# Sex Pistols say "Bollocks!" to Hall of Fame **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 14, 2006, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253 "2006-03-14T00:52:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Crandolph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7cd45c/32.png) [@Crandolph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crandolph)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2006, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/81 "2006-03-15T22:52:57Z")
I believe “Ballroom Blitz” didn’t come out until about '74. _Never Mind…_ is a very strong rock record. There wouldn’t be any “college radio” schlock like whiny, droney REM had there not been a punk explosion, and the Pistols were a big part of that. Better put out one great album and split than bore and annoy me for 30 years! Steve Jones and Paul Cook were in a few bands after the Pistols and in fact backed Joan Jett on some songs that people who just said they can’t play likely know and enjoy. Glen Matlock, who actually played bass on most SP recordings, in not at all a bad musician and his band The Rich Kids also had a great album. Of course Lydon was in PIL, not my cup of tea but he tried something different. Lydon & the others were characters in their own right long before they met McLaren, which is how they caught his eye to begin with. I’d be disappointed in the band if they decided that the Hall of Fame thing was an honor that they needed to attend in order to curry favor. Did someone actually suggest that Blink-182 is a better band than the Pistols? That warmed-over 23rd generation poorly photocopied suburban mall attempt to catch the excitement and danger that bands like the Pistols suggested 30 years ago? Wow… ---
**Author:** ![Subterraneanus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Subterraneanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterraneanus)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2006, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/82 "2006-03-15T23:07:09Z")
> [@Exapno Mapcase](#): > > I started listening to popular music in 1963. > > I started paying attention to popular music history when I was in college. > > I had a good understanding of music and the business and its wild and vulgar and brilliant and often sordid history by 1976. > > I’ve studied it in even more depth since. And not just music but the entire spectrum of popular culture starting in the 19th century. A few people here know more on individual aspects of popular cultural history than I do - that’s the fate of all generalists - but I’m convinced nobody knows more about it overall. My opinion is an informed one, for whatever that’s worth. It might be worth little on the specialized subject of punk rock, but then again, maybe not. > > Here’s my opinion. > > I though the Sex Pistols were crap in 1977 and nothing I’ve read or heard since has made me change my mind. > > Attitude and talent can co-exist. In this case, it doesn’t. Attitude does not last. Talent lasts. The Sex Pistols did not last, in any sense of the word. QED.\* > > - No, not you. Go away. 🙂 It’s not clear what your exact argument is, but the two most obvious possibilities are unsound: \*Possibility #1 ## If a band lasts, then it has talent The Sex Pistols didn’t last The Sex Pistols didn’t have talent\* This argument is clearly invalid, since even if the two premises are true the conclusion doesn’t necessarily follow. Even if it’s true that 1.) if it’s raining my car will get wet and 2.) it’s not raining, it doesn’t follow that 3.) my car is not wet. Perhaps I just washed it. Furthermore, the first premise is arguably false, since there are bands that have lasted which nevertheless lack talent. The argument is therefore unsound. \*Possibility #2 ## If a band has no talent, then it will not last The Sex Pistols didn’t last The Sex Pistols didn’t have talent\* This argument is valid—if the premises are true the conclusion must be true—since it’s an example of _modus tollens_. However, it is not sound, since both premises are demonstrably false: there are bands with no talent that nevertheless last, and the Sex Pistols have obviously lasted—at least in _some_ respect (you denied that they have lasted “in any sense of the word”). Even if you qualify the second premise and claim that the Sex Pistols haven’t lasted _musically_, the first premise remains false, and you haven’t considered the possibility that the Sex Pistols will last in the long run. Furthermore, many will simply deny your claim that the band hasn’t lasted musically. Now you may want to make the stronger, more controversial claim that a band has talent _if and only if_ it lasts: if it has talent it will last _and_ if it lasts it has talent. It’s hard to imagine this claim being true. And if you simply want to _define_ a band that lasts as a band that has talent and a band that has talent as a band that lasts, then you’re simply playing with semantics and _equivocating_ with respect to the common-sense notions of _lasting_ and _having talent_ (which imply no necessary connection between the two at all). I’m not taking issue with your assessment of the Sex Pistols’ music. I’m simply pointing out your flawed reasoning. Then again, logic isn’t a part of popular culture. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/83 "2006-03-16T02:41:18Z")
