http://www.punk77.co.uk/punkhistory/punkhistinto.htm - http://www.punk77.co.uk/punkhistory/punkhistinto.htm

i found this site, and i was fasinated by how ignorant and biased it is, here are some articles to show you what i mean, and though this read may piss you off, try to keep cool...i want your opinion on this.

professional journalism?, or biased horse doo doo?, you be the judge.

It may be biased, but then everyone is biased according to one's musical tastes. And there is a lot of truth in what is written on this site (I browsed through it a little). Bands like Genesis and Yes indeed had turned into dinosaurs, and it is no wonder that the rise of punk coincided with the creative decline of Genesis, Yes, ELP and other bands. And there was a creative decline! They had sold out. Punk was a necessary and vital transfusion of blood into rock music, and some bands picked up a lot of influences from it.
Of course they exaggerate a lot, and I wouldn't be in here if I didn't like those "dinosaurs". But as much as I like a musical style I try to keep an open mind, and the criticism of prog rock of the late 70s is more than justified.
Ironically though punk fell into the same trap. The music industry quickly turned the revolt into "business as usual" with a capital "B".

BaldFriede wrote: It may be biased, but then everyone is biased according to one's musical tastes. And there is a lot of truth in what is written on this site (I browsed through it a little). Bands like Genesis and Yes indeed had turned into dinosaurs, and it is no wonder that the rise of punk coincided with the creative decline of Genesis, Yes, ELP and other bands. And there was a creative decline! They had sold out. Punk was a necessary and vital transfusion of blood into rock music, and some bands picked up a lot of influences from it. Of course they exaggerate a lot, and I wouldn't be in here if I didn't like those "dinosaurs". But as much as I like a musical style I try to keep an open mind, and the criticism of prog rock of the late 70s is more than justified. Ironically though punk fell into the same trap. The music industry quickly turned the revolt into "business as usual" with a capital "B".

i agree to a extent...i like punk, though articles like that kinda make me ashamed to like punk.

  Well he seems to know a lot about prog for someone who doesn't like it. I suspect he has aquired more than a few prog recordings and had more than a few listens. So if he really dislikes it as much as he claims why has he spent so much time listening to it.

 Whatever you do you can be criticised and so it is with prog. You can try to be creative and someone derides you for being pretentious.

 His point seems to be that he loves the anti establishment side of punk and hates the selling out of guys like Mclaren and co. But remember that hating is the other side of the coin to loving so those who really hate the establishment secretly long to be part of it. See Mick Jagger getting his knighthood with a huge grin from ear to ear and his dad saying he was always a good boy, no trouble at all.

 So what you have is quite a narrow minded person who thinks that rock and roll should only be a certain way and anyone who does it differently stinks. The logic in the writing is very poor.It is not at all objective so doesn't merit as much response as I have alredy given it.

Funny thing is, the writer keeps talking about pop-music, and how Prog altered the pop-music world, so i can only guess he thinks punk = pop.

I think Sid vicious is turning in his grave over this.

tuxon wrote: Funny thing is, the writer keeps talking about pop-music, and how Prog altered the pop-music world, so i can only guess he thinks punk = pop.   I think Sid vicious is turning in his grave over this.

its pretty hypocritical when this guy calls prog crappy comercial music(which it isnt) and prog bands sellouts and yet, punk bands have made much more pop songs and chart topping hits than any prog band, and when was the last time you heard a camel or gong song on a tv comercial?, never...but you hear songs by joan jett, the ramones and the clash in tv comercials all the time.

Like what was stated above, he certainly seems to know much about prog. A student doing research on something he loathes? I doubt it. My guess, from the reading, is that this guy was a prog fan at one time as well and got disillusioned with the whole movement when the bigger bands started to commercialize a bit. Then he saw the light and became part of the punk movement.

I will give him credit, though. He wrote a cohesive, articulate article. Most punkers I know have difficulty spelling their names. More proof that he was a product of the prog era who became disillusioned with his heroes.

