Saturday Morning Jukebox: Punk Privilege
This past week, for some reason, I’ve been re-visiting the music of the 90s punk scene. I guess it’s a balm for the soul when living in a cubicle farm. Punk has always had a socio-political aspect to it, and third wave punk was no different, offering up anthems against the plastic corporate world North America had on offer.
NOFX penned one such anthem, Don’t Call Me White:
It was never one of my favourite NOFX songs (I preferred when they were singing about sexuality (NSFW) or covering Don MacLean), so I never paid it too much attention. It wasn’t a bad way to spend two and a half minutes.
But despite having a worthwhile underlying sentiment (rejecting an unthinking artificial lifestyle), the actual messaging in the song is rather problematic. The first verse has a hint of a you-know-who-the-real-racists-are-? argument:
The connotations wearing my nerves thin
Could it be semantics generating the mess we’re in?
I understand that language breeds stereotype
But what’s the explanation for the malice, for the spite?
It goes on to yell out, essentially, #NotAllWhites:
Does this mean I have to take such shit
For being fairskinned? No!
I ain’t a part of no conspiracy,
I’m just you’re average Joe.
And it finishes with a flurry of misunderstanding systemic racism:
So go ahead and label me
An asshole cause I can
Accept responsibility, for what I’ve done
But not for who I am
Of course, ‘twould be foolish to seek philosophical purity from Fat Mike. I’m not really going to rag on a 20-year-old punk song for a lack of depth in political thinking, but the era really did offer some very good political critiques:
This wasn’t Ten Foot Pole’s* only politically-minded song, but it does demonstrate an issue with much of 90s punk’s socio-economic rage. The scene was dominated by middle-class, suburban white males. This wasn’t Grand Master Flash’s message, the rage was based more in ennui than oppression. It doesn’t negate the complaints, but it does separate these bands from 70s-era punk.
But just because you can’t sing and scream about true oppression, doesn’t mean you can’t make valid criticisms of the disconnected nature of North American society. Offspring** certainly did:
However, if you want to go full-on angry left wing politics–something that would fit in nicely with Ethan, Shawn and Elias–there’s Propagandhi (NSFW).
*For Conor, Mike S. and Burt: Ten Foot Pole was fronted by former ChiSox/Dodgers/Cardinals/Indians relief man Scott Radinsky.
**Before they became an insipid pop band that made the likes of Lit and Oleander look like vanguards of artistic creativity.
Punk is usually a reaction. (Not always (#notallpunk) but usually.)Report
Yes. It is incredibly reactionary, and I’d say that’s too its credit.Report
I would say that expressionism was also an entirely reactionary movement, though I fail to see the relevance of pro-activity and first causes here.
When it comes right down to it, Jimmy Page would probably have been playing a banjo if not for Segovia. Mandolin perhaps.
But I don’t see a lot of Segovia influence in Page’s playing. Not even the overdubs.Report
a flurry of misunderstanding systemic ________
I see an assertion of the person in the lyrics cited, which flies in the face of all systemic consideration.
The appearance of incongruency seems fairly predictable while reading from the perspective of the system.
Bursting forth from the individual, this is pure self-affirmation.
And one which appeals to me far more than Descartes, no less.Report
In the early 90s, I lived in the Positive Force house outside Washington DC and helped put on a ton of punk benefit shows that all seem to coalesce in my mind as one big Fugazi/Bikini Kill show. I guess I’ve been rethinking that era as well, especially as it seems to have recently passed into documentary history:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0EU1JDV9zAReport
@rufus-f I don’t know quite how to express this, but I’m always struck with a sense of wonder and weirdness when music critique is of literary qualities (lyrics). I grow more and more to believe there are two very different ways of hearing/thinking of music — one verbal, and so hung on the words, the other musical, where words are just another instrument in the orchestration.
I’m trying to find a better way to express that; since I’ve been considering it for some time.
But in reviewing the punk scene of the ’80’s and ’90’s, I’d much turn to the raw sound, as counterpoint to the highly-produced disco that took over the pop markets, too.
(And Jonathan, please forgive the digression of this comment; I loved your post, but it did lead me to ponder, once again, the differences between lyrical hearing and musical hearing.)Report
I tend to think of it as incredibly misguided, on most occasions, when the lyrics totally dominate all other considerations.
In fact, “lyrically interesting” is a thing I would say about a band whose music sucks.
Example: Marilyn Manson is “lyrically interesting,” for the most part. Powerman 5000 (or how ever many thousand it is by now) has a lot better music, and more consistently, though the lyrics aren’t of as high of quality.
Similarly, Rush has better lyrics than Dream Theater, but then Rush has Geddy Lee singing.Report
Ya know, I tend to listen more to the music too because I have a huge appetite for anything in the “rock’n’roll” vein, which runs through Son House, the Troggs, the Kinks, the Sonics, and a bunch of other stuff that, to me, is “punk”. I care about the lyrics to the extent that I want to scream them out and not be embarrassed at how dumb they are. But the music has to be there first. I will admit that this music is not hugely diverse musically- you hear the same riffs over and over. So maybe people start focusing on the lyrics for that reason.
I should also disclose that I sing in a punk band with songs like “Take Some Pills and Drive Around” and “She Wants to Get Laid” so I get the appeal of music over lyrical brilliance!Report
I think I get it. Lyrics are an embellishment?
That’s the way I call it. Granted, some lyrics are really cool.
But for the most part, I don’t care if it’s just screaming:
It burns when I piss
. . . which is actually some pretty cool lyrics, come to think of it.
I want credit if you use it. And a demo.
I’ll take care of the beer.Report
When I think of songs, I probably indeed put a lot more emphasis on lyrics than music. But I’m sure the music influences me more than I realize.Report
I always saw Punk has a kind of genre which could be really left-wing or really right-wing.
Joey Ramone was basically your New York Jewish liberal. I’ve seen footage of him campaigning for Jerry Brown in 1992. This is when Jerry Brown still had a reputation for being a liberal’s liberal and was still being tailed by the Moonbeam nickname.
Johnny Ramone was very right-wing. Very conservative and would talk about how punk rock was really a conservative genre. He also liked to taunt Joey Ramone with anti-Semitic jokes from what I’ve heard.
The same seemingly goes for Punk. Some of the biggest punks were also the most conservative people politically in high school. I guess this is because punk appeals to an outsider ethos and there is nothing very outsider about being a social democracy-welfare state-collectivist liberal. And since I grew up in a town that was very Democratic leaning, being a rebel meant being conservative. Maybe in a more conservative area, the punks would be into socialism, communism, anti-Capitalism?
It is probably a big mistake to associate any art form with liberalism or conservatism. Jack Keourac used to cheer for Joe McCarthy according to Allen Ginsburg and was pals with William Buckley. Gary Snyder was a Beat but advocated for hard work and simple living as much as Ginsburg advocated for freedom and exploration via drug use.
Or you can just quote Bad Religion who wisely noted “No Bad Religion song can make your life complete.”Report