The Exploited - Punk's Not Dead

It’s definitely beyond the scope of this article to fully define the “punk aesthetic” (any serious interest on your part can be pursued until your eyes bleed on these here interwebz), particularly when it comes to all the mutated forms incarnate today. But I’d like to see if I can at least present an outline…

The 1960’s was a seminal time for subversion in modern society. If there’s any place we need to search to find the roots of Punk (to find protopunk), it is there. However…

- Protopunk was never a cohesive movement, nor was there a readily identifiable proto-punk sound that made its artists seem related at the time. What ties proto-punk together is a certain provocative sensibility that didn’t fit the prevailing counterculture of the time … It was consciously subversive and fully aware of its outsider status … In terms of its lasting influence, much proto-punk was primitive and stripped-down, even when it wasn’t aggressive, and its production was usually just as unpolished. It also frequently dealt with taboo subject matter, depicting society’s grimy underbelly in great detail, and venting alienation that was more intense and personal than ever before. [1]

The Cover of Punk Magazine, Issue #2

To put it in grossly oversimplified terms, the reaction to the “happy complacency” of Ozzie and Harriet’s 1950’s and to the Vietnam War, and then finally to the banality of Disco and the corporate control of Glam Rock, led to a reaction of its own, which became, predictably, iconoclastic.

- Punk had a unique and complex aesthetic. It was steeped in shock value and revered what was considered ugly. The whole look of punk was designed to disturb and disrupt the happy complacency of the wider society. Outside of punk’s torn and safety pinned anti-fashion statements, this impulse to outrage was never more apparent than on punk album covers. [2]

But amid the destruction of all things sacred, the orgiastic violence and the “mindless” self-destruction, there was something hearty and perennial at Punk’s core that continued to thrive and change, continually pushing boundaries and experimenting, breaking taboos and shoving all manner of things down society’s collective throat. And in that respect, it landed squarely in its rightful place: alongside all the other radical art movements, some beginning well over a century ago.

Artist Unknown - Found at www.mydigitallife.co.za

From its turbulent beginnings in the 1970’s, Punk grew and thrived, branching in all directions in successive “waves,” opportunistically embracing influences and ideologies—sometimes appearing to wane, only to reappear again with a vengeance when any new energy source was found. By the 1980′s, a wide variety of scenes had staked out their claims in cities around the world, and the punk aesthetic had left its indelible mark all across the broad spectrum of Rock-and-Roll, not to mention many corners in the art world.

By legendary Crass artist, Gee Vaucher - Found at www.supertouchart.com

Fast Forward to the 1990’s, and even to this very day, artists are still “revisiting” Punk’s vital beginnings, re-sharpening their teeth and mating all the old hungers with new sounds, new visions and new purpose. We have Post-Hardcore, Post-Punk, Pop Punk and Art Punk, not to mention the various “Metals” and “Alternative” branches. We have Goth, Emo and Screamo, and…well, you get the point. And this is a ridiculously simple list of just the musical incarnations!

Goth image found at www.gothlook.info

The grassroots appeal and staunch criticism of authority and the status quo have made their way, also predictably, into the very fabric of social and political life. The green movements, the anti-capitalist/anti-consumerist movements, even a wide array of futurists, gay rights activists and free speech advocates have all been baptized in these waters.

Found at www.pirateparty.org.uk

So what then can we say truly remains of the original Punk “spirit,” and what value can this have for a new pretender calling itself MysticPunk? Well, a single blog entry won’t suffice to explore that the way it deserves either. But if there’s anything I should fasten on here, I’d have to say it is the DIY (Do It Yourself) ethic, and the willingness to analyze, decontruct, taunt and engage every last authority. How can true individuality and individual liberty exist without a willingness to at least examine these authorities, and the outside constraints they place on our views of reality? In these respects, I think true mystics throughout history would feel right at home.

And I believe every artist who has ever lived, ever felt the undeniable drive to create something unique and personal, is already there.

1. From an essay on protopunk, found at allmusic.com.

2. From an essay by Mark Vallen, found at his website, art-for-a-change.com.

NOTE: “God Save The Queen” by Jamie Reid, found at wikipedia

CocoRosie – Bear Hides and Buffalo / Bruce LaBruce – Otto; or, Up with Dead People:

Tool – Sober:

Aphex Twin – Let My Fish Loose:

n.

