DiS Missive: Punks, critics, and why not to trust anyone over 30
- Artists:
- Steven Wells »
- The Offspring »
- The Ramones »
- The Damned »
- The Slits »
- Lady Sovereign »
- Girl Talk »
Relevant
-
Carling Weekend 2006 - Sunday
- Carling Weekend: Reading & Leeds festivals - The DiS preview
- In Photos: Girl Talk @ La Botanique, Brussels, Belgium
-
Don’t forget to listen: DiS meets White Williams
- Offset 2009: The DiS review
- In Photos: Offset Festival 2009
- Bald, bad and bonkers
- This Week's Singles: 06/04/09
DiS Missive: (noun) An article expressing a singular and very personal opinion, focusing on music and music-related matters, published on this here website. An opinion like, for example: “I think The Verve are a bag of shit.” As such, this opinion is not a collective one, held by the whole editorial team – DiS does not necessarily endorse the viewpoints expressed below and encourages readers to accept them as coming from the perspective of a single contributor. Thank you.
It’s easy enough to see how punk has ended up as such a common reference point for music writers of a certain age. Assuming that you were in your late teens when piece-of-shit bands like The Slits and The Rezillos were clogging up the charts, you’d now be on the cusp of your 50s, and presumably in as powerful a position as you’re ever likely to get writing about pop culture. Punk is also a genre that has signposted and slapped a blue plaque on all of its marquee moments – The 100 Club, Bill Grundy, that one junkie stabbing his missus – so any retrospect article easily writes itself without you needing to explain anything. And the majority of the genre’s protagonists have stayed alive long enough to be more than available for any Mojo: Punk Legends special publication articles that you’re being paid 30p a word to write. Yep, if you’re a middle-aged music journalist, punk’s been pretty good to you.
For the rest of us, however, it’s not been too helpful. I don’t mean as a musical style either: The Damned’s ‘New Rose’ was a straight-up heater, but then the genre mainly threw up 18 years of unlistenable garbage until ‘Self Esteem’ dropped. No, my beef is with punk as a superword, as an idea, as a concept. There’s a tacit acceptance amongst music writers that punk was some kind of musical Red October, an audio-revolution that every other subsequent cultural movement has to be measured against. This, as an idea, is at best fucking retarded, and at worse severely damaging.
The best way to demonstrate is with examples. One writer, The Guide, February 16, pontificating on the difference between sampling in the days of Steinski’s block parties, and the Girl Talk/Hype Machine era: “Two record decks and your dad’s old funk collection was once the working-class black answer to punk”.
Consider what is being said here. There are two types of sampling to this scribe: one that he sees worth in, and one that he’s proffering the Gas Face to. The former is ‘punk’, the latter isn’t.
Ignoring the obvious point here that if you can afford two direct drive turntables, a mixer, high-end headphones, a 150-watt amp, and around 500 LPs (plus storage space and transportation for them) then you’re not exactly so hood, this statement begs the question of why hip-hop has to answer to punk in the first place?
We could run at this with facts, easily. The first concrete examples of what we would now recognise as hip-hop precede any form of identifiable punk (in fact Pigmeat Markham’s ‘Here Comes The Judge’ was a top 20 single in America before the MC5 even formed). Punk has never been a major fixture in chart music for anything over a two year period in its history (‘77-‘79, ‘94-‘96), as opposed to hip-hop’s now 30-year reign as one of the world’s top selling musical genres. Hip-hop has been a major documenter and agent of social and economic change for three decades, punk is a t-shirt worn by Agyness Deyn. So, for sure, the sampling culture that gave birth to hip-hop is the black working class answer to punk, in the same way that Lionel Messi is the Argentine answer to Jimmy Bullard.
Then there’s ghouls like Alan McGee or Jim DeRogatis, who every time some pop cultural notary carks it – examples are many; insert your own obvious ones here – run up on the scene like Pheidippides, desperately seeking a passing hack to whom they can declare said cadaver the “original punk rocker” to, as if a man’s life is somehow worthless unless he somehow helped pave the way for Spunge.
