Pistols or Clash: Steel Cage Match

Just thought I'd try and spice things up around here (apart from the usual "what are you listening to/watching/doing to yourself in the privacy of a hotel room somewhere in the greater Pittsburgh area", etc).

I think everyone (or most everyone) will agree that, of the punk movement's many bands and artists, the Sex Pistols and the Clash are the biggest. But in terms of which one comes out on top...

I go back and forth on the question, myself: on the one hand, the Pistols had a more authentic claim to being working class and reflecting the conditions that brought punk to the forefront in '76-77. On the other hand, the Clash were able to maintain a fairly solid career and expand punk's narrow horizons long after the Pistols imploded. And when it comes down to Johnny Rotten versus Joe Strummer...I flip-flop even more

So anyway, let's see who wins in the steel-cage match. I left it open to both, if you're so inclined (or neither, if you can argue that some other artists has a better claim on the "biggest punk act" moniker)

Here's a question: to what extent would the Sex Pistols have been what they were if not for Malcolm McLaren's (at times) guiding hand?

Sex Pistols by a mile...

Without the Pistols Mick Jones would have remained a glam rocker and Joe Strummer a pub rocker...and once the Pistols split then the Clash just became the new Rolling Stones anyway.

Without McLaren there obviously would have been no Sex Pistols. Had they got rid of him in '77 and got Wobble in on bass instead of Sid then the Pistols could have been even better.

The Clash for me.

Maybe they were the real deal at the start, but the Pistols soon turned into a parody of themselves. The game is lost as soon as the spitting, swearing and self-abuse becomes more significant than the music. Step forward Mr Babyshamble.

It's not hard to take so many drink and drugs that you can't function any more - that's being a lightweight. In order to be considered true greats, you have to stay on top of your game - the Pistols fell well short of that.

The Clash were serious about their art and that's why they stayed at the top for longer.

I met Joe Strummer just before he died and he was a lovely guy, so you could say I am a bit biased.

The sex pistols get my vote. for sure the clash went on to make great music, combining punk with reggae, and other genres, but the pistols embodied the true spirit of punk in '76 & 77, self-imploding in a super-nova fashion.

The Clash; The Pistols were the Punkier of the two, but the clash had more quality.

All lost in the supermarket...

The Pistols. The Clash had the staying power, and the more varied output, but the Sex Pistols had a vast influence that set the tone for the entire punk movement. (Which is not to say by any means that the Clash weren't influential!)

(And of course, without the Pistols, there would probably be no JD/NO.)

The Clash win this one for me. Fucking awesome band

Clash had more substance but I'm more of a Buzzcocks fan.

More fun than either of them.

Johnny Come Lately wrote: The Clash for me.

Maybe they were the real deal at the start, but the Pistols soon turned into a parody of themselves. The game is lost as soon as the spitting, swearing and self-abuse becomes more significant than the music. Step forward Mr Babyshamble.

It's not hard to take so many drink and drugs that you can't function any more - that's being a lightweight. In order to be considered true greats, you have to stay on top of your game - the Pistols fell well short of that.

The Clash were serious about their art and that's why they stayed at the top for longer.

I met Joe Strummer just before he died and he was a lovely guy, so you could say I am a bit biased.

Those are my sentiments exactly. Anarchy is fun to listen to for awhile, but the struggle of the normal working man will always be more interesting.

JHC

Clash for me.

I did enjoy the Pistols back then, but the quality of Clash is so much better.

Guns of Brixton

the clash. they had substance. very few bands can get away with writing a rock song about the spanish civil war, after all.

The Clash - even when he was doing those busking dates with Simmo in 85' i was still drawn to them. The man is a legend to me, thankfully caught his last tour as well before..

The Sex Pistols are probably more influential, but I voted for The Clash because I think they've had a lot more good songs.

AgentWood wrote: the clash. they had substance. very few bands can get away with writing a rock song about the spanish civil war, after all.

How about if a band wrote about the Battle of Waterloo? Now that would be impressive.

Definitely Sex Pistols. Clash was a great band but they did'nt have the same impact as the Pistols had in they early days of punk. Who knows, Barney and Hooky might not have started their band so early if they had'nt seen them at The Lesser Free Trade Hall back in June -76.

really prefer the clash

Who's the person who voted for neither???? Can we have them strung up by their shoelaces???

JHC

68Pontiac wrote: Who's the person who voted for neither???? Can we have them strung up by their shoelaces???

JHC

Prolly some 19 year old snot-nose. You have my permission.

neither!!

the boys from Killing Joke are the top punk band of all time.

methanolcereal wrote: Clash had more substance but I'm more of a Buzzcocks fan.

More fun than either of them.

I have to agree

The Clash!

Indeed!

Chuck Norris would win =]

/2000

neither...The Ramones for me. Wasn't Johnny Rotten afraid he might get beaten up by da brudders?