http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/09/why_freddie_mercury_is_a_punkr.html

so...basically...this is McGee blabbing about Freddy Mercury actually being more 'punk rock' than we realise. i dont have a gripe specifically with that statement,...its just this whole fucking culture of talking about stuff being punk rock years before punk was generally accepted to have errupted

this is nothing to do with the movement really, im not defending the rituals of the movement or whatever...

im just so bored of that cliche line...

eg.

'oh yeah...well actually, y'know...johnny cash..was like ...y'know...in many ways. y'know...he was like the very first punk rocker..really..'

fuck. off. boring fucking no point statement.

or even people outside of music, thats a better one.

'well. y'know ...like...Ghengis Kahn,...in many ways sooo punk rock before we even knew what punk was...y'know....'

im sure i've heard this about a million people
these lines tend to get rolled out on documentaries with people gasping to make a point, any point, no matter how dull, tired and fatuous.

anyone thats been a little bit naughty in history instantly becomes a precursor to punk.

does anyone know what im going on about?

there is probably a valid point to be made somewhere about actions and influences, but in my head, i hear this line and just imagine Stuart Maconie gurning away on channel fours 100 greatest punks before punk.