1. a. Immediate consciousness of the transcendent or ultimate reality or God. b. The experience of such communion as described by mystics.

2. A belief in the existence of realities beyond perceptual or intellectual apprehension that are central to being and directly accessible by subjective experience.

3. Vague, groundless speculation.

The Wikipedia article on mysticism also provides some good information, assuming you read it with a critical eye and a tolerance for occasional changes, which can honestly be interesting in themselves.

But the title of this entry (and the subtitle of this blog) includes the word “rational.” So, how does that figure in? And does it negate definition three above…?

The idea that mysticism is merely vague, groundless speculation has certainly become more and more prevalent over the last century or so, and even more pronounced thanks to the crusades of notable atheists Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris, the so-called Four Horsemen. Personally though, I believe it’s in the discussion of mysticism that some real dialogue can take place in the emerging conversation between science and religion. Even Sam Harris has broken ranks (or perhaps just picked up a quarter-step in the pace, if you will) on the subject, particularly in the last chapter of his book The End of Faith, and taken quite a bit of heat for it [2], as well.

Mysticism has been called “the golden thread,” or the spiritual principle that runs through all the world’s religions. For me, this is an apt, though somewhat over-simplified, description. Over time, I’ve come to embrace a broad sort of fictionalism. That is, I accept the philosophical proposition that all our knowledge, all our studies, indeed all of our thoughts about life, the universe and everything, are by necessity based on words and symbols (and the semiotics therein), which are by their very nature fictional. We made them up, evolved them, adapted and played with them to suit our needs. Even mathematics with its “unreasonable effectiveness” must fall into this category. But as Alfred Korzybski states, I believe in “General Semantics,” “the word is not the thing.”

The map is not the territory.

The first entry on this blog, a very old Zen story entitled, “No Water, No Moon,” could be interpreted to be the realization or cognition of a brand new convert to fictionalism. For me, it exemplifies what I believe to be at the heart of the mystical experience: that moment when the fictional constructs we use to try and order our knowledge and make sense of the universe fall away–that moment when the pail breaks–and we apprehend, and more fully experience, the universe as it truly is. Is it any wonder that we then, after having experienced such a thing, return to the world of thoughts and words to try and express what we’ve witnessed? And is it any wonder such thoughts and words might be called “vague” or “groundless”?

In this regard, maybe definition three is apt. Perhaps poetically so.

So, what does this have to do with MysticPunk? Well, to whom should we turn to “express the inexpressible” if not our artists? And what better mode for laughing away all the old superstitions and irrationality (and rebelling against the “establishment” holding those things in place) than by invoking the punk aesthetic? Maybe by playing in this fictional sub-genre I’m calling MysticPunk we can not only find some artistic inspiration, but also have a conversation that’s well worth having.

In closing, I’ll leave you with this quote from Sam Harris, from the same essay footnoted above:

“…there is a kernel of truth in the grandiosity and otherworldly language of religion. It really is possible to have one’s moment-to-moment perception of the world radically transfigured by “attentional” discipline. Such a transfiguration, being both rare and profoundly positive, may occasionally merit a little poetry.”

1. Modern Language Association (MLA):
“mysticism.” The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 29 Oct. 2009. .

2. An essay by Sam Harris for secularhumanism.org .

That’s the official answer. The unofficial (and far more truthful) one is: I haven’t got a clue—I’m making this shit up as I go along…

I don’t claim to have originated the term, but the first time I used it was after seeing that some of Clive Barker’s work had been included in a “Splatterpunk” collection [1]. Being a fan of Clive’s, I was (inappropriately) offended for him. My knee-jerk response was, “It isn’t Splatterpunk, it’s Mysticpunk!” I remember thinking that, despite the sometimes shocking levels of gore, sexuality and violence in his work, he used it in the service of stories with genuinely spiritual/metaphysical aspirations. Of course, at that time I’d only read several of his novels (Imagica, Weaveworld, The Damnation Game, The Great and Secret Show—must-reads, all, IMO), and I wasn’t yet familiar with The Books of Blood or The Hellbound Heart/Hellraiser. I hadn’t even seen his contributions to those Splatterpunk collections—a dreadful sin, I know, judging before properly analyzing. Prejudice much?