Also, as Baldfriede stated above. Punk became the beast that he loathes. Funny that he doesn't notice that. Perhaps he has gotten too old to see the truth about a genre of music that has become far more big business than prog ever was. Afterall, music is for the youth....his words.

It's obvious the author cannot handle prog's greatness. He feels alone, insecure and ashamed at the fact that he cannot comprehened a mere 6 (count it, six) minute song. So naturally, he will attack it.

Poor guy.

boo boo wrote:   Jethro Tull. Even the most hardened nostalgic will wince at memories of Jethro Tull. They started out as a blues group but quickly developed a taste for the theatrical and portentous at which point the groups megalomaniac leader started dressing up in riding breeches, hair like catweazle, sporting cod pieces standing on one leg while puffing into a flute and conducting the group through the hard labors of pieces like Thick As A Brick Aqualung and Passion Play. What these were all about was anyone's guess. A mystery to me.

Ian Anderson addressed this kind of feedback years ago...

"Brain-storming, habit-forming, battle-warning weary winsome actor spewing spineless
chilling lines.
The critics falling over to tell themselves he's boring and really not an awful lot of fun.
Well who the hell can he be when he's never had V.D., and he doesn't even sit on
toilet seats?
Court-jesting, never-resting he must be very cunning to assume an air of dignity and
bless us all with his oratory prowess,
his lame-brained antics and his jumping in the air.
And every night his act's the same and so it must be all a game of chess he's playing,
but you're wrong, Steve. You see, it's only solitaire." - from Solitaire

I didn't read that much of the article above, but there is something I would like to say. Not all punks hate prog. I happen to be a fan of both genres of music. I grew up listening to nothing but underground punk music and in recent years, some friends have gotten me into progressive rock.

I just wanted to say that not all punks are like this. Yes, some are arrogant, ignorant a-holes, but quite a few others are actually well mannered, very smart people that are openminded to other genres of music. Others just feel they are superior to everyone else (and some prog fans can be like this too).

Rattail wrote: Others just feel they are superior to everyone else.

no offense to any metal fans here, but metalheads seem to have that kind of attitude the most.

Man Overboard wrote: I would have to disagree.  Maybe I know the wrong group of metalheads...  I post on another forum, where metal is the main topic (instead of prog), and while metal is the most-discussed music there, among the regulars, we talk about everything we're into, be it prog, punk, pop, indie, or otherwise, and anyone who balks at the non-metal discussion gets a dirty look.  We love our metal there, but we can recognize when it's a bit silly, and have no problem takin' the piss.

i guess it depends on the enviorment, i used to post on other forums where metalheads were the most abrasive...so much that a lot of people got fed up and left for other forums.(including me)

Man Overboard wrote: Some metalhead forums are absolutely atrocious...  I do have to agree with that.  But you can't generalize that...  there are a lot of extremely intelligent metalheads.

agreed, i guess that wouldnt be any more rational than that jerk i quoted on the first post who basicly classifies all prog fans as losers.

nevermind this post.

Here's what so many people who listen to punk need to know:  Without the Who, we'd probably never have punk in the 1st place.  They were the 1st punk band, period.  And yet the author knocks them.  Yeah, they did create the concept album, but they didn't "kill" the 3 minute pop song.  Most of their catalog has a few longer songs, but most stay in the 3-4 minute range. I hate that all these people who call the Who pretensious.

And since when were the Doors not considered "decadent".  Morrison thought he was Dyonisis!

boo boo wrote: At worse whimsical and lyrically embarrassing.. Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds....wow LSD. They were clever boys to write that !

Well... the person who wrote this didn't knew much, I found incorrect information in all the discriptions of the bands above though this one about the Beatles I thought everyone knew... right away I saw it I laughed like a madman.

The lyrics is crazy though it had absolutely nothing to do with LSD at all.

Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds was a picture drawn by Julian Lennon and when John asked him what it was Julian said: Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds.

Then John made a song out of it... I don't think little Julian had LSD on his mind, I've seen the picture too... looks like a flying woman surrounded by stars...

Can also say that http://www.allmusic.com - www.allmusic.com often is wrong with band information, saw the info of how Iron Butterfly came up with the title: In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida and they're so wrong on that side... though this song is about LSD and tripping... though everyone knew this.

The Miracle wrote: EVERYONE GO http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8294&FID=3 - HERE

You cant send hate mail to someone for expressing an opinion about his taste in music.

Whatever happened to freedom of speech.....?

Peace.

No seriously,this kind of person always wants to impose his own taste in music on other people,that's all.His basic argument appears to be that "pop" songs shouldnt be more than 3 mins long and should be based on basic "rock n roll" chord progressions.Which means that by about 1970 all that could be said and played would have been done,to death.
Everyone has the right to be culturally vacuous,this guy just takes it to extremes.

bogdan. wrote: for begining I agree with BaldFriede. "Bands like Genesis and Yes indeed had turned into dinosaurs, and it is no wonder that the rise of punk coincided with the creative decline of Genesis, Yes, ELP and other bands. And there was a creative decline! They had sold out." Second. Most of you people are wrong. The fact is that you do not understand PUNK movement, as punks does not understand PROG movement. It is basicaly the same. True PUNK and PROG (Dead Kennedys(NOT Sex Pistols), GBH, The CLASH(NOT NO-FX, or some other pop-punk), Early Yes, Genesis, Rush...)contradict to pop music, punk with its atitute (PUNK is not music, its just muvement), prog with its music. This guy, who wrote that article, he did't ctritisize the prog music, he critisized some of prog artists and their thinking. For examle The Beatles (or Metallica nowadays), who were making their albums to earn lots of money. That pisses him off.

im sorry but i disagree...when the beatles made revolver and sgt pepper they were breaking away from their old formula, their ambition was not to make money because their new music wasnt commercial, their ambition was to break musicial boundrys, which they did...if punk rockers hate prog because they dont understand it, i wouldnt be surprised, they probably have the incapability, it may be because they lack the intellect or brain cells to understand the meaning of prog or the ambitions of progs greatest bands, perhaps because they dont like songs with big words that they dont know how to spell, pronounce or understand...ok, thats enough laughing at the expense of punk for me...also im pretty sure that guy was bashing prog.

Hangedman wrote: From what I understand it isnt prog he dislikes it bands that break the mould and try something different. im surprised hes a punk fan and not an ac/dc (the band that admitted they are making the same album every year) fan

hey i like ac/dc. =(

boo boo wrote: hey i like ac/dc. =(

dont worry about it, hells bells is awesome

kingofbizzare wrote: They had some good things to say about Hawkwind at least...

i know, kinda hypocritical how he poked fun at yes for how they dress on stage yet he praises hawkwind and devo...makes no sense...im also curious about why he didnt mention pink floyd whatsoever, after all...they were the biggest target for the sex pistols.

Rob The Good wrote: That guy seems to love Hawkwind and Roxy Music....umm...Art Rock. He's clearly a total loser! A friend of mine said she liked "Art Punk"...eh?!!! That's a contradiction!

and hypocritical, the guy who wrote this article says musicians shouldnt try to make art, which is exactly what hawkwind, roxy music, david bowie, velvet underground, television and nirvana all make.

king of Siam wrote: I think that the punk was necessary to put prog into its place which is not the mainstream. Secondly, punk has sold out and is an extinct form of music because all new punk sounds the same And last of all Crass was an art punk band Punk has died but prog still continues!!!

funny, thats not what rolling stone, spin or blender says, according to them, prog is dead and punk still lives.

