Apparently, punk didn't want them or the song. Fine; marketed in the punk arena, is "Do Anything You Wanna Do" masquerading as one of the best power pop songs, after all? Contradictions abound!
Great great great stuff. I’m not a fan of punk but you’re so right this tracks cross-overs and even defies the norm of what would traditionally be expected in the genre. I quite liked the track, actually. Decent vocals, a catchy melody, a sense of rhythm my ears find more palatable than the typical punk repertoire (no disrespect to the genre, it’s just not my cup of tea, but I’ve always valued its rightful place in society more so than the music itself).
Thanks, Andy! Those "expectations" you mention are what fueled my writing this! Timing and label positioning pointed the band into the punk arena, but their true influences and output (see my reply to S.W. elsewhere here) belied that PR direction!
The guy who wrote "Do Anything..."s melody (Graeme Douglas) was in a pop band (Kursaal Flyers) just before The Rods! I had Eddie & The Rods' first two albums, and can't remember another song....it'd be interesting to go back and listen to the rest of their songs....not so much to see if we could find another "Do Anything...", but more so (I'm guessing) see if we can find ANY punk leanings, or just more songs that seem to find the pop/power pop lane in which to settle! I'm glad you like the song, though.....that PROVES it ain't punk!!!😁👍
Speaking of exceptions that prove the rule, I'm curious to see how much our impressions of punk overlap -- this is one of the first songs I heard that made me think both "that's unquestionably punk" and "I really like that song" -- "Shit From An Old Notebook" by the Minutemen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zjcut9IQRM
Thanks for giving it 10 seconds; interesting I like the vocals on that better than many punk songs (D. Boone does not have a great voice; but the balance between the guitar, voice, and drums on that song feels right to me).
Great stuff! I find it fascinating that there isn’t more talk of just how important pub rock was for the development of both punk and power pop. There was a lot going on musically in mid-70s Britain, lots of transformation, and it seems like pub rock laid the groundwork for a lot of what followed to some degree (glam too). And, from what I can tell, there was a brief moment when punk and power pop were like twins.
Thanks, Steve.....this was a fun one! Yes, punk and power pop have to be twins, or I wouldn't love both as much as I do (I sense you feel similarly)! Punk and power pop are (and have been) far more than "like twins"....they ARE twins, and gloriously so! Exhibit A: The Ramones. And, here we get into the inspirations which fueled the output, and we happily put aside the annoying genre "assignments"!
I loved The Ramones right outta the gate (in real time), but it took me until their 3rd, "Rocket to Russia" (my fave of theirs) before I realized what was (and had been) so obvious: Regardless of what genre they were assigned, it was finally obvious, just by listening, what and who their influences/inspirations were: Bluntly (and the list can be longer), Spector, Beatles, Beach Boys (and aren't those sounds at the top of every power pop artist's and fan's lists?).
To drive the point home, just how different are The Ramones from The Raspberries? Even if you find their respective sounds polarizing, musically, isn't the list of Ramones influences literally no different from Eric and the 'Berries?!? That's why we loved Eric (among so many more reasons)!
After I got to know The Ramones (personally, and thru interviews/articles of the day), it was just a slam dunk affirmation of all of that! For me, the breakdown occurs when "punk" acts just hammer away into a melody-free din, and become more about anger and braggadocio than anything even close to melody and songcraft.
Pub: You're right about its influence on both punk and power pop. But, in the U.S., pub was an absolute non-entity. Columbia, bless their hearts, released a couple of Dr. Feelgood's albums here in the States (mid-'70s), but I've never recorded an album, and I almost outsold them!!!
As for the lack of "talk about pub's importance," you'll find way more talk of that in the UK tabs...nothing here, and certainly not now. But, back in the day, too, nothing but the cursory mention of pubbers in the U.S. rock press, and that was only when they released a domestic album (which was rare).
Good point....but, in the States, that all seems like a well-kept secret (or "blindspot" as you say), and only the output that gave them U.S. headlines, airplay, and sales is all that anyone is aware of. It's weird, from a point-of-reference angle, that the pub roots for each are A) lost in the mists of time and lack of press, airplay, and sales in the States and B) so much more front-of-mind for record buyers/historians in the UK!
You'll get nods of understanding and approval from UK fans with that mention, but here in the States, the phrase "pub rock" will but enlist a furrowed-brow "huh?" from most record-buying fans (even from collectors of '70s vinyl), except for the most well-read and discerning listeners.
