Was punk a welcome reaction to the excesses of the rock music of the early to mid 70's e.g. the introspective art rock of bands like ELO, Yes, Lighthouse, Genesis; tracks being as long as entire LP sides; the Rolling Stones partying with Truman Capote and sundry Hollywood movie stars; rock stars like Sir Paul being knighted; etc?
Or were the punkers just a bunch of crude, rude, talentless boys who could have inflicted themselves upon rock basically anytime but just happened to do so in 1977?
Gotta say yes. I like to think of it as a rubber band effect...The poppier things get the darker, louder, crazier other genres become to separate themselves. More independent labels notice the change in taste and culture and swoop down to take advantage of it for its Anti-hero message. Just opinions, i may be completely off my rocker...
__________________ Without music, life would be a mistake. Friedrich Nietzsche
I never have liked punk music at all and certainly don't think it was necessary ( of course even GOOD music isn't necessary so that's irrelevant). I thought as a fad it was bizarre but mildly interesting but the music was mostly awful musical instrument abuse.
To each his own, but I thought it was a giant waste of time ( hardly any of that time belonging to me).
I think it served it's purpose, but I agree with Runtfan about the terrible musicianship of most of the punk rock bands, I didn't collect many of them either, and I never liked the Sex Pistols, thought they were just image and not much substance.
I think it depends how you look at punk rock, to LG and runtfan,
I don't really look at it as much of a serious genre, its fun, angry, and a way to just beat the hell out of a guitar and feel great, I guess technically it is not "good" music, its more a sound of passion, its sort of, if you like it great, and if not youre not really missing out, I just like the raw energy sometimes, Steely Dan and the Ramones are both in my top five alltime artists, so I guess yes, to each his own, but it isn't meant to be good music
Eberg I understand what you said, but still the crap that some punk bands recorded was just awful, I don't care if they were trying to make a statement, they sounded terrible.
For me London Calling is the best record to come out of the punk movement period, and The Clash would get my vote as the seminal Punk rock band that achieved more than any other group, they evolved beyond just their punk roots and became a worldwide musical force.
I never really liked the Ramones that much, but I give them credit for being one of the giants of the genre beyond all doubt.
Eberg I understand what you said, but still the crap that some punk bands recorded was just awful, I don't care if they were trying to make a statement, they sounded terrible.
For me London Calling is the best record to come out of the punk movement period, and The Clash would get my vote as the seminal Punk rock band that achieved more than any other group, they evolved beyond just their punk roots and became a worldwide musical force.
I never really liked the Ramones that much, but I give them credit for being one of the giants of the genre beyond all doubt.
allright well what about bands like Television, Cars... groups like that, I consider it punk, and even it you look past their "statements" its just some fun tunes, Romantics, The Knack, it doesn't even really have a point its just fun
Was it necessary, NO. Did punk rock happen, YES. I categorize punk like I do Disco, Rap, or any other music that was experimental, but gathered a following. It is all part of creativity and the natural flow of how things change with time. One thing tends to influence another. Punk rock was a means of open expression, whether it be for expressing political views, economic views, or whatever, it opened the doors to other avenues of expression in music.
It was a change, but was it necessary, I dont think so. Punk never dominated the music scene. Punk just opened the doors to other avenues of music. Punk music was the emergence of the "Do It Yourself", and soon split the scene into so many different sub-genres and sounds that were defined by a geographical region.
If you look back in musical history......there has always been change. Change is inevitable, but not necessary The one constant in the last 50 years, is ROCK.
well, Fox, that was the backlash reaction to punk. It gave the industry a swift kick in the arse. Although, I dont think that was what the musicians intended to do I think they just wanted to show the industry you can make music yourself and market it, and it will sell.
Was punk necessary? 
Re: Was punk necessary? 
Re: Was punk necessary? 
The one constant in the last 50 years, is ROCK. 
Re: Was punk necessary? 
I think they just wanted to show the industry you can make music yourself and market it, and it will sell. 
Linear Mode
ClassicRockForums.com