Talk:New wave music/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

New Wave of British Invasion?

I remember being told at the time (circa 1982) the New Wave refered to the 'next wave of the British Invasion'. Of course many bands that came to be known as New Wave were American, and some were from other places. Anyone else heard of this explanation? user:ike9898

There are various explanations - but the term seems to have already existed around 1978/79. I don´t think your explanation is false but it is the same with every cultural trend - later on, scientists, priests, philosophers, today journalist try to explain it and nobody knows what really happened ;) Rabauz 09:40, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've always defined new wave as having as having a modern type sound- the Cars, the Fixx, Joy division Devo ect. A lot of the bands listed on the page I don't consider new wave like INXS, Cindy Lauper among others. CLAT1@aol.com

I can not call a thirty year old music modern anymore. Even the term modern sounds ironically quaint. I would say Punk and New Wave made a break from rock's R&B, rural roots. The music evolved from London,New York and other urban areas. It is also a singles oriented music. EK June 25th 2005
The Problem in my view is that you have actually total different sounds - there is modern rock like The Police, REM on the one hand and there is synthpop on the other hand. I quite agree with your term "modern type sound" - the punks learned their instruments and developed an interest in a new aesthetical sound, away from conservative Rock´n Roll - punk music is actually a back to the roots movement. So one part like the rockbands mentioned above began making sophisticated rock, others like The Stranglers, OMD, Depeche Mode tried something different, leaving the Rock´n Roll tradition, sometimes more oriented to pre war music. Around May of 1986 New Wave as movement ended up in mainstream pop.Rabauz 09:40, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
By the way, I really debate the inclusion of a few bands as "New Wave", particularly R.E.M. and a number of post-punk bands (Joy Division, The Fall, etc. Many of these bands were either in reaction to or had nothing to do with New Wave.WesleyDodds 19:13, 1 October 2005 (UTC):: I understand where you are coming from but as it was actually happening it literally sounded and felt like a New Wave EK 2:17 11 October 2005
I know what you are talking about. How about creating a list of key artists that most would agree are very New Wave? We could also keep the full, more inclusive list, explaining that some of the artists are at the edge of category. Who are your candidates for the list (not necessarily your favorites, just the most typically New Wave)? Here's my (user:ike9898) first few picks...
  • Thomson Twins
  • Devo
  • Flock of Seagulls
  • Haircut 100
  • ....

Absolutely no-one in Britain at the time or now would call the Thompson Twins, Haircut 100 or Flock of Seagulls 'new wave'. That term had ceased to be used in the UK by 1980. Haircut 100 were classed as 'New Pop', the Thompson Twins as 'pop' and the Seagulls as 'synthpop'Vauxhall1964 (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Hall & Oates

Hall & Oates?!? Really? ike9898 15:30, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

Mike Oldfield

Mike Oldfield? Really? In my opinion Oldfield tried to make "modern" music, and he still tries (Ibiza Trance). But he is not really a typical New Wave artist. By asking the oracle of google, I got two Interviews in german, in which he expresses his diregard to New Wave and also Punk. Maybe his attidute changed around 1983-84, but Oldfield ist acutally a progressive or artrock musician. Rabauz 13:32, 12 December 2004 (UTC)

Removal

The sound of 'New Wave' is open to much interpretation. It is doubtful that a definitive New Wave band ever existed. Is it New Wave? Is it No Wave? New Romantic? Synth Pop? It appears to be more a sub-cultural movement stemming from the end of popular disco and DIY punk than a categorised music genre.

I removed this becaue the rest of the article already covers the most important part (i.e. that New Wave is vague) but in a more cohesive and informative manner. No Wave, New Romantic and synth pop should all be described and incorporated into the text. Tuf-Kat 22:27, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

I removed: Beginning in the early 1990s, New Wave music in the U.S. came to be commonly referred to as Retro music.

That's a very broad statement that I don't think is true nor will stand the test of time.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.16.21.241 (talk) 02:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

New Wave's 4th incarnation

The article is completely off base in saying New Wave ended in 1992. Since the late 90’s due to the dour nature of alternative rock and gansta rap and the dour post 9/11 era there has been a nostalgic look back at New Wave. The era with its poppy sound and funky hair and clothes look like innocent fun today. Go listen to internet radio,satellite radio or 80’s lunch hour and New Wave dominates despite the fact the heavy metal and rap were just as popular in the 1980’s. This nostalgia has led to the 4th incarnation of New Wave music. I agree basically with the article up to 1992. New Wave’s first incarnation 1976-1978 was as a marketing ploy for punk. People forget or are to young to remember how deep the resistance was to the music in the U.S. The Sid and Nancy fiasco turned off the public and maybe even more importantly a drunken Elvis Costello calling Ray Charles a “blind ignorant nigger“ during and argument with Bonnie Bramlett made the U.S. rock world very hostile to the music. The second incarnation (1978-1981?) and third incarnations (1981-1988?) are explained well enough above. I would add the influence of MTV for third incarnation. The 4th incarnation I would say began in 2001 with the so called “the bands” witch mined to varied degrees 2nd second incarnation New Wave and electro clash and underground dance music movement influenced by 1980’s techno pop. The last 2 years have seen success of such bands such as The Killers,Modest Mouse,The Bravery etc which mine heavily 2nd incarnation New Wave. These bands are having even more commercial success then their 1980’s counterparts consistently at the top of both the singles and Album charts. These groups have been referred as "New New Wave" and increasingly just "New Wave". which is really what they are. Somewhat to my regret I have concluded that New Wave music may not solely be associated with the late 1970’s thru 1980’s of my young adulthood. EK June 26th 2005

Thanks for using this theme for the last line of the New Wave article and if this was the inspiration for the post punk revival article you really did a good job building a house out of my foundation EK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.117.103 (talk) 06:37, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Growing up during the early 80's

My interpretation of New Wave as a genre involved a particular use of the synthesizer as an instrument, but not the main instrument. Bands such as Eddie Grant, Sly Fox, Depeche Mode, Kim Wilde, Devo, and Tears for Fears mostly represented the New Wave sound whereas Yaz was the quintessential Techo sound. In the mid 80's, most New Wave bands simply moved away from the quintessential New Wave sound. Bands such as Talking Heads, Thompson Twins, The Pet Shop Boys, and Kim Wilde simply fell out of the limelight, while bands such as The Cars, and Duran Duran moved away from the New Wave sound and into more of a pop sound. Depeche Mode made a conscious decision to concentrate on House music. Starting in the mid 80's the discotech was making a comeback - especially in Europe. During the late 80's and well into the 90's there was something of an underground movement that was simply called "New Music" that kept the genre alive until it's minor resurgence in the early 2000's. "Sex" by Berlin is an example of the later style New Music sound to hit the charts from the underground scene. I did notice that many of the most successful New Wave bands of the early 80's ended up living and performing in Europe long after they were forgotten by Americans.

With all due respect, I would say your 'interpretation' is incorrect. The article explains where the term came from and what it applies to. I think some of those bands you're referring to are usually considered 'New Romantics', others just pop. It's always tempting to categorize bands, so we know how to pigeonhole them when we first hear them - "oh, they're like so-and-so" - but usually good bands try not to just copy others, but to be original. It's art. They also tend to evolve and develop, so the category we try to fit them in might change over time. Usually it's us doing the categorizing, not the band "deciding" to move into such-and-such an area. Combine that artistic sensibility with the fickleness of public taste, and the idiots in the music industry, and you end up with a constantly shifting, changing pattern which defies labels. So in other words, labels such as 'New Wave' might be a handy tag but are always only ill-defined terms that different people rarely agree on. In the meantime, the artists just do their own thing.Graham 23:59, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, you're quite right, I ran out of time and had to leave before I could complete it. But saved what I wrote for later edit as I expected to change computers. I did not expect anyone to respond so quickly. My error. Since your contribution, I'll forgo editing and start anew to prevent confusion. You hit upon my major editing intent - to talk a bit about the blurred lines between categories. For instance, late Berlin is as easily categorized as House as New Music. In the case of Depeche Mode, they actually announced their intent to head into the club scene - thus we know it was a conscious decision. But as for the others such as The Cars, they simply progressed into a more mainstream sound over time. We actually agree on the major points you made. I also see your point about the New Romantics subgenre. That it lists nearly everything I mentioned is not lost upon me. The list given is quite across the board when it comes to the sound, though. Many bands did not use synthesizers but still had a peculiar sound that was clearly New Wave. Plus, Prince could be considered New Romantic in the way he dressed and perhaps in the way he acted. But many would classify his music as Alternative, rather than New Wave.

