Edited by Maria Noujaim
The 1970s marked the rise of the punk subculture. As youths were rearing mohawks and safety pin-studded uniforms to protest the economic inequality, they sought to make heard the frustrations of the working class and challenge the deceitfulness of the ruling class.
Punk culture revolves around self-expression and individuality as well as political ideologies that involve anti-capitalism, anti-authoritarianism, anti-racism, and values that preach living freely, without the burdens of judgement or exploitation weighing on people’s shoulders. But as many subcultures have, punk came face-to-face with one of the evils of a capitalist society, resulting in an insidious apex of commodification that frames the bleak zeitgeist of punk in the 21st century. Punk originally made its rounds in England during the 1970s via music and fashion that expressed the ideologies of the subculture, mainly through the total rejection of mainstream culture – specifically by the means of rebellion and non-conformity. The subculture also gained ground in the United States through punk rock bands such as Ramones but even before then, proto-punk bands such as The Stooges were already household names of the genre. England had its own bulk of punk rockers that were of paramount influence such as The Damned and The Clash.
In an , the band’s co-founder Joe Strummer clarified the intent behind the kind of music they were putting out, “we have to bring rebel rock to be bigger than music that has no meaning such as heavy metal or make-up music from England. We see that rock ‘n’ roll is the only medium that young people are tuned into, so how can it just be abandoned to meaningless things?” The political message interwoven into punk rock was a tool used to convert the youth from passive to active in terms of social restrictions and the political climate of the time – punk musicians from other parts of the world shared similar views. Dead Kennedys’ lead singer Jello Biafra mentioned in an that the intention of punk was to break down societal conventions that were restraining freedom. Despite the well-meaning goals of the movement, the public rejected it during its primary emergence. It was seen as people being mischievous for the sake of being difficult and attracting attention, but as time passed, the outlook on the subculture began to shift. People began embracing it and seeing it as what it was – a reaction to the dynamics of inequality that were present in society, and thus were more prone to embracing the counterculture as a way of fighting the status quo.
But punk’s rise in popularity took a turn for the worse, resulting in an ironic adoption into mainstream culture and the dilution of its political philosophy at the hands of its commodification. This newfound adulation came with gatekeeping attitudes that prioritized the aesthetics of the subculture which only cultivated sameness and act-alikes instead of the individuality it had previously been associated with. Icons that were associated with punk began rejecting it. John Lydon (formerly Johnny Rotten) of the Sex Pistols said in a 1979 , “punk became like fascist, it has to be this way or else. […] I’ve always said music should be many attitudes, all tolerable. It becomes intolerable when one takes over and obliterates the rest. […] The pathetic conclusion of that movement was that one load of arseholes was replaced with another load. Nothing was achieved.” The interview took place in 1979, only two years after the punk explosion.
The commodification of punk is what ultimately led to its ‘death’ which was a double-edged sword – the movement was being reconsidered in terms of monetary value through the logic of capitalism. It basically presented a new realm of items that could generate profit, especially for fashion brands and music labels. John Lydon details how the punk explosion was digested in his autobiography, No Irish, No Blacks, No Dogs. “By 1977, the tabloids absolutely reveled in “how to be punk” articles. They’d have a centerfold of these boring kids they’d pick off the street and dress them up as they thought punks were.” The emphasis on emulating punk aesthetics is evident in the interest multi-million-dollar corporations began taking in punk fashion staples such as disheveled jeans and ripped clothing held together by safety pins.
These fast fashion brands represent the antithesis of the movement, not only because of how phony it all seems to be, but because these empires are built on unethical means of production and the exploitation of the working class. There is vexatious irony in wearing a Dead Kennedys t-shirt made with the blood, sweat, and tears of exploited workers when the former’s lyrics detail their anger towards these very corporations. Their song Soup Is Good Food contains an especially harrowing verse within this context, “Your number’s been purged from our central computer / So we can rig the facts and sweep you under the rug / See our chart? Unemployment’s going down / If that ruins your life that’s your problem.”
Companies have also taken on certain trends to create an “anti-brand” or “anti-star” through meticulous advertising. The anti-star represents a celebrity who evokes controversies through challenging common ideals and beliefs held among their more generic counterparts. Meaningless slogans along the lines of “your parents don’t want you to listen/see this” are more prominent than ever. Even the rise of alternative fashion among Gen-Z has produced many industry plants that fit those trends simply because they are popular in the modern cyberspace. The creation of an “anti-star” is clearly a poor attempt at re-creating the controversy that punk ignited when its icons called for action to change and outwardly condemned those who cash in on the rest of society. Songs like Bad Brains’ “Don’t Need It” comment on consumerism while others such as The Clash’s “Career Opportunities” details struggles of the working class – the impact is missing because of how pseudo-rebellious these efforts have proved themselves to be. The attempted revival of an anti-star is an idea with potential and possibly something that the culture could benefit from, but up-and-coming artists’ outlook on the public (especially of the younger generation) is that they’re easily swayed thus resulting in a less than impressive attempt at bringing new life into punk culture in a postmodern climate. The same pattern of commodification has found its way into different subcultures that are driven by leftist politics such as grunge – the “Nirvana” t-shirt being what I believe to be the biggest symbol of subculture commodification simply because of how mass-produced that specific t-shirt is.
Punk was started to challenge the conventions of society, but it only exists these days to allow people to mindlessly partake in the feeling of rebellion while still conforming to our current culture. One cannot claim to have any form of relation to a counterculture while simultaneously upholding traditional conservative beliefs that this very counterculture stands to defeat. The ‘death’ of punk was a double-edged sword – it had to die for the degradation of its philosophy to stop, but the spirit still lives on in those who choose to speak out against the abysmal systems we live under. One does not need to wear leather jackets and combat boots to represent punk. Icons like Bob Dylan who wrote several Civil Rights anthems or Neil Young who continues to speak out against injustice will always have a more vital place in punk than a bogus pop-punk industry plant ever will.
