The connection between them was photographer Lynn Goldsmith, who dated Springsteen and was friends with Smith. I believe she introduced them.
I’m trying to find the cite about the guys who would eventually form The Clash meeting the Ramones before they played their first concert in London. They Were moaning about wanting to be in a band, but not being good enough. Joey reassured them that it didn’t matter - “Come see us. We suck!”
gaffa - I haven’t heard that story, but it doesn’t seem out of character for the Ramones. The one I’ve heard is that the Sex Pistols opened for Joe Strummer’s pub rock band the 101ers one night, and Joe decided punk was the next big thing. Next thing you know, we have the Clash.
So are there people seriously suggesting that “punk” in its original meaning can only be applied to English bands? I mean, hardcore did happen, and it was its own thing, but to say that American punk was limited to hardcore is totally absurd. Television played their first gig at CBGB in '74, several years before hardcore was a twinkle in a Californian’s eye.
And to address Miller’s comment: there’s no contradiction between those two things I said. As has been mentioned, the first printed use of the term “punk rock” was describing a ? and the Mysterians song, which had little if anything to do with the “movement” that sprung up in the '70s. However, the style of music that we’re talking about was named for the magazine called Punk that was printed in New York. I know I misspoke in the OP, but punk knows no nationality.
I also want to bring twee into the discussion. Silly as the term sounds, I think twee is just as powerful an expression of the punk spirit as the original, more violent or visceral punks were. I’ll take on anyone who tries to tell me And Don’t the Kids Just Love It isn’t punk rock! (Not to assume that anyone would. Just saying.) For the record, I give credit to the English for twee, both the term and its earliest exemplars (except the Modern Lovers, of course, who are fellow Bostonians, but I won’t split hairs).
Yeah, ignoring the whole early 70s NYC scene is nuts - to say nothing of what was bubbling under the ground in Detroit five years earlier.
As for ‘Red Patent Leather" - how much do you like the New York Dolls? Because my review - as someone who owns a red vinyl copy of it, and still buys the occasional Johnny Thunders bootleg just because - is that unless you are a huge Dolls fan you can do without. Like most live punk albums of the era, it sounds like the engineer left the microphone in his sock drawer. Most of the new songs can be found on either the Heartbreakers’ LAMF or on the early Johansen and Thunders solo albums.
For my money, their New Years eve gig in 1973, which was broadcast on WABX, Detroit is their best live album since it combines a good set with some sense of sonic quality. There are a couple of versions of that floating around.
I liked Really Red but found their “the message” more interesting than their music; their front man, U Ron Bondage, was married to one of the MyDolls. Both bands started out not very good but got much better over the years. (The DYI thing.) More on Really Red here.
One day I went into Ron’s record store, heading for the Old Fogey Section (Dave Edmunds, Nick Lowe, etc.) & he put “You’re Gonna Miss Me” by the 13th Floor Elevators on the turntable.
Definitely Punk Precursors; this excellent book pointed out that, when the Elevators made it out to San Francisco (freshly shorn for a court date), they actually taught the artists on the scene how to play loud, driving rock & roll. The SF gang had the hair & the hip clothing but were mostly folkies trying to figure out how to express themselves electrically. However, the Elevators were mostly remembered for taking acid until their brains dribbled out of their ears & for their tragic later history…
(source)
Bridget - thanks for that link. Teaching you the Fear was a great song and albumn.
Rhino Records has put out some Punk Precursor albumns as well as a lot of real kick ass music. http://www.rhino.com/
Near as I can tell, “Punk” has three broad definitions in the world of music -
-** Punk, the Scene**: bands that were part of the scene that came to be called Punk in the 70’s across a variety of locations, but most famously in New York City and London. Bands like Talking Heads, Suicide, Blondie, Television, etc. in NYC may not sound like Punk, the Sound (see below), but they were and are punk in terms of being part of the scene.
Punk, the Sound: Punk has become shorthand for Ramones-style music. Like it or not, it is commonly-used and useful in its way, and has led to subgroups like Mallpunk, skate-punk, cowpunk, etc.
Punk, the Sneer: Punk is an attitude within the music world. It can be anti-establishment and political, or it can just be a middle-finger to any icon or unquestioned rule. Heck, Kanye West stage-bombing Taylor Swift was punk in its way - Kanye was a douchebag, but he did it his way 
Each use of the word is valid.
