Jump to content

Help needed for university paper on Green Day


Katarina.

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone! Thought I'd post this in GD Chat since more people might read it here :P

I am writing a paper for my music class on punk identity, and I would appreciate it very much if you would want to help me by answering the following questions:

- What is (the) punk (identity) to you?

- Why are or aren't Green Day and specifically Dookie punk?

- Do you think it's fair that Green Day wasn't allowed to play at Gilman street for years until now?

If you're interested you can either PM me the answers or post them here, and you will of course be credited in the final paper :) Thanks!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. "Punk" is doing what you love, because you want to. It's about being open-minded, and not judging others based on anything (unless, of course, they are bigots - that is definitely not punk by any definition). It's about embracing bands who sing about all sorts of things, from girl problems to teenage alienation, masturbation to political discourse, drugs, food, (literal) shit, and everything else you can imagine - including nothing at all. It has nothing to do with what type of record label you're on - many of the original punk bands signed to major labels early on (the most notable being the Clash, but the Sex Pistols were, too [i want to say they were dropped, though - don't quote me on that], as were the Ramones [although I believe Sire was originally independent, then bought by a major - again, don't quote me]). The Clash faced a good deal of criticism (i.e. they "sold out") for their signing, but nobody seems to remember that. They're still considered punk, though - as are the Ramones, the Pistols, the Buzzcocks, Dead Kennedys, etc.

2. Green Day is definitely punk - they still play what is considered "punk" music (i.e. none of that prog rock stuff that Genesis plays, no hour-long guitar solos [a real thing in the '60s, and a reason for the start of punk rock], most of their songs are just guitars, bass, drums, maybe keyboards and/or sax, and they rarely run long [and "Jesus of Suburbia" and "Homecoming" are not the longest punk songs out there - hell, NOFX's "The Decline" isn't the longest!]). They've also gained the respect of a lot of their contemporaries and predecessors - John Lydon seems to be the odd one out (although he seems to despise pretty much all modern punk bands - he's brushed off Rancid and blink-182 pretty brutally), while Glen Matlock actually went to a Green Day show and enjoyed himself, apparently (a topic I started a while back discusses this thoroughly - I think one of the other Pistols has also expressed respect for GD). Jello Biafra openly expressed admiration for Green Day (I'll dig up the link if I can), and introduced them a couple weeks back at Gilman (and went to a FHT concert at Gilman years ago - there's footage on YouTube of him talking to Billie Joe). Joey and Johnny Ramone (and I think Marky) seem to like them (although since Marky's worked, either live or in-studio, with Rancid, the Offspring, Fall Out Boy, and other GD contemporaries, I'm not terribly surprised), the guys are friends with Rancid and NOFX (it seems - Fat Mike and Mike Dirnt have hung out in the past couple months and posted pics on Instagram, and GD participated in at least two Fat compilations - Short Songs for Short People and Rock Against Bush Vol. 2), the guys in the Offspring like GD (Dexter and Noodles recently spoke positively of GD and blink in a Twitter Q&A), etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Let's not forget their refusal to let Wal-mart censor 21st Century Breakdown (and the fact that only Uno!, Dos!, Tre!, and a 2012 version of American Idiot have clean versions [not counting singles] - plenty of other punk bands (including the Exploited, the Offspring, blink-182, Sum 41, and Reel Big Fish) have had "clean" albums, so this is nothing new.

As for Dookie being punk or not... it is. Singing about drugs, adolescent alienation, and girls? The Ramones, Buzzcocks, and plenty of other bands have done that (the Ramones are pretty unique amongst punk bands in that they have almost no profanity in their discography - Paramore is probably the closest non-Christian band that I can think of [aside from MxPx, who have covered "Longview" live], and Hayley had no problem using the word "shit" in a solo song [the Ramones only had the words "hell" and "damn," a song called "Censorshit" which contained zero swears, and a use of a homophobic slur in "Warthog"]).

3. I think it's perfectly fair - Gilman makes its own rules, and that makes it unique. Besides, they only banned the band - not the individuals. Pinhead Gunpowder, Foxboro Hot Tubs, the Network, the Frustrators, California - any Green Day side project/band featuring GD members not signed to a major can play at Gilman just fine. No idea if they'd be allowed to play unrestricted if they left Reprise - I know the Offspring, blink, and Bad Religion all left their majors, but I don't know what their status with Gilman is (or if blink-182 ever played at Gilman in the first place).

