Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Gareth Dylan Smith, Mike Dines and Tom Parkinson - Punk Pedagogies - Music, Culture and Learning-Taylor & Francis Group (2017)
Gareth Dylan Smith, Mike Dines and Tom Parkinson - Punk Pedagogies - Music, Culture and Learning-Taylor & Francis Group (2017)
Typeset in Minion
by Apex CoVantage, LLC
Contents
Foreword vii
ZACK FURNESS
Preface ix
GARETH DYLAN SMITH, MIKE DINES
AND TOM PARKINSON
Acknowledgements xi
Contributors xiii
Part I
Punk Learning and Learning from Punk
Part II
Punk Teaching and Teaching Punk
Part III
Theorizing from Punk Pedagogical Practice
13 “There’s Only One Way of Life, and That’s Your Own” 191
GARETH DYLAN SMITH
Index 225
Foreword
About five years ago, I put together a book called Punkademics that featured essays
from a number of professors and graduate students who, like myself, had spent
a considerable amount of time navigating the seemingly odd terrain between the
punk scene and the university. I obviously knew there were a number of “punka-
demics” out there when I started the project, but in both the process of editing that
collection and, especially, in the years following its publication, I ran across far more
fellow travelers than I ever thought existed. In addition to making acquaintances
with some of this book’s editors and contributors, I have met or corresponded
with dozens of professors throughout the world who played in bands, wrote zines,
started labels, cooked with Food Not Bombs, hopped trains, participated in protests
and direct actions with other punks, opened DIY venues and put on punk shows—
including, it turns out, the first one I ever attended when I was fourteen.
As both an aging punk and a veteran teacher, I have long been interested in
what punk teaches young people about the pragmatics and ethics associated with
making music, art and other kinds of media where profit is not the central organiz-
ing principle. To put it baldly, I am fascinated by how punk and hardcore scenes
function as pedagogical spaces: spaces in which people can learn to think critically,
experiment with new ideas and practices, embrace a participatory view of culture
and, ideally, cultivate a sense of self-awareness about punk’s own hypocrisies and
dead ends. Given that many of these lessons are ones that professors spend enor-
mous amounts of time trying to instill in their students, it is not surprising that
punk similarly becomes a lens through which one can view the process of educa-
tion itself. After all, university classrooms are some of the few designated spaces
in which young people can also try to make some sense of the crazy world they
inhabit while exploring the contours of a secular social space in which human
beings are not implicitly reduced to their roles as workers or consumers.
This book brings together a new collection of scholars who grapple with the
inter-dynamics of punk and education in their writing and in their classrooms.
Punk Pedagogies: Music, Culture and Learning features the voices of teachers and
academics who draw inspiration and direction from their varied relationships to
punk as a form of music, a set of cultural practices, and a critical vantage point
from which to see, think and educate. Their chapters not only provide us with new
theoretical issues to discuss and debate, they also give us some effective tools for
teaching, as well as rich insights into how the boundaries of the thing we call “punk”
can be pushed, pulled and expanded into new terrain.
Zack Furness
April 2, 2017
vii
Preface
“Punk” and “pedagogy” might seem like an odd, even contradictory choice of
terms to share the title of a book. “Punk” is far easier to pronounce (is the sec-
ond “g” in “pedagogy” meant to be soft or hard?), and almost everyone knows
what they think punk means or denotes. Punk has enjoyed mainstream media
attention, and as such has various familiar characteristics and associated stereo-
types, whereas pedagogy has the air of a more specialist concept. Punk conjures
(depending on who is doing the conjuring) music, rebellion, filth, anarchy, dis-
respect, criticality, disruption, noise, graffiti, an aesthetic, an ethos, a political
or apolitical stance, particular times and places, and culture. Pedagogy is a less
familiar word to many, albeit one that, once explained, everyone understands
from their own experiences of it. We hope that it might be beguiling enough a
term to attract readers who already understand the rest of our book’s title, and
who, in traditional punk fashion, want to find out for themselves what it means.
If someone picks this book off a library shelf or impulse-buys it online, just to
find out what it’s about, that would exemplify a key tenet of punk pedagogy—
the punk pedagogy of Punk Pedagogies, if you like!
Pedagogy is about teaching and learning. It covers all the stuff that goes on in
learning environments, usually classroom contexts in school, colleges and uni-
versities. But thanks to scholarship and practice in community music contexts,
and the growth in understanding of informal learning praxes internationally,
“pedagogy” now arguably accounts for—however (in)tangibly, temporarily or
contingently this might be—what happens in a far broader range of contexts
and situations of learning. So, while “punk” and “pedagogy” might at first
glance appear to share very little, they in fact are both diverse sites of tradition,
innovation and tension, and can each be understood to encompass both narrow
and diverse practices and perspectives (hence our use of the plural, “pedago-
gies”, in the book’s title).
The chapters are mostly rooted in the individual authors’ own practices as
punks, and consider how aspects of punk can inform teaching and learning.
Since this is not a methods book, we provide no instructions on “how to be a
punk pedagogue”—to do so would be antithetical to almost all interpretations
of punk. Readers can hear in these pages the voices of the authors, all of whom
either self-identify as punks or have been identified by the editors as such. This
being said, very few of the contributors would fit one easy stereotype of punk
such as that perpetuated by, for instance, the North American chain of clothing
stores Hot Topic.
ix
x • Preface
The editors would like to acknowledge the contributions to this book project
of all those people without whom it would not have been possible. The book
began as an idea proposed by Louise Jackson, and Louise’s time became con-
sumed with her commitments along the way; we owe Louise a considerable
debt of gratitude for conceiving of the project and inspiring us to take part.
Mary Stakelum saw promise in our proposal to discuss this book at the 2017
Research in Music Education conference at Bath Spa University; Mary’s confi-
dence in the project reassured us that we could be on to something worthwhile.
We are tremendously thankful to all the contributing authors, for their diligence
in attending to feedback from us, and for continuously aspiring to produce the
best possible work in construing and critiquing punk pedagogical practices. A
special thank-you is owed to Russ Bestley, who designed the book’s marvellous
cover art. We also wish to thank Constance Ditzel for her enthusiasm for this
volume, and the team at Routledge for helping us to produce a book dealing
with complex subject matter that is close to our hearts.
Gareth, Mike and Tom
April 2017
xi
Contributors
John Dougan has a PhD in American Studies from the College of William
& Mary, and is professor of music business and popular music studies in the
Department of Recording Industry at Middle Tennessee State University. He is
the author of two books: The Who Sell Out and The Mistakes of Yesterday, The
Hopes of Tomorrow: The Story of the Prisonaires.
xiii
xiv • Contributors
Nasim Niknafs, the recipient of the Connaught New Researcher Award, Faculty
Mobility Grant, and OMEA’s Agha Khan Initiative, is an Assistant Professor
of Music Education at the Faculty of Music, University of Toronto. Born and
raised in Iran, Nasim’s selected publications have appeared in Music Education
Contributors • xv
Tiago Teles Santos was born in Porto, Portugal, and developed an interest in
various cultural issues. With undergraduate and master’s degrees in Sociology
from the University of Porto, his research interests include social exclusion,
space and territory, education and culture. His master’s thesis “Bad Kids.
Towards an understanding of the symbolic and material universes for existence:
punk references in Porto, Portugal”, was one of the first works on Portuguese
punk. Nowadays he works in Motorsport.
1
2 • Gareth Dylan Smith et al.
equal opportunity is, indeed, both a desirable and a feasible goal, but
to equate this with obligatory schooling is to confuse salvation with the
church. School has become the worldwide religion of a modernized pro-
letariat, and makes futile promises of salvation to the poor of the tech-
nological age.
(Illich 1970, 10)
Authors in this volume mostly work in higher education, and as such have
vested interests in perpetuating existing systems of education, compulsory
and otherwise. We are perhaps thus reticent to embrace so (self-)destructive
an agenda as to seek the total dismantlement of education systems. Through
the frame of punk pedagogies, however, we seek to explore possibilities to effect
change.
Our intention in curating this volume is not to say what punk pedagogy is or
should be. Our aim is, even less, to attempt to define punk, a notoriously evasive
and multifaceted beast. Contributing authors grapple with punk’s historicity, its
pervasiveness, its (dis)functionality, its evasiveness and its messiness. Punk is
dynamic and responsive, like the best of pedagogical practice. For this reason,
we do not attempt to delimit, contain or constrain pedagogies in, of, for or
about punk. In the context of music education, David Lines asks:
How can music teachers ensure that they do not succumb to the dis-
abling discourses of neoliberalism, mastery, and narrow conceptions
of learning? How can music students move from situations where
they are treated as docile bodies in music learning production lines
or mastery contexts to places of creative freedom, expression, and
meaning?
(Lines 2016, 126–127)
Presenting Punk Pedagogies in Practice • 3
pedagogical action can . . . be taken in music education to ensure that stu-
dents have opportunities to work with the subjective positions in music
and, if necessary, exercise resistance to schooling discourses that nega-
tively impact on open and creative subject positions.
(Lines 2016, 127)
This book resonates with Lines’s perspective—which he did not explicitly artic-
ulate as representing a specifically punk orientation—traversing pedagogical
practice in and beyond just music, as well as in and beyond formal educational
contexts.
The focus of the book is on punk pedagogies. It is not, however, a “how to”
guide to applying punk pedagogies, nor is it a manual or guidebook on being
a punk pedagogue. The editors share music education philosopher Randall
Allsup’s (2016, 106) “long[ing] to find or create a space in which people can
connect with others across difference and ability in an ongoing and unfinished
way”. We seek to challenge “a symbol system . . . in which mere relay of infor-
mation is characterized as education” (107); we are “ultimately interested in
the subjectivities from which engagement in open encounters are formed and
reformed” (108). We propose punk pedagogies as possessing the potency and
potential to achieve these ends and more.
(1) The Do-It-Yourself (DIY) ethic, which demands that we do our own
work because anybody who would do our work for us is only trying
to jerk us around;
(2) A sense of anger and passion that finally drives a writer to say what’s
really on his or her mind;
(3) A sense of destructiveness that calls for attacking institutions when
those institutions are oppressive, or even dislikable;
(4) A willingness to endure or even pursue pain to make oneself heard or
noticed;
(5) A pursuit of the “pleasure principle,” a reveling in some kind of Nietz-
chean chasm.
(Kahn-Egan 1998, 100)
“Punk Pedagogy: Education for Liberation and Love”, in Zack Furness’s edited
volume, Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower (2012). Torrez
explores the philosophy around the notion and definition of a “punk peda-
gogy”, drawing on her experience of teaching a course on youth subcultures’
linguistic cultural practices as forms of resistance. Torrez’s punk pedagogy is
positioned through the delivery of subject matter with an attempt at facilitating
and engaging with the students at a critical level, exploring individual and social
responsibility in “heal[ing] an ailing society” (Torrez 2012, 137). She asserts,
“while punk philosophy frames how we interact with outside society, it likewise
shapes our position as educators and the manner by which we construct the
classroom . . . as a learning environment”. She also explains:
In Chapter 9, Jessica A. Schwartz and Scott Robertson set out what they
term a “pedagogy of comedic dissidence” via two case studies of the punk band
Dead Kennedys and the hip-hop act Public Enemy. They demonstrate how play-
ful subversion of taken-for-granted aesthetics opens up space for the discussion
of social and political issues, the confrontation of trauma and oppression, and
collective learning, suggesting acknowledgement and incorporation of such
approaches in formal educational contexts.
In Chapter 10, Laura Way provides a reflective account of two uses of zines
in the teaching of college sociology courses. Way argues that the aesthetics and
practices of zine creation offer a versatile and inclusive alternative to traditional
forms of coursework, providing a framework for students to consider their per-
sonal experiences in stimulating the sociological imagination, and providing
teachers with a means to gather rich, qualitative and context-specific feedback
from students.
In Chapter 11, Alexis Anja Kallio considers the potential of punk in dem-
ocratic school music education, describing a shift from curricula dominated
by the canon of Western Art Music towards encompassing popular musics.
Interrogating and recalibrating the deviantization of some popular music
genres as morally risky “problem musics”, Kallio proposes that punk—as
a music, but also as a pedagogic conceit—might offer a means to mediate
value conflict and multi-directional power dynamics within a democratic
education.
In Chapter 12, Tom Parkinson explores the ambiguous relationship between
university education, punk and other subcultures, identifying across a num-
ber of existing accounts anxiety relating to perceived risk of co-optation and
corruption, but also a number of rhetorical strategies used by educators to rec-
oncile these two aspects of their lives and achieve a working, ethical balance.
Parkinson includes analysis of interviews with five academics self-identifying
as punks, and who draw upon punk in their work.
In Chapter 13, Gareth Dylan Smith offers an account of his personal aca-
demic, professional and musical journeys. Through the conceptual frame of
eudaimonism, Smith describes how he reconciled an impulse to pursue his pas-
sions and interests with a commitment to a broader good, leading to a teaching
approach that he has since identified as pedagogically punk. He calls for adop-
tion of punk pedagogical action in higher education, for working towards a
more socially just world.
In the final chapter, Tiago Santos and Paula Guerra discuss punk’s opposi-
tion to the status quo and counter-hegemonic stance, arguing that these imbue
it with a critical power that is of immense potential value to educators. Through
a theoretical discussion that takes in the work of philosophers and sociologists
Freire, Foucault, Bourdieu and Apple, they propose reasons that, and ways in
which, punk might be drawn upon in curricula and pedagogy to help overcome
crises in late modernity.
Presenting Punk Pedagogies in Practice • 9
In Conclusion
This book was not construed explicitly to praise punk pedagogies. There are,
however, no chapters in the volume that explicitly decry, abhor or warn against
them. As such, it is appropriate that the editors confess we are all supportive of
punk pedagogies, in principle and in practice. We all identify with aspects of
punk, and are each affiliated with the Punk Scholars Network, of which Mike is
a founder member. Mike’s PhD thesis was on anarcho-punk, and he has edited
numerous books about elements and topics of punk. Tom and Gareth both are
both members of bands that incorporate punk in outlook, ethos and aesthetic.
Once again invoking Randall Allsup (2016), and looking far beyond specifi-
cally music education, we hope that this book serves as an opening for readers,
that it creates space for discourse and action. It is in the nurturing of liminal
spaces (Tuan 1977), in a wide range of contexts and places, that we see the
potential for punk pedagogies.
References
Allsup, Randall E. 2016. Remixing the Music Classroom: Toward an Open Philosophy of Music Education.
Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
Chomsky, Noam. 2016. Noam Chomsky on the New Trump Era: UpFront Special. Al Jazeera.
Accessed March 31, 2017. www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB54XxbgI0E.
Dines, Mike. 2015a. “Learning Through Resistance: Contextualisation, Creation and Incorporation
of a ‘Punk Pedagogy’.” Journal of Pedagogic Development 5, 3: 20–31.
Dines, Mike. 2015b. “Reflections on the Peripheral: Punk, Pedagogy and the Domestication of the
Radical.” Punk & Post-Punk 4, 2&3: 129–140.
Foxley, Rachel. 2013. The Levellers: Radical Political Thought in the English Revolution. Manchester:
Manchester University Press.
Furness, Zack (Ed.). 2012. Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower. Wivenhoe: Minor
Compositions.
Hill, Christopher. 1975. The World Turned Upside Down: Radical Ideas During the English Revolu-
tion. London: Penguin.
Illich, Ivan. 1970. Deschooling Society. London: Marion Boyars.
Kahn-Egan, Seth. 1998. “Pedagogy Pissed: Punk Pedagogy in the First-Year Writing Classroom.”
College Composition and Communication 49, 1: 99–104.
Lines, David. 2016. “While My Guitar Gently Weeps: Music Education and Guitar as Leisure.” In
The Oxford Handbook of Music Making and Leisure, edited by Roger Mantie and Gareth D.
Smith, 115–130. New York: Oxford University Press.
Miklitsch, Robert. 1994. “Punk Pedagogy or Performing Contradiction: The Risks and Rewards of
Anti-Transference.” The Review of Education/Pedagogy/Cultural Studies 16, 1: 57–67.
Niknafs, Nasim, and Liz Przybylski. 2017. “Popular Music and (R)evolution of the Classroom
Space: Occupy Wall Street in the Music School.” In The Routledge Research Companion to
Popular Music Education, edited by Gareth D. Smith, Zack Moir, Matt Brennan, Shara Ram-
barran, and Phil Kirkman, 412–424. Abingdon: Routledge.
Schwartz, Jessica A. 2015. “Listening in Circles: Punk Pedagogy and the Decline of Western Music
Education.” Punk & Post-Punk 4, 2&3: 141–158.
Sirc, Geoffrey. 1997. “Never Mind the Tagmemics, Where’s the Sex Pistols?” College Composition
and Communication 48, 1: 9–29.
Smith, Gareth D., and Atar Shafighian. 2013. “Creative Space and the ‘Silent Power of Traditions’ in
Popular Music Performance Education.” In Developing Creativities in Higher Music Education:
International Perspectives and Practices, edited by Pamela Burnard, 256–267. London: Routledge.
Smith, Kyle. 2016. “Donald Trump Is the Punk-Rock President America Deserves.” New York Post.
Accessed November 9, 2016. http://nypost.com/2016/11/09/donald-trump-is-the-punk-
rock-president-america-deserves/.
10 • Gareth Dylan Smith et al.
Sofianos, Lisa, Robin Ryde, and Charlie Waterhouse. 2015. The Truth of Revolution, Brother: An
Exploration of Punk Philosophy. London: Situation Press.
Springer, Simon, Marcelo Lopez De Souza, and Richard J. White. 2016. The Radicalization of Peda-
gogy: Anarchism Geography and the Spirit of Revolt. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
Tuan, Yi-Fu. 1977. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis: University of Min-
nesota Press.
Ward, Colin. 2011. “The Anarchists and Schools.” In Autonomy, Solidarity, Possibility: The Colin
Ward Reader, edited by Chris Wilbert and Damian F. White, 231–238. Edinburgh: AK Press.