I think once Status Quo morphed into their '70s heads-down boogie rock they became the most popular pub rock band. They had Wembley in their sights and America also started to buy their albums in droves.
You mention the Ramones, and I'd also mention Blondie as a crossover success that started out in the punk scene (I wouldn't call Blondie punk but they also started at CBGB).
Exactly, Nick.......and, that's a whole other great discussion waiting to happen: The beauty of that whole era and scene....Punk and new wave (to the movement's/genre's credit) whelped such a wide variety of disparate sounds! Far more than just the bam-bam-bam of the narrow "punk" lane.
For every Tuff Darts, you had a Blondie; for every Rezillos, you had a Television; for every Generation X, you had a Talking Heads. It really was dizzying, but you gotta hand it to the artists for not just settling for a sound....they, for the most part, followed their passion, and produced genuinely original music.
Also, hand it to the visionary label execs (the bloodsuckers came later, just as the purist of disco in its early days soon gave way to the money-grubbers to dilute its beauty). Sire's Seymour Stein was leading the way, certainly, but there were others that signed unique acts; they just didn't match the prodigious (talent and sheer number) signings that Seymour made. Capitol had The Motels, Elektra had Shoes (power pop, but that same era, and so overlooked), and there were others. Warner Bros. always seemed to be behind in the new wave/punk lane (Sex Pistols notwithstanding).
For me, this exploration of punk's evolution through the lens of The Rods' trajectory and their signature track, "Do Anything You Wanna Do", offers a fascinating perspective on the fluidity of genre boundaries and the influence of cultural context on artistic interpretation. It's a testament to the complexity of music history and the ongoing dialogue between tradition and innovation. Top-quality writing, a great read.
Thanks, Jon! Much appreciated, and thanks for subscribing! You nailed it....it's all of that, and I also wanted to shine a spotlight on that specific moment in time, and how Island showcased them, so openly in the punk arena (would love to hear the bandmembers' thoughts on that)!
Had The Rods gone label-shopping 5 years before or after, it's doubtful any bold pronouncement of their proposed genre labelling would've occurred to label suits (Just "here's a new band..........")!
I think of Joe Jackson with A&M and his first album in '78 (signed then, "Look Sharp" released 1/79): He, of course, got lumped into the new wave camp, even to the point (by some critics) as being called the label's Elvis C. Thankfully, Jackson's talent carried him above and beyond that era, and he didn't get buried under the hype and flood of barely-proficient contemporaries! Other acts weren't so fortunate, but other acts may not have been so talented.
See Joe's "Steppin' Out" for an incredible genre-stretching (and era defying) example. Thankfully, Joe had a career long and relevant enough to produce, in 2012, his Ellington tribute album, "The Duke."
Thanks, Colin! By "punkiest," you're referring to the music or the crowd? I could assume either, I suppose, 'cause I'm really only familiar with a small handful of their songs, and I like what I've heard. I'm more fascinated by Grohl, for all he's been through, but he's emerging into one of rock's best "elder statesman," and I really only mean that because he IS a veteran of several decades, now, and he's a very vocal rock historian (as I've seen in interviews, etc). Did they do any covers last night?
Live covers tell you an awful lot about an artist! One of my favorite stories is telling how I saw Jellyfish (look 'em up, if you're not familiar, and try their "The Ghost at Number One") in about '91, and they did an encore of Player's "Baby Come Back"!! Completely out of the blue, and made a simple, forgettable '70s Top 40 pop song suddenly a pop classic because Jellyfish covered it! I ended up doing "Baby Come Back" several times at karaoke a decade ago!!
Yeah! It was a bit of both. Like you mentioned, Dave is an “elder statesman” now but considerably younger than the bands I still go see who formed in the 70s and are the furthest thing from punk. It was just a fun energy and more f bombs in one night than I’ve seen in my lifetime 🤣
They did do a couple of covers. A few Foo deep cuts. Nothing from Nirvana or the band he was in before that that had relative success. They did a bunch of improvisation though. I was really impressed. First time for me seeing them but I know about a dozen or so of their songs and had to go bc it was their first time in Charlotte since 2012ish.
You can tell that Grohl cares about the audience and the music. I gathered as much from his memoir — terrific read if you haven’t read it. But getting to see him actually living it out was really powerful. I had a lot of adrenaline pumping leaving the show!
