Yeah, it's no secret that The Sex Pistols were about the image.

But image has always been a part of rock n roll. So it's a bit of a silly thing to discredit a band for.

I'd rather knock Sex Pistols for being awful musicians who get all this undeserved praise for apparently killing my favorite genre of music.

yeah, i see those bands has having many of those attributes too, but i think each one had a strength in one of those

Yeah, The Ramones were basically the Bay City Rollers with a faster tempo and distorted guitars.

And without the charming good looks. :laughing:

Oh please.

I'm not saying it's important on a musical level.

You should know me better than that, I rant a lot about critics and hipsters putting greater emphasis on image than the actual music.

That being said, image has been a very important part of music marketing since the days of Mozart. And that will never change.

We would be without a lot of great and important artists if they didn't have the right, fashionable image to get people to take notice. You think The Rolling Stones would have been as popular if they looked like this?

http://gopher.mnstatefair.org/images...large/1282.jpg

Personally I think most punk that followed later on actually sounds closer to The Damned than any of those 3 bands.

yeah but you're not going to hear too many people crediting the Damned for influencing them. more artists linger on influences like Joe Strummer, Richard Hell, John Lydon, and Colin Newman than anyone else.

i'm getting to the point where i think the extent of first-wave punk music started and stopped with the Stooges. everyone else sounds so lame by comparison.

Eh. The Clash >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Stooges.

Character limit can only allow for so many arrows.

http://magicalbums.files.wordpress.c...-i00-cover.jpg



*wait's for long lines of "wtf is wrong with you"/"zero musical taste"*

so yeah, should i hate it then or what?