I remember when my mum and dad were part of a cultural revolution and I pissed all over the historical evidence. Actually, wait, that never happened. I was never so privileged to have been handed down such culturally important artefacts like the acetate to ‘Anarchy in the U.K’, and then decide to burn it.
Fair enough it’s his stuff, apparently, but what’s ‘punk’ about torching something worth so much money that hundreds, even thousands of people could be helped if the proceeds from selling it were donated to charity? He didn’t get the amount he wanted so he destroyed it.
I do, however, agree with Joe Corré on one point. ‘Punk’ has become a watered-down, mainstream, throw-around term for alternative culture. The era of Mohawks and safety pins should have been put to rest aeons ago, but yet it still creeps into peripheral view. The ethos of ‘punk’ isn’t dead, it’s still here in the DIY scenes and the people grafting for something to believe in or trying to make a change.
What are your thoughts? Is he right or wrong?