Part I
Punk Learning and Learning from Punk
2
Art Attacks: Punk Methods
and Design Education
RUSS BESTLEY
Introduction
The relationship between punk and design pedagogy can be explored in two
broadly distinct areas. These centre on what might be described as conceptual
approaches—the nature of design thinking in comparison with punk doctrines;
and practical strategies for the creation of designed artefacts or objects—the
tools, processes and practices of design making in relation to common punk
design tropes. In short, the twin themes of thinking and making. As someone
who has self-identified with punk since my initial participation in the sub-
culture during the late 1970s, and as a graphic design practitioner, researcher,
writer and educator, I am in a rather unique position to be able to reflect on the
ways in which punk visual strategies drew upon or adapted long-standing art
and design traditions, and how those resulting revisions may have subsequently
impacted upon graphic design and visual communication practice and, conse-
quently, design education.
Punk can be viewed as an approach—a way of relating to the world, and a
practice—the production of certain things (music, in the form of performances
or records, visual arts and fashion, for instance). By comparison, the word design
is both a noun and a verb, and graphic design is an activity of creative reason-
ing (the act of designing) and a craft-based practice that involves the making of
objects and artefacts (designs):
The verb to design literally means to plan something for a specific role,
purpose, or effect. As a noun, design can be defined as an act of creative
reasoning—a process whereby the designer balances lateral, original
thinking with pragmatic, logical, solution-driven methods.
(Noble and Bestley 2016, 10)
Since the advent of computer-based tools for design in the late 1980s and early
1990s, graphic designers have been increasingly concerned with all stages
of the design process—from conceptualizing and planning to the practical
13
14 • Russ Bestley
Researching Design
The academic study of design, notably graphic design, can broadly be defined
in three models of design research:
Graphic design is, then, an object of study, a creative practice and discipline
in its own right, and a tool or method—a visual language—through which
Art Attacks • 15
subject to interference by activists from both the Left and Right, including the
Socialist Workers Party, Rock Against Racism, the National Front, the Anti-
Nazi League, the British Movement and others, its inherent radicalism often
viewed as an opportunity for recruitment and the further dissemination of
political dogma (Bestley 2008; Raposo 2011; Worley 2012, 2016). It also bears
noting, however, that even in punk’s wider, perhaps more apolitical and less
overtly ideological interpretation, notions of identity and authenticity often
lead to a form of internecine squabbling over whose definition of terms is more
valid, whose version of punk is closer to the “truth”.
Punk and academia are not natural bedfellows, and the adoption of punk
in some educational sectors as a vehicle for the promotion of ideological posi-
tions might be called into question. The relationship, at times uneasy, between a
vague and unsubstantiated “philosophy of punk” and reliance on post-Marxist
models of academic critique in contemporary higher education, within the Arts
and Humanities and the Social Sciences in particular,1 can lead to a series of
rather questionable punk canons, framed within academic discourse. Art and
design education has adopted the same philosophical approach, with degree
curricula widely drawing upon the critical theories of Theodor Adorno, Wal-
ter Benjamin, Terry Eagleton, Roland Barthes, Raymond Williams and Pierre
Bourdieu as key texts, and Cultural Studies departments (introduced to shore
up the academic credibility of practice-based courses and programmes) bring-
ing their ideological baggage into the studio with them. The corresponding
language of base and superstructure, ideology, agency and hegemony has also
seeped into academic discourse on the subject of punk. For instance, Estrella
Torrez, a professor within the Chicano/Latino Studies Program in the Faculty
of Arts and Humanities, Michigan State University, argues for a model of “anar-
chist agency” in her definition of punk pedagogy as what she describes as an
“education for liberation and love”:
our own identities as punks are intimately intertwined with radical femi-
nism, anticapitalist self-organization, Third and Fourth World liberation,
veganism and food justice, and DIY, not even mentioning the most fun-
damental desire to produce new and liberated societies.
(Miner and Torrez 2012, 29)
accepted trope, with DIY embedded in many definitions of the subculture. Like
other punk maxims, this is not without contradictions: the celebrated first inde-
pendent punk record released in the UK, Buzzcocks’ Spiral Scratch EP (January
1977), was funded through a number of loans, including £250 from guitarist
Pete Shelley’s father, and a deal was arranged by manager Richard Boon for
the pressing of the record at Phonogram. Sleeves were printed at Delga Press
in Kent, and the batch production, manufacture and packaging of the record
was handled by professional service providers—less a case of doing-it-yourself,
perhaps, than buying-it-yourself (Bestley 2016).
This might be a helpful model for graphic design and design educators to
reflect upon, embodying an approach or rationale together with the adoption
of innovative methods in the creation of designed objects or artefacts. Punk’s
raw visual and musical aesthetic has also become a stylistic set of conven-
tions for others to follow (notwithstanding the irony inherent in the notion
of a punk canon). The problem here for educators is in relying on these ste-
reotypes within a model of punk pedagogy—such as asking art and design
students to create “punk” graphics through the production of fanzines that
simply re-hash a stereotypical visual aesthetic of early punk material, with
little or no critical understanding of the original rationale, or the technologi-
cal constraints that led to the creation of those styles in the first place. The
risk of falling into simple pastiche, without any clear intention to underpin
such a strategy, is quite high; as Ian Trowell argues in his critical reappraisal
of a collection of short-lived punk glossy magazines in the early 1980s, an
archetypal aesthetic convention of punk publishing has become standardized
and set in stone:
The true value of considering punk in relation to design education falls some-
where between these two polarities—in approaches to the subject that might
follow some common punk conventions (DIY, a rejection of traditional modes
of thinking or practice, a questioning of authority, empowerment to have a
go) along with practical strategies that reflect some of punk’s original creative
methods (innovative use of materials, an embrace of experimentation and risk-
taking, the parodic or subversive adaptation of already existing visual material
to offer counterpoints and alternative readings). The twin phrases anyone can
do it and do-it-yourself were something of a punk mantra, tied to a vision of
independence from the mainstream music industry, and these principles may
be worth revisiting in respect to professional design approaches and the educa-
tion of designers.
Art Attacks • 19
argued that each piece of writing contains multiple layers and meanings, and
the world view and experience of the reader are, in fact, more influential to
the reading of a text than the author. In turn, the author should not be seen
as an independent agent, instead drawing upon wider social, cultural and his-
torical codes and conventions. This position was important in the development
of postmodern theories of communication, initially applied to literature and
subsequently expanded to mass media, advertising and popular culture. This
debate was at the heart of an ongoing dialogue within sectors of the graphic
design press regarding the relationship between design practice and contempo-
rary theories of postmodernism. Graphic design’s subsequent soul-searching
could be seen on reflection as perhaps a little self-indulgent, and certainly some
of the practice-based responses to the “death of the author” seemed ultimately
to head up a blind alley of meaningless complexity. Keedy again summarized
this problem rather neatly:
Design critic Rick Poynor also attempted to engage with graphic design’s rela-
tionship with postmodernism in his critical history of the period, No More
Rules, published in 2003. Noting Wolfgang Weingart’s late 1970s radical graphic
experimentation and the evolution of what were termed “Swiss punk” styles,
Poynor suggests that the British “new wave” in graphic design differed from
its US and European counterparts, in part because of the different context of
modernism to which it was responding:
modernism had never been the dominant force in British graphic design
that it was in Europe, or that it was, in a more corporate sense, in the
United States. Much more than in the US, Britain’s new wave was identi-
fied with youth culture and popular music and these designers tended to
position themselves outside of design’s professional mainstream, a quest
for identity that could be read as a postmodern gesture in itself.
(Poynor 2003, 32)
From a graphic design perspective, then, at least some of the new aesthetic
“revolution” brought about by punk could be situated within a broader
Art Attacks • 21
The making of mistakes demonstrates that risks have been taken, that the
designer has thought laterally, outside of the box, and that the range of
implied boundaries that delineate standard methods and practices have
been bypassed in the pursuit of original and unexpected results. Innova-
tive and new design needs to make such mistakes, rather than to rely on
established conventions and ways of reflecting the world.
(Noble and Bestley 2016, 95)
material, from John Heartfield’s AIZ anti-Nazi magazine covers of the 1930s to
the theoretical strategies of the Situationist International in the 1960s and Peter
Kennard’s photomontages for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND)
in the late 1970s and early ’80s. The graphic work produced by, for instance,
Jamie Reid, Linder Sterling and Gee Vaucher, can be directly compared with
these historical antecedents and contemporary peers, and punk visual commu-
nication should be seen in the context of a longer historical tradition. That does
not mean that punk did not bring anything new to the design table, nor obscure
the fact that a wider audience were to discover these strategies through punk:
for many who first encountered these kinds of visual approaches in the work
of punk designers, they were punk attributes, not something drawing upon a
longstanding legacy or heritage. Punk, then, enabled a re-focusing of some of
these methods for a new audience.
Like its musical heritage, punk visual communication drew upon a wide
range of precedents, adopting and adapting methods to suit. Hebdige’s model
of punk bricolage is useful here, in the aesthetic approaches adopted by punk
pioneers in music, fashion, art and design. While such ideas were far from new,
their creative re-appropriation was to give punk a diverse range of aesthetic
styles that would become closely associated with the subculture. Again, for
design education, part of the problem here is in the distinction between design
thinking or strategy and design practice—punk styles can be easily appropri-
ated and rehashed—indeed, the power and impact of some punk visual tropes
has seen them commandeered for a wide range of purposes, from branding and
advertising (especially where a suggestion of rebel chic is required) to protest
graphics and political sloganeering where punk’s implied “authenticity” is a use-
ful metaphor for down-to-earth, with-the-people communication.
The first wave of punk gave rise to some hugely influential and long-lasting
design output, but it also empowered thousands more amateur designers to
create their own interpretation of a visual language that mirrored the excite-
ment and ambition of the new scene—some of it highly innovative, some of
it awkward, ugly, cheap and nasty, but collectively comprising what could be
called a punk aesthetic. The natural limitations of simple tools and materi-
als, as well as the quick production of graphic work by untrained designers,
led to a repetition of certain graphic conventions: simple black and white
artwork, hand folding and binding techniques, and hand-rendered or type-
written text. These basic graphic elements had also been central to a number
of avant-garde art movements during the early twentieth century, and became
key conventions in the visual aesthetic of subversion or political protest.
Jamie Reid’s awareness of the work of the Situationist International and the
late hippie underground in Europe and the USA may have led him towards
more informed versions of agitprop graphic material, but many other punk
designers made no such historical allusions—the look was simple, dirty and
aggressive, and it meant “punk”.
24 • Russ Bestley
This is one subject that could form the basis of classroom discussions within
graphic design education, as it relates closely to the ways in which radical or
oppositional subcultural movements (and their associated aesthetics) can be
absorbed back within the parent culture, in direct contrast to the fringe elements
that found ways to evade this process. This mirrors a number of precedents
within art history, some of which have been tied to something of a pre-history
of punk itself. Robert Hughes’s The Shock of the New charts the evolution of
avant-garde art practices in the twentieth century and the establishment of the
term “modern art”, noting the philosophical and ideological influence of move-
ments such as Cubism, Futurism and Constructivism, along with the impact of
technological and cultural change. Later in the century, the Lettrists and Situ-
ationist International both widely acknowledged a debt to the early Surrealists,
a group initiated by André Breton in the wake of the “anti-art” Dada move-
ment in Europe and the US between 1915 and 1924. Resisting all attempts to
institutionalize their own theories as an ideological “ism”, Guy Debord and the
Situationists argued that the Surrealists’ original revolutionary intent had been
recuperated and neutralized through the term Surrealism and its subsequent
adoption within the art market. As Sadie Plant notes in her definitive history
of the Situationist International, citing Ken Knabb’s translation of Mustapha
Khayati’s Captive Words: Preface to a Situationist Dictionary in Internationale
Situationniste #10, March 1966:
the most corrosive concepts are emptied of their content and put back
into circulation in the service of maintaining alienation: dadaism in
reverse. They become advertising slogans.
(Plant 1992, 79)
industry, and much of the aesthetic (musical, lyrical and visual) associated with
these new scenes was deliberately awkward, “ugly” and unfashionable, in keep-
ing with earlier doctrines of punk.
In viewing such oppositional positioning within a subculture, rather than
purely reflecting Hebdige’s established model of subcultures as an ideological
counterpoint to the mainstream (derived in turn from the theories of the Bir-
mingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies developed during the late
1960s and early 1970s), it is worth considering the notion of subcultural capi-
tal (Thornton 1995). Extending Pierre Bourdieu’s work on high culture, Sarah
Thornton posits the theory that subcultural agents acquire status through the
acquisition of “unofficial knowledge”, commodities and objects, in turn raising
their position relative to others within the same subculture. Alastair Gordon
takes a more punk-specific view on the acquisition of status within local scenes
in what he describes as “the workings of micro-discourse in maintaining and
constructing subcultural punk authenticity” (Gordon 2014, 183).
Caution needs to be exercised here, too, however, in order to avoid impos-
ing yet another set of hierarchies within punk, in this case reflecting perceived
levels of engagement and radicalism. A significant number of punk participants
do not focus on the acquisition of status: indeed, the subculture is somewhat
unusual when compared with others that focus more keenly on “scene-leaders”
and a sense of being “cool”, in that punk, outwardly at least, celebrates the
uncool, the dysfunctional and the marginal. Opposition to mainstream culture
may, then, come not just from active engagement, but instead via a real or simu-
lated attitude of contrarian indifference.
rubber stamps, stencils and direct printing techniques). Again, many of these
methods drew upon a much longer tradition of agitprop art and design going
back to the early twentieth century (Hollis 1994; Prince and Lowey 2014),
though punk provided a new focus and context with, in some cases, a more
powerful result. In part this was due to the wider social and cultural impact of
punk, and the ways in which prominent designers such as Jamie Reid, Malcolm
Garrett, Winston Smith, Gee Vaucher and Raymond Pettibon could employ
mass-produced objects within popular culture—record covers, magazines,
posters, flyers—as vehicles for their provocative visual work.
Equally, the resourcefulness of the amateur punk creatives can offer inspira-
tion and encouragement to design students. The lo-tech, lo-fi design methods
adopted by these makers, often driven by their conceptual and physical lim-
itations, clearly demonstrate the old maxim that “necessity is the mother of
invention”. Graphic design students who are encouraged to “make more mis-
takes” would do well to look at the strategies adopted by punk and post-punk
DIY designers, often with no formal training or experience. It is perhaps a
rather ironic suggestion that students, who by definition are undertaking a rig-
orous curriculum of study, could learn a lot from analyzing the design work of
a bunch of rank amateurs who did not so much break the rules as demonstrate
a complete lack of awareness of their existence in the first place.
Notes
1. Many Arts and Humanities departments within higher education have followed models devel-
oped by the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) in their approach
to cultural studies, and notably the study of subcultures and popular culture.
2. See, for example, Chapter 8 within this volume: “Here We Are Now, Educate Us”: The Punk
Attitude, Tenets and Lens of Student-Driven Learning by Rylan Kafara, University of Alberta,
Canada. The History of Punk course, established in 2012, that forms the basis of this reflective
essay focused on “non-hierarchical learning opportunities”, where “community and exposure
to punk tenets was emphasized—for example, students were encouraged to bring vegan food to
class to share with others”.
3. The Further and Higher Education Act 1992 was also a critical juncture for a range of new media
disciplines and the bringing of popular culture into the academy.
4. Caution should be exercised here in the stereotyping of punk as a natural extension of the
Situationist agenda. While key figures in the evolution of early UK punk, including Malcolm
McLaren, Jamie Reid and Bernie Rhodes, were well-versed in the sixties counterculture, includ-
ing the SI and King Mob, a wider attribution of causality is problematic, to say the least. See
Home (1991) and Bestley (2008).
5. Leyton Buzzards, “I’m Hanging Around”/“I Don’t Want to Go to Art School”/“No Dry Ice or
Flying Pigs” (Chrysalis Records, 1979).
References
Barnett, Ronald. 1997. Higher Education: A Critical Business. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Barthes, Roland. 1977. Image-Music-Text. London: Fontana.
Bestley, Russ. 2008. Hitsville UK: Punk and Graphic Design in the Faraway Towns, 1976–84. PhD
thesis, University of the Arts, London.
Bestley, Russ. 2015. “(I Want Some) Demystification: Deconstructing Punk.” Punk & Post-Punk 4,
2&3: 117–127.
28 • Russ Bestley
Bestley, Russ. 2016. “Design It Yourself? Punk’s Division of Labour.” Cadernos de Arte e Antropo-
logia 5, 1: 5–21.
Bestley, Russ, and Ian Noble. 2001. Document: We Interrupt the Programme. Southsea: Visual
Research.
Bestley, Russ, and Alex Ogg. 2012. The Art of Punk. London: Omnibus.
Bierut, M., W. Drenttel, S. Heller, and D. K. Holland (Eds.). 1994. Looking Closer: Critical Writings
on Graphic Design. New York: Allworth Press.
Bierut, M., W. Drenttel, S. Heller, and D. K. Holland (Eds.). 1997. Looking Closer 2: Critical Writings
on Graphic Design. New York: Allworth Press.
Cherry, David. 1976. Preparing Artwork for Reproduction. London: BT Batsford.
Dale, Pete. 2012. Anyone Can Do It: Empowerment, Tradition and the Punk Underground. London:
Routledge.
Furness, Zack (Ed.). 2012. Punkademics. London: Minor Compositions.
Gordon, Alastair. 2014. “Distinctions of Authenticity and the Everyday Punk Self.” Punk & Post-
Punk 3, 3: 183–202.
Hebdige, Dick. 1979. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Routledge.
Heller, Stephen. 2016. “America’s Big Design Problem.” Design Observer. http://designobserver.
com/feature/americas-big-design-problem/39439.
Hollis, Richard. 1994. Graphic Design: A Concise History. London: Thames & Hudson.
Home, Stewart. 1991. The Assault on Culture. London: AK Press.
Howard, Andrew. 1994. “There Is Such a Thing as Society.” Eye 4, 13: 72–77.
Hughes, Robert. 1991. The Shock of the New: Art and the Century of Change. London: Thames &
Hudson.
Keedy, Jeff. 1998. “Graphic Design in the Postmodern Era.” Emigre 47: 50–60.
Kristiansen, Lars J. 2012. Screaming for Change: Articulating a Unifying Philosophy of Punk Rock.
Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Latimer, Henry C. 1977. Preparing Art and Camera Copy for Printing: Contemporary Procedures and
Techniques for Mechanicals and Related Copy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lupton, Ellen, and J. Abbott Miller. 2006. Design Writing Research: Writing on Graphic Design.
London: Phaidon.
Miner, Dylan, and Estrella Torrez. 2012. “Turning Point: Claiming the University as a Punk Space.”