However, in my mind, there was more or less a definition of the genre that one could use at that particular time. For instance, in 1981 through 1983 the popular band Duran Duran was clearly New Wave. But I considered Sly Fox and Haircut 100 as also New Wave even though they were completely different. This despite the fact that I was not cognizent of what was on the producers minds at the time - we had no real internet with which to easily look up such things. The fact that the producers and I both agree on what was clearly the New Wave sound would be an astounding coincidence if it were just coincidence. But it is not coincidence - there was a definite sound to it, no matter how difficult it may be to clearly define it. Many of the bands attributed to New Wave were equally considered Punk or Pop. The Cars' first three albums could be considered both Pop and New Wave, but their Heartbeat City and subsequent albums saw them move away from the New Wave sound, or at least as I defined it circa 1981 when the genre hit it's stride (so to speak). We cannot define where the the edge of one genre ends and another picks up, but perhaps we can define the quintessential center of a genre at a particular time; knowing that the center will drift is some direction from year to year. Consider; my own preferences tended to drift towards the Pop side of the New Wave spectrum while someone else's preferences may drift towards the Punk or the Techo (or synth, if you prefer) sides of New Wave. All the music could be considered part of the New Wave genre but all three of us could be listening to completely different bands. In a way, one could argue that New Wave put the three genre's together similarly to the way Fusion did with world music. And that just because I may not like the punk side of it did not make it any less New Wave.

Perhaps you are correct and I'm trying to define something that can never be clearly defined or agreed upon. As you can see, it being "merely impossible" did not stop me from trying, though. But if you think I'm mangling this Wiki, I shall desist and give permission to edit or delete any and all of my contributions ;) 0945 EST, 8 February 2006

A perspective from someone who is a bit older. I am different then you in that my pre teen years were in the latter part of the AM Top 40 era and my teen years were the "Classic Rock" era thus the years in question here were my early adult years. The "New Wave" felt and sounded like like a New Wave. From long to short hair (until grunge) from rural roots to urban orientation from Album cuts back to singles and also the beginning of videos and computers everything seemed to change overnight. Every song was the best ever until the next one I heard. Back to your point people did have a tough time trying to describe the varying types of music going on. Remember Dance Oriented Rock or DOR,Modern Rock Oi,and some people by the mid 80's started to use "alternative rock". But emotionally to me all of it even punk fell under the "New Wave" umbrella. 3:23, 7 March 2006 EK

The discussion above is very interesting, but i'm not sure I agree with either one of you. I grew up in the 80's and we (my friends and I) liked many different types of music - including what we termed 'New Wave". When we used the term "New wave", we were speaking of bands like Depeche Mode, Erasure, New Order, Morrissey, Yaz, The Cure, Gary Neuman, etc... We never considered bands like The Cars to be new wave. In fact, The Cars first album is really a rock album and where I grew up (NYC) they were constantly played on Classic Rock Radio and never on New Wave Radio (WLIR). As far as Duran Duran is concerned, I would say we considered them Pop. As far as 'Modern Rock" or "Alternative Rock" is concerned, we reserved that for the bands that came out in the 90's. I guess the main problem is that this article doesnt really explain "New Wave" to the way many of us who grew up in the 80's think of new wave. I noticed that Wiki has an article on Synthpop and that category seems to fit more with what I remember New Wave to be and Synthpop is an expression I nor my friends growing up never used.


I fully agree with these WPs, this article has not been written by someone that "lived" the new wave era. Brian W 12:00, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

There's different interpretations of what New Wave is and isn't, even at the time. In England, post-punk was clearly defined and the Smiths were certainly not considered a New Wave band. The Cars are generally considered a New Wave band, although I can see why some people wouldn't think so. Nowadays people are trying to make serious attemtps to delinate the genre, and so certain things in retrospect will and won't be considered New Wave. WesleyDodds 22:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
The Cars were considered New Wave in their fashion and their recordings' production values, but their music often had the same aggression that could be heard in rock and was embraced by rock fans. As fans of either genre were generally antagonistic to the other, the Cars were less embraced by people in the New Wave culture.
By the time the Smiths came around, no one was calling the music new wavers listened to New Wave anymore. It was being called "new music," and two years later, "alternative." FemmyV 00:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC).
Like New Wave this discussion came back from the dead. The Cars are a very interesting subject. At the time they broke they were described as "New Wave" and also criticized for "selling out". They were named best new rock band of 1978 by many people. Before then here in the U.S.A. unlike in England and Europe our understanding of “punk” was through negative sensational newspaper and television stories. The Cars were the first New Wave group we actually heard. As a New York area resident like the poster above I will give what I remember of Cars airplay. WPIX-FM had a New Wave format for a brief period in 1979 and played The Cars constantly. The two prominent college radio New Wave programs at the dawn of the 1980’s were New York University’s “New Afternoon Show” and Hofstra University's “Post Punk Progressive Pop Party” (Still love that name). The Cars were played on neither. From 1971 until 1982 WLIR was a progressive rock station that stayed that way even while the other rock stations became more commercial. In this regard they were the only ones to play Punk and New Wave Bands on a regular basis. I do not remember if they played The Cars. In 1982 they switched to a full New Wave,Synthpop singles oriented format which is what I believe you were describing. They did not play The Cars. Today The Cars are a staple of Classic Rock Radio. They are not played very much on New Wave nostolgia formats making a good case that The Cars are not New Wave. However unlike some bands such as The Police or Cheap Trick and U2 who were considered New Wave circa 1979-1981 but which I do not consider New Wave today I do consider The Cars as belonging to the genre. They had the look (remember skinny ties) associated with the New Wave of the period. The sound used synthesizers, they were urban oriented and the lyrics had a cynical edge. Looking back the analogy I make is that The Cars to New Wave were like AOL was to the Internet in 1995. The opened the door for you to go in as deep as you wanted. (EK) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.117.103 (talk) 09:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Dark wave

In the late '70s and the early '80s there were european bands with a dark sound... the cure (faith), joy division (closer), later depeche mode (black celebration)... they were called Dark wave. That's definitely a part of the New wave history... don't delete this term!

Judging from the Darkwave article, it seems more a broad term and doesn't become a proper genre until the 90s. Those bands you mentioned are more accurately classified as post-punk or gothic rock. WesleyDodds 07:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Having grown up during the 80s in Belgium, where New Wave was a huge subculture, I can assure you that at least in that part of the world the term "New Wave" generally referred to exactly the bands mentioned in the Dark Wave article (Sisters of Mercy being the archetypical New Wave band), while most of the bands mentioned in this article were simply considered mainstream pop music. The term "goth" didn't even exist yet at the time! If different parts of the world had different definitions of "New Wave", then this article should simply be an index of those definition and link to articles where each regional interpretation is explained. Krommenaas 12:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Exactly! Folkor 04:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
the classical Gothic rock is a part of dark wave. Dark wave isn't really a genre of music... it is an umbrella term like New wave and describes the dark thing within the New wave movement. After the new wave movement was over, dark wave survived in the underground until in the '90s. It's defintiely a term from the '80s used for DM or Joy Division and later mainly used for german Wave music groups like Deine Lakaien.
In the US, darkwave became popular through the label Projekt Records. they used the term for their mail order service. You must know, Projekt Records was cooperating with the german label Hyperium Records in the early '90s. Projekt borrowed the term Darkwave from germany in the middle or the end of the '90s...
BTW: Post Punk isn't a musicstyle. It was a term used in the early '80s to describe different kinds of music developed in the UK after the Punk era (Two-Tone Ska, Oi!, Mod, Positive punk, etc.). There's a book from 1984, called "Who´s been sleeping in my brain"... read it.
Post-punk is more of a music style than Darkwave, because I can go to a bookstore or a magazine stand, pull something out, and find a lot of material on the genre. And of the styles you listed, post-punk only covers Postitive punk, which quickly became gothic rock. The problem with Darkwave is there's no real set idea or description of it until the 90's; the 80s bands classifed are a hodgepodge that at the time were already classfied under a varitey of genres including post-punk, New Wave, goth, dream pop, and so forth. It's certainly valid as a generic term, but not as a genre term, especially in relation to New Wave since a lot of Darkwave bands aren't New Wave. WesleyDodds 23:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Proto New Wave that had nothing to do with Punk

As the article said in the beginning punk rock and New Wave were interchangeable. Even today it is hard to imagine New Wave occurring without punk rock turning the music industry upside down. But an look back shows that major glam acts such as David Bowie and T-Rex to an extent as well as Sparks,Roxy Music and Kraftwork produced music that was singles,urban an synthesizer oriented and predated the punk rock explosion.. Both Roxy Music’s “Love is a Drug” and David Bowie's “TVC 15” fully New Wave however you want to look at it landed on the charts on both sides of the Atlantic in 1976 months before The Sex Pistols went on the Bill Grundy Show. 01:47, 16 June 2006 (EK)

The comments above seemed to be an inspiration to change the overview from "born out of the punk rock movement” to "born out of the punk rock movement however taking little or no influence from punk.". This is a misinterpretation of what I was saying. My reason for those comments were to point out the largely unrecognized fact that there were elements of new wave that had little inspiration from punk. I was defiantly not saying that new wave had little or no influence from punk. Indeed punk strongly influenced new wave. New wave took from Punk its urban orientation, singles format, cynical attitude, fast beat and some fashion elements. Some punk rockers criticized new wave for being a watered down version of punk. 01:54, 14 August 2006 (EK)

You could say this about any genre. For example, rock 'n' roll grew out of R&B in the 1950s, but soon took influence from country music (resulting in the rockabilly subgenre), and many people point to "Move It on Over," a country song from the 1940s, as having proto-rock elements. Still, rock's natural evolution was fundamentally from R&B, not country.

