago, and doesn't represent any aesthetic or ideological threat to the mainstream, or as an attitude, which is more interesting and also more valid to the essence of punk.

Either way, Dead Kennedys or Dead Milkman are not the prime examples of punk, though their names surely are tempting to use. I'd use the Sex Pistols and the Clash for any archetypic definition (so-called American punk prophets such as the NY Dolls are not archetypic as well).

I thought the attitude was the forefront of Punk, the anarchy etc. This was conveyed through the music. So if that attitude is still alive today (which it certainly is) then bands such as pennywise for instance certainly can be defined as punk for incorporating such topics in their music. The Clash were pants anyway.

Attitude is the forefront of Punk, but it wasn't conveyed THROUGH the music - the music WAS the attitude. Other things, such as clothes and haircuts, were involved as well, but the main thing was the music (most 'punkers' would tell you that by the time all the clothes and hairstyles began, punk was already dead and turned into a commercial trend). For a music to convey anarchism, anti-establishment sentiments and off-mainstream ideas it has to be innovative and non-mainstream. It's not enough for the lyrics to convey that. Punk as a genre is not so anymore. That's why bands that try to be punk while doing the same old punk/hardcore genre thing are so pathetic, much like heavy metal bands were in the 80's.

Surely then, by what you say even the music sold out if they signed to labels and released material in a commercial fashion.

PS not all the clash is pants... sorry I got carried away... I got very dissappointed the other day whilst listening to London Calling (a great song but the album sounded a bit too 80's for my tastes).

That was the whole point of it - Punk virtually failed the moment the first punk band was signed to a major record company.

But, of course, reality's not that extreme. For a few months, at the beginning of Punk, the music industry was briefly at a point where, like in the late 60's, record executives had no musical idea as to what it really is they were signing, and that's why lots of uncommercial bands were signed to major record labels (and were cermoniously kicked out later, usually).

Independent record labels thrived on that attitude and created for the first time an alternative to the mainstream music industry. The industry's definition of the 80's independent labels scene as a musical genre and not as an alternative method of distribution has enabled it to take over, and that's why you have today that confusion between punk as a genre and punk as an attitude.

I'd recommend Jon Savage's Excellent book about punk "England's Dreaming" for any further info about Punk.

PS. London Calling was released in 1979 and was never considered as a punk record - by that time, for better or worse, the Clash has turned into a 'straight' rockn'roll band, despite their albums' lyrical content. Personally I love it, but the Clash's punk era ended with the release of their 2nd album.

The problem with punk in today's day and age is that everything get's assimilated into the mainstream. Pop culture takes what is altenative and popularizes it. How do you express your anti-establishment rhetoric and general dislike of the norm when even the Backstreet Boys have tatoos and you can get a rainbow dyed mohawk at Supercuts? How do you freak out the new neighbors when they have more piercings than you do?

The answer is you have to forget image. Spiky hair and torn jean jackets worked in the beginnings of punk. But when you can walk into a Hot Topic outlet and pick up a studded belt for 30 bucks you know it's over. Ripped shirts were there cause you were destitue and didn't give a rip, not cause some guy in a band did it. The only way to be punk these days is to have the ideaology. You've gotta be able to shock and incite and inspire with what you think and say. I agree with everyone that we need a revolution in the music world, but we have to know what it is going to look (or not look) like. Trust the ideals, the words and thoughts, not the looks.