But it’s the hacks who are the real villains here, as a rule if anything is wrong in music it’s the fault of music journalists. And certainly, on one level, it’s funny to see some dude from 2006 hit his deadlines and word count by declaring grime (ask your grandparents) the “British urban answer to punk” (click, the key line:_ “whether or not grime is remembered as just another short-lived craze could rest on* Lady Sovereign*'s success”_). But it also means that we’re not going to make any real progress because we’re being hamstrung by a wallet-chained Sealed Knot of middle-aged white guys who want us to repeatedly relive their teenage summer of ’77 over and over again, because God forbid any subsequent generations come up with their own methods of enjoying themselves. And if you’re gonna call one guy out as representative of this malaise, then Steven Wells is #1 on your list.
Look, I’m not setting out here to play Kimbo Slice, the chunky, unsophisticated newcomer providing giggles by wailing on clapped-out ‘90s throwbacks incapable of defending themselves, but sometimes you gotta holla.
For our younger readers out there, Steven Wells was an NME journalist in the late ‘90s who was down for some CHALLENGING OPINIONS every now and then. (He now contributes to DiS sibling site theQuietus.com.) Most of the bands he went to bat for at the time were, yes, ‘punk’ to him (Asian Dub Foundation, Daphne and Celeste, Dandy Warhols), and all of whom now can elicit “Haha, shit, people really used to listen to that?” responses when raised in polite conversation nowadays. He was a writer of his time: if he’d have been a fashion journo he’d have been telling us that Zubaz were punk, if he was a film critic his favourite actor would have been Ethan Hawke.
Anyway, it’s 2008, and it’s like Victorian Dad out there with this guy. Seven of the last 20 articles he’s written for Comment Is Free focus around the idea that ‘punk’ is something we should all actively seek to aspire to, in lieu of actually having any original thought processes.
OK then, punk. What’s punk Steve? Well, apparently skanked-out alt-porn models grinding on each other, and we all know what an egalitarian workers’ cooperative the Suicide Girls and their ilk are. Being a fan of the pro-wres ever since I was seven, I always assumed that indie wrestling was a world consisting solely of wife beaters, cokeheads, and Born Again Christians (in the case of deleted on legal advice, all three), working for a motley crew of rape porn pedlars and guys caught in online child molestation stings. But no, apparently it’s punk. “Urban bike polo” _is also punk apparently, despite the fact what he appears to be discussing (hipster drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon whilst engaging in faux-extreme sport) appears to be a Vice _intern’s wank fantasy circa July 2005.
The man has written (at least) four articles on The Sons of Ben, a group of American (association) football fans who are eagerly awaiting the arrival of a soccer franchise in Philadelphia. Now, remember that franchising (and indeed Franchise FC) is possibly the single most despised feature of the game by committed English football fans, what is Stevie’s take on all this? If you think it’d be to call them_ “soccer punks”, award yourself a gold star. Apparently by willingly accepting, and indeed propagating, one of the major evils of modern day sports, these people are somehow _“triumphing over the Disneyfied McFan experience”. These aren’t the thought processes of someone who has any idea of what is actually going on. These are the thought processes of the kind of person who, after watching Supersize Me, went_ “Oh my god, that’s terrible. From now on I’m only eating at Burger King”_.
Elsewhere, in a piece about Maxim magazine giving Nas’s _Nigger 2.5 stars out of 5 without ever having listened to it, Stevie Boy decides that the racial connotations of such an act aren’t really of any interest, and instead decides to have a go at* The Black Crowes *for propagating_ “mouldy old retro schtick”. Word to Littlejohn, you couldn’t make it up. Reading Steven Wells in 2008 is kinda like a perpetual loop of the _“Can’t you go five minutes without humiliating yourself” _scene between Abe and Mr Burns in the ‘Curse of the Flying_ Hellfish’ episode of The Simpsons, except with a pair of falling trousers replaced by someone going “B-b-b-b-but... The Ramones!”_
The depressing thing here is that I’m not clowning one lone lunatic clinging to the past, desperately trying to force his past on every subsequent generation. No, there’s a whole phalanx of Wellses in music criticism, men in their late 30s, early 40s, dictating the pace of debate, and none of them are going to be happy until every single development in humanity is graded on a scale of 1 to 10 Strummers. Someone needs to check out what punk’s answer to Logan’s Run is ASAP.