It's the same with New Wave. Just because it incorporated non-punk elements, and therefore has non-punk predecessors, doesn't change the fact that it fundamentally evolved from punk. marbeh raglaim 10:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Tom Petty

Does the paragraph about Tom Petty really belong in here? What did Tom Petty have to do with New Wave?

It does. Petty was a key figure in the emergence of new wave and as the reference shows, his music contributed to the need for a new "label" for this type of music. He clearly sees himself as having played a significant role in the new wave scene and his comment about inventing the genre, however facetious, is worthy of inclusion. Grimhim 23:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Whether Tom Petty, a chattel slave of ABC Records, sees himself as having played a significant role is irrelevant. Erik Warmelink (talk) 04:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Sasaki Problem

moved from wikipedia talk:contact us

As a new user, I made some changes to the pages. A so called Expert keeps on changing them. Ok maybe he is correct, but I added Info to the New Wave music page which was a well known opinion by Nu Metal fans. But Sasaki deleted this, who is he/she to continually make changes to my contributions for no reason. So basically this is a complaint about him/her Sasaki, I will stop making contributions from now on. What is the worth of me investing time in Wiki, if some know-it-all wants to control all the information. This is a problem with Wikipeadia that some users are continually deleting peoples effort. This is a complaint against Sasaki basically. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.10.93.147 (talk • contribs) .

"a well known opinion by Nu Metal fans", do I really need more than WP:POV to explain my actions? Sasaki 20:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

You are continually targeting what ever I do, what do you have no life. Whenever a change is made you are there? There is plenty of opinions in Wiki and if it was just plain fact then half the articles would not exist. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.10.93.147 (talk • contribs) .

Again, may I direct you towards WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL? Sasaki 20:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I know the dam rules, but you cannot deny that to make a page opinions are needed. Firstly I doubt you understand western music, so why are you editing these type of pages. Wow the rules, the rules are being followed, the problem is that you feel, you are the only Information source. You are ruining Wiki, this is a serious complaint. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.10.93.147 (talk • contribs) .

Where to start? Well firstly I take great offence to your thinly veiled racism. Someone's location or ethnic background does not preclude them from having knowledge of any given subject. However, for the record, I am white, live in the UK, and grew up listening to new wave. While I do not consider myself an expert, I consider myself sufficiently knowledgeable to judge whether your contribution was a valid one. If you really want to know what ruins Wikipedia, it is when people with limited knowledge insert irrelevant, inaccurate and unnecessary information into an article, thereby compromising the integrity of Wikipedia. Sasaki 21:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm trying to start a new WikiProject on New Wave music

and I sure would appreciate your support with this project, not only in the proposal stage but also with the actual execution of this proposed WikiProject, should I manage to get enough support for it to go live. If you have any ideas, suggestions, etc., that would be lovely and I would love for more people to participate and make this WikiProject, like, totally awesome, dude. (Krushsister 03:34, 8 October 2006 (UTC))

* IT'S LIVE! The project, I mean. Now if you head on over to the above link, you will get a link to the actual link for the category. Thanks galore to the people who supported the project's coming into being! (Krushsister 04:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC))

Urgh! A Music War airs on VH1 Classic

I happened upon the last thirty minutes or so while channel flipping. I added a mention in the article for that movie. If only I knew beforehand . I had not seen the film since the 1980's. Some incredible but forgotten gems. I hope they air again it better yet a the DVD of it is released. 69.114.117.103 07:32, 31 October 2006 (UTC) (EK)

Wesley Dodds

Stop reverting every change that anyone makes to this page. Much of this article is extremely contentious and America-centric, and every effort that is made to improve it is blindly reverted. If you know so much about New Wave, try citing some sources. 84.9.40.25 23:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Overview

I changed the words "an energetic reaction to the supposedly overproduced, uninspired popular music of the 1970s" to "energetic reaction to the popular music of the 1970s, which was felt to be overproduced and uninspired" because I felt the word "supposedly" bordered on Point of View. Why was it reverted? 69.114.117.103 03:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC) (Ed Kollin)

Because "Wesley Dodds" will not allow anyone to alter this page in any way. 62.255.104.96 14:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
No, it's because we need citations for declarative statements. The current overhaul is more of what we need with this page. WesleyDodds 23:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Maybe I am missing it because I look at these pages late at night but where is the cite for "supposedly"? 69.114.117.103 08:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC) (Ed Kollin)

British Invasion

Judging by earlier comments on this page, the following section in the overview is based on nothing more than what someone half-remembers:

"During this period of interchangeability, the "new wave" was seen as a third distinct movement in rock music, the Rock and Roll of the 1950s being the "first wave", the British Invasion of the 1960s being the "second wave". This latest "third wave" of the 1970s was then the "new wave".[citation needed]"

More to the point, it contradicts both what is said immediately above (that New Wave was a reference to the French Nouvelle Vague). Unless someone can come up with a reliable citation for this "British Invasion" stuff within a week, I think it should be deleted.Malcolm Starkey 16:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

OK then. It's gone. Malcolm Starkey 19:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Lack of Documentaries

A look on youtube shows several documentaries on punk including the excellent BBC presentation "The Punk Years" and BBC America's Dgenertion Punk. A informative documentary on the American Hardcore scene of the early '80 s was just released to DVD. PBS just broadcast a special on the British Invasion. While songs and videos of '80's New Wave are played and replayed I have yet to see a look at not only how New Wave came to be but its social and cultural implications. Why do you suppose considering the continuing popularity and influence of the music should this be? Edkollin 07:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Discrimination

why Yugoslav New Wave music is listed as a paralel movement? Why not as a regional scene? or why not to add New wave music scenes by country category in the template? its not a separate musical genre or a derivate or anything. it was the New Wave music scene of the former Yugoslavia, like there was also a Punk scene in Yugoslavia, Hard'n'heavy scene and so on. they may had some local trademarks but still they were punk, new wave and hard/heavy scenes respectively. For instance, are Belgian punk rock bands a separate musical genre just because they are not from the UK or from the US? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chajeshukarie (talk • contribs) 17:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

rationale

rationale concerning my last edit: Sepultura are a brazilian metal music band. they are counted as belonging to the global metal scene along with their american counterparts megadeth, slayer and others.there's no separate 'standalone' musical genre called brazilian- metal . of course, brazilian metal bands may have certain distinguishable features but that doesnt mean they do not belong in the same category as their american counterparts. "Parallel movements" are movements that exist at a same time without any mutual contact or a point of meeting, exactly like two paralel lines. The New wave in Yugoslavia was New Wave music, a national branch for Yugoslavia, in a same way the British New Wave scene was a national scene (a branch) for the United Kingdom. Its the same music for both of the scenes: minimalist, with the bass guitar in front of the mix, anti-hard rock otrientred with no 'guitar hero' solos, ussually clean or with slightly distorted guitars lowered down in the mix, with frequent use of ska, reggae, power pop etc., with intelectual yet often funny lyrics; they wore exactly the same fashion: minimalist neck ties and suits covered with pins (badges) (like The Jam); even the music videos are made in the same stereotypical new wave manner: "white" studio, a band in suits and so on. the new wave fans in yugoslavia listened to the same bands as their us and british counterparts: blondie, XTC, elvis costello and the attractions, devo, oingo boingo, members and so on. the prominent magazine Dzuboks from belgrade frequently published reports from the states and the uk, incl. a report from the filming of the concert-film "Urgh! Music War" and so and so on. some external video examples: [1], [2], [3], [4],[5].--Chajeshukarie 11:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

p.s. certain local feature is for example the local pre-history of the scene, which included progressive and experimental bands such as Buldožer which was beyond its time. some consider them Yugoslav proto-New Wave band. they are formed in 1975. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chajeshukarie (talk • contribs) 20:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization

Sorry if this has been covered, but I didn't see anything about it. Why is New Wave capitalized, when other genres of music are not? --emw 23:22, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

In 1974 progresive rock bands (such as Roxy Music, Blondie, New York Dolls, Patty Smith, etc; influenced by Rock & Roll band such the Romones, the Knack, The Saints, Iggy Pop, these I would lable proto-punk) added integrated circitry distortion to electric guitars and synthesizers (non Valve), along with those who only used synthesisers, bands such as Krafwerk (1974) or those that only used electric gutars were at this time labled "New Wave". The British media latter labled such bands as Punk rock (a derogotory term because of their unliking of it and because many players or followers dressed like hood or hooker) first aplied to the 'Sex Pistles' in 1976 who then claimed to be New wave. The Cars were another band labled New Wave in the 70's. Many varients of New wave such as Plastic Punk (an equle amount of synthesizer sound with distorted gittars such as Tubeway Army with Gary Newman who was lable king of punk in the 70's; Debbie Harry of Blondie was labled Queen of punk in the 70's) Its hanting form was lable Gothic punk (Siouxsie & the Banshees holding the queen of Gothic, The Cure having the then labled King of Gothic: Robert Smith), the Funky form of 'New wave' was labled 'New Romantic' in 1980. It has a rock drum beat (some times faster) but unlike Rock & roll usually lacks high 'A' notes. The Same sound has recently been labled by verious names especially Electro-rock.

