THE SEX PISTOLS

I don't know whether it is a purely personal thing or something to do with buying albums retrospectively and not being around at the time but, despite being a fairly big fan of first generation punk, I really don't like the Sex Pistols. Sure, this is a great album (although hardly the best of its genre) and, sure, they did release a few classic, era-defining singles, but I don't much like the band and I don't much like this album. In part I'm sure the problem lies with the perceived status of the Sex Pistols. Contrary to what the mass media might tell you they did not invent punk. I think it is fair to give equal credit to Johnny Thunders and the Ramones for that particular achievement. Indeed, they weren't even the first punk band in England - I'm fairly sure the Damned were. And they certainly were not (in a million years) the best punk band (Ramones and Clash for starters). What this all boils down to is the fact they were the first and best properly marketed punk band. I almost feel sorry for Johnny Rotten (note the "almost") as he obviously did have genuine artistic intentions but the fact remains the Sex Pistols were only just more than your typical manufactured pop band. No other classic punk band (excluding the "punk for the sake of punk" bands) was as much style over substance than the Sex Pistols. Yeah, yeah, I know they did have some substance but any band that sacks their main songwriter (Glenn Matlock) because someone else looks cooler as the bassist (Sid Vicious) does not suggest the band should be taken seriously as artists. Of course I'd love to draw the line at this point and dismiss the Sex Pistols altogether but we are left with the conundrum that their debut and only proper studio album is, in fact, really, really good. The song "God Save the Queen" might be mostly famous for being kept off number one in the UK singles chart by Orwellian manipulation by the authorities but that doesn't mean it isn't a great song. Similarly it is probably fair to call "Anarchy in the U.K." a definitive single of the era and I would not balk too much at this claim. Indeed, I'll go along with it. We all know the rhymes don't work ("anarchist" pronounced as "anar-kaist") and I fail to find it at all sincerely threatening but it is still a really great song. Indeed, perhaps the main fault of this album (other than the filler) is the fact that it is just so obviously style over substance. Disregarding my fear of falling into the rank pit of rock cliches the greatest lie ever uttered on vinyl is the sneered "we mean it maaaaan" during "God Save the Queen". If you can be sure of one thing it is that monsieur Rotten certainly does not "mean it". But then he could hardly go around singing about making money and manipulating social perceptions to sell more records. It doesn't just annoy me because of the insincerity itself but I mainly find offence at the fact people just don't realise the true nature of their "attitude". To avoid angering me even further I suggest you don't make any comparisons with the Clash. That said, Rotten isn't a stupid man so at least obviously tongue-in-cheek lines like the "fuck this and fuck that" rant in "Bodies" and the piss-taking in "Seventeen" ("when your mommy dies, she will not return") I can find genuinely amusing. On the other hand, the piss-taking in "New York" used to irritate the fuck out of me. If you didn't know, the lyrics are a homophobic parody of the New York Dolls (who were indirectly responsible for the Sex Pistols having a career in the first place). Thankfully, having now heard Johnny Thunders' riposte "London Boys", which is a hundred times more witty (and accurate for that matter - he is only too keen to remind them of their manufactured status) and a hundred times the better song, I can rest assured he had the last laugh. Anyway, with regards to this album the three hit singles are all great songs ("God Save the Queen", "Anarchy in the U.K." and "Pretty Vacant") and there are plenty of good album tracks ("Bodies", "Holidays in the Sun", "EMI", etc.) but there is still too much filler for me not to call this one overrated mother of an album. The slow "Sub-Mission" does sound quite threatening but it hardly plays to their strengths and "Problems" also goes on far too long for what is nothing more than a mediocre effort. The sameness that most punk albums suffer from is, of course, also a problem. I do want to give British TV station Channel 5 a special mention, though, for the superb use of "Liar" as music advertising a programme about disgraced politician Jeffrey Archer. If you saw it, you'll know what I mean. Anyhow, I strive for notions of objectivity so I'm not going to say this is anything less than a great album. It is not utterly fantastic, though, and it is wholly and momentously overrated by the more naive and ignorant members of the media and general public alike. And it should never be forgotten (particularly when discussing them in the same breath as the Clash or the Ramones) that the Sex Pistols were most successful as a triumph for Malcolm McClaren's marketing techniques and the power of manufacturing pop music.

From: Adlai Kowsnofski

I'd just like to point something out about the earlier Sex Pistols material (particularly Never Mind the Bollocks). There's a 2001 Sex Pistols compilation entitled 'There Is No Future' floating around that you really should hear if you ever get the chance. It was recorded by the original '75 Pistols lineup (i.e., before Glenn Matlock was sacked), and the songs (especially "God Save the Queen", "Anarchy in the U.K.", and "EMI") are all about ten million times better than in the Never Mind... recordings. The band sounds well-oiled, raw, and vicious, and they actually play the songs at the brisk pace they SHOULD have been played at in the first place. If they'd used these takes in the final recording, it'd easily have been 10* material.

• Return to the main page

Email me at: jackfeeny@yahoo.co.uk