Hey Brad. Been reading the comments. Fantastic. Another article lays therein. I know we talked about this before... so I know I'm just repeating myself, sorry... but I gotta say it... July 4, 1976, The Roundhouse, Camden, London, and July 5, 1976, Dingwalls, Camden Lock, London - the Ramones first ever UK gigs (as a support act)... look it up again and look at who attended (who was in the audience). I'd say that was "Punk" ground zero, the catalyst that caused the reaction that caused the explosion... You may remember, when we discussed this last year, at first I got all patriotic and said that I thought that "Punk" hatched in the UK prior to July 1976, due to The Clash, the Buzzcocks and The Sex Pistols, but history shows they all went to that gig and their first proper "Punk" gigs and recordings happened after that date, and they all cite that gig, the Ramones influence, as the tectonic plate shift... I'm willing to be proved wrong... always open to being shown differnt perspectives... however, the last time we talked about this, well, that's where we arrived... those two Ramones gigs in Camden, July 1976...
At least, those beginning seeds that were planted on The Ramones' two-night London gigs....I didn't spend much time other than state just what you said above (and cited a reference), but it's my article on the time I spent with the lads in '77 and '78 in Houston!
Hey, Brad, another thing that I wanted to say, on this topic of 'labelling' songs. I've never really understood this. The closest that I can ever get to figuring it is that it was originally driven by commerce, how to categorise a product so you can drive sales, and people generally wanting to put things into understandable boxes.
When people ask me what kind of music I like, firstly I get suspicious, and secondly, IF I answer, I take the time to explain that I like great songs, and that great songs can be reworked in several genres and they are still great songs. So it could be that there is only one song by a great artist that I actually really like. Bill Withers’ “Ain’t No Sunshine” being a case in point — “Lovely Day” and “Grandma’s Hands” sure, they are great songs, they’re just not for me, however “Ain’t No Sunshine” I’ve listened to thousands of times, and not just Bill Withers’ version, and I still love it, that song still always gets me.
Continuing this — please tell me what label or category you put this song in? “Ain’t No Sunshine”? It’s not Blues. It’s not soul. What is it? It defies categorisation. And it’s the same for many great songs.
I get a similar situation when people ask me which artists I’m into. I can probably count on one hand artists whose entire catalogue I like or at least like some tracks on all the albums/material they’ve released.
Those include David Bowie, Prince, and Amy Winehouse. I literally love almost everything they’ve done. That’s so rare for me.
I can’t think of any bands whose entire catalogue grabs me, usually, it’s just one or two albums at most, but more often just one or two songs.
So this whole idea of people saying things like — I like pub rock but not punk, or I’m into the blues but not jazz, or I only listen to rap music but never r’n’b…
…well, no, I just don’t get it!
I think the only thing that labelling is anywhere near close to useful for, is just the general categorisation of genres and sub-genres. Like the genre of "Contemporary Popular Music" (as oposed to maybe "Classical Music") and the sub-genres of "Rock" and "Soul" and "Blues" etc. That's kind of useful when trying to communicate generally.
And, that's it.
Thanks again for a great insight into "Do anything You Wanna Do" as you can see, these articles and the comments get me thinking!
Glad we gotcha thinking, Nic....thanks! You're right about it all. Genre labels have only ever been about clear communication, usually with the end-user (and sales) in mind. In my two show-biz arenas, they were certainly necessary for that communication.
Record stores: We needed divider cards to separate albums, yes, but then they had to occupy certain sections: rock, country, R&B, classical, etc. Radio: I was not about to work at a classical station, so 2 "FM Progressive Rock" stations it was! When it starts to get "personal" regarding your chosen faves, etc, it's up to us to, then, equivocate to whomever! And, you said it all perfectly with how you respond to questions about artists and songs.
"Ain't No Sunshine," if pressed, I'd say it's pop music, with that explanation leaning on the fact that it crossed over so many playlists....soul, Top 40, even MOR! Artists, as you know, hate these labels, 'cause they don't like being pigeonholed or typecast. But, most also realize it's a necessary part of the nature of the beast, and they realize their label, rock critics (when reviewing, etc), radio and retail have to find a slot for them somewhere....in order to effectively pitch and sell their product!
That's all well said, but I would still defend genre labels to an extent.
Genre categories offer a map of sorts and it's important to remember that "the map is not the territory" (meaning that any map will always make decisions about how to simplify and reduce the complexity of reality to a representation) but a good map will still help you navigate.
