What the Fuck is Post Punk?

[Ryosuke]

Ken, I'm gonna have to speak up in defense of "gut reaction" here. For me, when I listen to music, gut reaction is everything. Music to me is fetishism. I like certain types of vocal melodies, or certain types of guitar or piano fills, or certain things that drummers might do with their hi-hats etc. I have a fetish for those things. Which is really not that much different from a guy liking blond girls, or fat girls, and whatnot, as far as I'm concerned. I know that's not the approach that most people here take, and I have no problem with people intellectualizing over this stuff, but well, I just wanted to point out that it's quite possible to have awesome taste in music without being a pop scholar! (and I voted yes in this poll so that means I have awesome taste)

Of course, my "gut reaction" is probably different from pew's. For him, "gut reaction" seems to be about the kind of people who were listening to the music, instead of the music itself. But to each his own.

As for post-punk, well, er, I like Gang Of Four.

[JesusLooksLikeMe]

pauledwardwagemann said:

jllm said:

Wham were a fucking joke, admittedly. Early Spandau Ballet (first two albums) wasn't stuff you should sneeringly dismiss as "gay" without first hearing it, unless you actually want to display your ignorance. Yes, it's easy to sneeringly pick up on their True/Gold days, but that doesn't see the whole picture. Thompson Twins weren't really my bag. Duran Duran were and are fucking brilliant, frankly. Even music snobs buy into that now, I thought? Culture Club? Meh. But you've picked the worst stuff out selectively.

LOL! Duran Duran was fucking brilliant?!? Maybe to a teenage girl or a gay guy or someone who is drunk at a wedding--same goes for spandau ballent...I know, I know, I know, this much is true.

I like The Killers and stuff like that. Shouldn't be much of a suprise that I like plenty of Duran stuff too. I make a pretty hairy teenage girl though.

[riley]

Duran Duran deserve complete props as a quality band. To dismiss them as teen girl fodder is completely near sighted.

[pauledwardwagemann]

ryosuke said:

Ken, I'm gonna have to speak up in defense of "gut reaction" here. For me, when I listen to music, gut reaction is everything. Music to me is fetishism. I like certain types of vocal melodies, or certain types of guitar or piano fills, or certain things that drummers might do with their hi-hats etc. I have a fetish for those things. Which is really not that much different from a guy liking blond girls, or fat girls, and whatnot, as far as I'm concerned. I know that's not the approach that most people here take, and I have no problem with people intellectualizing over this stuff, but well, I just wanted to point out that it's quite possible to have awesome taste in music without being a pop scholar! (and I voted yes in this poll so that means I have awesome taste)

Of course, my "gut reaction" is probably different from pew's. For him, "gut reaction" seems to be about the kind of people who were listening to the music, instead of the music itself. But to each his own.

As for post-punk, well, er, I like Gang Of Four.

You like fat girls?

[RocDoc]

You're asking this just to check whether you have something in common with Ryo...or what?

This continual begging for 'acceptance'...I dunno, it's getting reeeallllly embarassing.

[bowiglou]

I did like a couple of the songs by popish/New romantic type bands back then such as Haircut 100, Thompson Twins, Spandau Ballet, Visage, etc.......but I found I would listen to the albums once or twice, and that was it........however, when I bought debuts by Lloyd Cole and the Commotions or Aztec Camera or early to mid- 80s releases by Magazine, REM, Replacements, etc., I would play them over countless times.......

Magazine gets very short shrift in the history of postpunk/rock, but Devotos post-Buzzcocks image and vision laid a blueprint for many subsequent bands......

[pauledwardwagemann]

IMO the Doors and the velvet underground were actally more of an influence on what Reynolds is calling "postpunk" than Punk was. It's not like these "postpunk" bands never woudl have existed if it werent for punk. These "postpunk" bands are just the natural progression of the Art Rock of the Doors, Velvet Underground, Roxy Music, Soft machine, Televison, Talking Heads, Modern Lovers, Blondie, Devo, etc.

[Kensterberg]

ryosuke said:

Ken, I'm gonna have to speak up in defense of "gut reaction" here. For me, when I listen to music, gut reaction is everything. Music to me is fetishism. I like certain types of vocal melodies, or certain types of guitar or piano fills, or certain things that drummers might do with their hi-hats etc. I have a fetish for those things. Which is really not that much different from a guy liking blond girls, or fat girls, and whatnot, as far as I'm concerned. I know that's not the approach that most people here take, and I have no problem with people intellectualizing over this stuff, but well, I just wanted to point out that it's quite possible to have awesome taste in music without being a pop scholar! (and I voted yes in this poll so that means I have awesome taste)

Of course, my "gut reaction" is probably different from pew's. For him, "gut reaction" seems to be about the kind of people who were listening to the music, instead of the music itself. But to each his own.