DiS Missive is our column featuring a quite singular opinion in every irregular edition; expect subjects to be tackled which regular features and reviews can’t touch, and for that grain to be gone against in the name of just because.
Steven Wells
The Offspring
The Ramones
Tweet This
Share on FacebookIn the maxim article
he justifies not listening to the black crowes album and then reviewing it, by comparing it to going on a blind date or to a meal and says "why would you wait for the main course if the starter consisted of rat hair and dog shit" (or something)
Well... BECAUSE REVIEWING THAT CD IS YOUR FUCKING JOB!
I don't go into work and say, "hmmm... I'm not a big fan of this new ordering system, I'm off home"
I
enjoyed that, even if it came across as an excuse to slag off some forgotten hack from years back.
i saw Dom by Far Cotton Rec the other day
it made me smile.
Man!!
This feature is well over my head!
hhehe...I'm kinda speechless...erm, ok, maybe not speechless....
Uhm, I can assure you The Slits and The Rezillos never clogged up the charts, Dom. If you argument is meant to *all* punk bands from the era are shite then I larf! These old ears - methinks - could make a far better argument that the punk bands of today fall way short of the standards The Damned, Dead Kennedys et al set.
The only real connection of hip hop and punk I can think of is when the CGGBs punks got together occasionally with the burgeoning rappers in NYC circa '77, but this connection is tenuous and largely only remembered in VH1 film documentaries.
Anyway, it's kinda an amusing read even if I'm missing the big point Dom is attempting to make.
While Steven Wells
retains the inability to write a music piece that can't be boiled down to "all your music is shit, listen to pop!"*, someone needs to sound him out.
(* Alright, apart from the one the other week that appeared to condone the Mexican emo beatings because it's a bit like mods vs rockers)
punk has a lot to answer for
the "77 year zero" attitude is perhaps the most damaging contributor to shitness within the alternative scene of the past few decades. The mistrust of technical prowess, of broad artistic exploration, of "pretention" (as a better man than me once said, "attacking a musician for being pretentious is like attacking a politician for being ambitious"), it's all been caused by the punk ethos, or more specifically the clingy journos who hold it on an unassailable plinth
What's worse though? "Punk as year zero", or the up and coming blog and zine writers of today and their "Pavement as year zero" schtick. Tough call..
It bugs me that it's always specified in terms of age
rather than whether someone is or isn't a Paul Weller/Campaign For Real Rock type. I know people like that ten years younger than me.
I'd rather sit staring at a wall for the rest of my life than read Mojo or any magazine that won't stop banging on about Led Zeppelin, or even The Clash.
Still, I read your Half Man Half Biscuit review earlier today so I know you have time for old duffers when they still do something useful!
I agree with what I think this is about.
I'm sick of some people constantly talking about how great The Sex Pistols were, and "you wouldn't understand it if you weren't there."
WELL IF THAT'S THE CASE, LET ME LIVE WITH WHAT IS GOING ON NOW, INSTEAD OF COMPARING IT TO WHAT I "WOULDN'T UNDERSTAND".
although I take this all back...
if in 20/30 years people are talking about "Arctic Monkeys as year zero".
God that would be shit.
I've still got a couple of years of beign considered trustworthy...yay!
Is now the time to declare my love of skanked out alt porn models?
well said Dom.
I really enjoyed reading Swells in the early 90s when his CAPITAL LETTERS rants were amusing and often quite titillating to a young teen, but now his continual punk, punk, punk grrr-ing does seem outdated and out of sync...
But the best, and most salient, point here is that punk was good - FOR TEN MINUTES - then it got incredibly dull, outdated, and polluted with a million and one copiests.
Like Britpop x a million. But with shitter clobber.