NetsNJFan wrote: This putz can go f*ck himself.  he brings out (some) valid points about prog, but these mean nothing without context, especially when placed in such a biased environment.  he obviously has very little knowledge of 'music' (classical, jazz, etc.), and instead believes music solely means entertainment/pop.  if he was so disgusted by the works of Yes, no doubt classical music would disgust him even more (being even farther removed from the 3-chord thrash he desires).  it's really too bad that all he looks for in music is the simplest common denominator, and the fact that he can't see that 'punk' has 'sold-out' much more than prog ever could have.  putz.

it also makes no sense...why would you want to limit yourself to one style of music?, i dont, i love many forms of hard rock and classic rock, alternative rock and grunge, prog rock of course, blues, jazz, some country and bluegrass and some metal and yes even punk...you really have to be pretty damn stubborn to limit yourself to one genre and then say everything else is crap...but a lot of punks and metalheads are like that, and thats why they piss me off sometimes.

Forgotten Son wrote: bogdan. wrote: but you still didn't get it, that he's not talking about music, but people who's thinking to make money with music (as I sad it before). Not just some prog musicians, but all kind "pop "music"". There are people who creates music and people who sells music. (1st kind of people sometimes become "sell music" people, that is here a problem). Yes, but as Boo Boo stated, this guy spends time criticising albums like Sgt Peppers, which are so innaccesible (for their time) that it is inconceivable that the artists thought they were making a recodr that would sell and make them lots of money. I very much doubt many prog bands (except Asia and the like, if you can call them prog bands) were motivated by desire for material gain (beyond enough money to make a comfortable living). The artists he attacks are the artists that were creating the music they wanted to and just happened to become successful. It is bands that deliberately mimicked these greats that should come under criticism if what you say is the main theme of this article. Ironically there were far more bands that cashed into the punk movement than ever cashed into prog.

plus many punk bands seem to have only one ambition, get rich and famous.

Forgotten Son wrote: I must say, Boo Boo. It's amazing the difference in responses to that article between here and DDD. A lot of the responses on DDD were like OMGZ!!!11 PUNX SUK!!11 one one. It's refreshing to here the level of intellectual on this site, even though I don't agree with all the opinion expressed.

that mainly has to do with the kind of people who are posting, i have come to learn that most progressive rock fans have an open mind and are not biased in a sense that they wouldnt try or respect other genres...DDD is run by metalheads who seem to think everything else is inferior, which is why i am put off by metalheads...im not saying that there arent metalheads out there with a open mind, i know there are some, but very few...anyway i like it here, screw DDD, whos need em?, i dont.

bogdan. wrote: boo boo wrote: Forgotten Son wrote: I must say, Boo Boo. It's amazing the difference in responses to that article between here and DDD. A lot of the responses on DDD were like OMGZ!!!11 PUNX SUK!!11 one one. It's refreshing to here the level of intellectual on this site, even though I don't agree with all the opinion expressed. that mainly has to do with the kind of people who are posting, i have come to learn that most progressive rock fans have an open mind and are not biased in a sense that they wouldnt try or respect other genres...DDD is run by metalheads who seem to think everything else is inferior, which is why i am put off by metalheads...im not saying that there arent metalheads out there with a open mind, i know there are some, but very few...anyway i like it here, screw DDD, whos need em?, i dont.   Here is another question. What do you now mean by telling open mind people. People who listens all kind of music(pop, rap, and other crap), or people who listens just music.

well, open minded people dosent necessarly mean somebody who likes everything, it means music goers who can respect or appreciate every genre for what its worth...even if its a genre they dont like...speaking of which...not all rap is bad...im anything but a rap fan and i hate most of it, but at least when its done right rap requires a lot of skill, rhythm, timing and good lyrics...so i can appreciate rap when its done right(which it rarely is nowedays with the likes of chingy and nelly)...im no tupac fan, but hes a good example of how rappers can be poets, plus he was skilled on the mic....to be honest, i still get down to the funky beats of public enemy, RUN-DMC and the beastie boys every once in a while.