In Punkademics, edited by Zack Furness, 27–35. London: Minor Compositions.
Noble, Ian, and Russ Bestley. 2016. Visual Research: An Introduction to Research Methods in Graphic
Design. London: Fairchild Books.
O’Hara, Craig. 1999. The Philosophy of Punk: More Than Noise! London: AK Press.
Palmer, Jerry, and Mo Dodson. 1995. Design and Aesthetics: A Reader. London: Routledge.
Plant, Sadie. 1992. The Most Radical Gesture: The Situationist International in a Postmodern Age.
London: Routledge.
Poynor, Rick. 2001. Obey the Giant: Life in the Image World, 2nd edition. Basel, Switzerland:
Birkhäuser Verlag.
Poynor, Rick. 2003. No More Rules: Graphic Design and Postmodernism . London: Laurence
King.
Prince, Suzy, and Ian Lowey. 2014. The Graphic Art of the Underground: A Counter-Cultural History.
London: Bloomsbury.
Raposo, Ana. 2011. Never Trust a Hippie: The Representation of ‘Extreme’ Politics in Punk Music
Graphics and the Influences of Protest and Propaganda Traditions. PhD Thesis, University of
the Arts, London.
Reid, Jamie, and Jon Savage. 1987. Up They Rise—The Incomplete Works of Jamie Reid. London:
Faber and Faber.
Rose, Gillian. 2007. Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Materials.
London: Sage.
Ryde, Robin, and Russ Bestley. 2016. “Thinking Punk.” Punk & Post-Punk 5, 2: 97–110.
Ryde, Robin, Lucy Sofianos, and Charlie Waterhouse. 2014. The Truth of Revolution, Brother: The
Philosophies of Punk. London: Situation Press.
Sabin, Roger. 1999. Punk Rock: So What? The Cultural Legacy of Punk. London: Routledge.
Thornton, Sarah. 1995. Club Cultures: Music, Media and Subcultural Capital . Cambridge:
Polity.
Torrez, Estrella. 2012. “Punk Pedagogy: Education for Liberation and Love.” In Punkademics, edited
by Zack Furness, 131–142. London: Minor Compositions.
Art Attacks • 29
Trowell, Ian M. 2017. “Digging up the Dead Cities: Abandoned Streets and Past Ruins of the Future
in the Glossy Punk Magazine.” Punk & Post-Punk 6, 2: 21–40.
Worley, Matthew. 2012. “Shot By Both Sides: Punk, Politics and the End of ‘Consensus’.” Contempo-
rary British History 26, 3: 333–354.
Worley, Matthew. 2016. “Marx—Lenin—Rotten—Strummer: British Marxism and Youth Culture
in the 1970s.” Contemporary British History 30, 4: 505–521.
3
“Khas-o-Khâshâk”1: Anarcho-Improv
in the Tehrani Music Education Scene
NASIM NIKNAFS
The first time we ever left Iran was when we got invited to perform at
this festival in Amsterdam, in Holland, called The Iranian Intergalactic
Music Festival2 . . . it was the first time for us also performing on a proper
stage, you know, just this real rush of excitement of how cool it is to be on
an actual stage and performing freely without worrying about the cops
or anything. Because when we used to perform in Iran, we always had to
have lookouts or people watching out for us . . . but that element of danger
would add such an excitement to the show. The adrenaline of knowing
any moment the doors could just bust open and then a whole bunch of
cops would raid the place and take all your instruments. You know, when
people were dancing in that room and they were screaming and having
fun, it was all or nothing. And that sort of sense of carelessness, it was the
most rock ‘n’ roll thing ever. I mean, I’ve performed hundreds of shows
outside of Iran. Nothing has ever come as close to that for me, to sort of
be able to enjoy that kind of freedom of just letting go. Over in the West,
I was always self-conscious, “Shit! Am I good enough? Are people giving
a fuck? Or is my mic loud or whatever, you know?” Over here, in the
underground, when we were performing, it was just pure raw rock ‘n’
roll. There was nothing else. We weren’t pretending to be anything else.
That’s all that we were.
30
“Khas-o-Khâshâk” • 31
gaze of the authorities—a genre of music that still to this day resides in a state
of liminality (Nooshin 2005) due to unpredictable regulations over its produc-
tion in the country. However, yearning for the voice of his city, neighbourhood
and community, Raam returned to Tehran as can be inferred from the opening
excerpt. The “pure raw” feelings he was seeking in his musical interactions were
not readily achievable in the many different places he had travelled to, lived in
or passed by when on tour. It seemed the “mainstream” music industry was not
his thing! Nor were the diasporic interpretations of his music by the Iranian
emigrants. Reflecting upon one of Raam’s concerts I attended in Toronto:
His music was much improved, and he was more mature on the stage,
but the adrenaline rush we all used to experience while being in those
concerts back in Tehran was missing. His concert was reduced to “yet
another rock show” within the Iranian diaspora overground, where most
people attended to see and be seen, rather than experience the dangers
and solidarity these events usually entailed.
(Niknafs 2016, 357–358)
Despite now being able to pursue his musical ambitions freely, he had encoun-
tered new, different, unexpected constraints within his new milieu, and found
that he wanted to enjoy his unique musical experience divorced from the coer-
cion and pressure of the market—even though what he sang and played was, in
his own words, “low-quality”, “bad music” and even “garbage” at times.
Raam’s story is unique in itself, but nonetheless similar to those of so many
other rock musicians in Iran after the 1979 revolution who left the country to
pursue careers in music. But why did Raam return? What was it that has per-
suaded other rock musicians (such as Behzad Omrani5) to remain? What was
so intriguing about the place and space of their music-making that, regardless
of the hardships associated with music production, encouraged them to stay?
In this chapter I investigate a music [education] scene based on Bennett and
Peterson’s (2004) understanding of “local, translocal, and virtual” scenes, in a
vibrant city like Tehran. Basing upon Gosling’s (2004) writings on Anarcho-
Punk, I argue that the most practical way to pursue (rock and alternative) music
and become engaged in one of Tehran’s music scenes seems to be through what
I call Anarcho-Improv. In doing so, I examine three politically charged periods
in the contemporary history of Iran, and engage with these mobilizing move-
ments in relation to the anarchist, improvisatory and self-governing rock music
scene. The periods I focus upon here are:
I write this chapter as one of the scene members that Raam described in
the opening excerpt. I danced, screamed, played and sang songs while par-
ticipating at underground parties, concerts or what Howard Becker (1982)
termed “art worlds”. Music was only one aspect of the scene that spoke to
so many of us; beyond that, it was the sheer force of participating in artis-
tic projects through live conceptual performances, theatre, visual arts and
cultural engagements that turned us into—I realize today—anarchists, the
ultimate projection of “a self-organizing society based on voluntary coop-
eration rather than [. . .] coercion” (Ward 2004, 10). And all of this was
mostly through trial and error, imitation, peer-mentorship and proactive
access to a lively creative scene without the figure of authority as teacher,
although the capital “A” of Authorities as the controlling state loomed con-
stantly over us.
Similar to Raam, I have also left the country to pursue my musicianship,
but unlike Raam I have not returned to live in Iran, though I have been back
a few times to visit family and a handful of friends who have stayed in the
country. I also visited Iran to situate myself again within the streets of Tehran,
its traffic and social life, the familiar crowds and cafés, and to experience the
newly emerged locales, art galleries and newer and younger scene members.
Having experienced the life of a traveller/foreigner and various underground
musical scenes in Europe and North America, I wanted to return mentally
and emotionally to the place whence my music education began and that of
many of my colleagues. As part of an ongoing research project into the life of
“unofficial” and “official” rock musicians in Iran, this chapter illustrates some
shared characteristics among these musicians and their music education: that
of improvisatory anarchism in/as their music education that gave rise to “far
smaller utopias [that] managed to convey the same sense of knock-you-down
newness, [and] of soul-conquering significance” (Schneider 2013, xiii) and that
encompass intricate
votes were tallied, the victory of Ahmadinejad was apparent; he “won the
ballot with 62.63 percent of the vote, while Moussavi received 33.75 percent
of the vote” (CNN 2009). Dismayed and zombied-out, it was such an out-of-
body experience that without a word we crawled back to our homes, in very
much the same way that much of the world likely experienced the election of
Donald Trump in 2016. How could it happen? It was unfathomable that after
months of campaigning, and renewed energy and hope, Ahmadinejad had
become the president again; another four years of political suffocation and
economic frenzy. A hollow night filled with disbelief, anger, confusion and
cold sweats turned into phone calls to Iran, to other friends in various parts
of the world, all staying awake and soberly following every news channel,
social media and local news in Iran. There was talk among my friends and
I, through physical and cyber communications, of returning to Iran, but our
parents would not accept it: “There is no way you are flying back. Stay where
you are. Stay! This is not happening all over again”; a plea shared by so many
parents in Iran with loved ones living outside the country, referring back
to the 1979 revolution, when they had experienced mass mobilizations and
the political aftermath of the revolution. I stayed where I was—a decision
that haunts me still to this day. I had a complex understanding of the 1979
revolution through word of mouth from parents and elderly relatives and
friends, first-hand experience of living through the Iran-Iraq war, and had
experienced the establishment of the government over the years. Along with
comprehensive research into the contemporary history of Iran post-1979
revolution, these experiences resulted in my non-participation in the 2009
post-electoral turmoil, or better said, uprising which immediately followed
the election results. Instead, I devoured the news of a developing decentral-
ized and leaderless movement, and following every move, I contacted my
friends inside and outside the country, participating in online and offline
petitions, and remote demonstrations.
On June 14, 2009, two days after the election results, Ahmadinejad gave
his victory speech and addressed the demonstrators: “the nation’s huge river
[will] not leave any opportunity for the expression of dirt and dust [Khas-o-
Khâshâk]” (Tait 2009). This statement did not go unnoticed. People took it as a
“badge of pride” (Tait 2009) rather than a mere insult, and art works, music and
chants created by the protesters emerged, taking ownership of the accolade of
“Khas-o-Khâshâk”.7 A now famous short poem, turned into a slogan in the 6/8
time signature, came out, similar to the structure and ethos of Rumi’s poetry—
with short, rhythmic and poignant verses:
You are the dirt and dust, you are the enemy of this land
I am the passion, I am the light, I am the pained lover
You are the coercion, you are the blind, you are the halo without beam
I am the courageous, I am the owner of this land.8
34 • Nasim Niknafs
Drawing from the values of anarchism, which poses the question “why bother
to confront a ‘power’ which has lost all meanings and become sheer simula-
tion[?]” (Bey 2003, 126, emphasis in original), and postanarchism as a “politics
and ethics of indifference to power” (Newman 2016, xiii), this slogan can be
seen to celebrate the Tehrani music [education] scene: passionate, bright, cou-
rageous and owning the “Khas-o-Khâshâk”, or literally, “punk” mentality. The
protestors and rock musicians alike reimagined the offensive slur of being
Khas-o-Khâshâk, and the lack of state-sanctioned music education, into a
decentralized, new and proactive Event (Žižek 2014): “in this case, the previous
trauma, [being called as Khas-o-Khâshâk], is that of the birth of subjectivity
itself ” (97), such that the “Event [is] the act of reframing, [Khas-o-Khâshâk]”
(190). Wilfully being Khas-o-Khâshâk, or “punk”, or “dirt and dust”, or “gar-
bage”, becomes an act of subversion and anarchism,
1997 that launched a new era for musicians, termed the “Cultural Thaw” by
Nooshin (2005). With less harsh regulations over the teaching, learning and
performing of music, rock musicians of all walks of life began to surface in
public. Nevertheless, their situation remained precarious, as these regulations
were unpredictable. Rehearsals, performances, teaching and learning, and dis-
semination of their music did not enjoy the kind of freedom from which most
of their counterparts in other parts of the world benefited, and the presidency
of Ahmadinejad in 2005, and later his contested victory in 2009, made mat-
ters worse. In this unstable climate, rock musicians took control of their own
learning.9 For instance, all of Behzad’s music-making and learning occurred
through collaborating with peers and other artists. Even his guitar teacher,
with whom he started his guitar playing, was considered a peer rather than a
higher-ranking music professor, as the music scene-specific tendency was that
if someone knows a craft, they teach whatever skills they have to another per-
son, fuelling the concept of DIY, collective learning and communal education.
Behzad remarked:
Electric guitar was not as common in those days. You had to find a per-
son who would even teach acoustic guitar. And they would tell you “hey,
I don’t know it either, but I’ll teach you whatever I know myself ”.
Robertson (2012, 69) argued that, “with very few outlets for official music train-
ing in the styles that unofficial musicians enjoy, these young men empower
each other and build on communal knowledge of the scene by teaching new
recruits”. Behzad was also adamant about creating the music of his band, Bom-
rani, collaboratively:
Examining the local, rich stories of Behzad revealed that he and his bandmates
were following a do-it-yourself (DIY) ethos in their music-making and learn-
ing, like that espoused in punk culture. They created a local anarchist scene
through mutual aid, experimentation and imaginary understanding (Suissa
2006) that responded to all their musical needs. They became simultaneously
teachers and learners while representing a unique local music [education]
scene rooted in their sense of geographical and mental belonging, very much
in line with the revolutionary movement and the two uprisings that “emerge[d]
from ‘outside previously circumscribed situations’, and those movements that
36 • Nasim Niknafs
Thus, the precarious situation of unofficial music in Iran might have uninten-
tionally10 helped the emergence of an ideal, or in the anarchist terminology,
utopian, music education as a “complex system” (Borgo 2005) divorced from a
centralized, standardized and state-organized music education that more often
than not is exclusive.
Therefore, in the case of a Tehrani music [education] scene, rather than a liberal
democratic music education sanctioned by a centralized entity, a scene with a
tangible “face-to-face democracy” (Bookchin 1974) would work effectively, as
“coordination requires neither uniformity nor bureaucracy” (Ward 2004, 89).
Working on the ground, being in constant connection with other musicians,
“Khas-o-Khâshâk” • 37
artists, thinkers, and the dynamic space of teaching and learning, would make
for a more meaningful and profound music education than one so simplisti-
cally, abstractly and deterministically oriented that takes away the subjectivities
and denotations of the parties involved.
In what follows, I discuss a complex Anarcho-Improv music [education] scene
where its source of inspiration originates from Persian traditional music, cul-
tural and political history, and years of subversion through creativity that “makes
us aware of the power of bottom-up design, of self-organization. It operates in
a network fashion, engaging all the participants while distributing responsibil-
ity and empowerment among them. Networks facilitate reciprocal interactions
between members, fostering trust and cooperation” (Borgo 2005, 193).
What I propose, therefore, drawing upon the Tehrani music [education] scene
described throughout this chapter, is an effective music education as a “peak
experience” devoid of any specific criterion, frame of reference or standard-
ization, rather than a state of “ordinary permanence” with its set rules and
regulations, and immaterial power hierarchies. This is a music education as a
“complex system”, without schooling or institutionalization that:
Both Raam and Behzad, now well-known rock musicians within the country,
learned their rock music from peers, intensive listening, copying sound from other
artists and having the help of other fellow musicians, fans and scene makers, very
much similar to Green’s study of British popular musicians (2002). Yet there are also
dramatic differences in the political bedrock supporting their musicianship. Unlike
Green’s participants, Raam, Behzad and so many other rock musicians in Iran were
not permitted to practise their music in terms of learning, rehearsing, performing
and disseminating their music. Their motivation was not necessarily about gain-
ing foothold in the industry, but to be able, publicly and effortlessly, to enjoy their
music. Not having a local rock model (Robertson 2012), Raam remarked:
Word started getting out. We’d throw these underground parties, and we
even had concerts . . . I remember we would like watch, you know, we’d really
“Khas-o-Khâshâk” • 39
record everything we would see on satellite TV.11 We’d record live concerts
to see what microphones they’re using, what amplifiers, what guitars, how
they played their instruments. And we would just emulate these different
acts . . . And the shows were crazy, every time the news would spread to
other people and other people would want to come and see what the hell
is going on. And it all happened, you know, very organically. We didn’t
have proper internet even though [there] was like good internet happening
outside everywhere else. It was just really difficult for us to communicate
any other way. So, it’s just basically word of mouth. And people started
hearing about the band [Hypernova]. Then we just kept playing a couple
of underground shows in Iran and move from studio to studio because it’s
quite difficult, at that time, to even find a place to rehearse because of all
the noise that we would make. And at one point we found this basement,
underneath a parking lot, like four-stories underground. We would literally
spend all of our days and nights over there just playing non-stop. All these
little things, they seem pretty mundane, but for us it felt the most difficult
task ever . . . for us it was just trial and error.12
When Raam discusses his music education in terms such as “trial and error”,
“word of mouth”, “recording live concerts on satellite TV” and “underground par-
ties”, he is recounting a local music [education] scene that is more concerned with:
the ways in which emergent scenes use music appropriated via global
flows and networks to construct particular narratives of the local. Besides
music, such narratives of emergent local identity incorporate aspects of
other local cultural forms . . . such as local dialect, dress, and history, as
well as diverse forms of knowledge, that are often used as strategies of
resistance to local circumstances [. . .] whereby particular local scenes
construct shared narratives of everyday life.
(Peterson and Bennett 2004, 7)
According to Gosling (2004, 172), “in [such situations] we can see the impor-
tance of a collective DIY ethic and the authenticity of the bands. The members
of the networks worked hard, not with financial motivations but with a com-
mon belief in the integrity of the networks” and a shared resistance towards
the governmental impositions. In the case of rock musicians in Iran, “The top-
down policy-making scenario cannot operate . . . What can work, however, is
gradual minute changes, and local activism. To overcome the unpredictability
and ambiguous legalities around creating their music, anarchism seems the
most logical path” (Niknafs 2016, 8). It is precisely this mentality that makes
anarchist education different from that of liberal education: “in anarchist the-
ory, what renders a national curriculum or a body of knowledge objectionable
is the simple fact that it is determined by a central, hierarchical top-down orga-
nization” (Suissa 2006, 137). The instability of the regulations of the musical
40 • Nasim Niknafs
resist choosing sides, we should embrace our critical diversity to the full-
est extent possible. This requires humility and a refusal to take oneself
too seriously. [. . .] We need to realize that there are legitimate critiques
regarding our own practices and conclusions.
