Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Subject: Punks vs Hippies
Let's take a look at ourselves and maybe see how our present day culture evolved. Believe there was a battle between sub-cultures, the hippies and the punks.
The following suggestions may help generate some thoughts on the subject (also see same subject in the 80s for good responses):
1. What were/are the hippies?
2. What were/are punk rockers?
3. Why did they clash?
4. What was disco and how did it play into the battle?
5. Why did these well defined sub-cultures seem to fizzle in the 80s?
Please give any ideas, discussion, information, etc. Should be fun and informative!
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
1. Hippies are people who believe in free love, and self expression (losers that don't work, and are on welfare).
2. I don't know haw to discribe punk rockers very well, but they are the ones with spiked hair and stuff (maybe someone else can answer this question for you?).
3. don't know
4. don't know
5. don't know
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
From what I understand, punk emerged in the mid-to-late 70s as a reaction to a perceived "sell out" by the hippie generation. Punks tended to be somewhat younger, and were forging their own style as against the slightly older hippie trip. I believe the Clash refer to "phony Beatlemania" in one of their early songs, for example.
The musical style and sound of punk was in many ways itself a reaction to the often very long and musically intricate works of groups like the Grateful Dead, Yes, Peter Gabriel-era Genesis, Pink Floyd, and so on. Which reminds me of another example of the punks' disdain for late 60s/early 70s era music...Johnny Rotten of the Sex Pistols had a Pink Floyd t-shirt with "I HATE" written above the band name. Punk was loud, fast, relatively short songs using basic chords as opposed to, say, the Dead jamming on "Dark Star" for 40 minutes.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Hippies were against the establishment or the status quo. Much like the punks, they were trying to established their own identity unlike the older generation. The difference may just be in the perception. When I think of hippies, I think of peace-loving, do-your-own-thing, type thing. But, when I think of punk rockers, I think of youngests who want to harrass other people, pins and needles sticking out of cheeks, etc.
Cat
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
These are great responses and informative. My idea, the punks were mostly poor kids from blue collar families. They liked the "military chic" style and probably ended up on the front lines in our wars. They looked at the hippies as the "haves," and themselves as the "have nots."
Punk was given a negative look, especially by Hollywood, in the 70s and early 80s. The styles, music could easily be perceived as violent, hence punk looking characters were made the villains on tv, in movies, etc. There was an episode of Quincy in which the rapists, murders, drugees, you name it looked likes punks. The movement fizzled but rebounded as the New Wave when the punk look became commercialized.
The movie "Road Warrior" provides a period look at the 2 sub cultures, i.e. the hippies had the gas and wore robes and sandals; the punks had nothing, wore spikes, and wanted the gas. Max was neutral, but he joined the hippies after the punks killed his dog. I think there were punks throughout history like James Dean, maybe Beetoven, thanks again!
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Quoting:
I think there were punks throughout history like...maybe Beetoven...
End Quote
(referring to Mozart):
"He was the first punk ever to set foot on the Earth"
- Rock Me Amadeus, Falco, 1985.
Punk was, for me, originally an attitude rather than a style of clothes or hair. If you look at old footage of early Sex Pistols gigs you'll see most of the crowd wearing what look like ripped up school uniforms rather than studded leather trousers/jackets and Mohican hairdos (I think Americans called this style "Mohawk").
The attitude was very energetic but somewhat nihilistic and iconoclastic ("Destroy!" - Johnny Rotten, 1976). Many say that the attitude was borne of frustration with the music scene of the mid/late 1970s, i.e. prog rock that had not really evolved since the 1960s. I think that's a lazy analysis, given that glam rock and a lot of 1970s pop had a lot of energy inherited from the 1950s and early 1960s (e.g. Rock'n'Roll Part II - Gary Glitter, Blockbuster, Teenage Rampage - The Sweet, pretty much anything by Slade).
I believe that attitude is why people make statements like "Mozart was a punk".
So really the punk ethos, at least in the UK, evolved from a number of influences, social & political unrest (unemployment & trade union conflict), fashion & style, music. As CatwomanofV said, it was a lot to do with young people finding something to latch onto that their parents didn't like or accept. That's been a feature of youth culture in the West since the 1950s.
