This is an old argument I had with a buddy of mine and I changed my mind, came around to his point of view after giving it some thought. What do you guys and gals think?
2007-05-23 05:35:40 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music ➔ Rock and Pop
I really enjoy the people who are delving into it. I see three "best answers" already and I wish I could reward all of them. To the people who are quick to just say new wave or a resounding no I think you're missing their relevance. I'm not saying yes or no, but I think it's kind of a tough question.
2007-05-23 09:25:52 · update #1
Great posts by praveen and rain man as well. I wish I could give 3 best answers out. Personally I used to land on no and after talking to my friend about it landed on yes. His argument which I now agree with, though it took some convincing is that it's more than their "new wave/art rock" sound. It's their ties to the scene, approach and attitude in regards to the music, counter culture appeal and attack at convention. The combination of all these things makes them punk for me. Another way to quantify it from another angle is how the Ramones and Green Day can both play 4 chords at relatively the same speed, but when the Ramones do it it's punk and when Green Day does it it's pop. I definately see both sides of the argument though and I really appreciate everyone's insights.
2007-05-24 04:03:12 · update #2
I guess it would depend on what your definition of "punk rock" is.
The NY Scene - CBGB's consisted of the Ramones, Television, The Dead Boys, Blondie, The Dictators etc...
if you listen to them they aren't the sound most people think of when they think of "punk" if you think of it in this forum then yes Talking heads is part of that punk scene.
the London Punk Scene was a little harsher - with the sex pistols etc...
although The Clash was more like the NY Scene.
and then you have the Southern California Scene - Black Flag, the Minute Men, The Meat Puppets and so forth - That is more the speed punk that people think of and if that is what you are basing it on then No they are not punk
I know this doesn't answer your question but I think you need to explain what your definition of punk music is.
If it is Green Day and Blink 182 - then no answer is required because they suck.
2007-05-23 08:40:11 · answer #1 · answered by Pinkus 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
that is a tough question. They were not "post" punk; they were playing at CBGB's right from the get-go with Blondie, the Ramones, Television, etc. so I'm gonna say "yes" even though they never really had that raw sound that you hear in other punk bands.
2007-05-23 06:11:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Talking Heads? Not really dude...They are actually post-punk or new wave.
They draw heavy influences from punk rock though,so songs may sound like it.They combined punk,art rock..even funk and came out with a unique sound at that time.It was clubbed with the new wave/post-punk bands then.
If you consider post-punk to be a sub-genre of punk [which I don't...they are different] then you can continue arguing forever. :D
Bleh,whatever the genre,they are awesome . :]
2007-05-23 05:44:08 · answer #3 · answered by Praveen Hegde 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the are new wave punk. not the angry stuff that first came from England in the mid-70s, but the transition that happened in the late-70s, early 80s.
2007-05-23 05:44:15 · answer #4 · answered by yowza 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
New Age.
2007-05-23 05:40:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They actually are post-modernists.
At least they claimed to be singing about post-modern ideas.
2007-05-23 05:43:14 · answer #6 · answered by Pumpkin Head 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hmm... tough one that is... they can be considered.. but they're not pure punk rock... but they do have the elements of punk rock... hmm... i honestly can't say...
2007-05-23 05:40:18 · answer #7 · answered by freekspy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They were really "NEW WAVE" & "PUNK" crossover.
2007-05-23 05:45:46 · answer #8 · answered by jon_mac_usa_007 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No
2007-05-23 06:15:43 · answer #9 · answered by Matt B 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