Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
Big Klu

You dont like THE CLASH because

Recommended Posts

I personally don't like them because I found their music really boring. The whole punk movement/attitude didn't affect me. It just wasn't relevant to me in any way.

Edited by yahyoubetcha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
New Wave/Punk saved rock. The late 60's-early 70's generation were past their prime by 76-77. All the the bands of that era were already slipping. Punk didnt force change or make music shittier, the previous gen. just ran out of ideas.

Big Klu, my husband and I met one another on the punk rock scene in ’78 (during my own post-Zep years) and I agree with you that the “late 60's-early 70's generation were past their prime by 76-77”. Nothing like a new music genre (and a new love) to help move on with one’s life (and get one’s adrenalin pumping again). My husband was heavily involved in the punk rock scene and we were both still young enough to immerse ourselves in this new genre. Musically, it was a very, very exciting time! We loved The Clash so much that, after seeing them in NYC in ’79, we went to London twice (’80, ’81) to see them in concert (and to see other punk/new wave/ska/reggae bands perform at small clubs and venues - e.g., Max’s/CB’s/100 Club/H&A/Masque/HK Cafe). Musically, NYC, London, and LA were important places for us during the late ‘70s – early ‘80’s. We loved the energy and the newness of the genre. Seeing the bands close up, in small clubs and rubbing elbows with them later in after-hours clubs, was a refreshing change from huge stadium concerts. The Clash were an essential part of that scene and created some very powerful music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally don't like them because I found their music really boring. The whole punk movement/attitude didn't affect me. It just wasn't relevant to me in any way.

Many people felt that way towards punk indeed but for those that were into it, part of the reason was they felt it spoke to them - they could relate to their attitude more so than they could rock. Similar to why rap music started. Inner city kids couldn't relate to things like Born to Run when their life wasn't about that.

Mad Screaming Gallery - well said :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Many people felt that way towards punk indeed but for those that were into it, part of the reason was they felt it spoke to them - they could relate to their attitude more so than they could rock. Similar to why rap music started. Inner city kids couldn't relate to things like Born to Run when their life wasn't about that.

Mad Screaming Gallery - well said :D

Thanks. :D

I also want to add that, while the Sex Pistols may have been a "created" band, many of the bands that were playing on the punk scene rose up spontaneously. Their albums were created by small, new, unknown labels. We would also wander around downtown and find out who was playing by reading handbills that were printed off and stapled to poles and walls. We found out about the clubs in London via word of mouth from band members we met at the after-hours clubs in NYC. It was a completely different (and refreshing) world from the Ticketmasters peddling tickets to large stadium concerts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm visiting my older brother this week & I was goung through his old CREEM magazines & I saw this letter & I laughed my ass off because I thought of this thread. This letter was published in CREEM June 1981. Here goes:

"Life is not east when you're an obsessive perfectionist. Case in point: I've been meaning to write a letter expressing my intense dislike for the Clash. Simple, right? Wrong! I'm in a terrible dilemma. Is it 1) the Clash 'sucks', since "Clash" is a singular noun, 2) the Clash 'suck' since "Clash" is referring to more than one "person" (person?Clash? a conflict in terms, obviously)? Anyway, you get the point.

Love, College Kid Academia, USA

P.S. Why the hell am I worrying??? Most of your readers probably think "Singular Noun" is the lead singer of some obscure punk rock group"

At least he was funny

Edited by kakdaddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks. :D

I also want to add that, while the Sex Pistols may have been a "created" band, many of the bands that were playing on the punk scene rose up spontaneously. Their albums were created by small, new, unknown labels. We would also wander around downtown and find out who was playing by reading handbills that were printed off and stapled to poles and walls. We found out about the clubs in London via word of mouth from band members we met at the after-hours clubs in NYC. It was a completely different (and refreshing) world from the Ticketmasters peddling tickets to large stadium concerts.

It must have been really sad for you to learn when CBGBs closed if you spent a lot of time in the clubs in New York. But I think what you said touched upon one of the great aspects of punk - that real rawness and immediacy. It wasn't about glitzy shows with big stage productions and slick campaigns. It was very grass roots, DIY.

I know to an extent the Sex Pistols were "created" but I love em anyways :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It must have been really sad for you to learn when CBGBs closed if you spent a lot of time in the clubs in New York. But I think what you said touched upon one of the great aspects of punk - that real rawness and immediacy. It wasn't about glitzy shows with big stage productions and slick campaigns. It was very grass roots, DIY.

I know to an extent the Sex Pistols were "created" but I love em anyways :D

Not only did CBGB's close, it was supposedly going to reopen in Vegas! CB's was a great place in its day. I still remember leaving there during the wee hours of the morning and walking past the homeless men sleeping on the Bowery. I loved the gritty edge that the city had back then - I really believe that the downtown music and art scene flourished in that "renegade" environment.

