Was punk necessary?

[Mr. Bob Dobolina]

Yes, in the short run it was necessary. No, in the long run it didn't really change anything. The internet has changed the industry way more than the punk movement did.

 

[LG]

I was thinking about this early this morning....that's when my little gray cells are working at their very best.

The changes in music although much closer together time wise remind me of the great age of painters, who also went through metamorphosis through the ages, each era different than the one before but not quite extinguishing the style that came before it. Adding to a much broader canvas literally for people to enjoy.

I can count on one hand how many punk bands I really like(Sorry to my die hard punk fan Mud.), but I cannot deny it was a reaction to many social issues and used music to send the message that was heard around the world.

 

[Dessalines]

Just one more step on the never ending road.

 

[Khor1255]

In a very real way a serious step backwards.

minimalism, meh

 

[stepcousin]

I say yes, it forced hard rock to go underground and then come back with a vengeance.

 

[Khor1255]

I totally get that. I think rock needed a kick in the ass and punk gave it that. But the whole minimalism really gave record companies a hardon for endless ways to exploit talented musicians.
In very short order cock rock displaced all heavy rock music. It wasn't punk's fault per se but the ripple effects still haven't gone away.

 

[Riff Raff]

Dunno why but I hate terms like cock rock and hair metal.

 

[Khor1255]

Well, they are derrogatory. And if you have never been burned by the direction music has taken in your lifetime I can understand. Especially if you like 80s and similar 70s stuff.

Don't get me wrong, I love early Sweet, Kiss and a few other things that border on hair metal. I just don't like the fact that everything became cookie cutter examples of least common denominator music industry sock puppet bands.

Don't think I'll ever get over that in fact.

 

[Aktivator]

Going off on a slight tangent ... I remember feeling at the time that punk, while it seemed new and exciting also struck me that a lot of band members and their fans appeared very narrow minded. Only punk, any other kind of music (looking for a polite term) was terrible and you were really lame if you liked prog, arena rock, basically anything from the 60’s and 70’s that is now what is referred to as “classic rock”, pop music and heaven forbid disco. Me, being the way I am and was then as well, I definitely used to have some weekends and even consecutive days of the week where I must have seemed like a multiple personality – punk one day, disco the next day and rocking out the next. Fortunately I knew some of the sorts of punk people who did see the bigger picture musically and most of my other friends were fairly well rounded types musically. (Once upon a time I was the one seeking out new and different and sometimes off-the-wall music and now I'm the old fuddy-duddy I promised I wouldn't become! )

sounds like me in the 70's I mean I liked Patti Smith, The Dead, The Who, Joe Pass, Vivaldi and Weather Report. My brother was the punk fan but I could always put on the Classic 60's and 70's rock and he was okay. Of course I put on Vivaldi.

These days I look back on the whole punk times and realize there was lots of different genre breaking out at along with punk and its mix together these days.

 

[Death on Credit]

Well, they are derrogatory. And if you have never been burned by the direction music has taken in your lifetime I can understand. Especially if you like 80s and similar 70s stuff.

Don't get me wrong, I love early Sweet, Kiss and a few other things that border on hair metal. I just don't like the fact that everything became cookie cutter examples of least common denominator music industry sock puppet bands.

Don't think I'll ever get over that in fact.

I'm confused...Why is punk rock minimalism to blame for the rise of hair metal?