 Well I can read it ok........and others have managed to contribute to this thread...

Teaflax wrote: The formatting ruining the first page makes this thread unreadable-   The "preview" button; it's your friend. Alternately: making a link.

i tried editing it, eh, ill edit it all out and let people find it themselves.

boo boo wrote: Teaflax wrote: The formatting ruining the first page makes this thread unreadable-   The "preview" button; it's your friend. Alternately: making a link. i tried editing it, eh, ill edit it all out and let people find it themselves.

Why? Because some smart-arse wants to smarm you?

Teaflax wrote:   Respect for the prospective reader, maybe? And what an odd use of "smarm"...

Well nobody else has had any problems with it and presumably Boo Boo could read it ok (even if there was an attempt at "formatting").Therefore one would have to anticipate a problem that was not self-evident.Ergo you are being picky,and using an absolute (unreadable) which isnt warranted.Denigrating the whole thread because the original post is problematic for you.....

smarmy........the quality of applying smarm.

It's in my dictionary under "people more smarmy than me"

Teaflax wrote: Tony R wrote: smarmy........the quality of applying smarm. It's in my dictionary under "people more smarmy than me"   Well, smarmy would be "marked by a smug, ingratiating, or false earnestness", and I thought I was just being sharp and rude, which is kind of the opposite of ingratiating.   But you're right in that I used an absolute when I should have qualified it with "for me", and for that I do apologize.

You're one cool customer Tefal!

tuxon wrote: I think Sid vicious is turning in his grave over this.

My friend and fellow ProgArchiver Tuxon, I seriously doubt it . You can only turn in your grave about something when you can have some sort of intellectual activity in your brain, and Sid hardly had any when he was alive, since he was a near-retarded . I'm not sure that his IQ had gotten any higher in his afterdeath.

Cesar Inca wrote: tuxon wrote: I think Sid vicious is turning in his grave over this. My friend and fellow ProgArchiver Tuxon, I seriously doubt it . You can only turn in your grave about something when you can have some sort of intellectual activity in your brain, and Sid hardly had any when he was alive, since he was a near-retarded . I'm not sure that his IQ had gotten any higher in his afterdeath.

he wasnt retarded, just talentless and wasted from drugs.

boo boo wrote: Cesar Inca wrote: tuxon wrote: I think Sid vicious is turning in his grave over this. My friend and fellow ProgArchiver Tuxon, I seriously doubt it . You can only turn in your grave about something when you can have some sort of intellectual activity in your brain, and Sid hardly had any when he was alive, since he was a near-retarded . I'm not sure that his IQ had gotten any higher in his afterdeath. he wasnt retarded, just talentless and wasted from drugs.

pretty sad he has more of a legacy (in music) than a slew of much more talented, educated and deserving prog 'musicians' - (something he was not)

NetsNJFan wrote: boo boo wrote: Cesar Inca wrote: tuxon wrote: I think Sid vicious is turning in his grave over this. My friend and fellow ProgArchiver Tuxon, I seriously doubt it . You can only turn in your grave about something when you can have some sort of intellectual activity in your brain, and Sid hardly had any when he was alive, since he was a near-retarded . I'm not sure that his IQ had gotten any higher in his afterdeath. he wasnt retarded, just talentless and wasted from drugs. pretty sad he has more of a legacy (in music) than a slew of much more talented, educated and deserving prog 'musicians' - (something he was not)

i know, hes the worst bass player ever...and ironicly, the most popular bass player ever.

I watched Sid & Nancy last night.  It was funny. 

Anywho,  I was at a library and picked up a book of the 50 worst albums of all time.  Instead of listing crappily-produced and moronic albums, they made entries of the following.

ELP: Tarkus

Yes: Tales From Topographic Oceans

Jethro Tull: Aqualung

It also listed this (paraphrased):

"Genesis was one of the better prog bands, meaning they were boring only 90% of the time."

