If punk is truly an anarchic, violent, no holds-barred, spit-on-the-world kind of freedom, is punk realistic? Is punk even possible?
***CHALLENGE: Publicly perform as your punk band you formed in class.***
***CHALLENGE: Publicly perform as your punk band you formed in class.***
4 comments:
Punk is whatever you want it to be. If you want punk to be rebellious, then you go be a rebel. I think that we stereotype punks into this group of violent, rebellious people. When "punks" are just like any other person they just enjoy listening to different types of music and express themselves differently. Punk is possible if you want yourself to be seen as a "punkee." In my opinion it is a made up stereotype that is used to label a type of group. Punk is punk. Prep is prep. Jock is jock. Theyre all just labels to describe people. You are whatever you want to be. If that is a punk, then you are a punk. No problem at all with that.
the problem though is that punk is seen as always violent and loud. they do this because it is easier to get a message across than if they were to be peacefull. if they really wanted to make a difference though they should be peacefull and become more offical with what they want to be heard.
No not at all. i belive that puck is an oximoron. they rebele against socity and try to be non-conformests, but in the meantime they areconforming with the non-conformests
Punk in the definition presented is impossible due to the contradictoriness of its beliefs. In the simplest sense, punk is about not conforming [to the government and consumerism] by conforming to the “punk” stereotype which in itself is a contradiction. Another example of such a type of contradiction is “emo,” as clearly stated in the popular “Emo Song” – “I’m an emo kid, non-conforming as can be. You’d be non-conforming too if you looked just like me.” and all throughout pop culture in shows such as South Park.
However, a large portion of the punk subculture is unaware of the roots of punk as defined in the question. Many take on the culture as a result of the bandwagon effect (a fad) or because they genuinely believe in it and like the fashion. If punk were truly that which is defined above, then it would not be defined as punk, it simply would not have a definition and people would not recognize it as a group since everyone would be so different united only by their need to rebel. It would just be many seemingly unconnected person(s) engaging in genuine anti-conformism (which is even more non-existant in our world today despite all the new groups claiming to be nonconformists – emos for example).
-Michael Ch**ng
Post a Comment