(Malott 2012, 264, emphasis in original)
Notes
1. In Persian, this means “garbage”, “punk” or “polluted particles in the air”, quoting President
Mahmood Ahmadinejad discussing the nature of the 2009 electoral protestors in Iran.
2. www.festivalinfo.nl/festival/5353/Iranian_Intergalactic_Music_Festival/2006/.
3. www.kingraam.com/.
4. The terms “official” (rasmi) and “unofficial” (gheire-rasmi) are now extensively used in the
context of Iranian rock music, and refer to the degree to which musics are aligned with and sanc-
tioned by the state. Other terms such as “underground” (zirzamini) or “illegal” (gheire-ghanooni) do
not sufficiently cover the depth and breadth of such music in the country. For further detail on
the contextual meanings of these terms please refer to Nooshin (2005b) and Robertson (2012).
5. http://bomrani.com/.
6. Ghamari-Tabrizi (2016, October 28) referring to the 1979 Revolution, Book Launch, Toronto,
ON: University of Toronto.
7. The “appropriation of stigmatizing labels” is a common trope of countercultures—taking a deroga-
tory term and reappropriating it as a badge of honour. See for example Galinsky et al. (2013).
8. Translated by the author.
9. I would like to highlight that the peer learning norms of rock music flourished under these
cultural constraints, where for instance Western classical music may have suffered, for the con-
ditions of learning were conducive to rock’s learning setting.
10. Rock music is particularly conducive to this situation. For further discussion of rock’s charac-
teristics from an educational perspective, see Green (2002).
11. Satellite TV was one of the major illicit outlets for Iranians to have access to the outside world: “These
satellite TV networks offered new horizons for a population whose cultural life had been limited to
war imagery and discourse. They provided sounds and images of life lived differently in the world
outside their own borders” (Alikhah 2008, 95). For further detail please refer to Alikhah (2008).
12. The interviews with Raam were in English and transcribed verbatim. But the interviews with
Behzad occurred in Farsi, and I translated them.
13. For example, the pressure placed on teachers to meet targets, the involvement of audit culture
in educational management and also state interference and oversight in curricula are situations
in which teachers and students cannot have full agency in the discourse of their teaching and
learning situations.
42 • Nasim Niknafs
References
Alikhah, Fardin. 2008. “The Politics of Satellite Television in Iran.” In Media, Culture and Society
in Iran: Living With Globalization and the Islamic State, edited by Mehdi Semati, 94–110.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Becker, Howard Saul. 1982. Art Worlds. Berkley: University of California Press.
Bennett, Andy, and Richard A. Peterson. 2004. Music Scenes: Local, Translocal and Virtual. Nashville:
Vanderbilt University Press.
Bey, Hakim. 2003. TAZ: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism.
Brooklyn: Autonomedia.
Bookchin, Murray. 1974. Post-Scarcity Anarchism. London: Wildwood House.
Borgo, David. 2005. Sync or Swarm: Improvising Music in a Complex Age. New York: Continuum.
CNN. 2009. “Timeline: 2009 Iran Presidential Elections.” June 19, 2009. www.cnn.com/2009/
WORLD/meast/06/16/iran.elections.timeline/.
Galinsky, Adam D., Cynthia S. Wang, Jennifer A. Whitson, Eric M. Anicich, Kurt Hugenberg, and
Galen V. Bodenhausen. 2013. “The Reappropriation of Stigmatizing Labels: The Reciprocal
Relationship Between Power and Self-Labeling.” Psychological Science 24, 10: 2020–2029.
Ghamari-Tabrizi, Behrooz. 2016. Foucault in Iran: Islamic Revolution After the Enlightenment. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Gosling, Tim. 2004. “ ‘Not for Sale’: The Underground Network of Anarcho—Punk.” In Music
Scenes: Local, Translocal, and Virtual, edited by Andy Bennett and Richard A. Peterson,
168–186. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
Green, Lucy. 2002. How Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education. Aldershot:
Ashgate.
Khasnabish, Alex. 2012. “To Walk Questioning: Zapatismo, the Radical Imagination, and a Trans-
national Pedagogy of Liberation.” In Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Actions, Theories, and
Critical Reflections on Education, edited by Robert H. Haworth, 220–241. Oakland: PM
Press.
Malott, Curry Stephenson. 2012. “Anarcho-Feminist Psychology: Contributing to Postformal
Criticality.” In Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Actions, Theories, and Critical Reflections on
Education, edited by Robert H. Haworth, 260–282. Oakland: PM Press.
Nettl, Bruno. 1980. “Musical Values and Social Values: Symbols in Iran.” Asian Music 12, 1: 129–148.
Newman, Saul. 2016. Post Anarchism. Cambridge: Polity.
Niknafs, Nasim. 2016. “In a Box: A Narrative of a/n (Under)grounded Iranian Musician.” Music
Education Research 18, 4: 351–363.
Nooshin, Laudan. 2003. “Improvisation as ‘Other’: Creativity, Knowledge, and Power—The Case of
Iranian Classical Music.” Journal of the Royal Musical Association 128: 242–296.
Nooshin, Laudan. 2005. “Subversion and Countersubversion: Power, Control, and Meaning in the
New Iranian Pop Music.” In Music, Power and Politics, edited by A. J. Randall, 231–272. New
York: Routledge.
Robertson, Bronwen. 2012. Reverberations of Dissent: Identity and Expression in Iran’s Music Scene.
London: Continuum.
Schneider, Nathan. 2013. “Anarcho Curious? Or Anarchic Amnesia.” In On Anarchism, edited by
Noam Chomsky, vii–xvi. New York: New Press.
Tait, Robert. 2009. “The Dust Revolution—How Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Jibe Backfired.”
Guardian. June 18, 2009. www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jun/18/iran-election-protests-
mahmoud-ahmadinejad.
Tarnoff, Ben. 2016. “The Triumph of Trumpism: The New Politics That Is Here to Stay.” Guardian.
November 9, 2016. www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/us-election-political-
movement-trumpism.
Ward, Colin. 1996. Anarchy in Action. London: Freedom Press.
Ward, Colin. 2004. Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Youssefzadeh, Ameneh. 2000. “The Situation of Music in Iran Since the Revolution: The Role of
Official Organizations.” British Journal of Ethnomusicology 9, 2: 35–61.
Žižek, Slavoj. 2014. Event. London: Penguin Books.
4
Should I Stay or Should I Go?
A Survival Guide for Punk
Graduate Students
DAVID VILA DIÉGUEZ
Introduction
During my five years of graduate school in the US I have crossed paths with
many peers who are having a really hard time finishing their PhDs. Although
most are dedicated students and scholars, many feel that graduate school is
sucking all their life out, as well as completely neutralizing them as academics.
Having to adapt to specific discourses, being required to focus on “market-
able” topics, competing with other students over research grants, and other
pressures to toe an expected line, are turning their graduate school years into
a stressful and dehumanizing experience. According to a study carried out by
the University of California, Berkeley, in 2014, 47 percent of their PhD stu-
dents and 37 percent of their MA students met the criteria to be diagnosed
with depression (Graduate Assembly 2014, 7). In addition to this, a study car-
ried out at an anonymous large US university in 2006 showed that 44.7 percent
of graduate students reported “having an emotional or stress related problem
over the previous year”, and 57.7 percent said that they knew a colleague who
had experienced “an emotional or stress related problem over the last twelve
months” (Hyun et al. 2006, 255). This prevalence of emotional and psycho-
logical instability in graduate school is, I would argue, closely related to the
current neoliberalization of higher education culture. Integral to capitalism is
the commodification of the everyday, and graduate students are going through
a process of becoming competing commodities themselves. However, in spite
of it all, many graduate students are turning their distress into active resistance.
In the summer of 2016 I attended KISMIF (Keep It Simple, Make It Fast),
an international conference on punk and underground cultures held in Porto,
Portugal. There I met over 200 graduate students and scholars from all around
the world who presented on niche topics such as feminist punk in Australia,
Romanian underground music under socialism, and resistance patterns of
tattooed bodies. Many did so in very personal and non-traditional ways. To
cite just a couple of examples, some speakers played instruments and sang
43
44 • David Vila Diéguez
during their presentations and one student made the audience dance. It was
refreshing to see so many scholars giving such original presentations while
still being profoundly analytical and “academic”. For a PhD student like me,
it was mind-opening to realize that punk and underground cultures were not
only the subject matter of most of the presentations but also influenced the
way the organizers and presenters approached the event as a whole. In fact,
the conference could be considered an underground event within academia
due to the heterodox and irreverent character of both the form and content
of the scholarship.
Prior to attending the conference, I had read Punkademics (Furness 2012)
and had also been in touch with various members of the Punk Scholars Network.
In my development as a young scholar, KISMIF represented a peak moment in
my initiation to date into the field of “punk studies”. Following the conference,
two things became clear to me: first, that there are indeed many scholars who
question and challenge the model of traditional academia; and second, that,
following a punk DIY (Do It Yourself) ethos, they are organizing and creating
very interesting alternatives.
At the same time, he uses the term “punkademics” in the context of higher
education to refer to “professors, graduate students, and other PhDs who,
in some meaningful or substantial way, either once straddled or continue
to bridge the worlds of punk and academia through their own personal
experiences, their scholarship, or some combination thereof ” (2015, 8). In
hopes of helping to avoid—or, at least, attenuate—graduate school–related
psychological conditions caused by the neoliberalization of higher educa-
tion culture, in this chapter I would like to introduce a new sub-category
that I call “punk graduate students”: graduate students who question the
prevailing modes of thought and the authority within graduate school
and academia while trying to foster solidarity and collaboration to resist
the spread of neoliberal individualism. Taking this definition as a starting
point, I propose that one way to help improve the graduate school experi-
ence is by more graduate students becoming punk graduate students. The
rest of this chapter will point to a few ideas for my peers to achieve such
transformation—and not die trying!
faster outcomes and, at the same time, require fewer university resources?
In such circumstances, students become merely the means to the results of
the research, and their specific realities are completely ignored. Using the
US as an example, while a middle-class white American male who is eco-
nomically supported by his parents might have written the most convincing
proposal, the committee evaluating the proposal might be ignoring that he
is competing with a foreign female student of colour who is supporting her
whole family with her graduate stipend while taking care of two children.
Submerged in neoliberal ideology, universities would only pay attention to
the “quality” and potential results of the project proposal, perpetuating the
inequality with the already socially advantaged people: the foreign student
will keep struggling to finish her PhD while the American student who had
no financial problems will just have some extra money.
Punk graduate students should normally acknowledge these contradictions
since, due to their constant challenging of the norm, they would often be part of
the group of students that is most vulnerable to such structural discrimination.
According to Pierre Bourdieu,
before he [or she] is born” (2001, 1505), Gramsci thought that power is some-
thing dynamic and that the dominant ideology is mutable and can therefore be
subverted. In order to do so, Gramsci asserted that progressive forces have to
pay attention to popular culture and the already existing concepts in it, to try
and contest hegemonic power.2 In order to explain this, he gives the example of
Italian folklore during the first half of the twentieth century; while it was very
conservative, it was also the most influential culture in Italy. Gramsci thought
that it was a huge mistake not to use Italian folklore as a tool for subverting the
meanings construed by the hegemonic forces of the time (Jones 2006, 37). In
this way, he observed that folklore and popular culture should also be used to
separate old concepts from those “which are in the process of developing and
which are in contradiction to or simply different from the morality of the gov-
erning strata” (Gramsci 1985, 190).
I believe that this is an attitude from which punk graduate students could
learn a good lesson for their everyday life at university. When it comes to tak-
ing advantage of resources that help students develop their PhD research, punk
graduate students should find a balance between staying dogmatically true to
their principles and temporarily playing by the rules of neo-liberal academia.
Otherwise, they would only be hindering their own development as well as
leaving greater space for other students to continue to perpetuate traditional
practices within the university. Punk graduate students need to question the pre-
vailing modes of thought within graduate school and academia, but they would
also need to negotiate with the established concepts and practices in order to
move forward, act upon them, and then change them. In other words, drawing
a parallel with Mallott’s (2012) suggestion, it is crucial for punk graduate stu-
dents to learn “to identify where power resides, understanding how it operates,
and then devis[e] methods of challenging it” (2012, 65). Therefore, one should
be perfectly fine with shaping grant proposals, papers or event comments to
appeal to those in charge of choosing the grant recipients or grading her/his
classwork if needed. These are things that will not have any real repercussion
on students’ future contribution as academics, but that can tremendously limit
their development at graduate school when it comes to, for instance, financial
support or recommendation letters, among other things.
Meanwhile, punk graduate students should also keep looking for other DIY
spaces in which they can be more radical in their questioning and keep trying to
subvert the current hegemonic ideology through those other means too. Just like
punks created their own fanzines, had their own radio stations and created their
own record labels to publish their music, punk graduate students should cre-
ate alternative blogs and websites, publish magazines and organize workshops,
round tables, discussion groups, conferences and more, to keep contesting hege-
mony without having necessarily to miss out on the opportunities that graduate
school offers—just like the students who took part in KISMIF did.
50 • David Vila Diéguez
At university, knowledge becomes a commodity one can buy and sell in even
more commodified forms such as diplomas, certifications or publications. As
these things become the signs of knowledge, the student who owns them also
becomes a commodity as a knowledge-containing object that is little more than
an instructional book or video. In other words, the student turns into a thing
that a teaching institution can buy on the back of the amount of knowledge she/
he is supposed to have, given the diplomas or certifications she/he holds.
Through this process, the commodity form “stamps its imprint upon the
whole consciousness of man [and woman]; his [or her] qualities and abilities are
no longer an organic part of his [or her] personality, they are things which he
[or she] can ‘own’ or ‘dispose of ’ like the various objects of the external world”
(Lukács 1971, 100). At university, the commodifying process permeates the
whole institution, imposing its fragmented logic upon everything including stu-
dents’ consciousness. It is not only the job market that sees students as things,
but even the students struggle to feel like an organic part of their job. This way,
students—but also professors, lecturers, secretaries, etc.—become fragmented
as human beings, and their abilities become completely disconnected from an
organic and complete experience of life. Put differently, the student in graduate
school becomes a specialist in specific topics through the purchase of commodi-
fied knowledge on those specific topics with the sole purpose of being competitive
in the job market. By doing so, she or he becomes a profoundly fragmented “ ‘free’
worker who is freely able to take his [or her] labour-power to market and offer it
for sale as a commodity ‘belonging to him [or her], a thing that he [or she] ‘pos-
sesses’ ” (Lukács 1971, 91)—hence, not something he or she is.
This way of experiencing the learning process at university can result in an
obsessive search for commodity-abilities and commodity-knowledge in order to
become more competitive in the job market. There is always that other discipline
Should I Stay or Should I Go? • 51
you can learn, that other perspective you can also apply, all those other works you
can also read, all those theories and authors you can cite, and so on. In such cases,
the acquisition of commodified knowledge for the purposes of participating in a
knowledge economy and positioning oneself as an attractive proposition within
the academic marketplace can generate much stress, anxiety and even depression.
In order to confront these added difficulties, punk graduate students need to stay
focused on their own goals and work hard to achieve those, not the ones imposed
by any kind of institutional or macroeconomic pressure. Otherwise, one can enter
a circle in which, as Marx noted when talking about workers’ alienation from the
“rest of workers” and “from their species-essence” (2009, n.p.), separates herself
or himself from the rest of the people and the important things in life as human
beings—alimentation, sleeping or exercising, to name a few things about which
graduate students might tend to forget.
It is also important to notice that in spite of rhetoric advocating critical
thinking, students attending graduate school will in many cases not be trained
in autonomous critical thinking as much as in rehearsing and adopting already
existing discourses within academia. As Terry Eagleton points out when talking
about literary studies, “becoming certificated by the state as proficient in literary
studies is a matter of being able to talk and write in certain ways. It is this which
is being taught, examined and certificated, not what you personally think or
believe” (1996, 175). One can extend this to the rest of the academic fields too,
especially in the humanities. Students will learn whom they need to quote as
well as how to reproduce many of the already institutionalized concepts in their
fields. As a result, they will be partially deskilled as critical thinkers to learn how
to shape their thoughts in an academically recognizable trend, which can result
in students’ loss of agency by having to change their thoughts to succeed.
In order to avoid the alienation caused by the commodification of knowl-
edge and students as well as the loss of agency, it is extremely important for
punk graduate students to explore other spaces of education outside the uni-
versity. Giroux (2011, 13) asserts that
Through the concept of “critical public pedagogy”, Giroux opens the learning
experience to the public sphere, breaking the limits of the university. Following
this perspective, I agree with Dines (2015, 28) when he says that
Punk has always been a culture that has been involved with innumerable
social movements: antimilitarism, squatting, feminism, queer movements
and anti-racist movements, among many others. In the same way that punk
has, for many people, been the “the educator—the facilitator—that provided
a framework of enquiry, questioning and interrogation” (Dines, 2015, 21),
one can also seek out other scenes or social movements that provide similar
learning environments. Leave the library and go engage with people who are
not part of academia wherever you live. As Paulo Freire (2005, 72) points
out, “we all know something; we are all ignorant of something”, and that
includes people outside the university too.3 Wherever you attend university,
there are likely high schools, libraries, theatres and other spaces you can
use to explore different cultural activities through which to engage with the
community.
There are hundreds of social projects with which one can get involved:
enrichment programs in high-risk and low-income communities; projects deal-
ing with matters of race, gender, homelessness, immigration and asylum; fair
food, housing and eviction-related projects and so forth. As part of my everyday
life at graduate school, I have been part of different music groups with which I
have participated in political conventions celebrating Hispanic and other less
represented cultures in Nashville, Tennessee. In addition, alongside a diverse
group of students, I have organized literary recitals and an online magazine
open for anyone who wants to participate (www.furman217.com). These are
just a couple of examples [of] things that punk graduate students can do in their
community to expand the learning experience beyond the library walls.
school in the US I have come to identify the first symptoms of turning into this
neoliberal student when one starts to feel guilty any time she/he is not studying,
or when enjoying leisure time begins to feel like procrastinating or being a lazy
graduate student.4
Many graduate departments contribute to nurturing this neoliberalized
student, encouraging students to compete with one another through vari-
ous grants, awards and distinctions that only consider students’ work as
individuals—best paper, best presentation, best teaching assistant (TA) and
so on. By doing so, they isolate students from each other and manufacture
a “high performance ego, [that] always demands more of the self ” (Dardot
and Laval 2013, 274). These individualistic rewarding methods can be very
damaging for the student body because they perpetuate the classification
of students in groups of winners and losers, often turning students against
one other. Under such circumstances, graduate students might adopt a very
strict and unnecessary discipline, hoping to achieve some sort of valida-
tion, and could end up overestimating the importance of cultivating the
individual over the collective, fuelling the drive for competition and hin-
dering cooperation with their cohorts. In addition to this, students might
also feel extremely disappointed when, despite their hard work, they are
not rewarded, which can also damage their self-esteem tremendously and
contribute to general discomfort among students. Instead of exclusively
rewarding the successes of students as individuals, it would be interesting
and valuable to explore different ways of celebrating or acknowledging every
student’s work and making all students part of everyone’s success. In order
to do this, punk graduate students could foster a culture of joint research
projects, presentations and publications, instead of focusing on their own
projects individually. The same can be said about fostering collaborative
grant proposals and sharing funds between students—something normal
in most scientific disciplines but less so in the humanities.