I’ve since read Clive’s other work and laid my prejudice aside. For a good article on Splatterpunk, and a revealing excerpt from one of Clive’s stories, go here. Since then I’ve also seen him refer to his own work as “metaphysical fantasy [2],” thus allaying any misplaced outrage that remained in me. However, in typical obsessive-compulsive fashion, I continued to gnaw on that term, “MysticPunk,” for years, thinking: “I know there’s something for me here. I know there’s something here!”

But it wasn’t until I came across the Stuckist Manifesto, with its proposal for a model of art that is a; “…holistic…meeting of the consciousness and unconsciousness, thought and emotion, spiritual and material, private and public…” that I felt moved to not only somehow participate, but to do so in a way that gave form to these feelings I have on the subject of MysticPunk.

So, after extraordinary procrastination (also typical fashion for me) I have convinced myself this is something worth exploring—hopefully, in the company of others.

Why not use the term “metaphysical fantasy”? Well, it isn’t very catchy, is it? And, despite being a lover of the fantastical, I find the term “fantasy” too constraining, too indicative of a certain style to be really useful. Why not “Mystical-Stuckism”? Well, I’ve certainly considered it. But the Stuckist is first and foremost a painter. Don’t argue, it says so right there in the manifesto. And I want to explore this through every possible medium, and with a rather specific focus.

Hence, the term MysticPunk. Such as it is.

The problem here, and the problem of discussing anything pertaining to mysticism or spirituality, is, I believe, one of definitions. One purpose of this blog will be to delve into the definitions of such things as spirituality, the soul, salvation, damnation, enlightenment—to name just a few. I won’t merely revisit what they’ve meant historically, but I’ll try to discover whether they have any relevance or importance to us in the modern world. Obviously, I think they do. But I will allow time and public discourse to determine the veracity of that assumption. I’ll specifically use the next few entries to try to define what mysticism is, at least as I understand it, and how the punk aesthetic (a broad and equally vague term that should feel right at home here) might be used to explore this in an artistic context.

Which brings me to the primary purposes of this blog:

1.) To provoke the thoughts of other artists.

2.) To provide those who wish it some direction and/or inspiration.

And most importantly,

3.) To provide artists wishing to participate in this journey with a venue to display their work. Which obviously necessitates that they actually DO some. Art, that is.

To that end, I’ll be starting a separate website and forum soon. I hope you’ll join us there.

Lastly, I would like to issue a couple of caveats. Writing this blog will entail, as is true of all such endeavors, a certain amount of USI—Unwarranted Self-Importance. And as a corollary of said USI, I will definitely exploit this opportunity for SSP—Shameless Self-Promotion. I apologize for all this in advance. I suspect, however, that the carnivorous (and undoutedly carnal) nature of web2.0 culture will probably keep me in check. Mostly.

So, with clenched cheeks and a song in my heart, I travel this road.

(TL; DR: We haven’t got a clue WTF MysticPunk is. But if you can come out to play, maybe we’ll find out together.)

1. Splatterpunks: Extreme Horror — Paul M. Sammon, St. Martins, 1990 ISBN 0-312-04581-6 and, Splatterpunks II: Over the Edge — Paul M. Sammon, Tor Books, 1995 ISBN 0-312-85786-1

2. Lord Of Illusions – A Fable Of Death And Resurrection, by Simon Bacal, Sci-Fi Entertainment, Vol 1 No 5, February 1995. Reference found at Clive Barker’s official site

The nun Chiyono studied Zen under Bukko of Engaku, but she was unable to attain the fruits of meditation for a very long time.

Finally, one moonlit night, as she was carrying water in an old pail bound with bamboo, the bamboo broke and the bottom fell out of the pail.  At that moment, Chiyono was set free. 

As was customary, she wrote a poem in commemoration:

In this way and that I tried to save the old pail
Since the bamboo was weakening and about to break
Until at last the bottom fell out.

No water in the pail.
No moon in the water.
Emptiness in my hand!

From Zen Flesh, Zen Bones, a collection of Zen koans and commentaries.