Is Punk dead? Of course it is – and for good it is. Imagine this: Cultural and social phenomena would last forever. Groups of old men would gather while other even older men would stand on stage, playing songs from I-don’t-know-when while the other old men would stand there, holding their beers and with a tear in the old eye, mumbling words of glory in the grey beard. Other bands, consisting of sons of the old men, would be named after songs of the old men (some would call them “forefathers”): They would play the exact same music, the same formula. Not enough with that: The time continuum would have to be stretched out to politics, world politics maybe, cause you know, “more than music” used to be one of the commandments. At these concerts I asked to imagine, the old men’s role would be that of being apostels of those old times. They would reassure the young guys of how it used to be and how it still is – because their presence, their music, their formula guarantees continuity. A land of the lost, a land, time forgot – when dinosaurs walked the earth.
This seems to be a pretty picture to some and it’s a nightmare to others. Sure, you might say: societies need values, need orientation, and so is the little Hardcore-Punk re-enactment scene. Nobody gets hurt, so what. Let them have their innocent little fun.
At the end of the 130 minutes “You weren’t there” documentary, the film makers Joe Losurdo and Christina Tillman ask the individuals who were portrayed in the movie, what they think of today’s Punk. Some are a bit baffled: What a question! These guys were activists, they spent many years in the subculture of choice, some had serious fights, some lost friends along the way – it was fun, but it wasn’t for free. It shaped their personalities. Unlike say some figures you saw in the abysmal “The Day the Country died” documentary, nobody gets lost in nostalgia here. Steve Albini for instance, with his radical visions one of the great destroyers of Punk, sees no good in these times. Vic Bondi (who, as we who weren’t there learn in the movie still hates Albini with an inspiring passion) says he thinks “Get your own fucking scene!” when he sees kids with Minor Threat t-shirts. Another guy, whose name escapes me at the moment, calls for cultural practices that annoy the shit out him, a parent, 50 years old. Punk doesn’t annoy him, he says, because he likes Punk but he wants the kids to be as annoying as he was.
These last 10 minutes of “You weren’t there” are in your face … well, Punk, if you like. With disgust and disbelief, revulsion, loathing and boredom – yes, we are bored of the current state of the the arts, we all are – these individuals portrayed give you a glimpse of what they used to be and what the worldwide phenomenon of music at the brink of chaos was. And is not anymore. That’s truly a great moment in this documentary (you’ve seen this, a bit simpler, in “American Hardcore” already): By destroying the myths, the moments when things were “real” shine through. Wonderful.
I was at one of these Hardcore festivals recently. One or two dozens of bands played, 18 years old running around with “old school” shirts and authentic gear. Man, it was almost like the 80s. At some point, one of the blokes from one of these bands drove by in a big car with his wife and the baby of theirs. Nice, bright people, very sympathetic and I’m not being sarcastic about this. Before his band gets on stage, the wife leaves with the baby, the nice bloke puts on his denim jacket – it’s work time. Blue collar ethics (it was a blue jacket, ironically). Punk is work, I realized, it takes an organised life to be into Punk (or Hardcore, or Doom or Metal, for what it matters). When the blue collar band with the pierced and angry female singer played, some really relaxed guy, about the same age, grinned at me: “The bands are trying so hard to come across emotional and passionate, it’s really funny”, he said. “It takes a lot of work to make such a performance!” Couldn’t have said it better. Now, Punk is work, you know. Saving the world, singing about the injustices of life, dude, that’s serious shit. And keep the wheels of history turning too. It would die, the whole 70s and 80s stuff, if it weren’t for those who carry on the torch, who go around in circles, keeping the wheel in motion (like in that first Conan movie, haha). And who possibly wants Punk to die ….. after all ….. it was so much fun, you know. And it’s good for the heart to have a goal in life. It keeps you young.
It seems to be a comforting thought to live in a world where history is always but a mouse click away. You want to live in the middle ages? No problem, there’s a re-enactment group nearby – sign up today! Punk is dead? No way, asshole, thousands of people gathering at Punk shows day for day all over the globe, how could it be dead? You think GISM were the shit? No problem, just form a band under the name of an old GISM song and you can be sure it will feel almost as if it all was real.
“You weren’t there”, portraying the many aspects of cultural deviance in Chicago between 1977 and 1984, hits you like a big, ugly hammer. By carefully digging up the all sorts of stories, legends, gossip and trash and chronologically putting it in order, you get the impression of being exposed to something very extraordinary. And something very old. It’s easy to get lost in nostalgia during the first 2 hours – the music is always as great as it can be and very diverse it is, like it used to be. The video material is invaluable and the people interviewed are interesting, intelligent. You look at them, you hear them talk and you can immediately tell that they have gone through experiences that go astray from everyday life and that’s what makes them great interview partners, whether you share their point of view or you don’t. From the Goth and Post-Punk tenderness of DA to the storming Hardcore power of bands like EFFIGIES or ARTICLES OF FAITH, to the youthful naivety of RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED or VERBOTEN (10 years old playing Punk music!) to the overwhelming nihilism of BIG BLACK or the poststructural noise of END RESULT- a freak show like you couldn’t invent one if you tried! So after these really intense moments, it’s such a relief to hear them all say: “It’s over. It’s dead.” This is not being said with nostalgic feelings or heroic sadness. It’s just the simple fact that our lifes are never complete, we all keep losing what we thought was ours and cultural and social processes do not enroll as such, with a set of rules and a collectively shared consent that this and that is important and this and that is not – history is always and inevitably made in retrospect, first by the “witnesses”, then by historians (and being a historian myself, I really learned to understand that the worst enemy of any historian is in fact the contemporary witness).
There was no such thing as a Chicago scene, says the singer from the controversial EFFIGIES – well, now there is. As a documentary about a regional Punk (or however you want to call it) scene, it’s the best I’ve seen so far, simply because it doesn’t blow things up to larger than life dimensions. I weren’t there, and maybe it’s a fault of mine that I don’t check the maps too often when I listen to music, but I didn’t know of a Chicago scene until yesterday (when at the same time I learned that this scene never existed). As a blogger and archaeologist, I felt mortified. I had posted some of the bands that appear in the movie and of course, I had no idea of the context of a band, like, RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED. I didn’t know that their obviously young age played an important role in what they did and how they did it, that they were not handicapped by their youthfulness but au contraire propelled their sound with it (and annoyed older Punks). I didn’t understand the impact the EFFIGIES had until yesterday. Or how controversial the left-wing politically charged Hardcore of ARTICLES OF FAITH was in an assesable local scene and how the works of people like Steve Albini were to a certain level coined by that. That and much more I learned from “You weren’t there”, a microstudy of Punk and Hardcore.
Get the DVD and the limited edition set incl. a übergreat soundtrack album here.
Here are some of my favourite tracks I ripped from the soundtrack:
TUTU & THE PIRATES: Wham bam son of Sam.mp3
DA: Dark Rooms.mp3
END RESULT: They love war.mp3
NEGATIVE ELEMENT: Anti-Pac Man.mp3
PS: Read Nietzsche’s “Vom Nutzen und Nachteil der Historie für das Leben (Unzeitgemässe Betrachtungen II) and have a good laugh with the old Fritz.
164 Comments
when I spoke to you last year you said that you were becoming milder and you didn’t like it. good to see you’re over this phase LOL
there’s just no blog like this around. totally adorable.
[Reply]
Haha, when and were did I say that, Lars? “We’ll never wimp out!” (Celtic Frost shortly before releasing their monumental “Cold Lake” album).
[Reply]
LOL sure you remember, old bastard!
I will never understand how somebody can claim “Hardcore is alive” or anything. these people must be so fucking stupid it hurts. maybe its like you said some just need so called values. conservative shitheads (Napalm Death).
[Reply]
Eh, just a bunch of old timers dangerously out of step with the kids. And thus it was always.
There are plenty exciting and forward-looking bands around today that play PUNK and HARDCORE without being “retro” or all about “nostalgia”.
[Reply]
Yeah Tony – a saw some middle age-re-enactment group in the nearby forests last year. They sure had a great time and told me they felt very authentic too!
[Reply]
thanks for the sogs erich. i’m getting the dvd as sood as i can.
[Reply]
Punk/hardcore will always be there for those who want it. It is still very real and alive for many, particularly the young. Get out to a few shows with new bands and stay off the nostalgia tour circuit. Many of the new bands do ape the classic HC sound but some are very refreshing.
[Reply]
You know it’s funny, as an avid reader/listener of this site, I saw this one coming man. It was as if the bell on the microwave went off, telling you the food was done and it wasn’t just Peter’s post either. I’m glad you wrote this as way of trying to make sense of something that at times doesn’t make sense. Of course there is a big difference when something is fresh or spontaneous. A freshly baked pie with it’s warmth and overpowering aroma vs. the pie that you buy at the store that’s chalk full of preservatives. I wasn’t there for the baking of that pie so there is something important missing. Punk/hardcore/metal are being re-evaluated today by people who didn’t participate. It’s like a historian trying to describe a medievil battle, it doesn’t capture the screams, the smell of death, the sweat and so on. What I think we have today is the Green Day generation realizing that there is something more than the bubble gum punk. Not being creative enough to invent something new. Old timers trying to recapture their youth. I’m obviously babbling Erich, so one question that I can think of after reading this is, is music a phenomena or an evolution? For me I’ve always judged music, old and new, by how it makes me feel and if I enjoy that feeling. Even bad music makes me feel something. Babbling done.
