Abstract:Punk's do-it-yourself call to arms led to a widespread adoption of the rhetoric, if not always the practice, of independence from traditional means of production. During the early period of punk's development in the United
“…Thus we find such laying bare most clearly in the cover art for the records of a small number of acts such as the Desperate Bicycles, TV Personalities, Scritti Politti, and the Door and the Window, which, as we will see further below, included detail of how each record was made, and a breakdown of costs for key elements of the final product (such as recording studio, mastering, pressing, and sleeves). Occasionally this minor meta-discourse of DIY praxis was extended: at least one of these acts (Scritti Politti) also produced a booklet one could mail order about how to make your own record (Bestley, 2018: 13); another (the Desperate Bicycles) propagandised further by singing about the process of making their own record in the lyrics of one of the recorded songs.…”
Section: Tracing the Development Of Diy Discourse In Early British Pu...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pete Dale confirms that technology was the driver for both the practice and the discourse of ‘ so-called Xerox music’ (emphasis added), ‘because basic multi-track recording equipment was being mass-produced as never before, and because Xerox copiers enable fanzine writers to easily produce discourse about the recordings produced’ (2008: 175). 6 Yet, while Xerox – photocopying – arguably suggested a challenge to ideas of copyright, possibly to notions of ownership and access too, it was also duplicatory, offering not just sameness, but the guarantee of sameness, while, as Russ Bestley notes, ‘even the production of fanzines and flyers required access to often elusive technical processes’ (Bestley, 2018: 8). The Xerox machine was generally located in that least punk of everyday spaces, the office, where one might have to work one's dread daily drudge prior to night-time excitements.…”
Section: Tracing the Development Of Diy Discourse In Early British Pu...mentioning
This article offers a critical provocation and reconceptualisation of the DIY/punk nexus, both to challenge the standard critical narrative of punk as originary DIY culture and to liberate the broader practice of DIY from the limits of punk. It critically traces the development of the discourse of DIY both in original British punk c. 1976–1984 and in what has become punk studies, mapping the development of the scholarly orthodoxy. It then challenges the latter via an interrogation of aspects of punk that have been repeatedly presented in the scholarship as evidence of its DIY-ness: punk mediation, instrumentation, and participation. These three then constitute a context for the central and more detailed critical exploration of the most widely accepted DIY/punk practice, the independent or self-produced record, which is also read as ‘non-DIY.’ The article concludes by widening the critical gaze via a call for DIY to undergo a process of depunking.
“…Thus we find such laying bare most clearly in the cover art for the records of a small number of acts such as the Desperate Bicycles, TV Personalities, Scritti Politti, and the Door and the Window, which, as we will see further below, included detail of how each record was made, and a breakdown of costs for key elements of the final product (such as recording studio, mastering, pressing, and sleeves). Occasionally this minor meta-discourse of DIY praxis was extended: at least one of these acts (Scritti Politti) also produced a booklet one could mail order about how to make your own record (Bestley, 2018: 13); another (the Desperate Bicycles) propagandised further by singing about the process of making their own record in the lyrics of one of the recorded songs.…”
Section: Tracing the Development Of Diy Discourse In Early British Pu...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pete Dale confirms that technology was the driver for both the practice and the discourse of ‘ so-called Xerox music’ (emphasis added), ‘because basic multi-track recording equipment was being mass-produced as never before, and because Xerox copiers enable fanzine writers to easily produce discourse about the recordings produced’ (2008: 175). 6 Yet, while Xerox – photocopying – arguably suggested a challenge to ideas of copyright, possibly to notions of ownership and access too, it was also duplicatory, offering not just sameness, but the guarantee of sameness, while, as Russ Bestley notes, ‘even the production of fanzines and flyers required access to often elusive technical processes’ (Bestley, 2018: 8). The Xerox machine was generally located in that least punk of everyday spaces, the office, where one might have to work one's dread daily drudge prior to night-time excitements.…”
Section: Tracing the Development Of Diy Discourse In Early British Pu...mentioning
This article offers a critical provocation and reconceptualisation of the DIY/punk nexus, both to challenge the standard critical narrative of punk as originary DIY culture and to liberate the broader practice of DIY from the limits of punk. It critically traces the development of the discourse of DIY both in original British punk c. 1976–1984 and in what has become punk studies, mapping the development of the scholarly orthodoxy. It then challenges the latter via an interrogation of aspects of punk that have been repeatedly presented in the scholarship as evidence of its DIY-ness: punk mediation, instrumentation, and participation. These three then constitute a context for the central and more detailed critical exploration of the most widely accepted DIY/punk practice, the independent or self-produced record, which is also read as ‘non-DIY.’ The article concludes by widening the critical gaze via a call for DIY to undergo a process of depunking.