In addition to the foregoing, it would be crucial for punk graduate students
to organize and stay together; it is extremely important to develop a student
community that goes beyond the self-entrepreneurial competition. One of the
most important ideas would be that of creating a non-hierarchical group of
students whose voice is heard within the department decisions and which func-
tions as a support group for all students. This could take the shape of a union or
just a student organization. In my years as a graduate student, we have started
a more or less organized committee, have a representative who goes to meet-
ings with professors, and have held creative writing workshops, open mics and
literary recitals. Along with this, we founded the magazine, mentioned ear-
lier, in which many of us are involved (www.furman217.com). Punk graduate
students can create student associations; try to procure resources from their
departments or universities to bring their own speakers; organize workshops or
54 • David Vila Diéguez
film clubs; create online platforms, Facebook groups, shared clouds and folders;
create a common archive with materials for exams or other information they
think incoming students might benefit from; share syllabi and materials for
those who work as TAs; distribute surveys to inform the department if there
are any issues regarding students; or even just get together to have dinner, chat
and listen to each other. Students, as a community, have the power to keep
the individual from becoming this self-absorbed, alienated, neoliberalized stu-
dent. Only by making these practices part of students’ daily lives can alternative
approaches to graduate school be explored and, thus, a culture of collectivism
and resistance to the current individualistic practices of neoliberal university
be created.
Notes
1. In this sense, and following Paula Guerra’s example, it might be useful to think of “punk” as a
“hyperword”: a polysemic word with meanings that are constantly changing depending on vari-
ous factors (2010, 131).
2. My interpretation of “popular culture” here coincides with that of John Storey when he says that
“popular culture in [Gramci’s] usage is not the imposed culture of the mass culture theorists, nor
is it an emerging from below, spontaneously oppositional culture of ‘the people’—it is a terrain of
exchange and negotiation between the two: [. . .] marked by resistance and incorporation” (2015,
10).
3. The idea of learning from people that are not necessarily certified scholars or experts in a spe-
cific field is also brilliantly exposed in Cultures of Anyone (2015) by Luis Moreno-Caballud. In
his work, the Spanish scholar/activist uses social movements in Spain as an example of a collec-
tive thinking/learning process that can teach individuals involved in them more than any of the
ideas developed in most academic papers.
4. Riyad A. Shahjahan offers a provocative interpretation of “being lazy in the academy” by defin-
ing it as “being at peace with ‘not doing’ or ‘not being productive,’ living in the present, and
deprivileging the need for a result with the passage of time” (2015, 489).
References
Adorno, Theodor W. 2004. Negative Dialectics. London: Routledge.
Althusser, Louis. 2001. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses.” In Norton Anthology of Theory
and Criticism, edited by Vincent B. Leitch, 1476–1508. New York: W. W. Norton.
Beer, David. 2014. Punk Sociology. London: Palgrave Pivot.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge: Harvard
Press.
Dardot, Pierre, and Christian Laval. 2013. The New Way of the World: On Neo-liberal Society.
London: Verso.
Dines, Mike. 2015. “Learning Through Resistance: Contextualisation, Creation and Incorporation
of a ‘Punk Pedagogy’.” Journal of Pedagogical Development 5, 3: 20–31.
Eagleton, Terry. 1996. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Cornwall: Blackwell.
Freire, Paulo. 2005. Teachers as Cultural Workers. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Giroux, Henry A. 2011. On Critical Pedagogy. New York: Continuum.
The Graduate Assembly. 2014. Graduate Student Happiness & Wellbeing Report. Berkeley: Univer-
sity of California.
Gramsci, A. 1985. Selections From Cultural Writings. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
Guerra, Paula. 2010. A instável leveza do rock: Génese, dinâmica e consolidação do rock alternativo
em Portugal. PhD dissertation, Universidade do Porto.
Haenfler, Ross. 2012. “Punk Ethics and the Mega-University.” In Punkademics: The Basement Show
in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness, 37–48. Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions.
Hyun, Jenni Q., Brian C. Quinn, Temina Madon, and Steve Lustig. 2006. “Graduate Student Mental
Health: Needs Assessment and Utilization of Counseling Services.” Journal of College Student
Development 47, 3: 247–266.
Illich, Ivan. 1970. Deschooling Society. London: Marion Boyars.
Jones, Steve. 2006. Antonio Gramsci. London: Routledge.
Kanpol, Barry. 1999. Critical Pedagogy: An Introduction. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Khan-Egan, Sathan. 1998. “Pedagogy of the Pissed: Punk Pedagogy in the First-Year Writing Class-
room.” College Composition and Communication 49, 1: 99–104.
Lukács, Georg. 1971. History and Class Consciousness. London: Merlin Press.
Lyotard, Jean François. 1984. The Postmodern Condition. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Mallot, Curry. 2012. “Finding Balance in the Academy.” In Punkademics: The Basement Show in the
Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness, 65–67. Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions.
Marcus, Greil. 1989. Lipstick Traces. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Marx, Karl. “Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844.” Marxists.org. Accessed August 22,
2016. www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Economic-Philosophic-
Manuscripts-1844.pdf.
56 • David Vila Diéguez
Miner, Dylan, and Estrella Torrez. 2012. “Turning Point: Claiming the University as a Punk Space.”
In Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness, 27–35.
Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions.
Moore, Caroline. 2016. Punk Rock Entrepreneur: Running a Business Without Losing Your Values.
Portland, OR: Microcosm.
Moreno-Caballud, Luis. 2015. Cultures of Anyone. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
O’Hara, Craig. 1999. The Philosophy of Punk: More Than Noise. San Francisco: AK Press.
Shahjahan, Riyad A. 2015. “Being ‘Lazy’ and Slowing Down: Toward Decolonizing Time, Our Body,
and Pedagogy.” Educational Philosophy and Theory 47, 5: 488–501.
Storey, John. 2015. Cultural Theory and Popular Culture. New York: Routledge.
Thompson, John B. 1984. Studies in the Theory of Ideology. Los Angeles: University of California
Press.
Torrez, Estrella. 2012. “Punk Pedagogy: Education for Liberation and Love.” In Punkademics: The
Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness, 131–142. Brooklyn, NY: Minor
Compositions.
Warner, Brad. 2005. Hardcore Zen: Punk Rock Monster Movies & the Truth About Reality. Somer-
ville, MA: Wisdom.
Wohlsen, Marcus. 2011. Biopunk. New York: Penguin Group.
5
Punk Entrepreneurship: Overcoming
Obstacles to Employability in the UK’s
Higher Education Pseudo-market
WARRICK HARNIESS
Neutral Territory
Start a band, throw a brick, you lazy fuckers make me sick.
—Lifetime, “The Gym is Neutral Territory”
(Wilson 2014). I went into the kitchen. “Aida, do you want to buy the Titanic
soundtrack from me?” While my parents were out, I sold it to my family’s amah
for HK$100 of her limited disposable income, so she could listen to it on her day
off with friends. It was an entrepreneurial act of rent-seeking that befitted my
privileged place in Hong Kong’s classist culture of vulture capitalism. However
unsure of myself I may have felt as an awkward teenager, I was unconsciously
asserting my status as a young man who knew his place in society.
Getting into punk as a teenager in the mid-1990s was easy for me. Punk
was cooler than it had ever been before, conferring “status—symbolic power . . .
both cultural and social capital, and . . . a clear potential route to economic
capital” for its leading lights (Wilson 2014, 93). The politics of art and taste have
much to teach us about prejudice, and in the same way that double standards
exist to favour in-groups and ostracize out-groups, so too are they prevalent in
our attitudes towards pop-culture fads and fashions. Sentimental schmaltz a la
Celine Dion is very often the throwaway music of the globally disenfranchised,
while punk—“anger’s schmaltz” (Wilson 2014, 125)—is subversive, “nearly
always a term of approval” (Wilson 2014, 126), the perfect subcultural testing
ground on which the young and relatively fortunate can learn the boundaries
of their intellect, social aptitude, and relational desires for control, affection and
self-determination (Schutz 1958). Perhaps it’s that I’ve been watching too much
of The Wire, but I see it that this is how punk came to save me from becoming
just another careless young capitalist in the same way that, say, a boxing gym in
a Baltimore project might save a young black man from an early, violent death at
the hands of a street corner drug gang. For me, punk was safe, neutral territory;
a sanctuary from which to hone what I’ve learned are crucial professional skills.
My experience is not unique. Punk is a gateway drug for many young people to
an enlightened state of mind—a belief system that favours practice over theory
and passion over qualification, and that encourages the critical questioning of
everything as a method for productively engaging with a turbulent world.
***
Punk is the personal expression of uniqueness that comes from the expe-
riences of growing up in touch with our human ability to reason and ask
questions.
—Greg Graffin, PhD, author, singer, lecturer
Steve Albini claims that “every significant life experience I have had I owe . . . to
the Ramones” (Dunn 2016, 32), and I have similarly concocted a neat memo-
rial to narrate my conversion to punk, a eureka moment from which I never
looked back. The birthplace of punk for me is the west side of Hong Kong
Island, somewhere between industrial Wong Chuk Hang and residential Aber-
deen. In the early summer months we played football during PE lessons, under
a sweetly humid cloud belched from the British American Tobacco factory that
loomed over the threadbare pitch. After one such session, at the back of the bus
Punk Entrepreneurship • 59
returning us to our school up the road, my friend Jamie played me Green Day’s
1,039/Smoothed Out Slappy Hours on his Walkman. I wasn’t that impressed, but I
was intrigued—it sounded like nothing I’d ever heard before. Soon after, I heard
Pennywise, Propagandhi and NOFX—roughly in that order—and pretty much
instantly rejected heavy metal and indie rock in favour of fast, melodic, American
punk. Not long after I had sold the Titanic CD to Aida, I got rid of many records
that I later did regret selling (including Iron Maiden, My Bloody Valentine and
scores of death metal albums), but such is the price of seeing the light.
The epicentre of our new punk world was the Warehouse youth club, a for-
mer police station built in the mid-nineteenth century at the beginning of the
British colonial era, located at the top of an impossibly steep hill above Aber-
deen. The windowless holding jail block was converted into a band rehearsal
room. It smelled, not unpleasantly, of mild damp and ancient floor polish and
it is one of the most evocative scents of my adolescence (I went back for the
first time in 15 years in 2014, and it still smells the same). The Warehouse
had a sleepy timelessness; it was truly a refuge from the social and academic
pressures of the hustle and bustle below. Playing in bands and writing songs
took on a new urgency and meaning for me personally. I’d already been writ-
ing for two years, but I now had a template within which to practice, one that
my bandmates understood and revered; importantly, and unlike heavy metal,
it was a template that I was just about proficient enough to apply. As a 16-
to 19-year-old I gave myself, unequivocally and absolutely, an education that
blended the academic, applied and technical in a way that school never could.
I am not suggesting that school was a waste of time, but if I took A Levels in
English literature, history and economics/business studies (which I did), then
I may as well have taken an AS Level in punk rock (far more useful than AS
General Studies, a mandatory requirement).
Punk rock was my moral and spiritual awakening. Through practice, I
learned how to critically ask questions about the world around me, that appeared
ever more corrupt and hypocritical the more I read and saw. Playing and writ-
ing music with others I learned how to collaborate creatively and express my
thoughts in a structured way, with the aim of evoking an emotional response
from a target audience. We organized and promoted our own gigs, recorded and
distributed our music, and engaged in friendly but serious competition with the
other bands with whom we performed. We didn’t so much work as a team to
realize a goal set by others (for example, a manager) as much as we bonded as a
group who set forth a collective vision together. In 1998, Fugazi came to Hong
Kong and played two shows, at our school auditorium and in Kowloon Park. I
interviewed Ian MacKaye for my fanzine, and went to dinner with the band. It
was a kind of field study, an opportunity to learn, however fleetingly, from the
best. In a recent response to an interviewer’s argument that “DIY punk matters,
it empowers individuals . . . and communities, and at the global level it challenges
corporate-led globalisation”, MacKaye said, “those tenets on why punk matters
are so obvious to me that they don’t even need to be spoken. It’s like something
60 • Warrick Harniess
we breathe” (Dunn 2016, 1). But it wasn’t obvious or guaranteed when I was
younger (as I suspect it isn’t for those who are discovering punk for the first time
today), and that is part of its (trans)formative power. The process of conversion
works precisely because the knowledge and values that seem so obvious and
natural post-conversion are so alien and unknown prior to it. Fundamentally,
this punk conversion experience has the same life-changing impact as a truly
excellent learning experience that appeals to all the senses. Playing punk rock as
a teenager was my first meaningful attempt at bootstrapping entrepreneurship,
in which I learned by doing, making iterative improvements from one crudely
crafted song to the next, and building an audience gig by gig. I frequently call
upon the knowledge I gained from my A Level studies to inform my work today,
but in a somewhat detached way that seems fitting for an educational experi-
ence that was purely cognitive. In contrast, my punk rock education was truly
holistic—an active learning experience of body, mind and spirit—and I feel and
remember it, emotionally, to my core even today.
These days I hear and sing punk rock songs in the same way, I imagine,
as the amahs in downtown Hong Kong on Sundays sing religious songs of
praise—they comfort me, reassure me, affirm my identity as an individual and
a group member with specific values and world view. The songs are merely
token expressions of a deeper faith and mindset. This mindset has helped me
to interpret my career-related observations and experiences, and has influ-
enced the development of my professional interests. As an entrepreneur I am
concerned about the corporatization of capitalism, meaning what Stiglitz calls
“government munificence” towards large organizations that leads to the cre-
ation of “laws that make the marketplace less competitive” (Stiglitz 2013, 48).
As an independent consultant and freelance lecturer working in higher educa-
tion I am also actively engaged in the debate around the consumerization of
higher education, which broadly refers to the extent to which HE institutions
have become more consumer-oriented as a competitive strategy, and thus more
accountable to the market segments that most utilize their services. The corpo-
ratization of capitalism is a salient feature of the state-controlled free market,
and it exacerbates one of the greatest challenges the developed world faces—the
growing inequality of wealth distribution. I firmly believe that higher education
is a key tool for reversing this worrying trend, but that the industry’s ability to
make a more meaningful contribution in this regard is hampered by its current
state as a “pseudo-market” (Williams 2013, 13). I believe it is time for a “big
bang” of deregulation in higher education.
***
We stand paralysed, the corporate godhead demands a sacrifice.
—J Church, “Picture This”
The UK’s higher education system is a £17.5 billion export industry with global
reach and impact (HM Government 2013). This valuation reflects the measure
of its transformational power not only for British people but also for those from
other countries who eschew what is likely to be a cheaper education in their home
countries in order to receive a British education. The very fact that home and
international students alike are prepared to make such a significant investment
reflects a hard truth: that the education they seek is part of a wider “customer
journey” (Brown 2009) towards improved employment prospects. This is not to
say that education is not “important in and of itself ” (Williams 2013, 18), but in a
globalized and ever more populous world facing significant resource constraints,
this purpose diminishes in importance in relation to a primary goal of prepar-
ing young people and upskilling others for employment. In other words, helping
Punk Entrepreneurship • 63
Punk Entrepreneurship
Of course, I have an agenda here.
Why else connect punk and entrepreneurship so brazenly in service of a
policy position? Are my own experiences really so universal as to warrant this?
Broadly, I think they are. In this concluding section, I summarize my answers
to three questions:
Why Punk?
No such thing as spare time
No such thing as free time
No such thing as down time
All you got is life time
Go!
—Henry Rollins, “Shine”
Why Entrepreneurship?
There wasn’t anybody that was going to do it for you. You had to make
it happen.
—Ian MacKaye, punk entrepreneur
When I reflect on my education to date there are some things that I wish I had
been explicitly taught earlier and more frequently in life. Summarily, these are
how to think radically about innovative ways to contribute to the world in a
measurably useful way; how to experiment with doing this and to learn from
practice; and how to see things more keenly from other peoples’ perspectives,
particularly with a view to understanding whether my efforts to contribute to
the world might make a difference. These are hard lessons to teach young peo-
ple, with their limited world experience and difficulty in understanding their
own feelings and behaviour, let alone those of other people. Upon reflection, I
began to learn many of these lessons from writing and playing punk rock when
I was a teenager, but I had little clue at the time and I would well have benefitted
from more sustained and varied application.
When I was 31, struggling still to understand the causes and consequences
of the financial crisis, I did an MBA and so began a journey towards being
conscious of the skills and mindset needed to contribute meaningfully to the
world. I believe that I began this conscious journey far too late in life (and I cer-
tainly do not think that an MBA is necessary). The skills and mindset needed
are a blend of “hard” and “soft” knowledge, all of which have been championed
in, among other places, academic and policy papers, the education media, and
employment-oriented conferences (see, for example, the Higher Education
Academy’s revised “Pedagogy for Employability” report, 2012). These “hard”
skills include the abilities to write a coherent and engaging presentation using
a simple narrative structure that articulates premise, rationale and desired out-
come for a practical project; design and conduct basic ethnographic research;
build a crude prototype or blueprint of an idea using preferred tools (whether
writing computer code, crafting an object or writing an outline); create a plan of
work with tasks divided among individual group members; and create a simple
financial budget. By consistently practicing and refining these technical skills,
young people begin to develop the all-important “soft” skills of empathetic
communication, assertive collaboration and bold creative and critical thinking.
Together, these skills serve to help build confidence and resilience, and the self-
awareness to recognize that one has a far greater chance of achieving success
and measurably contributing to the world if they are able to demonstrably take
ownership for their efforts.