I was recently praising Kadrian's post on Belafonte / Mouskouri ( https://firstpressing.substack.com/p/the-language-of-music ) and I said that one of the challenges of writing about music is that you want to let the recording speak for itself -- the song can convey a set of emotional and artistic choices far better than describing it. But, at the same time a listener needs some point of entry and some way to orient themselves to be in the right mindset to listen and understand. I think his piece did a good job of doing that but, most of the time, the way that we we understand music is by making connections to other things we've heard, and what other songs convey emotionally or artistically.
Genre descriptions can reference some of the ways that we make those connections. They aren't perfect, and we shouldn't be trapped by them, but they can be a useful guide.
I don't know if "Ain't No Sunshine" is Soul but, if I knew that someone liked Soul I could recommend it as being Soulful. . .
Wasn't familiar with Eddie & the Hot Rods but they do sound like a band that could have been played alongside the Bay City Rollers. Perhaps not quite as pop though. I hear The Romantics! Maybe they needed a few more years and MTV to hit the public ear and eye!
The Romantics! Good call....hadn't thought of them in this context! But, it works. MTV would've been good, but like radio, they had to choose to play them! By '81 (when Nic saw them at The Marquee, and on 8/1/81, when MTV signed on), The Rods were, likely, on their career downturn (I'd have to check).
As for the States, The Rods never got airplay. Island released "Do Anything..." as a single here in the U.S., but, as you can guess, got no AM airplay, and they were one of those bands who were just too melodic and/or too much in the "punk" lane (fans' and press perspective) to get FM radio play. Had "Do Anything..." been anything close to a Top 40 hit, it'd be interesting to see if it would-a made your 1977 Memoir Top Ten!!
Great stuff, as per usual, sir. My thoughts on punk, in general, and my takeaway from your article seem to align with Andres', so I'm gonna piggyback off of and second his comment, rather than waste everyone's time searching for my own words to say pretty much the same thing. Although, I'm gonna give myself some credit for still finding such a long-winded way to essentially say good job and ditto.
Hey, I live on "long-winded" it seems! I can't seem to say "welcome, and thanks for subscribing" and I've already logged 1,500 words, and the dreaded "too long for e-mail" blue banner of death!!
Well, and your comment, I sense, Patrick, is borne out of that same boredom I have with that confounded genre labelling. I had fun playing with all that here, and hopefully exposed the folly of that exercise, while also hoping readers might have found a new song "lurking" behind the dreaded (and unfortunately-tagged) "punk" shadows! Thanks again!
Well said. Definitely dangerous to get too wrapped up in genre labels. For example, my sister steadfastly contends she hates sci-fi, which is just insane to me. I get that sci-fi is not everyone's preferred genre, but there's so much variety within it, you're bound to find something you like in it. You can't just casually dismiss the whole genre, or you're gonna miss out on something good. So I try very hard not to do that with any genre, whether it be in books, music, movies, or whatever. I don't like a lot of punk, so I rarely go searching for music that, fair or not, falls under its umbrella, but I'm careful not to dismiss it when I do come across it. And I've found some gems because of that, which I believe validates such an approach.
You got it, Patrick! We write, so we get how we, sometimes, need a thing on which to hang something, so our readers can get a point of reference! I think our troubles arise because that same general public embraces those labels, whole cloth. That's why I love playing with and having fun with that very same dilemma!
This was fun to write, also, because it called upon my "boots on the ground" memories of working at Houston's Cactus Records store in '76 and '77 (I was 22). I was the one who ordered imports, and remember precisely getting in that first Damned album...I knew it was the first "official" punk album from UK! So, I snapped it up right away, and only discovered later that no label dared release it in the U.S.!
I remember getting in the Hot Rods album, too, and while it was released before The Damned's album, I only recall the pronouncement (by UK rock tabloid press) that it was that Damned album that was to be the first British punk album.
“Punk’s Bay City Rollers”😂 I love that! Which ever way you look it, “Do Anything You Want To Do” is a great song. Thanks for the shoutout, Brad, much appreciated.
Great great great stuff. I’m not a fan of punk but you’re so right this tracks cross-overs and even defies the norm of what would traditionally be expected in the genre. I quite liked the track, actually. Decent vocals, a catchy melody, a sense of rhythm my ears find more palatable than the typical punk repertoire (no disrespect to the genre, it’s just not my cup of tea, but I’ve always valued its rightful place in society more so than the music itself).
Thanks, Andy! Those "expectations" you mention are what fueled my writing this! Timing and label positioning pointed the band into the punk arena, but their true influences and output (see my reply to S.W. elsewhere here) belied that PR direction!
