4 ms·

Howl: a nostalgic homage to the brief, hazy era of “pure” London punk

32 points by tintinnabula 9y ago

meesles 9y ago
While I love capturing these moments of time to share with the world, I can't help but feel a twinge of sadness that these and many other vibrant, productive communities all eventually get swallowed up by the mainstream. What are these groups called today? Where are the mini-Renaissances that play a massive role in generating culture? Will these happen less and less as everyone is exposed to the global stream of information?
- jandrese 9y ago
  I feel like this is one of those things where if you knew about it it would already be dead. It only works when its a small community of like minded individuals, once it goes mainstream its ruined or at least transformed.
  - specialist 9y ago
    The lifecycle of social networks. Lather, rinse, repeat.
- zokier 9y ago
  Internet definitely has changed subculture dynamic, in a way I'd call narrower and deeper. On one hand internet has allowed subcultures of all sorts to flourish by allowing like-minded people to connect beyond geographical (and also social) boundaries and form their own communities. The flipside being that as more of the interaction happens online in those communities it also spreads less outside, even more to meatspace. Another aspect is that because internet allows everyone to find their own separate sub-culture and community, there are less such stark generation-defining sub-cultures happening. There is sort of filter bubble effect going on.
- shams93 9y ago
  Music is no longer a social movement. Back in the day being a fan of the Clash went far beyond music you were joining a social/political movement, something you believed in. Katy Perry might sing a catchy tune but its all about her personal ego, Joe Strummer say himself as a Che Guevara, a revolutionary socialist leader, a lot more than just a singer of hit songs. Songs became hits because they gave you a vision you could believe and participate in.
  - cies 9y ago
    > Music is no longer a social movement. Look harder, I'd say. See Bar25 in Berlin and the sound that is heard there (Katermukke label, etc.). Or Berghain and it's sound (Ostguton label, etc.). Hell yeah music and "social/political movement" are still as linked as ever. There's still a whole "roots" reggae/dub scene world wide that would besides social/political also come with an embedded spiritual and/or religious movement. Revolutionary hip-hip, like Dead Prez or Immortal, is still strong. In Europe there's still Freetekno. I could go on. Hell no revolutionary vibes from K. Perry! But it's still there. > Songs became hits because they gave you a vision you could believe and participate in. Yes. It's not advertised. They do not hit the charts anymore. So what. Shun the charts. We've got soundcloud, they've got ad-ridden radio and MTV.
  - kbp 9y ago
    > Music is no longer a social movement. Back in the day being a fan of the Clash went far beyond music you were joining a social/political movement, something you believed in. Katy Perry might sing a catchy tune but its all about her personal ego I don't think the Clash ever had the kind of mainstream success that someone like Katy Perry has. A more appropriate analogue for "back in the day" would be like Andy Gibb or someone.
languagehacker 9y ago
I'd probably rather re-read Please Kill Me: An Oral History of Punk by Legs McNeil
- rnd0 9y ago
  There's also a website; pleasekillme.com which is tangentially related. At least the authors seem to be involved with the site to a large (but not exclusive) degree.
- sincerely 9y ago
  Why? Was it so good that no other book on the same subject is worth reading? If so I'll have to check it out haha
unicornporn 9y ago
Awesome to see a Zero Books published book here! Also, be sure to check out "Kill All Normies: Online culture wars from 4chan and Tumblr to Trump and the alt-right", another excellent book recently published on Zero Books.
tonyedgecombe 9y ago
I always thought punk was a bit shit, it didn't seem to have any musical merit to me so although it was my era I ignored it. I struggle to see why, a generation later, people look back at it with anything but disdain.
- harrumph 9y ago
  >I struggle to see why, a generation later, people look back at it with anything but disdain. Because your frame of reference of musical merit is at best subjective and at worst, built upon nothing but raw prejudice. Attacking that fact is what punk did. That's a freedom, and some people insist on freedom in art.
  - tonyedgecombe 9y ago
    I hear the same thing from the art world, if you don't understand this art then it's because you are too ignorant. I think it's bullshit there as well.
    - harrumph 9y ago
      >if you don't understand this art then it's because you are too ignorant Maybe I’m not being clear. I’m not saying anything about ignorance. I am instead saying that some people demand freedom in their art and it necessarily follows that such persons expect their aesthetic standards to be challenged. Indeed, such persons usually enjoy or at least appreciate it when a challenge to their aesthetic appears. Others, for whom aesthetic freedom is not an animating principle, do not make that demand, preferring instead to stake out a familiar set of aesthetic expectations and forms. Avoiding challenge and preferring familiar forms and expectations is a very popular choice - it requires far less engagement with art because most questions about importance of the art are already answered for the adherent. This easier path is always available for persons who are more comfortable belonging than they are beholding.

