Sex Pistols

[walkman]

Originally posted by the scientist:
 No Walkman, you missed my point.
 
 You said seeing the pistols now would probably make you laugh. I dont think that detracts from their accomplishments. Like if you met picasso today he isnt much of an artist anymore either, he is dead.
 
 I think the pistols album stands up very well today, that is what matters, not if they look pathetic now. It is the recorded material and its effects. The concerts at the time and the clothes they wore at the time and the art it inspired at the time.
 
 Hell, go to borders and look how many books you will find on the pistols and punk vs Neil Young. Sure there are a lot of books on nsync and shit too, but not new kids on the block. Punk has stood the test of time. But then it moulded modern culture.
 
 What did Neil Young do again?

Comparing a living Johnny Rotten to a deceased Picasso completely evades the point of my argument.  The point is, in fact, that a living Picasso's art was never good for a laugh during his brilliant career, whereas Rotten is now comedy material.  The thing of it is, Picasso WAS a great artist up until the day he died.  That's precisely what cemented his legacy as a genius and an innovator - he never lost his touch.  
 
 P.S.  Neil Young did as much to pave the road for punk rock as anybody making music before 1975.  He just did it with better songs.

[mankie]

Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
 

 by whom the general public or bowie fans? just because he isn't sell boatloads of records doesn't mean that there are some fans out there digging his recent output.
 
 [/b]

Kosmo, you seem to be forgetting that scientist markie wk and Rhett are the last word on music...what they say is the final word, end of story. Anyone else's opinion are irrelevant...that's just how liberals are.
 
 The reality is that great music is bought much less than the shite....Britney, N'sync, Limp Bizkit, WK, the list goes on. Whoever has the best marketing is who sells the most cd's, talent has nothing to do with it.

[Venerable Bede]

hey smackie. . you should check this out when you're in vegas:
 
  http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=573&ncid=757&e=1&u=/nm/20030718/od_nm/leisure_bambi_dc
 
 
   

[markie]

Originally posted by walkman:
 

The point is, in fact, that a living Picasso's art was never good for a laugh during his brilliant career, whereas Rotten is now comedy material.  The thing of it is, Picasso WAS a great artist up until the day he died.  That's precisely what cemented his legacy as a genius and an innovator - he never lost his touch.  
 
 P.S.  Neil Young did as much to pave the road for punk rock as anybody making music before 1975.  He just did it with better songs. [/b]

that is why I used the boxer example to start with, remember Tyson and Ali. Some things just look rediculous if old people do them....
 
 like riding skateboards and wearing bondage pants and pretending to be rebellious, or boxing.
 
 I have never heard anyone suggest that Neil Young paved the way for punk before. He was a hippie, right? The punks hated hippies. They are the anithesis of punk.

[markie]

Originally posted by mankie:
   Whoever has the best marketing is who sells the most cd's, talent has nothing to do with it.

I would contend that bowie has some of the best marketing. He is a rock superpower. When he has a new album you see posters of it everywhere, and if the singles are good they get radioplay.
 
 From what I have seen on tele, bowie looks like he is still very good live, but none of his albums in the last 20 years have been massively influential, there were a run of albums preceeding that though that I would contend are massively influential and are still great to listen to now. Those albums were part of the zeitgeist, for want of a better word. The crrent albums are not.

[ggw]

I think you guys are comparing apples and oranges.
 
 Neil Young has worked in practically every genre of modern music -- folk, rock, blues, country, punk, electronic.  He's been at it for going on forty years now and still creates relevant material, and has influenced countless rock, country and folk musicians.
 
 The Sex Pistols released one seminal album and cemented their place in history by saying "fuck" (or some similarly verboten word) on the telly.  They created a fashion revolution, but even the Scientist would admit they were not as influential musically as other punk bands.

[markie]

Originally posted by ggw:
  I think you guys are comparing apples and oranges.
 
 They created a fashion revolution, but even the Scientist would admit they were not as influential musically as other punk bands.

I was enjoing the comparison though. I dont know too much about Neil Young. I guess he is American as the Pistols were English.
 
 I disagree with your later statement. I think the pistols were THE influential punk band. Especially for the english scene. And without the English scene it is possible that the NY scene might have been forgotten by now. (I doubt it , but thats conjecture)
 
 All of the British punk bands after the pistols were to some extent just copying the pistols, especially in their beginnings. Later on many weht on to do much better more interesting things. But copying the pistols was the initial spark.
 