As for post-punk, well, er, I like Gang Of Four.

And indeed you do have awesome taste, Ryo. And there's certainly a place for gut reaction to music, as music. I hear Jim Morrison, and I puke. That's a visceral gut reaction. Has absolutely nothing to do with people who like the Doors (hell, Bowiglou is one of my favorite cyber-people, but he loves the Doors), it has to do with the fact that Morrison's singing and "artistic expression" causes me to immediately lose my lunch ... because it's awful. Just like you, there are certain styles of guitar work that I like, that strike a visceral chord with me when I hear them.

But that's a key element here that's missing from some other analysis ... we're talking about reaction to the music, not a reaction based upon people who we associate with the music. I've got some very personal experiences with a substantial part of the Neil Young and Elvis Costello catalogs, for example, which cloud (in both good and bad ways) my reactions. But when I'm talking about the artistic merits of these guys, I'm basing it on my take on their music -- i.e. best relationship I've ever had (in some ways) was practically scored to Live Rust, and Like a Hurricane in a particular (I thought it applied to her, she thought it applied to me), but I still think that I Am a Child is a horrid song, and Neil's catalog is wildly hit and miss. Beginning of (more or less) the end in another relationship was intimately bound up in EC's Imperial Bedroom, and The Long Honeymoon in particular. I have absolutely horrid memories associated with this record, but you know what? it's still one of El's best recordings, and Man Out of Time remains an eternal classic, regardless of the shit that went down in my life while it was playing.

Does that make my earlier comment make a little more sense? I'm not trying to downplay the importance of a "gut connection" to great music -- I only needed to hear about 30 seconds of Me and Mia to know that I was going to be loving some Ted Leo -- but it's important to look at what that "gut" is reacting to. It's one thing to dismiss something because you don't get that connection with it, it's another to dismiss it b/c you associate it with people you didn't like at the time.

[pauledwardwagemann]

kenholzman said:

...there's certainly a place for gut reaction to music, as music. I hear Jim Morrison, and I puke. That's a visceral gut reaction. Has absolutely nothing to do with people who like the Doors (hell, Bowiglou is one of my favorite cyber-people, but he loves the Doors), it has to do with the fact that Morrison's singing and "artistic expression" causes me to immediately lose my lunch ... because it's awful.

kenholzman said:

And if all you're doing is going with your "gut reaction" to these songs/bands, then you're really worthless in terms of talking about what you like and why..

Ken, you MUST have voted for Kerry. I havent seen a flipflop like that since Kerry voted for the war right after he voted against it.
I'm trying to understand how you could so quickly do a 180. So which of these two comment of yours do you actually believe? Because I'm not buying your arguement that its okay when you have a gut reaction, but when I have one I'm being an idiot. I mean come on, cant you for once in your life show me that you have at least a hint of integrity or even the slighest amount of intellectual honesty and just admit you are being a straight up hypacrit.

[Mary]

pauledwardwagemann said:

Through the first chapter of his book Reynolds namechecks Jon Savage and his England Is Dreaming quite a bit. I own the Savage book, but its been a few years since I've read it. It still kinda pisses me off that Brits seem to neglect all of the original punk rock that began in the US. Pisses me off because it makes me feel like they arent giving a complete and accurate history (or analysis). It's also leading me to the conclusion that Postpunk doesnt really exist since it relies on a misinformed (underinformed) premise--that being that punk rock began when the Ramones played England on July 4, 1976 and ended when Johnny Rotten asked the crowd at Winterland in San Fransisco "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?" to end the the show that ended the Sex Pistols tour of America, and thus tolling the end of the Sex Pistols as well.

It's ridiculous to criticize a book that is supposed to be about BRITISH PUNK ROCK for being about.... British punk rock. And Savage intended his book to be even more narrowly focused than that: its primary object is the Sex Pistols, although obviously Savage is trying to use the Pistols to capture a more broad cultural zeitgeist, so the book also looks at British punk more generally. So naturally it ends when the Pistols perform their last, infamous concert at Winterland. Surely if I decided to write a book about the Ramones it would be ridiculous for some Anglophile to criticize me for neglecting British punk.

