Though it might well be political.
I am writing this post, which is extracted from an email I had cause to write this week when someone questioned a stance I had taken in a newsletter that Pink Floyd was a punk band.
I know - right?
To quote the writer ...
"And Pink Floyd a punk band, WTF!!???)"an email correspondent
I often take a contrary stance on things to elicit a response. But when I take that stance, it isn't uninformed, just different. So 'Pink Floyd is a punk band' had the desired effect, it elicited response - but no logical argument back, just a preconceived notion that they are a rock/progressive band - which cant possibly be punk. Me - I still say YES. I mean if Malcolm McLaren can produce an album that fuses opera and R&B has he lost his punk? Rigid classification just doesn’t work - I think that also goes some way to explaining how databases have transitioned over time from hierarchical to relational to graph. But back to Punk Floyd.
A Collection of Links you might enjoy - if not - read on
- MTO 21.2: Cohen, Expansive Form in “Dogs”
- Pink Floyd’d Animals pulls no political punches 40 years later
- There is actually a punk band called Punk Floyd
- Punk Floyd : Were Pink Floyd one of the biggest influences on punk?
The point of it all being that if Punk is only about the music / style / genre … then no, Pink Floyd is not a Punk Band
If Punk is all about anti-establishment commentary and political action - then absolutely yes, they are ... and Roger Waters specifically is the original punk.
The desire of the article and a lot of what I write is to take a non obvious stance to make people sit up and either respond "right, I never thought about it that way" or "the guys talking crap” … and I look forward to that debate … always seeking to learn.