Talk:Sex Pistols/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Contents

ad

I will check this out, but I'm pretty sure the 'hip Young Gunslingers' ad was in New Musical Express to recruit young new journalists to write for that paper rtaher than to form the pistols. The 'hip young gunslingers' included Julie burchill and Tony Parsons, who were actively interested in and made their names by covering the pistols & punk, but the ad wasn't directly connected to the formation of the band. quercus robur

Have checked. This is definately the case quercus robur

D'oh! You're right. The Pistols ad ran :
Wanted: Whizz kid guitarist. Not older than 20. Not worse looking than Johnny Thunders
My memory is slipping -- User:GWO

This ad is covered in Jon savage's book 'Englands dreaming', Mclaren ran the ad, but the band was already formed by then... They auditioned some guitarists but realised that none of them were any better than the band line up as it already stood, so it doesn't really make a difference to the overall history of the band quercus robur

Page title

are they "The Sex Pistols" or the "Sex Pistols"? Either way, the page title should agree with the bold text in the first line. -- Tarquin

Well, Tokerboy just changed the text to The Sex Pistols, but I think he's wrong - I just checked in Jon Savage's tome on punk rock, England's Dreaming, and he indexes them as "Sex Pistols" (and he's not shy of the definite article, because the index also has "Buzzcocks, the", for instance).
One slight problem with this. The band insist they've always been "Buzzcocks", not "The Buzzcocks"... -- User:GWO
OK, so the fella's not perfect (it's still a good book, mind) - I think the index reflects common usage pretty well though, if nothing else: there are more links to Sex Pistols than The Sex Pistols after all. And he does list them as "Buzzcocks, the" rather than "Buzzcocks, The"... hm, why am I writing this? --Camembert
I don't suppose it's a big deal, however - I'll leave things as they are, for now at least. --Camembert
I had thought it was Sex Pistols too, but I typed it into the the allmusic guide and it redirected me to The Sex Pistols. I've checked the Pixies and it redirects "The Pixies" to Pixies, as is correct, so I figured it was reasonably authoritative. Jon Savage might be more accurate though. Tokerboy 21:13 Nov 17, 2002 (UTC)
Yeah, I like allmusic, but it has some appalling errors in it which means I can't bring myself to trust it entirely - just to give one example, it conflates two (maybe even three) different people called Alan Holmes - I know for sure they are not the same person, because one of the Alan Holmeses told a friend of mine himself that they were different. Admittedly, that's somewhat more obscure, but still - I filled in the form to let them know, but nothing changed - if they made it a wiki it might work better  ;) So I tend to trust Savage more - I'll move the article to Sex Pistols, but as I say, it's not a big deal really - I'm just feeling awkward tonight. --Camembert

Need explanation

Again the band faced controversy when a record shop in Manchester was threatened with prosection for diplaying the album's 'obscene' cover, although the case was overturned when defending QC John Mortimer produced expert witnesses who were able to demonstrate that the word "bollocks" was of legitimate English origin.

Can someone explain the last statement? Surely being of legitimate English origin doesn't mean a piece of content is categorically not obscene? Is my issue with the word 'legitimate'? 66.153.56.194 16:51, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Wally Nightingale?

. 144.177.0.6  asked  (Wally Nightingale? Who he?)

No idea, but according to Jon savage & John lydon and their respective books on the Pistols he formed the band in the first place, he's now dead by all accounts due to substance abuse. This is all verifable information in the various Pistols bios etc quercus robur 00:56, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The reaction of most visitors who know a little about the Pistols will be to say "Who?", and to click on the link... but we don't even have a little stub article about him to answer that question. After a little googling I'm far from convinced that he ever really existed, but if he did, it seems he was only a member of the band before they named it "The Sex Pistols". I might be persuaded that he maybe deserves a mention, somewhere in the depths of the article but he certainly doesn't merit the top billing he has now. I'm removing him. GrahamN 04:29, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

"chart rigging"

Current edit reads;

Nevertheless, in the week of Queen Elizabeth II's Silver Jubilee, the record officially reached number two in some UK charts (although many people believe they acually reached number one and the charts were rigged to prevent them topping it), although the title and artist were replaced with a blank space in many publications.