[Reply]
“Is Punk dead ? Of course it is – and for good it is. Imagine this: Cultural and social phenomena would last forever. Groups of old men would gather while other even older men would stand on stage, playing songs from I-don’t-know-when while the other old men would stand there, holding their beers and with a tear in the old eye, mumbling words of glory in the grey beard. Other bands, consisting of sons of the old men, would be named after songs of the old men (some would call them “forefathersâ€): They would play the exact same music, the same formula. Not enough with that: The time continuum would have to be stretched out to politics, world politics maybe, cause you know, “more than music†used to be one of the commandments. At these concerts I asked to imagine, the old men’s role would be that of being apostels of those old times. They would reassure the young guys of how it used to be and how it still is – because their presence, their music, their formula guarantees continuity. A land of the lost, a land, time forgot – when dinosaurs walked the earth.”
brilliant! doesn’t albini also say that these people obviously aren’t the brightest around? it’s such a great movie everybody should see it.
[Reply]
Which band was it with the wife & child episode?
[Reply]
The name escapes me, Markus, but Flo might help us as soon as he shows up
Justin: I’m sorry, I don’t understand your question. And no, you never babble.
Re-enactors: You rule!
[Reply]
“is music a phenomena or an evolution”? Do punk/hardcore/metal have a definitive starting and ending point, or are they just part of something that is constantly in flux? Punk is dead, but blues and jazz live on?
[Reply]
I do think that in the period from the late 70s to the 80s something new happened in the history of music. The element of speed was one important aspect of these discontinuities. But on the other hand I’m tempted to say that maybe it’s too soon yet to say – I really wonder how people will look at these things in say 30 years of time from now. – Punk as a movement is dead and so is, say, Jazz of the 50s. That doesn’t mean one can’t enjoy it, but as an innovative form of art it’s simply passé. I was at a jazz club recently: Some nice modern jazz. Good music, but dude, it smelled very rotten
Just like The Freeze show I recently attended to: It was fun. After the gig, everybody left the time bubble, shook off nostalgia and I jumped on my scooter and drove home, into the present, if you so wish. Nobody says re-enactment can’t be fun.
[Reply]
check this out:
http://www.chicagohardcore.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7709&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
some kids got really pissed by the ending of the movie. totally agree with everything erich said and I can’t see why this should anybody off. if you ain’t got the guts to make something new at the age of 20 then you’re a fucked up loser. and if you’re in your 40s and still play the same game you’re even worse. punk and hardcore (sorry: no metal for me!) were great. we had a great time. but the world has changed since then and we changed too (at least some of us).
[Reply]
I think you’re right, it’s too soon to say historically. There is no doubt though that punk made an impact and what has always amazed me was the incredible variety that was spawned by that spark. At some point it lost it’s spark though, but all that it had spawned remained. Those sub genres continue to spawn. For me we can blame the commercialization of music for the death of punk. On top of that I think we ask too much of our musicians sometimes. It’s not enough to simply be artistic enough to string some notes/words together to create a song, we expect something that is going to make us cum in our pants. They can’t all be the Stooges, the Ramones, the Sex Pistols, the Bad Brains, etc. That shit was magic. I think the band Kansas sid it very well,
“I close my eyes
Only for a moment and the moment’s gone
All my dreams
Flash before my eyes of curiosity
Dust in the wind
All they are is dust in the wind
Same old song
Just a drop of water in an endless sea
All we do
Crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see
Dust in the wind
All we are is dust in the wind
Now
Don’t hang on
Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky
It slips away
And all your money won’t another minute buy”
[Reply]
Justin, you’re the best, really – citing KANSAS in this very context is so subversive and ironic, you can’t possibly beat this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qxSwJC3Ly0
[Reply]
I’m in my 40s and punk is still vital to me. I don’t think that makes me a loser. And I am glad to see younger punks keeping some of the same ideals alive. Not all of them get it, but many of them do. I think it is time for punk to get small and underground again. Hot Topic, Green Day and Warped Tour need to go away. Basement shows, van tours and DIY projects are where punk is alive.
[Reply]
I think you are all a bunch of old farts & that’s coming from someone who reaches 40 next year! Hardcore is dead FOR YOU!! How many times does this have to be said?! Some of us are still enjoying the new bands, so it’s not dead FOR US!! Pretty simple. You are entitled to your opinion, of course, but don’t pretend to speak for anyone else. Still, I love this blog & the writing, & it makes you think so keep up the great work, Erich!
[Reply]
I find Green Day or Offspring really cool Pop music. It’s “Hardcore” bands that make me wanna puke. – I guess you just don’t seem to be getting the point, Adamski and the other 40 years old living a modest life of nostalgia. Scary, really.
[Reply]
Oh, I’m getting your point, Erich, I just think it’s bullshit!
[Reply]
I thought that Kansas lyric fit rather nicely
I’m at fucking work right now, working hard, can you tell and they won’t let me update the flash player so I can watch Youtube. Very smart on their part really, but so unpunk. Will have to get back to on the video. Kind of a trip man, I was reading some of the more recent comments on Peter’s post and now a few here, people are very passionate about this topic. Maybe I need to think about this whole thing a little more.
[Reply]
wait a minute – punk ain’t dead cause I still go to shows? LOL
[Reply]
Please give me your Wretched/Indigesti split 7″ Erich. No need to hang on to a lousy piece of plastic from a dead culture, right?
[Reply]
“Dead culture”, haha. Are you retrokids getting ethno now?
[Reply]
TAKE YOUR FUCKIN’ NOSTALGIA AND STICK IT UP YOUR ASS!!!
and then give me all your rare Swedish HC records, pretty please?
[Reply]
That’s so typical: Begging, asking and saying please. What a loser generation. What would you do with these records? Hold them in your hands and dream you wuld have been there? Oh no, I forgot: Punk’s alive, it’s 1977 now and forever, haha.
[Reply]
last year a friend of mine tried to rip some 20 yrs old retro shits crucifix shirt when he was drunk. that was good fun.
[Reply]
Well written and interesting read from a historian. When punk stop invented itself that must´ve been the dead of an era. And I guess it happened around 84. Not that much interesting came out of the movement after that. With that said I still enjoy some so called retro bands. The experience of music is subjective and if “hear” or “feel” that the kids are doing it with their heart and got a passion for it I usually dig it. It´s re-enactment for sure but it can still be fun. Relax.
Still it´s sad that the kids of today can´t and won´t try to shock me with music unheard of before. But I do understand the appeal of punk: pick up an instrument and just go for it, do what you want and I think there in lies the key that so many kids feel that punk is still fresh and relevant to them unlike other musical genres.
Well I´m simple minded. If people wan´t to reform their bands and play. Do it. I don´t care. I will laugh at you if it sucks. But I will applaud bands like Zero Boys that travels around and let people watch their original artistic work. It´s like a museum. Get in travel, back in time, get out and let´s hope it inspired you.
It will never be like in the old days. And thank god for that. Most of the time it sucked. At least in Sweden. When I look back and think of all the gigs I went to I think I can count to 4 memorable ones. And the bands that I saw and got stuck in my head weren´t from Sweden.
Politically it sucked big time in the old days too. To conformistic and stale. Where the fuck was the HUMOR?? And there in lies a big dilemma for me: when Hardcore came Punk wasn´t as fun and unpredictable anymore. So I guess Punk died with Hardcore. Though as you know I love Hardcore but it mostly consisted of a bunch of humorless and close minded jocks.
[Reply]
I would just play the records and enjoy the music. Is that so bad? I don’t give a fuck if punk is alive or dead, I have other shit to worry about. But I like the music and if anyone has a problem with that, they can suck my balls.
“Only in it for the music???” YES, NOW FUCK OFF.
[Reply]
im 20 and i listen to old hardcore, who cares i can like what i like and i can be in a band playing like that, what are the kids supposed to create everything has pretty much been done except for dumb experimental stuff
[Reply]
zach are you dumb or what? does he say anything other than the times have changed and yet you little twats make a travesty out of OUR music? why should he give you his rare records. these records belong to US not to you copycat wannabes.
[Reply]
“Still it´s sad that the kids of today can´t and won´t try to shock me with music unheard of before.”
What nonsense, there is so much music out there, and certainly not everyone is stuck in a nostagia trip or even needs the traditional “band” setup anymore. Sounds more like you have stopped paying attention, you sound like my grandma.
Its like Herr E says, hardcore is dead. As it should be for an intrinsically self-destructive music. But there are still cool scenes left and right, and if you in your tunnelvision don’t acknowledge them as being “culturally viable” all for the better, cus you don’t belong in them and they don’t need you. Just as back in the day 99% of the mongoloids either ignored hardcore punk or thought it was shit, now you are part of the faceless masses and excommunicated from the realm of relevance.
amen
and that package looks awesome, ordered it straight awy!
[Reply]
i love old and new punk. justin fuck green day. i never liked that band and i never thaught they were punk in any way shape or form. erich i went to a show with d.o.a and nofx. they’ve still got it man. and the new bands are as good as the old ones. rf7 still rips as well. i want to start a grindcore band to make lots of fucked up noise not to be a poser or do something that’s been done before. i do it for me.
