whither 'punk'?

[dwdudic (luther)]

On Sun, 1 Feb 1998 01:00:07 -0800 (PST), you wrote:

>
>Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 21:24:10 -0500 (EST)
>From: IHCOYC XPICTOC <gustavus>
>Subject: Nostalgia (was: wither the Ramones?) [NPC]
>
>On Fri, 30 Jan 1998, BlackMonk (Tom,as always) wrote:
>
>> If you want to get into it, Bullshit is never killed. It always returns as
>> nostalgia in a decade or so.
>
>Actually, it seems that the nostalgia cycle is running ever shorter and
>shorter.  I see K-Tel type promotions for music celebrating the beginnings
>of MTV and other features of the mid-1980's.  
>
>If current trends continue, by 2065 the nostalgia cycle will have
>overtaken the present, and we will then have to become nostalgic for the
>future.

	Didn't Frank Zappa once say that at our present rate, we would
at some point start to get nostalgic for last week? ;-)

	Ok, here's a thought for ya'll...Is it actually better that
'punk' is no longer (according to the Billboard charts) a commercially
viable musical form?  I mean for creativiy's sake...
	you know, that quote from Patti on the History of Rock and
Roll along the lines of "small pockets where everything sparkles, and
people create for no reason except that they want to" (as opposed to
the profit margin, which every so-called 'punk' band had their eyes on
post-'Nevermind' (which IS  a good record, given...)

	-luther

	Oh, if it appears I have a vendetta against 'punk', I do
against the narrow definition...
	My old band sounded like television (what a suprise, huh?),
but we were turned down form clubs because we weren't 'punk' enough!
	Then these clubs quit booking live music, because there were
not enough people going to shows to pay the bills!!!