And with all due respect, agreeing with someone describing someone as a total no talent after they've survived 35 years in the music business makes people look complete arses and entirely justifies not taking their views seriously on any other subject let alone this one. It shows a lack of insight, understanding and credibility that you would hope would never appear in a forum such as this where otherwise such great breadth of knowledge and alternative perspectives exist.
But no, we're reduced to the playground meme of "It's s@&£ cos I say it is, so there!".
Poor.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Jasonf
Originally Posted by Mike Hughes:
class="quotedText"> Oh and Jason, guess which song I have on a 7" single? It's a horrible offensive, crass, unsubtle thing. Momentarily amusing to a juvenile mind and symptomatic of how stunningly unoriginal the Pistols were when left to their own devices and unravelling.
Lol, actually I still know the exact tune to that single, okay it's a very simple tune, but I only heard the track twice back in 1983 or 84. Still you could say it left an impression. Yes they had an influence, even a musical influence in the sense that they became a benchmark for British punk for others to carry the batton...more successfully IMO.
But as this 'good boys', 'bad boys' pthing is concerned, that just reinforces my point about the music media clouding the real issues, if a band is good or not, there is an element of dont believe the hype with the SP and none with the PIL IMO.
Cheers.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Mike Hughes
I think you're right Jason. People have 35 years of bile stored up for the SP because of the hype. PIL saw Lydon walk away from that and establish musical credibility as well as significance.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by dis
Mike - great posts !! Incisive and coherent.
But - JLs musical credibility and significance ? Elaborate please.
Also, interested in your definition of "great music" on earlier post - the first couple of sentences seem to describe gm to a tee.
There is a difference between objective and subjective revision of a band's legacy.
Ignore 35 years of accumulated SP bile ( ew yuck ) ,media hype, JL's posturing, The PIL metal case ( more of a desperate stunt than a torn Union Jack ) ......
Subjective musical taste aside, who will be looked back on as a band who inspired others, challenged pop style and method, generated discussion ?
dis
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by chimp
It sounds to me that there are some OLD prog rockers on this thread who still can't get over the fact that punk and SP in particular laid their heroes to rest like the bloated dinosaurs that they were ( no more heroes). Punk in general was a diy for the masses, and SP did NOT have that much musical ability, I remember Lemmy taught sid how to play bass, his comment was "He's a nice kid but he is a crap bassist.Lets just say that imo punk helped change the face of music from cheesy repetitive dirge to fresh repetitive dirge.
I am a lover of all types of music from all era's so I am not biased in any way, but to dismiss punk and SP in particular is narrow minded, just take a listen to "Holidays in the sun", a fantastic track, and even if punk was a variation of blues rock who bloody cares, isn't all modern music reputed to have been influenced in one way or another by blues.
As for the psuedo working class nonsense, SP were working class, the clash were middle class, Joe Strummer went to grammer school, and going back a decade, (correct me if I am wrong) the beatles were working class lads and the stones weren't.
Regards
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Mike Hughes
Thanks dis.
I'm of the view that the fact we're discussing them now means they both left a legacy albeit of different types perhaps. That a person may not choose to pursue aspects of that in their own collection is fair enough but being dismissive is just ignorance and dogma.
As far as great music is concerned It's an elusive thing but I know it has bugger all to do with conventional notions of singing or musicianship. It often has a lightness of touch, a knowing humour or even an uplifting darkness. Something to which you can relate. Digging myself a hole here...
I always liked a definition used to describe Swingin' Party by The Replacements. "The slackness of true authority".
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Wugged Woy
Originally Posted by Mike Hughes:
Yes Roy, I believe we are at cross purposes. I was referring to your comment about the Beatles and the Stones. I commented that the perception of them was the exact reverse of the truth. You said that was wrong because your family knew both. Please explain who the posh boys were then!
Mike,
I understood you. But, you originally said that the images of 'nice boys' and 'ruffians' (which were the images the record companies wanted to promote) should have been reversed. This is what I disagree on - the Stones, in our experience, behaved in a loutish way in the early 60's not just as part of their public image, but also in private. Things changed of course as they grew older (and phenomenally rich). The Beatles, though by no means angelic, generally acted in a manner in accordance to the image they wanted to portray.
You didn't state anything about posh boys in your original post and therefore my follow up had nothing to do with how much money their daddies had in their back pockets.