The guy who wrote "Do Anything..."s melody (Graeme Douglas) was in a pop band (Kursaal Flyers) just before The Rods! I had Eddie & The Rods' first two albums, and can't remember another song....it'd be interesting to go back and listen to the rest of their songs....not so much to see if we could find another "Do Anything...", but more so (I'm guessing) see if we can find ANY punk leanings, or just more songs that seem to find the pop/power pop lane in which to settle! I'm glad you like the song, though.....that PROVES it ain't punk!!!😁👍
Exactly! “The exception proves the rule” kinda situation!
Speaking of exceptions that prove the rule, I'm curious to see how much our impressions of punk overlap -- this is one of the first songs I heard that made me think both "that's unquestionably punk" and "I really like that song" -- "Shit From An Old Notebook" by the Minutemen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zjcut9IQRM
I could manage just about ten seconds or so 🤣 The melody is not terrible but I can’t with those vocals!
Thanks for giving it 10 seconds; interesting I like the vocals on that better than many punk songs (D. Boone does not have a great voice; but the balance between the guitar, voice, and drums on that song feels right to me).
Yes, I agree it’s not as disruptive as other punk songs. I’m a soul/R&B kind of guy, where vocals are everything, so I’m obviously biased 🤩
Like Andres I respect punk, but I think I fall into a trap of sometimes associating "true punk" as the stuff that I don't really enjoy.
Great stuff! I find it fascinating that there isn’t more talk of just how important pub rock was for the development of both punk and power pop. There was a lot going on musically in mid-70s Britain, lots of transformation, and it seems like pub rock laid the groundwork for a lot of what followed to some degree (glam too). And, from what I can tell, there was a brief moment when punk and power pop were like twins.
Thanks, Steve.....this was a fun one! Yes, punk and power pop have to be twins, or I wouldn't love both as much as I do (I sense you feel similarly)! Punk and power pop are (and have been) far more than "like twins"....they ARE twins, and gloriously so! Exhibit A: The Ramones. And, here we get into the inspirations which fueled the output, and we happily put aside the annoying genre "assignments"!
I loved The Ramones right outta the gate (in real time), but it took me until their 3rd, "Rocket to Russia" (my fave of theirs) before I realized what was (and had been) so obvious: Regardless of what genre they were assigned, it was finally obvious, just by listening, what and who their influences/inspirations were: Bluntly (and the list can be longer), Spector, Beatles, Beach Boys (and aren't those sounds at the top of every power pop artist's and fan's lists?).
To drive the point home, just how different are The Ramones from The Raspberries? Even if you find their respective sounds polarizing, musically, isn't the list of Ramones influences literally no different from Eric and the 'Berries?!? That's why we loved Eric (among so many more reasons)!
After I got to know The Ramones (personally, and thru interviews/articles of the day), it was just a slam dunk affirmation of all of that! For me, the breakdown occurs when "punk" acts just hammer away into a melody-free din, and become more about anger and braggadocio than anything even close to melody and songcraft.
Pub: You're right about its influence on both punk and power pop. But, in the U.S., pub was an absolute non-entity. Columbia, bless their hearts, released a couple of Dr. Feelgood's albums here in the States (mid-'70s), but I've never recorded an album, and I almost outsold them!!!
As for the lack of "talk about pub's importance," you'll find way more talk of that in the UK tabs...nothing here, and certainly not now. But, back in the day, too, nothing but the cursory mention of pubbers in the U.S. rock press, and that was only when they released a domestic album (which was rare).
It does seem like an American blindspot. But Nick Lowe, Elvis Costello, The Records, et al. all came out of pub rock.
Good point....but, in the States, that all seems like a well-kept secret (or "blindspot" as you say), and only the output that gave them U.S. headlines, airplay, and sales is all that anyone is aware of. It's weird, from a point-of-reference angle, that the pub roots for each are A) lost in the mists of time and lack of press, airplay, and sales in the States and B) so much more front-of-mind for record buyers/historians in the UK!
You'll get nods of understanding and approval from UK fans with that mention, but here in the States, the phrase "pub rock" will but enlist a furrowed-brow "huh?" from most record-buying fans (even from collectors of '70s vinyl), except for the most well-read and discerning listeners.
I think once Status Quo morphed into their '70s heads-down boogie rock they became the most popular pub rock band. They had Wembley in their sights and America also started to buy their albums in droves.
You mention the Ramones, and I'd also mention Blondie as a crossover success that started out in the punk scene (I wouldn't call Blondie punk but they also started at CBGB).