My husband loves the Sex Pistols. So much so, that he actually wanted to go to their reunion concert in England. We didn't make it to that reunion either. <sigh>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not only did CBGB's close, it was supposedly going to reopen in Vegas! CB's was a great place in its day. I still remember leaving there during the wee hours of the morning and walking past the homeless men sleeping on the Bowery. I loved the gritty edge that the city had back then - I really believe that the downtown music and art scene flourished in that "renegade" environment.

My husband loves the Sex Pistols. So much so, that he actually wanted to go to their reunion concert in England. We didn't make it to that reunion either. <sigh>

The thought of CBs reopening in Vegas is too painful to even think about! A lot of great art and music movements do flourish amongst the grittier sections of cities, that's for sure. It's sad so much of that has been lost.

Two missed reunions - I'll echo your sighs :'(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another one. It has less to do about the Clash then punk in general. This letter was published in CREEM May 1980. Mind you it's 27 years later & lets' see if certain people on this board haven't gotten these two guys mantra down pat.

"I have one thing to say about PUNK-PQUOIT!! The best groups are: LED ZEPPELIN, LYNYRD SKYNYRD, AEROSMITH, NEIL YOUNG, TED NUGENT, JEFFERSON STARSHIP, MOLLY HATCHET, OUTLAWS, ROLLING STONES, QUEEN, CHEAP TRICK, FOGHAT, FOREIGNER, BOSTON, WHO, BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN, JIMI HENDRIX, HEART, KANSAS, ELO, KISS, JOURNEY, STYX, VAN HALEN, AC/DC AND CARS.

DISCO'S DEAD. IT CAN GIVE ME HEAD! How can anyone compare stupid, fucking punk rock with the ultimate music above?

New wave like BLONDIE , JOE JACKSON, THE CARS, & DEVO are fairly good, but the rest is like trying to mix oil & water.

The SEX PISTOLS were so fucking gay, it's a wonder how they ever became a group!

FROM TWO FUCKIN' DEDICATED ROCK FANS FROM THE FUCKIN' CITY OF CHAMPIONS!

PITTSBURG, PA

PS. IN YOUR FEBRUARY 1980 ISSUE THERE'S A PICTURE OF PAT BENETAR SPREADING. TELL HER SHE CAN SPREAD ON MY FACE LIKE THAT ANYTIME!!

PSS. IGGY'S A FUCKIN' QUEER!

(MORAL: Ben Dover was a homophobe, too - Editor)"

LOL! You would think that 27 years hadn't passed. Same stupid arguement then, same as today. I just like the fact that Iggy & the Pistols are "queer" & "gay" while Queen go unnoticed in their world. My prediction is that in a year or two from that letter being published they started listening to Priest not aware what the lyrics to their new favorite song, "Hell Bent For Leather", was really about. They then dated a few girls but never settling down, realized one day all they had is their shared love of music, popped in a cassette of "Hell Bent For Leather" & it finally... all.. made... sense. They now share a cottage in Rhode Island where they run a Wicker Shop. A happy ending for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats lazy. Then again your stance is lazy.

I once agreed with you, which coincidently was before I actually listened to punk. The same supposed know-it-all's who hate the Clash out of principle likely enjoy The Who. Shit, The Clash are practically Yes/Gentle Giant/Jethro Tull/King Crimson compared to The Who. The Who could only wish they put out an album as varied and challenging as Sandinista. But generally their sound is similar, and still Mick Jones was more advanced on guitar than Pete!

The only difference between them are the labels people slapped on them.

New Wave/Punk saved rock. The late 60's-early 70's generation were past their prime by 76-77. All the the bands of that era were already slipping. Punk didnt force change or make music shittier, the previous gen. just ran out of ideas. Television (the band) are at times considered punk, but they had distortion-free twin lead guitarists! :blink:

For the most part I agree with your post with the exception of "new wave/punk saved rock" and "the late 60's early 70's generation were past their prime by 76-77"

Firstly what makes you think rock needed to be saved, there were tons of great bands like Van Halen, AC/DC, Ozzy with Randy Rhoads around to name a few that were just getting ready to explode and Punk had ZERO influence on these people.

I think Disco had as much an influence if not more on rock & popular music than Punk ever did.

All you have to do is watch the 02 videos to see that the the late 60's early 70's generation even today are still not past their prime they just need a real reason to get down again and they kill it nuff said !!!

Where are the Punks of the 70's today ???????

RjK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Firstly what makes you think rock needed to be saved, there were tons of great bands like Van Halen, AC/DC, Ozzy with Randy Rhoads around to name a few that were just getting ready to explode and Punk had ZERO influence on these people.

I think Disco had as much an influence if not more on rock & popular music than Punk ever did.