"Vice intern’s wank fantasy circa July 2005."
Otherwise known as "Reality, circa 2008".
Thank God for Age Discrimination Law
http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/is17.asp
One of the most obnoxious and downright discriminatory pieces I've ever read here or anywhere else.
:( I'm on the cusp of my 50's
and I loved punk.
Thats so unfair, i never say that modern music is rubbish.
I think that there is an awful lot more musically talented new bands now with alternative ideas.
However I must speak up and point out that one thing the opinion says is not right about.
Punk was a revolution, if only because of the stiflingness of the way a lot of the previous few years music was going, previously innovative bands were getting lazy and fat, riffs were getting longer and more indulgent, they were all getting a bit samey and just trying to be 'more so' of the same thing......there were of course exceptions and even though an avid punk I liked roxy music david bowie and trex......oh and stuff like can.
(I also liked a lot of pre punk disco n soul but thats my own special secret shame)
to sum up punk was the freshest broom, simply because there was so much dust and cobwebs of conformity, in society as well as the supposedly alternative culture of popular music. But I love a lot of music today and im constantly amazed at how much more talent and musicality there is now.........ha hahahahaha 'the rezillos clogging up the charts' i only remember one of their songs getting in the charts 'top of the pops'
ps it also wasnt crap fashion...simply because it wasnt fashion, most people didnt get their clothes from malcom maclarens shop, they made the look themselves and it could be what you wanted, I notice with wry cynacism that all clothing genres are now brought to modern musical styles via prepackaged consumer rebellion lines from the outlets of Mr Mammon
You would have had a good point, its a shame you made it crapper by casting your insults around too liberally and too wide. Im sure musical journalists can be full of shit, and nostalgia coupled with pulling rank of age and experiance probably gets annoying to you.
But personally I shut up about music and let myself be a fan and get clues from clued up youngsters who know far better whats good going on rather than me.
Trust me.
You’re Full of shit
Dismissing all of punk’s legacy because of some retarted journalists is idiotic. You’re also completely missing the point of why punk is important. Its not the sound of a million sex pistols knockoffs that’s important, but the D.I.Y aesthetic is what’s revolutionary. It completely democratized music making it accessible to anyone with the drive to do it, thus paving the way for countless brilliant (and crap) bands. The fact is that none of the bands on this website would be around if it weren’t for this. For this alone punk is something that shouldn’t be ignored, to do otherwise is to be wilefuly ignorant.
Another great concept is concision and focus in writing. That’s something else that’s really important, and is something again that should be strived for.
And the Slits were shit chart music!!? Are you deaf or what? Because in that case you’re a brave pioneer doing the work you do and I salute you.
this whole article
is the most piss poor thing i've ever read on Dis, its just asking for it isnt it? The caveat at the start of the article distances one of your own writers from the rest of you, because you know that this is a complete load of shit.
So cos im 31 im supposed to just fuck off somewhere and put away all my records, CD's, magazines, things that im not willing to let go of for the reason that they made a huge fucking difference to MY life and because im now in my 30's some faux-radical fuck-head deems it unacceptable for me to have an opinion or to love music?
aye, right mate.
Religion
Nothing wrong with Punk, but people lose perspective when discussing the bands of the time. Even John Lydon was not entirely without precedent (check out 'Iron Butterfly' from the Can album'Delay 1968'). In terms of energy, it's difficult to see how you can say your average punk band was any more blood,sweat and tears than beat combos like The Yardbirds twenty years previous, and Mods, Rockers, Hippies etc. were much more prevalent as youth movements.