Edit: Maybe I shouldn't be so hesitant. Their Buddy Holly cover is fairly punk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xuzobXZUsY
Exactly, Nick.......and, that's a whole other great discussion waiting to happen: The beauty of that whole era and scene....Punk and new wave (to the movement's/genre's credit) whelped such a wide variety of disparate sounds! Far more than just the bam-bam-bam of the narrow "punk" lane.
For every Tuff Darts, you had a Blondie; for every Rezillos, you had a Television; for every Generation X, you had a Talking Heads. It really was dizzying, but you gotta hand it to the artists for not just settling for a sound....they, for the most part, followed their passion, and produced genuinely original music.
Also, hand it to the visionary label execs (the bloodsuckers came later, just as the purist of disco in its early days soon gave way to the money-grubbers to dilute its beauty). Sire's Seymour Stein was leading the way, certainly, but there were others that signed unique acts; they just didn't match the prodigious (talent and sheer number) signings that Seymour made. Capitol had The Motels, Elektra had Shoes (power pop, but that same era, and so overlooked), and there were others. Warner Bros. always seemed to be behind in the new wave/punk lane (Sex Pistols notwithstanding).
For me, this exploration of punk's evolution through the lens of The Rods' trajectory and their signature track, "Do Anything You Wanna Do", offers a fascinating perspective on the fluidity of genre boundaries and the influence of cultural context on artistic interpretation. It's a testament to the complexity of music history and the ongoing dialogue between tradition and innovation. Top-quality writing, a great read.
Thanks, Jon! Much appreciated, and thanks for subscribing! You nailed it....it's all of that, and I also wanted to shine a spotlight on that specific moment in time, and how Island showcased them, so openly in the punk arena (would love to hear the bandmembers' thoughts on that)!
Had The Rods gone label-shopping 5 years before or after, it's doubtful any bold pronouncement of their proposed genre labelling would've occurred to label suits (Just "here's a new band..........")!
I think of Joe Jackson with A&M and his first album in '78 (signed then, "Look Sharp" released 1/79): He, of course, got lumped into the new wave camp, even to the point (by some critics) as being called the label's Elvis C. Thankfully, Jackson's talent carried him above and beyond that era, and he didn't get buried under the hype and flood of barely-proficient contemporaries! Other acts weren't so fortunate, but other acts may not have been so talented.
See Joe's "Steppin' Out" for an incredible genre-stretching (and era defying) example. Thankfully, Joe had a career long and relevant enough to produce, in 2012, his Ellington tribute album, "The Duke."
Great piece, Brad! Saw Foo Fighters last night and it was the punkiest rock show I’ve ever been to. Great timing to see this today!
Thanks, Colin! By "punkiest," you're referring to the music or the crowd? I could assume either, I suppose, 'cause I'm really only familiar with a small handful of their songs, and I like what I've heard. I'm more fascinated by Grohl, for all he's been through, but he's emerging into one of rock's best "elder statesman," and I really only mean that because he IS a veteran of several decades, now, and he's a very vocal rock historian (as I've seen in interviews, etc). Did they do any covers last night?
Live covers tell you an awful lot about an artist! One of my favorite stories is telling how I saw Jellyfish (look 'em up, if you're not familiar, and try their "The Ghost at Number One") in about '91, and they did an encore of Player's "Baby Come Back"!! Completely out of the blue, and made a simple, forgettable '70s Top 40 pop song suddenly a pop classic because Jellyfish covered it! I ended up doing "Baby Come Back" several times at karaoke a decade ago!!
Yeah! It was a bit of both. Like you mentioned, Dave is an “elder statesman” now but considerably younger than the bands I still go see who formed in the 70s and are the furthest thing from punk. It was just a fun energy and more f bombs in one night than I’ve seen in my lifetime 🤣
They did do a couple of covers. A few Foo deep cuts. Nothing from Nirvana or the band he was in before that that had relative success. They did a bunch of improvisation though. I was really impressed. First time for me seeing them but I know about a dozen or so of their songs and had to go bc it was their first time in Charlotte since 2012ish.
You can tell that Grohl cares about the audience and the music. I gathered as much from his memoir — terrific read if you haven’t read it. But getting to see him actually living it out was really powerful. I had a lot of adrenaline pumping leaving the show!
Sounds fun! Thanks for all that! I'm glad you got to see them.