All you have to do is watch the 02 videos to see that the the late 60's early 70's generation even today are still not past their prime they just need a real reason to get down again and they kill it nuff said !!!

Where are the Punks of the 70's today ???????

1) I agree, I don't think music had to be "saved". It's just music. I don't think punk had much influence on those bands but those bands were fans. DLR loved the Pistols, AC/DC played CBGB's & alot of punks loved & still love them, & Ozzy... you don't get much more working class then him.

2) Disco had a HUGE influence & is STILL hated amongst Classic Rock fans even more so then Punk. Ridiculous.

3) The old timers' are still fighting their "30 Year War" & they keep breeding 13 year olds who only know what their parents listen to on the radio (Classic Rock) & what's on MTV. What would you pick if those were the options presented to you?

4) Zeppelin are past their prime. I haven't heard anything new from them since, I don't know, when I was 7. They were great at 02 but that's like saying the Beach Boys still have"it". They're not a band, they "were" a band.

5) Where are the "70's Punks" today? Dead, like Randy Rhoads & Bon Scott. Missing in action, like Michael Anthony. Sometimes reunting for the odd gig, like Zeppelin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where are the Punks of the 70's today ???????

RjK

Paul Simonon - plays bass for The Good The Bad and The Queen.

Mick Jones and Tony James are in a band called Carbon/Silicon

Terry Chimes is a chiropractor

Buzzcocks are still together

Paul Weller has his solo career

as does Tom Verlaine and Richard Lloyd

Bruce Foxton is a band with Simon Townshend called The Casbah Club

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't quite get this thread either but I like the Clash a lot and I like a lot of punk music. It's not my absolute favorite genre but I think it absolutely needed to happen and had a very important impact on the future of a lot of music.

Methinks the point of this thread is to get people to actually think about their reasons for hating The Clash, or punk in general. Big Klu's original post listed a bunch of actual reasons that people come up with for dismissing an entire genre, and putting them out there like that makes them look very trivial and petty, indeed.

Then, if they connect the dots, the public sees that they have no good reason for dismissing punk (in general), and should get their collective head out of the sand and listen up.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it.

Anyways, Punk/New Wave rules. I'll take Pink Flag over any Yes album, any day of the week.

edit... well, maybe not Yes. I happen to like them. More the 'classic rock' garbage that fills the airwaves: Journey, Eagles, Boston, Styx, AC/DC, etc.

Edited by Muse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, this is a message board. Why are people posting around their opinions anyway?

:coffee:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where are the Punks of the 70's today ???????

Probably still trying to learn a second chord, unsuccessfully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3) The old timers' are still fighting their "30 Year War" & they keep breeding 13 year olds who only know what their parents listen to on the radio (Classic Rock) & what's on MTV. What would you pick if those were the options presented to you?

Well if I was 13 again, I'd want my own music that's of my own generation. The problem is modern "rock" music is basically shit. Nobody jams anymore, nobody takes any chances. Now it's all tenth generation Pearl Jam..........

It's really a shame.

Regards;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul Simonon - plays bass for The Good The Bad and The Queen.

Mick Jones and Tony James are in a band called Carbon/Silicon

Terry Chimes is a chiropractor

Buzzcocks are still together

Paul Weller has his solo career

as does Tom Verlaine and Richard Lloyd

Bruce Foxton is a band with Simon Townshend called The Casbah Club

The point of my question was that even though some of the guyz may still be working, unless your "into Punk" not to many know or for that matter give a damn compared to the members of Zepplin who are setting records (if you believe the hype) with the huge amounts of money being offered to tour again.

All the Punk bands together just don't add up to "The Mighty Zepp" and all we really care about right !!!!

RjK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The point of my question was that even though some of the guyz may still be working, unless your "into Punk" not to many know or for that matter give a damn compared to the members of Zepplin who are setting records (if you believe the hype) with the huge amounts of money being offered to tour again.

All the Punk bands together just don't add up to "The Mighty Zepp" and all we really care about right !!!!

RjK

1)Zeppelin is my favorite band, as I assume, as well as most people on this board. That's something I think we can all agree with. Why I like Zeppelin & the Clash & Ray Charles & whomever else I like is because the music speaks for itself. I'm not limited in anything that I enjoy, I don't have to impress anyone or be part of a "gang" mentality to justify what I like. That's the part of Punk I've always related to: be an individual, do your own thing. Once it becomes a uniform, be it a mohawk or a mullet because your peer group walks around that way, you are cattle.

2)I could care less what records Zeppelin set. So what? Michael Jackson has set plenty of records outstripping Zeppelin, does that make him a more viable artist than Zeppelin? In your world it sounds that way. All I care about is the drums on "In My Time Of Dying", that says more than how many tickets or units they have sold. I don't care, why would you?

I don't care how much money they're being offered, I ain't seeing any of it. They're not worried about how much I make or don't make nor should they. It's about the music they put out & whether I like it or not. Simple.

