Public Image Limited

[Marky Dread]

Lydon: Theresa May, what a babe.

I shudder to think what he'd say about Thatcher now. If a person can speak warmly of Trump, there's no reason not to applaud her own bust-it-all-up, stick-to-principles character.

He spoke about her when she died. Saying he wouldn't speak ill of the dead. Pretty much the same stance he took when McLaren died. I wonder why anyone cares though really. It's like he meant something other than being a great vocalist to people. He was never a politician and the closest song the Pistols released as a poltical song was "Liar". If people think AitUK and GStQ were political then they really missed the point.

I guess I and most everyone else missed the point then. Invoking anarchy, fascism, the Berlin Wall etc certainly signals that this ain't your average pop song. If you don't want to treat Lydon or his music as political, you're certainly free to do so; audiences get to shape the music, too. But to suggest that everyone else has been just plain wrong when they see the ideological thrust in it is a distinctly minority position.

I've never seen the Sex Pistols as a political group. Rotten/Lydon was never an anarchist . GStQ was just a fun song taking aim at a lofty target because no one else really dared at the time. As for Holidays in the Sun the band went to Berlin to escape problems here in th UK and so it proved inspiration for his lyrics.

I'm happy to be in a minority. You can read into those lyrics as much as you like but the Sex Pistols were a fun rock n roll band not a political ideology.
I

[Silent Majority]

I think the Pistols 100% revelled in ideology and political ideas and John's softened and confused attitude to authority and bigoted, powerful wankers like Farage and Trump is a big step away from the ideas that he infused into what would have been a fun and simple rock n roll band without him.

[Marky Dread]

I think the Pistols 100% revelled in ideology and political ideas and John's softened and confused attitude to authority and bigoted, powerful wankers like Farage and Trump is a big step away from the ideas that he infused into what would have been a fun and simple rock n roll band without him.

Yeah I wonder just how many real anarchist became as such after hearing the Sex Pistols. Or how many anti royalist only exist because of hearing the Sex Pistols. You are giving those songs way to much thought.

Now if we were talking about Crass you might have a point.

[Flex]

I know they weren't actually anarchists, but I think their music was still politically motivated in at least one dimension. If it was all an act, it was a compelling enough act that there was/is value in taking that dimension of their music seriously (if not literally).

[Marky Dread]

I know they weren't actually anarchists, but I think their music was still politically motivated in at least one dimension. If it was all an act, it was a compelling enough act that there was/is value in taking that dimension of their music seriously (if not literally).

I know plenty who bought their records and I personally don't know one single person who bought into any agitprop version of the Sex Pistols as some kind political force. They changed music and fashion greatly but no one's political view. They were pop songs not political manifestos.

[Marky Dread]

I know they weren't actually anarchists, but I think their music was still politically motivated in at least one dimension. If it was all an act, it was a compelling enough act that there was/is value in taking that dimension of their music seriously (if not literally).

I know plenty who bought their records and I personally don't know one single person who bought into any agitprop version of the Sex Pistols as some kind political force. They changed music and fashion greatly but no one's political view. They were pop songs not political manifestos.

Fucking he'll McLaren saw them as a tough version of the Bay City Rollers and wanted them to compete with Cliff Richard. Musical anarchy people come on get real.

[Dr. Medulla]

I know they weren't actually anarchists, but I think their music was still politically motivated in at least one dimension. If it was all an act, it was a compelling enough act that there was/is value in taking that dimension of their music seriously (if not literally).

I know plenty who bought their records and I personally don't know one single person who bought into any agitprop version of the Sex Pistols as some kind political force. They changed music and fashion greatly but no one's political view. They were pop songs not political manifestos.

To you, certainly. Isn't it rather arrogant to deny how other people have interpreted the music, what they've done with it? Am I a complete moron for having had my political views altered by discovering Pistols and punk? If you want to regard them that way, no one is going to say you're wrong for enjoying them on your own terms, as non-political pop. But to say that thousands of fans and writers are all, well, thick is pretty nasty.

