LOL...I don't know why I agree but I do. I was 7 in '77 and my parents were a "bit hippie". I was always the "black sheep" and revelled in the attitude, the safety pins, tartan trousers and Plastic leather jacket with the studs in it..........LOL. What a laugh!!!
Still got a clip round the ear mind when I over stepped the mark!! My dad used to take the piss but now sees that the attitude element was a way of expression at an early age. All builds on character and determination in a way, being able to express yourself without fear (within reasoning and with intelligent opinion). Whether you agreed or disagreed with the opinion of another punk....you respected it for individualism, argue the toss and end up fighting at the end of the night.
There was always a limit, but for the "hardcore punks" Sid included, they were *all out*, hell-bent on Anarchy and Destruction. That was the difference between the attitude and the image lifestyle. Again Mr Lydon addresses this along the lines of "He {Sid}, believed the hype surrounding the whole punk rock ethos".
Most of the "punks" who fall into the first category, went over the boundaries of even semi intelligent behaviour; But were most of the "casualties" a victim of their own despair and misconceptions from the reality of the "punk situation"? ...........Phew, I'm getting a bit too deep here!!!!
I think most "punks" fall into the second category thankfully, or like myself, somewhere in the middle between good & bad, bad & good?? Punk could be clbutted as a lot of things, but one thing is for sure, Punk is individualism with your own limit for morals. (with a small amount of image to boot)
Kev.H
