7 Comments
Dec 30, 2022Liked by The Dreadnoughts

Well, I can see why this was rejected – far too lucid and readable, not nearly swathed enough in academic double-speak and jargon. Too much fresh air and real people! Get back in the library!

Srsly tho, a very entertaining read, and made me wonder if there's much of an overlap to be found with theatre practice vs theatre criticism. That sense of *being there* is so vital in the bubble of suspended disbelief that theatre depends on ... I've certainly met Drama PhDs who have adopted the 'anthropologist in the tree' perspective but most of them got into theatre through the magic of being there. The one supremely ironically detached one I'm thinking of got burned, and turned against the experiential necessity out of spite. I imagine there's a lot more extant writing on theatre than there is on punk ... it'd be interesting to hook the latter into the former, from an experienced perspective, and see what happens.

Expand full comment
founding

I'm glad I took the time to read this. I can see why they didn't accept it - and I'll bet you figured they wouldn't - but they had to read all about themselves in it, and that is pure punk.

Expand full comment

Great read.

As maybe the most qualified person in the world to talk on the subject, I'd love to hear similar academic thoughts on folk-punk, and how that intersection works. Does sticking an accordion in make it folk punk? I don't think so - there's a great band called Sinful Maggie that heartedly reject the folk-punk or irish-punk label (check out "we're not fuckin irish" if you've not already) that do just that.

For me there's something atavistic about folk-punk that makes me *feel* like something is folk-punk, but I've never been able to describe what or why.

Also, I think your description of what is punk goes some way to explain why nazi punk is so fucking bad.

Expand full comment

I loved this; refreshingly unpretentious and down-to-earth compared to some academic philosophising I could name. My only comment would be that it somewhat blurs the two lines of criticism being discussed: definitional critique of punk as something that ignores the nonrepresentational and the lived experience, and moral critique of punk by PSM advocates. Not that those aren't related criticisms that both fit under the theme/title being discussed, but only one of them relates to the article's conclusion, and I found myself confused by mixing them together while reading.

Then again, I'm exactly the sort of academically-inclined, doesn't-go-to-enough-punk-shows, boring-ass nerd being critiqued here, so maybe I just need to get the stick out of my arse.

Expand full comment