[Reply]
I am 45 and still punk as fuck! I love going to gigs of new bands and old bands alike…but I fucking refuse to pay 50 fucking dollars to see a band like CockSparrer play their old ass songs in those old ass bodies of theirs. Oh…and Metal still sucks ass! As you can see, I am bored. Oh…and old dogs suck ass too! Fuck them!! When they get old they don’t play like they used to…they don’t fetch and play dead. They are all fucking retro dogs…just emulating the dogs that came 30 years before them. Fuck that ripoff shit. Teach those new dogs some new tricks!! Retro dogs suck. Even worse are those dogs that want to bark about Satan and love watching one armed drummers that sucked really bad when he(hint hint) had two arms. Oh…and lyrical content??? Jesus Christ!! Oops…I mean, at least Satan will never remain the same and become drivel. Thanks for letting me make more sense than absolutely nothing. It all makes no sense and I don’t care. Hahahaha
[Reply]
Still it´s sad that the kids of today can´t and won´t try to shock me with music unheard of before.â€
What nonsense, there is so much music out there, and certainly not everyone is stuck in a nostagia trip or even needs the traditional “band†setup anymore. Sounds more like you have stopped paying attention, you sound like my grandma.
Well Jerry if you want me to stop sounding like your grandma please give some examples.
Funny how people make assumptions without knowing shit ha ha.
[Reply]
Erich, you should not forget that you too praise the retro trend
. Franz Ferdinand! A great tribute band to the 70s XTC.
[Reply]
That’s right, Peter. But hell, I would never say Punk or harder 70s Rock lives because of Franz Ferdinand.
[Reply]
Quite a controversial discussion here but the quality of the discourse proves your point (“I´m still punk as fuck! Fuck you!”).
I think obsessing over the “new” is wrong. What is ever new anyway? It is a subjective and abstract term. A lot of the smarter people that initially took part in the hardcore punk scene fell for that idea and kept looking for something “new and exiting”, or its little cousin “extreme and shockingâ€, in other fields of music and culture. Punks I knew got lost in the rave scene of the early 90´s, in the industrial music-scene, the SM scene, Hip Hop, Reggae, Jazz or stopped listening to contemporary music altogether, to only listen to classical music.
But the majority got hooked by the music industry and their pushers, the music press. They are best at dealing with anything “new”: it is their business. Most of the old punks from the 70´s and 80´s have been listening to “new and exiting” indie rock since they left the punk scene.
What they never regained was the intimacy and friendships in the hardcore scene, that transcended cultural and social boundries. The lifers that never left and the young people that take part in the diy scene today, still share that.
True anger, frustration and sadness about the conditions we live in are still rarely expressed with integrity in music today. Of course there are a lot of wrongs in the diy hardcore punk scene. And you still have to dig as deep as you had to 25 years ago, but I wouldn´t know where else to find these qualities today.
[Reply]
Mmm…you’ve brought these “old days” points up several times over many years Erich. I can relate in that I have a very bipolar attitude toward what my exact attraction to this scene should be in my “advanced years”. But I do “have” to say…
That’s right, “I” wasn’t there, and I graciously wipe the cold sweat from my brow that I WASN’T there! To rub shoulders with defective people…loudmouth assholes, drug addicts, liars, nazis, homophobes, schizophrenics who would take a piss on my leg as soon as look at me, and the worst of them all: the closet instigators who never did SHIT, but who pathetically hold onto this image of “danger” 20-30 years later for some perverse “bragging rights”. The music and the passion is what attracted me to punk, not the “ideal” of being a gutter loser.
If I was a product of the first wave, I’d be THANKFUL those “glory days” are DEAD! “Today’s youth” romanticizes all those WORST elements of punk that, quite frankly, I always detested. They worship the assholism creating your own chip on your shoulder…and unfortunately the “dinosaurs” keep propagating this image, and it’s such a slap to MY face (and I’m no kid) when these fuckfaces self-righteously proclaim “well, we’re not relevant anymore so PUNK’S DEAD, fuck your band it’s a rip-off blah blah”.
The old guys can all go to hell (except you Erich, because you belive in neither God nor Devil!
)
[Reply]
P.S.: It’s ironic that I ended up “rubbing shoulders” with an endless barrage of loudmouth assholes, drug addicts, liars, nazis, homophobes, and schizophrenics anyways!
[Reply]
Its a music not a time period. You old timers need to fuck off.
[Reply]
“But hell, I would never say Punk or harder 70s Rock lives because of Franz Ferdinand.”
No, who said that?
[Reply]
I did say so, Peter, I did.
Roc: Well, that’s the question here – is it “a music” or a “time period”? I don’t think it’s that simple. And I fucked off long time ago – but I’ll still be around when you’re long gone.
[Reply]
This is Flo a.k.a. the guy with the big car, wife and child.
I didn’t put my denim jacket on before going on stage, but when I got out of the warm car. In fact, I took it off when I plugged myself in. And my mentioning of my sweatsoaking “workwear” to you later on was with an ironic undertone. Besides, my lovely wife tells me to remind you that it was you who was blue-denimed this evening.
After having cleared the most important issues, now more serious:
If my band is considered “retro” or not lies in the eye of the beholder in this case. I can understand if you see us as a re-coming of things you saw twenty years ago already. I can just state that I do not focus on creating a nostalgic vibe of a time that I didn’t even experience myself (this different to people who proclaim themselves to play in a “80s hardcore band”), neither do I stress myself by trying to avoid any kind of maybe nostalgic reference. I like playing my music, stealing moments/feelings of other music that I like, playing it in my way, thus maybe only reproducing cheap nostalgia, maybe accidentally finding something new once in a while. What shall I do – it feels good. It is no “work”.
@Markus: the name of the band is CROWSKIN.
[Reply]
No hard feelings, Flo – but this is not a subjective matter. All you retros keep saying that, thus demonstrating that you didn’t understand what I’m saying. By the way, your band sounded like a not so talented Metal band anyway and I was under the impression you felt very uncomfortable with the “Hardcore”-tag. And yes – it looked like a lot of work.
Next time you’re here in Zürich, I want to see you get out of your car with the denim on already! True rockers never take off their denim! and then I’ll invite you and your wife to Hiltl to make up for the sarcasm.
[Reply]
This sounds like a deal!
[Reply]
It is official – Erich & his cohorts are bitter old men with a chip on both shoulders. They decided that hardcore is over, so that’s that. Amen! Erich, you are starting to sound more & more desperate with each comment. It’s actually a wee bit embarrasing now. I’d like to know the official date of hardcores demise, if that’s OK? I’d imagine that the you of 25 years ago would be mortified at the thought of what you became.
[Reply]
Adamski, I would beat myself with a big stick if I wouldn’t have changed in the last 25 years, for fuck’s sake. We’re not kids anymore. At least I’m not. You might wanna live on in your time bubble, just like all the re-enactors.
[Reply]
Adamski: Hardcore lost its relevance and integrity when the 1988 revelation boyscout scene officially declared the remainings a joke and turned rebellion into complete bullshit. Maybe you had your head to deep up your ass to notice cause you were so busy in your everlasting Hardcore scene.
Whatever came after the 1988 comedy was retro. And it got worse and worse with every generation that followed.
[Reply]
Well said, Cockroach, well said. To me there’s one record that in a way stands for the end of Hardcore and that’s Big Black’s “Atomizer” album (and maybe more consequently “Songs about fucking” too). I didn’t see it so when those albums came out, the whole process of disintegration was kinda hectic, with bands like NoMeansNo getting bigger, the Metal issue etc.. Retrospectively, the whole damn thing fell apart in the mid 80s, but some of the remainings (like Big Black) were diamonds. And then the boyscouts came along, the crusties, the veganists and all those tasteless wiedergänger.
[Reply]
Erich, we all change as we age, but I’m talking of your outright dismissal of a style of music simply because you decided it wasn’t relevant to YOU anymore. I may not have the boy-ish enthusiasm for hardcore that I did in my teens (& boy, was I obsessed!), but I am still a fan of modern HC bands & still see it as relevant. Laughable to you, but that’s absolutely fine with me. Each to their own, mate.
[Reply]
Cockroach (apt name!): The whole point is is that it lost it’s relevance to YOU. That’s absolutely cool. Just don’t be so arrogant as to speak for other people. I keep emphasising that HC didn’t die for ME.
[Reply]
Does anymore know of any Norweigian death metal bands? I heard they’re seriously into it where they burn churches and shit. If they’re down for that then they are worth a listen!
[Reply]
Black Metal, Eddie, Black Metal. Thanks for your contribution anyway.
[Reply]
Adamski, you mean it didn’t lose its relevance to you. You don’t seem to be the brightest hen in the shed, do you. We’re talking about historical facts here. That’s probably why Erich keeps coming up with the middle ages reenacters comparison (right Erich?).
[Reply]
See you have Soap & Skin on heavy rotation. Great taste!!! Is Hardcore dead? Was it ever alive? Stupid macho cult, I never got it.
[Reply]
Cockroach: That’s all I’ve been saying in this discussion & over at KBD – it’s still relevant to me. Nothing to do with my apparent lack of intelligence. Historical facts? Ha ha! You wrote the history of hardcore? News to me. Ah, the arrogance of the cynical old fart!
[Reply]
Such a passionate/bitter response on this one, with the all important name calling and insults. I for one don’t think any of it died, it just evolved, for better or worse, the same way it was born. Erich I think you made a good point when we were talking about 50s jazz. Anyway not feeling too much like getting involved in the heat of this one. So far the highlights of the discussion, for me, have been;
M’s, “last year a friend of mine tried to rip some 20 yrs old retro shits crucifix shirt when he was drunk. that was good fun.”
and Eddie’s, “Does anymore know of any Norweigian death metal bands? I heard they’re seriously into it where they burn churches and shit. If they’re down for that then they are worth a listen!”
I’m telling you, forget the retro, punk/hardcore live on through the drunk and satanic.