As I recall it wasn't so much 'chart rigging' as refusing to acknowledge the record existed AT ALL, hence the blank spaces instead of the artist and title. I'm convinced that they were number one in some UK charts even if not the 'official Uk radio 1' chart, but this is based more on memmery than anything else, looks like I'll be digging out Englands Dreaming again to try & verify this....quercus robur 18:24, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I have a growing suspicion that this "blank space" business may be either an urban legend, or something that happened, but not in as widespread a way as is implied. I've never seen it given an actual source, e.g. "The Mirror printed the chart with a bank space at number two" or somesuch. (And actually, why not just omit the number 2 altogether and go straight from 1 to 3 rather than leaving a gap?) Bonalaw 12:31, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I clearly remember the blank spaces in more than one chart quercus robur 19:19, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It seemed fairly widespread to me. I recall reading some pop magazine at the time showing the No.1 as a solid black line covering all of the text, and it also appeared that way in the Top 20's that were shown in a couple of tabloid newspapers, who had a habit of publishing the week's Top 20 singles in those days. Also, where I lived at the time (Portsmouth, UK) the local Woolworth's and Rumbelows stores had "Top 20" boards displayed on their singles counter, and both of them had No.1 followed by a blank space. Even at the time, as a 13 year old, I found the whole thing laughable. If you hate the Sex Pistols' "God Save the Queen" then fair enough, but it's fairly extreme behaviour to not even acknowledge that it existed!

Sid Sings

Have moved Sid Sings from pistols discography to 'Viscious solo album' as it's not a Pistols album. In fact should it be removed from discography altogether? Otherwise there is a case for also including PiL, Professionals and Rich Kids as these were all post pistols projects by ex band members? quercus robur 19:59, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree that Sid Sings should not be included in this article, so I removed it. -- Heaven's Wrath   Talk  01:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Biggs?

I noticed someone added Ronnie Biggs as a member. He sang with them on only 2 tracks, I think, which I don't think qualifies him as a "member". If he's listed certainly Edward Tudor-Pole should be. I think existing mentions of them in the article were sufficient, but I will yield to people who know more about it. -R. fiend 19:30, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Biggs wasn't part of the Sex pistols but was just an old lag being used by Mclaren for novelty value once the Pistols were to all intents and purposes finished. quercus robur 19:46, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

post-pistols

I think records released under the Pistols name, post-Lydon, should be privileged (in this article) over other projects. The Cook/Jones pre-Professionals incarnation might not be the canonical Sex Pistols, but those singles had UK chart success and were released under the Sex Pistols name.

  • Agreed, post pistols projects, eg, PiL, The Professinals, Rich Kids, the rubbish Sid Vicious put out, etc, releases should go on their respective pages rather than here. But post-pistols projects using the Pistols name (ie, cash-ins, he said in amost non-NPOV fashion...) should be differentiated as such quercus robur 22:00, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Check out my PiL article, btw. I wouldn't want it nominated for featured status because people tend to gang up and whack on the text of featured candidates (sometimes not for the better), but I think it's pretty comprehensive and colorful.


History Edited

I am an anonymous user who edited the History section of the Sex Pistols page. I have made it more true than the previous version. I used the Sex Pistols Box Set booklet to help me write this. Don't worry, I put it in my own words. 2 April 2005

Pistols manufactured? No. The Clash? Yes.

"Conversely, it can also be argued that the Sex Pistols were a manufactured pop act in the vein of The Sweet, Mud, and other early-'70s 'hard rock' singles acts, inasmuch as their look and sound were in part innovations of Malcolm McLaren's. Opinions, however, differ widely on McLaren's actual responsibility for the band's artistic and cultural relevance, with the evidence suggesting that McLaren was never fully in control of events, and played almost no role in creating the band's actual music and lyrics".


Nonsense. If you look at the FACTS, such an argument cannot be made. Half the band existed before Mclaren's involvement.One third happened to work in Mclaren's shop,the final quarter was spotted by Mclaren in his shop. The only solid Mclaren 'input' concerning the Pistols was that he introduced the first 3 to Lydon, and they wore clothes from his shop (which also, he apparently made them pay for!).


To compare that situation to a manufactured band is laughable. Using that criteria any band that has Manager who makes a decison which affects the band in anyway becomes 'manufactured'! What many people don'trealise these days, is that the 'manufactured' rumour ONLY exists because of a press smear campaign in the 70's, where the lie was spread that the band couldn't even play their own instruments and the 'Bollocks'album featured nothing but session musicians. Couple that with Mclaren's own (largely fictious) account of the band's history in the 'Great Rock And Roll Swindle' film...and you have a myth perpetuated to this day by people who aren't fully aware of the facts. If the press hadn't printed that lie in 1977 and Mclaren hadn't lied in the film in 1979 there's NO way there would ever be any discussion about the Pistols being a manufactured band.