Note that many recent documenteries contradict much of what was said and done in docco's pre 1996. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.24.110.115 (talk) 04:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Random Thoughts

The way the article has been rewritten to show how the genre has many definitions makes it hard to read. Some specifics. The quote from the article about the Boomtown Rats could make its point without being that long. The article used to point out that New Wave has at times synonymous with Synth Pop. The height of its popularity in the United States coincided with Synth Pop and the birth of the Personnel Computer. There is a long paragraph about fashion which is fine as it is but to narrow. New Wave could considered an era,a generation.a social or cultural phenomenon in which the music was the soundtrack to. New Wave culture in the U.S. trended more middle class, upper class, higher education and in the early years more towered people in their late teens and twenties . Elements included celebrating nerdiness ,individuality. Movies that in part or in whole that might be considered to have a New Wave sensibility include The Rocky Horror Picture Show,Times Square (Unfortunately),Breaking Glass,Valley Girl,Smithereens,Liquid Sky and any number of Molly Ringwald flicks. I understand at this point this my POV and Original Research and to U.S. centric. and as I mentioned above the book or Documentary about this era has not been made making it hard to get proper citing Edkollin 22:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC).

Yes, I'll agree that this article is a bit of a mess. There is a simple reason for this:
In Britain, the term "New Wave" has a specific and fairly precise definition. It refers to the more chart-friendly version of punk popular in the late 1970s, epitomised by Elvis Costello, Tom Robinson, Blondie, the Boomtown Rats etc. In fashion terms, this translates to skinny ties, tight suits etc.
In the US, as well as meaning this, "New Wave" apparently also encompasses pretty much anything from the first half of the 1980s - including bands like the Thompson Twins, A Flock of Seagulls, Duran Duran, Haircut 100 etc. However, these bands (and the accompanying fashions) are categorically not New Wave in Britain (from where, incidentally, all of them originate). It would be almost impossible to find a single citation from a respectable British music writer that would describe anything in this second category as New Wave. Synth-pop, similarly, is not regarded as New Wave - it is regarded as Synth-pop. That's why it has a different name.
Now, this is not a simple problem of POV. New Wave is a term with two quite distinct definitions on opposite sides of the Atlantic. (I would be interested to know which definition is more widely used in, say, Australia.) The current page is an attempt to describe two things under one heading, and as a result it is an ugly mess. It certainly won't be improved by ramming in uncited references to the Rocky Horror Picture Show and a load of Molly Ringwald films.
I'm not convinced this can ever be resolved. It's one of those pages, like vest and suspenders, that make me think the whole Wikipedia project cannot work, because of users' irreconcilable differences in language use. Malcolm Starkey 12:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Agreed that my "random thoughts" are far from article ready. It came about because I am in the process of reading "Rip It Up and Start Again: Postpunk 1978-1984" by Simon Reynolds which deals heavily with early '80's pop It got me thinking about what a book/film about the American scene would look like and my conclusion was that it would not be called "American New Wave Music" but "The New Wave era in the United States". I called it POV because a lot of those thoughts (sans Molly Ringwald) were similar thoughts feelings I had during the era(individuality,nerdiness.computers/synth pop etc) I put in in in the hope that just because I had not read a respectable article dealing with the subject does not mean that none had been written. And by the way any proper article about the U.S. scene must include a discussion of the Anglophile phenomenon. Edkollin 03:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Although both Synth Pop and Techno Pop were used in the early '80's in the U.S. Techno Pop was the more popular terminology. Techno Pop is never used today Edkollin 03:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC).

Compilations

The last two paragraphs of the New Wave in the United States are advertisements which I think there is a rule against. Would a new nostalgia section that would mention that there are compilations as well as Internet radio stations etc and reference cites that contain ads against the rules? Edkollin 03:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

New Wave is Music associated with Gays

Wasn't New Wave music meant to be associated with bisexuals, there is no mention if this in the articles?

Several members of popular New Wave Bands such as the the B-52's and Frankie Goes to Hollywood had prominent openly gay members and of course their was Boy George. The music had a gay following. The music had a creative artistic bent which is stereotypically associated with gays. The music was far from being exclusively gay. It appealed to people who were or felt "different" and the gays are just one group that can fit that description. The term gay was used as a slur against New Wave music by some fans of and members of Hardcore Punk and Hair Metal bands. There is nothing I remember about the music appealing to bisexuals in particular Edkollin 08:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget the guy from WHAM! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.199.188 (talk) 12:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

New Wave had no more gay connections than rock or pop. I can think of only one New Wave artist who was openly gay/bisexual (Tom Robinson). The idea that Frankie Goes To Hollywood, Wham! or Culture Club/Boy George were New Wave is wrong. As this article states 'new wave' in the UK stopped being used around 1980, several years before these groups appeared. They were never called 'new wave' in Britain as this term was obsolete by then. In the US 'new wave' was/is used as a catch-all term for any 'modern' sounding pop/rock from the late 70s until the end of the 80s (especially if it came from Britain)but referring to British acts from the 80s as 'new wave' will make no sense to those acts themselves or British readers. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 01:06, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

New Wave (music) → New Wave music — The article was originally at New Wave music until Sdornan moved it with the edit summary "Proper disambiguation.", though no reason that New Wave (music) is the correct title was given. This goes against the convention for genre articles such as Rock music, Pop music, and Hip hop music which don't use parentheses since the names also function as adjectives. I'd go ahead and move it but I want to make sure there are no objections before it is moved and all the links that go here are changed back. —17Drew 00:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Support moving back to New Wave music. This is not like Intonation (music), which is a concept in music theory and has the title disambiguated from Intonation (linguistics). It is a genre of music and should have its title accord to that format. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 02:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - I absolutely agree with this move. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (tαlk) 19:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose - the name is "New Wave", so "New Wave (music)" would be the proper title of the article. --Yath 04:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:
  • I first made the move because the term for the movement is New Wave, not New Wave music. Pop is located at Pop music because pop is such a common word, or in Experimental music's case because experimental is a common adjective to begin with (plus, Experimental (music) doesn't make sense anyway). Also, it makes sense to title Hip hop music the way it is because the music is a subset of the larger Hip hop culture. Same with Christian music, Folk music, etc. In New Wave's case, I feel that the term itself is specific enough not to be used as an adjective with a trailing music, and because New Wave IS the musical movement, not a subset of a larger movement. Also, other articles about movements called New Wave are located at New Wave (science fiction) and New Wave (design). There are also other music genre articles with this type of disambiguation, such as Emo (music), Post-industrial (music). Sdornan 14:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
    My recommendation would be to move Emo (music) and Post-industrial (music) then. Take Soul music, House music, Electro music, or Ambient music, which are being disambiguated from articles of which they aren't subarticles. It's common to refer to these as simply soul or electro, but they also function as adjectives. New Wave is used the same way; for example, The Buggles is a New Wave band, and "She Blinded Me with Science" is a New Wave song. 17Drew 23:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
    But in those cases, particularly Soul and House, the words are so common that people wouldn't necessarily know what you're referring to without the word music. (Soul and House are both completely different, and more common, things.) It also wouldn't even make sense to title articles Ambient or Electro, because those words are adjectives themselves and need the word music behind them. (A genre just called ambient wouldn't make any sense, and ambiance is related but not the same thing.) New Wave is the name of the genre and movement alone, and the fact that it's music doesn't need to be clarified, just disambiguated since there happens to be New Waves in other fields. Sdornan 14:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Distinction: New Wave as a branch of punk rock VS. New Romantic

How come you removed Blondie's Parallel Lines pic from the article which many consider an epitome of the New Wave (suits and ties and all that minimalist 2 Tone pre-hippie-inspired sort of iconography)? On the other hand, I see Duran Duran pic added to the article (i beleive everyone would agree they are definetly an epitome of the New Romantic movement which is something different, though related to the New wave, I may call it a derivate). Is there a sort of war going on here between former punks and new romantics? :) Really, it seems that both sides want to push certain agendas here, like "we were the real thing not you" and stuff. Call me biased, but I will be with punk-rockers on this issues:

  • What is New Wave? A sophisticated and experimental subgenre of punk rock that gradually developed into a separate genre- "Punk rebelion with intellectual attitude"; minimalist fashion and sound; related to Punk rock, Ska, Reggae, Power pop, Mod Revival; experimental and minimalist music videos (Making plans for Nigel by XTC; Pump it up by Elvis Costello); anti-hard rock and anti-heavy metal (Deep Purple and all that), anti-establishment (not necesarily in a political way) but still very "poppy". Acts: Blondie, Devo, XTC, B52's, Squeeze, Go-Go's, Elvis Costello & The Attractions, Boomtown Rats, The Police. New Wave should not be equated to New Romantic nor Synthpop nor Post-Punk nor Gothic Rock, although they are all somehow related.

