You start a thread complaining about how there's no punk today, and are now complaining that there's too much.

Come on.

It doesn't make any difference which one I say--no punk or too much--because it isn't real punk. It looks like it, it sounds like it but the due date has expired. It expired long ago. There can't be any real punk today. If there was a true punk mentality today, they wouldn't be doing this stuff. The ground may be hallowed, if you prefer to see it that way, but nevertheless it has already been trodden on and punk was never a genre to walk endlessly in circles.

I gotta tell ya, that was one of the dumbest things I've ever read. The due date expired? I didn't realize our urge to protest an overbearing system, which has only gotten worse since the old punk days, had spoiled. I didn't realize our strive towards freedom had gone bad. Oh hey guys, go ahead and stop voicing your opinions, stop taking stands, punk has expired.
If there was a true punk mentality, they wouldn't be doing what? Acting on the very basis that punk was born?

That's a pretty conformist-ish thing to say, that punk has a due date.

I'll be playing in basements, handing out flyers and pamphlets, starting protests, marching down the streets, and all that till I die.
I guess you just gotta be a punk to see it all.

that's some br00tal **** right there. i was beginning to think they were some weird experimental noise band and was like what the **** is this guy talking about this ain't punk. I like the part I underlined, in a world full of unappreciative spoiled twats it can at times be hard to discern the people who are there because there's nowhere else for them from the people who just want to run away from the suburbs.

Punk today is now part of what real punk once rebelled against.

I certainly never said that. Did you actually read any of my posts on this thread or just part of the opening sentence before shooting back a reply?

Playing something that's already been done instead of moving it to a new level. I'll give Naked City credit. They've probably done the most to get punk in line with a new zeitgeist but they also have an extensive jazz background--Frisell, Baron, Horvath are all famous jazz musicians. They were able to move punk because they had someplace to move it.

I think it's conformist to play something that had its heyday 30 years ago.

You just have to have not been old enough to remember people doing all of that 30 years before. How do you expect it to end any differently? Look at what they did and try something else or they did it for nothing. And so are you, for that matter.

http://www.contractortalk.com/attach...trollalert.gif
http://www.contractortalk.com/attach...trollalert.gif
http://www.contractortalk.com/attach...trollalert.gif
http://www.contractortalk.com/attach...trollalert.gif

No, no, no, no, no.

I just have to point out that your tirade against Hip hop is fundamentally incorrect, as it is born not only out of a similar culture as Punk but ethos as well (i.e. DIY, can't play instruments, pointing out flawed systems, and so on).

And cite dadaism all you want, I don't think that much original punk was that god damned intelligible. It's kinda supposed to dodge pretensions like that. Nothing against Dadaism, but you don't have to participate in it to be opposed to war or politics.

Also, Detroit is cool, it did kinda give us the Stooges.

What?? You're telling me that grunge didn't blow donkey cock? C'mon! Grunge destroyed music even more than rap did. When grunge appeared on the scene, that was all the young idiots of America wanted to listen to and everything else fell by the wayside. Bands couldn't get hired if they didn't play grunge. Everybody had to sound like Nir-vomit and Hurl Jam and Stone Pimple Toilets.

It was a disgrace. F-uck grunge and f-uck Seattle. Ten times worse than Detroit.

Even if I accept this as true, there ain't room enough in this town for both of
'em so I pick punk.

That's true of hip-hop. Punk was that way from the beginning. Just look at the MC5--by the mid-60s were free jazz fanatics (Rob Tyner took his name from McCoy Tyner) who were avowed anarchists which they preached from the stage and involved in various anarchist and extreme left causes. And those movements all embraced dada if you ever bothered to check--were founded by dadaists. Punk wasn't born from dada, it was continuation of it. There would have been no punk without dada. That not every punk band knew s-hit about dada doesn't prove anything. I know people who hate the Beatles but love all these bands that never would have existed without them.

There was nothing pretentious about dada. They went head on against the Nazis and some ended up in the camps. They had a hell of a lot more guts than a lot of people today who fancy themselves rebellious when their "tude" consists of nothing but zoning out on ecstasy in a f-ucking rave somewhere, who only get mad when the cops interrupt their party.

Again, that doesn't mean anything because the antiwar consciousness was raised by organizations that were either founded by or spun off of organizations founded by dadaists and other surrealists. The guy carrying a placard protesting a war may not be aware that he's doing this because dadaists came up with it but that's just his ignorance. It's not the reality.

And it also gave us the MC5 so there you go.