Was punk necessary?

[Foxhound]

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?

 

[Alocer]

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...

 

[0000]

I think it was necessary, it was a need vaccination of passion put back into rock n roll, plus some fun, cool music came out of it

 

[Flower]

I think it was necessary, it was a need vaccination of passion put back into rock n roll, plus some fun, cool music came out of it

I agree ...

*Flower gets a handheld mirror to check for pimples ....

 

[rtbuck]

I think it was necessary, it was a need vaccination of passion put back into rock n roll, plus some fun, cool music came out of it

I agree also & I'll never forget Pete Townshend saying basically the same thing in an interview I heard back in the late 70's

 

[runtfan]

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).

 

[LG]

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.

 

[0000]

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

 

[Flower]

In my book ... The Ramones = Punk = Fun




We're a happy family
We're a happy family
We're a happy family
Me mom and daddy
( 2X )

Sitting here in Queens
Eating refried beans
We're in all the magazines
Gulpin' down thorazines

We ain't got no friends
Our troubles never end
No Christmas cards to send
Daddy likes men

Daddy's telling lies
Baby's eating flies
Mommy's on pills
Baby's got the chills

I'm friends with the President
I'm friends with the Pope
We're all making fortunes
Selling Daddy's dope

Sitting here in Queens
Eating refried beans
We're in all the magazines
Gulpin' down thorazines

We ain't got no friends
Our troubles never end
No Christmas cards to send
Daddy likes men

We're a happy family
We're a happy family
We're a happy family
Me mom and daddy

 

[0000]

Flower's got the right idea =)