A PUNK MANIFESTO
by Greg Graffin
Bad Times, 12/98
I have never owned a record label, nor directed a successful
merchandise company, so I don't pretend to be an expert on marketing. I have
evolved through my craft as a songwriter, but others have labeled it and
marketed it and made it neat for consumption.
Although I have made money from Punk, it is a modest amount when one
considers the bounty that has been bestowed on the companies that promote
Punk as some sort of a product to be ingested. It has always been my
way to de-value the fashionable, light-hearted, impulsive traits that
people associate with Punk, because Punk is more than that, so much more
that those elements become trivial in the light of human experience that
all punkers share.
Since it has been a part of me for over half of my life, I think the
time has come to attempt a definition, and in the process defend, this
persistent social phenomenon known as Punk. It is astounding that
something with so much emotional and trans- cultural depth has gone without
definition for so long, for the roots of Punk run deeper, and go back in
history farther than imagined.
Even in the last two decades, it is difficult to find any analysis of
the influential effect that Punk Rock had on Pop Music and youth
culture. And rarer still are essays detailing the emotional and intellectual
undercurrents that drive the more overt fashion statements that most
people attribute to Punk.
These are some of the wants that compelled me to write this. If my
attempt offends the purists, collapses the secrecy of a closed society,
promotes confidence in skeptical inquiry, provokes deeper thought, and
decodes irony, then I have done my job and those who feel slighted might
recognize the triviality of their position. For I have nothing to
promote but my observations on a sub-culture that has grown to global
proportions, and through visiting much of it, I have found threads of common
thought everywhere.
Common thought processes are what determine the ideology that binds
people together into a community. There is desire among Punks to be a
community, but there needs to be some shape imparted on the foundations of
the punk ideology, and where it comes from. The current Punk stereotype
is scarred by mass-marketing and an unfortunate emphasis on style over
substance.
But these ills don't destroy the Punk sentiment, they merely confound
the education of the new generations of people who know they are punk,
but don't know what it means. It is a long road to understand what it
means. This essay is part of the process.
PUNKS ARE NOT BEASTS
Punk is a reflection of what it means to be human. What separates us
from other animals? Our ability to recognize ourselves and express our
own genetic uniqueness. Ironically, the commonly held view, among the
marketeers and publicity engines, stresses the "animalistic", "primitive"
nature of punks and their music.
They assume that violence is a key ingredient in punk music, and this
assumption is easily perpetuated because it is easy to market violence
and news items about violence always get column space. This focus on
violence misses a key element of what Punk is all about:
PUNK IS: the personal expression of uniqueness that comes from the
experiences of growing up in touch with our human ability to reason and ask
questions.
Violence is neither common in, nor unique to punk. When it does
manifest itself it is due to things unrelated to the punk ideal. Consider for
example the common story of a fight at a high school between a punk and
a jock football player. The football player and his cohort do not
accept or value the punk as a real person. Rather, they use him as a vitriol
receptacle, daily taunting, provoking, and embarrassing him, which of
course is no more than a reflection of their own insecurities.
One day, the punk has had enough and he clobbers the football captain
in the hallway. The teachers of course expell the punk and cite his poor
hairstyle and shabby clothing as evidence that he is a violent,
uncontrollable no-good. The community newspaper reads "Hallway Beating
Re-affirms that Violence is a Way of Life Among Punk Rockers".
Spontaneous anger at not being accepted as a real person is not unique
to punkers. This reaction is due to being human, and anybody would
react in anger regardless of their sub- cultural, or social affiliation if
they felt de- valued and useless. Sadly, there are plenty of examples
of violence among punks. There are glaring examples of misguided people
who call themselves punks too. But anger and violence are not punk
traits, in fact, they have no place in the punk ideal. Anger and violence
are not the glue that holds the punk community together.
IN UNIQUENESS IS THE PRESERVATION OF MANKIND
Nature bestowed on us the genetic backbone of what punk is all about.
There are roughly 80,000 genes in the human genome, and there are
roughly 6 billion people carrying that genetic compliment. The chances of two
people carrying the same genome are so small as to be almost beyond
comprehension (the odds are essentially ? 80,000 times the number of
possible people you can meet and mate with in a lifetime! A practical
impossibility)
The genes we carry play a major role in determining our behavior and
outlook on life. That is why we have the gift of uniqueness, because no
one else has the same set of genes controlling their view of the world.
Of course cultural factors play the other major role, and these can
have a more homogenizing effect on behavior and world-view.
For example, an entire working-class town might have 15,000 residents
who are raised with the same ideals, work at the same factories, go to
the same schools, shop at the same stores, and like the same sports
teams. As their children develop, there is a constant interaction of
opposite forces between the social imprinting their culture imparts and the
genetic expression of uniqueness.
Those who lose touch with their nature become society's robots, whereas
those who denounce their social development become vagrant animals.
Punk stands for a desire to walk the line in between these two extremes
with masterful precision. Punks want to express their own unique nature,
while at the same time want to embrace the communal aspects of their
cookie-cutter upbringing.
The social connection they have is based on a desire to understand each
other's unique view of the world. Punk "scenes" are social places where
those views are accepted, sometimes adopted, sometimes discarded, but
always tolerated and respected.
PUNK IS: a movement that serves to refute social attitudes that have
been perpetuated through willful ignorance of human nature.