[Reply]
Some spur of the moment raving:
Perhaps the pseudo-irony here is that we can have a discussion on whether or not Punk is dead, which requires it to have some sort of “life,” if you can call it that, sickly as it is… the number of heated comments any post that deals with this issue receives is a strange testament to this zombie life, or at least the echoes of what once was life. I recall that Napalm Death’s first demo from 82 was called Punk Is A Rotting Corpse…perhaps that imagery is somewhat relevant here.
I see Erich’s role as historian, or perhaps genealogist/physician here, as evaluator, an important part of such tracing to Nietzsche. Perhaps this is just my opinion, but declaring that punk is dead doesn’t mean that there aren’t still “punk” shows, new bands, new songs, new audience members, and even some fun, as some here seem to implicitly believe. Erich mentions going to one of these, and even enjoying some of it, in the post! It appears to mean, that punk, in general, no longer has an “active” character, but a “reactive” one, and thus is unfit to go by its old name. In the crudest terms, and speaking in general, it’s old, stale, and stubbornly mired in the past, even as the conditions around it have transformed drastically, and the explosive creativity and momentum it once had have long since fizzled out. The declaration that punk is dead is a diagnosis of this condition, and in this sense, inspired by objective history, but also a necessary move of evaluation. Only that which affirms becoming, affirms its inevitable becoming, is fit to return, or will ever return, as Deleuze’s Nietzche says…it would seem punk has been possessed by reactive forces, failing to do so.
Erich mentions watching a re-enactment, and then leaving the “time bubble” back to our modern life. I personally believe that if punk has value, it is in inspiring us now, in the same way that Foucault’s later study of Greek styles of living was meant not as a call for blind imitation (as if authentic re-enactment is truly possible,) but as a call for evaluation and activity, and of course, inspiration. In order to be able to do this, we have to be able to accept punk’s place in history, and stop trying to revive it or to pretend that it truly lives, at least in the crude ways that many do now. One thing Deleuze noted about music was that it is not the absolute sound itself that should establish continuity, but the “energy.” In this sense, and maybe partly contrary to punk’s own pretensions about its absolute new-ness, punk was more rock and roll than the elvis impersonators and other rock and roll revivalists of the 70s…it had the affirmative, explosive creativity that had once characterized early rock and roll.
As a young listener myself, this is what I try to do, or the relationship I try to have with this music and with that time, which I do love. I don’t mean to claim any absolute authenticity from my listening practices, or to shamelessly appropriate without regard for history. I also don’t pretend that much of the music I enjoy is “alive,” or that listening to it “brings me back to the 70s/80s.” At the same time, I can’t deny that I’m drawn to it, and have strange (inauthentic) visions or inklings of those times, and the energy and feelings they produced. I can only acknowledge that those feelings are those of the present, inescapably, and hope that they translate into good things in the now.
[Reply]
Is that it then? Wow! I enjoyed that little discussion – it was fun!
[Reply]
Punk Rock and Hardcore are about as dead and tired as this argument. I think the crux of the argument lies in the fact that it has been around for over 30 years, whereas, when I first started, it had been around for not even six and, in retrospect, it had already jumped the shark by that point. Would I have gotten into it if it had been around for 30 years? ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOT! I would have found it amusing like I find those old 60′s garage bands amusing. It was totally different back then and it drew a different caliber of freak in those days. I don’t relate to the young kids I see in that scene now–they seem spoiled, cliquey, stupid, and BORING. I saw the world in fairly radical terms as a kid and I know I wouldn’t waste my time on that shit if I were 12 years old in 2009.
From where I sit, Punk has become a fake rebellion ritual for middle class kids. Most go through the motions and turn out like mom and dad in the long haul. I’ve seen them come and go. I don’t think music will be the same vehicle for rebellion it was before–it seems like it’s played out. Nothing wrong with loving those old Punk records, though, so long as you’re not a nostalgic geek about it. There are a lot of geeks out there these days.
I also think people have lost sight of how little talent it takes to crank that shit out. If some of that stuff is “art”, just shoot me. If you are going to make retro racket for the shear joy of making noise, the least you can do is say something interesting or offensive. It ain’t hard, believe me–especially with all those over-sensitive PC fucks dominating things these days. At this point, it should be glaringly obvious to anyone with a half a brain that the world is going down the toilet. It is much worse than when I was a kid. You’d think these kids would adapt a more reactionary “counter culture”.
[Reply]
man thanks a lot for this posting andthanks everybody for the debate. this has really opened my eyes in many ways. I follow this blog since about the year. every now and then the admin would throw in remarks such as punk being dead etc. I always thought uargh fuck him, just another old bitter man. but now I’ve come to realize that this is maybe not at all so wrong. yes: since many years the music keeps repeating itself. same with the lyrics and images: it’s the same over and over again. what first stroke me when I found this blog was how some of these old timer bands sounded fresh, but I think you’re right – it also shows how OLD and dull and unoriginal today’s hc is. has it really changed apart from a better sound and improved technical skills? I don’t think so. just about everybody I know who is into new hc thinks that classics records from bands like koro or negative approach kick the shit out of ANY new hc release. but what can we do now? I would love so much to see a new counter culture come, radical, wild and original. but how?? blogs like this are inspiring. I only wish some of the foul mouthed here would recognize this and start appreciating more what they find here!
[Reply]
wait a second. where is the admin of this site from? switzerland? haha what the fuck do you know about anything when you live in switzerfucingland?? fuck off!!!!!
[Reply]
Erich, you’re a great guy. You just nailed and put words over thoughts I had for a couple of years.
I’m only 21 and I’m big time into metal. I’m curious by nature; so I dug through old school metal, the “golden age” of extreme metal, all naturally when discovering the genre (thanks Internet). I dug so much into it that I’m considering making all of my college studies about the history of that period (say, 1980 to 1996). I came to enjoy a lot more the old things, when it was rotten, out of this world, spontaneous and kinda random (things were just coming out like they they did…). Now, as a still avid fan of old things metal, I witness my peers from the same age and generation forming bands that play in the old school vein, rediscovering the old shit and leaving behind the evolution the style has known since 2000. They go so far that they dress exactly like in the old days, release paper fanzines and demotapes (I admit I actually transfered good rips into tapes, just for fun, hehe)… While I totally enjoy the music, there’s something sounding terribly fake. We’re not in 1987. We weren’t even BORN in these days. This is nothing more than re-enactement, a big real life role playing game where we play death metal. This is nothing more than that, really.
Further from this, I think this is dangerous : this is not only a new form of communautarism, but it’s almost negating evolution, a negation of the nature of arts. It’s not doing the shit “in the true way”, it’s re-enacting, a fucking live action role playing game. And at the same time, negating absolutely everything made after the period we try to live. It’s as bad as forgetting the past. I see that everywhere I step, whether it’s metal, punk or even rockabilly… Everything just seems so fucked up and fake, flattering one’s emotions by fake underground fame made by “trueness” and “respect” to something that died 20 years ago, but all of a sudden woken up from its grave by the necromancers and grave diggers from the Internet. This is like refusing to feed when starving just to respect the dark ages when no one had enough food for a living… serious-FUCKING-ly !
(I’m only 21 and already talking like an old fart. Isn’t that a proof that everything seems so FUCKED about today’s “scene” ?? hehehehe, totally awesome blog btw)
[Reply]
Thanks everybody – this is really awesome! I’m totally chuffed. What a passionate debate.
[Reply]
PS: Jimo: Sorry, but I’m afraid I haven’t done as much for the “scene” as you did in the past 20 some years. Forgive me.
[Reply]
Sounds like Jimo doesn’t know his/her music history and has reactionary Conservative sentiments to boot!
Haha if I could move to Zurich, I would be thrilled.
[Reply]
WTT: Having people like you around me, I guess that’s my aequivalent of other people’s dreams of a happy family with a nice partner and kids and all
[Reply]
ChainSW, that was one of the most brilliant comments I´ve read. Clearly written and well thought out.
Since time is relative the past might be the future and vice verse. Last but not the least I won´t to cite what Exploited said in 1980: Punk´s Not Dead! Ok I´ll cite Crass from 1978: Punk is dead.
[Reply]
Anyone remember the movie Little Big Man? These Indian warriors called the Contraries, who ride their horses backwards, wash themselves with sand and say “no” when they mean yes, those were the original punks. Punks were the ones who didn’t fit in with the misfits, it was an ongoing game of “you want this? well, I’ll do the other thing!” This led to endless permutations in musical/ political styles in a very short (1977-1984) time span (straight edge vs. druggies, fast vs. slow, slow vs. fast, ïncorporating “wrong” musical styles like country and metal, etc. etc.). By around 1986, all of these permutations had become frozen into sub-styles (Crust/ Skate/ Grunge/ Boyscout S.E./ Alt.Country etc.) that have pretty much remained unchanged in the last 20 years. Now people can buy into any cut-and-dried scene of their liking, which is fun, and nice, and sometimes even makes for good music, but IT’S NOT THE SAME THING.
[Reply]
Now that everyone has stated their bullshit…I don’t care. I will still love music that I love and go to gigs because I love that music.
[Reply]
Jay: That sums it up perfectly. If Erich or whoever claims that hardcore is dead, that is their prerogative. I’ll still buy the records & go to the gigs ‘cos that’s what I’m into.
[Reply]
That’s very heroic of you, Adamski.
[Reply]
Erich, haven’t you heard the old saying that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit?
[Reply]
What year did you get into hardcore Erich?
I find it hilarious that you call yourself a historian and an archiologist, either a weird sense of humor or a total cockhead?
