a few years ago, tom gabel called the punk scene a "ghetto"

and, i can't help but admit his word choice was incredibly poor, but i'm pretty sure i understand perfectly what he meant.

i wrote this on an internet forum discussing whether or not "ska was dead" and it's got me thinking a bit more about the grand scheme of the ska and punk genres.

"ska is dead but i love it oh so much. here's an abbreviated reason as to why it's dead. first and most relevant example to current day: the new big d and the kids table album. coming off of an album that they said was their most fun time in the studio as a band, and an album that put their necks out on the line to try something new, the negative response from so many ska punk kids bummed them out (yes this is true, they told me themselves). so they go back into the studio and put out a generic medio-core album with minimal stand out tracks. why? to appease the mass ska-punk assholes who refuse to let a sound progress. i hate to quote tom gable but maybe he was right with some of his critique of punk, because so many of the hard-core punxxxxxx refuse to let a band progress with their sound. so the heart is taken out of the music. next example. the mad caddies. their last album was the same kind of thing, a big departure from their punk roots and a bit of experimentation in a more laid back sound. i saw them live in support of that album, and they said it was their lowest attended show in 10 years. that's fucking weak. ska shouldn't be dead, but because people refuse to let it off life-support, it may as well be."

there'll be a lot more about big d as this bit of thought progresses. but the fact of the matter is you can't progress very easily in such a scene of music. i mean, that's if you develop as a band with any sort of real involvement in the culture. a band like alkaline trio is a band that can change their sound without a ton of backlash, and the reason is because they were never the DIY hardcore punk ethic kind of band. the hardcore punks seem to never really be that into alkaline trio, they always seem very indifferent. never much hate, and the love for them is a different kind of love than you see with some more hardcore punk-ethic bands.

and there's your nofx's. their sound hasn't wavered, but their opinions have become more politically and self aware. the hate for them is never too strong. sure, the street punks might not like how big fat wreck is (even though it's not even part of the RIAA) or how it has an outside distribution deal, but the fact of the matter is fat mike has done a lot for the scene and never changed his sound too much, so their legion of fans has stayed rather constant.

but let's get back to the idea of punk being a ghetto, or maybe a place where music isn't allowed to progress. i'm writing while listening to what i believe is the absolute best rancid album. life won't wait. life won't wait is an album unlike any other rancid album. it's actually rather different than most punk out there. this album has so many outside influences, it's so unique, and it has some of the most intelligent lyrics tim and lars have ever put out. speaking of lars, it's the last album where he scored the opening vocals. but that's neither here nor there. everything clicks on this record for rancid, their ska influences are in their element, matt freeman is shredding the bass, you can actually distinguish tim's guitar playing (something almost impossible, even in their live show), and the guys are at their highest point as musicians. i know punks who hate rancid and would give anything for another op ivy record, but love life won't wait.

and what happens? everybody bitches because it's not hardcore enough. where's the punkkkk rancid i grew up on? blah blah blah. complain city. now, i'm not going to lie, i got into rancid when the nofx/rancid split came out, and the last album i ever bought of theirs was life won't wait. and why was that? cause the band hardly ever acknowledged it, so i didn't think it was worth my time. it's the least represented album in most of their live shows, and i think the reason was the mini-backlash.

now i don't think rancid are the kind of people who really give too much of a fuck what people think. especially nowadays. they want to be long-timers, and i'm pretty sure they know they're best ablums have been made. dominoes was a bad attempt at trying to fool people into thinking the next wolves is right around the corner. and the fact that nothing has ever been said about why brett reed left is another odd "we don't care" kind of example. they don't care, they know who they are and they're comfortable with it. but the fact of the matter remains. punks bitched about the lack of "punk" on life won't wait and the next album was a direct response to that. rancid V, or rancid (2ooo), or whatever you want to call it, is undeniably their most hardcore album. and they've never dipped back into the kind of sounds found on that monstrous forth album. sure they still play bloodclot, and hover street, and occasionally a few others, but you don't see as much as the other albums. it's too bad, really.

hey, i'm not saying a band shouldn't ever try and please their fans, but they shouldn't do it quiet so drastically. again, i could be wrong cause rancid don't seem like they give a fuck, but they definitely took a big risk with life won't wait and i'm sure they all were very proud of it and had wished it was as big as wolves. there's a level of chance taking that's between artist integrity and fan appreciation that is tough to find.