What separated punk from the other things
is the same thing that separated 'Brit Art' like Tracey Emin from the rest of the art world... the most important thing about 'punk' bands wasn't the substance of what they did (which was frequently like a cacophonic school band), but rather how they conceptually justified it. Fucking tailor MADE for journalists, really!
hey Dom
have you decided to stay in tonight in front of your Pc registering the amount of pissed comments on here to show your flat mates how controversial and radical you are? Like "the NME are bound to seek me out and employ me now"! Your a Primark Charlie Brooker mate.
i cant believe people get so angry about this
its an article written by dom passantino. how can you take any of his insults/sweeping generalisations/exaggerations seriously? theyre clearly ridiculous!
the general argument here is really quite a good one, its just decorated with actually-quite-entertaining-but-kind-of-farcical asides. "why not to trust anyone over 30" is obviously not the main point of this missive, its just a 'controversial' headline, are people really getting worked up about it?
i'm confused
am i bad for being over 30? or is punk bad? or is rap the real punk? am i just really dense?
what was this load of toss?
nothing to do
with the point/s being made, just a really bad article, poorly written, purposely obscurist, incredibly pretentious and borederline unreadable.
if your actual point is ' i don't like other journalists what are old and i dont like punk' then just say it.
that 'self esteem' bit was hilarious though.
that is a cruel insult
to charlie brooker.
he's the poundstretcher version at best.
^this
i can't believe people are saying things like "i'm over 30, does this mean i'm an idiot and should die now? YOU UTTER CUNT"
the point is valid, the execution is Passantino-esque, and the only people who could possibly be offended by it are punk fetishising journos. And overly sensitive fogies..
You know
this piece would have fitted better on TheQuietus. Admittedly, the Swellsian concept of 'Punk' as an idea, as an ideal to aspire to, is worrying and outmoded.
But then again, so is the concept of 'Cool' and that only the young with fire in their bellies have a firm grasp what that concept is, and can mean. Just like the punks did, way back when.
The grist in this mill isn't that we're being subjected to the opinions of older music writers who have been there, done that, torn the t-shirt. It's that they're looking at what's out there and setting it up against this impossible unrepeatable golden era scene and ethos.
That is understandably annoying. It's hard to match up against the weight of legend, and endless repetition of mythic deeds, gigs, albums. We've got a canon of classic punk albums now, which is pretty absurd, eh? Unlike DiS, the printed word doesn't allow any real debate on the matter. It's sort of like a monologue from your grandad, but without a Werther's original to make it worthwhile.
The good news is, we all get to idolise, cherish and embellish our memories too; put across our golden era, our unsung heroes when the time comes.
And when that time comes, the kids won't give too much of a shit then either ;)
HARDWARE
LIVED PUNK..NU ROM..STYLE..C86..RIOT,,I WAS LONG HAIRED HIPPIE,SOMEONE PLAYED ME NEW ROSE,CHANGED MY LIFE,MESSECTICS......................
Brilliant
article.
It's Nice..
...to see that there are some other old DiSers, even if some don't know where the caps lock button is.
If
we are all so into punk rock how can we be typing on the internet at this time of night on a Friday?
I'm also listening to stuff on myspace, so I'm OK.
I'm an old git in his 30's...
..and I have to say I agree with a lot of this article. I find The Clash and all the journalists who go on about Joe Strummer, etc... dull as dishwater.
I saw The Ramones live once, they were ok but nowhere near as good say Orbital were live, when I saw Holy Fuck a few weeks ago they had loads more energy that the Ramones did. Obviously any 30/40 something journalist would say this is nonsense as it wouldn't sell papers. You only have to see the amount of townies around in Ramones t-shirts to know it's just a fashion thing, I'll bet 80% of them don't own a record by the band.
I particularly loath Alan McGee's blog on The Guardian which is not even written by him. I'm sure he comes up with the idea though, this week it was Acid House. Great, you are such a revolutionary Alan with your regurgitated Punk ideals which always lead you to talk about sales figures (not very punk-rock). You've been a bore since 1992 now fuck off!
Hey
I like this article!
It's entertaining in the same way that Steve Wells is/was entertaining - an engaging, occasionally humorous piece of pure polemic that's designed to (and clearly has) got some people's hackles up. suckers!
Even if writing 'the anti-punk article' is something of a cliche too...
..
"(I also liked a lot of pre punk disco n soul but thats my own special secret shame)"
!?
Does this mean..
That Dom is going to stop writing in a few years in order to follow his own misguided criteria for being a 'real' journalist?
fingers crossed.
x
.