Everyone getting butt hurt because this music was ‘ours’ is also deluded, you didn’t invent shit. It’s a never ending cycle, it doesn’t die. As a ‘movement’, sure it’s dead, whoever thinks it’s not is bat shit crazy. But there is is still some great bands out there and they usually don’t give a fuck about being a part of a ‘scene’, ‘movement’ or keeping anything alive or re-creating anything.
[Reply]
Adamski: No, Adamski, I haven’t heard that one.
XXX: Too timid to use your real name?
[Reply]
Hardcore is deader than dead, Adamski: It’s become so incredibly ludicrous, it’s almost as if it was never something you would want to get involved with. It’s a shame, and worse than that: It’s a reactionary fad for half-fascists and dickheads.
[Reply]
I think the real problem is not really “this is dead/this is not dead”, but rather “how the fuck is it happening now ?”. You can’t tell a movement is alive/dead. Outdated, beginning, yes, but alive/dead, it’s just silly. We are talking about evolution of musical movements here, not about living entities. Music doesn’t die as long as you have records, scores and transmission of knowledge (everything that is now disturbingly simple with the Internet, so disturbing almost nobody noticed… fools). It’s the time that dies. Today there’s nothing like it was in the old days. You can’t decently tell it is the same as 20 years ago. You cannot decently tell hardcore, metal or whatever is just like 20 years ago, just because the world is not same. Period. 80s hardcore is dead ? Of course it is ! We’re in 2009 for fuck’s sake ! What we have is a scene in 2009, with an 30-years old history. You can’t deny last year like you can’t deny 1982.
I think the Chief Historian in charge of the blog won’t disagree (at least, I hope, hehe)
[Reply]
The chief historian says: Yes, it’s dead. And yes, it was alive. The life-metaphor, as I used it, refers to the ability to change form. And Hardcore, just like Punk, has lost this ability very quickly. Sure, it “evolved”, if you so wish – but I’d say there’s a clear discontinuity, a rupture, that took place in the 2nd half of the 80s. Whatever came after this has nothing to do with what HC (or Punk) was anymore. Call it “Post-Hardcore”, “Neocore”, “Idiot Rock”, “Metalcore”, “Reenactment Pop for morons” or whatever.
And no, time does not die. Time destroys. That’s the point.
[Reply]
by “time” I meant “a specific period”, like yesterday or February the 3rd 1997, it’s the past, in a nutshell (man I should learn to structure my words in english, i’m telling everything and its opposite in the same sentence). In my young eyes I think the ruptures in musical styles are just evolution, for sure it has nothing to do with the first incarnations but I think there’s still a leit-motiv, used differently, but still. I’m not really into the hardcore history, as I said, but I can see that in what I know the most -metal- and I tend to think the two have the same kind of history : underground birth, several different periods of history wih clear rupture points. I think the “changing of form” is found here, around that leitmotiv, that thing that lies behind the music and finally makes it a whole “entity”.
thanks Chief !
[Reply]
Chief like american indian chief (Häuptling)? That sounds nice!
Yeah, I feel very uncomfortable too with english and would love to write in german.
[Reply]
yeah, Chief of the GoodBadMusic Tribe, where we mosh around campfires while listening to Heart Attack.
Let’s all learn esperanto, everyone will be uncomfortable with its language !
[Reply]
Is that all you poseur ass punks have to say?? It is fun for me to read about all your beliefs. Please keep it going. Don’t let it die…
[Reply]
Fuck that bullshit attitude about being against young people liking older bands, wearing their t-shirts and playing in bands inspired by them. Sure, you can compare how it is living in 2009 vs. 1982 and think about the advantages vs. the negative things (like drug abuse, violence at shows and etc. “back in the day”). But to be arrogant about it, is kind of like destroying what it is that’s cool that the older punks have together (as in it has not been turned into a joke, since the the time they we’re into it).
Within f.ex the metal scene, no one has a problem with kids liking bands from the 80′s or 70′s (and calling some movie “you weren’t around to experience it” would be thought of as plain stupid).
I think of liking the bands whose sounds inspired and set a high standard for later bands, as being into the “classics” and not “wishing I lived in the past”. Sure, there also was alot of crap in the 80′s and thankfully it has been forgotten by future generations.
[Reply]
What’s wrong with drugs and violence?
[Reply]
I guess that drugs and violence was (and is) a part of the “fun”.
Of course it all was new and fresh back in the day, and of course it had a different impact in the world.
But great music is great music. If you like it that’s cool and if you don’t like it anymore, then don’t be against others being into it.
I’m not saying new bands should be singing about Ronald Reagan or the nuclear threat that was in the 80′s. But I personally prefer newer bands of the kind that knows about and likes bands from that time (the “classics”), more than bands thinking it all started in 1993 or somewhere in the 00′s (and I’m also thinking of other genres than punk).
[Reply]
Thank christ (or somebody) the music lives on without scene bullshit, trends and general ignorance. Thats what dies and good riddance. “Fuck the glory days.
[Reply]
Another perfectly executed post with a vision to offending whilst increasing site traffic Erich, bravo old chap. This one is on par with your All Skrewed Up blitz. Now be a good sport and admit that you too got into hardcore too late, though you could post ‘Righteous Fuck’ as a prime example of a post-’hardcore’ record that isnt as laughable as an athritic Mahern and Co ca$hing in.
[Reply]
I first got in touch with HC in 1981/82 (Minor Threat, DKs, Discharge) for what it’s worth, but that has got nothing to do with examining the music. Just check the comments of younger folks like “What’s The Truth”. Yeah, I feel I missed a lot of it, due to age and location, but retrospectively, I guess I was pretty much close to the heartbeat of “extreme music”. That awkward feeling of being “too late” has followed me throughout my life and it took me some time to realise that it’s some sort of a rather general attitude: I’ve never been one who feels comfortable in identification, identity, groups, opinions etc.. – “Righteousfuck” was a post-hardcore record, as everybody knew when we released it. $rupture were very aware of that too – thus the sarcastic, cynical cover. Same with Infest: To me that has always been one of Hardcore’s swansongs. – I’m not seeking to increase traffic, sorry mate. I’d do things very different if I was out for that (and why should I want to increase traffic, what for?). Traffic increases when I quickly post records in a row, it doesn’t depend on single postings. If anything, I try to increase comments, because blogs live entirely from comments, good ones and bad ones.
[Reply]
Heavy metal is not dead, how about some raw metal now?
[Reply]
Heavy metal was never alive…it was just a bunch of hippies singing about Satan and other stupid shit…hahaha
[Reply]
Satan kills, punks sniff glue.
[Reply]
This has been Erich’s detailed view on punk, stay tuned next week for an indepth look at metal.
Has it gone down the same path of decreasing relevence as punk? Or is it’s unifying influence upon be-denimed heshers still as strong as ever?
[Reply]
What do you consider hardcore’s swansong then? That’s a serious question, is their a definitive record that signalled the end for you? When does the punk/hardcore in your collection end?
[Reply]
It’s debatable at what point in time (in the 80s) HC faded away, lost its creative force, the little of its subversion (if it ever had some). I tend to believe such processes don’t just happen overnight or on one record.
[Reply]
“fuck green day. i never liked that band and i never thought they were punk in any way shape or form”
..Ah, come on. When I saw them they were playing in a tractor shed in the middle of a cornfield screen printing t-shirts in the back of the bread truck they were touring in. Singing sugary songs about pretty girls in the library was totally punk (or completely reactionary) in 1989.
[Reply]
I can spot Marx and the ugly Sartre Rowohlt box set.
[Reply]
Top notch, Offtopic. You just won yourself a kiss on the belly.
[Reply]
concerning the stealing from the pioneers – we have translated for our zine an old INFEST int-w from Megawimp #3.
[Reply]
and hardcore is and will be alive, Erich, until there are dedicated people who express true anger and desperation through this music that everyone can learn. there is a strong international movement and many kicking bands and even if they don’t create as much as you (wow the cross of two genres, a rocket science) that is not more pathetic than you with your statement now. this is a way of thinking and a way of life, not only the innovations in music which gives you a boner.
[Reply]
I think it’s more a way of not-thinking and a way of wanna-be-life.
[Reply]
My family moved to L.A. in 1975. I was 15 then. You can say I was there when Punk exploded in L.A. All of a sudden these baldies were around callin themselves “Hardcore”. Aggressive white middle class male. Stupid people and none of them lasted longer than a year or two. Some great bands came from this scene (Black Flag, Circle One …) but somehow the bands and the baldies didn’t mix. I guess the bands knew how fucked up they were. Before 1985 the baldies had long hair went to Metal gigs or dropped out.
[Reply]
punk as any form of social movement definatley is dead, but there are still tiny microcosms of “musical scenes” being born and dying, whose impact will never spread beyond a handful of people, and I find this delightful.
but the whole retro, band revivalist thing does annoy in the sense of people attempting to immerse themselves in the mythos of a music and scene that they never were, and have no right to be, associated with.
[Reply]
so, Erich, why it was a way of huge THINKING and real LIFE in your glory days? instead of some lasy spoiled kids there were a lot of jocks and nazis starting fights. as for “art” sence – what do you expect to “invent” from a 18 year olds who have nothing to deal with the instruments before, in the age when all “primitive” and aggressive types of music was already invented? and if the ones feel like a NA or YDI lyrics which are still bloody relevant today (as more and more hc lyrics too), what do you expect to express their feelings through? rap? some weird electronics? or just don’t be pathetic, leave music, work on a factory and beat their wifes to release the pressure like their fathers?
