Accurate, or inaccurate? If the latter, how would YOU define it?
― Michael Daddino, Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:14 (twenty-three years ago)
I wouldnt try to define it...
but perhaps you can define EMO for me;)
― insectifly, Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:19 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:19 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ray M (rdmanston), Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:21 (twenty-three years ago)
It would also be too easy to think its just about the sound as well.
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:24 (twenty-three years ago)
― joan vich (joan vich), Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:29 (twenty-three years ago)
― jess (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:40 (twenty-three years ago)
The Oxford English Dictionary -- the gold standard of dictionaries. It's big and sexy and blue, if memory serves.
Incidentally, they cite a 1971 Dave Marsh review of a ? and the Mysterians show when giving examples of proper usage.
I'm tempted to post some of the other music-related definitions for a hoot and a holler.
― Michael Daddino, Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:46 (twenty-three years ago)
― DeRayMi, Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:47 (twenty-three years ago)
Yes, and in 1978 that attitude seemed pretty well exemplified by luddite Clash fans bottling Suicide off stage.
― Ray M (rdmanston), Thursday, 22 August 2002 16:52 (twenty-three years ago)
― Leee, Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:08 (twenty-three years ago)
― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:16 (twenty-three years ago)
― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:17 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:18 (twenty-three years ago)
oh yes they are...and they dont talk back either ;)
― insectifly, Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:31 (twenty-three years ago)
Well, OK, not those trashy mass-market "collegiate" dictionaries that aren't worth the paper they're printed on. But a well-made unabridged? Rrrrowr! And even the Scrabble dictionary has a certain flirtsy charm about it.
(Atlases, however, might be even sexier than dictionaries.)
― Chris Piuma, Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:40 (twenty-three years ago)
Dammit. *cries*
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:47 (twenty-three years ago)
― matt riedl (veal), Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:49 (twenty-three years ago)
Yes, but that's as far as you're concerned. I think you're wrong, but that's as far as I'm concerned. Once again, we're plunged into interpretation. If I said that, as far as I'm concerned, the Knack were punk, would I expect the OED to mind me?
― matt riedl (veal), Thursday, 22 August 2002 17:52 (twenty-three years ago)
― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Thursday, 22 August 2002 18:34 (twenty-three years ago)
Sorry veiled reference about pornography actually-
the famous comment by Justice Potter Stewart- who couldnt define it "but "knew it when he saw it"
― insectifly, Thursday, 22 August 2002 18:42 (twenty-three years ago)
― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Thursday, 22 August 2002 18:53 (twenty-three years ago)
++ as you said, that's as far as i'm concerned.but in a way, the truth in music definitions is MY truth, since everyone has their own vision about it, and in my case (and i guess many others on this board) it's a deep and thought of own vision.as far as i'm concerned, punk-rock and its attitude changed my life and my approach to the music, so i didn't agree with the definition.then again, it's not that bad for such a serious dictionary.oh, and don't tell me you think the knack were punk. american fm one hit wonders they were (my sharona rules, though).
― joan vich (joan vich), Friday, 23 August 2002 07:55 (twenty-three years ago)
It would be incredibly cool if the OED entry for "punk rock" appeared in the 1972 edition, thereby getting the jump on everybody (except, I suppose, Dave Marsh).
― nickn, Friday, 23 August 2002 19:45 (twenty-three years ago)
― Graham (graham), Friday, 23 August 2002 21:07 (twenty-three years ago)
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 August 2002 22:04 (twenty-three years ago)
― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Saturday, 24 August 2002 18:23 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 25 August 2002 01:39 (twenty-three years ago)
― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Monday, 26 August 2002 13:29 (twenty-three years ago)
the guitar sound is merely so-named by analogous back-formation
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 26 August 2002 13:34 (twenty-three years ago)
― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Monday, 26 August 2002 14:14 (twenty-three years ago)
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 26 August 2002 14:17 (twenty-three years ago)
― s, Thursday, 29 August 2002 13:40 (twenty-three years ago)
Mistaken punk for hardcore or emo.
I said it. waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 29 August 2002 13:52 (twenty-three years ago)
― Jhazmyn, Thursday, 19 December 2002 21:34 (twenty-three years ago)
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 19 December 2002 21:39 (twenty-three years ago)
― gygax!, Thursday, 19 December 2002 21:43 (twenty-three years ago)
It occurred to me, after reading the latest Frank Rich column, that "punk" as a verb should probably be in the dictionary by now.
― jaymc, Sunday, 9 August 2009 17:31 (sixteen years ago)
irrelevant to the revive, but my Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary (© 1963) defines "rock 'n' roll" as "jazz characterized by a strong beat and much repetition often with both blues and folk song elements." I've always found this adorable for some reason.
― waltzing ma~ (unregistered), Sunday, 9 August 2009 17:55 (sixteen years ago)