Hope that explains our misunderstanding.
Oh, and it's Woy
Regards.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by TWP
Every now and then something new comes along that changes the musical direction and breaks the norm. at the same time creating a new audience that others dislike or dont understand , The Beatles being a prime example ,
The Sex Pistols came along and changed the direction again for a new audience, yes punk was already getting a head of steam with New york dolls and others but it was the Pistols that grabbed the attention.
To say the sex Pistols were irrelevant is total rubbish,
As suggested elsewhere on this thread probbaly suggested by Old Hippys who didnt like the noisy upstarts.
Me i am glad they grabbed the attention, made a few singles , upset the status quo in more ways than one and made one Classic album ( manufactured or not ) .
If they hadnt we would not have had the next Changes in music direction , Joy Division , followed by The Smiths then Public enemy then Sonic Youth , Nirvana which leads me back to the Beatles as Kurt Cobain claimed without the Beatles Nirvana would not of existed.
God save the Sex Pistols as Mr Biggs once sang !
TWP
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Mike Hughes
Still think we're slightly awry Woy My point was that The Beatles had that nice image but often behaved appallingly. The Stones had a rough working class image which they lived up to in many ways but in retrospect its easy to see they were followers rather than leaders and much of their controversial behaviour was rich boys acting like they ruled the roost rather than working class kids rebelling. Thus all was not what it seemed at all.
To pick up another point. If music does not absolutely stop you in your tracks and completely change the way you think about it and other things at least once in your life then you're probably listening to boxes not music.
Amusingly, punk mostly passed me by. I was more into ELO and Graham Parker. Post punk captured me though. Music has stopped me dead three times..
R.E.M. - easy to forget now how out there Murmur was. Took me months to get into it and then it registered that it was about mood not lyrics.
Throwing Muses - Hate My Way mesmerising me on Peel and showing how melody could hide within discord.
Ted Hawkins - on Kershaw. Astonished to find that a voice like that was living and breathing. Unforgettable..
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Sniper
Originally Posted by TWP:
To say the sex Pistols were irrelevant is total rubbish,
I agree. They were hugely relevant. Like Russian tanks rolling into Prague you just knew that life was never going to be the same again. Like the plague. Like the insane taking over the asylum. Like the worst kind of pestilence. It was just totally hideous and obnoxious talentless sh1te. This Orc noise has/had no redeeming features whatsoever. The Pistols were just a bunch of ugly little ranting puking c**nts with no ideas. It was never about music. They sooner they are forgotten the better in my view. Ditto that prat McLaren and that freak show Westwood woman. All in my humble opinion of course.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by TWP
Sniper , you should really get off the fence and make up your mind about the Sex Pistols.
It was just totally hideous and obnoxious talentless sh1te.
Well in some ways that was the point of Punk , you didnt need to be able to play dull 20 minute guitar solos ponce around in big hats and platform shoes or indeed dress like a wizard pretending to be in touch with mythical creatures and then Spend 30 minutes introducing the band at gigs , letting the drummer show of his skills for another hour on his own then launch into an extended version of an obscure album track sending the audience to sleep . in my humble opionion of course.
You and plenty of others dislike the Sex Pistols which is fair enough , each to their own . but to say they are irrelevant is not correct. russian tanks or not.
Myself i am no fan of Pink floyd its all noise to me but i wouldnt suggest they are irrelevant , just as i dont like them . they had a time and a place just as the Sex Pistols did.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Wugged Woy
Originally Posted by Sniper:
Originally Posted by TWP:
To say the sex Pistols were irrelevant is total rubbish,
I agree. They were hugely relevant. Like Russian tanks rolling into Prague you just knew that life was never going to be the same again. Like the plague. Like the insane taking over the asylum. Like the worst kind of pestilence. It was just totally hideous and obnoxious talentless sh1te. This Orc noise has/had no redeeming features whatsoever. The Pistols were just a bunch of ugly little ranting puking c**nts with no ideas. It was never about music. They sooner they are forgotten the better in my view. Ditto that prat McLaren and that freak show Westwood woman. All in my humble opinion of course.
Hurrah !!! Bang on Sniper, mate.
All this talk of legacies and musical influences is complete bull.
