The things you find out from Fametracker
May. 23rd, 2004 02:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
omorkaShould I be embarrassed that I follow what is, at its base, a celebrity fansite? Even if it seethes with snark and irony, embraces the HoYay (if not the slash), is acutely aware of the political and social implications of fame and celebrity, bashes Scientology at every opportunity, and has discussion threads like "Unpopular Musical Opinions You Hold"?
Okay, I'm embarrassed. But not too much.
At any rate, I meandered off their New Wave thread (entitled "The Politics of Dancing") and discovered something: there is a historical antecedent for my distate for punk, my complicated semi-adversarial relationship to goth, and my ambivalence for the neopunk subgenre of the alternative movement. To make matters worse, it also seems to encompass my dress style (such as it is).
I'm apparently a New Romantic (minus the fanatical clubgoer aspect and the really weird hair). Oh, I knew they existed, but previously I'd only heard the label applied to Duran Duran, for whom I have little appreciation. Allison McMurtree would be proud.
There's a box for me, and I didn't even know it.
Okay, I'm embarrassed. But not too much.
At any rate, I meandered off their New Wave thread (entitled "The Politics of Dancing") and discovered something: there is a historical antecedent for my distate for punk, my complicated semi-adversarial relationship to goth, and my ambivalence for the neopunk subgenre of the alternative movement. To make matters worse, it also seems to encompass my dress style (such as it is).
I'm apparently a New Romantic (minus the fanatical clubgoer aspect and the really weird hair). Oh, I knew they existed, but previously I'd only heard the label applied to Duran Duran, for whom I have little appreciation. Allison McMurtree would be proud.
There's a box for me, and I didn't even know it.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-05-23 02:08 pm (UTC)And yes, I can totally see you as a New Romantic.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-23 09:18 pm (UTC). . . I tried to find the Hanson cover of "Dirrty," if for no other reason than to share it with He Who Ain't Got No Feet, but I haven't had any luck yet.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-23 02:09 pm (UTC)Punk as anti-intellectual?
Date: 2004-05-23 06:53 pm (UTC)Hm.
I would be keen to disagree with that as a blanket statement. Too many people confused either the idealistic nihilism (and there's a fucked up dichotomy for you!) or the desire to play whether or not you had the skill, with an anti-intellectual bent. Certainly, some bands did not embrace the cerebral (the Sex Pistols and the Ramones, frex - granted, I like the Ramones, but it took them several years before they could admit to being somewhat smart) but one could argue that even the Clash had elements of cogitation about them. Meanwhile, bands like Gang of Four were nothing BUT intellectual pursuits. (Listen to their song Anthrax, specifically the background lyric/lecture. Then, you had Devo with their 'theories' of de-evolution (and I'd state that their first couple of albums were pretty damn punk). And let's not forget Billy Bragg, who straddles the line between punk and folk (don't laugh!) and is one of the most well-thought-out lyricists I've heard. Hell, look at Jello Biafra and Henry Rollins - two people who make just as much time for their spoken word works as they do for their music.
Granted, a lot of the current punkers seem to be more in the stoopid-sk8punk genre than the 'kinder, gentler socialism' agitprop that many used to (or still) espouse. There are some out there that just write good pop songs, and there's nothing wrong with that - accessibility isn't intrinsically a bad thing, and the songs aren't written to sound like a stupid person. However, too many do have the 'not too bright loser' tag so that they can appeal to disaffected youth. [sigh] (And yes, dear, I am primarily pointing at Offspring. Whiny bastards.)
I think that writing off punk as 'anti-intellectual' is unfair to a degree, any more than writing off pure pop as 'anti-intellectual' would be fair.
Sorry to explode at you like that - I just need to have a sign that says "do not taunt happy fun rock critic"...
Re: Punk as anti-intellectual?
Date: 2004-05-23 08:17 pm (UTC)Re: Punk as anti-intellectual?
Date: 2004-05-23 09:15 pm (UTC)Re: Punk as anti-intellectual?
Date: 2004-05-23 09:13 pm (UTC)As I mentioned to you IRL, the basic ethos of punk that I have always understood is that it is flatly egalitarian - it doesn't matter whether you're smart or stone dumb, educated or left school at age 8, are a virtuoso on your instrument or never picked it up before. Punk is what anyone who has the energy and enthusiasm can do. (Same applies to punk dance, ergo the Pogo and slam dancing.) Once you've stepped beyond that, you're no longer in the arena of Punk - you're either doing performance art in the punk style (Go4), or you're New Wave. So I think punk certainly can be anti-intellectual, although there were individual punk bands and artists who weren't.
Now, you want a genre that's actively anti-intellectual and in-your-face about it, take a look at most New School rap. (Old School rap often is not, and the non-rap portions of hip-hop aren't necessarily.)
Re: Punk as anti-intellectual?
Date: 2004-05-24 09:26 am (UTC)For what it's worth, a lot of people seem to lump Devo in with the punks, even though I would agree that they are basically more of an 'experimental' or 'electronic' group.
I would say that punk is more purely defined in term of rejection of the dominant paradaigm. That's why it has had such lasting power for so many, and why is has returned with a vengance more recently. Then again, I'm happy to lump the neo-punks in with the orig. groups of the movement. But seriously: antiintellectual? I don't think that's strictly accurate. The Clash certainly had some thinking man's music in their playlists.
Re: Punk as anti-intellectual?
Date: 2004-05-24 07:55 pm (UTC)I've read a number of critics who claim that as soon as the Clash went all thoughtful on them, punk was officially dead.
I prefer subversion of the dominant paradigm over rejecting it/fighting it in the open. Hiding in plain sight tonight . . . planting seeds in gravel . . . that sort of thing. If the kids leave my room more willing to think, then I've done my job; if they leave more willing to yell at the cops, I haven't so much. If someone else is making a lot of noise and distracting the Man while I reach out from the inside, all well and good, but I'm afraid I think only the master's tools will dismantle the master's house.
(Extra points to anyone who recognizes what happened in that last paragraph.)