New Punk

Another dated Pit piece. I think this also became a paper for a sociology class!

Without a doubt, punk rock has had a huge influence on music. When punk began in the Seventies, it brought a needed slap in the face to the complacency of rock music and mainstream culture. Regional punk scenes sprang up in the U.S. and punk remained as a scene in England.

Then, in the early to mid Eighties, punk began to slowly die out. Heavy metal and rap were becoming the darlings of the mainstream, as was New Wave. To survive, the punks realized they needed to change with the times or break up and give up. Some bands like Bad Religion and Social Distortion made the transition and enjoyed underground popularity. Others like the Dead Kennedys and Circle Jerks could not take the pressure of mainstream dominance or Tipper Gore’s Parent’s Music Resource Center censorship. For all intensive purposes, punk was dead.

Then in 1991 a band called Nirvana released an album called Nevermind, and Mtv started playing a video from the first single ‘Smells Like Teen Spirit’. Once again, punk became a musical force to be reckoned with. The new punk was not the same though. Some of the energy was there, but at closer examination we see this ‘new school’ punk as a mere cheap imitation of it’s progenitor. The new punk bands lack much of the conviction of their forefathers, and it turns out seem more interested in mainstream success and making music videos and hooky little pop punk than true musical statements.

The new punk is a cheap imitation of the original. Many of the things the new punks stand for, the old punks were revolting against. ‘The millions of new fans who embraced groups like Green Day last year (1994) aren’t very interested in the bands that influenced them, punks founding fathers are discovering’ (Rolling Stone ).
Punk had it’s initial beginnings with the CBGB scene of mid seventies New York. Bands such as the Ramones, New York Dolls, Heartbreakers, Talking Heads, Patti Smith, and Television are the true initiators of punk. The scene soon spread to England and influenced such British punks as the Sex Pistols, Clash, Jam and the Damned. The roots of punk can be traced back even earlier to such groundbreakers as Iggy Pop, David Bowie, the Velvet Underground, and MC5. After the demise of the Sex Pistols, regional punk scenes began to pop up in U.S. cities like Los Angeles with bands X and Social Distortion, Bad Religion, Fear, and the Germs. Out of San Francisco came the Dead Kennedys and Dolphin. There were still Brit punk bands like GBH and Buzzcocks. Then came the rise of Mtv, heavy metal and rap. Punk could not keep its already tenuous hold on the music scenes.

Perhaps the punk scenes were too local and regionalized to remain in existence for too long. With the emergence of the Seattle scene in the early part of the Nineties came the rise of such bands as Nirvana, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, and Alice in Chains. It is ironic that many of these early Seattle bands had their start on and indie label called Sub Pop, as indie labels were a mainstay of original punk. Following the success of Nirvana and their fellow Seattleites, the alternative music scene slowly but surely became the mainstream. Mtv had a huge hand in the rise of these bands, the success of the alternative, and the resurgence of punk.

As the nineties trudged on, bands such as Green Day, and Offspring began to enjoy success with their almost ‘punk lite’ sounds. Some of the older punks reunited and went on the road to try and ride the wave of the resurgence, like the Vandals, Circle Jerks, Fear, and 7 Seconds. Some were successful, others weren’t. Regardless, some of the originals who had managed to maintain cult followings like Bad Religion and Social Distortion found themselves being outsold 10 to 1 by bands like the Offspring.

The key factor in the mainstream acceptance of new punk was Mtv. Mtv was willing to give airplay to bands like Green Day and Offspring following the success it had had with giving exposure to the Seattle scene. These bands opened the door for other punk bands to get on Mtv. The young, trendy, mall punks and frat boys begin to learn about punk from these new videos and the radio friendly catchy songs like Green Day’s ‘Longview’ and Offspring’s ‘Come Out and Play’.

Overall, new punk is more melodic, catchy and musically conventional than original punk. It is also much less political and controversial. The success of new punk on the radio and Mtv gave these bands a much wider exposure than the original punks had. In addition, there are a lot more underage clubs and shows now than there were in the early Eighties. Thus, younger fans also have better access.
The new punk bands also enjoy much more favorable media coverage and critical acclaim than the punk founders. The new punks are now huge rock stars with worshipful fans who have no problem paying $20-30 to see these bands at huge arena shows. This whole mentality is part of what original punk revolted against. Huge tours, expensive shows, and expensive product seem to go against the original punk ideals.