Thrown into a violent rage, I made the decision to retaliate (1: because I was furious, 2: because I knew that the book couldn't beat me up).  I hawked (sp?) the hugest lung oyster in the book and hid it tax code section, ensuring its eternal neglect. I know people are entitled to their opinion, but:

Tiresias wrote: I watched Sid & Nancy last night.  It was funny.  Anywho,  I was at a library and picked up a book of the 50 worst albums of all time.  Instead of listing crappily-produced and moronic albums, they made entries of the following. ELP: Tarkus Yes: Tales From Topographic Oceans Jethro Tull: Aqualung It also listed this (paraphrased): "Genesis was one of the better prog bands, meaning they were boring only 90% of the time."   Thrown into a violent rage, I made the decision to retaliate (1: because I was furious, 2: because I knew that the book couldn't beat me up).  I hawked (sp?) the hugest lung oyster in the book and hid it tax code section, ensuring its eternal neglect. I know people are entitled to their opinion, but:

i know, but blender beats them all for pure bias...they did a list of the 50 worst artists ever...no NSYNC or backstreet boys but they had ELP at number 2...primus and the doors were also included...they also did a greatest guitarist list and johnny ramone was number 1, i wish that was a joke, but its not.

Tiresias wrote: I've seen tumors with hair more talented than Johnny Ramone...not to mention more intelligent and carrying a greater value to society.

that was a little too harsh dude...ramone is nothing special, but he made some good riffs and was pretty good at least for his genre...plus some classic rock songs under his belt.

boo boo wrote: i know, but blender beats them all for pure bias...they did a list of the 50 worst artists ever...no NSYNC or backstreet boys but they had ELP at number 2...primus and the doors were also included...they also did a greatest guitarist list and johnny ramone was number 1, i wish that was a joke, but its not.

 - Disgraceful, Ramone......Ramone?????? feh.

NetsNJFan wrote: boo boo wrote: i know, but blender beats them all for pure bias...they did a list of the 50 worst artists ever...no NSYNC or backstreet boys but they had ELP at number 2...primus and the doors were also included...they also did a greatest guitarist list and johnny ramone was number 1, i wish that was a joke, but its not.  - Disgraceful, Ramone......Ramone?????? feh.

same magazine that called yngwie malmsteen a horrible guitarist.

boo boo wrote: NetsNJFan wrote: boo boo wrote: i know, but blender beats them all for pure bias...they did a list of the 50 worst artists ever...no NSYNC or backstreet boys but they had ELP at number 2...primus and the doors were also included...they also did a greatest guitarist list and johnny ramone was number 1, i wish that was a joke, but its not.  - Disgraceful, Ramone......Ramone?????? feh. same magazine that called yngwie malmsteen a horrible guitarist.

    that earns three
he's not very creative but a brilliant guitarist nonetheless, and wipes the floor with Ramone.

Teaflax wrote: NetsNJFan wrote: he's not very creative but a brilliant guitarist nonetheless, and wipes the floor with Ramone.   To me, the difference between skilled and brilliant is precisely creativity.   Yngwie is a technically skilled player, which is about as useful as being the fastest painter. It does not make your art one whit better.

yngwie isnt just about speed(like batio), he could play neo classical renditions of classical music pieces...and his arpeggios gave his playing a violin like tone, i hate it when people say hes not original.

Everyone knows that punk bands are just bitter because the musicians they ridicule studied their instruments well and are more skilled than those screaming, complaining, one-chord wonder bullsh1tters. I wrote him a lengthy email, but it wasn't as rude as that statement.