[Reply]
and for example in an ex-USSR countries or in a countries like Indonesia, where all the shit (not including the bands that existed before which you cant count on the fingers of the hand) became to develop only in the late 90s it’s even more relevant.
[Reply]
“Bloody relevant” – haha. C’mon, NA or YDI lyrics are dumb, primitive and actually pretty much directed against kids like you, when you take a closer look. I don’t care what music you listen to or how people like you feel during their re-enactments. I wouldn’t give a toss about Stoneage re-enactors’ view on the “past” or how they feel re-living it. It’s not a subjective matter: It’s over since more than 20 fucking years and if you kids are too dumb, too wrapped up in all your esoteric pseudo-political crap, if you like any other nazi need to team up with people sharing your idiotic views, then that’s absolutely your cup of tea. Don’t just bore me with it.
[Reply]
Haha wonderful Erich. Give em hell they deserve it. Fucking retro kids.
[Reply]
well FOG lyrics are much much better tha YDIs. and explain this “against you” in their lyrics! i used to respect you Erich before all that but now i see you just a crappy old A G E I S T farting from his mouth. and you never was more hardcore than some younger people who also feel it in their guts not only in the brain like some snobbish self-admirating bore.
i’m not in the pseudo-political unity, and i think in many times more isolated than you.
you’re just pitiful old man Erich, who never meet the real problems. and you’re all right, the youngsters just don’t need the opinions of the old corpses with rotten brains. pathetic old sucker wanking on his fetishes. “i’m so artsy-fartsy, got such a good taste!” go fuck yourself with it.
[Reply]
Another heart broken.
[Reply]
go wank on yourself again Kasanova.
[Reply]
i wish i live in Zurich to kick your ass with a passion on some show. pretty oldschool attitude, eh?
[Reply]
Haha, I wish you’d live here, kid.
[Reply]
Too bad I don’t live in Assholistan to kick your ass, Mikhail.
[Reply]
think you’re too OLD and WEAK to do that. anyway, you’re welcome, superior man from a superior country.
[Reply]
This discussion make me hate all hardcore ever recorded.
[Reply]
to the point, where is that dinosaur jurassic place where cochroaches are big enough to kick myself?
[Reply]
“Superior man”, “superior country”? Kid, you need professional help. First step: You’re banned here.
[Reply]
That’s scary man. People threatening you with violence cuz you said their music and political views are crap.
[Reply]
Pär – I hear you. Completely obnoxious and pathetic, on both sides.
[Reply]
Oh my…
How things have changed with communication by via the computer.
[Reply]
To calm down I’d recommend this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3bfrPk6aIE
Then I’d like to cite one of the comments there: “you can be in a cover band but you dont need to look just like them in every way ”
And now I’d like to say: Please put the scene to sleep!
-
I wonder why no one responded to Michalkes post (“…What they never regained was the intimacy and friendships in the hardcore scene, that transcended cultural and social boundries. The lifers that never left and the young people that take part in the diy scene today, still share that…”)?
The community aspect of scene is quite a big selling point actually, just one that I don’t think one should buy. The delusional state of being in the warm comfort zone of the “like minded” with it’ s projective hallucinations about the hostile outside is definitely not healthy.
The one thing capitalism and it’ s accompanying bourgeois society succeeded in, was to set us free from the bonds and chains of community and all we can think of is getting back into the tribe?
Well, I was never handed the key to any scene and always stood “outside watching in” (Artificial Peace) and I hate “community” with a vengeance (“Gemeinschaft” in German has an even nastier ring to it), cause i know I can’t exist in it’s suffocating embrace – I need the breathing spaces and loopholes of bourgeois society (so pay no mind to me, I’m just a minor threat) but my disfunctionalities aside I still am right in saying: Please put the scene to sleep (really any scene, if you could arrange that, Erich).
-
As for western post-industrial boredom/retro culture – I’m pretty sure there’ s no escape.
[Reply]
Why people try to change a person’s opinion or attack them about this? The older generations are not meant to understand this music or why we like it. Its become something a bit different from what theyve known. Some still enjoy it. But if not, leave them to their oldies punk and glory days and stay off their lawns.
[Reply]
Into my arms, Alois
[Reply]
on behalf of those who only read and usually don’t comment: thanks for the continued work on your blog (easily the best!) and for the passionate debate on subjects like this. seems like some of your readers/downloaders can’t appreciate your work. it’s so typical that the “reenactors” just do what they always do: they consume and bitch around a bit.
[Reply]
Alois point was that the very idea of “building a scene” was and is already a mistake. – In the case of hardcore it’s easy to see why that is so: Maybe at first it was only a bunch of individuals / outsiders who shared common interests here and there and acted accordingly; but soon the notion of “scene” meant something different: a “home of the heart”, a comfy little niche where everyone means well towards the others, or at least should do so. The next step is the idea that this little scene is some kind of ideal community, a morally superior mini-society from which the “normal people” could and should learn a great deal … That’s the point when the scene becomes an ultra-moral project and being part of it entails a load of moral duties one has to discharge … the necessary consequences of this are quite unpleasant: bad argumentation, self-righteousness, hypocrisy, the constant droning and patroling of the guardians of the scene and the ostracizing of undesired misfits … in short: bullshit everyone should be able to do without. It’s no wonder that this children’s crusade came to it’s end rather quickly.
Although the hardcore-punkies thought of themselves as “radical critics of a rotten society”, quite ironically they were only representatives of exactly that kind of false, moral critique that is so depressingly rampant in bourgeois society: With instinctive assurance they detected the root of everything they disliked in a combination of moral degeneration (especially on the part of the leaders) and intellectual dimness (particularly on the part of the followers who – of course – follow “blindly”). – So, in a political sense, hardcore was only a waste of time and energy. Time and energy that would have been put to a much better use, if the rebellious youth had stopped to moan about the despicableness of certain individuals and started to work out a proper critique: a theoretical understanding of how this society really works. – A way better project than clinging to the youthfully extreme version of the common moral self-opinionatedness.
[Reply]
And how does this society (which one?) really work, Caroline? And what is it thata bunch of kids could do about it?
[Reply]
Which society? – Bourgeois society: freedom & equality, private property, democratic rule and market economy – you know, the kind of society we live in.
How does it work? – As you might have suspected, this is a subject for a series of books and not for the comment section of a blog, but I’ll give you an example of what I’m getting at: A rather common critique of capitalist economy goes something like this: “The reason why there are still so many people starving in the world today is that those in charge of the economic power are a bunch of greedy bastards, that don’t care about anybody else.†– The interesting thing about this critique is the total lack of necessity on the part of the economic system: Everything would be great if only the decisive figures weren’t so irresponsibly greedy – with an extra-dose of morality everyone could be just fine. – The mistake here is the complete indifference towards the nature of the capitalist mode of production, its funcitioning and its aim.
So for a change here’s a try at a rational approach: The aim of the ventures in this economic system is the private monopolization of abstract wealth – the accumulation of money – and not the well-being of the society’s members. The fact that the growth of capital is the aim in a market economy has a variety of dire consequences: for those who work (their income is a deduction from the profit the employer wants to make with their work capacity and therefore meagre), for those in need (they get what they need only when they can afford the price charged by the owner – if they can’t, their needs doesn’t count and remain unfulfilled, even if they are vital), for the consumer (the important aspect of a commodity for its vendor is its exchange value – the money he can make with it – and not its use value; one of the consequences of this is for example the existence of food that doesn’t do you any good at all) and for the natural basis of life (in capitalism nature has two functions: It’s a depot and a dump). – So what about the CEOs, bankers and managers? – Quite simple: They are not evil, they are simply the decisive servants of the accumulation of capital; with all the above mentioned consequences.
What can a bunch of kids do about it? – The same as a bunch of adults: Working out a theoretical understanding of bourgeois society and trying to spread this knowledge; of course not in order to die as wise old men but with the goal to convice more people of the fact that this economic systems deserves opposition. – And yeah, I know that kids are normally busy doing all kinds of other stuff; but so are adults; there’s really no such thing as an appreciative audience when it comes to dissenting thoughts.
[Reply]
Caroline’s point is obviously much better than mine and beautifully executed too – i never read a more concise description of the workings of the scene system . What I tend to overlook is how the scene mirrors the outside in it’s moralistic stance – she perfectly elaborated this in a few sentences.
-
I haven’t the foggiest idea what the young people of today could or should do. (Aren’t they quite happy with headshots and job-application training? For those that aren’t quite happy there’s always Emo, a form of noncommittal scene that comes without all of the unsavoury aspects of scene Caroline depicted so succinctly.)
My answer certainly wouldn’t be: “start with the basics – Horkheimer/Adorno – then maybe you could do as H.G. Backhaus did who devotet his whole scholarly life since the 60′s to the study of the first three chapters of Das Kapital “;
nor would it be to start another round of the folcloristic spectacles of “activism” (really spectacles of helplessness and powerlessness) we tried our hands on in the zeroes like the summit hopping events f.i. …
So, as always – schimmerlos.
-
In regards to your offer, Admin… oh, alright, if you pull down the blinds…
[Reply]
We’ve got a Marxist here
And cultural practises, like playing fast music, I guess would be part of the “überbau” according to your point of view, right?
I don’t want to talk on behalf of Alois, but he sure had a very positive notion to the same term you use as a combat term: that of the bourgeoisie. I tend to be on Alois’ side very much.
(You know how they say: Who never was a Marxist when (s)he was young, has no heart – who still is one when older, has no brain).
[Reply]
Oopsy, the above comment of mine was written before Alois’ ultra quick answer to Caroline came in. But with his comment, Alois sure as hell confused me. It’s getting babylonian here.
