Post Punk

[nofi]

ny dolls grandfathers of punk? i think not. they were a rock band, pure and simple.

[slinkp]

I  woiuldn't call myself an expert on the history, or what is or isn't "hardcore" (or "punk" or "postpunk" for that matter) - an exercise which I think is inherently doomed -
I tend to side with Mike Watt's line that "Punk is whatever we made it to be."

But it can be fun to bat labels around anyway, so: yes Uwe, Black Flag was considered one of the originators of hardcore. The Dead Kennedys qualified as well, I think they came a bit later.

Black Flag got restless though; while a lot of bands quickly ossified hardcore into a formula, Black Flag, around the time Rollins became the lead singer, went from being the fastest band around to being the slowest (but still most abrasive-sounding), eg. "Damaged"; from there they veered off into avant-noise atonal jams that are hard to characterize.

There was also an important early hardcore scene in Washington, DC. Minor Threat and Bad Brains would probably be the best known. Bad Brains eventually evolved into a more metal-edged sound.

[Granny Gremlin]

I found a list of post-punk bands.  I'm not sure if this helps much or not.  Now I'm seeing what are called post-punk bands which I might think of as alternative rock bands.  Also, there seems to be a link between post-punk and alternative, complicated by the fact that alternative rock can also be an umbrella term for anything that isn't mainstream. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_post-punk_bands

Yep.  PP and Alt both were umbrella terms (as was punk, really - I mean, name 2 1st wave punk bands that sounded the same to be considered an aesthetic genre; before hardcore and Ramones cloning - The Pistols were nothing like the Clash who were nothing like Television who were nothing like ....).

Basically PP is the well from which a bunch of other genres sprang out of.  Gothic rock, Madchester, Shoegaze, Emo (before it got formulaic and shitty), Noise, Drone  etc.  Eventually some nerds decided to codify what PP means and made that list, but as I said in my OP, I don't care to use too rigid a definition here; not the point. To confuse things further, Punk was originally considered part of New Wave by the journos (the British ones; the Americans not so much).  It only later came to be more restricted to post punk (not capital Ps) synthpop.

Anyway, Slinkp's got it.  Gang of Four is one of those bands I always knew I should be in to, but I just never got over how shitty some random record of theirs (4 live tracks on a 12" 45 IIRC) that I bought at a garage sale (or something) was (not anything like what I was expecting from what I was hearing; more like Slade hungover actually) and never gave them another chance.  The track Slinkp posted is much more like it - if I heard that first I might have gotten more into them.

[uwe]

ny dolls grandfathers of punk? i think not. they were a rock band, pure and simple.

Once again, we are in agreement, Nofi. We should really move together. I solemnly promise to play Prog, AOR and Heavy Metal CDs only when you are not at home!!! And my Air Supply Greatest Hits never again. I'm a good cook!

When the New Musical Express "broke" punk in 76/77 (it was the English music publication on the forefront of advocating it, Melody Maker was slower to get on the train and Sounds stuck relatively long to the hard rock bandwagon before eventually morphing into Kerrang), bands that had before been branded as "not so competent players, but noisy and hard" such as The New York Dolls and The Stooges were all of the sudden dusted off as sources of inspiration for the punks (the third band were the MC5 which were all of the sudden hailed as proto-punks when before they had been put in the heavy metal shelf). Malcolm McLaren had of course managed the latter day New York Dolls (when they were already on their way down, ie after release of their two albums which had gone nowhere), so he was quick to portray himself as having already managed a "punk band" ahead of The Sex Pistols. McLaren and Lydon/Rotten were always circling each other guardedly on who invented The Sex Pistols first.

In 1975 you would have been hard-pressed in finding either The Stooges, The New York Dolls or the MC5 mentioned in the British music weeklies, in 1976/77 they were hailed as the seeds of the new movement. The buzzsaw sound of The Ramones was credited to The New York Dolls, The Dictators were hailed as the new MC5 and every punk musician professed to have owned Raw Power (which beckons the question why to the chagrin of Iggy it sold so poorly when it came out). Very few journos dared to point out that something like Televison's debut might - sneering vocals aside - have musically more to do with something as unhip as Wishbone Ash than, say, The Stooges.

