What is Punk?
 

Iv'e been hearing a lot of different thigs lately about what punk is.

A friend of mine told me that when punk was getting its start, they were all about the money... just saying F*** You all the while.

He also said that now-a-day (major) modern punk is all about the money, and they are kinda whimpy....


I think if theres no attidtude and jumping around moshing kinda stuff... get outta here with yo punk wanna be self's.

what do you all think?

punk is... dead.

if you need to ask you'll never know.

No way punk is dead!

I saw Rage Against the Machine at coachella '07.. and it was the most insane punk (ish) show ever. moshin like caaaraaazyay and whack jobs bouncning off everything in sight.

but i have found that the best punk shows ive seen have been by unsigned bands cause the shows are fun.. action packed and its just the good old fashioned punk attitude of fun and energy!

Oh noes...a punk debate thread. This can't go well.

And did you really just bring up RATM in an effort to back up your claim that punk is not dead?

For the record I agree though, punk is not dead. It's only evolved like every other movement/genre.

It's whatever you want it to be and it's alive and well.

this is precisely why punk is dead.

ok. i don't want to get into this debate, but would honestly just like to know what you think. i say punk is dead because although i agree that it is about fun and energy, it seems in my mind that the dawn of punk, at least the appeal it had, was based on the philosophy of creating revolution. it was about people that were in pain as a result of the state of the world, and those people coming together through music to spread awareness or at least provide a subjective commentary on the issues at hand.

i don't think punk should be dead though. i think it's in dire need of a resurrection. at least the dissident mindset anyway. now it's fashion. now it's a certain drumbeat.

and zach de la rocha? he's as punk as they come these days if you ask me. he understands that punk doesn't sound like anything, but you can put sounds underneath it and without even acknowledging it as punk, it undeniably just is.

.

here's another one for the bin.

can't let the bin be all you all the time now can i?

@zevokes - i think we're on the same page but on different lines, either way i'll elaborate when i get back from work.

i was agreeing with you, i meant this thread

not really sure if you were referring to me with this comment but since the OP is apparently banned / deleted i'll just keep blabbing haha

first to Captain Caveman - my bad, i misunderstood you're original comment. :beer:


back to business. i most definitely stand behind my initial comment of 'if you have to ask, you'll never know'. Punk isn't something you learn, like any other aspect of relating to music (aside from technical specifics and theory) you either get it or you don't.

to say that Punk was all about the money at the start and to leave it at that is being incredibly ignorant. yes they wanted money, but not because they wanted to be rich, but because they wanted the rich to know what it was like to be poor.

punk is necessity.

it wasn't always called punk but the attitude that drove punk rock has always existed in those who saw it necessary to rock the boat and shake the system. with classic UK punk rock from the late 70s it was about shaking the system to reflect the social issues facing the working class at that time. all the social problems and the reforms that painted a bleak future for the working class, the disconnection between the ruling class and the plebs.

having the Sex Pistols following the Queen's path on a barge down the Thames while performing wasn't 'punk' so much as it was necessity. the modern world needed to step up and not just pay attention to the plight of the working class but needed to acknowledge that change was necessary, that the status quo was not good enough and that people would not willfully toe the line into that good night.

at the same time across the pond it was necessary for bands like the Ramones to stick it in the side of bloated arena rock. it was a necessary shake up for the music business to stop pandering to their now middle aged peers and start paying attention to another generation's needs.

to consider punk to be a fashion or a musical style isn't entirely wrong but it's like thinking that masturbation is the same as making love because you still end up having an orgasm. the saddest thing is that the punks who seem to get it are still trying to use the same methods as 30+ years ago to shake the system while those who don't are actually getting into the position where their shaking could make a substantial difference.

Zach de la Rocha is not a 'punk' per se but he most definitely embodies the attitude, RATM was a necessary band in the 90s to prompt a generation to take a more critical look at the society they lived in. that's what we're missing in the mainstream now, the attitude of not giving a crap either way about what you do and just doing it because it needs to be done.

God I hope not, the last thing the world needs another punk revival.

I agree with you about the dissident mindset aspect of it. I think that last thing that ever had that was the acid house movement in the late 80s.

And most of the people involved in that were old punks anyway

its not dead; and doesn't need to be revived. the reason you think this is because you haven't actually seen it.

i think the original style has long served its purpose. no one reacts with shock and awe at the sight of a mohawk and spiked leather anymore, they think 'oh look at that angry teenager looking for attention' regardless of age.

we most definitely need another shake to the system though, but to call it punk or to simply attach the 'post' prefix completely obliterates any sort of worth to the movement though.

I second. Ths is the worst thread ive seen in recent times.

i agree, and thank you for reiterating my point so as it comes off less "punk". to call it punk would be a mistake.

punk is still alive, its just underground and unsigned bands as others have already mentioned. I saw a punk band in Germany last summer, and in this small as bar the crowd of appx 150 was going insane. It was nuts, and after they stayed and got f@$^%&g drunk with us, how cool is that s*#t?

how is that different from a strum along country rock cover band playing for 400 at the local tavern before sitting down for a pitcher with all their 'friends' during breaks?


(just wondering :pimp:)

+1

The so called punk rockers that are at the top of charts... they're not punk. They're pop. Yes, Green Day USED to be a ****ing sick punk rock band back in the 90's. Blink-182 was sick, then Enema came out and people only know them for that album.

Punk is not about the money. Not the real punk.
Punk is about being yourself; **** trying to copy other bands like these so called "punk" bands we always hear about.

Punk, to me, is about change. Like you see Anti-Flag and Post-Hardcore bands like Rise Against and Strike Anywhere... These guys are amazing musicians, and they're trying to change things in the world because they don't like it. I have great respect for them.

Punk isn't a music. It isn't a style. It isn't a way of life. It's not even a political statement.

It's all those, but it all started with sex, and not the missionary position type sex either.

Isn't punk like I hate the government and my girlfriends cat?

No.

Think that covers that.

I'm pretty sure it is.

i'm pretty sure you should shut the fuck up

The ideology spouted by Rage Against the Machine did not prompt any "critical look at...society". I mean, apologetics for Marxist political theory and minority nationalist groups like AIM and the Black Panthers? That's tired politics; those ideologies were resounding failures when they crested in popularity (in the USA) in the 60s/70s. Not only that, but they shirked away from the most controversial aspects of their ideologies history (read: gulags, executions)....

RATM were a politically correct band, through and through. They were not critical, nor were they novel. They were simply trotted out a mutant form of the old and tired politics of a previous generation, a mutant form missing any substantially controversial aspects. Hence why you could walk into the mall and buy a CD of theirs.

It's quite simple really.

You just listen to this
http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l99/urbanH/495.jpg
This
http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l99/urbanH/236.jpg
This
http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l99/urbanH/1435.jpg
And this
http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l99/urbanH/806.jpg

and if you still have no idea what punk is then give up.

Thread closed