Punk was just another style of music that arose with the simple aim to make artists and record companies rich. Most artists IMO were completely talentless, and wouldn't have known what a revolution was even if Che Guevara had risen from his grave and shoved a Kalasznikov up their rectum.
The Sex Pistols etc. didn't give the death blow to traditional or progressive rock at all. The music world was just changing naturally. Or would our Punk boys here claim that the rise of the later New Romantics was as a direct challenge to the old style music called Punk, which was duly killed off ?,. Let's take our rose-coloured spectacles off and stop reading too much into the whole Punk episode.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Guido Fawkes
Never mind the Sex Pistols, here's the Russian Tanks.
Punk Rock was like a breath of fresh air as it swept away a lot of stuff I didn't like - namely AOR and bands ending with ....er.
JL always strikes me as a Guy who could start an argument in an empty room and always likes to annoy or upset, which is a shame as it sometimes gets in the way. The first 4 SP singles were great in my view, but after that I lost interest ... they weren't exactly the Clash or Desperate Bicycles.
What followed punk was ... well the 80s 'nuff said.
I think I'll put another Roger Dean poster on the wall.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Mike Hughes
Wioy.
The comedy's great. Thanks. Duo with sniper anyone?
The influence of punk etc. is both obvious and undeniable. That you're this upset this far down the line speaks volumes. There's no rose tinted glasses at this end. Anyone who thinks the music was changing naturally though maybe needs to think back a bit harder and do some reading...
I'm not sure anyone here has made claims as to what punk killed. Lydon was quite clear at the time about liking Van Der Graaf for example and if you can't hear that influence in PIL and how that was absorbed into dance music then it's time for an ear syringing. All links in the chain even if you don't personally like them.
The argument that I don't like something ergo it's rubbish is playground stuff. Second rate thinking.
As for "obnoxious". Chuck Berry, Jimmy Page, Jerry Lee, Gary Glitter etc. It's an interesting back story if you're obsessive but personally I don't put my musical preferences on a pedestal or expect anything especially role model like from them. As I said, that's comedy.
"Talentless"? Yes, obviously. A 35 year career; millions of fans; ranged across punk; post punk; dance music. Wrote stuff you're dull arguing over 35 years later. No talent or influence there, obviously.
If we're going to discuss this could you at least try to do so with some rigour rather than cliched, stereotypical "they robbed me of my heroes did destroyed things for real music" mindless bile.
Oh, isn't that you pretty much accused Lydon of? Humour AND irony. Fab
Thanks. Keep it up.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Wugged Woy
Originally Posted by Mike Hughes:
Wioy. The comedy's great. Thanks. Duo with sniper anyone? The influence of punk etc. is both obvious and undeniable.
No, that's not especially true. No more than any music has an influence on that which follows it.
That you're this upset this far down the line speaks volumes.
But I am not upset. Why do you say this ? I'm just stating my view, like you are. Am I not allowed my view without being called such ?
There's no rose tinted glasses at this end. Anyone who thinks the music was changing naturally though maybe needs to think back a bit harder and do some reading...
Maybe reading is what you have done. I lived through it all, so am entitled to my opinion.
I'm not sure anyone here has made claims as to what punk killed.
Yes, posters have. Example quote 'no more heroes'. You don't have to read back too far in the thread.
The argument that I don't like something ergo it's rubbish is playground stuff.
Woh there cowboy !!! I don't like loads of things but i don't call them all rubbish. However, I don't like SP, and in my opinion they were rubbish. Please note my previous use of 'IMO'. Please also stop twisting my comments to justify your viewpoint.
If we're going to discuss this could you at least try to do so with some rigour rather than cliched, stereotypical "they robbed me of my heroes did destroyed things for real music" mindless bile. Oh, isn't that you pretty much accused Lydon of? Humour AND irony. Fab Thanks. Keep it up.
But I didn't say this. Why are you making all this up ??
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by dis
I detect in most posts a (sometimes begrudging) acknowledgement of SPs legacy, and even PILs.
It 's a beautiful sunny Sat.morning, having my coffee listening to French bedroom laptop electronica by Colleen ( Mike - you might like ). Was she helped by people such as the SPs deciding they could DO IT ? Yes, yes I know McLaren rounded them up and herded ,and others before and since have done diy, but.. Next listen will be The Clean on NZ legendary small indie label Flying Nun (early 80s). Were they helped by the DO IT ethos ? Yes, yes I know SPs were major label .
