Meh. Who cares about the status of punk. Regardless of whether or not it’s dead or alive, Avril isn’t it. She’s just some cheesy pop singer who likes to pretend she’s talented. She reminds me of Pink in that regard. They’ve both got that whole pop-singers-who-don’t-like-to-be-called-pop-singers thing going on.
Like what was said before, I keep the sound off in the case of Avril and Kylie.
Avril is 18. She’s doing what all 18-year-olds do – trying to be cool. Maybe she ends up looking like a poser, but I promise that she isn’t trying to demean punk rock music. And I expect that no one takes her punk image seriously except 12 year old girls. And, of course, ‘real’ punk rockers who accuse her of tainting their image.
As far as her music goes, it’s got a nice sound. She can definitely sing, and the pop/guitar combo is a trend that I approve of.
I can think of worse rolemodels for young girls. They say she cowrites all of her songs, and listening to the lyrics, I believe them. Sure, they’re a little silly, but they also paint a pretty clear picture of how teenagers see love. That’s a lot better than Brittney and others like that who sing about nasty dirty sex nonstop.
She’s just a cute little poser. Give her a break,
My wife has the Avril Lavigne album and the Christina Aguilera album. I hate both of them, but I can live with Avril. Christina totally grates and I can’t have it on within earshot. It is nothing new that pop music is copping moves from real innovative music (or at least music which doesn’t suck donkey balls). Michael Jackson went “Bad.” Crap alterno-pop dominated the 90s after the grunge scene, and many of those groups are still around. In the post-Britney world, pop stars are scrapping for directions. Christina takes her Britney and adds more of the goth-punk/hip-hop slut route. Avril takes her cues from the White Stripes, the Strokes, the Hives, adds skate rock and mixes that with Britney.
Let them say whatever they want to say. In the end, they are musicians. Listen to either album, and I don’t care if they are calling themselves postmodernist deconstructionalists, 5 minutes of the album tells you it is pop. Their image means nothing and that seems to be the only thing changing in pop. It has always been irritating, it will always be irritating. At least with Britney you could turn down the sound.
I take it you havent heard Heathen, then. Or Earthling.
…hours was a pile of shite.
Twist- Heathen’s ok. I didn’t care for Earthling, myself. But I didn’t mean that Bowie hasn’t made any good music since the late 70’s, I meant that nothing he’s done since then has been much of an influence on anyone. Bowie’s a major artist because of everything up to & including Scary Monsters, but that was, what, 24 years ago. When people say they love Bowie, they’re talking about the Bowie of the 70’s.
To put it in perspective, people complain she didn’t know who the Pistols were. Those guys were born in the 50’s. You think, when they came out, they were familiar with Louis Jordan, Big Joe Turner, Wynonie Thomas and all the other earliest artists of what became R & R, who recorded in the late 40’s & early 50’s?
You see what I’m saying. She’s a kid trying to make it in show business. Some record company mucky muck decided to market her as a punk to 12 year olds. What’s to be upset about? Nothing’s what it was when it was something. No Doubt are “ska?”, Shania Twain is “country?”, Lincoln Park are “metal?”, R. Kelly is “R&B?”.
Music today, feh.
gabba gabba hey
I’ll reserve judgment on her singing ability until I see her actually sing in real time. The one tape I saw of her “singing” in concert makes me question whether or not that’s actually her voice on the album - she did not sound as if she could sing at all, and it didn’t even sound like the same person.
<Wiping away tears>
I couldn’t agree anymore.
Sigh…
Having her name mentioned in the same thread as the Ramones is the closest she will ever get to punk.
Here is hoping Joey seeks her Canadian ‘boot’ head out and gives her a sloppy hickey when the dead rise.
I will say it once more…
The Ramones…they saved the world from the evil that was disco.
But since Avril is Canadian, shouldn’t it be “gabba gabba, eh?”
:d&r:
“Tellll meeee, why’d they have to go and make names so com-pli-caaaateeeed…”
You have to be fucking kidding me. This sounds like one of those elitist “my music is better than your music” statements.
Repetitiveness and unoriginality began as soon as the Sex Pistols and Ramones took off. All punk bands since have sounded like them. 3 chord riffs, 2 minute songs, 20 minute 10 song records. The only one that EVER really sounded distinct was DK, and that is what made them one of the best.
FTR, NOFX and AFI are just as punk as any of your old school bands. Pennywise is more hardcore than punk.
Exactly. Or try The Au Pairs. Or how 'bour the whole “Riot Grrrl” scene (a name I detest) which put forth bands like Bikini Kill, Heavens to Betsy, and the aforementioned and utterly awesome Sleater-Kinney?
While there is a very exacting definition of “punk,” namely the genre that includes bands like The Ramones, The Buzzcocks and The Sex Pistols, it has become so influential that I think it’s more useful in the taxonomy of music genres to give it a broader definition and set up sub-genres below it. After all, “rock and roll” as a genre is strictly a three-chord, melodic musical form, influenced mainly by country and blues. How many of us out there bitch about how The Who or Led Zeppelin aren’t real “rock” because they’re not part of the first-wave like Elvis and Chuck Berry? Or who’s to say two-tone or third-wave ska isn’t ska because it happened to come along years after The Skatelites ceased to exist?
You must be kidding me. Are you to say that The Buzzcocks and The Clash, Wire, Patti Smith, The Jam, Joy Division weren’t distinct? The last two you may put in the post-punk category, but for me these bands are all very distinctive, and hardly unoriginal and boring.
But, hey, different strokes…
When did they cease to exist?
God bless the Skatalites. They’ve got the Energizer Bunny by at least 85 miles.
OK I made though all of these posts. Now a couple of points:
-
I had no idea who this girl was until my local radio station (Q104 in NYC) started playing the sound bite of her mispronunciation of Bowie’s name. Pretty funny and sad at the same time.
-
Didn’t Paul McCartney mispronounce someones name at the last Grammys/MTV or some other pointless award show? I believe it was someone a lot less popular though. Oh wait didn’t he call a woman a man or vise versa?
-
Is U2 punk? Because by definition of some one above (paraphrasing) “If a punk listens to it then it is Punk”. Wasn’t Joey Ramone (The Father of Punk) listening to and enjoying U2’s new album while on his death bed? So if he listened to it it must be punk.
-
Didn’t the Ramones do cover songs? Does that make the covered music punk? I find it hard to think that “Needles and Pins” is the anthem of all that is Punk.
FTR, I like the Ramones and I am not saying that they are not Punk. I am just making a point.
Avril Lavigne…
Her songs are catchy on the radio… You get quite sick of them after the 30th time in a two hour span…
I just heard her live and accoustic (I believe she was playing the guitar) on the radio and she sounded AWEFUL… very very bad singing… then she said her voice was tired from singing too much…
The same day I saw a 3 minutes thingy on the news, because she had a concert around here (Mass.), she sounded … AWEFUL… Thank God, some music was there to cover some up…
It was really shockingly terrible…
My opinion… she sucks.