"Our music was definitely escapism, not just a generation sipping cocktails in a newly opened wine bar and voting for Thatcher - it was the opposite," says Martin Fry (ABC) [6].
"People used to call us Thatcher's children - that used to really annoy me," says Boy George regarding the New Romantic era.[7]
"Q: Do you feel that your videos, such as the one for "Rio" which showed you swanning around on a yacht with bikini-clad girls, made you the acceptable face of Thatcherism? A: No, I don't. New Romanticism may have been aspirational, like Thatcherism, but our aspirations were about individualism and freedom of expression. For Thatcher, it was just about money. Us being on a yacht wasn't about having lots of money, it was about going somewhere decent to make a video because we needed a holiday."- Simon Le Bon [8]
"(...) Instead, it (Top Of The Pops) ended up more like a noisy, extended commercial for Thatcherism, where upwardly mobile groups of negligible quality such as Spandau Ballet and Duran Duran paraded as if they were rehearsing for a Lloyd Webber musical" [9]

I think that its finally time to draw a distinction between the New Wave and New Romantic, they ARE related but not a same thing. Of course, that would be an uneasy job, cause some artists may have belonged to both during certain periods.Idiukurac 15:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

This goes back to the U.S. vs U.K. discussion we had above. Blondie created music that would fit both definitions of New Wave but also had hit records that were reggae,hip-hop and disco. Duran Duran (and other New Romantics) fit under the loose U.S. definition. But Duran Duran are known for the videos which "proved" the art form as a viable marketing tool,their high class partying image and teen idol status more then their music Edkollin 07:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Racism and Homophobia of New Wave/Punk in the 1970's

I love how this article conveniently ignores the fact of how racist and homophobic the New Wave music movement was in the 1970's. New wave fans were were white and felt threatened by the liberal open society of the 1970's. They were especially threatened by disco music, which they felt which they associated with gay and black people. I remember back in the 1970's how intolerant and bigoted New Wave fans were. Their magazines were felt with hatred. I noticed that Punk Magazine has the audacity to display some of the pages of their magazines from that period. Take a look at: http://www.punkmagazine.com/vault/vault-main.html and you will see numerous homophobic and racist remarks in many of these pages. 24.6.21.209 02:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Unmitigated bullshit.
The 1970s punk/New Wave scene, although largely white, was racially inclusive (Poly Styrene, Annabella Lwin, The Specials) and actively embraced black music. Don Letts was the DJ at The Roxy, and played reggae records because none of the punk bands had at that time recorded anything. The dub/reggae influence is clearly audible in records by The Clash, The Ruts, Elvis Costello, Joe Jackson, The Slits etc, as well the 2 Tone scene. Disco was a lesser influence, but was by no means "hated" or regarded as "threatening" - think of Blondie's Heart of Glass or Rapture and Ian Dury's Reasons to be Cheerful, Part 3.
And, of course, another New Wave/disco crossover was Pete Shelley's Homosapien, of which there is a sample on the main page. Shelley was just one of a number of openly gay musicians on the 1970s punk/New Wave scene, alongside Howard Devoto, Vaughan Toulouse of Department S and Tom Robinson, who wrote the well-known protest song Glad to be Gay for a Gay Pride event.
Oh yes, and in 1978 there was a huge Rock Against Racism concert featuring contributions from The Clash, The Buzzcocks, X-Ray Spex, The Ruts, Sham 69, Generation X and the Tom Robinson Band.
Still, don't let the facts get in the way of your paranoid ranting, will you Mr 24.6.21.209? 80.254.147.52 13:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, the New Wave scene was definitely anti-disco, homophobic and racist what with all the explicit disco borrowings, openly gay members and multiracial bands.
This is far more absurd than the identical attempt on the Punk rock talk page. If anything New Wave was fairly closely linked with disco and the gay scene at the time. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 14:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The following is from the disco article:
The emergence of the punk and New Wave scenes contributed to disco's decline. Anti-disco punk songs began cropping up in 1977. As the popularity of disco grew, so did the number of anti-disco songs. In order to distinguish themselves from Disco fans, Punk and New Wave fans wore safety pins, played their music loudly, and had no qualms about their music being obnoxious. Heavy metal, country-western and rock 'n' roll bands all got into the act as well.
The fact that disco originally sprung from gay clubs provided white American men from rural and socially conservative areas with a specific scapegoat at which they could aim their criticism and let their homophobia hang out. Gay bashing and racism reared its head often in the criticism of disco. In the March/April '78 issue of Punk, John Holstrom succinctly brings to light the folly of disco in a cartoon called "Disco Mania."[1] This cartoon makes numerous homophobic jokes (using the word "fag") and the New Orleans fanzine Final Solution derides disco as music for "niggers" and "faggots."[2] The virulent attacks on not just disco music, but its stereotyped culture came partially as a reaction to a decade of women's rights, civil rights and gay rights battles.
The anti-gay sentiment and unbridled racism (against blacks, latinos and people of middle eastern descent) wasn't new to Punk and wasn't limited to a hatred of disco. Gay bashing was also a reaction against the strong queer influence of early punk. Though such rock 'n' roll heroes as the New York Dolls, Lou Reed and David Bowie all flaunted an ambiguous sexuality, it didn't sit well with many of their fans. Macho boys from middle America seemed especially threatened by the gender-bending.
Some of the anti-Disco Punk/New Wave songs include:
  • D.O.A. -- "Disco Sucks" (1978)(Sudden Death/Quinetessence)
  • Razar -- "Stamp Out Disco" (1978) (Able Records)
  • Vectors -- "Death To Disco" (1979) (Chateu East Records)
  • Rotters -- "Disco Queen" (1979) (Rotten Records)
  • Disco Zombies -- "Disco Zombies" (1979) (Uptown Records)
  • Dirt Shit -- "Discosheisser" (1979) (Razz Records)
  • Skams -- "Discoglin" (1979) (Betong Records)
  • Accident -- "Kill the Bee Gees" (1979) (No Threes)
  • Government -- "Hemingway Hated Disco Music" (1979) (Government Records)
  • Rotzkotz -- "Disco Sound Is Dead" (1979)
  • Johnny Yen Bang -- "Kill the Disco" (1980)
  • Blitzkrieg -- "Rock 'n' Roll Is Dead" (1981) (Blitzkrieg Records)
  • Dicks -- "All Night Fever" (1981) (Radical Records)
  • Rattus -- "Fucking Disco" (1981)(Hilipili Records)
  • Bleach Boys -- "Death Before Disco" (1982) (Tramp Records)
(I thought you were talking about the 1970s?) 80.254.147.52 13:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Vibrators -- "Disco In Mosko" (Rak Records)
  • Jimi LaLumia + Psychotic Frogs -- "Death To Disco" (Death Records)
  • Victims -- "Disco Junkies" (Victims Records)
  • The Business -- "Smash the Discos" (Secret Records)
  • Chosen Few -- "Disco Tek Wreck" (Chosen Few Records)
24.6.21.209 03:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Reply to "80.254.147.52": I'll ignored the 1980's and British artists you mention as I am talking about racism/homophobia in New Wave Music in the 1970's in the USA. As for Blondie's "Heart of Glass" I will simply paste this from the wikipedia page on the song:
"Almost immediately after its release, "Heart of Glass" became the subject of controversy because of its disco sound. At the time, Blondie was one of the bands at the forefront of New York's growing New Wave musical scene. Suddenly they found themselves accused of "selling out" for releasing a disco song. According to Blondie frontwoman Deborah Harry, "Heart of Glass" made the band pariahs in the eyes of many of their fellow musicians in the New York music scene. The band was accused of pandering to the mainstream that many punk/new wave bands at the time were actively rebelling against."
In other words she was declared a sell-out by New Wave/Punk fans and she became a pop artist soon after that. The other Blondie song you mention "Rapture" is not disco.24.6.21.209 03:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
"Rapture" was influenced by funk and hip hop, both of which were closely linked with disco — funk being a major influence on disco, and hip hop being largely derived from it. "Heart of Glass" was controversial more as a pop song than as a disco song.
If you want to talk solely about the US '70s punk/New Wave scene you should make that clear. "Punk in the '70s" would include Radio Birdman, The Clash and Métal Urbain.
Yes, elements of the New York punk scene were racist and homophobic. Clearly, other elements were not: Richard Hell, the New York Dolls and Joey Ramone were against pigheaded homophobia. Blondie and Patti Smith were clearly not racist. If you want to include the entire US, you get X, Dead Kennedys, The Dead Boys, the Big Boys... all openly opposed to racism and or homophobia. All '70s US punk.
Why not extend this? There are homophobic groups in hip hop culture, racists in country music, and both have been applied to a large degree in depictions of heavy metal culture. But they're only elements of the scenes really. At least, this should be raised at Talk:Punk subculture rather than at the music pages. But I really don't see your original research making the cut without sources, and the larger sects within punk (and New Wave!) have always been anti-racist, anti-homophobic, egalitarian ones. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 10:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
24.6.21.209, my friend, all of the bands and artists I mentioned are from the 1970s apart from Department S and Bow Wow Wow. The reason you're ignoring them is not because of their lack of relevance, but because they contradict your pat little theories.
In return, I'll ignore the long list of no-mark bands you cut and pasted from the ludicrous rant in the disco article. Who the hell are Rotzkotz, Johnny Yen Bang and Jimi LaLumia + Psychotic Frogs etc etc? (Note that none of them have Wikipedia entries, by the way.) A list of incredibly obscure singles by nonentities and two quotes from fanzines do not equate to widespread prejudice within the entire genre.
More to the point, since what you are saying has nothing to do with New Wave, I suggest you go to the Punk rock page and continue the discussion there. Good luck with that. 80.254.147.52 13:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
The opening statement is filled with same type of racist stereotyping that it is supposed to be railing against. In immediately losing credibility the writer blew a chance to discuss a legitimate issue that had some validity. Part but not all of the anti disco sentiment of the late 1970's was based on disco's origins in the black and gay community. I was around during that time and many New Wave fans despised disco. White oriented New Wave bands that had funk and dance elements in it were cool innovators while the black originators went unheard. Blondie's Rapture was outselling many of the hip hop artists of the time. And club was just another word for disco. That being said there was a very different feel in both in the music and the clothes between the originators and those that were influenced by them. While many early hip hop recordings featured "boasting" many New Wave bands and fans came out of a nerdy college atmosphere(this was also true for British "postpunk" bands). So were the white New Wave fans who liked Liquid Liquid but did not listen to P_Funk racists or just listening to music that spoke to them?
Lost in the argument if the writer or anybody else can find a reputable source that holds that particular opinion it most certainly belongs in the article Edkollin 06:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