Besides which, Savage doesn't deny the significance of American punk in the book - there's a discussion of CBGBs, Hilly Kristal, the Ramones, the New York Dolls, Television, Richard Hell, and Patti Smith - but it's brief because the book is about England, not America.

As for Duran Duran - pretty good band. Not really my favorite kind of music but catchy. Good stuff to throw on at a party for sure.

M

[pauledwardwagemann]

mary said:

pauledwardwagemann said:

Through the first chapter of his book Reynolds namechecks Jon Savage and his England Is Dreaming quite a bit. I own the Savage book, but its been a few years since I've read it. It still kinda pisses me off that Brits seem to neglect all of the original punk rock that began in the US. Pisses me off because it makes me feel like they arent giving a complete and accurate history (or analysis). It's also leading me to the conclusion that Postpunk doesnt really exist since it relies on a misinformed (underinformed) premise--that being that punk rock began when the Ramones played England on July 4, 1976 and ended when Johnny Rotten asked the crowd at Winterland in San Fransisco "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?" to end the the show that ended the Sex Pistols tour of America, and thus tolling the end of the Sex Pistols as well.

It's ridiculous to criticize a book that is supposed to be about BRITISH PUNK ROCK for being about.... British punk rock. And Savage intended his book to be even more narrowly focused than that: its primary object is the Sex Pistols, although obviously Savage is trying to use the Pistols to capture a more broad cultural zeitgeist, so the book also looks at British punk more generally. So naturally it ends when the Pistols perform their last, infamous concert at Winterland. Surely if I decided to write a book about the Ramones it would be ridiculous for some Anglophile to criticize me for neglecting British punk.

Besides which, Savage doesn't deny the significance of American punk in the book - there's a discussion of CBGBs, Hilly Kristal, the Ramones, the New York Dolls, Television, Richard Hell, and Patti Smith - but it's brief because the book is about England, not America.

As for Duran Duran - pretty good band. Not really my favorite kind of music but catchy. Good stuff to throw on at a party for sure.

M

I wasn't criticizing Savage's book per say, I was criticizing the common attitude among Brits of thinking of Punk Rock only in terms of the Sex Pistols (with perhaps a nod to the Ramones) when in fact punk rock was totally an AMerican original that Maclcolm Mclaren ripped off...

[Mary]

pauledwardwagemann said:

IMO the Doors and the velvet underground were actally more of an influence on what Reynolds is calling "postpunk" than Punk was. It's not like these "postpunk" bands never woudl have existed if it werent for punk. These "postpunk" bands are just the natural progression of the Art Rock of the Doors, Velvet Underground, Roxy Music, Soft machine, Televison, Talking Heads, Modern Lovers, Blondie, Devo, etc.

Not sure about Reynolds since I haven't read the book, but as far as my understanding of British postpunk is concerned, I think punk was a very significant influence on most of these bands. You can even hear it in the evolution of their own sound - compare Joy Division's early singles to Closer and it's actually like listening to a punk rock band consciously expand their sound and add in "post-punk" influences. Ditto for Wire - perhaps even more so. Or take Magazine, one of bowiglou's faves, and consider they came out of the ashes of the Buzzcocks, a paradigmatic punk rock band. Hell, what about PiL - Johnny Rotten's post-Pistols brainchild - and the Sex Pistols were the quintessential punk rock band! Members of Gang of Four and the Mekons all happily admit that British punk rock had a massive influence on them, changed their whole conception of what music was and could be and should be. Alternative TV, another classic post-punk outfit, was started by Mark Perry, whose previous endeavor was writing Sniffin Glue, the famous British punk rock zine dedicated to chronicling the exploits of the Pistols, the Clash, the Damned, the Buzzcocks, the Adverts, and other stalwarts of British punk rock. So it seems clear to me that punk was an obvious influence on postpunk. Not to say the VU weren't - they were, too. But I do think a lot of these bands would never have existed if the Pistols and Clash didn't come first.

Cheers,
M

[Mary]

Postpunk doesn't rely on the premise that the Brits started punk or that punk ended with the Pistols at Winterland. I don't know why you think that. In fact I'm pretty sure almost everyone who thinks about and enjoys postpunk would try and define it in terms of a wide variety of influences, including punk rock, art rock, krautrock, the Velvet Underground, dub, funk, dance music, etc etc. Considering that most people classify the whole New York no-wave phenomenon as an instance of post-punk, and that was an American scene which clearly had its roots in American punk and CBGBs especially, I really don't know how the genre can be based on the premise that the Brits started and ended punk rock.