.?.
dis
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Mike Hughes
I'm not twisting anything Woy. I used quotation marks as an example of the perspective on display here. Sorry for being sophisticated. Clearly a more simplistic punk attitude was required.
Think you're clearly angry. What other reason is there to go on about it after all this time and to claim someone to be talentless for no reason other than you don't like them. You haven't actually put any other point forward on that. What is it that Lydon lacks that your musical heroes have in spades? What is it that Jah Wobble, a sophisticated bassist; a musical adventurer and much in demand musician lacks then? The lack of talent is??? The relevance of the obnoxiousness is???
Care to give us an example of someone you liked from that era who went on to be as, if not more, influential, bearing in mind that the Pistols begat an indie music scene that burgeoned across nations and genres and produced some of the most amazing music of the past 30 odd years. Labels so open minded they toted metal alongside, ambient, alongside poetry etc. You're arguing against everyone who at least understands the significance of influence of punk without ever making a point for yourself. It's just bile.
Also interesting to note that you're confusing yourself. Always an indication of anger and hatred. On the one hand the talk of legacy and influence is total bull. Next minute it isn't. It's just that they were no more influential than anyone else. Putting aside that the latter concedes one of the main earlier points in the thread - that they were then influential - which one is it? If clearly can't be both.
This is the sort of thread that appears on here from time to time. Musical snobs roused from slumber by hit sight of an enemy they previously thought dead or at least justifiably wounded.
Oh and yes, I did live through it. I made different musical choices until post punk kicked in but I was very much there. My band rehearsed next to several other Welsh punk bands; a mate had his band signed to Creation and ran the first fanzine in North Wales and so on. Yawn. Yes, I've also read about it. Why would I not? Is self education a crime? Again, the exact opposite of the approach of punk. I could go on but no-one needs a p@&£(;g contest.
As Graham Parker once so memorably stared:
"There are people in charge of pens who shouldn't be in charge of brooms" and "I know my place, I just won't stay there!".
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Mike Hughes
Just seen your post dis. Will look our for Colleen. Already like the Clean, the Chills etc.
All the time this thread has been going on I've been trying to articulate a forming thought about how yesterday's punk is today's chart hit. Then it struck me. The XX. It's just Young Marble Giants without the Farfisa.
Woy is the sort of person who can't see that today's chart music, which he no doubt thinks is appalling for the most part, sucks most of its influence from the avant garde and the punk ethos of DIY. Pop artists are far more radical now than they ever have been. But hey, punk? Had nothing to do with either of those trends at all. Never introduced anyone to bedroom recording. Never introduced anyone to stuff outside their limited experience, at all. Ever!!!
Jeez.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Guido Fawkes
Just had a look at the latest hit parade and, with the exception of Florence & the Machine, there is nothing familiar to me. I've no idea what any of it sounds like. Where's all my favourite bands gone? I played 5 seconds of the #1 by PSY - give me the Clash any day or Van Der Graaf, of course.
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by Tony2011
Originally Posted by Guido Fawkes:
Just had a look at the latest hit parade and, with the exception of Florence & the Machine, there is nothing familiar to me. I've no idea what any of it sounds like. Where's all my favourite bands gone? I played 5 seconds of the #1 by PSY - give me the Clash any day or Van Der Graaf, of course.
I'd love to hear Lemmings or Undercover Man on ToTp. "hit parade" .
KR
Tony
Posted on: 05 October 2012 by DrMark
Tony - I have always wanted to ask you - what is behind you (presumably you) in your avatar? It looks like you are standing in front of a snowy scene with 2 evergreen bushes...but I would wager that is not at all what is really in the background!