Even the "old guard" was quickly full of praise: A young Steven Tyler said in a CBS rock monthly: "People say we look like the New York Dolls and that Joe and I are Johnny Thunders and David Johansen clones, but in truth, while we all love the Dolls, music comes first with us and is the basis of our success". And Morgan Fisher of Mott the Hoople/Mott praised the Dolls for the iconic first-time impression they made on him when they opened for his band.

[Granny Gremlin]

bands that had before been branded as "not so competent players, but noisy and hard" such as The New York Dolls and The Stooges were all of the sudden dusted off as sources of inspiration for the punks (the third one was the MC5 which were all of the sudden hailed as proto-punks when before they had been put in the heavy metal shelf).  ...

In 1975 you would have been hard-pressed in finding either The Stooges, The New York Dolls or the MC5 mentioned in the British music weeklies, in 1976/77 they were hailed as the seeds of the new movement. The buzzaw sound of The Ramones was credited to The New York Dolls, The Dictators were hailed as the new MC5 and every punk musician professed to have owned Raw Power (which beckons the question why to the chagrin of Iggy it sold so poorly when it came out). Very few journos dared to point out that something like Televison's debut might - sneering vocals aside - have musically more to do with something as unhip as Wishbone Ash than, say, The Stooges.

The Stooges did set the stage for punk in a number of ways.  Attitude/spectacle as well as loud/noisey/riffage vs virtuosic solos being chief among them. The MC5 thing was mostly due to the NY punk scene honestly being into them (and answering interview questions accordingly).  This isn't it, but I distinctly remember a classic snap of Patti Smith, in this same MC5 Tshirt, though when it was in better shape (+docs and not much else IIRC), otherwise dishevelled on the floor of some loft.

[nofi]

that may have been the concert i saw. mott, aerosmith and dolls. i think it was 1974. was fisher in mott at that time.

[Barklessdog]

Someone had to post this somewhere. I'm not sure where it belongs.

[uwe]

that may have been the concert i saw. mott, aerosmith and dolls. i think it was 1974. was fisher in mott at that time.

Yes, he was. And Mott were also signed to CBS.

So how was that gig? Any recollection? Aerosmith probably played everybody's ass off. They were still young and hungry then, yet well-honed from endless tours and not yet filled to the brim with Peruvian produce.

[uwe]

The Stooges did set the stage for punk in a number of ways.  Attitude/spectacle as well as loud/noisey/riffage vs virtuosic solos being chief among them. The MC5 thing was mostly due to the NY punk scene honestly being into them (and answering interview questions accordingly).  This isn't it, but I distinctly remember a classic snap of Patti Smith, in this same MC5 Tshirt, though when it was in better shape (+docs and not much else IIRC), otherwise dishevelled on the floor of some loft.

Well she did get what she wanted in the end! And didn't even have to change her name for it. She married MC5 guitarist Fred "Sonic" Smith.

[Dave W]

Duh, Dave!  I was attempting to get across that I listened to punk even before post-punk, the original as opposed to the 2nd generation. Philosophically, I was trying to impress "it's ok to like Post-Punk, I even listened to what spawned it". I will from now on accompany all my postings with a manual of explanation and deciphering.

I owned both New York Dolls albums already (and liked them, especially In Too Much Too Soon)  when they were still regarded as a glam-hard rock band. Two years later they were all of the sudden the grandfathers of punk.

Post-Punk, hard core style, is to me probably something like the Dead Kennedies or Black Flag, is that an accurate assumption?

New York Dolls did influence punk. They were never considered a punk rock band except maybe in the minds of some music writers.

Dead Kennedys and Black Flag were generally considered American punk bands, not post-punk.

But I agree that post-punk, like alt-rock, is an umbrella term. If it wasn't overwrought 70s arena rock, wasn't pure punk, wasn't too poppy, wasn't metal or overtly new wave, it got thrown in. Everything from the Replacements to The Smiths.

Post-punk or new wave? Or both? Maybe Stan Ridgway should get his own genre.

[westen44]

I remember the first time I heard "Mexican Radio."  It has to get credit for being original.  I certainly had never heard anything else like it. 

[uwe]

"overwrought 70s arena rock ..."

No idea what he could mean with that term.