And it spawned some great bands too, my personal favourite being The Clash who I love to this day. I don't spend much time listening to my old Slaughter And The Dogs albums though. They were rubbish. ;)
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Quoting:
1. Hippies are people who believe in free love, and self expression (losers that don't work, and are on welfare).
2. I don't know haw to discribe punk rockers very well, but they are the ones with spiked hair and stuff (maybe someone else can answer this question for you?).
3. don't know
4. don't know
5. don't know
Uh, gee, I don't really know anything about any of this, and i can't spell worth a damn, but I do know how to post to a website, so you ought to pay attention to me. Jeepers, what a moron.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Quoting:
1. Hippies are people who believe in free love, and self expression (losers that don't work, and are on welfare).
2. I don't know haw to discribe punk rockers very well, but they are the ones with spiked hair and stuff (maybe someone else can answer this question for you?).
3. don't know
4. don't know
5. don't know
Uh, gee, I don't really know anything about any of this, and i can't spell worth a damn, but I do know how to post to a website, so you ought to pay attention to me. Jeepers, what a moron.
End Quote
I'm no moron, just because I don't know crap that you do.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Hippies are NOT losers who do not work. I know a lot of 60s kids who might be considered Hippies and they are working and respected people.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Quoting:
Hippies are NOT losers who do not work. I know a lot of 60s kids who might be considered Hippies and they are working and respected people.
End Quote
Well Ms. DaisyJane you have not visited my hometown. About 40% of the population are hippies. And 90% of them do not work.
I didn't mean to offend you by stating this.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Fred, your're no moron because you don't know. This info won't get you enough to buy a cup of coffee anyway, but its entertaining, and for me, I learn a little, that's it, it entertains me, makes me feel good, so write what you know or don't know!
Quoting:
I'm no moron, just because I don't know crap that you do.
End Quote
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Quoting:
Fred, your're no moron because you don't know. This info won't get you enough to buy a cup of coffee anyway, but its entertaining, and for me, I learn a little, that's it, it entertains me, makes me feel good, so write what you know or don't know!
End Quote
I was talking to RolandRock, because he called me a moron.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
punk were kids who rejected the norm. whatever the norm was, and was hard and had a thing for pins and spikey hair
hippie was about love and freedom and nudity lol also stepping outside the norm
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
The punks in Britain were frustrated by the politics of the day. It was difficult to get a job and morale was low. The music was a 'revolt' against it.
The Hippies were idealistic and I don't think it suited the punks because they knew that they were living in an idealistic world.
The last paragraph is a little speculative. :)
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Hippies rock!
Living the Unconventional Lifestyle
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Hippies rejected the establishment and what was considered normal. They believed is peace & love. I don't know about punks though. I used to laugh at the way the punks wore their hair.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
> Hippies rejected the establishment and what was considered normal. They believed is
> peace & love. I don't know about punks though.
Punks rejected the establishment and what was considered normal. The more political aspects of punk rock really wasn't all that different from the political aspects of hippiedom.
> Why did these well defined sub-cultures seem to fizzle in the 80s?
Tough question, and perhaps because I don't ~quite~ agree with it's phrasing. I wouldn't say the sub-cultures were well-defined. Speaking from the perspective of an 80's punk (foot-long spiked green hair, combat boots, studded leather jacket, bondage pants, the whole works), there were different "varieties" of punks even within such a small group. We were loosely joined by music, loosely joined by a sense of getting along (ie, friendship). But that wasnt always the case.
The differences, from my experience, became pronounced in the later 80s (87-88) as the "loose" joining of music separated further and further into different genres (speed metal influences becoming more and more prevalent). The fracturing leads to different music, different audiences, different viewpoints, different goals. It got to the point that I'd get hassled for looking like a punk rocker at a punk show.
The music I was interested in mostly came out of the UK. Very few bands in the US was generating the kinds of sounds I liked. UK hardcore punk rock (essentially a 2nd wave of punk) appeared to be going pretty strong through the 80s, not fizzling at all, and was the fuel for myself and my closest friends. It was a different scene than the home-grown one in New England, and the rest of the US.