Ironically, if you look at the early history of Pistols 'rivals' The Clash and their Manager Bernie Rhodes, they were very much manufactured in many respects...defintely moreso than the Pistols ever where...Rhodes introduced Strummer to the band (same as Lydon did for Mclaren)...but that's where the similarity between the two bands ends. Rhodes took matters even further, he told them what to write songs about, he told them how to think, he told them how to act, he even told Mick Jones how to cut his hair ....yet The Clash are seen as an honest and scrupulous band, always 'keeping it real'!


Don't get me wrong, I love The Clash. But if anyone is willing to consider the Pistols manufactured, then using the same logic that same person MUST have to consider The Clash as the new Monkees!

It can also be argued that the Clash, while more explicitly "political", were not really more articulate than the Pistols. Rotten's lyrics were in fact very articulate, and a lot of it relied on wit to make a point. The Clash (at least as they were around the time of the Pistols) embraced the use of political slogans, which sometimes is a powerful weapon, but wasn't complemented enough with strong "backing statements" (in other words, lyrics) in some of those songs. The Clash took themselves too seriously, and it's been proven that humor is often the deadliest weapon.


Guitarist/producer Chris Spedding weighs in on this when he states that the early demos that he produced (Problem, Pretty Vacant, No Feelings) highlighted the band's musicianship: "I'm quite proud of the Sex Pistols demos, especially when compared to their other later recordings. On my demos you can hear everything quite clearly - the bass and drums are really audible plus you can actually hear what the rhythm and lead guitars are doing. Part of why they (McLaren and the Pistols) didn't like my demo was that because I like R&B, I highlighted their rhythm tracks with a big bass drum and bass aound, particularly because Matlock had some intensely played bass runs. They wanted a guitar soup. I think that whenever you've got an interesting rhythm section like that, a band sounds like they can actually play, and since that was the whole point of my demo - to prove they could play - that's what I pushed. When you have a guitar soup, which is what the demo they recorded later sounds like, you have to face the fact that someone's trying to cover up the fact that they can't play. And that's what McLaren wanted people to think that they couldn't play, that was just an idea, a way of making all this anarchy stuff happen."Dannyinla 21:27, 23 February 2006 (UTC)dannyinla

Intro section

Would someone who knows the Sex Pistols better than I do care to try making the intro section more neutral? "no other group better exemplified the punk movement's spirit and inherent contradictions" is anything but NPOV. The intro section isn't particularly informative, either; maybe mention Sid Vicious or something up there? I'd be bold and fix it, but I don't know a damn thing about the band. CDC (talk) 01:17, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, if you 'don't know a damn thing about the band,' then don't go all car-alarm on the opening paragraph. Sid Vicious was their second bassist, as the article makes clear, and contributed little to the band. Auto movil 05:26, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Wow, sorry - just trying to throw in a little constructive criticism from an admitted outsider. Adding Sid Vicious was just an off-the-top-of-my-head example. My point was that in the lead section, I wanted to know a little more about why the band was so influential, or a few key facts about its career (when? where? who?). Adding these things would make the article more accessible for someone, like me, who doesn't know much about the band, by telling me what's most important in the body of the text, and by giving me a useful overview if I don't want to read the whole thing just now. I was also suggesting that in my opinion the statement I quoted above, unsourced, isn't neutral. CDC (talk) 18:20, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
CdC has a point- therefore I've modified the opening para to include a reference to the Pistols' lasting influence on popular culture, hope that helps without making the opeing overly-wordy. The reasons for their influence become clear as the article unfolds, and are many, eg, jamie reid artwork, the myth of Sid, God Save the Queen, Anarchy in the UK, the effect on UK music industry, etc, etc, etc quercus robur 20:14, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, it's important that the intro isn't wordy and that it--like the band itself--is to the point. It's fine the way it is.
Not sure about the statement that the Clash were more articulate, however. Seems a bit subjective and hard to verify. I also think Lydon has a lot to say and says it well when he chooses to do do. Perhaps it should say something like 'more willing to articulate' or simply 'more political'?--kingboyk 19:30, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

The sentence "While The Clash were both more articulate and politically motivated, and Buzzcocks had more astute pop sensibilities, no other band so strongly exemplified the British punk movement's spirit and inherent contradictions or made such a lasting impression on British popular culture." is completely unreferenced, and represents either an editor's point-of-view or original research. Is there a specific source for this claim? Jkelly 20:52, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