What is punk?
(headbutts you, then gobs in your face)
THAT’S WHAT, YOU GIT!
Haven’t I seen you at the Cat? You look familiar (ahhh… but you know how that place is… it coulda been someone else.)
What is punk? Suck my cock. You’re my punk now.
Did I offend you? Good.
(The Tubes: I was a Punk before you were a Punk)
(There has always been a long history of homosexuality in punk. Some because of the original definition of the word… ask Ginsberg, or watch the Maltese Falcon, and some because of the transgressive nature of the movement: if it offended people, do it, and some because it was a good way to get cash for drugs.)
(53rd and 3rd, Ramones)
I’m actually not sure which definition came first. Punk as a weak (receiving) gay, or punk as worthless crap.
I was looking at a bunch of old punk demos for a long post inspired by WordMan’s post above (I abandoned it, the premise turned out to be crap) and I came across this clip.
I loved Crass as a kid so I put it on and while listening looked through the comments section.
Take a look. I think many of the people who are responding don’t realize that this song was recorded in 1977. It’s a bizarre and yet somehow a very fitting complement to the discussion here.
The Velvets were an art rock band, the polar opposite of punk.
Punk, as a musical genre and social force, started in England in 1976. The only American band of the 70s (or earlier) that came close to sounding like punk were the Ramones, but their image was all wrong. The image was at least as important to punk as the music, despite what some people might say.
The fact that “punk” is an American word, that basically meant “hoodlum”, is irrelevant to the musical genre - it could be called “Dave rock” and it would still have started in England in 1976. With the words “Is she really going out with him?”
Released as a single in September 1978. (Yeah, I can nitpick about dates too.) Or am I missing a nuance?
Are you kidding? Art rock is not antithetical to punk at all - the musicians that the New York punk scene crystallized around were largely made up of artists or artistically inclined people. Patti Smith, love her or hate her, put out one of the defining punk albums in the '70s, and it doesn’t get much artier than Patti Smith. Besides, calling VU an “art rock” band is kind of misleading, because their art connections are largely extrinsic to the origins of the band and the music itself. They were avant-garde, yes, but that doesn’t conflict with punk at all.
Punk definitely did not start in England, nor did it start in 1976. The punk bands that emerged in England freely admitted to identifying this new, aggressive, and largely heedless music coming out of the States with the social struggles they were experiencing. Name me the first punk bands to emerge in England in '76 (or earlier) and I’ll bet I can find the American band they were imitating or inspired by.
And for that matter, how were the Ramones not punk? And how was their image “all wrong”? They were yobs that wore ratty clothes, sang songs about doing drugs and then did said drugs. No art theory there - distilled punk. Nor were they “the only American band that came close” - this statement tells me you don’t know much about American music from the period. The Modern Lovers? The Dead Boys? The Voidoids? DNA? How do these bands not sound like punk to you?
And anyway, a lot of this taxonomy we’re talking about has been applied retroactively, because no matter where you were, punk was never meant to be any one thing. Punk was avant-garde composers like Rhys Chatham or Glenn Branca playing on the same bill as Sonic Youth, and Marquee Moon is just as vital a punk document as Rocket to Russia.
New Rose by The Damned was released on October 22nd, 1976, on the Stiff Records label, catalogue number BUY 6. That’s the song I was quoting from, and the song that is generally recognised as the first punk release.
The Damned. Oh, and replying “The Shangri-Las” doesn’t count.
Television’s “Little Johnny Jewel” came out in '75, and Patti Smith’s “Hey Joe/Piss Factory” came out in '74. Independent releases by American punks that predate “New Rose.” The Damned are noted by Wikipedia as being the first English punk band to release a single, but I’d say that’s as far as it goes.
Good songs, not punk. Television had more in common with prog than punk, and Patti Smith was art rock. It’s quite simple - you can’t be punk and be progressive and/or arty - they are anathema. That’s why The Clash and The Damned weren’t punk after their first few albums.
To be honest, “Yes Sir, I Will” wasn’t punk, but I wouldn’t necessarily say that to the face of a skinheaded vegan with CRASS patches on his studded pleather jacket…
That’s fucking stupid. Punk wasn’t about regressing, it was about loosing the restraints and doing whatever you wanted. Punk isn’t anathema to anything, that was the whole point. Any kind of rules, especially the kind that you are suggesting, are the real anathema to punk.