I dropped out of the scene beginning around '89. These days, I *occassionally* see real (what I'd call real... essentially English style) punk rockers, so it appears to be around still. However, I don't know what any good hardcore punk rock bands are any more. There are so-called punk bands out on the radio (Green Day, Rancid, etc) which I'm biased into not even considering them punk rock at all, no matter what they look like, simply because their style is too "lite"....
> What were/are punk rockers?
For me, it's a look, it's a music. And, it's a philosophy. Granted, the hardcore political philosophy doesn't have to be there, but dis-satisfaction with status-quo, dis-satisfaction with cog-in-a-capitalist-machine is usually a big part. The dis-satisfaction should hopefully be channelled productively, rather than how I usually viewed the American Hardcore scene of rich suburban white kid boredom: let's drink beer, skate, and have a barbeque.
Defining the music (because the music makes the punk rocker) is very, very difficult because there is a fine line between punk and metal... but it's a world of difference. The music is hard, fast, but uses a different sounding distortion than metal. Different vocal style than metal, different drum rhythms than metal. Different melodies than metal. Generally, it's a little more straightforward, and closer to old rock-n-roll than metal is. More box type patterns for the construction of the bass lines. Less half-steps, very little of that metal style muted "ch-ch-ch-ch-chunnn"; no million-notes-a-second solos. Simple, straight-ahead power.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
The hippies were anti establishment and so were the punks each in their own way, as far as music was concerned hippies seemed to respect and admire talent were as the punks seemed to want nothing to do with it.
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
> hippies seemed to respect and admire talent were as the punks seemed to want nothing to do with it.
Well, I think a punk attitude is better characterized as: if talent leads to boring, irrelevant music, then what good is it? :)
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Quoting:
Well Ms. DaisyJane you have not visited my hometown. About 40% of the population are hippies. And 90% of them do not work.
I didn't mean to offend you by stating this.
End Quote
I see that you're a fellow Canadian. Where's your hometown?
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Well, I think a punk attitude is better characterized as: if talent leads to boring, irrelevant music, then what good is it? :)
Punk: lack of talent leads to boring, irrelevant music, too.
When I was into it in the '80s, punks spent most of their engergy trying to figure out who was not "punk" and excluding them. I was not "punk" even when I had an orange mohawk because I liked The Cure and The Smiths, not "hardcore." Favorite phrase among punks: "No poseurs!" The problem was it was ALL pose. There was not a genuine thing about it. OK, Johnny Rotten giving the finger, that was genuine, everything that followed was derivative.
There were some "punks" in my town, but no solidarity. The jocks, preps, and metalheads hated us but that was the only thing we had in common.
When an angry group rejects the establishment, the social code they establish is far more intolerant, hostile, and conformist than the one they supplant.
You had to act vulgar and tough, and listen to music that was hard and fast. If you didn't, you were a "poseur."
Henry Rollins is a fascist. His current audience of dumb college age jocks is in keeping with his true ethos.
MaxwellSmart
Subject: Re: Punks vs Hippies
Very well said and enlightening. Always interpreted the Missing Person song, "What are words for" as one of the anthems shedding light on the attitude of the period. The singer said , "I think I'll dye my hair green," for the reason that no one listens to anyone anymore. She was willing to sacrifice her pretty blond hair in an attempt to shock some sense into people. Wow, an orange mohawk, you must have raised an eyebrow or two!!!
Quoting:
Well, I think a punk attitude is better characterized as: if talent leads to boring, irrelevant music, then what good is it? :)
Punk: lack of talent leads to boring, irrelevant music, too.
When I was into it in the '80s, punks spent most of their engergy trying to figure out who was not "punk" and excluding them. I was not "punk" even when I had an orange mohawk because I liked The Cure and The Smiths, not "hardcore." Favorite phrase among punks: "No poseurs!" The problem was it was ALL pose. There was not a genuine thing about it. OK, Johnny Rotten giving the finger, that was genuine, everything that followed was derivative.
There were some "punks" in my town, but no solidarity. The jocks, preps, and metalheads hated us but that was the only thing we had in common.
When an angry group rejects the establishment, the social code they establish is far more intolerant, hostile, and conformist than the one they supplant.
You had to act vulgar and tough, and listen to music that was hard and fast. If you didn't, you were a "poseur."
Henry Rollins is a fascist. His current audience of dumb college age jocks is in keeping with his true ethos.
MaxwellSmart
End Quote