Suggestion

I created a navigational template for the Dream Theater article, {{Dream Theater}}, that might be of use to the Sex Pistols article (and its related pages). The Iron Maiden and Rush articles use the same template style, and it seems to work well for bands with many members and releases. Someone with enough knowledge to complete it for Sex Pistols should consider doing so, it is very useful. plattopustalk 02:28, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Other Members

There isn't even a mention of Steve New or Nick Kent

urm I don't recall them being members of the Sex Pistols- Sid V allegedly once hit Nick kent with a bicycle chain, but I don't think that constitutes being a band member.... quercus robur 00:23, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

If they were members it was before Sid. It might have even been before they took the name the Sex Pistols. I'm not positive but a lot of sources say they were members so they should at least get a mention somewhere.

What sources? Certainly not Englands Dreaming or No Dogs, No Blacks, No Irish, which I would consider pretty much definitive. quercus robur 08:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Fodderstompf says Bob New was a member "for about 15 minutes" [1] and this bio of The Damned mentions something about a band called The Swankers with John Lydon, Nick Kent, and Steve New [2] Certainly not as good as the sources you mentioned but the fact that there are such sources at all leads me to believe the two should at least be mentioned in this article and there relationship with the band, whatever it was, be addressed.

Well it all sounds a bit dubious to me, but if you can successfully integrate it into the article go ahead quercus robur 23:56, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Razor incident

Thoguh accounts of this vary, even to the point of claiming that it never really happened and was merely one of McClaren's stunts, I have never seen it placed in Finsbury Park. Here is just one citation for the Pegasus: [3] It's supposed to have taken place in the car park too. Additionally, only some accounts refer to 'Teddy Boys' (who were in pretty short supply around Newington Green in 1977 (I lived there then) - they could be found beating up on punks in Camden Town and Kentish Town, mostly.) Tarquin Binary 12:55, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I remember seeing newspaper headlines about this at the time, so it actually happened rather than being a Mclaren invention. I also seem to recall that the incident hapened in acr park. Maybe it was in the Finsbury Park area rather than actually in Finsbury Park? quercus robur 10:05, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
The new edits to this section look good to me, maybe something about the gang being 'Teddy Boys' possibly being a myth could be added? quercus robur 10:24, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
No - the Pegasus on Green Lanes is a long way from Finsbury Park, not only is it not in the area, the whole expanse of Highbury (a big district) is between the two areas. The reason for the confusion may be that Green Lanes is a very long road that stretches from Newington Green up through Finsbury Park and beyond into deepest Haringey. Some lazy journalist just took a quick look at the A-Z and picked on a random Green Lanes district is my guess. My recollection of the incident (and I remember the headlines too) agrees with the source I cited too as to it being the Pegasus (you don't easily forget if the locale is one of your local pubs). Still have no memory of 'Teddy Boys' being mentioned though and cannot figure out why they would have been hanging round Newington Green.
By the way (not that I think it was a stunt), but having it appear in the headlines would be the exact object of Mclaren pulling a stroke like that, so that in itself wouldn't prove it was real. His whole genius was in manipulating the media, remember. :) Tarquin Binary 11:13, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


I agree that Mclaren would certanly have capitalised on the press coverage, but although he certainly mainuplated events (including, in my opinion, the self-destructive tragectory of Sid which could probably have been prevented if the people around him had cared about him more rather than hyping him up into a rock & roll icon) he didn't actually invent them as far as I was aware... BTW if memory serves, weren't Lydon's attackers portrayed as cartoon Teddy Boys in The Rock & Roll Swindle film? Maybe this is where the myth originates? quercus robur 12:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I agree with your analysis. But it is easy to see how people at the time could believe that he might stage something like that. So it's more a comment on McClaren's reputation at the time than anything. With regard to the film, this is tricky, I have seen it at least 3 times, but not for ages. My memory is that we do not see the assailants at first, just sinister shadows falling on Johnny, then there is a razor or knife opening and we do not see the actual nasty business because it is obscured by the assailant's back (of which I don't remember any fashion details). Now while that sounds like a very detailed recollection, I don't trust it, so we need input from someone here who has the DVD, I think. Tarquin Binary 12:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Legal battle

Just realised that an important part of the Sex pistols saga, ie, the long, protracted and highly accrimonious legal battle between Lydon and Mclaren is completely missing from this article... Anyone fancy a crack at this? quercus robur 10:24, 5 November 2005 (UTC) I have been working on adding this but been busy with other things. I should have it up within the next couple of days.Logan1138 17:36, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Recent Edits