that's big d's current problem.

they have gone about for the damned, the dumb, and the delirious in all the right ways. saying "oh we didn't have the punk songs in us at the time, so we had to wait for the inspiration again" and yadda yadda yadda. but read sean p rogan's thoughts on fluent in stroll and look at the mass exodus of band members. or hell, read the post i made about the night i spent with these guys. they were bummed that the album they put all their heart into and had a blast making was rejected by the hardcore punks. big d, you're not allowed to not be a punk band. how dare you spread your horizons and make an album unlike any other out right now? to the guys who criticized that record, fuck you. you're allowed not to like it, but the shit that was talked was unjust. i can't think of anything more punk than doing something completely unfamiliar to you and taking a huge chance on something. punk is supposed to be anti-authority and inherently anarchist, fluent in stroll put aside all the rules of what a ska punk band should be.

i will say this. people are the most vocal when they're unhappy. if everybody was happy, we'd have a quiet world. the people who loved fluent in stroll weren't the ones who were bitching about it. and now that damned is out, the people who liked it are complaining. people love to bitch, and you're going to always see more negative comments than positive. it's the nature of the world.

but it didn't sit well with the guys sitting at the kids table. nobody wants to be hated, and their spirits were down. in the words of steve, "i was reading comments on punk news telling me to kill myself. that sucks." so where are we now? sean p rogan, founding member of the band, is out of the band, living in mass with his new wife, playing solo shows and giving guitar lessons. i have a hard time believing if this album took off, he wouldn't still be in the band. dan stoppleman, long time trumpeter, tired of touring. big steve, not even at warped right now. seeing big d at warped last week, the only familiar faces were derrick, dave, and ryan. that's a more than 50% turn around in personnel. and how's the new album? generic. you're a DIY punk, how dare you change your sound. it's not allowed. i don't care if it makes you're band unhappy.

so let's now take a look at the guy who called the punk scene a ghetto. freshly off a major label and back in the streets where he started...just with a lot more money. they signed to fat-wreck after being sabot and no idea veterans and putting out one of the best folk-punk records i've ever heard (as the eternal cowboy). oh there's that backlash, they're on fat-wreck. they better up the punk hard or we're gonna hate them. nahhhh, searching for a former clarity pushed the creative envelope further than cowboy and was their sonically best sounding album. was it their best album? no, that's still cowboy. but it definitely had the best sound.

but they go to sire, and out come new wave and white crosses and in comes the backlash. but i can't help but support some of the criticism. tom acted like a prick, warren seemed to get kicked out of the band, and their setlists were awful. but lately, man. all i gotta say is go back and read my review of their recent set in rochester. i will defend this band from that day forward, unwaveringly. unless they change their sound too much and i gotta join the hardcore punks in hating them.

some criticism is warranted when it comes to artistic development. what green day did was the wrong decision at the time, and they almost deserved to be cast out of the scene. but lookout! couldn't support them anymore, they were getting too big. and you can't criticize a band for being liked, if you made music to be hated and have no fans, you wouldn't be around very long, and even the punks wouldn't like you. but. there were other options. for example, epitaph was starting to take off and they handled smash just fine. but, instead they went reprise. which wasn't the right move. but hey, dookie was a good record. and they could have never made such an amazing album like warning: on lookout! records. those songs wouldn't sound good at gillman street. sorry. but what happened after warning:? the same thing i've been talking about throughout this whole piece. it was a creative gamble that turned out amazing, but was critically ill-received. and as a result, the band went into hiatus. granted, i don't know if it was the punks who hurt green day's feelings. this was probably very much more a weezer post-pinkerton breakdown than a big d breakdown. and oddly enough, weezer and green day both regrouped after a few years and put out a medio-core record that was somehow well received amongst critics and fans alike.

but i'm starting to stray from the point. there are too many punks that can't be happy. if tom gabel isn't an anarchist, and mike mccolgan isn't the singer for the dropkick murphys, then life sucks. big d better play LAX at every show, fat mike should have fed those fans piss, the mad caddies better not play too much reggae, and the day blink-182 breaks up again will be the best day ever for the true punxxxxx.


-jc