Johnny Rotten's biography is a frustrating read to be sure. He's deliberately confrontational and negative, matter of factly contradictory and he constantly contradicts himself. But, his biography, Rotten: No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs (so named for the sign that used to hang outside English pubs) is pretty fascinating.
One very interesting thing Johnny does is to hand over the narrative to others who were there with him as punk music became relevant. John does most of the talking, but there are whole chapters handed over to his father, plus anecdotes from people like Steve Jones (who was with John in the Sex Pistols), Billy Idol (Generation X), Dave Ruffy (The Ruts), filmmaker Julien Temple and Chrissie Hynde (The Pretenders, also sometime cashier at Malcolm McLaren's Sex boutique)., amongst others. Instead of one man's skewed view of music history, we get several different perspectives of the same story, which makes for some fascinating reading.
First off, John's recollection of the history of punk is very different from a lot of other histories I've read. John claims that punk didn't just come from the disaffectedness of urban youth, but that it also grew in the fashion shops and gay bars of working class England. He said that punk was as much a fashion movement as a musical movement. He said that punks would buy (or more often, steal) clothing from shops and then tear it up, stitch it up and mold it into something else. He also claims that he invented the clothespins-holding-clothes-together movement, not Richard Hell, which is the first time I've ever heard that. Another interesting claim is that punk was ultimately British, not influenced by the American proto-punk bands that toured through the area before punk hit (The Ramones, New York Dolls, The Stooges), which is another thing I've only heard from John's mouth. He does say that the British did punk better than most of the American bands that followed, which I agree with. The British understood that punk music was a class and political movement before it was a musical movement.
Johnny's claims often clash with others in the book, and sometimes with himself. His dislike and outright hatred for most humans is difficult to swallow without seeing it as an affectation. John seems deliberately confrontational for the same of conflict, not for some ideological point he's making. He hates Malcolm McLaren and for pretty good reasons (Malc managed the band, mostly into the ground), hated Nancy Spungen (but everyone did), hated The Clash, hated bandmate Glen Matlock and hated pretty much every other band doing punk at the time. His views of Sid Vicious are interesting. He liked Sid as a person, but hated his drug addiction, his obsession with being a rock star, his inability to play his instrument and his relationship with Nancy Spungen. He also says in multiple places that Sid was a passive, calm person, but also says he did wade into bikers while playing on stage and swung around a bicycle chain while dancing in clubs. It's difficult to take John seriously sometimes.
The real meat of this book is understanding the musical output and overall feel of the punk scene at the time. Seeing a band as scummy and vaguely talented as the Sex Pistols climb out of the muck is endlessly entertaining. There's a full chapter on John's trip to Jamaica to scout reggae music for Richard Branson's Virgin record label that's very interesting. He also reprints all the statements from his trial with Malcolm McLaren, who John sued for revenues after the Pistols broke up, which make for some candid looks at the players at the time. The stories from the trip across the American south are wonderfully decadent.
I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in the punk movement or independent music. Just remember to take John's word with a grain of salt.
No comments:
Post a Comment