The Mighty Musical Observations Thread

[101Walterton]

I wonna be me so I have a picture of someone else

A second of your life is ruined for life.

This song should have been on Bollocks instead of, say, Liar.

Satellite over both. Imo.

Damn straight.

Can’t disagree with that.

[Kory]

This Is brainwash and this is a clue to the Docs who fool you

I wonna be me so I have a picture of someone else

A second of your life is ruined for life.

This song should have been on Bollocks instead of, say, Liar.

Satellite over both. Imo.

I'd rather see Satellite and IWBM over Liar and Problem.

[Marky Dread]

I wonna be me so I have a picture of someone else

A second of your life is ruined for life.

This song should have been on Bollocks instead of, say, Liar.

Satellite over both. Imo.

I'd rather see Satellite and IWBM over Liar and Problem.

Problems is great.

"I Wanna Be Me" is a good track but the production would be out of place on NMTBHTSP as it was recorded by Dave Goodman in 1976 a year before the Bollocks takes. That said so was AitUK recorded in 1976 but has a much fuller sounding production by Chris Thomas.

[Kory]

A second of your life is ruined for life.

This song should have been on Bollocks instead of, say, Liar.

Satellite over both. Imo.

I'd rather see Satellite and IWBM over Liar and Problem.

Problems is great.

Not greater than those two.

[Heston]

Did You No Wrong for me instead of Problems. It was the only track on Bollocks I never cared for.

[Dr. Medulla]

My students have consistently been baffled by my twin assertions that (a) punk rock saved my life when I was 16 and continues to constructively inform my worldview; and (b) it's largely been a pointless, even regressive movement except for being a hilarious if unintentional critique of popular culture and consumer capitalism as a whole.

I relate to (a) for sure—would you agree that if it was true of more people, then (b) would not be true? Rather, if punk changed the lives of more people, would its impact on the world be more valuable, or is the way in which it changes lives inherently pointless?

It relates to, I think, what a person think punk represents and how it might apply to how you carry yourself. Punk taught me to be more critical, to feel confident about being an outsider and to dissent, and that hierarchies and abstractions get in the way of how we should relate to one another. But punk music and punk communities have, as a whole, been about asserting new dogmas, new hierarchies and exclusivities, and, in the end, to be much more free market capitalist dogmatists than the big bad record company—they just to play the game, too. I don't necessarily begrudge that latter point, but if your aim is to make a living selling records, how radical is that? Staying on a small label might be more ethical and share the wealth better, but it's still capitalism, so let's not exaggerate how radical punk is in taking on The System and all that. Something essential is lost, it seems, when punk gets applied to formal or practical matters. That's what I mean about the apparent paradox about punk's salvational quality and it's meaninglessness to accomplish much.

[Silent Majority]

Did You No Wrong for me instead of Problems. It was the only track on Bollocks I never cared for.

Definitely switch those two.

[101Walterton]

Did You No Wrong for me instead of Problems. It was the only track on Bollocks I never cared for.

Definitely switch those two.

Problems starts great but doesn’t see it through.

[Dr. Medulla]

Can't imagine swapping out songs. Add the others, the more the merrier.

[WestwayKid]

Can't imagine swapping out songs. Add the others, the more the merrier.

I do like Did You No Wrong...but in my mind it's such a perfect album as is - one of the best ever - so no additions or subtractions (or submissions) for me!

[101Walterton]

Can't imagine swapping out songs. Add the others, the more the merrier.

Agree with this more.

[Kory]

My students have consistently been baffled by my twin assertions that (a) punk rock saved my life when I was 16 and continues to constructively inform my worldview; and (b) it's largely been a pointless, even regressive movement except for being a hilarious if unintentional critique of popular culture and consumer capitalism as a whole.

I relate to (a) for sure—would you agree that if it was true of more people, then (b) would not be true? Rather, if punk changed the lives of more people, would its impact on the world be more valuable, or is the way in which it changes lives inherently pointless?

It relates to, I think, what a person think punk represents and how it might apply to how you carry yourself. Punk taught me to be more critical, to feel confident about being an outsider and to dissent, and that hierarchies and abstractions get in the way of how we should relate to one another. But punk music and punk communities have, as a whole, been about asserting new dogmas, new hierarchies and exclusivities, and, in the end, to be much more free market capitalist dogmatists than the big bad record company—they just to play the game, too. I don't necessarily begrudge that latter point, but if your aim is to make a living selling records, how radical is that? Staying on a small label might be more ethical and share the wealth better, but it's still capitalism, so let's not exaggerate how radical punk is in taking on The System and all that. Something essential is lost, it seems, when punk gets applied to formal or practical matters. That's what I mean about the apparent paradox about punk's salvational quality and it's meaninglessness to accomplish much.

Gotcha, well said and relatable for sure.

[Marky Dread]

Can't imagine swapping out songs. Add the others, the more the merrier.

This is hard to disagree with this win/win idea.

[Dr. Medulla]

I feel like Zoidberg under the misapprehension of popularity!

[Marky Dread]

I feel like Zoidberg under the misapprehension of popularity!

The problem is you!