As often happens to me, I went into this article to fix a couple minor grammatical problems, and wound up rewriting quite a bit. Brash fool what I are, I dint even think to look here first, so sorry for hacking up a once-featured article; hope I didn't ruin it for ya. :) btw, if you hate my work here, you'll probably want to have a look at Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols, as well as Wally Nightingale.Eaglizard 10:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Hayes and Jim Mackin

Xavier1019 has added the above as early members of the band. Does Xavier (or anyone else) plan on adding separate articles for them ? If not their names should be de-linked (no, not volunteering to create them - never heard of them before this - my very quick check of the web did find them mentioned as there near the start but no clue as to when they left or what they did post-Pistols...). Cheers, Ian Rose 23:06, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

The date of Sid Vicious' first gig.

The article says that Sid Vicious first played for the Sex Pistols thus "Ritchie played his first gig with the Pistols on April 3, 1977, at the Screen on the Green in London"

This however I believe to be untrue - If you look at

http://www.davegoodman.co.uk/Dave%20Goodman/Daves%20Book/1977/mar_1977.htm or http://www.rockmine.music.co.uk/Pistols/SexDate2.html

You will see that Sid made his first appearance in March at the Notre Dame Hall in London. These two sources have the exact date at either the 21st or 28th. Perhaps someone could shed some light on which one it was.

If you look at http://www.rexfeatures.com/cgi-bin/r2show0?k=sex+pistols+mar+1977&s=3@3PVlOjSVF3NDpFCSYsjH3D&u=DEFAULT&p=b00000014105726002&t=00000021 you will see the first three photographs taken by a photographer called Ray Stevenson have Sid Vicious playing with the Sex Pistols at the Notre Dame Hall in Mar 1977.

212.111.35.130 15:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)Ryan212.111.35.130 15:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

  • "Originally called The Strand...", "Past members..." - are you crazy? The Strand is The Strand, The Swankers is The Swankers and the Sex Pistols is the Sex Pistols! The Strand is not the Sex Pistols and the Sex Pistols is not The Swankers! Is it clear?


Sub articles

Do we really need these sub-articles on previous incarnations of the Sex Pistols such as The Swankers and The Strand (band), especially as they seem to only contain text copied and pasted from the main Sex Pistols article quercus robur 13:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Hardly - suggest they should be deleted and the links removed from this article. Cheers, Ian Rose 14:57, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Even the The Swankers ARE the Sex Pistols, it's good to have a separate page about the history.

--HappyBoy

It is if there is anything significantly expanded on that isn't already in or would be relevant to the Sex pistols article. At the moment it doesn't look that way, I'd put the Swankers page up for VFD if I had any sort of clue how to do this these days on wikipedia, its all got so convoluted and complicated... quercus robur 23:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

"Surviving" Members

I deleted the blurb about the 'Rock N Roll Hall Of Fame' which refers to the "surviving" members. All of the original lineup survive, and Americans need to educate themselves to the fact that Sid Vicious was not part of the original lineup , as is common knowledge in the U.K.

Yanno, if Souxsie or Billy Idol had joined the band instead, I'd have considered them fully members. Instead, we got one of John's friends named John, but he had at least been around about as long as the "BC", so he was kinda as much part of the band as they at least, I always thought. But what do I know, I'm just a underedumacated Americun. Personally, I think John (the first) was the dickhead, not Matlock, and they admit Glen wrote the music for all their good songs anyways, so it weren't that Syd sucked, per se, but that Matlock was a critical cog in the machine. Ah well. Great songwriters never get along, just ask Macca.Eaglizard 05:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

As well as changing the misspelling (honor - honour) I've also added the "surviving" bit back in. I may be wrong, but "surviving members" does not neccessarily need to include the original line up. Sid Vicious may not have been part of the original line up but he is generally seen as being part of the definitive line up, and was one of the punk icons. If you still don't agree then by all means revert it. I'm really just bothered about the spellinghedpeguyuk 9:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

They Didn't Attend The Rockhall Induction?

Why wouldn't they attend their induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? Surely that is a great honor. 67.188.172.165 22:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame reportedly wanted them to pay a certain price to attend the induction (for a table, or something of that sort.) Plus... let's face it, they're the Sex Pistols. They have an image to keep up. Hall of Fame? Naaaah. Skin Crawl 06:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.