Punk Entrepreneurship • 69
A free market system, if it’s good for anything, effectively uses pricing to match
supply and demand. Acceptable price points are found by virtue of a complex
psychological dance between sellers and buyers, influenced by context and
the nature of the product or service that is for sale. Assuming that buyers are
protected by consumer rights laws, prohibiting underhanded sales and mar-
keting tactics that would otherwise proliferate under the auspices of caveat
emptor—the “buyer beware” principle (Luyendijk 2015, 106)—sellers will strive
to “deliver the value promised by their value proposition” at a price at which
customers “perceive this value” (Kotler and Keller 2009, 77). There are certainly
factors that can decrease a buyer’s price sensitivity and allow for greater oppor-
tunity on the part of a seller to conceivably overcharge. These factors include
the ease with which the value of similar products or services can be compared,
and the perceived associated benefits that a product or service will deliver
beyond its immediate scope (Nagle et al. 2011), both of which are relevant in
the context of selection of higher education products. But different prices for
similar products or services give people pause for thought and invite them to
research further the reasons why one product is priced higher than another. In
the context of selection of higher education products I firmly believe that this
can be no bad thing.
The freedom to “mark to market” the prices of their learning programmes,
allowing for the opportunity to significantly grow a main revenue stream, might
encourage HE institutions to prioritize building competitive advantage around
the inputs and processes by which they develop these learning programmes
over and above research prestige. Broadly, this would involve hiring talent, at a
70 • Warrick Harniess
Note
1. I am aware that ascribing “libertarian values” to people as diverse as Larry Livermore, Mike
Burkett and Ian MacKaye is contentious. I do not personally know them, nor have I ever had
the opportunity to discuss these ideas with them. They may well take umbrage with my views in
this regard as too, I expect, will others! But like MacKaye, I “think of punk rock as a free space”
(O’Connor 2008, 8); it is not aligned with any one ideology or political position. As I articulate
in the section titled “Punk Entrepreneurship”, I believe punk’s practical malleability is part of
its staying power. Punk means different, contradictory things to different people, and as such
defining “punk” is a wicked issue—it will never be satisfactorily resolved. I make no apologies
for my perspective that punk is a byproduct of capitalistic systems and that, therefore, the entre-
preneurial activities of its proponents can be interpreted accordingly. Inevitably, other people
will disagree and I celebrate that as democratic tradition. Coincidentally, I also acknowledge
that “entrepreneurship” is perhaps as nebulous a term as “punk”. Suffice it to say, I believe that
entrepreneurship is fundamentally about assessing and reconciling risk and reward. In some
Punk Entrepreneurship • 71
cases, this may take the form of establishing a business venture in the pursuit of profit. In other
circumstances it may be about consciously pursuing an activity that could be loss-making from
a monetary perspective, but that is considered worthwhile because of the enjoyment, satisfaction
and/or learning opportunities it brings.
References
Boas, Taylor C., and Jordan Gans-Morse. 2009. “Neoliberalism: From New Liberal Philosophy
to Anti-Liberal Slogan.” Studies in Comparative International Development 44: 137–161.
doi:10.1007/s12116-009-9040-5.
Bobbitt, Philip. 2008. Terror and Consent: The Wars for the Twenty-First Century. London: Allen
Lane.
Booker, Christopher. 2004. The Seven Basic Plots: Why We Tell Stories. London: Continuum.
British Chambers of Commerce. 2014. A Business Plan for Britain. Accessed January 25, 2017. www.
britishchambers.org.uk/2014%20BCC%20Business%20manifesto.pdf.
Brown, Tim. 2009. Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires
Innovation. New York: HarperCollins.
CBI. 2013. Tomorrow’s Growth: New Routes to Higher Skills. Accessed January 25, 2017. www.cbi.
org.uk/media/2178879/tomorrow_s_growth.pdf.
Dunn, Kevin. 2016. Global Punk: Resistance and Rebellion in Everyday Life. New York: Bloomsbury.
Gardiner, Laura. 2016. “Stagnation Generation: The Case for Renewing the Intergenerational Con-
tract.” Resolution Foundation. Accessed January 25, 2017. www.intergencommission.org/.
Graffin, Greg. 2002. A Punk Manifesto. Accessed January 25, 2017. www.allidoispunk.com/about/
greg-graffin-a-punk-manifesto/.
HM Government. 2013. International Education: Global Growth and Prosperity. Accessed January
25, 2017. www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-education-strategy-global-
growth-and-prosperity.
Kahneman, Daniel. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. London: Penguin Books.
Kotler, Philip, and Kevin L. Keller. 2009. A Framework for Marketing Management, 4th edition.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Law, Lisa. 2002. “Defying Disappearance: Cosmopolitan Public Spaces in Hong Kong.” Urban Stud-
ies 39: 1625–1645. doi:10.1080/00420980220151691.
Livermore, Larry. 2015. How to Ru(i)n a Record Label: The Story of Lookout Records. Don Giovanni
Records.
Luyendijk, Joris. 2015. Swimming With Sharks: My Journey Into the World of the Bankers. London:
Guardian Books and Faber and Faber.
Marginson, Simon. 2011. “Higher Education and Public Good.” Higher Education Quarterly 65:
411–433. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2273.2011.00496.x
Marginson, Simon. April 10, 2014. “There’s Still No Such Thing as a Higher Education Market.”
TES Online. Accessed January 25, 2017. www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/opinion/
theres-still-no-such-thing-as-a-higher-education-market/2012541.article.
Nagle, Thomas T., John E. Hogan, and Joseph Zale. 2011. The Strategy and Tactics of Pricing: A Guide
to Growing More Profitably, 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
NOFX, and Alulis, J. 2016. The Hepatitis Bathtub and Other Stories. Boston: Da Capo Press.
O’Connor, Alan. 2008. Punk Record Labels and the Struggle for Autonomy. Plymouth: Lexington
Books.
Pegg, Ann, Jeff Waldock, Sonia Hendy-Isaac, and Ruth Lawton. 2012. “Pedagogy for Employability.”
Higher Education Academy. Accessed January 25, 2017. www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/
pedagogy_for_employability_update_2012.pdf.
Pynchon, Thomas. 2013. Bleeding Edge. London: Jonathan Cape.
QAA. 2012. The Quality Code, Part B: Assuring and Enhancing Academic Quality. Accessed January
25, 2017. www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/quality-code-
part-b.
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 3rd edition. New York: Harper
and Brothers.
Schutz, William C. 1958. FIRO: A Three Dimensional Theory of Interpersonal Behavior. New York:
Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
72 • Warrick Harniess
Smith, Gareth D., and Alex Gillett. 2014. “Creativities, Innovation, and Networks in Garage Punk
Rock: A Case Study of the Eruptörs.” Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts 4:
9–24.
Sorkin, Andrew R. 2009. Too Big to Fail: Inside the Battle to Save Wall Street. London: Penguin
Books.
Stiglitz, Joseph E. 2013. The Price of Inequality. London: Penguin Books.
Thiel, Peter, and Blake Masters. 2014. Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future.
London: Virgin Books.
Tilak, Janidhyala B. G. 2008. “Higher Education: A Public Good or a Commodity for Trade?” Pros-
pects 38: 449–466. doi:10.1007/s11125-009-9093-2.
Trivers, Robert. 2013. Deceit and Self-Deception: Fooling Yourself the Better to Fool Others. London:
Penguin Books.
Williams, Gareth. 2016. “Higher Education: Public Good or Private Commodity?” London Review
of Education 14: 131–142. doi:10.18546/LRE.14.1.12.
Williams, Joanna. 2013. Consuming Higher Education: Why Learning Can’t Be Bought. New York:
Bloomsbury.
Wilson, Carl. 2014. Let’s Talk About Love: Why Other People Have Such Bad Taste. New York:
Bloomsbury.
6
Just Go and Do It: A Blockchain
Technology “Live Project” for
Nascent Music Entrepreneurs
MARCUS O’DAIR AND ZULEIKA BEAVEN
The philosophy from the beginning was you don’t have to know how
to do it, you just have to figure out what to do next. And it’s ok to make
a mistake, if you guess wrong what to do next, you step back and you
try to take the appropriate step. And it worked. To the extent that it
worked, it worked! —Jay Clem, Cryptic Corporation 76–82
73
74 • Marcus O’Dair and Zuleika Beaven
punk (and, indeed, some post-punk1) was undoubtedly radical: its insistence
on independent means of production (Laing 2015).
Characteristic of punk—particularly British punk, according to Laing—was
a do-it-yourself attitude “which refused to rely on the institutions of the estab-
lished music industry, whether record company or music press” (2015, 24). This
do-it-yourself approach is typically assumed to refer primarily to playing music:
“This is a chord, this is another, this is a third. Now start a band”, as Sideburns
fanzine famously declared (1977, n.p.). Yet that same DIY ethos could apply
equally to writing about and recording and distributing that music (Smith and
Gillett 2015; Savage 2005; Laing 2015).
True, not all punks have been insistent on independence: some of the most
prominent punk bands, among them The Clash and The Sex Pistols, signed to
major labels, while even some “indie” record labels used major labels for dis-
tribution. On the other side of the Atlantic, The Ramones worked with a major
label, while Black Flag and the Dead Kennedys had periods “flirting with labels
that had links to majors” (O’Connor 2008, 3). Bestley (2014) has suggested that
punk’s do-it-yourself rhetoric was often little more than a naïve ambition, while
Furness (2012, 14) states that it is a mistake to conflate punk with “100% pure
authentic resistance to the culture industry/mainstream/system”. Even so, as
Laing suggests, an emphasis on independence can be considered fundamen-
tal to punk. Furness insists that punk is defined, as much as anything, by “a
participatory, “bottom up” view of culture . . . a broader “Do It Yourself ” coun-
terculture” (10). Gordon (2012) also regards this DIY approach as integral to
punk. Today, the “indie” act signed to a major label is so commonplace that the
obvious contradiction is often ignored. But, as Hesmondhalgh (1999) writes,
“indie” was originally characterized by a new relationship between creativity
and commerce, a means of reconciling the commercial nature of pop with the
goal of artistic autonomy for musicians. We note not only the transformations
associated with punk entrepreneurship, but its place as a mechanism for cre-
ative control.
Laing, focusing on the UK, divides punk labels into two types. First there
were the small-scale “Xerox” labels, a term Laing borrows from Desperate
Bicycles, whose Refill label could be considered to epitomize the phenomenon.
Their track “Handlebars” can be read as a manifesto for this approach, featuring
as it did the words: “It was easy, it was cheap; go and do it!” Also representative
is the Spiral Scratch EP by Buzzcocks, released on the band’s own New Hor-
mones label and financed by borrowing money from family and friends. As
Savage (2005) notes, “the implications of Spiral Scratch were enormous . . . what
was so perfect about the Buzzcocks’ EP was that its aesthetics were perfectly
combined with the means of production” (297). It was not only these two acts:
Dale (2008) argues against the tendency to “reify” Buzzcocks and Desperate
Bicycles as proponents of DIY, noting significant antecedents and continuations
of the DIY impetus, most notably the anarcho-punk group Crass.
Just Go and Do It • 75
Focusing on American bands of the late 1970s and early 1980s, O’Connor
(2008) makes a similar point: the vast majority of bands never signed to major
labels, or even to small labels with relationships with major labels. “For them,
doing it yourself was not a choice but a necessity. The music industry was
mostly not interested” (2).
In part as a consequence of this sense of entrepreneurship born out of neces-
sity, punk blurred the line between creativity and entrepreneurship. Burnard
(2012) maintains that entrepreneurship is a form of creativity, a view supported
in the specific context of punk by Smith and Gillett (2015). While it may be
perceived that there is a potential conflict between creative and entrepreneurial
aims, Bilton argues convincingly in his 2007 text Management and Creativity
that they can co-exist: the opposition of “suits” and “creatives” is a myth. The
highest profile, and most contested, example of such co-existence is perhaps
Malcolm McLaren (Savage 2005, 314), whose self-declared “creative manage-
ment” is exemplified by ambitious schemes such as the film The Great Rock ‘n’
Roll Swindle. Rather than McLaren, the sense of enterprise as creative practice
is perhaps best epitomized by the “pop-group-posing-as-corporation strat-
egy” (Reynolds 2005, 248), as represented by Public Image Ltd—conceived,
in direct contrast to The Sex Pistols, as “an organisation free from manager’s
interference” (Dudanski 2013, 150)—and The Residents. With the intention of
achieving “complete cultural autonomy” (Reynolds 2005, 248), The Residents
78 • Marcus O’Dair and Zuleika Beaven
developed the notion of enterprise as creative practice, running their own label
and making their own artwork and films. The blurring of lines between cre-
ativity and entrepreneurship is also evident in the various punk and post-punk
musicians who ran labels: Daniel Miller at Mute, Jerry Dammers at 2-Tone,
Throbbing Gristle at Industrial, Crass at Crass Records and, slightly later, Derek
Birkett at One Little Indian. While Laing (2015) suggests that the DIY ethic was
particularly a phenomenon of UK punk, a list of equivalent American labels
would include SST and Dischord.
In defining at least some punks as entrepreneurs, then, we argue for two
significant and inter-related points: that entrepreneurship can be born out of
context and necessity to change realities; and that motivation and intent can be
drawn from a desire to support creative practice and achieve creative control,
rather than to make money. Many punk entrepreneurs exist well outside the
dominant neoliberal discourse, but they are no less entrepreneurial for that.
spreads across the campus, critical discussion of its place intensifies. Torrez
(2012) assumes that the tendency in universities towards generating “entrepre-
neurial scholars” is part of “the corporate university”, and that the pressure on
academics “to pursue an entrepreneurial trajectory” is opposed to “the belief
that university education should emerge from intentional forms of critical ped-
agogy” (133–4). We draw on alternative discourses of enterprise to argue that it
is not only innovative but supports critical engagement—that there is, in other
words, nothing fundamentally “unpunk” about enterprise pedagogy.
The other, related, shift is in how entrepreneurship is taught. The intention
with our own live project, which we outline in greater detail later, is to recreate
as closely as possible the “learn as you go” process of venture creation, with an
emphasis on active (Chickering and Gamson 1987), experiential (Kolb 1984),
heuristic (Depaepe et al. 2010) and entrepreneurial learning (Dalley and Ham-
ilton 2000; Rae 2000; Rae and Carswell 2000; Deakins and Freel 1998; Cope
and Watts 2000; Gibb 1997). Historically, the desire for experiential learning
in an environment as close as possible to “real world” enterprise led initially to
an emphasis on simulation: see for instance Pittaway and Cope (2007) and Tan
and Ng (2006). Yet simulation in an artificial context also had limitations (Pit-
taway and Cope 2006), and there has been a more recent trend to move “beyond
simulation” (Beaven and St George 2007). Beaven and St George argue for an
approach that promotes active learning not by simulation but by using live,
real-world projects that offer “genuine pressures and crises” (2). Live projects,
for instance, can help develop collaborative and participatory skills, enrich the
student learning experience, develop enterprise skills and significantly increase
employability in a sector with precarious employment (Sheffield School of
Architecture 2013). Enterprise teaching, then, is moving beyond preparing
business plans, a feature of the planning approach prevalent in many business
schools and MBA programmes that had transferred to some enterprise edu-
cation. Jones and Penaluna (2013) note the business plan is losing credibility
outside academia and argue it should not be central to enterprise education.
Scholars including Bheemaiah (2015) and Barre (2015) have suggested that
business schools need to teach about blockchain technology because of its
disruptive potential. Like entrepreneurship, however, we believe blockchain
technology needs to be taught beyond business schools, in our case to students
studying Popular Music as well as Music Business & Arts Management (ques-
tioning the division between artist and entrepreneur, and between creativity
and management, being a key part of legacy of punk). This in part represents
our desire to ensure that the curriculum remains current; given its disrup-
tive potential, blockchain technology also provides a broader opportunity to
re-conceive—and to de-mystify—the music industries. We have suggested
elsewhere (O’Dair et al. 2016) that claims for disintermediation in the music
industries as a result of blockchain technology have been overstated, yet it
remains a useful exercise for those studying the music industries to imag-
ine the value chain stripped right back to artist and consumer, and from that
blank canvas to then work through the intermediaries that might be required
in between. Such an approach is very much indebted to punk, one contribu-
tion of which was “rendering visible through its DIY philosophy the previously
mystified mechanics of music participation, consumption and participation”
(Gordon 2012, 106).
We introduced blockchain technology into the curriculum for Popular
Music and Music Business & Arts Management students in the 2015–16 aca-
demic year: the potential impact of the technology on the music industries was
critically examined in scheduled lectures and at a symposium that took place
on campus. In that academic year, we also held four extracurricular “music on
the blockchain” workshops. It was felt that keeping the workshops optional—
and un-assessed—would help to make them a “safe space” in which to “fail”,
particularly given the risks inherent in working with nascent technology. With
the informed consent of participants, these workshops were recorded and sub-
sequently transcribed. There were four staff involved in the workshops: two
(the co-authors of this paper) came from a music or music/creative industries
enterprise background, while the other two, David Neilson and Sukhvinder
Hara, both had a background in computer science.
We attempted to adopt a punk (or cypherpunk) pedagogy in the sense
defined by Torrez (2012): a move away from viewing teachers as owners of
knowledge and students as empty receptacles into which knowledge is poured,
towards “reciprocity between teacher and learner” (133). A working definition
of punk pedagogy, Torrez states, would be “a space where the teacher-learner
hierarchy is disavowed and the normative discourse of traditional education
is dissembled” (136). Punk is wholeheartedly opposed, Torrez suggests, to the
idea of experts. Although the lecturers members involved in the workshops did
(hopefully) bring with us a certain amount of useful knowledge, we did not
present ourselves as experts, instead being open about the fact that we were
learning about this constantly developing technology, and its implications, as
82 • Marcus O’Dair and Zuleika Beaven
we went along. The two lecturers from computer science, meanwhile, were
learning about the music industries.
The following exchange demonstrates this sense of co-constructing knowl-
edge in the workshops, with students, music staff and computer science staff all
learning together about potential applications of blockchain technology:
Not all the students involved in our project share a desire to bypass established
channels; though some have shown an interest in re-appropriating the means of
production, others see an ongoing role for labels and performance rights orga-
nizations. Blockchain technology can be seen to embody punk’s move away
from centralized power towards peer production and peer-to-peer networks,
and some of our students saw the technology in such a light: as “really in the
artist’s favour . . . The label would still get a percentage of it but not so much at
all anymore. Ten percent which in the end, probably, is the way it should be”.
