Shane Greene’s article “Peruvian Punk as a Global Means of Underground Production” was a fascinating read for me, as I am someone who hasn’t really explored all that punk as a music genre has to offer- socially, culturally and politically. Greene discusses punk as a “form of resistance” that is “difficult both to sustain and to predict its future lives”, as he identifies the role of underproduction and undercutting within the context of the Peruvian punk scene (286). As a culturally-produced phenomenon that ultimately seeks to subvert a public norm, “to disregard: to negate regard; to refuse to respect”  and “to repudiate rather than hold in esteem”, punk challenges and resists what ‘is’ (290). As something that grew in Peruvian popularity, albeit ‘underground’ of sorts, with a primary medium consisting of a “poor-quality demo cassette”, Greene highlights how, even in its forms and methods of distribution, punk conveys the very messages it has been created to deliver (291). Music as a form of cultural resistance is arguably not uncommon today, with lyrics of songs in popular media becoming increasingly politically charged, but the punk scene presents acts of resistance to not only political contexts, but the creative destruction of “aesthetic professionalism and monopolization”- these popularized channels of cultural media production themselves (289).

I think the comment made by Greene that stimulated the most thought for me while reading was how “to be maximally punk one starts by disregarding others’ definitions, including others’ definitions of what punk is or can be”, how a ‘true’ punk doesn’t even think about what it means to be punk- to put it more succinctly, “not giving a fuck if you are punk or not” (286). This had me wondering, then, what an ‘authentic’ or genuine punk would have to say about what others have to say about them. I guess you could say that talking and writing about what punk is and does, is, of course, not very punk at all. In fact, you could say that by writing this I am doing the exact opposite of what true punk attempts to do… All-in-all, as someone without much punk listening experience I found Greene’s article to be quite thought-provoking; it opened some windows into a genre of music I hadn’t yet ventured into much. 

My question is for anyone who is an active listener of punk, or anyone at all who wants to answer: I would love to know what draws you to punk as a genre of music? What does punk mean to you?