that's rad. kopper said:

No, I still listen to ELO (not so much Queen, though, I admit). I have a lot of tastes that go way beyond the world of garage-punk. In fact, I'd love to get my hands on the Zoom LP that came out in 2001 to rave reviews but that's now OOP. Anyone have a copy? I'll even settle for MP3s at this point.

Mike said:

kopper said:

And I was also one of those kooks who was listening to ELO and Queen, too. So sue me. ;)

Ha! Well you may have been listening to those Kopper, but I doubt you were one of those kook types I was refering to. We'll just rack it up to youthfull experimentation on your part.....now what did I do with that Blondes Have more Fun picture disc my brother gave me in the 7th grade?

one of the best albums of all time? bold statement. i disagree. but i love that record. the clash definitely had hits and misses - a lot of misses, in my opinion - and most peoples, really. love the Clash. fuck the Boo! and fuck you! Kevin Schneider said:

The first album is amazing - one of the best albums of all time by any band, any genre, and is in many ways the very definition of what punk meant in the late 70s. Give 'em Enough Rope is really, really good. London Calling is just okay. Sandinista, Combat Rock, and Cut the Crap all suck. Those three albums combined have three good songs total. Two of those three songs, Should I Stay or Should I Go and Rock the Casbah are overplayed to the point where I am no longer able to derive any pleasure from hearing them. The third, and the only worthwhile song on the 3 disc monstrosity that is Sandinista, is Police on My Back, which is a cover.

I think you're onto something in labeling the Clash as "easily identifiable". They're the favorite punk band of so many because they branched out beyond punk, and have a much broader appeal. Heck, most folks in the U.S. never even heard of the Clash until the release of London Calling. They certainly didn't get any airplay until Train In Vain. Regardless, if you look at just their punk output (77-78), I think they're certainly one of the punk bands ever. And they were one of the few punk bands to have any sustainability (although, perhaps due to moving beyond punk).

For my tastes, I'm on the other side of the Clash fence than you. Give 'em Enough Rope is a fantastic album - perhaps their best. And I'm not going to say that Sandinista is a bad album. I have a certain level of respect for its eclecticism. Plus, many admire it, including yourself, and the band. That being said, I honestly find it almost unlistenable. George Martin said that the White Album would have been much better served as a single ablum. I think I'd have a hard time enjoying Sandinista were it cut down to an EP.

No, I still listen to ELO (not so much Queen, though, I admit). I have a lot of tastes that go way beyond the world of garage-punk. In fact, I'd love to get my hands on the Zoom LP that came out in 2001 to rave reviews but that's now OOP. Anyone have a copy? I'll even settle for MP3s at this point. Mike said:

kopper said:

And I was also one of those kooks who was listening to ELO and Queen, too. So sue me. ;)

Ha! Well you may have been listening to those Kopper, but I doubt you were one of those kook types I was refering to. We'll just rack it up to youthfull experimentation on your part.....now what did I do with that Blondes Have more Fun picture disc my brother gave me in the 7th grade?

kopper said:

And I was also one of those kooks who was listening to ELO and Queen, too. So sue me. ;)

Ha! Well you may have been listening to those Kopper, but I doubt you were one of those kook types I was refering to. We'll just rack it up to youthfull experimentation on your part.....now what did I do with that Blondes Have more Fun picture disc my brother gave me in the 7th grade?

The first album is amazing - one of the best albums of all time by any band, any genre, and is in many ways the very definition of what punk meant in the late 70s. Give 'em Enough Rope is really, really good. London Calling is just okay. Sandinista, Combat Rock, and Cut the Crap all suck. Those three albums combined have three good songs total. Two of those three songs, Should I Stay or Should I Go and Rock the Casbah are overplayed to the point where I am no longer able to derive any pleasure from hearing them. The third, and the only worthwhile song on the 3 disc monstrosity that is Sandinista, is Police on My Back, which is a cover.