[Reply]
Oh my, when I pressed submit, Caroline’s 2nd piece appeared and boy, when she delivers she delivers!
I guess the question remains: what form does this “Working out a theoretical understanding of bourgeois society and trying to spread this knowledge” take on? All I can see here are some sectarian circles that in past years were quite effective in shaking the selfconcept of parts of the radical left, but other than that?
[Reply]
erich, I don’t know if I understand your point, but is it correct that you DON’T say that the difference between HC and “HC” was that the one was “authentic” and the other wasn’t? If “authenticity” is not the problem, I guess you don’t see too much relevance in Hardcore – am I correct? So your critique is only one of formal aspects?
PS: Thanks for this. This is some of the best shit I ever read about Punk and HC! Goes much further than these naives books from people like Martin Büsser or that horrible “Philosophy of Punk” book (forgot the authors name).
[Reply]
@ Markus: I think you got me very precisly. Let’s play with Marx a little further, in a more ironic manner though. I’m sure you’re familiar with the popular Marx quote from the “18. brumaire”, where Marx quotes Hegel who said that all historical events occur twice. Hegel forgot to add: “First as tragedy, then as farce”, Marx writes.
In the case of Hardcore and its continued re-enactment, one could say that like other forms of subculture, Hardcore occured twice: First as farce, then as embarrassement (and nuisance).
[Reply]
Erich, no, my answer was far from ultra-quick (perhaps I should refresh the page before submitting) and related to the stuff from a day ago …
My notion of bourgeois society is confused at best , certainly not _very_ positive, just positive enough that i developed my doubts about doing away with the whole package of “freedom & equality, private property, democratic rule and market economy”.
-
@Markus/Erich: I’m not sure if not the more conventional view of retro-culture is more appropriate here. what should stop us from hitting repeat over and over again?
are there even distinct “occurances” of historical events to speak of here?
-
and Caroline has some marvellous brain for sure.
[Reply]
Well, Alois – were the re-enactors smart enough to “hit repeat” and would it be possible to actually repeat even small parts of history – that’d be fun. Imagine a form of past, where you could copy and paste certain events just like you can on your computer. Unfortunately, things aren’t so.
The biggest (and unwilling) irony of re-enctment lies herein: By playing continuity, the discontinuities shine through oh so nicely.
[Reply]
Damn, that is some deep shit. Way over my head I think. A lot more thought went into some of these comments than ever went into hardcore becoming a “scene”. Totally off topic but, Caroline mentioned what some might consider the reason for starving people. To me, there are so many starving people in the world, because people don’t use contraception. Don’t breed the children you can’t feed. Common sense. Is that what we’re lacking? Human beings are flawed by greed and selfishness. Everything we create, including scenes, inevitably dies because of those flaws. A bunch of cannibals running around feeding off of each other. Reminds me of hardcore shows circa 1986 in L.A.
[Reply]
Justin, in many places of the world, children are “capital”. Plus: Not everybody can afford contraception, or is led to believe that the use of contraception is “unchristian”. And: A lot of people, families, societies run into trouble later on, after they “bred”. A bit simply put.
[Reply]
OK, one more.
I didn’t mean it in a digital copy and paste way. You can however start your little performance all over again or start your own little club after choosing from the menu what suits you ( and here our digital internet life greatly contributes in connecting us to the obscurest forms of our past and present). There’s no need to stop repeating the performance; it will never make for a historical event though, you’re simply stuck in a continuum (which started some time after the first event – farcical or “real”)
[Reply]
I got your point, Alois. Have you read some Houllebeqc lately?
Unfortunately (or, I’d say: fortunately), reality (in a very basic, factual sense of the word) is a bit more complex than these Derridaean gimmickries (though I like their productive aspects very much, as you hopefully can guess).
[Reply]
Just noticed what you have on heavy rotation. Great album, just wondering about your thoughts on it being part of an end of hardcore. Without knowing what you mean I was really excited by the evolution of metal and hardcore into grindcore and powerviolence.
[Reply]
Bands like Repulsion (which is on heavy rotation at the moment) I think ended something and started something new. I don’t see this as “evolution”, but as rupture. Repulsion, Master, Death and others introduced a new form of musical aggression compared to which Hardcore as we knew it seemed rather, hmmm, gentle. People often think “Grindcore” (as it was called post festum) came from Hardcore. That’s not true: Grindcore is what Metal kids made out of Metal after they heard D.R.I., Discharge or the likes.
[Reply]
ChainSW really said anything I would have said already (and from the young[er] metal fan perspective, too). There’s a lot of this re-enactment in the metal “scene”, too. There are just an assload of bands questing for some sort of “purity”, untainted by “modern” influences. It’s all wrapped up in “anti-trend” rhetoric, despite being, in my mind, one of the most readily identifiable trends in metal right now, be it denim-and-bullet-belts pseudo-crossover-revival like Merciless Death or leather-and-bullet-belts Blasphemy knock off “bestial black metal”. And of course, so much of it is generic to the point of obnoxiousness. Nevertheless, some bands sound “old school” but do it right because they have some inspiration for more than just imitation (even if they will carry on some sort of “old school” visual presentation), a knack for songwriting, or just some “it” that makes it stand out. Good examples of that being stuff like Nocturnal Graves and Begrime Exemious.
Of course, I think the crux of this debate is hardcore because the narrative of “relevance” has always been unkind to metal (and it seems “relevance” is sort of the implied issue here). Metal bands were “dinosaurs” when the genre was arguably less than a decade old.
[Reply]
“People often think “Grindcore†(as it was called post festum) came from Hardcore. That’s not true: Grindcore is what Metal kids made out of Metal after they heard D.R.I., Discharge or the likes.”
Now this is a can of worms if I’ve ever seen one! I (and I’m sure many others) would love to hear more about this, especially because many of these “Grind” bands have been written into history as far more hardcore than metal-oriented, including FOG (in the sense that the number of metal bands mentioned as influences is usually dwarfed by the number of hc bands, and also in the sense that most of the musical elements are seen as being present in the hc ancestors.)
What I tend to think of first when I hear about “metal kids making metal after hearing Discharge/DRI/etc.” is stuff like Slayer, who represent such a discontinuity in metal primarily because of the new vocal rhythms and sudden increase in speed in my opinion. These also appear to be the first metal bands to explicitly express an affinity with early hc.
When you apply this same scenario to Grindcore, are you suggesting that bands like Master and Death were more important than the hc bands? Interestingly, now, Repulsion/Master/etc. seem to be labeled by many as early Death Metal, and thus associated more with that group of bands.
What’s most interesting to me in this set of bands you identify is a certain stripped-down sound that is different from the hc-influenced metal like Slayer I mentioned earlier. Slayer took the hectic, messy rhythms of early DRI and seemed to almost streamline them, make them tighter, more mechanical, more controlled. Master and Repulsion, and that Death demo with the drummer from DRI all sound way more unhinged, as if they had taken the “chaos”/”messiness” (forgive this vagueness, it is difficult to describe) of some of the hardcore bands that influenced them and retained it. I’m sure it sounds that way to me partially because all of these bands had muddier production, but they also used simpler melody lines, more chords, and gave up the falsetto, which Slayer retained even if they had less melodic vocals than their predecessors, for more guttural shouting. I can see why you describe them as a different rupture, but I am interested in their relationship to “Grindcore,” since Death Metal dominates their narratives today.
[Reply]
Just out of curiosity are any of you “What’s the Truth?” “Alois” “Caroline” musicians of any sort? Short: can you play and do you play an instrument?
[Reply]
punk is a music not a time. i don’t know what new bands you are listening to but i know some new bands that sound different from the old. the old punks like erich i respect the most because thy were in this a long time before i was but i like some new bands as well. and yes i am trying to put together a noisecore band so yes i do play. and yes it will be different from anal cunt and the rest of the noisecore bands. i’m not scared of trying new things. so what i’m saying is at least one kid is gonna teach an old genre new tricks.
[Reply]
Thanks for the great input, Elliot. I guess I was wrong with everything I ever said about everything.
[Reply]
that’s not what i said. what i was saying is some kids are doing new shit. you’re not wrong about everything in fact you’re right about most things. but don’t dismiss the hole thing yet. that’s all i was saying.
[Reply]
Elliott has definitely not read or understood a word of what people are discussing here LOL. never mind, it’s life 2.0 where everybody is entitled to have an “opinion” …..
[Reply]
Wow! 150 comments… Is this a record in the GBM house/grotto? Hope I’m not too late for the party
1. I’d like to say first how much I enjoyed comments no. 69 and 71. No 69 = Bolibompa who stole forehand a comment I didnt write, hahaha. Wanted to quote Crass too. Anyway the first one quoted saying punk is dead was Mark P in early 77 (he said something like, “punk was dead the day The Clash signed with CBS”). No. 71 = Niels who had one of the better blogs around and whose comments are always so interesting. Didn’t remember that scene of the movie Little Big Man even tho it used to be a fave movie in the 80s…, hahaha, small world.
2. The quote of the Exploited has some importance in this debate methinks. Because the “punks not dead” motto introduced an element of stubborness in punk that was a total Umwertung of the original punk ideology of perpetual change, originality and so on. And thus “resistance” became a new issue in the punk agenda in the Thatcher years (imported overseas anyway); the politics side to it was formulated by Conflict with their “From protest to resistance” lemma too. And so it’s no surprise that there was a couple of years ago a book about punks history called “Punk. 30 años de resistencia” (= 30 years of resistance). Such title blew my mind at first because it was so anti-punk but then on second thought I saw it made such sense. Because that’s what punk became thru the years specially in the 90s.
