"Punk is aggressive, steel, street, action..." Oh please. I think punk is hot as anyone else (especially punk girls) but don't pretend it's anything more than a fashion statement. it's as silly and as superficial as wearing a tuxedo, period.

There's nothing wrong with that, but pretending you're more angst ridden or cool than other people just because you dress according to a certain rule-set is asinine and arrogant.

I can definitely see where he's coming from...compressed music files don't sound as crisp as listening to good ol' vinyl.

Also, about punk. It started out as a movement against highly polished, over produced music that sounded like shit. Yes, fashion was a big part of the music ( thanks to Vivianne Westwood)but you can say that about any performance type art form.

I hate Mp3 for different reasons; who wants 3000 tunes in a player the size of butane lighter? I sure as hell don't. I am lucky if I listen to 15 tunes and I love all the old stuff. Mp3 sucks and robs the artists. Off it!

I interviewed Reed a couple of times for newspaper and magazine stories and spent an evening with him in his L. A. hotel suite chatting with Lou and Sylvia and drinking Scotch whisky. He blew me away when he said he didn't believe in evolution. I don't think he's a creationist, but he has some wild ideas. Typically Piscean. I liked him -- lots. But he had a caustic tongue when he wanted to display it.

The smart among us notice WOTWS is almost 4 decades old and was barely listenable back then.Reed sucks and is not worth anyone's time.

Reed's an icon. You don't have to like him to love him.

Sure, WOTWS sucked. Lots. But check out the Velvet Underground. Half the music that's come out since was influenced by it.

All that's left of punk is a few old cranks who are apparently immune to drugs, and a few young twerps who think it's just clothes. But it used to be a way of telling your neighbors to F themselves.

I very much want 3000 or 30000 mp3's in a player the size of a butane lighter, and the artists who get "ripped off" are just collateral damage in the (just and inevitable) demise of the record industry. All the mp3 pirates on Earth have stolen maybe a tenth as much from artists as the recording industry has stolen.

you guys on this post are assholes. you don't shit about punk, art, music, fashion, hipness, coolness, or creativity. Velvet Underground is one of the most influential bands
in all of modern music. To name a few Reed's played with
incl john cale, springsteen, pete townsend, ginger baker,
ornette coleman, david bowie, the killers, bright eyes.
the list goes on and on. you might not like his thing, but he's extremely well respected and revered among his
peers. it's said that the VU didn't sell a lot of records, but
everyone who bought one started a band. top that!

Reed's solo career has it's up and downs, but a record like Berlin is considered by many to be a masterpiece. raw, gritty, uncompromising, visionary. New York, Street Hassle, The Bells, Ecstasy all singular records. And he still
sells out concerts all over the world!

mindcontrol: "you guys on this post are assholes. you don't shit about punk, art, music, fashion, hipness, coolness, or creativity"

ahem...do I know you? cause you sure don't know me...

shpiwrecked: "started out as a movement" with "fashion a big part of the music
thanks to vivianne westwood."

no, actually, we don't know each other. my comments weren't specifically directed at
you, but let's look at what you wrote. i don't think punk has an absolute definition, but
it never was a movement. never, ever, ever. in fact punk is antithetical to the concept
of a "movement". i would called it more of an explosion. a massive and radical cultural
break in music, art, and fashion that happened in NY and London circa 1976-77.
an extreme, often nihilistic, way of thinking about one's reality. but throw in a good
amount of humor. let's not be too serious here!. that's punk. then there's "punkrock".
you know, the music. you know it when you hear it.

v.westwood (btw her first name is VIVIENNE) was only tangentially related to the fashion
aspect of punk, and only in london. no self respecting punk would buy her stuff, and
they couldn't afford it anyway! a real punk would make their own shit and wear it. (again this about being an individual) or better still they'd shoplift it from someone like VW!! now that's really punk rock!

as far as it being a reaction to "highly polished, overproduced music". no way. you're
telling me guys like johnny rotten and joey ramone sat around in their squat and said
let's make a record that's raw and primal and we'll call it punk rock? these guys didn't have a fucking clue! some journalist came up with the name "punk".

and fashion being related to all "performance type art form" ? huh?........sometimes yes,
but not exclusively. clothing can often just be incidental to a performance or irrelevant.
depends on what the performer wants to convey.

Fair enough...though one thing to point out is how to "define punk" which is, to me anyways, a moot point. I only used Vivianne Westwood as an example of how punk has crossed over to mainstream or better yet has embraced the mainstream or maybe it was always part of it. Punk is dead because, if we examine it beyond the surface aesthetics, was basically a superficial movement...not that I heave the right to define "punk" anyways! Oh. about the quality of the music. I am referring to the movement against musicians who recorded using 16 tracks in each recording and how it started to sound over produced...for example The Beatles and ELO ( not that I don't listen to them ). Analog and Lo-fi recordings seem to have more depth to me, again this is a personal preference.