[Flex]

I know plenty who bought their records and I personally don't know one single person who bought into any agitprop version of the Sex Pistols as some kind political force. They changed music and fashion greatly but no one's political view. They were pop songs not political manifestos.

Without wanting to come off as piling on, I'll add to Doc's points that Lydon himself invites this comparison by opining on political matters. Engaging in political commentary invites comparison to the body of his public work, which conveniently engaged in a lot of politic rhetoric (completely insincere rhetoric, by your reckoning).

I think, straightforwardly, that Lydon was making political statements in the 70s and he's making them today, and it's odd not to naturally compare the two.

[Marky Dread]

I know they weren't actually anarchists, but I think their music was still politically motivated in at least one dimension. If it was all an act, it was a compelling enough act that there was/is value in taking that dimension of their music seriously (if not literally).

I know plenty who bought their records and I personally don't know one single person who bought into any agitprop version of the Sex Pistols as some kind political force. They changed music and fashion greatly but no one's political view. They were pop songs not political manifestos.

To you, certainly. Isn't it rather arrogant to deny how other people have interpreted the music, what they've done with it? Am I a complete moron for having had my political views altered by discovering Pistols and punk? If you want to regard them that way, no one is going to say you're wrong for enjoying them on your own terms, as non-political pop. But to say that thousands of fans and writers are all, well, thick is pretty nasty.

First of all I called no one a moron. Secondly this discussion is about the Sex Pistols and not "punk". And who made you the spokesperson for thousands of fans. You speak for you as I for myself. You can view the Sex Pistols however you see fit. I have no problem with you viewing the Pistols as some political force if you like. I just don't agree is all.

I did have my political view changed by punk but that was not by the Sex Pistols.

[Marky Dread]

I know plenty who bought their records and I personally don't know one single person who bought into any agitprop version of the Sex Pistols as some kind political force. They changed music and fashion greatly but no one's political view. They were pop songs not political manifestos.

Without wanting to come off as piling on, I'll add to Doc's points that Lydon himself invites this comparison by opining on political matters. Engaging in political commentary invites comparison to the body of his public work, which conveniently engaged in a lot of politic rhetoric (completely insincere rhetoric, by your reckoning).

I think, straightforwardly, that Lydon was making political statements in the 70s and he's making them today, and it's odd not to naturally compare the two.

I see no problem in disliking his views now. John has a much more public platform with talk shows etc. Inder is correct in calling him a bore earlier in the thread. Why do people expect him to keep the same views for 40 years?. He's entitled to speak whatever bullshit he likes on those talk shows. I think he's sad in what he's saying and he's completely out of touch. I guess people change, in 1977 he was a public enemy now he's a celebrity So I'm never surprised when he comes out with some stupid comment.

[Flex]

I see no problem in disliking his views now. John has a much more public platform with talk shows etc. Inder is correct in calling him a bore earlier in the thread. Why do people expect him to keep the same views for 40 years?. He's entitled to speak whatever bullshit he likes on those talk shows. I think he's sad in what he's saying and he's completely out of touch. I guess people change, in 1977 he was a public enemy now he's a celebrity So I'm never surprised when he comes out with some stupid comment.

It would be odd to keep the exact same views for 40 years. But it's not unreasonable to hope that someone who used to do so well capturing the spirit of a marginalized, downtrodden youth would have nothing but disdain for monsters like Nigel Farage and Donald fucking Trump. Those people are evil and cruel, and seeing Lydon speak well of them is disheartening, partly because it's obvious how thoughtless and out-of-touch those comments are.

Being a celebrity doesn't stop you from being a person connected to others in this world, or it shouldn't. It's a shame that, apparently, Lydon has ensconced himself in a life such that he can casually aid and abet deep cruelty and racism with no apparent concern.

[Marky Dread]

I see no problem in disliking his views now. John has a much more public platform with talk shows etc. Inder is correct in calling him a bore earlier in the thread. Why do people expect him to keep the same views for 40 years?. He's entitled to speak whatever bullshit he likes on those talk shows. I think he's sad in what he's saying and he's completely out of touch. I guess people change, in 1977 he was a public enemy now he's a celebrity So I'm never surprised when he comes out with some stupid comment.