> [@Crandolph](#): > > I believe “Ballroom Blitz” didn’t come out until about '74… Well now you’ve made me go and look it up. It was [released](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweet_(band)#Album_Discography) as a single in the Uk in 1973. It was included on the LP _Desolation Boulevard_, released November, 1974, and was re-released in 1975. The performance referenced was in support of the first release, and [aired](http://www.sweetlife.dk/887) September 13, 1973. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Rieux](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Dr.Rieux](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Rieux)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/84 "2006-03-16T08:04:56Z")
So f-ing what. The Sex Pistols were never a serious band, just a cynical marketing ploy. ---
**Author:** ![Small\_Clanger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@Small\_Clanger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Small_Clanger)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 10:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/85 "2006-03-16T10:14:33Z")
> [@whole bean](#): > > You seem intent on limiting punk to British punk, Yup. More specifically English punk > [@](#): > > to many the Ramones are quintessential punk – they may not have had the whole brit-punk look exactly > [@](#): > > but what the hell does that matter? If dressing punk made you punk, then Good Charlotte and Avril Lavigne would be a punk. They’re not. What does that tell you? That nearly thirty years have passed? The _English_ punk scene was about style and attitude and non-conformity\*\*\*\*\*. Which is why wearing punk stuff in 2006 is presumably post-retro-ironic or something. \*\*\*\*\* back in the 70s at least, got stale fast. ---
**Author:** ![ayalabmaj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/54ee81/32.png) [@ayalabmaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ayalabmaj)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/86 "2006-03-16T15:33:26Z")
> [@Dr. Rieux](#): > > So f-ing what. The Sex Pistols were never a serious band, just a cynical marketing ploy. Why couldn’t they have been both? ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/87 "2006-03-16T17:03:15Z")
> [@Small Clanger](#): > > Yup. More specifically English punk exactly Reread WordMan’s post with the brief history of punk, I haven’t the energy to reeducate you. You’re trying to reinvent the term. You are flat out wrong to say there was no punk before the Pistols, wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Small\_Clanger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@Small\_Clanger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Small_Clanger)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/88 "2006-03-16T18:11:19Z")
> [@whole bean](#): > > You’re trying to reinvent the term. You are flat out wrong to say there was no punk before the Pistols, wrong. Maybe I should’ve been more specific. What I’m trying to point out is that there were no English punk bands before The Sex Pistols. There was certainly no English punk movement. After the Pistols there were suddenly a _lot_ of punk bands, a sort of Cambrian Explosion of punk rock. The punk movement here was not just about the music. It was about self-sufficiency (loads of bands got their records pressed independantly and there was a huge fanzine scene) and the style which for the most part followed the Pistol’s (Jamie Reid/Westwood/Bromley contingent) mode. Playing fast angry music (usually badly) was only part of the requirement. The American interpretation of “punk” seems to include bands that I don’t see as having much in common with the English “punk” bands. Ask a British person (of a certain age) to name some punk bands and the list will go some thing like: The Sex Pistols, The Clash, The Damned, The Stranglers, The Jam. . . ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/89 "2006-03-16T19:00:05Z")
> [@Small Clanger](#): > > Maybe I should’ve been more specific. What I’m trying to point out is that there were no English punk bands before The Sex Pistols. There was certainly no English punk movement. After the Pistols there were suddenly a _lot_ of punk bands, a sort of Cambrian Explosion of punk rock. > > The punk movement here was not just about the music. It was about self-sufficiency (loads of bands got their records pressed independantly and there was a huge fanzine scene) and the style which for the most part followed the Pistol’s (Jamie Reid/Westwood/Bromley contingent) mode. Playing fast angry music (usually badly) was only part of the requirement. > > The American interpretation of “punk” seems to include bands that I don’t see as having much in common with the English “punk” bands. > > Ask a British person (of a certain age) to name some punk bands and the list will go some thing like: > > The Sex Pistols, The Clash, The Damned, The Stranglers, The Jam. . . very well. Just don’t tread on American punk, man. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/90 "2006-03-17T01:05:53Z")
> [@Crandolph](#): > > Steve Jones and Paul Cook were in a few bands after the Pistols and in fact backed Joan Jett on some songs that people who just said they can’t play likely know and enjoy. Don’t forget that Steve Jones produced a number of sessions with the emerging bands in California at the end of the 70s (A couple years ago, DBK Works rreleased the stuff he did for The Avengers), and was, as far as I can tell, the first one to break from the Dangerhouse sound. His work as a producer had the West Coast sound like you get later from Spot and Ray Manzarek. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/91 "2006-03-17T01:13:28Z")