No such thing as 'New Wave'

http://youtube.com/watch?v=i7GefvKKAIY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.53.78.15 (talk) 12:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

because one dude said it?--Greenday21 (talk) 22:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)Greenday21

new wave in the u.s mid 80s

In the mid-1980's artists like Madonna, Cyndi Lauper, Huey Lewis and the News and Prince were considered to be New Wave.

"says who" was the edit summary - here's a quick answer:

These are not offered up as citations, because they wouldn't fly as such - just as justification for the piece to include these names. (I might reconsider Huey, actually.) I notice that most of the other artists on the page are also not listed with citations, so you'all can decide how to proceed on this. Tvoz |talk 09:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

At best New Wave influenced. A 1986 Rock History book by Rolling Stone magazine (do not have book with me) says artists like Prince and Madonna although not New Wave would not have had success without the Punk and New Wave movements a point I agree with Edkollin 17:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok - I'm not an expert on new wave, so I don't have strong feelings about including them - in the US I've heard them (again, less so Huey Lewis, so scratch him) associated with new wave, "pop" wave, late new wave - but it's your collective call. Tvoz |talk 18:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

come on people, not every 1980s pop singer was new wave. and this confusion new wave, new romantic, synthpop.. new romantic and synthpop have their own articles, they are separate stories, this article is supposed to be about blondie, the gogos, costello, squeeze, the rats... what duran duran? moreover it says "keyboard-led band". dd is a standard rock set: guitar, bass, drums. sure they used keyboards a lot but that doesnt mean you can equate them to a standard synthpop acts such as the early dm or yazoo. and that "us definition" some were refering to, are there any further sources on that? I checked the about.com page, it does mention dd however it says "in the early 80s, additional genres closely associated with New Wave became popular. From the ashes of punk came post-punk, a dark-toned aspect of New Wave brought about by Joy Division and Public Image, Ltd. Forming another subgenre were the New Romantics. Led by Spandau Ballet and Duran Duran, these groups melded guitars and synthesizers and placed a great importance on fashion and imagery.". so it says additional genres Dzole 09:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree, Dzole. Malcolm Starkey 11:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Not so fast. You are reading what you want out of the article . "Now termed Synth Pop, this style was originally a sub-genre of New Wave". "post-punk, a dark-toned aspect of New Wave". "Frankie Goes To Hollywood's epic New Wave debut, Welcome To The Pleasuredome". That piece like ours has conflicting messages for reasons discussed above. As we mentioned In the U.K. New Wave was a musical genre consisting of the arty and pop sides of punk rock and was for the most part over by 1980. Correct me if I'm wrong but from what I have read in the UK Punk rock was one of the major cultural events of modern times. Most people over a certain age will remember exactly where they were when they watched or heard about the Grundy interview. Thus the term "postpunk" made sense. Two Tone had a distinct cultural meaning the New Romantic and synthpop movements were in some aspects conservative movements in the sense of bringing back pre punk musical values of hooks and sexiness. In that context connecting these genres would seem ludicrous. In America New Wave was more a cultural as well as a musical movement. Synthpop, Postpunk even punk rock in some aspects were as the article hinted at sub genres of the New Wave movement. Most people did not go as far as calling Madonna or Huey Lewis New Wave but as proved above some did. The Sex Pistols did not even get in the top 100. US music journalists would use the term postpunk because they read the British music mags but the term had less literal meaning in the US. In the late 70's in US rock it was about dressing down,analog,albums. The major rock bands were Foreigner,Styx,Boston and their ilk. In the 80's you added computers, video the music was singles oriented and fashion and hair styles were colorful. The above is over simplistic and if you read some of the above discussions redundant but the point being made is that "New Wave" is an accurate description what was being experienced in the US so that is why it held on. On a personal note I remember reading an interview around 1984 or 1985 with Howard Jones (Spin Magazine I think )where he remarked that he was astounded that his US fans were were still using the term New Wave and calling him that. Edkollin 06:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Here's a thing. The original definition of New Wave in the article has sources and citations. The so-called US definition does not. Why doesn't somebody go off and find some reliable sources for these assertions, rather than relying on some sort of truthiness to justify them. Please note that the website of Sam Goody does not constitute a reliable source.
How about an article from Rolling Stone, or Spin, or any other piece by a serious music journalist that supports this slapdash broad-based definition of New Wave? Otherwise, it seems to me that the page is giving too much credence to an incorrect usage of the term. Just because a lot of people might think that Madonna is New Wave, it doesn't follow that she is, or ever was. Reliable citations, please, from respectable music critics. Malcolm Starkey 20:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. In popular music popular definitions should have some weight. All seem to agree that the "New Wave" was coined as a marketing term so why is cites from a with a marketing angle incorrect to use?. I will gradually provide cites from varied sources that have a "slapdash" approach.
I would go to winamp or itunes radio type in new wave in search and listen to what they play A genre definition From allmusic.com[10] A listing of songs from an 80's New Wave compilation[amazon.com/gp/product/B000V9GGUI?ie=UTF8&tag=liketotally80-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=B000V9GGUI&adid=3915c4d2-d653-47cb-a9fa-da28ebbf8633]A Rolling Stone magazine review of the DVD Depeche Mode 101 that calls the film "the greatest New Wave concert film of all time"[11] A wisegeek.com article that includes Duran Duran and U2[12] A listing of New Wave artists from AOL music[13] Definition from nostalgia central website [14] And of course urbandictionary has a few definitions[15] Edkollin 07:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
From a 1986 Knight Ridder service news article "Eurythmics' Annie Lennox and Dave Stewart have maintained a level of musical quality and popularity that few of their new wave peers have matched. They were pop music's Class of '82-'83, a horde of new bands who, grouped under the catchall phrase new wave, were classified as the second British (and European) Invasion. The names were as high-tech and pop-drenched as the music; Duran Duran, Eurythmics, Culture Club, Billy Idol, the Fixx"[16] You asked for Rolling Stone Magazine you got it a 1999 review that calls Duran Duran well you know[17] Edkollin 20:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
A sarcastic use of the term from a 1984 article by Robert Christgau an esteemed U.S. music critic about the music business at the time "Of course, if the majors had been prepared with Linda Ronstadt and REO Speedwagon videos when the channel went on the air in 1981, it's conceivable it would have flopped, or meant very little. Instead, bizzers handed the ball to mostly British "new wave" longshots. Appearance-obsessed art-school types who were eager to stake some of their Eurodollars on the stateside profits rock and rollers dream of, these young musicians came up with lots of snazzy clips. Thus MTV was the making of such bands as Men at Work, whose debut eventually outsold both Asia and American Fool in 1982; the Stray Cats, London-trained Massapequabillies whose midline-priced debut compilation is now double-platinum; A Flock of Seagulls, with their high-IQ haircuts and dumb hooks; and let us not forget Duran Duran." "I'm willing to venture that MTV won't ever be as conservative a cultural force as AOR. The circumstances that thrust it briefly into the commercial forefront of "new wave" were temporary"[18] Edkollin 08:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
A review by Newsday music journalist Glenn Gamboa of Duran Duran's new album in where Gamboa called the band "80's new wavers"[19] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edkollin (talk • contribs) 02:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Urban Dictionary? Are you taking the piss?
Popular misconceptions have no place in an encyclopedia. A lot of people, for example, consider Gary Numan or Kraftwerk to epitomise "the Eighties sound"; indeed, I saw a display in a record shop a few months ago (Fopp on Tottenham Court Road, if you want to know) that featured The Man-Machine and Replicas as "classic Eighties albums", despite them both being released in the Seventies. Just because a lot of people think something is the case, doesn't mean that it is.
Once again, there are no citations in the article. If you genuinely consider Nostalgia Central and AOL Music to be sources on a par with serious music writers like Charles Shaar Murray and Jon Savage, why don't you incorporate the citations into the text? Malcolm Starkey 08:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
You are correct in that this or any article should not print something provably wrong such as Gary Numan came out in the eighties. A definition of a musical genre is not something that is scientifically provable just an opinion. I have no problem with more leeway in describing musical genres. What makes a musical journalists even a renowned one opinion more "educated" then the marketing execs at AOL music?. But lets talk reality here most musical "journalists" are college age or just above fans taking a fantasy stop before going on with their real life. And if we are talking about America most are working for publications that are A. Part of the same mega conglomerate as the "record company" B. So dependent on the industry that they might as well be part of their marketing division. It is not England with their influential weekly music papers. "Serious" musical journalists have so little influence that when they and the public agree on something a big deal is made about it. I plan to to continue to gradually add more cites hopefully with more "serious journalists". I do not really have the time everyday to drop by my local library and look at microfilm of every 1980's music publication and newspaper article to search for every band referenced as "new wave".I have no plans at this point to put any of these cites in the article. I am using them as part of the dispute resolution process. And yes I was "takin the piss" as you call it with the Urban dictionary cite.(Off topic: I remember when reading the British music press seeing that particular expression and thinking a lot of people in England have pee fetishes) Edkollin 03:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Quote: Edkollin: As we mentioned In the U.K. New Wave was a musical genre consisting of the arty and pop sides of punk rock (...)(end of quote) re: But it was the same in the US: Blondie, The B-52's, Talking Heads, The Cars, Devo and The Go-Go's were all American artists who were poppy and/or arty and/or punky as their British counterparts. The dispute here is not "a British vs. an American defintion" but "one def vs. another". As both defintions consider them "new wave", I think those artists should remain in the introduction as undisputed notable examples of this musical genre/movement. However, I removed some recent additions to the introduction: Duran Duran and ABC (both epytomized the New Romantic movement and their inclusion is not supported by the 1st def), Berlin (wrongly linked to the city of Berlin) and Naked Eyes (who are they?). The Cars were deleted as a collateral damage. Dzole 18:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the sensible edits you've made recently, Dzole, particularly the new songs added to the media section. I think we can agree that those are tracks that fit everyone's definition of New Wave. Malcolm Starkey 18:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I was under the impression that the difference was country based. It irrelevant to the definition irrelevant where the bands that said definition are from. If you have cites otherwise please list them. As for Naked Eyes they had a top 10 U.S hit with a cover of (There's) Always Something There to Remind Me which ranked at 58 on one list of top 100 New Wave songs[20] Edkollin 04:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Rough Draft for rewrite for New Wave in the U.S. section