Others saw the technology as having the potential to help emerging artists in
the live sector:
One possibility we discussed was working with the Mycelia project spearheaded
by the singer, songwriter and producer Imogen Heap, one of a number of initia-
tives exploring the potential of blockchain technology for the music industries.
Mycelia aims “to empower a fair, sustainable and vibrant music industry
ecosystem involving all online music interaction services” using blockchain
technology (Mycelia for Music n.d.). Heap’s vision for Mycelia includes “mush-
rooms”, or services, that can operate for profit yet still embody the collaborative
ethos of Rough Trade or Crass:
I see the music and the database as the source and the mushrooms as the
services that live above ground . . . As in nature, that which is taxing on
the system withers and dies and that which is giving back thrives.
(Heap 2016)
84 • Marcus O’Dair and Zuleika Beaven
As our project evolved, however, we decided, at least for the initial stages,
not to restrict ourselves to developing Mycelia “mushrooms” which, at the
time of writing, remain a work in progress for Mycelia more broadly. After
four workshops, covering the fundamentals of blockchain technology and
potential applications, we decided to “get our hands dirty” by uploading a
piece of music to a blockchain. We decided, in other words, to “just go and
do it”.
Music lecturer 2: Shall we just try it? Put some whistling on the blockchain,
learn from what goes wrong? Maybe starting with a mush-
room is too complicated—I feel we need to learn from
experience [. . .] I think we have several good ideas but we
should start with something small . . . get our hands dirty
a bit.
Student 1: I’m confused exactly what a mushroom is. I understood
everything about the blockchain the other day but I don’t
understand what a mushroom is.
Student 2: So if you compare it to the moment, the mushroom is the
label?
Music lecturer 1: It could be. But it could also be the album design company.
I think you’d have many . . . Or someone doing label ser-
vices. People you cut in.
Student 1: I got it. And what are you guys wanting to do? Or you don’t
know?
Music lecturer 1: We spoke about several ideas but lots of people were saying
they were confused . . . We don’t know if we’ll develop one
or multiple ones.
Music lecturer 2: We start, have a go? See what goes right and wrong, learn
from that?
Conclusion
By drawing on punk notions of DIY, and changes in enterprise pedagogy since
Gartner, we hope to move away from the notion that entrepreneurs are born
rather than made, with the Romantic corollary that those without such traits
may as well concern themselves with “pure art” (as if such a thing existed).
Instead, we have outlined how we are using a live project to encourage a number
of students—studying Popular Music as well as Music Business & Arts Manage-
ment at Middlesex University—to engage with blockchain technology, as well
as broader questions ranging from securing intellectual property to identifying
new revenue streams for musicians.
Our contention is that all musicians, and thus all music students, can be
entrepreneurial—and that, given the likelihood that our graduates may be self-
employed or employed in small and medium enterprises and micro-businesses,
they may need to be so. Yet this is not to assume that they should be motivated
primarily, even at all, by profit; as with Crass and The Cartel, entrepreneur-
ship may be a means of operating commercially with an alternative ideology.
Punk shows that entrepreneurship can flourish alongside non-corporate, even
overtly anti-corporate, ideals, and that it can be a means of achieving creative
autonomy. Many punks, and punk scholars, may despise the notion of punk as
entrepreneurial. We suggest that this is because of an enduring assumption that
enterprise is fundamentally neoliberal and primarily concerned with profit—
an assumption we have challenged.
We have also shown that, far from being in conflict, entrepreneurship and
management can co-exist with creativity—indeed, they can be seen as an
extension of creative practice. Rather than recognizing a clear division between
creativity and enterprise or management, our project involved both Popular
Music and Music Business and Arts Management students, just as musicians—
Daniel Miller, Jerry Dammers, Crass and others—founded punk and post-punk
record labels. It is notable that there are artists at the forefront of the application
of blockchain technology for music, notably Imogen Heap and the cellist Zoe
Keating.
We hope that our live project will provide real-world experiential learning:
“for enterprise” rather than “about enterprise”. Although there is cause for opti-
mism in the prediction by the World Economic Forum (2015) that 10 percent
of global gross domestic product will be stored on blockchains by 2025, it is
also true that blockchain technology in general still faces significant challenges,
relating both to the technology itself and to its widespread adoption. Yet even if
blockchain technology never fulfils its promise, we believe there is considerable
value in the live project—in promoting transferable skills and encouraging stu-
dents to self-identify as entrepreneurs. Since the workshops are not assessed, we
hope they can offer a safe place in which to “fail”—and, more importantly, that
they can help students conceive of a definition of “success” in entrepreneurship
86 • Marcus O’Dair and Zuleika Beaven
that is not based on profit. Instead of standing aside for “born entrepreneurs”
with particular “traits”, and assuming that entrepreneurship is only for those
driven by financial rewards, the lesson of punk is that anyone can just go and
do it.
Notes
1. McKay (1996, 75) suggests that it was in the post-punk era that the political thrust of punk was
“more keenly developed and deeply explored”.
2. Other cryptocurrencies, such as ether, used on the Ethereum blockchain, have emerged even
more recently. Our focus here is bitcoin, since that is the currency we are using in the initial
stages of our live project, but the project as a whole is blockchain agnostic.
3. Heap (2016, 2) states her intention to create “a fair trading and bustling creative music industry
ecosystem”.
References
Anderson, A. 2005. “Enacted Metaphor: The Theatricality of the Entrepreneurial Process.” Interna-
tional Small Business Journal 23, 6: 587–603.
Anon. 1977. Sideburns. 1 January.
Ball, L. 2003. “Future Directions for Employability Research in the Creative Industries.” Working
Paper. Brighton: LTSN.
Barre, T. J. 2015. “Bitcoin: A Pedagogical Guide for the College Classroom.” Journal of Education
for Business 90, 6: 335–339.
Beaven, Z. 2013. Creative and Entrepreneurial Identity in Nascent Musician Entrepreneurs. Unpub-
lished thesis. Manchester Metropolitan University.
Beaven, Z., and St S. George. 2007. “Embedding Entrepreneurship in the Curriculum: Beyond
Simulation.” Paper presented to the EFDM 37th Annual Enterprise, Innovation and Small
Business Conference at the University of Ljubljana, September 13–14.
Beckman, G. 2007. “ ‘Adventuring’ Arts Entrepreneurship Curricula in Higher Education: An
Examination of Present Efforts, Obstacles and Best Practices.” Journal of Arts Management,
Law and Society 37, 2: 88–111.
Bessant, J., and J. Tidd. 2007. Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Bestley, R. 2014. “Design It Yourself? Punk’s Division of Labour.” Paper presented to Keep It Simple,
Make It Fast! conference. Porto, Portugal. July 8–11.
Bheemaiah, K. 2015. “Why Business Schools Need to Teach About the Blockchain: An Overview
of Cryptocurrency and Blockchain Technology Based Business Initiatives and Models.”
Working Paper. Accessed June 30, 2016. www.weusecoins.com/assets/pdf/library/Why%20
Business%20Schools%20need%20to%20Teach%20Blockchain.pdf.
Bilton, C. 2007. Management and Creativity: From Creative Industries to Creative Management.
Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Brabazon, Tara. 2012. Popular Music: Topics, Trends & Trajectories. London: Sage.
Brown, R. 2004. “Performing Arts Entrepreneurship.” Palatine Higher Education Academy. Accessed
June 30, 2016. www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/performing-arts-entrepreneurship.
pdf.
Burnard, Pamlea. 2012. Musical Creativities in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carey, C., and A. Naudin. 2006. “Enterprise Curriculum for Creative Industries Students.” Educa-
tion + Training 48, 7: 518–531.
Chickering, A. W., and Z. F. Gamson. 1987. “Is This: Seven Principles for Good Practice in Under-
graduate Education.” AAHE Bulletin, 39, 7: 3–6.
Cope, J. 2005. “Researching Entrepreneurship Through Phenomenological Enquiry.” International
Small Business Journal 23, 2: 373–397.
Cope, J., and G. Watts. 2000. “Learning by Doing: An Exploration of Experience, Critical Incidents
and Reflection in Entrepreneurial Learning.” International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behav-
iour and Research 6, 3: 104–124.
Just Go and Do It • 87
Dale, P. 2008. “It Was Easy, It Was Cheap, So What?: Reconsidering the DIY Principle of Punk and
Indie Music.” Popular Music History 3, 2: 171–193.
Dalley, J., and B. Hamilton. 2000. “Knowledge, Context and Learning in the Small Business.” Inter-
national Small Business Journal 18, 3: 51–59.
DCMS. 2006. The Role of Higher and Further Education: Developing Entrepreneurship for the
Creative Industries. Accessed June 30, 2016. http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/7624/2/dcms_enterprise_
and_he.pdf.
Deakins, D., and M. Freel. 1998. “Entrepreneurial Learning and the Growth Process in SMEs.”
Learning Organisation 5, 3: 144–155.
Delmolino, K., M. Arnett, A. Kosba, A. Miller, and E. Shi. 2015. “Step By Step Towards Creating a
Safe Smart Contract: Lessons and Insights From a Cryptocurrency Lab.” IACR Cryptology
E-Print Archive. Accessed June 13, 2016. http://eprint.iacr.org/2015/460.pdf.
Depaepe, F., E. De Corte, and L. Verschaffel. 2010. “Teachers’ Metacognitive and Heuristic
Approaches to Word Problem Solving: Analysis and Impact on Students’ Beliefs and Perfor-
mances.” ZDM 42, 2: 205–218.
Drakopoulou Dodd, S. 2014. “Roots Radical—Place, Power and Practice in Punk Entrepreneur-
ship.” Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal 26, 1–2: 165–205.
Dudanski, R. 2013. Squat City Rocks: Proto-Punk and Beyond.
Dunn, K. 2016. Global Punk: Resistance and Rebellion in Everyday Life. London: Bloomsbury.
Ellmeier, A. 2003. “Cultural Entrepreneurialism: On the Changing Relationship Between the Arts,
Culture and Employments’.” International Journal of Cultural Policy 9, 1: 3–16.
Furness, Zack. 2012. “Attempted Education and Righteous Accusations: An Introduction to Punka-
demics.” In Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness.
Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions.
Gartner, W. B. 1988. “ ‘Who Is an Entrepreneur?’ Is the Wrong Question.” American Journal of Small
Business 13, 1: 11–32.
Gibb, A. 1997. “Small Firms’ Training and Competetiveness: Building on the Small Business as
Learning Organisation.” International Small Business Journal 15, 3: 13–29.
Gordon, A. 2012. “Building Recording Studios Whilst Bradford Burned: DIY Punk Ethics in a Field
of Force.” In Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness.
Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions.
Heap, I. 2016. “What Blockchain Can Do for the Music Industry.” Demos Quarterly 8. http://
quarterly.demos.co.uk/article/issue-8/music-and-blockchain/. Accessed June 30, 2016.
Hebdige, D. 1988 (first published 1979). Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Routledge.
Herbert, R., and A. Link. 2009. A History of Entrepreneurship. London: Routledge.
Hesmondhalgh, D. 1999. “Indie: The Institutional Politics and Aesthetics of a Popular Music
Genre.” Cultural Studies 13, 1: 34–61.
Hindle, K. 2007. “Teaching Entrepreneurship in University: From the Wrong Building to the Right
Philosophy.” In Handbook of Research in Entrepreneurship Education. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar.
Hughes, E. 1993. A Cypherpunk’s Manifesto. Accessed June 13, 2016. www.activism.net/cypherpunk/
manifesto.html.
Jones, C., and A. Penaluna. 2013. “Moving Beyond the Business Plan in Enterprise Education.”
Education and Training 55, 8/9: 804–814.
Katz, J., and R. Green. 2007. Entrepreneurial Small Business. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kim, P., and H. Aldrich. 2005. Social Capital and Entrepreneurship. Boston: Now.
Kolb, D. A. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Laing, Dave. 2015 (first published 1985). One Chord Wonders: Power and Meaning in Punk Rock.
Oakland: PM Press.
Marcus, Greil. 2001 (first published 1989). Lipstick Traces: A Secret History of the Twentieth Century.
London: Faber.
McKay, George. 1996. Senseless Acts of Beauty: Cultures of Resistance Since the Sixties. London:
Verso.
Mougayar, W. 2016. The Business Blockchain: Promise, Practice and Applications of the Next Internet
Technology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Mycelia for Music. No date. Accessed January 27, 2017. http://myceliaformusic.org.
Nakamoto, S. 2008. Bitcoin: A Peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System. Accessed March 21, 2016.
bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.
88 • Marcus O’Dair and Zuleika Beaven
O’Connor, A. 2008. Punk Record Labels and the Struggle for Autonomy: The Emergence Of DIY.
Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
O’Dair, Marcus, Z. Beaven, D. Neilson, P. Pacifico, and R. Osborne. 2016. Music on the Block-
chain Report. Middlesex University. Accessed July 7, 2016. www.mdx.ac.uk/__data/assets/
pdf_file/0026/230696/Music-On-The-Blockchain.pdf.
Ogbor, J. 2000. “Mythicizing and Reification in Entrepreneurial Discourse.” Journal of Management
Studies 35, 5: 605–635.
Ogg, A. 2009. Independence Days: The Story of UK Independent Record Labels. London: Cherry Red.
Penaluna, A., and K. Penaluna. 2009. “Assessing Creativity: Drawing From the Experience of the
UK’s Creative Design Educators.” Education + Training 51, 8/9: 718–732.
Pittaway, L., and J. Cope. 2006. “Simulating Entrepreneurial Learning: Integrating Experiential
Learning and Collaborative Approaches to Learning.” HCGE Working Paper.
Pittaway, L., and J. Cope. 2007. “Simulating Entrepreneurial Learning: Integrating Experiential and
Collaborative Approaches to Learning.” Management Learning 38, 2: 211–233.
Rae, D. 2000. “Understanding Entrepreneurial Learning: A Question of How?” International Jour-
nal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research 6, 3: 145–159.
Rae, D. 2004. “Entrepreneurial Learning: A Practical Model From the Creative Industries.” Educa-
tion + Training 46, 8/9: 492–500.
Rae, D., and M. Carswell. 2000. “Using a Life-story Approach in Researching Entrepreneurial
Learning: The Development of a Conceptual Model and Its Implications in the Design of
Learning Experiences.” Education and Training 42, 4/5: 220–227.
Reddington, Helen. 2007. The Lost Women of Rock Music: Female Musicians of the Punk Era. Alder-
shot: Ashgate.
Rentschler, R. 2002. The Entrepreneurial Arts Leader: Cultural Policy, Change and Reinvention.
St Lucia: University of Queensland Press.
Reynolds, Simon. 2005. Rip It Up and Start Again: Post-Punk 1978–1984. London: Faber.
Savage, J. 2005 (first published 1991). England’s Dreaming: Sex Pistols and Punk Rock. London:
Faber and Faber.
Sheffield School of Architecture. 2013. A Handbook for Live Projects. Accessed June 24, 2016. www.
sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.304156!/file/Live_Projects_Handbook_Med_Single.pdf.
Smith, Gareth D., and Alex Gillett. 2015. “Creativities, Innovation, and Networks in Garage Punk
Rock: A Case Study of the Eruptörs.” Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts 4,
1: 9–24.
Swedberg, R. 2000. “Different Social Perspectives on Entrepreneurship.” In Entrepreneurship, edited
by R. Swedberg. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tan, S. S., and C.K.F. Ng. 2006. “A Problem-Based Learning Approach to Entrepreneurship Educa-
tion.” Education + Training 48, 6: 416–428.
The Theory of Obscurity: A Film About the Residents. Dir. Don Hardy. Film Movement LLC, 2015.
Film.
Torrez, Estrella. 2012. “Punk Pedagogy: Education for Liberation and Love.” In Punkadem-
ics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness. Brooklyn, NY: Minor
Compositions.
Vullings, R., and M. Heleven. 2015. Not Invented Here: Cross-Industry Innovation. Amsterdam: BIS.
Warren, L. 2005. “Images of Entrepreneurship: Still Searching for a Hero?” International Journal of
Entrepreneurship and Innovation 6, 4: 221–229.
World Economic Forum. 2015. Deep Shift: Technology, Tipping Points and Societal Impact Survey
Report. Accessed June 13, 2016. www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC15_Technological_
Tipping_Points_ report_2015.pdf.
Young, D. 2014. Enterprise for All: The Relevance of Enterprise in Education. Accessed June 30, 2016.
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/338749/Enterprise
forAll-lowres-200614.pdf.
Young, R. 2006. Rough Trade. London: Black Dog.
Part II
Punk Teaching and Teaching Punk
7
“Don’t Know Much About History,
and We Don’t Care!” Teaching
Punk Rock History
JOHN DOUGAN
[Johnny Rotten] this malevolent, third generation child of rock ‘n’ roll is
the Sex Pistols’ lead singer. The band play exciting, hard, basic punk rock.
But more than that, John is the elected generalissimo of a new cultural
movement scything through the grass roots disenchantment with the
present state of mainstream rock.
—Caroline Coon 1988: The New Wave Punk Rock Explosion (1977)
I was perhaps the person most surprised when my proposal for a new course
on “The History of Punk Rock” was accepted. Changes in higher education
curricula indicated that this manner of study did not fit in the “workforce
development” model of the new business-oriented, corporate university. My
impetus to create such a course originated in 2004 while teaching a somewhat
similar class for US students at King’s College London titled, “Roots, Rock, Reg-
gae: The Cultural Politics of British Punk Rock and Reggae Music”. Although
I could not prohibit anyone from taking the class, I decided that, prior to reg-
istering, I would meet with students individually to discuss why they were
taking it, what they hoped to learn, and what, if anything, they knew about
punk rock. In all of these pre-registration meetings not one student exhibited
anything less than intense enthusiasm. But, not long after the class began, some
of the enthusiasm began to evaporate. This chapter examines the terrors and
pleasures of teaching a part of rock music history that is deeply felt yet mostly
misunderstood—not just by students but instructors as well. Therein notions of
consensus history and canonicity are undone by the reality that what is defini-
tively “punk” depends on when and where you entered the discussion, and the
postmodernist impulse of valuing a multiplicity of cultural arrangements for
an understanding, albeit uneasy, of punk rock’s inherent opposition to be musi-
cally and culturally circumscribed.