In fact, here's one paragraph of what I wrote him.:

"Keep in mind that what you write about prog you can write about any genre of music. I could go on for days about how stupid punk bands look (studs, dyed colored hair, laughable amounts of leather garments). You can complain about lyrics and compositions being too complex, and I can complain about lyrics and compositions being too bland and simplistic. You have no solid arguements other than "Prog fans are nerds, Prog makes you think too much, and Prog musicians studied their instruments too much so they actually created innovative, intelligent music rather than simplistic, one-chord wonders". Weak and uninspiring."

And the end...

And he had the nerve to ridicule Fripp, of all musicians. I let him have it for that.

Very well said noussommedusoleil... i like your cut-throat debate style

Here's my two cents:

"I saw it coming. When I was at Canterbury University in 1970 it was already starting at the art college, where Ian Dury was a teacher. So I wasn't unfamiliar with these concepts. I think it was time for another generation to have their say. I don't think the whole musical world should have just been YES and Emerson, Lake, and Palmer. I also had several meetings with punks at the time, and [The Clash's] Mick Jones lives quite near us in Notting Hill - and we get on very well."   - Steve Hillage commenting on the punk explosion in 1976

Thanks for your time.

These people knew what they wanted ..lots of windswept guitar histrionics, gushing key boards, lyrics full of mystical allusions and song titles bearing no relation to the music and almost as long as the music itself

This bit made me howl, I guess he's missed the point, he talks about the above as if they were bad things, when in fact, he's just a typical punk fan that doesn't understand why its important to have complex music sometimes.

God ELP were stupid.

I'm not a big ELP fan, but the the stupidity of that statement boggles the mind, they are in fact musical masters when it comes to technical performance and musical theory. Again more insane wailings from a typical punk fan.

I like a fair bit of Punk, it annoys me that he feels like he has to bash Prog, but at the end of the day I like both genres [although admittedly PROG more] so I'm getting the better deal, and he's missing out.

Well...I have to put my two cents in.....

first things first.My favorite band is the ramones. I feel a connection with them that is personal. 2nd i was in a punk band for 4 years and we started out playing ramones tunes and misfits songs, and ended up playing jethro tull and ramones songs at the same shows. It was different.

The bottom line is, comming from both a lover of some "punk" and some "prog" is that we just dont understand each others POV on the subjects. "Punks" have a more conservative attitude when it comes to music, and they really just want to have fun and rock and roll. they dont learn theory, they dont care. Especially because prog is exhausting! after a while you just need to take a breath before diving into the next King crimson album.

People into progressive rock are looking for something creative, original, technical....basically all the things a MUSICIAN would look for. or someone who is just a theory head. I think if you can mix feeling with technicality you are deserving of credit. of course punk repetitive after a while, and can cause a person to expand their tastes. some people never do. fortunatly most people here have.

all in all, it is just a misunderstanding of culture, and the reasons why.

AAAAAAhhhh...

f**k the PUNKS!!!!!!!!!!!

Ulf Uggason wrote: Punk was incredibly exciting when it first hit.  But now, over 30 years later........   It's boring as hell! Which honestly is the worst insult you can say about punk, since one of its primary objectives was to eradicate the boring old guard of R&R.  If people today think they are radical and offensive by being "punk," all I can say is "BORING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" While I love a lot of old punk dearly, I clearly think it is the most overrated form of rock music. BORING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Peace, Ulf

Yes, and theres nothing more pathetic than an old punk hehehee

Is 20st century digital boy (by Bad Religion) a parody of 21st century schizoid man??? The fact that punks hate prog would explain it but I just heard about this "digital boy" so I can't tell you if there's a link in the lyrics with the famous KC song.

I am an antichrist
I am an anarchist
Don't know what I want but
I know how to get it
I wanna destroy the passer by cos i

I wanna be anarchy !
No dogs body

Anarchy for the u.k it's coming sometime and maybe
I give a wrong time stop a trafic line
Your future dream is a shopping scheme cos i

I wanna be anarchy !
In the city.....
is it not pretentous itself?)

^why? why the f**k would you ever revive this??? Please delete this sh*t for good!!!