“…DIY is often viewed as a core element of punk, an aspect that enabled activism against an assumed authority and power (Guerra, 2018; Martin-Iverson, 2014). It is therefore often lauded as a means of engaging with/utilising punk in a pedagogical sense (Bestley, 2017; Cordova, 2016). It should be capable of working in tandem with education in developing and encouraging the ‘movement against and beyond boundaries’ (Hooks, 1994).…”
DIY is often viewed as a core element of punk, an aspect that enabled activism against an assumed authority and power (Guerra, 2018; Martin-Iverson, 2017). It is therefore often lauded as a means of engaging with/utilising punk in a pedagogical sense (Bestley, 2017; Cordova, 2016). It should be capable of working in tandem with education in developing and encouraging the ‘movement against and beyond boundaries’ (hooks, 1994). However, this is not necessarily simple or straightforward to realise through one’s own pedagogical practices, especially when one considers them through an intersectional lens. We argue that punk scholarship on DIY fails to account for its capacity to support ableist ideologies and structures - incorporating it into punk pedagogy in an uncritical manner risks further deepening asymmetrical power relations in regards to disability and the adversity that people with disability experience. We utilise collaborative auto-ethnography to unpack some of the complexities involved in pursuing punk pedagogical practices and unpacking the aforementioned critique of DIY further. We consider how DIY can/could potentially be a powerful, empowering pedagogical tool and consider the ways DIY purports a damaging, ableist narrative, which at times can even aid the neoliberal agenda within higher education. The necessity for punk pedagogies to be underpinned by considerations of intersectional issues, both from the viewpoint of the teacher and the students, is demonstrated through our use of critical disability theory as an analytical tool.
“…(LWT 1976). However, in practice such hierarchies were harder to budge, particularly outside the realm of punk performance (Bestley 2018), though even here the mythology only briefly outweighed the brutal reality that some musicians were simply more capable, or more interesting, than others.…”
mentioning
confidence: 95%
“…There is, of course, a tension here between Fig.01 Clothing advertisements, New Musical Express, November 1977 andJuly 1978. punk as attitude and ideology and punk as a new and distinct form of popular music; between a philosophical approach to the subculture and the consumer-driven, traditional music industry that saw an opportunity to access emerging markets and new audiences. Certainly when it came to punk 'products' -records, clothing, promotional material -the more traditional business-led operations of branding, marketing, professional design and copyright held sway (Bestley 2018, Dale 2018. Punk clothes, always displaying a tension between the punk high fashion of Vivienne Westwood and Malcolm McLaren and the charity shop adaptations and home-made, do-ityourself outfits of many early fans, also witnessed a boom in copycat items sold by smaller traders and mail order sellers advertising in the back pages of the music press ( Fig.01).…”
Punk's embrace of autonomous, do-it-yourself, artistic production has been widely documented as a key element of the punk 'explosion'. At times, however, the rhetoric has exceeded the actual practice, and the boundary between DIY authorship and professional production has become blurred. Though much early punk visual material was indeed raw, rough and ready, and often appeared to run counter to any kind of formal aesthetic criteria in respect to design or taste, it was also widely the product of trained graphic designers and illustrators with a keen awareness of the appropriate visual language required to reflect a new, self-styled, anarchic and polemical subculture. Even many of the celebrated 'do-it-yourself ' punk pioneers relied on access to professional services for reproduction, including printers, pre-press art workers and record sleeve manufacturers. However, much like the punks who chose to make their own outfits, rather than buy 'official' clothing from the burgeoning punk boutique (and mail order) market, some fans and enthusiasts attempted to create their own punk graphics, or decided to adopt a naïve model of détournement in order to adapt or personalise jackets, shirts, school bags, scrapbooks and even record sleeves within their own collections. These home made artefacts can be viewed as products of subcultural participation and belonging, as an individual's response to punk's call to arms and as markers of possession. They may also help us to better understand an underlying, distilled and unmediated interpretation of punk's 'natural' visual language.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.