3)I've never understood why it has to be a competition about who is the "best". Still baffles me. Not all the punk bands added up together would equal "the Mighty Zep"? Are you kidding me? What, are you 2 years old? Can your dad kick my dad's ass? See me in the playground after school at 3 sharp? Get real, it's juvenile. Quality is quality, & in the end it comes down to preference. You like it or don't. Next...

4)I love Zeppelin & the Clash. They're two phenomenal bands in my book. Anyone have a problem with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3) The old timers' are still fighting their "30 Year War" & they keep breeding 13 year olds who only know what their parents listen to on the radio (Classic Rock) & what's on MTV. What would you pick if those were the options presented to you?

Well if I was 13 again, I'd want my own music that's of my own generation. The problem is modern "rock" music is basically shit. Nobody jams anymore, nobody takes any chances. Now it's all tenth generation Pearl Jam..........

It's really a shame.

Regards;

I agree to a degree. At 13 I would have liked music that was of my peer group, but I didn't relate to any of it. I'm 35, so at the time it was LA Hair Metal & English Synth Bands on MTV & the radio. I did not relate at all. All I listened to was "Physical Graffiti", "London Calling", & "Scary Monsters" by Bowie, courtesy of my older brothers who discarded those albums. As I got a little older I found out about stuff that wasn't on the radio or getting daytime airing on MTV. There was no internet, I had to search things out by word of mouth, imported magazines, trading tapes, etc. Thank God I live(d) in NYC because I was at least able to track these records down that you couldn't find at a Wal-Mart in Bumblefuck USA.

Today their is the internet. Everything is literally a touch away. I'm not saying you're going to find the "new" Zeppelin because you're not anymore than I would find a "new" Clash. They already existed. I guarantee that something is out there for you, myself, & some 13 year old who is/are interested enough in finding it. All we have to do is search it out with open ears & an open mind, because most likely it's not going to fall into your/our lap(s). DIY. Do It Yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Methinks the point of this thread is to get people to actually think about their reasons for hating The Clash, or punk in general. Big Klu's original post listed a bunch of actual reasons that people come up with for dismissing an entire genre, and putting them out there like that makes them look very trivial and petty, indeed.

Then, if they connect the dots, the public sees that they have no good reason for dismissing punk (in general), and should get their collective head out of the sand and listen up.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it.

:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thread. Its nice to see people like Zep who like something like the Clash. The powers that be try to market Zep to us as one of the bands grouped with The Stones, The Who, The Beatles, AC/DC, Van Halen, Bad Company, Journey, Deep Purple, etc. In short, Classic Rock.

Personally, I have never considered Zep to be Classic Rock. I think they're great, yet despise most classic rock. Personal taste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1)Zeppelin is my favorite band, as I assume, as well as most people on this board. That's something I think we can all agree with. Why I like Zeppelin & the Clash & Ray Charles & whomever else I like is because the music speaks for itself. I'm not limited in anything that I enjoy, I don't have to impress anyone or be part of a "gang" mentality to justify what I like. That's the part of Punk I've always related to: be an individual, do your own thing. Once it becomes a uniform, be it a mohawk or a mullet because your peer group walks around that way, you are cattle.

2)I could care less what records Zeppelin set. So what? Michael Jackson has set plenty of records outstripping Zeppelin, does that make him a more viable artist than Zeppelin? In your world it sounds that way. All I care about is the drums on "In My Time Of Dying", that says more than how many tickets or units they have sold. I don't care, why would you?

I don't care how much money they're being offered, I ain't seeing any of it. They're not worried about how much I make or don't make nor should they. It's about the music they put out & whether I like it or not. Simple.

3)I've never understood why it has to be a competition about who is the "best". Still baffles me. Not all the punk bands added up together would equal "the Mighty Zep"? Are you kidding me? What, are you 2 years old? Can your dad kick my dad's ass? See me in the playground after school at 3 sharp? Get real, it's juvenile. Quality is quality, & in the end it comes down to preference. You like it or don't. Next...

4)I love Zeppelin & the Clash. They're two phenomenal bands in my book. Anyone have a problem with that?

And I'm the 2 year old ............ lol

I'll put it simple for ya The Clash were a good band and sold alot of records but when it comes down to what band had a bigger influence on pop culture well we all know the answer to that one don't we.

So why are you so angry at me for pointing out the obvious ? Is it perhaps a hangover from listening to too much Clash or Sex Pistols and you feel you have to prove to your Forum buddies that your somehow more of a man than me ??? Or are you suffering from the small man complex ??? C'mon what is it kakdaddy ???

See ya on Springer cowboy !!!

RjK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll put it simple for ya The Clash were a good band and sold alot of records but when it comes down to what band had a bigger influence on pop culture well we all know the answer to that one don't we.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...