Good luck on your paper, and hope this is some help! I'll try to dig up some links.

http://bad.eserver.org/issues/1997/30/grad.html

Jello Biafra on big punk bands (specifically mentions GD and a Food Not Bombs benefit show)

Billie Joe and Jello talking at FHT concert

http://www.contactmusic.com/green-day/news/matlock-defends-green-day_14_02_2006

Matlock on GD

http://www.greendaycommunity.org/topic/93428-fellow-punks-on-green-day/

Topic I made a while back


Okay, it was Mick Jones (of the Clash) who spoke favorably of Green Day (got mixed up with Steve Jones).


http://www.punkmagazine.com/stuff/morestuff/joe_strummer.html

Joe Strummer: "I like to hear Green Day on the radio. It's a lot better than the other shit they play in England, let me tell you that."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Punk, to me, is about the freedom to do what you want to do, think what you want to think, enjoy what you want to without having to conform to any expectation, without being categorised as having to be a certain way.

I think Green Day and Dookie definitely are punk, if not always in their music then always in their attitude - signing to a major label and releasing Dookie were controversial things in the traditional scene that caused a stir for not following the expectations and instead simply being them doing what they wanted to do, which is exactly what punk is all about.

I think in the end it is fair, Gilman is there to help new bands and it's understandable for them to not allow established major label bands to play because of that. The hostility they were met with after signing to Reprise was obviously wrong, but overall I think only allowing small bands is fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hostility Green Day faced wasn't from "Gilman Street". It was from the community. From other bands. From their longtime friends and peers like Robert Eggplant and Sarah Kirsch. They knew they wouldn't be playing Gilman, I don't think that's where the real issue was

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Kat!

My framing of "punk" evokes a community more than anything else. Rather than considering it an ideology, a fashion style, or even a type of music, I think of it as the individuals that come together to cultivate belonging amongst themselves. Punk to me is singing alongside your heroes and newfound friends at a Captain We're Sinking show. It's stumbling into your favorite record store and realizing you're home, even when you're hundreds of miles away. It's the surge of tears you feel when your favorite band runs onstage and the chase of that feeling. So give me major label or indie, give me rich kids from LA or janitors from Minnesota, give me studded belts or shaven heads, give me the world's biggest band or one no one knows. Give me that sense of community through music, art, or organization, and I'll give you whatever "punk" might be.

Sure, Green Day are punk because they continue to engage in and support the community they've always been a part of. Naysayers will paint them as bloated, out-of-touch rockstars, when really they're a few good-natured, middle-aged dads with strong ties to their roots. As a Northern California native, I can assure you that none of our other homegrown superstars have given back as much as Green Day. We in the bay identify with the band because, well, they're us.

I feel like Gilman and its ethos, though recognized widely thanks to a certain handful of bands, are misunderstood. It's surreal to come onto a global community like GDC and see kids on the other side of the world arguing about who should or should not be playing within the hallowed bricks. As a result of the changing world around it, the Gilman of 2015 is not the same as the Gilman of 1986. The music industry, the political climate, even the street itself has undergone radical transformation since the infamous ground rules were laid down. Is it "fair" to apply these rules to Green Day in the 21st century? That's not for me to decide. I will point out, however, that as iconic as Gilman is, the bay is rife with independent venues with less stringent regulations that would welcome a band like Green Day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you could get some broader opinions if signed up for PunkTorrents.com and asked on that forum :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you could get some broader opinions if signed up for PunkTorrents.com and asked on that forum :P

Todd's right, most of us are probably going to be bias and call Green Day punk etc because we're all Green Day fans :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Green Day is more comparable to the Ramones than they are to their contemporaries. But I don't think it's their music that was a big deal. Tim Yohannon didn't like it, but I don't see how it was an issue because Sweet Baby and Crimpshrine had songs about girls that were just as poppy, if not more. From what I understand, the only issue was Green Day signing to a major label. Just wanted to clarify that. And Green Day's not gonna start playing at Gilman every week now. That was a one-time exception in order to raise money for the benefit. Green Day probably won't play there again unless they do another benefit for something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Punk is about an attitude/feeling and doing things your own way without worrying about what others think. It's not at all about fashion. To me if someone dresses in clothes that are considered "punk" it's a stereotype and the opposite of what punk is. Like kids with a mowhawk and colored hair now is a trend and not original at all. Same with tattoos, everyone is getting them so it's no longer an original thing it's "trendy" which isnt punk at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Punk is about an attitude/feeling and doing things your own way without worrying about what others think. It's not at all about fashion. To me if someone dresses in clothes that are considered "punk" it's a stereotype and the opposite of what punk is. Like kids with a mowhawk and colored hair now is a trend and not original at all. Same with tattoos, everyone is getting them so it's no longer an original thing it's "trendy" which isnt punk at all.

As Mike said, "anything can be a uniform, whether it's a suit and tie or a mohican".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Punk is about an attitude/feeling and doing things your own way without worrying about what others think. It's not at all about fashion. To me if someone dresses in clothes that are considered "punk" it's a stereotype and the opposite of what punk is. Like kids with a mowhawk and colored hair now is a trend and not original at all. Same with tattoos, everyone is getting them so it's no longer an original thing it's "trendy" which isnt punk at all.

