Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Who started punk - the ultimate poll

Who started it all then ?


  • Total voters
    38
shoddysolutions said:
Didn't the Damned release the first punk single?

''New Rose'' IIRC

Ramones released an album before the Damned released New Rose . And they were just faster to release something , they weren't the first to start playing !
 
Dubversion said:
that's not the same as being the band to start punk is it? not by a long chalk.
Seeing as there's no clear definition of who/what is punk or where/how it started that's as good as it's going to get.

The UK scene was certainly part insired by some of the music coming out of NYC but what made it so good for me was the definite, unique British quality added by bands like the Pistols, Damned etc.

So the first 'punk' band depends very much on your personal definition of what punk is/was. The Ramones were great, but they didn't have the menace, the energy or the wild anarchic qualities that defined punk to me as a teenager.
 
editor said:
So the first 'punk' band depends very much on your personal definition of what punk is/was. The Ramones were great, but they didn't have the menace, the energy or the wild anarchic qualities that defined punk to me as a teenager.

Ramones didn't have energy . I've heard everything now ! Next you'll be telling me the moon landings didn't happen :rolleyes:
 
editor said:
The Ramones were great, but they didn't have the menace, the energy or the wild anarchic qualities that defined punk to me as a teenager.

you're kidding, right?

ok, what about the new York Dolls then?
 
Dubversion said:
ok, what about the new York Dolls then?
What about them?

They didn't do it for me like the Pistols did at the time and that's the end of it, really.

Their appearance didn't engage me at all and they definitely didn't seem as relevant, as compelling or as exciting and dangerous to me at 17.
 
Savage Henry said:
Ramones didn't have energy . I've heard everything now ! Next you'll be telling me the moon landings didn't happen :rolleyes:
Tell you what: if you went a grown up debate, how about you stop the cheap misrepresentations?
 
Sorry, going to have to agree with dub :eek:

You can't really say that punk was "started" by any one band. Its almost as foolish as saying that Elvis invented Rock 'n' Roll :p
 
editor said:
What about them?

They didn't do it for me like the Pistols did at the time and that's the end of it, really.

Their apparance didn't engage me and they defintely didn't seem as relevant or as compelling to a 17yr old looking for excitement.



but you're still talking about what affected you. how the hell is that a benchmark for who started punk? to an extent, as i've said, it's kind of futile and ultimately subjective but it's not SO subjective as to purely depend on your perspective with scant regard for the facts of the matter.
 
editor said:
Tell you what: if you went a grown up debate, how about you stop the cheap misrepresentations?


You say the Ramones didn't have energy , exactly what are you basing this on ? I've seen them live several times and they were full of energy and considering they were getting on a bit then I'd imagine they had even more energy in the 70's. Maybe if you hadn't made such a ridiculous claim I'd be able to take your argument a bit more seriously !
 
Savage Henry said:
Your options are Ramones or Sex Pistols though :rolleyes:
not my fault you canne do a decent poll. If you hade said who came first i would have voted ramones if you said who do i listen to more i would say sex pistols.

However, you said who started punk and the fact the ramones are the better option just means the querstion was crap so neh :p


dave
 
kained&unable said:
not my fault you canne do a decent poll. If you hade said who came first i would have voted ramones if you said who do i listen to more i would say sex pistols.

However, you said who started punk and the fact the ramones are the better option just means the querstion was crap so neh :p


dave

I explained it in my first post it's a USA vs UK thing so I chose the main members of the relevant scenes !
 
Dubversion said:
but you're still talking about what affected you. how the hell is that a benchmark for who started punk?
I fucking LIVED punk when it happened. It changed my life. Still has.

Seeing as it's entirely subjective, I fail to see why your retrospective take on events is of any more significance than mine. I know what punk meant in the UK when it happened, and it certainly wasn't about the NY Dolls.

As far as most people were concerned at the time, punk started with the Pistols.

Shit poll this, btw.
 
editor said:
For the last time, that's not what I said.

What did you mean ?

You said they didn't have " the menace, the energy or the wild anarchic qualities that defined punk to me as a teenager" what were they lacking in energy then ? From my experience seeing them they certainly had loads of energy so what were they lacking for you ?

and I notice it's a shit poll now that your choice is losing :p ;)
 
Savage Henry said:
What did you mean ?
Your lack of intelligence in this debate is really quite disappointing, you know.

Try reading what I wrote again. Slowly. It really is self explanatory.
 
editor said:
Your lack of intelligence in this debate is really quite disappointing, you know.

Try reading what I wrote again. Slowly. It really is self explanatory.



Is that an FAQ busting personal insult there ? It's not self explanatory , maybe you would care to explain exactly what it means rather than using cryptic comments about lack of energy which in my opinion and experience is a load of bollocks anyway !

What is this mythicla punk energy your talking about ?

editor said:
Tell you what: if you went a grown up debate, how about you stop the cheap misrepresentations?

why not take your own advice , if you want to have a grown up debate why not try to not insult people !
 
Back
Top Bottom