Hey Brad. Been reading the comments. Fantastic. Another article lays therein. I know we talked about this before... so I know I'm just repeating myself, sorry... but I gotta say it... July 4, 1976, The Roundhouse, Camden, London, and July 5, 1976, Dingwalls, Camden Lock, London - the Ramones first ever UK gigs (as a support act)... look it up again and look at who attended (who was in the audience). I'd say that was "Punk" ground zero, the catalyst that caused the reaction that caused the explosion... You may remember, when we discussed this last year, at first I got all patriotic and said that I thought that "Punk" hatched in the UK prior to July 1976, due to The Clash, the Buzzcocks and The Sex Pistols, but history shows they all went to that gig and their first proper "Punk" gigs and recordings happened after that date, and they all cite that gig, the Ramones influence, as the tectonic plate shift... I'm willing to be proved wrong... always open to being shown differnt perspectives... however, the last time we talked about this, well, that's where we arrived... those two Ramones gigs in Camden, July 1976...
All exactly right, Nic! As for the "other article that lays therein," I've already written it!👇
https://bradkyle.substack.com/p/keyless-entry-my-night-in-the-ramones?utm_source=publication-search
At least, those beginning seeds that were planted on The Ramones' two-night London gigs....I didn't spend much time other than state just what you said above (and cited a reference), but it's my article on the time I spent with the lads in '77 and '78 in Houston!
Hey, Brad, another thing that I wanted to say, on this topic of 'labelling' songs. I've never really understood this. The closest that I can ever get to figuring it is that it was originally driven by commerce, how to categorise a product so you can drive sales, and people generally wanting to put things into understandable boxes.
When people ask me what kind of music I like, firstly I get suspicious, and secondly, IF I answer, I take the time to explain that I like great songs, and that great songs can be reworked in several genres and they are still great songs. So it could be that there is only one song by a great artist that I actually really like. Bill Withers’ “Ain’t No Sunshine” being a case in point — “Lovely Day” and “Grandma’s Hands” sure, they are great songs, they’re just not for me, however “Ain’t No Sunshine” I’ve listened to thousands of times, and not just Bill Withers’ version, and I still love it, that song still always gets me.
Continuing this — please tell me what label or category you put this song in? “Ain’t No Sunshine”? It’s not Blues. It’s not soul. What is it? It defies categorisation. And it’s the same for many great songs.
I get a similar situation when people ask me which artists I’m into. I can probably count on one hand artists whose entire catalogue I like or at least like some tracks on all the albums/material they’ve released.
Those include David Bowie, Prince, and Amy Winehouse. I literally love almost everything they’ve done. That’s so rare for me.
I can’t think of any bands whose entire catalogue grabs me, usually, it’s just one or two albums at most, but more often just one or two songs.
So this whole idea of people saying things like — I like pub rock but not punk, or I’m into the blues but not jazz, or I only listen to rap music but never r’n’b…
…well, no, I just don’t get it!
I think the only thing that labelling is anywhere near close to useful for, is just the general categorisation of genres and sub-genres. Like the genre of "Contemporary Popular Music" (as oposed to maybe "Classical Music") and the sub-genres of "Rock" and "Soul" and "Blues" etc. That's kind of useful when trying to communicate generally.
And, that's it.
Thanks again for a great insight into "Do anything You Wanna Do" as you can see, these articles and the comments get me thinking!
Over and out.
Glad we gotcha thinking, Nic....thanks! You're right about it all. Genre labels have only ever been about clear communication, usually with the end-user (and sales) in mind. In my two show-biz arenas, they were certainly necessary for that communication.
Record stores: We needed divider cards to separate albums, yes, but then they had to occupy certain sections: rock, country, R&B, classical, etc. Radio: I was not about to work at a classical station, so 2 "FM Progressive Rock" stations it was! When it starts to get "personal" regarding your chosen faves, etc, it's up to us to, then, equivocate to whomever! And, you said it all perfectly with how you respond to questions about artists and songs.
"Ain't No Sunshine," if pressed, I'd say it's pop music, with that explanation leaning on the fact that it crossed over so many playlists....soul, Top 40, even MOR! Artists, as you know, hate these labels, 'cause they don't like being pigeonholed or typecast. But, most also realize it's a necessary part of the nature of the beast, and they realize their label, rock critics (when reviewing, etc), radio and retail have to find a slot for them somewhere....in order to effectively pitch and sell their product!
💿✨😁👍🎶
That's all well said, but I would still defend genre labels to an extent.
Genre categories offer a map of sorts and it's important to remember that "the map is not the territory" (meaning that any map will always make decisions about how to simplify and reduce the complexity of reality to a representation) but a good map will still help you navigate.