Not sure if I'd agree with that. There are lots of parents that would disapprove of mohawks and colored hair- so cutting your hair in the bathroom while your parents are out is still a pretty punk thing to do :lol: and tattoos were never an original punk thing... They've been around forever.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't really add anything to 1 and 2 because BCap covered it perfectly. But, I would like to say something about #3. I think it is actually a circular question. If being punk is doing what you want and not giving a shit what others think, why would you create a rule that says you can't play there if you signed to a major label record deal? You are basically saying that you give a shit what record label the bands are on. Do punks care about rules? So, 25 years later, they finally decide to break the rule, which is a punk thing to do. But why did they break that rule? Did they break that rule because it was stupid to begin with and punks shouldn't care about rules, or did they break it because one of the biggest bands of the last quarter of a century wanted to play in their club? I don't think asking was it fair that they broke the rule but why did they have the rule to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't really add anything to 1 and 2 because BCap covered it perfectly. But, I would like to say something about #3. I think it is actually a circular question. If being punk is doing what you want and not giving a shit what others think, why would you create a rule that says you can't play there if you signed to a major label record deal? You are basically saying that you give a shit what record label the bands are on. Do punks care about rules? So, 25 years later, they finally decide to break the rule, which is a punk thing to do. But why did they break that rule? Did they break that rule because it was stupid to begin with and punks shouldn't care about rules, or did they break it because one of the biggest bands of the last quarter of a century wanted to play in their club? I don't think asking was it fair that they broke the rule but why did they have the rule to begin with.

I don't think it's so much that punks shouldn't have rules, as they should go by their own rules based on their own ethics. It's not so much "do what you want" as "do what you think is right". As a community they believed that providing a place for bands on independent labels to play in order to help support the local punk scene was right, so they made a rule against allowing major label bands taking up that space. Just as they made other rules such as no alcohol so that it could be all ages, and no bands with racist/sexist/homophobic lyrics because that went against their ethics. As a collective they played by their own rules based on their own punk ethics.

I think Green Day were allowed to play that show because they're a special case, pretty much. They're never going to be allowed to play there regularly, as the idea of the club is for non major label bands to have a place to play, but as they've continued to support the place over the years as well as supporting local independent label bands, remaining a part of the community and contributing to it, there was really no harm in letting them play a one off show for a good cause. Just seems like not being needlessly petty about things since bending a rule once for a good reason would do no harm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey everyone! Thought I'd post this in GD Chat since more people might read it here :P

I am writing a paper for my music class on punk identity, and I would appreciate it very much if you would want to help me by answering the following questions:

- What is (the) punk (identity) to you?

- Why are or aren't Green Day and specifically Dookie punk?

- Do you think it's fair that Green Day wasn't allowed to play at Gilman street for years until now?

If you're interested you can either PM me the answers or post them here, and you will of course be credited in the final paper :) Thanks!!

1 and mainly

2. Green Day always tried everything to get the best possibilities to be able to do what they love for the rest of their lives. Back in the Lookout-days they played their heart out in all the small venues and yeah in my opinion their music was punk rock and their lifestyle was punk as well. Signing a major label isn't really the definition of punk, but isn't punk also trying out things no one else does and everyone else hates? They didn't even care what other punks thought about them, so yeah I think that is punk.

As for Dookie: Definately. If you consider 39/Smooth and Kerplunk! punk I don't see why Dookie shouldn't be punk. Their style continued to be the same, just did they have a lot more possibiities now.

I know Green Day now say they don't care about whether their music is punk or not - the important thing is that it's good and if you will you can find the punk attitude in there again, but who actually cares? I love their music no matter what genre it actually is and I love the band no matter whether they're punks or not. You can find punk in pretty much everything and also everyone if you search for it, but you'll also find arguments against that as well in the same thing.

That's what I also think about punk in general. Punk to me also means freedom. Do what you want. Think what you want. Don't care about what you don't want. Try to reach your goals your way and don't care about what others think. Be yourself.

3. I think it is. Of course for Green Day The Gilman was their home, but it are also the rules - and always have been - that no band from a major label could play there. In my opinion that's also more than okay, because The Gilman was and is there for simply everyone who wants to hang out there and for every punk band that wants to play there. It's all about giving everyone the chance to have a great night or a great gig. If they had allowed bands like Green Day to regularly play there who knows what chance less known bands would have now...probably we'd have a club that's only really filled with people if a famous band plays in there now. Moreover less known bands would probably only get the chance to play as openers or the non-profit rule wouldn't work anymore - if you take it to extremes, of course. Actually, I think it's perfect the way it is now. Green Day still get their chance to play in their old home again from time to time, due to its rarity it's more special and unknown bands get their chance as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...