I love the first Clash album, and I'd definitely say it's punk. But that's just me. But early punk was rock'n'roll, after all. And I was also one of those kooks who was listening to ELO and Queen, too. So sue me. ;)

richard holguin said:

punk is self expresion ,

Way to simple. Under that definition nearly everything is "punk" which it is clearly not.

Yup, that's a good one! Bring on the stink! Hahah! About punk: Besides the "historic implications of the term" I would hang my coat to the hook of the guy above me.

punk is self expresion , all these albums are punk regardless of sound ... the clash are punk !

Yeah, yeah - all fair comments so far. One thing I should mention - what I started off saying stemmed from the fact that i'm not a fan of 70's punk personally i.e. - The Sex Pistols, The Damned, etc. I can quite imagine that SANDINISTA and COMBAT ROCK probably sounded quite horrific to punk fans of the time, but like i said i came to The Clash slightly later. I was a young lad experimenting with music - and fell in love with how The Clash experimented with what influenced them. Most people in the UK were too narrow minded at the time to see what The Clash were trying to achieve - it was the rest of the world that embraced them.

What i'm saying is that The Clash's debut album was the only true punk one and that people seem to have this romantic nostalgic view of them as something they never really were. You know, a lot of people wear a Clash t-shirt, i just doubt it's because they dig MAGNIFICENT SEVEN - and they did a hell of a lot more stuff in that vein than they did with the WHITE RIOT stuff. Great to hear everyones thoughts though. Just my opinion.

Now when I think of the term Punk:
My eyes roll back. Labeling something is to give that something meaning to which the world can relate to a specific idea. PUNK has had a few meanings: Somebody who takes it up the ass in jail and or prison. Another meaning is a genre of music... I could elaborate - but shit, yer on here - google mofo.
Punk, how I relate to it: a state of mind... a rebellious, questioning state of mind that seeks to abolish tyranny and corruption in the world. This definition is my own. For G.G. Allin punk was Chaos for Joe Strummer it was about justice. Punk is an attitude. Get wit it den.
The Clash are the epitomy of Punk - period.
More so even than many of the faux bands that came up around that time in '77.
It's not arguable... It's a FACT.

Yeah Mike, i guess what i said is very retrospective - i was slightly too young for punk [by about 4 years]. I personally think SANDINISTA is quite an achievement and i love COMBAT ROCK and LONDON CALLING. I guess they were punk in their attitude but smart enough not to get pigeon-holed as punk musicians.

Also i don't really think Joe Strummer was a phony, he was quite a complex individual yet prone to making the same mistakes as all of us... but you are well within your rights to think so, Fierce Play!

You know, up until "Sandinista" at least they definately were not what was considered "Rock" or pop for the era. Maybe it was just Strummer's voice that kept it from crossing that fine line. I agree that London Calling is much tamer than the 1st LP. But, it's all Rock n Roll isn't it? Play London Calling back to back with what ELO or Queen, or most anything else the kooks at school were listening to then, and it definately is "punk" in comparison. I mean I definately understand your point, but then I have to ask myself how much of that understanding is based on my 30 years of corrupting my ears with everything that's come along since.

Whew.., taking too many words for me to say, I'd disagree with your statement in 1980, but could give it a bit of agreement in 2009.

I completely agree. I get shit every time I bring this discussion up. Granted I love some of The Clash's tunes but there is something phony about strummer when he is being interviewed. I can't quite pin point it. But watch both The Ramones documentary ( End of the Century) and The Clash documentary (The Future is Unwritten) back to back and you might see what I mean. Also though...I am a loser and have way too much time to spend analzying things. ; )

I gotta agree with you straight down the line here. So much of what came out in the 80's that is classified as punk was done so because there just were not that many categories to stick them in, at least that's the way I see it. Maybe it was the confusion of their collectivist expression with the anarchist trend of punk that got them lumped in.