Now punk is a major label enterprise and a million dollar investment. It was not very long ago that major record labels would have nothing to do with punk as a genre, much less as an accepted musical moneymaker. Mainstream acceptance was a luxury the original punks rarely enjoyed. Originally, punk had a smaller, more elite audience, not the diverse audience seen today. The original punk bands generally played in small clubs, and didn’t do many all ages shows. These punks were less accepted and more outcasts than trendy. They also were much more political and controversial in their music and views.

The original punk movement also emphasized independence over success. Since there was little major label interest, the bands generally were on small independent labels. Material from bands was issued a great deal of the time on 7’ vinyl and in compilation albums.

Some of the original bands like 7 Seconds, Circle Jerks, and Vandals seemingly modified their sound to survive the dying knells of early Eighties punk. With the resurgence we see these same bands changing their sound back and playing their old material again. Some have enjoyed little success, others not much at all.

Critical opinion of the original punks seems to be much kinder in retrospect than at the time. This is probably due to the fact that the influence punk would have was not so obvious at it’s inception and height of popularity. Without a doubt, the original punks paid more in the way of dues than their future prodigies. The tours that the original punks put on were much smaller in scale than those of today. The shows were much smaller and generally held in clubs. Often three or four bands would play together. You still see this today with underground bands, but rarely with the more well known bands we are dealing with here.

There was also a stricter separation of musical genres during the early punk years than there is now. Another factor that permeated the early punk scene was the fanzine. There are still many fanzines but this is pretty much when the fanzine craze began. Fanzines were often magazines put together at little cost, often Xeroxed and passed out at shows.

Most of the early punk bands started out on tiny independent labels, or began by releasing their own product. Most punk bands released 7’singles with anywhere from two to four songs on them. Sometimes a band would be able to get enough money together to put out a full length album. Very rarely was an early punk band signed to a major label early in it’s career. These bands had to pay their dues.

Stylistically, the old punks and new punk dress very similar in many ways. Leather jackets and boots are popular, as are jeans and tee-shirts. Many of today’s punks also incorporate the skate styles or grunge styles as part of their look. At any given show you will see kids with leather jackets, flannel shirts and baggy pants that don’t fit. The old punks had the style and hair first though. Once again, the new punk style is an imitation of the former.

Musically, the new punk is not as raw or controversial as the older classics. There is little controversy or social commentary in the mall punk of today. Musically you can trace the influence of nearly every new punk band back to the original. The point is: ITS ALL BEEN DONE BEFORE.

The original punk bands were fresh and new and went in musical directions that had rarely been explored up until that point. The original punks had more to say and were more politically minded. This is not to say that there weren’t some punks in it just for fun, but politically there is no comparison between a band like Green Day and a band like the Dead Kennedys. Economically, it seems that today’s punks are a little more spoon fed than their ancestors. The artists are also making much more money by comparison, due to huge record deals, tours, and shows.

The media shows more interest and gives the new punks more exposure than punk has ever gotten. Mtv has also been hugely responsible for punk’s new appeal. Major labels, Mtv, the media, and the consumers have made punk a multimillion dollar business. In contrast, old punks struggled on small labels, made little money and saw little commercial and critical interest. What the original punks did develop was a strong fan base that lasts even today.

The dominant culture accepts the new punks as merely youths expressing themselves. Punk is trendy, cool, and mainstream. Formerly, punks were outcasts and members of a pseudo-elite musical movement. Punk was not accepted and was frowned upon as different and weird. Metalheads and jocks used to beat the punks up. Now they are the punks!

There is no doubt that the new punk movement is not a subculture. The new punk is a trend that is accepted by the mainstream media, parents, and consumers. It is merely a shadow of the original punk subculture, which was a revolt in style, attitude, and music. New punk as a movement shows that there is little creativity in mainstream music of today. The music and style shows lack of originality. It is more of a nostalgia movement than a musical movement.

The old punks expressed their individuality through style, attitude, and music. The new punks are too busy arguing what is punk or not to come even close to the new attitude. The new punks revolt for revolt’s sake. The new movement is trendy and more selfish than underground punk and the original punk movements. The originals were attacking conservatism, censorship, stagnancy, boredom, and the pompous rock star syndrome that still permeates music. Individuality, not conformity and trendiness were emphasized.