Because it depends on tolerance and shuns denial, Punk is open to all
humans. There is an elegant parallel between Punk's dependence on unique
views and behaviors and our own natural genetic predisposition toward
uniqueness.
cont. in next message...
by Greg Graffin
Bad Times, 12/98
I have never owned a record label, nor directed a successful
merchandise company, so I don't pretend to be an expert on marketing. I have
evolved through my craft as a songwriter, but others have labeled it and
marketed it and made it neat for consumption.
Although I have made money from Punk, it is a modest amount when one
considers the bounty that has been bestowed on the companies that promote
Punk as some sort of a product to be ingested. It has always been my
way to de-value the fashionable, light-hearted, impulsive traits that
people associate with Punk, because Punk is more than that, so much more
that those elements become trivial in the light of human experience that
all punkers share.
Since it has been a part of me for over half of my life, I think the
time has come to attempt a definition, and in the process defend, this
persistent social phenomenon known as Punk. It is astounding that
something with so much emotional and trans- cultural depth has gone without
definition for so long, for the roots of Punk run deeper, and go back in
history farther than imagined.
Even in the last two decades, it is difficult to find any analysis of
the influential effect that Punk Rock had on Pop Music and youth
culture. And rarer still are essays detailing the emotional and intellectual
undercurrents that drive the more overt fashion statements that most
people attribute to Punk.
These are some of the wants that compelled me to write this. If my
attempt offends the purists, collapses the secrecy of a closed society,
promotes confidence in skeptical inquiry, provokes deeper thought, and
decodes irony, then I have done my job and those who feel slighted might
recognize the triviality of their position. For I have nothing to
promote but my observations on a sub-culture that has grown to global
proportions, and through visiting much of it, I have found threads of common
thought everywhere.
Common thought processes are what determine the ideology that binds
people together into a community. There is desire among Punks to be a
community, but there needs to be some shape imparted on the foundations of
the punk ideology, and where it comes from. The current Punk stereotype
is scarred by mass-marketing and an unfortunate emphasis on style over
substance.
But these ills don't destroy the Punk sentiment, they merely confound
the education of the new generations of people who know they are punk,
but don't know what it means. It is a long road to understand what it
means. This essay is part of the process.
PUNKS ARE NOT BEASTS
Punk is a reflection of what it means to be human. What separates us
from other animals? Our ability to recognize ourselves and express our
own genetic uniqueness. Ironically, the commonly held view, among the
marketeers and publicity engines, stresses the "animalistic", "primitive"
nature of punks and their music.
They assume that violence is a key ingredient in punk music, and this
assumption is easily perpetuated because it is easy to market violence
and news items about violence always get column space. This focus on
violence misses a key element of what Punk is all about:
PUNK IS: the personal expression of uniqueness that comes from the
experiences of growing up in touch with our human ability to reason and ask
questions.
Violence is neither common in, nor unique to punk. When it does
manifest itself it is due to things unrelated to the punk ideal. Consider for
example the common story of a fight at a high school between a punk and
a jock football player. The football player and his cohort do not
accept or value the punk as a real person. Rather, they use him as a vitriol
receptacle, daily taunting, provoking, and embarrassing him, which of
course is no more than a reflection of their own insecurities.
One day, the punk has had enough and he clobbers the football captain
in the hallway. The teachers of course expell the punk and cite his poor
hairstyle and shabby clothing as evidence that he is a violent,
uncontrollable no-good. The community newspaper reads "Hallway Beating
Re-affirms that Violence is a Way of Life Among Punk Rockers".
Spontaneous anger at not being accepted as a real person is not unique
to punkers. This reaction is due to being human, and anybody would
react in anger regardless of their sub- cultural, or social affiliation if
they felt de- valued and useless. Sadly, there are plenty of examples
of violence among punks. There are glaring examples of misguided people
who call themselves punks too. But anger and violence are not punk
traits, in fact, they have no place in the punk ideal. Anger and violence
are not the glue that holds the punk community together.
IN UNIQUENESS IS THE PRESERVATION OF MANKIND
Nature bestowed on us the genetic backbone of what punk is all about.
There are roughly 80,000 genes in the human genome, and there are
roughly 6 billion people carrying that genetic compliment. The chances of two
people carrying the same genome are so small as to be almost beyond
comprehension (the odds are essentially ? 80,000 times the number of
possible people you can meet and mate with in a lifetime! A practical
impossibility)
The genes we carry play a major role in determining our behavior and
outlook on life. That is why we have the gift of uniqueness, because no
one else has the same set of genes controlling their view of the world.
Of course cultural factors play the other major role, and these can
have a more homogenizing effect on behavior and world-view.
For example, an entire working-class town might have 15,000 residents
who are raised with the same ideals, work at the same factories, go to
the same schools, shop at the same stores, and like the same sports
teams. As their children develop, there is a constant interaction of
opposite forces between the social imprinting their culture imparts and the
genetic expression of uniqueness.
Those who lose touch with their nature become society's robots, whereas
those who denounce their social development become vagrant animals.
Punk stands for a desire to walk the line in between these two extremes
with masterful precision. Punks want to express their own unique nature,
while at the same time want to embrace the communal aspects of their
cookie-cutter upbringing.
The social connection they have is based on a desire to understand each
other's unique view of the world. Punk "scenes" are social places where
those views are accepted, sometimes adopted, sometimes discarded, but
always tolerated and respected.
PUNK IS: a movement that serves to refute social attitudes that have
been perpetuated through willful ignorance of human nature.
Because it depends on tolerance and shuns denial, Punk is open to all
humans. There is an elegant parallel between Punk's dependence on unique
views and behaviors and our own natural genetic predisposition toward
uniqueness.
cont. in next message...