3. In terms of music I tend to think that it all became deeply uninteresting circa 1985-1987 (depending on which countries). But fact is, people kept joining in, there were ever new bands while lots of the old bands “resisted”, a fact that I dont think has been mentioned here. See Poison Idea in the early 90s, MDC, DOA, Conflict & The Exploited (of course), UK Subs (they must make their Z-album!) and thousands more. Was punk or HC dead? In which sense? Grunge was a derivation from Seattle HC. The neopunk Greendays and Offspring started in the late 80s, some of them (like No FX) had records even in the “glory (?) days”. And so on. There’s been a continuity without breaks. So where to put exactly the ‘retro’ landmark? It’s sorta blurred. Of course there’s the bands who openly reenact the past like all these Dis-bands. And then all those new bands from the 90s and even the late 80s were so extremely deja vu… Well obviously I’m not trying to say the last word on anything, just trying to open (or blur) some perpectives.
4. As for the argument that some used hete about repeating formulas because “everything has been done”, I’d like to quote good ol’ Salomo saying “nihil novum sub solem” some years BC and Pindaros saying very much the same in 5th century BC. Now serious: Admin quoted Nietsche’s second Unzeitgemasse Betrachtung, the cows in the lawn. Leibniz said about history that you gotta go back in order to make a longer leap and one would say he was right but then sometimes history can also become a burden and suffocate creativeness.
5. On Caroline’s comment. I dont think having the punks reading Marx books and being retro-marxists is gonna change shit either. Maybe the 80s US HC didn’t have a strong political agenda beyond the MRR guys, Dave Dictor, Biafra and Vic Bondi but the Crass anarcho punks had and, well, if anarchism is childish (like Marxists usually say) then you had Gang of Four and The Fall and the agit prop bands and if they were naive too you had serious communists in bands like Henry Cow and Art Bears. So what? From the 90s on there’s been lots of university blokes in the punk scene and thats how everything has become so organized with such XIX century discourse and well. Now let’s play the Hegel-Marxist game: the Zeitgeist for revolutions passed. Let’s hope the Marxist “science” is right and capitalism dies out of its own contradictions. That’s what revolutions had to “speed up” anyway. On the other hand the Marxist discourse against moralism has exactly the same moral superiority stance it dennounces. And anyway Marxism was always a moral philosophy disguised as a-moral science. Why should we think things must change anyway? On moral grounds? Or because we are just pieces in the history machine determined (by the force of the hand fo the Vernunft-Logos-Idea that leads all) to speed up the process?
Saludetes,
Fernando
[Reply]
Peter: Yes, I play. I’ve been playing for about 13 or 14 years now, though not punk or metal music, which I relate to more as a listener/watcher/audience member.
[Reply]
@ Peter: I play the harp and the flute.
[Reply]
Yeah I guess I didn’t make that clear in my last comment Erich, metal->grindcore and hardcore-> power violence. I was a little too young to understand what was going on in 76/77, but was definitely involved with splintering off of hardcore to powerviolence and metal to grindcore. Maybe I use the term “evolution” incorrectly. How about a “splintering shift giving rise to something new” in genres.
By the way, maybe they should send boxes of condoms along with the bags of rice, to fight off starvation.
In oder to collect welfare you should be drug tested and have to take the depo shot. Is there such a thing as anarcho-fascist, because I think that’s me.
Fernando another great mind to tackle the continuing dialog on Marxist/Hegelian/Nietzschean exegesis of hardcore.
Fernando = great mind, good friend, slow in replying to email
[Reply]
@ alois (comments # 129 and 132) – „what form does this ‘Working out a theoretical understanding of bourgeois society and trying to spread this knowledge’ take on?†–
As you mentioned H.-G. Backhaus, maybe I can clear things up a little by pointing out a difference: It’s one thing to identify a problem that you or somebody else has with certain political / economic / social conditions and to try to find an explanation, a theoretical solution to this problem, in order to be able to figure out how this problem could be solved practically. And it’s a completely different thing to pursue a philological exegesis of the magnum opus of one of the “great thinkersâ€, trying to figure out, how he was influenced by his predecessors. Of course the first four chapters of ‘Das Kapital’ are difficult, but after a while you’ll learn what you need to know about the basic economic categories such as commodity, value, money and capital and thus will be able to understand better what’s happening in the world; there’s realy no need to put this text into the context of Hegel’s Science of Logic.
When it comes to “spreading knowledgeâ€, I’m the first to admit, that this is really difficult. Difficult, because you ask a lot of the ones you try to win over to your cause. You don’t want to entertain them, you don’t promise to make their lives easier – instead you ask them to do a lot of hard thinking and to join you in an attempt to change society according to their own needs, which, on top of that, is forbidden. – So yes, maybe you’ll constitute only one of those “sectarian circlesâ€, but is that an argument against this cause? – I don’t think so: I’d like to see this cause succeed, but only because it’s a reasonable cause and not because I’m in love with success.
[Reply]
@ Peter – I used to play bass. Many, many years ago.
[Reply]
@ fernando (comment # 150) – No, there is no teleology in the “historic processâ€. And neither will capitalism’s contradictions lead to its own collapse – even if Marx wrote something like that in the 25th chapter of Das Kapital, he himself didn’t act accordingly: He spent years writing a book to convince people that capitalism deserves to be abolished and that they should form or join a communist organization in order to do so. He didn’t think that revolutions happen like earthquakes or blizzards, he knew that they are made.
„Why should we think things must change anyway?†– I don’t know how it’s for you. I want to change the things that I don’t like. That do me and other people harm. And I don’t need “moral grounds†for that: I have an interest and very good reasons for it.
So, do you act on moral grounds? (For example when you wrote this comment?)
[Reply]
Marx’ theory of history (histomat) is of course teleological – it’s what he calls “putting Hegel from his head onto his feet” (Marx replaces Hegel’s “Weltgeist” with the coming communist society).
What does all this rather dull and historically irrelevant Marx seminarism have to do with the problems we were discussing here, Caroline? You’re even falling back behind the Frankfurter Schule with your voluntaristic understanding of Marxism (in Marx’ theory, people don’t “act” in historical processes – the processes act through them, telegocially determined)?
“(…) instead you ask them to do a lot of hard thinking and to join you in an attempt to change society according to their own needs, which, on top of that, is forbidden.” – stuff like this gives me the creeps. first off, this kind of instrumentalization / exploitation of people is not only historically a bad joke, it’s also ridiculously naive, which has to do with the second point: when marxists talk about “own needs”, they of course mean their needs. and those needs are always the same, and something Alois already criticized: phantasms such as “alienation” or “common goals” bear (better yet: bore) an immense potential for violence in them.
but this is all petty talk – as historically dead as Hardcore as an artistic movement. No way deader: Modern societies live from and through individualism, difference, alterity, decentralisation – the pure opposite of Marxist dreams.
Damn, Caroline – you added a new form of re-enactment here: Marx re-enactment.
[Reply]
There is something I want to clear up: I’m not a spokesperson of marxism. The fact that I make references to Marx’s critique of political economy has one sole reason: I think it’s a correct explanation of this mode of production (apart from minor flaws). I never made references to any other part of his work. – So, it’s quite ironic that you accuse me of “Marx seminarism” and “Marx re-enactment” when the only person who ever mentioned “histomat”, “alienation” and the “Ãœberbau” is you. I know very well that that’s what you learn in Marx-seminars at the university but that’s not what I’m talking about. – You’re welcome to criticize every word I said about economy and politics, but please don’t pin every nonsense Marx or Engels wrote or that you ever heard in regard to marxism on me.
And concerning the “needs” of marxists, that according to you are so dangerous: In the case of the marxists I know they are quite simple – good food, a nice house, medical assistance when needed, a lot of free time … stuff like that. And therefore they want a society that has its purpose in this – the well-being of its members – and not in the accumulation of capital and the expansion of national power. – Which, by the way, are the real driving forces of “modern societies”.
And speaking of violence: When you want to get the creeps you may as well think of the violence that is used by those states who promote freedom and democracy. – Or is that something completely different, because theirs are goals you approve of?
[Reply]
Modern societies had and have many different driving forces, most of them being phantasmogorical. The accumuluation of capital and the expansion of national power were significants of the 19th century – with which the modernity broke in the most radical sense imaginable. That’s why you’re stuck to these simplistic concepts, cause you’re a Marxist.
[Reply]
the marxist banter is so ludicrous LOL. the blend of aggressive moralism and misread marx is so typical for the german left, if you ask me. what’s it gott do with hardcore? NOTHING.
[Reply]
that was a great debate! enjoyed reading very much.
[Reply]
Ha! The Marxist theories of the 1860s working men’s hall versus the cultural studies concepts of the 1980s gay bathhouse. Which side will win?
[Reply]
Guess marxism is kinda passé.
[Reply]
Attention! This is Rumour Control, here are the facts:
1. Punk died in 1980.
2. Everybody calling himself or playing “punk” after 1980 is considered a regressive idiot.
3. Everybody denying fact 1 and 2 will be haunted by the merciless spirits of Sid V. and Darby C.
4. You don’t want fact 3 to happen to you.
End of transmission.
[Reply]
thanks for letting me know about this film. i went out and bought it, great stuff.
oh and i’m not the zach from the comments above.
[Reply]
One Trackback/Pingback
[...] Good bad Music for bad, bad Times! / YOU WEREN’T THERE. A HISTORY OF CHICAGO PUNK 1977-1984 (D… [...]
Post a Comment