Let's not ask the question why - with all the rock press and media support it had - there never was a punk or post-punk band (well, not quite true, if you consider Green Day post-punk they make the stadium grade) that could sell out a stadium in its heyday much less still fill decent-sized halls 20 or 30 years after its heyday.

Are "overwrought 70s arena rock fans" just more faithful or is it the staying and buying power of baby boomers who stuck with what they liked as teenagers? Is punk a music of the moment that needs to be delivered with contremporary urgency in a live setting, but doesn't "store" well or "last"? No market for a 5.1 remaster of Never Mind the Bollocks?

[Dave W]

"overwrought 70s arena rock ..."

No idea what he could mean with that term.

 

I see you added to your post after I replied.

If you think the appeal or quality of a genre or a particular album is determined by whether anyone wants a 5.1 remaster of it, then you don't understand the appeal of it at all.

Aside from the fact that I only have a 2.0 stereo and no desire for anything more, I can't think of anything in my music collection that would be made better by remastering. Oh sure, in retrospect some 50s and 60s rock & roll and country singles could have been mixed better, but the song is what appealed to me, not the recording quality.

[Granny Gremlin]

Let's not ask the question why - with all the rock press and media support it had - there never was a punk or post-punk band (well, not quite true, if you consider Green Day post-punk they make the stadium grade) that could sell out a stadium in its heyday much less still fill decent-sized halls 20 or 30 years after its heyday.

Are "overwrought 70s arena rock fans" just more faithful or is it the staying and buying power of baby boomers who stuck with what they liked as teenagers? Is punk a music of the moment that needs to be delivered with contremporary urgency in a live setting, but doesn't "store" well or "last"? No market for a 5.1 remaster of Never Mind the Bollocks?

To run with your (poorly chosen) example, the Pistols did sell out arenas/stadiums on their Filthy Lucre (90s reunion) tour (e.g. here in TO). Granted that's not their 'heyday' but illustrates that their support is stronger than ever (or that their fanbase grew up, got jobs and exposed their youger siblings/friends to them).  The reason that that they didn't do that volume in their heyday was their status as an underfunded, fringe group.  The Clash sold out stadiums in their heyday for sure (well, maybe not stadiums, but playing Bonds for 2 months straight has got to count for something.... they did play actual US stadiums opening for The Who, and in Britain as headliners, dunno if they literally sold out those shows though).

The reason that there isn't a 5.1 remaster of Bollocks is because 5.1 remasters ARE bollocks.  An actual Pistols fan wouldn't buy it (they'd download the original, or maybe even the remaster out of curiosity, or buy a used copy). .. though I'm sure I've seen a 180gr 'audiophile' vinyl (also [mostly/usually] bollocks  FYI) reissue of the LP before (but they've done that for everything).

70s area rock was fuelled by this populist lets all be part of the group thing; peer pressure/belonging thing.  The bands were (relatively) safe (with a few exceptions; KISS had a little bit of a hard time here and there due to the whole evil-looking thing, but nothing like that faced by the Pistols - banned from the radio and concert venues in England - even the Clash had shows cancelled by promoters just for the genre association) and so was the music. Punk was always meant to be the antithesis of arena rock, so I really don't get the point here. Not olny that but think of who was a music fan, demographically at that time.  Boomers (tail end, but still).  Punk just didn't have that potential fanbase size to work with; it took time for multiple generations to add up to that (but it has, and I dare say you'll find more Pistols fans int he world today than Deep Purple.... or at least Slade).

Green Day is not post punk.  They started out as an relatively honest nth generation punk band and just got big (so get slagged by 'the real punks'  -  the Clash had that sort of asshat pegged on their debut record - that was one thing that was pretty new about punk: critisising/overtly mocking your audience - both Lydon and Strummer did a lot of that;, though obviously one was more mocking and one was more criticising/scolding).  ... not that I am a fan, they have gotten a bit big for their britches and ego-overgrown (that rant by Billie Joe when their set got cut short at some festival recently was hilarious), but I wish them no particular ill will and just because I'm not that into them (I was earlier - a mix of their down to earthness then and my youth I imagine) don't mean they ain't punk (frankly, most things these days that aren't contrived pop sensations can be arguably considered punk on some level and anyone who argues that is forgetting what was important about that movement in the first place).

[nofi]

more pistols than purple fans? not in your wetest punk rock dreams.