> [@Crandolph](#): > > Steve Jones and Paul Cook were in a few bands after the Pistols and in fact backed Joan Jett on some songs that people who just said they can’t play likely know and enjoy. Don’t forget that Steve Jones produced a number of sessions with the emerging bands in California at the end of the 70s (A couple years ago, DBK Works rreleased the stuff he did for The Avengers), and was, as far as I can tell, the first one to break from the Dangerhouse sound. His work as a producer had the West Coast sound like you get later from Spot and Ray Manzarek. ---
**Author:** ![want2know](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/50afbb/32.png) [@want2know](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/want2know)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/92 "2006-03-17T18:35:17Z")
> [@jackelope](#): > > Good for them. The entire concept of a “Rock and Roll Hall of Fame” is an oxymoron. If there’s one defining concept of great rock and roll, it’s the individualistic, anti-authority attitude of the musicians. The willingness (and intelligence) to see through the prevailing wisdom and do your own thing, whether it’s Ornette Coleman’s Harmolodics or Black Francis screaming in 7/4 time. That attitude is what makes rock attractive, and that’s what makes some of the great innovators seem so much larger than life. > > The thought of a “Hall of Fame”–of solemnizing, exalting, and _institutionalizing_ the visceral, anti-establishment ethos–is ludicrous at best, offensive at worst. So, if we use your logic, they should stop giving out Nobel Peace Prizes. After all, since peace activism is mostly “anti-authority”, rewarding it and “solemnizing” it just cheapens the entire movement, right? Puh-leeez! I, for one, am glad there is a Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. And rock music _is_ an institution, whether you like it or not, and deserves the “exaltation” its pioneers are finally receiving through their enshrinement. As far as the Pistols go, if they wish to refuse or denigrate their award, they certainly have the right to do so. However, IMHO, Johnny goes out of his way to be obnoxious and contrary. And while that may work when you’re a rebellious youth, at his age it’s kinda ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/93 "2006-03-17T18:47:34Z")
> [@want2know](#): > > So, if we use your logic, they should stop giving out Nobel Peace Prizes. After all, since peace activism is mostly “anti-authority”, rewarding it and “solemnizing” it just cheapens the entire movement, right? That’s a horrible comparison. Peace activism isn’t anti-authoritarian in the sense that it believes there should be no such thing as authoritarianism. At most, it’s a demand for a more responsible and moral authority. The driving ethos of most rock and roll has been a call for individualism and a defiance of authority regardless of the legitimacy or morality of that authority. There’s plenty of room to debate how much of this was empty posturing (My take: almost all) but it’s always been an overt part of the culture. As such, a Rock ‘n’ Roll hall of fame runs directly counter to that ethos, and comes across as empty, hypocritical, and incestously self-congratualtory, like virtually all industry-driven reward ceremonies. Also, it’s in fuckin’ _Cleaveland_. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/94 "2006-03-17T19:43:13Z")
> [@want2know](#): > > As far as the Pistols go, if they wish to refuse or denigrate their award, they certainly have the right to do so. However, IMHO, Johnny goes out of his way to be obnoxious and contrary. And while that may work when you’re a rebellious youth, at his age it’s kinda ridiculous. If I got offered some recognition, and then got told I had to pay $10,000 for a seat at the ceremony, I’d probably be less than gracious too. ---
**Author:** ![Subterraneanus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Subterraneanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterraneanus)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/95 "2006-03-17T21:20:27Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > That’s a horrible comparison. Peace activism isn’t anti-authoritarian in the sense that it believes there should be no such thing as authoritarianism. At most, it’s a demand for a more responsible and moral authority. The driving ethos of most rock and roll has been a call for individualism and a defiance of authority regardless of the legitimacy or morality of that authority. There’s plenty of room to debate how much of this was empty posturing (My take: almost all) but it’s always been an overt part of the culture. As such, a Rock ‘n’ Roll hall of fame runs directly counter to that ethos, and comes across as empty, hypocritical, and incestously self-congratualtory, like virtually all industry-driven reward ceremonies. > > Also, it’s in fuckin’ _Cleaveland_. Hey, don’t knock _Cleveland_: those folks have always been on the cutting edge of hydro-technology. For example, Clevelanders were the first to discover that water can be ignited. The process is called _Cuyahoganization_. ---
**Author:** ![Seven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Seven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Seven)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2006, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253/96 "2006-03-18T08:01:34Z")
After hearing about being tapped for the hall of fame (and jerking off in the bathroom about it) Lydon HAD to come out fake swinging. I swear everything that comes out of that idiot’s face is bullshit shock-value. I do get the feeling they don’t make any money off that album, so they might be a bit bitter. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sex-pistols-say-bollocks-to-hall-of-fame/348253.md?page=4)