[pauledwardwagemann]

mary said:

pauledwardwagemann said:

IMO the Doors and the velvet underground were actally more of an influence on what Reynolds is calling "postpunk" than Punk was. It's not like these "postpunk" bands never woudl have existed if it werent for punk. These "postpunk" bands are just the natural progression of the Art Rock of the Doors, Velvet Underground, Roxy Music, Soft machine, Televison, Talking Heads, Modern Lovers, Blondie, Devo, etc.

Not sure about Reynolds since I haven't read the book, but as far as my understanding of British postpunk is concerned, I think punk was a very significant influence on most of these bands. You can even hear it in the evolution of their own sound - compare Joy Division's early singles to Closer and it's actually like listening to a punk rock band consciously expand their sound and add in "post-punk" influences. Ditto for Wire - perhaps even more so. Or take Magazine, one of bowiglou's faves, and consider they came out of the ashes of the Buzzcocks, a paradigmatic punk rock band. Hell, what about PiL - Johnny Rotten's post-Pistols brainchild - and the Sex Pistols were the quintessential punk rock band! Members of Gang of Four and the Mekons all happily admit that British punk rock had a massive influence on them, changed their whole conception of what music was and could be and should be. Alternative TV, another classic post-punk outfit, was started by Mark Perry, whose previous endeavor was writing Sniffin Glue, the famous British punk rock zine dedicated to chronicling the exploits of the Pistols, the Clash, the Damned, the Buzzcocks, the Adverts, and other stalwarts of British punk rock. So it seems clear to me that punk was an obvious influence on postpunk. Not to say the VU weren't - they were, too. But I do think a lot of these bands would never have existed if the Pistols and Clash didn't come first.

Cheers,
M

Reynolds explains that Johnny Roteen went through a deliberate process of distancing himself from punk. PiL's guitarist Kieth Levene (formerly of the Clash) was doing the same thing. In fact Levene's guitar hero was Steve Howe of Yes (Levene actually roadied for Yes for awhile). Meanwhile Rotten dropped his punk rock name and began his makeover by going back to his real name, John Lydon, and appearing on a 90 minute radio program that allowed him to play all of his favorite music which included nothing but raggae and art rock like Tim Buckley, Canm Captain Beefheart, solo works by Lou Reed, nico and John Cale and Peter Hammill.
Reynolds argue in his book that Postpunk looked at punk as having failed. The name of Reynolds book is actually Rip it up and Start Again suggesting that everything punk rock did in their attemtp to overthrow Rock was completely wrong. The real way to change Rock was to work within the system instead of overthrowing it. And their was already a number of good examples of 'art rock' or 'new wave' bands who were already doing that or had already attempted that--and these bands (doors, VU, talking heads, etc) were the inspiratin for "postpunk".

You sound like you are interested in this subject matter Mary, I dont know how much free time you have this summer, but its a fairly easy read...you should pick it up if you get a chance (check with your library if you dont have the $$ to buy it)...

[Mary]

Well, the thing about the prefix "post" is - it's always supposed to imply a simultaneous disavowal of the thing which proceeds it, combined with an undeniable debt of influence and respect. That's certainly what it means in the term "postmodernism" in which postmodern artists are self-consciously trying to move "beyond" modernism while at the same time inevitably affected by it. (In fact within art history circles there's an endless debate as to whether postmodernism is a distinct thing at all, or just another reflex of modernism itself) So I agree with Reynolds that there was a genuine effort on the part of former punkers to distance themselves from punk as they embraced post-punk, but I actually think the self-consciousness of this effort betrays the extent to which the long shadow of punk still hovers over all these bands - like the absent father or whatever.

Also in the case of Johnny Rotten you have to keep in mind that a lot of what he was doing was less about "punk" per se than about Malcolm McLaren. He resented the scope of McLaren's influence over the Pistols, and the way that McLaren dictated "orthodoxy" for the band. So he was determined, after the Pistols, to reinvent himself in a way that gave him a distinct persona from the one McLaren had foisted upon him.

I'd be interested in reading the Reynolds book sometime, but probably not this summer....in the next month I have to plan two university classes, sell 80% of my possessions, find a new apartment, move across the country, and start a completely new life.... so not much reading-for-fun for me this summer, alas

Cheers,
M