Pretty sure I'll be dead of heart failure by then.
.
Punkz in the beeeeerliiiight...
The blank generation
This article isn't about punk. It's about journalists and their ilk who were the "right age" to encounter punk. But, the writer doesn't really say anything informative or interesting about them. He just moans about them and invents views on their behalf and moans about that. It is a vacuous article that has nothing to say, lacks logic, lacks a didactic narrative and, essentially, pretends to be a polemic against journalists of a certain age but fails because none of the "criticism" has any substance or solidity.
However one may feel about punk, positive or otherwise, this article makes no contribution.
It is clear that the writer has no skill as a writer of diatribes. He chooses to write such articles because he feels they may SELL but lacks the skills, ability and intelligence to write such articles.
Is that a blood pressure thing?
Stop reading GQ then.
The article did make me lol (as the parlance is I believe).
There is a good point buried in your dense prose, I can't agree more about your take on a "Swellsian" Punk year zero and cannonisation of those involved personally I couldn't give a fuck about Strummer et al in the same way I still have a healthy disdain for the ancient rock gods who didn't get wiped out by punk.
There is an element of truth in the concept of punk in 77 having a clearing out effect in terms of the overblown 60's hangover that was 70's popular music but it was a culmination of an enevitable creative and cultural critical mass. Bollocks to the punk authenticity test though.
You can disregard my views though as I am an Old C**t.
The point of this is...
not that punk was shite per se, just that using the word 'punk' as a synonym of 'good' is, well, a bit tired.
Sure, punk was a revolution of sorts and it had an impact and wasn't '77 great? but it's lazy journalism, as well as slightly patronising, to label any new movement with assumed worth as being 'punk'.
I think that's the point...
Seems to be mainly a diatribe against Steven wells though
About half the article is him going on about how much he hates him.
There seems to be a good point lurking in there somewhere, but it is well hidden amongst an article of hatred against one writer.
A good example is when
some fuddy-duddy on these right here boards was going on about Nas' 'Illmatic' being "a great album; almost punk rock in it's approach.."
The worldplay on that rec is seventeen times more important than the most sacred album of '77.
A lot of people do genuinely see punk as the rule of thumb for any form of music après-punk.
I agree...
...I'm 37, and so punk never meant much to me. Too young, and there were other things going on by the time I hit 13 and got into bands.
The whole punk "raw shittily produced simple music" ethos bores me silly. I just... like... music. I like some punk stuff, but I like other things, too. The 77 Year Zero thing stinks. There's acres of great music pre-77.
Similarly, a posture - a lifestyle- is not something I look for in music. Who needs the grief? Who needs these marketing niches?
This article loses some of it's force...
...when the same site once claimed that the Sugababes were the most punk thing around:
you have just put into words...
...what i have been thinking for a while.
good article and great perspective.
the thing is
Steven Wells and his ilk aren't in a very powerful position in terms of writing about pop culture anymore. DiS and Pitchfork are twenty times more powerful than the old men. People with influence read your writing, and not his. Feel better now?
You are right that new music shouldn't be measured against the old in the way you describe. It seems silly to throw in pointless jibes at the Slits, though - your point gets a bit lost.
Article was a load of shite...
Punk was and is about giving voice to the voiceless, which is where it can be compared with hiphop (see Bazooka_Joe's comment on the democratising force of punk's DIY ethic - absolutely bang on). However, there remain some sectors of society who would be better off kept silent. Namely, Dom Passantino.
For me, M.I.A and Diplo are the best examples of a surviving punk ethic, in the way that they give voice to marginalised peoples around the world.
Look out
the track Preacher and The Bear by the Golden Gate Quartet from 1937. That beats Pigmeat Markham by several decades as a proto-rap track.
You couldn't have picked two bands less deserving of a kicking than The Slits and Rezillos. Both were good then, and still sound good to me. Especially when compared to the likes of Pigeon Detectives and the Klaxons...
...but I'm well over 30.