32 points by tintinnabula 9y ago

While I love capturing these moments of time to share with the world, I can't help but feel a twinge of sadness that these and many other vibrant, productive communities all eventually get swallowed up by the mainstream. What are these groups called today? Where are the mini-Renaissances that play a massive role in generating culture? Will these happen less and less as everyone is exposed to the global stream of information?

jandrese 9y ago
I feel like this is one of those things where if you knew about it it would already be dead. It only works when its a small community of like minded individuals, once it goes mainstream its ruined or at least transformed.
- specialist 9y ago
  The lifecycle of social networks. Lather, rinse, repeat.
zokier 9y ago
Internet definitely has changed subculture dynamic, in a way I'd call narrower and deeper. On one hand internet has allowed subcultures of all sorts to flourish by allowing like-minded people to connect beyond geographical (and also social) boundaries and form their own communities. The flipside being that as more of the interaction happens online in those communities it also spreads less outside, even more to meatspace. Another aspect is that because internet allows everyone to find their own separate sub-culture and community, there are less such stark generation-defining sub-cultures happening. There is sort of filter bubble effect going on.
shams93 9y ago
Music is no longer a social movement. Back in the day being a fan of the Clash went far beyond music you were joining a social/political movement, something you believed in. Katy Perry might sing a catchy tune but its all about her personal ego, Joe Strummer say himself as a Che Guevara, a revolutionary socialist leader, a lot more than just a singer of hit songs. Songs became hits because they gave you a vision you could believe and participate in.
- cies 9y ago
  > Music is no longer a social movement. Look harder, I'd say. See Bar25 in Berlin and the sound that is heard there (Katermukke label, etc.). Or Berghain and it's sound (Ostguton label, etc.). Hell yeah music and "social/political movement" are still as linked as ever. There's still a whole "roots" reggae/dub scene world wide that would besides social/political also come with an embedded spiritual and/or religious movement. Revolutionary hip-hip, like Dead Prez or Immortal, is still strong. In Europe there's still Freetekno. I could go on. Hell no revolutionary vibes from K. Perry! But it's still there. > Songs became hits because they gave you a vision you could believe and participate in. Yes. It's not advertised. They do not hit the charts anymore. So what. Shun the charts. We've got soundcloud, they've got ad-ridden radio and MTV.
- kbp 9y ago
  > Music is no longer a social movement. Back in the day being a fan of the Clash went far beyond music you were joining a social/political movement, something you believed in. Katy Perry might sing a catchy tune but its all about her personal ego I don't think the Clash ever had the kind of mainstream success that someone like Katy Perry has. A more appropriate analogue for "back in the day" would be like Andy Gibb or someone.

languagehacker 9y ago

I'd probably rather re-read Please Kill Me: An Oral History of Punk by Legs McNeil

rnd0 9y ago
There's also a website; pleasekillme.com which is tangentially related. At least the authors seem to be involved with the site to a large (but not exclusive) degree.
sincerely 9y ago
Why? Was it so good that no other book on the same subject is worth reading? If so I'll have to check it out haha

unicornporn 9y ago

Awesome to see a Zero Books published book here! Also, be sure to check out "Kill All Normies: Online culture wars from 4chan and Tumblr to Trump and the alt-right", another excellent book recently published on Zero Books.

tonyedgecombe 9y ago

I always thought punk was a bit shit, it didn't seem to have any musical merit to me so although it was my era I ignored it. I struggle to see why, a generation later, people look back at it with anything but disdain.

harrumph 9y ago
>I struggle to see why, a generation later, people look back at it with anything but disdain. Because your frame of reference of musical merit is at best subjective and at worst, built upon nothing but raw prejudice. Attacking that fact is what punk did. That's a freedom, and some people insist on freedom in art.
- tonyedgecombe 9y ago
  I hear the same thing from the art world, if you don't understand this art then it's because you are too ignorant. I think it's bullshit there as well.
  - harrumph 9y ago
    >if you don't understand this art then it's because you are too ignorant Maybe I’m not being clear. I’m not saying anything about ignorance. I am instead saying that some people demand freedom in their art and it necessarily follows that such persons expect their aesthetic standards to be challenged. Indeed, such persons usually enjoy or at least appreciate it when a challenge to their aesthetic appears. Others, for whom aesthetic freedom is not an animating principle, do not make that demand, preferring instead to stake out a familiar set of aesthetic expectations and forms. Avoiding challenge and preferring familiar forms and expectations is a very popular choice - it requires far less engagement with art because most questions about importance of the art are already answered for the adherent. This easier path is always available for persons who are more comfortable belonging than they are beholding.