BY MIKEY MIGO
There are many varied opinions on what "punk" is. What used to seem as clear as day has wandered off into a huge depressing mess. I was never a big fan of the "punk" genre. That is until I actually went back and listened to the old stuff. Growing up with the "punk" scene in the 90's just wasn't my cup of tea and didn't exactly make me want to run out to my nearest CD store to pick up a Sex Pistol's album. Now, it's probably even worse. You have bands that are labeled as "punk" being said to not be punk at all. Many would say the day punk got on MTV was the day punk wasn't punk anymore. That's why we're here today. We're going to take a look into the history of punk music and see just how badly it's regressed.
First we have to go over the common characteristics. Well, at least the roots. Punk rock is the original alternative. The music is loud, fast, and aggressive. The chaotic tone of "antiestablishment" and "anarchy" filled the air. The sentiment of the Sex Pistol's slogan "No Future" rang in the unwashed ears of the entire community. The "look" of punk can be summed up in one word… "Dirty". While they'd claim they didn't care about their image, they sure as hell had a conformist uniform by the time the scene expanded. "Real punks" and the "posers" pretty much dressed the same. It seemed to border between "DIY" and "this is what I just woke up in" for the attire. Liberty spikes, leather, ripped up shirts with safety pins, and anything that'll spark some controversy or second looks just seemed to be the norm. The music, which not very technical and sometimes not even musical, was basically just there for the disenfranchised youth. If you think about it, that last sentence has been true for just about every other popular "rebellious" form of music; metal, grunge, and gangsta rap specifically. We all know the commercialization hell that those three genres devolved to. Just like every other interesting fact about these "defiant" genres… Punk did it first.
They say it starts in 1969 with Michigan's MC5 and The Stooges. I've listened to The Stooges catalogue and to me they were better that their spawn. There's still some resemblance of melody and the blues inspired tones made it much easier to take in. While many wouldn't say these two acts were flat out punk, they will say that they kicked the movement into action. In the 70's the club, CBGB opened in New York. From there things just snowballed. Bands and artists like Patti Smith, Ramones, Blondie, The Dictators, The Voidoids, and The Heartbreakers all came up. In the UK there was The Sex Pistols, The Clash, The Damned, Siouxie & the Banshees, and others more than holding their own within the genre. At this point, things still seemed fresh and on track by being off track. These are the bands who are often cited as the pioneers of punk. I've heard most of them and I do appreciate their work. They didn't come off as if they were trying to fit a specific "punk" mold and all pretty much did their own thing and did it well. The simplistic notes, aggressive speed, and shared space are pretty much the sum of their connection. This would change.
More and more bands formed and adopted the punk scene as their home base. With every new punk band that came out the gene pool became more and more diluted. While at this point, there was a lot more variety and individuality within the scene it was already showing signs of conformity. The Sex Pistols were getting tons of attention. Their appearances sparked controversy and the media ate it up. Their antics became the story more than their message. With suburbia getting a whiff of the stench of city chaos, punks days were officially numbered. The Ramones progressed and their music became more accessible. This was dawn of "pop punk", which has digressed into what most hate about the genre today. Pseudo-scenes were popping up all over. The idea of rebellion started getting confused with merely being an asshole. The already hard to define punk genre then became even more diluted as more and more subgenres were coming out. "New Wave" came to life as a spawn of punk, but soon would pull away and become its own thing. Hardcore punk, pop punk, and traditional punk all started to scatter. "Hardcore" seemed to be a precursor of metal as Black Flag, Dead Kennedys, Bad Brains, and others were heavy thrashers. "Ska Punk", "Skate Punk", "Nazi Punk", and even "Christian Punk" all took their own places. "You could open a window, throw a rock, and most likely not hit anything. But within a short distance of your failed toss you'd find a band that claimed the punk movement as an influence. At this point it just seemed that the party was over and everyone went home and took what they got out of it with them.
The 90's damn near killed punk music. "Pop Punk" became a virus that infected many ears during this time. Green Day Bad Religion, NOFX, Rancid, and Sublime brought punk to the masses. They dressed and acted like "punk", but their styles were conventional and just as stereotypical as any other mainstream genre. There's some good, no great music from these bands but it's not the same as the CBGB/UK scenes from years before. The rebellion was traded for tour riders and the DIY was replaced by prefabricated fashions. The dive bars and small shows were replaced by the Warped Tour. This spills over to the late 90's and early 00's as Blink 182, Sum 41, and Good Charlotte all blew up. The roots faded even more so as these bands were typical blandness of pop rock, only they woke eyeliner or claimed the old school punk movement as their muse. At this point "punk" wasn't a style anymore, but a marketing campaign.
By now, unless you're really digging deep for it all you're going to find out there is this "pop punk" style. With stores like Hot Topic, the fashion became mass produced. With radio and TV pushing it, the antiestablishment of punk put on their Sunday's finest and joined the herd mentality. The more recent "pop punk" acts would have been humiliated by the older groups. In an attempt to regain some actual substance, punk was fused with emo. Basically, the sentiment has become "Lets rebel and then cry ourselves to sleep". Yeah, I'm talking about "My Chemical Romance" and "Fall Out Boy" specifically. To me the best way to describe their music is "Disney punk". The vocals sound the same and the individuality is something of the past. So commercial and so artificial that tweens and under developed teens can sing a long and latch onto "the scene". Instead of liberty spikes we have the exaggerated Hitler hair. Instead of safety pins we have razor blades. Instead of aggressive songs about the government we have cliché and tongue-in-cheek chart toppers. This has to be exactly what Iggy Pop had in mind, right?
I'm not clinging on to the past here. I'm not "old school punk" or "an angry old man". If anything, I'm an outside observer. And to be fair, I'm not claiming to be an historian of punk music either. I'm a supporter of the idea of punk music, but the execution of recent years always turned me away from ever giving it the same attention I've given other genres. The point here is to figure out WHY punk music has decayed into exactly what it was rebelling against from the start.
Who do YOU blame for the regression of punk music? A specific band? The labels? The teeny-boppers? Time, itself? Who?
|
