From: graham@ug.cs.dal.ca (Michael Graham)
Subject: Re: Ramones, punk rock, XRaySpex, others (lots)
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 02:12:02 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.120416.14062@gdr.bath.ac.uk> mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf) writes:
>In article <Bu815t.CLH@cs.dal.ca> graham@ug.cs.dal.ca (Michael Graham) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep3.150154.28981@gdr.bath.ac.uk> mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf) writes:
>>
>>Yeah - and look at what Lydon has been doing for the past 8-9 yrs!
>>Boring generic rock. (He still does great interviews - especially on tv).
>>
>
>He still does Sex Pistols covers, and he sticks to his uncommercial
>singing style.

He does these covers after swearing that he never would. He does them because
that's what the audience wants to hear him do. Everything he has
done after the Levene split has been pathetic IMO. Not an ounce of
originality in any of the post '82 lps. What do you mean by "his uncommercial
singing style"? The annoying "a" sound he adds to the end of every line?
I wouldn't say that it's uncommercial - it's just a very annoying vocal
mannerism.
>>
>>>I'd agree that the pistols had some really good lyrics, but 
>>>I think they were too much of a media product produced
>>>by and for Malcom McLaurin.  
>>
>>Sure he was a great manipulator, but he didn't write any of the lyrics. He just
>>knew what would happen when these four guys who had nothing going for them and
>>were not exactly model citizens were put in the public eye.
>
>Did he?  How do you know what he was up to?  I'd heard stories that
>Adam Ant paid him big bucks to create an image for him.  I doubt if
>Adam Ant would have paid McLaren dosh if he hadn't been responsible
>for the Sex Pistols image (meaning attitude, style, and influence on sound
>and lyrical content).  The same was done for Bow wow wow.

Your "stories" of Adam Ant coming to McLaren with wads of cash are ludicrous
considering that Adam Ant was nothing before McLaren got ahold of him.

McLaren's name was attached to the Pistols as a manager/swindler. No doubt 
he arranged the A&M and EMI rip offs, but as to the influence on sound and
lyrics - and attitude, I doubt that he had much to do with this (other than
encouraging it). Look at the Bill Grundy show. If Grundy hadn't made some
remarks to Siouxsie Sioux, there would have been no huge scandal about the
swearing on TV (which McLaren no doubt LOVED). Of course, you could take the
position that the papers, McLaren and the BBC all collaborated on this.
>>
>>The Pistols lyrics, on the other hand, were full of angst (most noteably "God
>>Save the Queen" (No Future), and "Anarchy in the UK" (Destroy). The British
>>system promised them nothing so theywrote lyrics about it and damned the
>>monarchy. The record companies were making shit music so they ripped them off
>>and slammed them in "EMI" among others. They pissed people off BIG TIME. This
>>is all cliche now, but not 16 years ago.
>>
>
>Did they?  I assert that North Americans have a warped idea about how
>pissed off people in Britian were about the Sex Pistols.  British society has
>a way of accepting rebels and making them part of the establishment.

Slashing one of these rebel's faces with razor-blades, and beating other
members up bears this out? Maybe McLaren arranged that as well...
Attacking the Monarchy and mocking the british status quo during the Jubilee
was not a popular thing to do and the Pistols were not accepted for doing so.
Accepted by the status quo that is...

>>I've never heard of the Ramones getting any publicity for their violent attacks
>>on the US government (circa 1977). Maybe this was because they were just a fun
>>band doing covers like "Surfun' Bird".
>>
>
>The Ramones didn't get publicity, because they weren't media hyped like the
>Pistols were.  If you listen to the Ramones lyrics, you will find a lot of
>songs with subtle sarcastic attacks on the establishment.  They aren't as
>gutteral as the Pistols, but I think they have more to say.

First of all, there was nothing to hype as far as the Ramones were concerned.
What possible BIG HEADLINES could the Ramones ever have garnered?
& The Ramones may have more to say (for you), but they have had 18 years to say
it. 

For me the Pistols were far more political - mostly just because of their
very existence. McLaren played a key role in practically forming the band.
But once the ball was rolling, he just played the swindler IMO. I'd be
interested in knowing *if* he drove a wedge between Glen Matlock and Johnny
Rotten. Lydon claims that Matlock influenced too much by 60's pop and so they
kicked him out and brought in Vicious - who had known Rotten long before
the Sex Pistols existed. Has anyone read Matlock's book?

mike
-- 
**************************************************************************
Bjork sounds so good, that if I were a singer trying to make a living today    
I'd shoot myself in desperation of ever equalling her  -  Barbara Ellen, NME
Newsgroups: alt.music.alternative