New Wave in the United States is a popular catchall term used to describe music that emerged in the late 1970’s and crested during the 1982-1983 period in what was dubbed the second British Invasion when groups deemed “New Wave” scored high on the charts and receded by around 1987. The groups deemed “New Wave” in the late 1970’s such as Elvis Costello, The Police, Gary Numan, and Squeeze dovetails with the British definition of the genre. Major differences in what is deemed New Wave between the United States and Briton occurred from the early 1980’s onward when the term New Wave was used in America to describe nearly every new pop/rock artist, especially those that used synthesizers. Examples of artists defined in the Unites States as New Wave during this period that would not fit the British definition include Duran Duran,Flock of Seagulls,Eurythmics,Adam and the Ants,Human League,Naked Eyes and The Culture Club,[3],[4],,[5] ,[6],[7]

If there are no comments I intend to replace the uncited U.S. section in the article with the above or a cleaned up version of the above in a week or so. I feel this represents a mix of new and old media sourcing. The new media sourcing I chose is reprehensive of the thrust of what dozens of other new media sources are defining as new wave Edkollin 03:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I put this rewrite in the article as there have been no objections. On the to do list is a cited sentence that says groups like Duran Duran are in America called synthpop or New Romantic besides New Wave. Also a separate paragraph for the British definition since the above is comparing the two definitions.. A claim was made earlier in the talk pages that no respectable British Journalist would use the definition listed above. If anybody could produce those cites it would be helpful Edkollin (talk) 03:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I think you'll find that what I actually said was: "It would be almost impossible to find a single citation from a respectable British music writer that would describe anything in this second category as New Wave."
There is no need for a separate paragraph for what you call "the British definition" - there is a well-sourced and cited section detailing the original definition of New Wave which covers the subject adequately. There is a separate paragraph for the US only because the term has since become used in a much broader, looser sense there. Otherwise, where will you stop? "Definition of New Wave in Ireland"? "Definition of New Wave in Canada"? "Definition of New Wave in Australia"? "Definition of New Wave in New Zealand"? "Definition of New Wave in South Africa"? "Definition of New Wave in India"? "Definition of New Wave in the Cayman Islands"?
Perhaps you ought instead to concentrate on removing the various typos and punctuation errors in your new paragraph. Malcolm Starkey (talk) 22:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually you raise a good point. How does the rest of the world outside of the United States and Great Britain define New Wave? Is it closer to the original or the U.S definition? I really have no idea. If for instance the U.S. definition is used outside of the U.S. we would have to change the title of the section to something like “broader” definition Edkollin (talk) 08:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I can provide you with some insight on that. As a German, I believe I can speak on behalf of mainland Europe here. Today, the term New Wave is understood, maybe inaccurately, as engulfing everything from Robert Palmer to Pat Benatar, that's also because most attention was and is payed to poppy mainstream artists like Eurythmics, Depeche Mode and Simple Minds; lesser-known bands like Devo and Japan didn't even get much radioplay. Hardly anybody not familiar with that period uses the 'New Wave' term now, most just dub it "The 80s." Those who are familiar agree, that since we had the German version of New Wave with the Neue Deutsche Welle (which has the same meaning, but is a much more precisely defined umbrella term) from about '81 to '83, which included ska-like bands, synth-pop and industrial genres, that this should also be valid for the English New Wave, so basically including everything except punk and disco at the time.

So for us, New Wave does include all the new wavish pop acts until 1984, like Don Henley or Peter Gabriel, as well. So to be clear, there were no new wave bands as such, they all grew out of this after 1984, prime example is Talk Talk. So New Wave was more a term for a period than say a very specific genre. For us, it was the umbrella over 1) synth-pop (which was back then as you pointed out, called Techno-pop) 2) New Romantic 3)post-punk and, which might be hard to bear - for many pop acts of that period up to 1984. Then came the house-influenced Madonna, Pet Shop Boys or Wham, who are not connected with New Wave or its subgenres at all anymore. From this POV ;) my suggestion would be, to not try to name bands that are specifically New Wave, but just to use this as the 'uber-' term for the more accurately defined genres synth-pop, post-punk and New Romantic, but only from 197. to 1984. The result would be an article that basically just sums up the three genre-specific articles in one. Hopefully, we can all come to a definition that does this music justice. Skraelinger (talk) 00:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for you reply. From what I read "New Wave" has an even broader meaning in mainland Europe then in the U.S. I do think it would be pretty rare for anyone here to associate Don Henley with New Wave. I agree that New Wave is as much or more of a period then a music genre but this article is named "New Wave Music". They do use the the "The 80's" here but as I established "New Wave" still is in use. In the U.S. Hip-Hop and Heavy Metal were as important as New Wave to the music and cultural scene during that decade. I would say based on personal observation that Bon Jovi are the most popular group from that decade today. They had a number one album then and had one again this year. If you have some mainland European citings for your broad definition claims we could rework the article around them. Edkollin (talk) 07:46, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


I have in the talk section of the List of New Wave Bands and Artists proposed changing the title to to List of New Wave Bands and Artists (U.S. Definition). Discussion probably belongs in that talk page Edkollin 22:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Depeche Mode

Another editor added the group to the U.S. definition section. Then he decided that he was mistaken and put them in the summary section. I put the group back in the U.S definition section. Early Depeche Mode were a synthpop group. Synthpop is one the main differences in the two definitions. Proponents of the original definition consider Synthpop to be a totally separate genre. In America synthpop is either considered a subgenre of New Wave or the terms are used interchangeably. The groups work later in the 1980's are considered Alternative Rock but that discussion is for another day. Edkollin (talk) 04:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Punk Magazine March/April 1978 Issue, Page 25.
  2. ^ Final Solution February 1979 Issue, Page 19.
  3. ^ 1984 Article by music journalist Robert Christgau
  4. ^ 1986 Knight Ridder news article
  5. ^ Review: Duran Duran's 'Red Carpet Massacre' by Glenn Gamboa Newsday November 13, 2007
  6. ^ Definition by Allmusic.com
  7. ^ Top 100 New Wave Songs listing with definition of the genre

Fair use rationale for Image:Devo - Whip It excerpt.ogg

Image:Devo - Whip It excerpt.ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

New Wave fashion revivalists

I removed the following from the New Wave fashion section and bring it here for discussion:

New Wave revivalists are currently very popular in New York, Boston, LA, and Seattle (centering around nightclubs like New York’s Misshapes, Boston's Manray nightclub, Seattle's Buddha Bar in Belltown and featured in art and fashion magazines like Visionaire). The style has also recently been a major influence in high fashion, for example in the most recent collections of designers like Scott Gerst and Hedi Slimane (ex-creative director of Dior Homme.)