I was recently praising Kadrian's post on Belafonte / Mouskouri ( https://firstpressing.substack.com/p/the-language-of-music ) and I said that one of the challenges of writing about music is that you want to let the recording speak for itself -- the song can convey a set of emotional and artistic choices far better than describing it. But, at the same time a listener needs some point of entry and some way to orient themselves to be in the right mindset to listen and understand. I think his piece did a good job of doing that but, most of the time, the way that we we understand music is by making connections to other things we've heard, and what other songs convey emotionally or artistically.
Genre descriptions can reference some of the ways that we make those connections. They aren't perfect, and we shouldn't be trapped by them, but they can be a useful guide.
I don't know if "Ain't No Sunshine" is Soul but, if I knew that someone liked Soul I could recommend it as being Soulful. . .
Agreed. Maps are good, and I love maps. Especially simplified representations. There be dragons. There be treasure.
Agreed
https://milesjaffee.substack.com/p/jeff-buckleys-grace-in-11-map-points?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
I saw this post this evening, it's really very good... and the map reference fits nicely, thought you may both enjoy.
Wasn't familiar with Eddie & the Hot Rods but they do sound like a band that could have been played alongside the Bay City Rollers. Perhaps not quite as pop though. I hear The Romantics! Maybe they needed a few more years and MTV to hit the public ear and eye!
The Romantics! Good call....hadn't thought of them in this context! But, it works. MTV would've been good, but like radio, they had to choose to play them! By '81 (when Nic saw them at The Marquee, and on 8/1/81, when MTV signed on), The Rods were, likely, on their career downturn (I'd have to check).
As for the States, The Rods never got airplay. Island released "Do Anything..." as a single here in the U.S., but, as you can guess, got no AM airplay, and they were one of those bands who were just too melodic and/or too much in the "punk" lane (fans' and press perspective) to get FM radio play. Had "Do Anything..." been anything close to a Top 40 hit, it'd be interesting to see if it would-a made your 1977 Memoir Top Ten!!
Great stuff, as per usual, sir. My thoughts on punk, in general, and my takeaway from your article seem to align with Andres', so I'm gonna piggyback off of and second his comment, rather than waste everyone's time searching for my own words to say pretty much the same thing. Although, I'm gonna give myself some credit for still finding such a long-winded way to essentially say good job and ditto.
Hey, I live on "long-winded" it seems! I can't seem to say "welcome, and thanks for subscribing" and I've already logged 1,500 words, and the dreaded "too long for e-mail" blue banner of death!!
Well, and your comment, I sense, Patrick, is borne out of that same boredom I have with that confounded genre labelling. I had fun playing with all that here, and hopefully exposed the folly of that exercise, while also hoping readers might have found a new song "lurking" behind the dreaded (and unfortunately-tagged) "punk" shadows! Thanks again!
Well said. Definitely dangerous to get too wrapped up in genre labels. For example, my sister steadfastly contends she hates sci-fi, which is just insane to me. I get that sci-fi is not everyone's preferred genre, but there's so much variety within it, you're bound to find something you like in it. You can't just casually dismiss the whole genre, or you're gonna miss out on something good. So I try very hard not to do that with any genre, whether it be in books, music, movies, or whatever. I don't like a lot of punk, so I rarely go searching for music that, fair or not, falls under its umbrella, but I'm careful not to dismiss it when I do come across it. And I've found some gems because of that, which I believe validates such an approach.
You got it, Patrick! We write, so we get how we, sometimes, need a thing on which to hang something, so our readers can get a point of reference! I think our troubles arise because that same general public embraces those labels, whole cloth. That's why I love playing with and having fun with that very same dilemma!
This was fun to write, also, because it called upon my "boots on the ground" memories of working at Houston's Cactus Records store in '76 and '77 (I was 22). I was the one who ordered imports, and remember precisely getting in that first Damned album...I knew it was the first "official" punk album from UK! So, I snapped it up right away, and only discovered later that no label dared release it in the U.S.!
I remember getting in the Hot Rods album, too, and while it was released before The Damned's album, I only recall the pronouncement (by UK rock tabloid press) that it was that Damned album that was to be the first British punk album.
“Punk’s Bay City Rollers”😂 I love that! Which ever way you look it, “Do Anything You Want To Do” is a great song. Thanks for the shoutout, Brad, much appreciated.
Thank you for the inspiration! Those memories are valuable. Thanks for putting them down "on paper"!😉