 Bernie Rhodes and the clash were just following the malcolm mclaren mobile.

[bearman🐻]

I find it interesting that someone said that punk had little impact in the US...how much further from the truth could that be?  We give the world the Ramones and Iggy & the Stooges, arguably the 2 founding bands of punk rock, the UK gives us back the Clash, the Sex Pistols, and a slew of other bands. We give the world Husker Du, the Replacements, and whatever else you can dish up that influenced bands like the Pixies, Jane's Addiction and Nirvana.  Yeah, punk never mattered. Hippies rule!!

[ggw]

Originally posted by the scientist:
 I disagree with your later statement. I think the pistols were THE influential punk band. Especially for the english scene. And without the English scene it is possible that the NY scene might have been forgotten by now. (I doubt it , but thats conjecture)
 
 All of the British punk bands after the pistols were to some extent just copying the pistols, especially in their beginnings. Later on many weht on to do much better more interesting things. But copying the pistols was the initial spark.
 
 Bernie Rhodes and the clash were just following the malcolm mclaren mobile.

My point is that Young was influential musically, whereas I would argue that the Sex Pistols were more influential culturally.

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

Well said, GGW.
 
 

Originally posted by ggw:
  I think you guys are comparing apples and oranges.
 
 Neil Young has worked in practically every genre of modern music -- folk, rock, blues, country, punk, electronic.  He's been at it for going on forty years now and still creates relevant material, and has influenced countless rock, country and folk musicians.
 
 The Sex Pistols released one seminal album and cemented their place in history by saying "fuck" (or some similarly verboten word) on the telly.  They created a fashion revolution, but even the Scientist would admit they were not as influential musically as other punk bands.

[markie]

Originally posted by ggw:
  My point is that Young was influential musically, whereas I would argue that the Sex Pistols were more influential culturally.

Well If you say the attitude of punk, the do it yourself ethos, was a cultural change then maybe.
 
 Who did Neil Young have such a massive inluence on? I know I could look it up on allmusic, but that thing lies.

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

For me, let's put it this way. There was a time maybe ten years ago where I went to about six shows in a row, and every band I saw did a Neil Young cover. I have never seen anybody do a Sex Pistols cover.
 
    Off the top of my head, i think I have seen Matthew Sweet, Slobberbone, Cracker, Lucinda Williams, the Lemonheads, EmmyLou Harris, the Jayhawks, Canyon (not bragging about that one), and Cassandra Wilson.
 
    His songs have been covered by too many people to name, but they include David Bowie, Dolly Parton, Neil Young, Tori Amos, Paul Weller, Motorhead, the Pretenders, and the list goes on.
 
    And last and least, he is listed as the "programmer" on Andrew WK's I Get Wet album.
 
 
 

Originally posted by the scientist:
   

Originally posted by ggw:
  My point is that Young was influential musically, whereas I would argue that the Sex Pistols were more influential culturally.

Well If you say the attitude of punk, the do it yourself ethos, was a cultural change then maybe.
 
 Who did Neil Young have such a massive inluence on? I know I could look it up on allmusic, but that thing lies. [/b]

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

I think America has always had a do it yourself ethos. That is part and parcel what the Republican Party is built on.
 
 

Originally posted by the scientist:
   

Originally posted by ggw:
  My point is that Young was influential musically, whereas I would argue that the Sex Pistols were more influential culturally.

Well If you say the attitude of punk, the do it yourself ethos, was a cultural change then maybe.
 
 Who did Neil Young have such a massive inluence on? I know I could look it up on allmusic, but that thing lies. [/b]

[ggw]

Originally posted by the scientist:
 Who did Neil Young have such a massive inluence on? I know I could look it up on allmusic, but that thing lies.

Well he is the "Godfather of Grunge"
 
 If you go by allmusic, he influenced the Stooges, MC5, Nirvana and every other grunge, proto-grunge, post-grunge, alt-country, folk-rock, and proto-folk-alt-rock-grunge-country band ever.
 
 Nirvana and Wilco are the most often cited.  Nirvana were pretty big.

[mankie]

"Keep on rocking in the free world"
 
 What the hell was the man thinking?
 
 (I'm a fan of Neil Young for the record)