It would be odd to keep the exact same views for 40 years. But it's not unreasonable to hope that someone who used to do so well capturing the spirit of a marginalized, downtrodden youth would have nothing but disdain for monsters like Nigel Farage and Donald fucking Trump. Those people are evil and cruel, and seeing Lydon speak well of them is disheartening, partly because it's obvious how thoughtless and out-of-touch those comments are.

Being a celebrity doesn't stop you from being a person connected to others in this world, or it shouldn't. It's a shame that, apparently, Lydon has ensconced himself in a life such that he can casually aid and abet deep cruelty and racism with no apparent concern.

I've only ever cared about the music to be honest. Politics interests me only in a personal nature. As for John he was this little skinny very poor sickly kid from Finsbury Park and now he owns real estate and lives in California. He still believes he's working class and that's entirely up to him. He says he cares about people who are working class but to me he is remote from it all.

If you ever get the chance to listen to some of the old interviews the Pistols gave in '76 and '77 you will clearly understand my stance of them not being a genuinely political group. Writing lyrics that are of a political nature doesn't mean you are some kind of political force. AitUK is a great record but it didn't make me want to become an anarchist it just made me not want to hear Leo Sayer on the radio anymore.

[Dr. Medulla]

First of all I called no one a moron.

Earlier, you said this: "If people think AitUK and GStQ were political then they really missed the point." That's not exactly respecting people's interpretation. That's calling them wrong.

Secondly this discussion is about the Sex Pistols and not "punk". And who made you the spokesperson for thousands of fans. You speak for you as I for myself.

Feel free to point out where I'm speaking for other people. Pointing out that I'm far from alone in perceiving an ideological thrust in what they were doing is not being a spokesperson. Moreover, I never said people who treat the band politically or ideologically are wrong. I explicitly said that I have no problem with someone as yourself treating them non-ideologically. You're the one telling the rest of us we've misread him and them all along. I'll just withdraw from this now because, honestly, it's not that productive and can only go south.

[Marky Dread]

First of all I called no one a moron.

Earlier, you said this: "If people think AitUK and GStQ were political then they really missed the point." That's not exactly respecting people's interpretation. That's calling them wrong.

Secondly this discussion is about the Sex Pistols and not "punk". And who made you the spokesperson for thousands of fans. You speak for you as I for myself.

Feel free to point out where I'm speaking for other people. Pointing out that I'm far from alone in perceiving an ideological thrust in what they were doing is not being a spokesperson. Moreover, I never said people who treat the band politically or ideologically are wrong. I explicitly said that I have no problem with someone as yourself treating them non-ideologically. You're the one telling the rest of us we've misread him and them all along. I'll just withdraw from this now because, honestly, it's not that productive and can only go south.

Well you suggested it was arrogant of me "to deny how other people have interpreted the music". Well I actually think it more arrogant of you and all those writers you mention to not even bother to listen to what the band themselves had to say about their own records. "We're a fun band not a political band".

I suggested no one was thick either and that everyone is entitled to their view. I never used the term "Moron" and I didn't call you "nasty" for having your view. I didn't resort to any form of name calling whatsoever. This is the view of the band fact and not something I made up. Yes Rotten used politcal targets for some (very few in fact) of his lyrics. Egged on by Malcolm and Jamie Reid who had been into situationism in their early days together. Maybe the tongue in cheek line "We mean it maaaaan!" was lost on you.

Hey no hard feelings man. It's good to bump heads every now and again.

[Mimi]

I know they weren't actually anarchists, but I think their music was still politically motivated in at least one dimension. If it was all an act, it was a compelling enough act that there was/is value in taking that dimension of their music seriously (if not literally).

I know plenty who bought their records and I personally don't know one single person who bought into any agitprop version of the Sex Pistols as some kind political force. They changed music and fashion greatly but no one's political view. They were pop songs not political manifestos.

Maybe the UK was different, but I get a sense that over here they were considered more political than not. Pop or not, AitUK is a strong message to a young mind. At my age now, I see what you're saying. Teenage me thought very differently, though.