What IS "punk" ???

Jonny · Post by **Jonny** » Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:34 pm

janetvaher wrote:Real punk bands are hardly ever famous.

If you get famous you're no longer punk.

Janet · Post by **Janet** » Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:40 pm

They're just not mainstream. Lot of people don't want to hear real punk, it's too agressive, fast or whatever. Well, at least i haven't really seen any punk bands on MTV.

Post by **Ken** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:36 am

Phili wrote:Punk has no definition.

Amen.

sumday4182 · Post by **sumday4182** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:21 am

budgie. wrote:
Mike wrote:punk is Sum 41
hate to break this to you but, no, theyre not

Socialism
The Clash were the first strongly political punk rock band, as they introduced socialism to the punk scene. Some of the original Oi! bands expressed a rough form of socialist working class populism Ã¢â‚¬â€ sometimes mixed with patriotism. Many Oi! bands sang about politically-charged topics such as unemployment, police harassment and working class power.

kinda describes underclass hero a little bit which would make it a punk album which would make sum 41 punk, dave is the only reason they ever strayed away from punk as deryck said he wrote metal type songs so that dave would play them with dave gone the sums are definatly more punk than with him. to me punk is all about rebellion and sum 41 is one rebellious group so yea to me they are punk.

cool kids · Post by **cool kids** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:24 am

haha no rebellion is the definition of being a teenager. but to me rebelling comes across as being angsty and i don't think that is punk imo

Bass Cone · Post by **Bass Cone** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:37 am

Still_Waiting wrote:
Phili wrote:Punk has no definition.

Exactly

I agree. Punk is just...punk. You can't describe it, but you'll know it when you see it.

Asho_DirtyPoo · Post by **Asho_DirtyPoo** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:54 am

To me, punk is NOT buying a multimillion dollar mansion in LA with your "pop princess" wife *lol*

NOT bashing Sum 41. But they certainly are not punk.

I agree with Phili; there is no concrete definition of punk. And the definition in dictionaries etc? That means that people who dress/act/etc. and think they are punk, nowadays, are entirely NOT punk. Punk means not being like everyone else and not caring about image. EVERYONE and their mother wears the "punk" uniform now, thus making doing so NOT punk. And since when is spending tons of money on dying your hair and buying clothes to fit the look you want NOT caring about image?

It's all a giant contradiction. People should live with less labels and more genuinity.

And that's what I think about that. haha

Post by **Jeremy Kill** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:10 am

Yeah, Deryck for one thinks they're just a rock band.

I don't think of Sum 41 as a punk band really. There are other bands that are way more political than the Sums.

cool kids · Post by **cool kids** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:13 am

yeah i agree i hate when people try to fit an image. its totally fake. i also hate it when bands say they don't care what people think and then do the latest trend just so they fit in with whats popular. ex: green day with the eyeliner.

Asho_DirtyPoo · Post by **Asho_DirtyPoo** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:14 am

cool kids wrote:i also hate it when bands say they don't care what people think and then do the latest trend just so they fit in with whats popular. ex: green day with the eyeliner.

*cyber-high-fives*

100% agree.

sumfan*[Banned] · Post by **sumfan*[Banned]** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:15 am

is Rancid punk?

Or ska? :o

Post by **Jeremy Kill** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:16 am

Haha, the bassist from Simple Plan is a perfect example of a trend follower.

Post by **Dylan** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:18 am

all very good answers. :D

i actually went christmas shopping today and i went to the CD stores and guess where i found Sum 41?

the punk section.

WTF??

my freind once said that punk is just making songs and getting your message 'out there" without worrying about CD sales. that could fit.

but i think that Sum 41 was only "punk" in ALNF area. and even then just a teeny bit. and to see DTLI?, Chuck, and UH in the "punk" section of all CD stores, is just stupid.

cool kids · Post by **cool kids** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:19 am

sumfan wrote:is Rancid punk?

Or ska? :o

well most of the songs have both elements so i don't know haha and they are my favourite band lol

Asho_DirtyPoo · Post by **Asho_DirtyPoo** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:21 am

People are stupid, though, as well. For the most part, and I can see a lot of the trendy little fucks buying Sum 41 just because they heard it was cool to like them, looking in the punk section.

To me? Sum 41 is rock. Always have been, always will be. However pop-punk is a way I might describe their first two albums style, and UH as well (my opinion, leave me alone haha). BUT, I don't think pop-punk is a bad thing. I really would just use that term because that's the only real term one could use to actually have people understand the sorta sound they had on those albums...

cool kids · Post by **cool kids** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:33 am

well ive seen way less "punk" bands in the punk section like simple plan and good charlotte. oh did i mention how i hate the fact that itunes listings for genre sucks. like almost every band i listen to lists as alternative & punk. even when there is not one bit of punk in the band. argh

DUBWOOD · Post by **DUBWOOD** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:34 am

punk is the alternative to the bohemian disco era of the 70's, challenging social and gender norms by 'shock' value.

sumday4182 · Post by **sumday4182** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:26 am

"And since when is spending tons of money on dying your hair and buying clothes to fit the look you want NOT caring about image? "

buying clothes to look the way you want is not caring about image u go buy a shirt beacause you like it it might be cool or trendy it might be out of style, people might like it people may make fun of you for it, it may be made by holister or it might be a generic shirt but if you buy it and wear it on the sole purpose that you like it then you really dont care about your image to others you care about your image to yourself which is sort of punkish but i do agree that punk has no definition and u know it wen u see it but i belive it does have very loose perameters and outlines

Asho_DirtyPoo · Post by **Asho_DirtyPoo** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:10 am

Yeah but dude...90-95% of the kids running around out there today calling themselves punk are dressing the way they do souly so they fit the "punk" image - not because it's comfortable or it's what they specifically like or anything. It's because it gets them labelled the way they want.

(I'm not ragging on real punks. But the ones with the real ideals who really do just do what they want and aren't seeking attention are few and far between anymore)

sumday4182 · Post by **sumday4182** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 3:25 am

Asho_DirtyPoo wrote:Yeah but dude...90-95% of the kids running around out there today calling themselves punk are dressing the way they do souly so they fit the "punk" image - not because it's comfortable or it's what they specifically like or anything. It's because it gets them labelled the way they want.

(I'm not ragging on real punks. But the ones with the real ideals who really do just do what they want and aren't seeking attention are few and far between anymore)

agreed