Originally Posted by: earthman bucki think teh punx sybmol is teh gren dayz.

On a serious note, my real thoughts: weren't the sex pistols big in the mid-to-late 70's? If so, I think punk from back then was pretty legitimate. Back in them days, look who there was to contend with. Led Zeppelin, and bands trying to be Led Zeppelin. What's the opposite of Led Zeppelin, you ask? A band that can only just barely play their instruments. I think punk used to make sense, now it does not. The way I see it, punk doesn't describe the musical style, it describes the feeling of wanting to do the opposite of everything that's going on. If what was once punk becomes the next big thing, it is no longer punk. It is pop. And if what was once pop becomes obscure and only available if you search for it, it is punk. In fact, now that I've worded it like that, the term "pop-punk" just makes my head hurt.

Punk, back in the day, was about making a statement of rebellion. And that's ok, but the only problem is that it's easy to date because the things that they rebell against aren't going to be around forever. Things change. So the "punk" these days is only labeled as punk, but it's not genuine punk. It's just not of that era. It's become an image thing, look as ridiculous as you can, don't learn to play your instrument, be n the business about 2 weeks, make more money than Steve Vai. Ahem, as I was saying, the image of rebellion has taken it over. And the exact same thing has happened to black metal. When black metal first came out it was just the same. Basic, veritably talentless music based around rebelling. These days it's just a mass of douches that have to be "grim" and look "kvlt" and make god awful sounding demos and what not using recycled riffs because they think the point is that it's not supposed to sound good. Black metal and punk are two dead genres.