First of all, this is all unreferenced, the nightclubs do not have articles, the tone is unencyclopædic, and frankly it is irrelevant. A listing of cities in which "New Wave revivalists are currently very popular" does not help elucidate the subject at all. Who really cares if this fashion style is suddenly hip again? This is not a fashion blog. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 04:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

With no citing at all it is Original Research. If the proper citing occurs then we can debate weight Edkollin (talk) 01:55, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who listen to New Wave music

Would those who listen to New Wave music please add [[Category:Wikipedians who listen to New Wave music]] to your user pages? I would like to create it, however, I am the only Wikipedian currently in it. - LA @ 18:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

So much myth and misconception

The artical is pretty good, but some of what I read in the discussion is reflective of common revisionist history

In the history of all musical genres, new wave is perhaps the most routinely overthought,over complicated, and overblown of any.

“New Wave” was in fact, and extremely narrow music genre, which at it’s earliest, began around 1979, and at the latest, pretty much fizzled top a close by 1986. The talk of “90s new wave” is ludicrous, irrespective of the fact that even some 90s artists, attempted to tout their music as new wave.

What is often mistaken for new wave, is actually Post Punk, Folk Punk, Dark Wave, No Wave, Techno, Synth pop, Synth dance, Ska, Rock Steady, and even later trend like Emo and Indie.. What is so ironic, is that some of what has been falsely labeled “new wave” was in fact, created as an intention counter balance to what many perceived, with some degree of justification, as a commercial offering for wannabes.

This is what Siouxie Sioux and Bushie referred to as “Mistaking the opportunists with the protagonists” when they somewhat disgustedly announced the end of the Banshees.


"In the history of all musical genres, new wave is perhaps the most routinely overthought,over complicated, and overblown of any".Agreed although a good argument can be made for alternative rock. 1979 is a bit late as "New Wave" was in common use in 1977. Elvis,The Talking Heads and Devo started to have success in the 1977-1978 period. Emo?. That is a new one to me. Do you have examples of emo bands being described as new wave? The 90's. Republica and Elastica were described by some as New Wave influenced but that is not something they "touted". But they were exceptions to the popular styles of that era. Revisionist History?. As the cites for the article demonstrated it was quite overblown and complicated in at least one country during the 1980's. Music is about perception. The scientific method can not be used to prove The Human League is not new wave. Popular music is by definition what is popular with all of the watering down and bastardization that comes with it. If tomorrow for some reason Britney Spears was popularly perceived as new wave I would be appalled but she would be new wave and there is not a damm thing I could do about it(except find a way to put it in this article).

(Off Topic and POV) The recent Siouxie Sioux album was amazing to bad it did not get more play. Edkollin (talk) 06:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The poster who said “New Wave” was in fact, and extremely narrow music genre, which at it’s earliest, began around 1979, and at the latest, pretty much fizzled top a close by 1986." is simply wrong. The term was used 1977-1980 in the UK (where the term was coined). It was not in use in to the mid 80s at all. In America 'new wave' was used well into the 80s to describe anything and everything from UK synth pop, Aussie rock like Men at Work and goth rock like Siouxsie & the Banshees. In other words the US definition is almost meaningless as it's usage was so wide and indiscriminate. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 01:23, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

New Wave is not Punk

From my german point of view, I am born in 1961, New Wave was not "Punk" named in the days, it was two different matters. For example, I was a fan of "Blondie" in the late 1970th, but I was NEVER interested in Punk music. hemmerling (talk) 05:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Blondie - Parallel Lines.jpg

The image Image:Blondie - Parallel Lines.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

New Wave, From My Perspective, For What It's Worth

I don't know if this is helpful, but I thought I would give my sense of it. I think the best way to define it is groups heavily influenced by punk, but with a more subtle, pop oriented sound. The article includes that statement, but it could be more focused. If I had to list the groups that first come to mind it would be the Talking Heads, The Police, and Elvis Costello on his first few albums. Blondie is a tougher fit but they probably qualify. Same for The Cars. I've read interviews with both Elvis Costello and the Police where they describe an identical situation of being starving musicians at the time the Sex Pistols and the Clash came around. They were convinced that this was the way music was going, so they hopped on board, but brought a more musical/lyrical angle to it. There was an elevation of "nerdiness" as something cool, the fashion which suggested the 50s, suits, skinny ties, glasses etc., synthesizers, guitars with tremolo effects, and so forth. European synth pop groups like Duran Duran, the Human League, etc. do not qualify IMO. The Flock of Seagulls hairdo bands are not New Wave. There had to be some kind of "punk" attitude, even if the music didn't sound like the Ramones or the Sex Pistols. It's tough to define, but you know it when you see it. If I had to give one ultimate example of New Wave, it would probably be the Elvis Costello song/video "Pump it Up": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fbhIzN9-p0 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.37 (talk) 23:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree. Calling A Flock of Seagulls or Duran Duran "New Wave" is a misnomer. Malcolm XIV (talk) 07:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
As pointed out in the book Rip it up & Start Again PostPunk 1978-1984 by British musical journalist Simon Reynolds most of the synthpop bands had their roots in punk rock. According to Reynolds The Human League and others of their ilk. claimed they were doing a punk/subversive act by reinventing pop music. Synthpop by definition is putting computer nerdiness to music. I do not favor changing the basic two definitions tone of the article. We can not edit articles to what should be. Their are both popular and music journalists citings that define synthpop bands as new wave (as well as those that agree with you including the above mentioned book). The Definitions of New Wave in then United States at some point could be changed to "broad" or "catch all" definition. I have not found enough reliable citings using the broad definition outside the U.S. to justify that change at this time Edkollin (talk) 08:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I would argue that those synth pop bands were directly descended from "glam", not punk. Punk is not "subversive". It's in your face. Basically, whatever hippies and their music stood for, punk did the opposite. That was the point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.43 (talk) 17:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Off Topic

This is getting off topic but Synthpop had many influences glam,disco,punk,bubblegum etc. As for hippies and punks standing for opposite things I could not disagree more. They were stylistically opposite in many ways but were anti-corporate music, anti-war, racism(despite being mostly white) etc and pro individualism. The hatred of hippies among many punks centered around two main things the idea that the had hippies had "sold out" and became yuppies and the normal teen impulse to find an identity by distinguishing themselves from their elders. Back on topic in my view Blondie,Talking Heads,B-52's groups that everybody seems to agree are new wave were more subversive then in "in your face" Edkollin (talk) 06:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
As with many people, you get hung up on politics. In that regard, you are not entirely correct. Punk and New Wave were very politically eclectic, and in many cases a-political. The main point was stylistic, and social. Punk and New Wave knocked the entire cultural ethos of the 60s down and kicked it. It's not at all surprising given what the 60s "revolution" had become by the time punk came around--DISCO.
I don't think we are disagreeing that the main differences were stylistic. And disco was part of what I had in mind about hippies "selling out"(Also soft rock, Corporate Rock bands such as Boston and Styx). And having the same anti corporate music or racist beliefs is more cultural than political. Their shared pro individualism beliefs are the true opposites of todays social networking culture. I used to believe like the editors here that hippies and punks were true polar opposites. The seamless melding of many elements of the two during the early 1990's disabused me of those false notions.Edkollin (talk) 07:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
But we're talking about the late 70s/early 80s, not the 90s. "Punk" in the 90s had little to do with what it was like originally. You could call Green Day et al a parody of punk, but that's about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.17 (talk) 07:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
But the melding of the two cultures during the early '90's showed that the cultures were not the polar opposites we believed they were in the late 70's. I had in mind Nirvana not Green Day. Speaking of the late 70's "Whats so funny about peace love and understanding" would not have been out of place at Woodstock. Jim Morrison and John Lennon admired by hippies set the example of the angry,nihilistic cynical POV of punk. Because of the pogoing and the spitting punk gigs had a violent reputation but hippie gigs in the late '60s were more violent. Edkollin (talk) 00:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I think you've got the perspective wrong. "Punk" and "Flower Power" were both over and gone by the early 90s. The stuff that showed up at that time was just a synthesis of pre-existing musical styles, and had little to do with the "ethos" behind those styles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.0.146 (talk) 01:09, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
You're the one who has the wrong perspective. You missed the entire message of the introduction of both the Reynolds book and what the The Who were saying when they sang "Who are are you Who the fuck are you". The originators have no say at all in when something they started is "over". The later generation will do what they want for there own reasons. The '90's generation did a synthesis of not only pre existing musical styles but fashion and yes ethos. They had their own Woodstock with the most memorable moment being a concert by the "in you face" Nine Inch Nails. You have of course every right to think it was all a bad parody but may I remind you that all "innovations" result from synthesizing in some way things that have gone on before. That is what The Clash and many British first wave punks did when they embraced the "mellow" Jamaican Culture and put their own spin on things. Edkollin (talk) 08:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_wave_music/Archive_1&oldid=1150974256"