Re: Punk destruction!
I( never bought into Punk, clearly just basic music by a generation of kids who were no different to other generations who had the same ideas. And aided and abetted by an advertising industry looking for the next marketing ploy.Re: Punk destruction!
True, it was giving people a voice. That will always happen, teenagers need to rebel in some form or another as it's all part of growing up. And it wasn't anything new in retrospect. The 1960's had their own 'wave' ten years earlier in The Rolling Stones performing in a similar fashion. It seems every decade has its movers and shakers, it's natural progression.Re: Punk destruction!
I agree each generation had its heroes and villains, but basic chord bands are as old as the hills, and some always managed to earn a living long past their time, and some managed to create something of a legacy. Lydon and co were very heavily inflenced by the likes of the Velvet Underground, and later on Can.Re: Punk destruction!
Re: Punk destruction!
My generation. I remember punk was fun at the beginning before it went mainstream when the 'straight' media turned it into a bandwagon. Same as anything, if money can be made then it will be exploited. It's actual impact was not that much although there was a buzz in the air at the time. Lots of the bands were awful and a lot of people cut their hair short just because it was the trendy thing to do, I didn't as I've never followed fashion. Punk was, and is, an attitude but it really wasn't any different to what happened in 1966-67. To burn the material isn't punk, it's just a stupid 'look at me' statement, the sort that Westwood and co have indulged in for years. Yes they should have auctioned it off for charity, that would have been a better punk statement.Re: Punk destruction!
Sex pistols were a joke.Re: Punk destruction!
And the JamThread Tools | |
|