Pathetic piece by the way...
nonsense
that's hipster music that has little resonance beyond fashion-savvy kiddies.
They're taking the music of marginalised people and putting beats under them, they ain't giving a voice to them!
For the record, I think MIA is great though :)
theres plenty of surviving examples of punk ethics
but they generally mean theyre not well known.
great article
as usual there are plenty of misreable gits wanting to attack the writer and the article.
Hey, you whingers write an interesting and insightful article then. Can't do it? Of course you cant. Yet you bag someone who can.
really enjoyed this
can't believe anyone's actually angry with it
When you hit 30 - 40
Things change, I am no longer able to just absorb new music as I've had my fill and all the new stuff appears old, only due to the fact that I've listend to so much msuic.
So I guess the journos that write these peices are just writing about what they know.
I can add a few non punk names to the list of bands I could well do without hearing from ever again (Rolling Stones).
All this music is recent history, the music industry is recent history. All we can hope for is that the bands die and the fans die.
But what will we be left with? It's all cyclical so don't get too bothered by these bands and journos, it's good to have a rant though and I dig yours.
Can't these two
just get a room and get it out of their systems? Although, judging by Swells' response, that might involve some necro skull fucking.
Mojo
I prefer the "Punk" oldies to the "Neon-Bible-is-better-than-Funeral/Ryan-Adams-is-important/boring-is-fun/I-am-in-love-with-all-female-alt-country-singers" oldies. Old folk who like the Clash for the wrong reasons are somewhere between the two.
Just a thought - where are the female equivalents of Wells? Most of my favourite young critics are women - where are the 30+somethings?
the ones I can think of moved on
sylvia patterson, caitlin moran?
Maybe my hearing aid battery is flat
But this reads like one big troll. And made no sense, sorry, what exactly WAS the point other than you hate Swells?
I was never a fan of his writing in the past, as that has often veered too much into "ooh-look-at-me-aren't-I-good-because-I'm-being-controversial" bobbins, strange then merely to ape it in this long angry blog. And Swells' reply was a lot funnier than the original too. Never mind.
I just don't get the whole your age determines your taste in music thing. There are people of 17 who like the most awful conservative rehashed bollocks, and there are people in their 40s/50s/60s suppporting new and exciting music. The only thing I find about being a bit older than I used to be is that it's a bit harder to find stuff that interests me because it isn't just recapping something else 20 years ago. Which, I'm fairly sure, is the opposite of what people think is the normal ageing process. And I suppose that I'm not scared to say I like a lot of pop music, and swing, and drum'n'bass, because you're allowed to like more than one type of music (although to be fair I got over that stupid attitude aged about 22), but am bored rigid by most fashionable-music-that-claims-to-be-indie, and I don't feel like I have to prove myself to anyone and couldn't give a shit if people think I'm cool or not. (Although I was moderately annoyed when Sean invited me to thequietus on the basis he thinks old people need different music. Balls to that.)
Vive le difference. AKA: whatever...
punk
Well? what can I say? Rather than waste time thinking about that young man and his warble....i found this. Interesting.
I smell a set-up
Anyone else get the feeling this is a ploy to get us to read "sibling site" theQuietus?
Which, coincidentally *is* actually a better read, so I don't mind so much.
Hahahahaha
"The Damned’s ‘New Rose’ was a straight-up heater, but then the genre mainly threw up 18 years of unlistenable garbage until ‘Self Esteem’ dropped."
Toot toot, here comes the failboat!
In Photos: Biffy Clyro @ Leeds Festival 2010
In Photos: Weezer @ Leeds Festival 2010
In Photos: Arcade Fire @ Leeds Festival 2010
In Photos: Paramore @ Leeds Festival 2010
In Photos: Leeds Festival 2010 Day Three @ Bramham Park, Leeds
In Photos: Leeds Festival 2010 Day Two @ Bramham Park, Leeds
Spotifriday #59 - This week on DiS as a playlist
Spotifriday #57 - This week on DiS as a playlist
Last.fm
SoundCloud
MySpace
Friendster
RSS
Comments
- Post a new comment on this article