Posted on: 06 October 2012 by Wugged Woy
Originally Posted by Mike Hughes:
I'm not twisting anything Woy. I used quotation marks as an example of the perspective on display here. Sorry for being sophisticated. Clearly a more simplistic punk attitude was required. Think you're clearly angry. What other reason is there to go on about it after all this time and to claim someone to be talentless for no reason other than you don't like them. You haven't actually put any other point forward on that. What is it that Lydon lacks that your musical heroes have in spades? What is it that Jah Wobble, a sophisticated bassist; a musical adventurer and much in demand musician lacks then? The lack of talent is??? The relevance of the obnoxiousness is??? Care to give us an example of someone you liked from that era who went on to be as, if not more, influential, bearing in mind that the Pistols begat an indie music scene that burgeoned across nations and genres and produced some of the most amazing music of the past 30 odd years. Labels so open minded they toted metal alongside, ambient, alongside poetry etc. You're arguing against everyone who at least understands the significance of influence of punk without ever making a point for yourself. It's just bile. Also interesting to note that you're confusing yourself. Always an indication of anger and hatred. On the one hand the talk of legacy and influence is total bull. Next minute it isn't. It's just that they were no more influential than anyone else. Putting aside that the latter concedes one of the main earlier points in the thread - that they were then influential - which one is it? If clearly can't be both. This is the sort of thread that appears on here from time to time. Musical snobs roused from slumber by hit sight of an enemy they previously thought dead or at least justifiably wounded. Oh and yes, I did live through it. I made different musical choices until post punk kicked in but I was very much there. My band rehearsed next to several other Welsh punk bands; a mate had his band signed to Creation and ran the first fanzine in North Wales and so on. Yawn. Yes, I've also read about it. Why would I not? Is self education a crime? Again, the exact opposite of the approach of punk. I could go on but no-one needs a p@&£(;g contest. As Graham Parker once so memorably stared: "There are people in charge of pens who shouldn't be in charge of brooms" and "I know my place, I just won't stay there!".
Mike,
It's a pity your posts are too sophisticated for me - I'm only an English teacher, after all.
I'm afraid it's YOUR posts that are becoming snobbish and obnoxious. You posted directly at me regarding things I didn't say, and used quotation marks on things I had not said. That is called twisting things, whether you like it or not.
You comment on me going on and on, so I'm clearly angry - erm, Mike, so what are YOU doing. And you had the cheek to mention irony
I have every right to dislike SP and punk, and not to believe it's influence was anything like the level eulogised on this thread. I like what I like, I have the right to think something is rubbish.
As for the legacy confusion. Yes, I corrected myself, as obviously anything done in the past influences the future. Not just in music. But IMO there is no magical extra influence coming from punk.
Your last comments about your musical background only reinforces your snobby I know better attitude. As Graham Parker indeed said "I know my place" as someone who knows nothing so I won't bother giving my views in future.
Posted on: 06 October 2012 by Mike Hughes
Woy, you have every right to an opinion but when you post it on an Internet forum you post it to the world. You are asking either for support or testing it out against others. Don't act surprised if the world holds a different view. I don't expect anyone to change their opinions but if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. If you want some respect then back your opinion up. I asked you to and you chose not to. The" it's my right to hold whatever opinion i want in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary" is the very definition of prejudice.
Oh look there I go again using quotation marks to confuse you. Jeez.
I challenged your opinion because it doesn't stand up to analysis. The weight of fact and history is entirely against it. It is a prejudiced and demonstrably wrong headed view. I clearly did not quote you and nor have I twisted a single thing you've said. I've answered those points. I won't do so again.
Now come up with something of substance or stop harping on in response to every post on here contrary to your opinion.
Posted on: 06 October 2012 by Mike Hughes
And do us all a favour and stop quoting lengthy posts in full.
Posted on: 06 October 2012 by Adam Meredith
Originally Posted by Mike Hughes:
And do us all a favour and stop quoting lengthy posts in full.
My point was that The Beatles had that nice image but often behaved appallingly. The Stones had a rough working class image which they lived up to in many ways but in retrospect its easy to see they were followers rather than leaders and much of their controversial behaviour was rich boys acting like they ruled the roost rather than working class kids rebelling. Thus all was not what it seemed at all.
To pick up another point. If music does not absolutely stop you in your tracks and completely change the way you think about it and other things at least once in your life then you're probably listening to boxes not music.
Amusingly, punk mostly passed me by. I was more into ELO and Graham Parker. Post punk captured me though. Music has stopped me dead three times..
R.E.M. - easy to forget now how out there Murmur was. Took me months to get into it and then it registered that it was about mood not lyrics.
Throwing Muses - Hate My Way mesmerising me on Peel and showing how melody could hide within discord.
Ted Hawkins - on Kershaw. Astonished to find that a voice like that was living and breathing. Unforgettable..