Customer Reviews

Punk: The Whole Story

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

An unfortunately myopic look at punk rock, making sure we hear the same old mantras and canards: "The Sex Pistols invented punk...well, I mean, after The New York Dolls did...er, that is, after The Stooges did... uhh, MC5... uh, dang those New York guys were arty! And the British were so working class!" And the wind-up focus on Green Day is just disappointing, as they quickly departed the punk camp and evolved into a Modern Rock radio band, nothing more.

But this is the old dogma; the genesis of punk is understood to be far more complex than this simplified tale, by anyone who's done more than dipped their toe into the idiom. The preoccupations with punk as a youth movement or a fashion subculture or a political stance have all been discredited one way or another. That thinking was the birthplace of goonery of all types -- punk's right to swing it's nihilistic fist ends abruptly at the tips of our complicit noses. What remains when the bones are boiled isn't nearly as romantic or wish-you-were-there, but it has the advantage of letting the actual music triumph over the admittedly colorful personalities that make for better photo spreads and journalistic pieces to be compiled into coffee table books. Even "Punk" (the book) can admit that Sid Vicious is a punk rock icon for all sorts of non-musical reasons, and certainly not due to his contributions on wax.

Certainly, rebellion against extant aesthetics is a major ingredient...but this rebellion did not suddenly appear in 1971, it's been with us a long time. It's really only the method of delivery that changed. Similar rebellious movements have occurred in classical music, jazz, art, social movements, etc., only to be absorbed into academic revisionism - and it'll happen to punk rock too. Punk desperately doesn't want to become Classic Rock. But this codex is just the sort of think that romanticizes the generic looks and sounds of punk without transmitting any of the visceral or artistic push behind the spectacle.

There is a lot of perfectly nice, first-person source material here, though those sources are occasionally dubious. I read "Punk" cover-to-cover, with a salt shaker nearby. Punk rock's Us-vs.-them ethos translates into an Us-vs.-us stance: many of the musicians interviewed spend a great deal of time contradicting eachother - everyone wants to be the one who initiated the most significant events of punk legend. McLaren even gives himself credit for creating "the infrastructure for an alternative society" in the afterword!

More importantly...

How can you take a book on punk that claims to be "the whole story" seriously when it makes no mention at all of The Dicks? Bikini Kill? The Electric Eels? The Screamers? Scratch Acid? Mission Of Burma?? Crass? The Crucif**ks? These are not obscure bands, they are glaring omissions. The American South and West Coast are treated as virtually nonexistant. Hardcore is hinted at, but otherwise fairly absent. The years from 1982-1996 are largely skipped. If you are interested in American bands that aren't Patti Smith, The New York Dolls, Television, Black Flag, Blondie, or The Ramones, you won't find much information in this book!

The British bands that are highlighted include The Buzzcocks, Generation X, The Damned, The Stranglers, The Clash, and Siouxsie & The Banshees. The whole thing is strung together with the story arc of the Sex Pistols, beginning with their nascent flounderings and ending soon after Sid's death. The conceit that the Pistols were the apotheosis of punk is persisted throughout "Punk: The Whole Story." The fact that The Boomtown Rats and Wreckless Eric receive more than the single-sentence treatment afforded by some of the bands mentioned in the next paragraph really seals the verdict on this book: it is light.

Certainly, since it was culled primarily from MOJO, the Anglocentric bias and myth-making are inevitable, but fleeting mentions (often one solitary album review or name-drop) of the Germs, Dead Kennedys, The Minutemen, Husker Du, Pere Ubu, Minor Threat, and Wire do nothing to support the book's pose of being definitive.

Forget these bands, listen to bands from your own time. If you were there, you don't need this book. If you weren't, this will just dilute the education you can give yourself by going to some basement shows or a dingy owner-operated record shop. If you're obsessed with these personalities, save your money and buy a guitar.

This is a terrific book.

The only unfortunate aspect is the "offering" by Nick Kent. Mr. Kent, I was there and you were not even a blip on the radar screen. Nick Kent seems to have the same sort of difficulty with the truth that Malcolm McClaren has always had. So in that, his self-aggrandizing claim of being on the scene before there was one is at the very least, documentation of how he considered himself way more important than he actually was to the whole thing. There's a bit too much Blondie as well. She just wasn't what we thought was punk at that time.

The whole movement was thanks to the Sex Pistols and there is plenty of focus on the group and their brief career. The book gives time to their come-back a few years ago which is also very interesting and relevant.

All in all, a good book. Just don't be fooled by Kent.

Great book, easy read, and filled with lots of cool stories. I like the way it was broken into sections about each different band. Good read for someone who needs an "intro" to the seeds of punk rock

my my the hole n the story is better i think
don't get me wrong this is a terrific book,i truely did enjoy it but 'the whole story?
not even close not a single mention of poison girls dayglo abortions not a single line or mention of CRASS what is this guy thinking
no angry samoans
blondie have a proper place but if i were 2 say where u won't print this
david cassidy was a punk but he has no place n this book either
to me blondie and cassidy r closer than her n doa who by the way aren't mentioned much either
nick kent? really who cares ,i sure don't
it is a great book but not the WHOLE story
i was there
so was my great friend and band mate X-LAX
nobody asked us anything
there was so much going on u can't include every attitude every band every individual person
but don't call it the whole story and fill n holes with nick kent and blondie
4 what's here though it is a great book it just should have been vol.1
right x

"Great Punk Book "
Id buy it again , I just might !
If Your offended by Nudes ?
Get out the Sharpies !!!
In that GRREAT Punk Tradition - Make Your Mark !!!
But Just a few are necassary.
The fewer words the better. Right?
"Long Live Punk !!!"
"Long Live Punk !!!"
"Long Live -- Hay were is -----------.

Great book... about a by gone era...oi oi Lots of rare photos of many punk people and clients at popular punk clubs in the village and brooklyn.

PUNK: THE WHOLE STORY celebrates some thirty years of a movement which embraced musical and social anarchy and produced not just revolutionary music, but outrageous street fashion. It was born in 1976 and Punk Magazine embraced the music, movement and personalities: PUNK details the years leading up to punk's beginning and offers a color photo-laden survey of the genre essential for any student of contemporary music.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

Very nice book, lots of pictures that I have not seen before, the collection of biographies were also good, although short. This makes a great "coffee table book"

It's a very intersting book.
Rich of wonderfull photo, offer a very completed review of Punk scene.