91
92 • John Dougan
“Awesome”
That was the word I most often heard from students when it was announced I
would be offering an upper division elective,1 somewhat problematically titled
“The History of Punk Rock” (the use of the definite article is heavily freighted
with an implied certainty that my approach to the topic would be in some man-
ner definitive—which was not the case). I, too, was excited by the response,
tempered only by the reality that “The History of Punk Rock”, to many of
them, sounded more like fun than real academic work. My methodology was
straightforward and simple: teach a combination lecture/seminar that built its
narrative upon chronological linearity, explored the genre’s development and,
ultimately, would springboard into discussions of cultural geography, race, gen-
der, class, generational conflict, youth subcultures, the business of punk rock
and the roles authenticity plays in the creation and commodification of the
music. All of this would be done by interrogating the complex relationships
among performers, audiences (often one and the same) and the music business.
I divided the course, though not equally, into three parts. First, pre-punk
influences: mid-’60s American garage rock, teds, mods, skinheads, the Brit-
ish Invasion, Glam and Pub Rock, the etymology of the word “punk” as both
adjective and noun, and its use in rock journalism. Part two concentrated on the
so-called first wave of US and UK punk with an admittedly predictable focus
on New York and London, but also the punk diaspora and its rippling effect
in the “faraway towns” (Manchester, Leeds, Cleveland, Minneapolis, among
others). Part three emphasized post-punk and new wave as well as various sec-
ond- (and third-)wave sub-genres (e.g., hardcore, anarcho-punk, no wave, riot
grrrl), concluding with the rise of grunge, the multiplatinum pop punk bands of
the mid- to late ’90s and a rather perfunctory summation on “the state of punk
today”. Resisting an historical path of least resistance by populating this history
solely with musicians, I wanted to introduce my students to a diverse cohort
of participants: garage rock historian and guitarist Lenny Kaye, CBGB’s owner
Hilly Kristal, Rough Trade record shop and label chief Geoff Travis, photogra-
pher Roberta Bayley, Roxy nightclub owner Andy Czezowski, clothing designer
Vivienne Westwood, journalist Caroline Coon, X-Ray Spex singer Poly Styrene,
filmmaker/DJ Don Letts, graphic artist Jamie Reid, Punk magazine co-founder
John Holmstrom, Sniffin’ Glue fanzine publisher Mark Perry and BBC Radio 1
DJ John Peel (among many, many others), all of whom made valuable contri-
butions to the creation of a multivalent punk aesthetic. There was a required
listening component and, along with numerous articles and essays, two primary
texts: Gillian McCain and Legs McNeil’s Please Kill Me and John Robb’s Punk
Rock: An Oral History. Both of these, regrettably, went mostly unread.
Although I was at this time (the late ’00s) in the vernacular of punk, an “old
fart” (I was 21 the year the first Ramones album was released), I possessed the
enthusiasm and naiveté to think such a task could be accomplished over the
course of a semester. Reality, as it so often does, forcefully intruded to remind
Teaching Punk Rock History • 93
me that this would not be the case—there was simply not enough time to
cover adequately all of the material. Worse still, for a number of students the
class was, sadly, no longer awesome. Or as one student sheepishly confided to
me midway through the term, this was simply way more than she wanted to
learn about punk rock. A less generous person might use that last statement
to bang on at length about student apathy; it is, after all, a course in punk rock,
a chance to study something a bit different, of personal interest or curiosity,
not some boring curricular requirement. And while the challenges in teach-
ing this course were, at times, significant, placing the lion’s share of the blame
on the students would be unfair. I would rather begin by admitting my own
pedagogical shortcomings, some of them the result of me assuming I would
be teaching students who were, to varying degrees, as stimulated and curious
about the subject as me. However, before I do that, some context is important.
and have limited, or non-existent, skills. As Jessica A. Schwartz notes, this peda-
gogical model, one that has diminished the role of the humanities and creative
arts, “reward[s] intellectual entrepreneurs, technological innovators and com-
petition, and imagines higher education as a business investment, rather than a
right in which a burgeoning adult can intellectually rebel, lost in an ‘unproduc-
tive’ train of thought” (2015, 146). The result is a widening divide between what
one of my colleagues simplistically refers to as “thinking” classes (what I teach),
and “doing” classes (what he teaches). The latter are reckoned to be more valu-
able than the former because, it is assumed, “doing” classes are mainstays of job
preparedness, whereas “thinking” classes are mere intellectual frivolity. And, as
this class was an elective, some students treated it with similar indifference. After
all, how was a class on punk rock going to help them get a job?
Defining higher education so narrowly and instrumentally places a course
on punk rock (and, by extension, popular music studies as a multi-disciplinary
field that incorporates contributions from the humanities and social sciences)
in a precarious position. No longer can it be assumed to be a necessary part of
a curriculum. It has perhaps always been a struggle encouraging young under-
graduates that an important part of their education is the privilege of intellectual
exploration, of understanding not simply how to do things, but why they do
them, and what impact it will have on the various communities in which they
work and live. Higher education is about understanding history and its rhetoric,
textual analysis, understanding the nuances of race, class, ethnicity and gender
identity—a complex, imbricated world of popular (sometimes radical) art and
commerce. This is a world that, according to Greil Marcus, gives its participants
the opportunity
My fear is that this message is getting lost and, in the future popular music
studies, as part of a comprehensive music industry education, will be marginal-
ized or vanish entirely as the champions of the new “corporate university” wield
more power, and classrooms increasingly become what Henry Giroux calls
“intellectual dead zones” (Giroux 2010, cited in Dines 2015, 134). The social
and political conservatism undergirding neo-liberalism is wary of creative,
progressive, free-thinking students who understand that any country’s popular
music history is a door that opens to a greater, more nuanced understanding
Teaching Punk Rock History • 95
of social, cultural and political realities. At its best, popular music speaks to
the heart of democratic expression—attacking stereotypes, questioning con-
ventional wisdom and challenging authority. These attributes should, I would
argue, belong in every music industry curriculum.
My desire to teach this course, despite my personal left-leaning politics,
was not solely predicated on refuting the neoliberal agenda, nor was it to teach
punk rock history as a means of radicalizing students to take arms against a
sea of troubles—or so I thought. It was not until later that I became cognizant
my approach to the subject matter was, at the very least, implicitly influenced
by proponents of critical pedagogy such as Paulo Freire and Henry Giroux,
and while my familiarity with the former’s seminal treatise Pedagogy of the
Oppressed was hardly definitive, I, too, believed in the intellectual import of
such Freireanisms as the “correct method lies in dialogue”, and “liberating edu-
cation consists in acts of cognition, and transferals of information” (Freire 2000,
67, 79). These aphorisms, I felt, formed a particularly apt pedagogical founda-
tion for teaching punk rock history.
What I neglected to take into consideration was how much a still evolving
punk rock canon would collide headlong with students’ limited knowledge
96 • John Dougan
[B]y the 1990s, dissident youth subcultures were far less able to arouse
moral panics despite an accelerated pace of style innovation. In the 2000s,
subcultural style is worth less because a succession of subcultures has been
commodified in past decades. “Subculture” has become a billion-dollar
industry. Bare skin, odd piercings, and blue jeans are not a source of moral
panics these days: they often help to create new market opportunities.
(Clark 2004, 227)
This is not to cynically argue that the manner in which I was exposed to punk
rock was fundamentally purer or more authentic than the manner in which my
students encountered punk, with the false piety common among older punks
who unfairly dismiss later generations’ “first contact” punk narratives as mere
simulacra (“Oh, your first punk show was Green Day, was it? Well, mine was
the Ramones in 1977!”) (Sofianos et al. 2015, 218). Yet, as a popular music
historian, it was important to me to be mindful of how diverse “first contact”
narratives create history or, more accurately, histories. Simply put, the moment
a person is introduced to and transformed by punk rock, and the media aiding
and abetting said transformation, is where their history begins—their own, pri-
vate “year zero”. John Robb, writing in the book many of my students neglected
to read, notes that this particularization was endemic to punk from its outset:
Everyone decided what punk was for them. There were endless argu-
ments about what we were fighting for, what we should be wearing on
our feet, what we should listen to, and how we were going to change the
fucking world.
(2006, 3)
The course’s leitmotif, therefore, was to disabuse the students of such rigidly
held notions and constructs. I wanted them to not see and hear punk rock as
musically and ideologically static, but rather as capacious, complex and varie-
gated. In the end, I wanted them to be comfortable with the assertion that at
its best, and sometimes its worst, punk rock was, like the title of Don Letts’s
documentary, “an attitude” or, better still, in the words of Minutemen founder,
the late d.boon it was, truly, “whatever we made it to be”.
resided in three categories. The minority of the class fell, somewhat appro-
priately, under a designation I deemed “hardcore”, their brains crammed full
of arcane details, pledging an unwavering allegiance to a pure, yet inchoate,
purity of sound and vision that “remain[s] exclusive only for so long as [it]
remain[s] unknown or inaccessible to the majority” (Muggleton 2002, 64).
As for the others, I grouped them, somewhat uncreatively, into two types:
“sort of know” and “never heard of ”. The former might recognize a song or
two by bands putatively regarded as canonical such as the Ramones, Sex Pis-
tols and the Clash, and maybe a second- or third-generation band like Green
Day, but did not know Joe Strummer from Johnny Rotten or that, at the time,
three of the four original Ramones were dead. I should note that bands that
fell under the designation of pop-punk, like Green Day, were loathed by the
hardcore students; to them, mainstream success negatively marked such bands
as “inauthentic”, or, more commonly, “sell-outs”. As for the latter group, well,
“never heard of ” is a fairly self-evident designation. To them nearly every-
thing was brand new and, as a result, a few of them experienced sustained
epiphanies that quickly turned into intense enthusiasm—always a gratifying
experience (as a teacher I am far less interested in “preaching to the choir” and
far more interested in facilitating and witnessing inspirational discoveries).
Others, however, reacted with near palpable disdain—furrowed brows and
near-audible eye rolling; they were learning too much about punk rock. One
thing was abundantly clear—irrespective of the grouping in which the students
resided, all of them had gaps, some significant, in their knowledge of not just
punk rock but also punk rock’s connective musical and cultural tissue. There
were gaps in my knowledge too—just not as many. The gaps or blind spots in
my knowledge spoke to punk’s heterogeneous nature—that punk’s diversity,
be it sonically, sartorially or politically, was its strength and, as such, made it
virtually impossible for anyone with a knowledge base deemed authoritative to
fail to fully appreciate all of the genre’s participants and nuances.
In order to separate punk from its various influences, I chose a variation on
Nicholas Rombes’s view that
punk was the product of a specific and unique set of artistic, cultural,
and economic forces at work in the US in general and New York City
in particular (though, unlike Rombes, I included the UK in general and
London in particular) in the early to mid-1970s, and that no matter how
far back we reach to look for punk antecedents, it is only in the 1970s
that the movement became fully articulated in music, comics, and the
underground—and eventually mainstream—press.
(2005, 28–29)
With this in mind, I was convinced that, whatever approach I took, my students
needed to learn about the centrality of the Ramones to this narrative—and
100 • John Dougan
clear) cluttering up the world with “dozens and dozens of lousy academic
and pop music histories . . . about them”. Roger Sabin echoes this sentiment
writing that the history of punk and its attendant canon have been organized
around too many
This statement reiterates something Sabin wrote years earlier in the collection
Punk Rock, So What! where he notes that what problematizes the debate over
punk is that, too often, those writing and re-writing the genre’s narrative, in an
effort to reify a consensus history, use fundamentally unsound criteria:
This is not to say that outstanding analyses do not exist; they do. It is
simply that overall the consideration of punk has been hamstrung by two
things: the narrowness of the frame of reference (how many more times
must we hear the Sex Pistols story?), and the pressure to romanticize
(usually equating with seeing punk as a form of nostalgia). The aggregate
result of this has been to solidify our notions of what went on during
punk into a kind of orthodoxy—i.e. whenever we approach a new piece
of writing on the subject, we think we already know what it meant.
(Sabin 1999, 2)
In theory, I see the validity of both sides in this debate. It is easy, and maybe
a little lazy, to fall back on a Ramones-Pistols-Clash holy trinity approach to
punk, foregrounding their contributions instead of, say, Wire, or Crass, or
X-Ray Spex (all of whom are required listening in my class). To Bayard, Sabin
and perhaps to many reading this, the Sex Pistols story is old news, but to a
classroom of Millennials it represents an historical moment that has slipped far
below the horizon of recognition. So when I screen Julian Temple’s The Filth
and the Fury, Don Letts’s slightly sanitized Clash biography From Westway to
the World or Michael Gramaglia and Jim Fields’s fascinating Ramones docu-
mentary End of the Century, the result is overwhelmingly successful, leading to
animated discussions of youth subcultures, punk as moral panic, DIY culture,
the relationship between performer and audience, punk’s cultural intertextual-
ity and, as it relates specifically to the Clash, how the exaggerated militancy of
punk’s musical “year zero” mentality (“No Elvis/Beatles/or the Rolling Stones/
in 1977” barked Joe Strummer in the Clash song “1977”) morphed into the
“anything goes” aesthetic of albums like London Calling or Sandinista.
Postscript
This chapter began as a presentation to the US chapter of the International
Association for the Study of Popular Music in 2011. Since then, I have taught
“The History of Punk Rock” a total of three times—the number it takes, I think,
for one to begin getting comfortable with a course. Some things have changed
for the better; some problematic issues remain, frustratingly, the same. Over-
all, however, the course has improved, as has my ability to reach students and
impress upon them that Marcus’s claim to live as a subject rather than an object
of history is, now, more relevant and important than ever. The last time I taught
the class, a student slipped a note under my office door at the end of the semes-
ter; part of her note read: “The History of Punk Rock won’t land me a dream
106 • John Dougan
salary, but you opened my eyes to music as an art to appreciate. For that you are
worth all three years of tuition it took to get to your class”.
What this says to me is that, ultimately, the binaries born of the neoliberal
discourse in higher education (i.e., thinking vs. doing, skills-based employabil-
ity vs. learning for the sake of learning) are completely and utterly false. That the
rhetoric of the corporate university is used to reinforce such allegedly imperme-
able boundaries is further evidence of the fatuity of this discourse. Increasingly,
efforts to vocationalize degree programs are being met with resistance from
faculty and students (especially those in the fine arts and humanities) who
understand that higher education does not function exclusively as a form of
workforce development. Although the tension between “thinking and doing”
will not disappear, at least not in the short term, this tension can be managed
even as universities create more fast-track undergraduate and graduate degree
programs all the while emphasizing “value education” (Billeaux and Kahle
2015). Clearly, a course on punk rock history stands far outside the parameters
of such academic reductionism (and its attendant anti-intellectualism) but,
because of punk’s inherently oppositional nature, challenges the efforts of neo-
liberal education’s standardized, business-friendly model. As Schwartz notes,
“Moreover, [this] opposition has been a constant, and it has been in pursuit of
what many educational reformers, along the lines of John Dewey, believe is the
ultimate goal of education: democracy” (Schwartz 2015, 150).
So, when I receive such positive affirmation from a student, I can only think:
Punk’s not dead. And now I’m sure.
Notes
1. This denotes a course for third- and fourth-year undergraduate students that counts towards a
required total of upper division hours but does not fulfil any other specific degree requirements.
2. On American television the two most infamous examples of punk as moral panic were on the
popular police drama Chips (1977–1983) and the investigative medical series Quincy M.E. (1976–
1983). The former aired an episode on January 31, 1982, titled “Battle of the Bands” wherein a
punk named Pain thuggishly and violently attempts to sabotage a “battle of the bands” contest
eventually won by a “new wave” Blondie-style band called Snow Pink. A December 1, 1982, epi-
sode of Quincy M.E. titled “Next Stop, Nowhere” featured, yet again, a thuggish, violent punk rock
band called Mayhem (no relation to the Norwegian black metal band). The Internet Movie Data-
base (IMDb) description of the episode reads: “Quincy takes a look into the world of punk rock, a
music that he believes may have contributed to the death of a teenage boy”. Both of these episodes
were doubtlessly influenced by the 1982 low-budget exploitation film Class of 1984, wherein a
new teacher at an inner-city high school wages a violent battle against a gang of punks.
3. In keeping with Shuker’s appraisal of canonizers and their canons, Rolling Stone recently (issue
number 1259, 21 April 2016) contributed to the taxonomical debate with yet another “authori-
tative” list—in this instance, “The 40 Greatest Punk Albums of All Time”. The seven writers
surveyed placed, unsurprisingly, the Ramones debut first, followed by the Clash’s debut, and
Never Mind the Bollocks, Here’s the Sex Pistols third. Of the 40 recordings listed, 17 were from
the 1970s (although I would contend that Funhouse by the Stooges and the first New York Dolls
album should have been elided as pre-punk), 16 from the 1980s, five from the 1990s and only
two released since 2000: 2003’s Fever to Tell by the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, and 2014’s Deep Fantasy by
White Lung.
Teaching Punk Rock History • 107
References
Bannister, Matthew. 2006. “ ‘Loaded’: Indie Guitar Rock, Canonism, White Masculinities.” Popular
Music 25, 1, 77–95.
Bayard, Marc. 1999. “Introduction.” In The Philosophy of Punk: More Than Noise! edited by Craig
O’Hara. San Francisco: AK Press.
Bestley, Russ. 2015. “(I Want Some) Demystification: Deconstructing Punk.” Punk & Post-Punk 4,
2&3, 117–127.
Billeaux, Michael, and Tricia Kahle. 2015. “Resisting the Corporate University.” Jacobin. www.
jacobinmag.com/2015/09/graduate-workers-university-missouri-mizzou-scott-walker-
wisconsin-unions-labor/.
Clark, Dylan. 2004. “The Death and Life of Punk, the Last Subculture.” In Post-Subcultures Reader,
edited by David Muggleton and Rupert Weinzierl. London: Bloomsbury Academic Press.
Dines, Mike. 2015. “Reflections on the Peripheral: Punk, Pedagogy and the Domestication of the
Radical.” Punk & Post-Punk 4, 2&3, 129–140.
Dougan, John. 2001. Two Steps From the Blues: Creating Discourse and Constructing Canons in Blues
Criticism. PhD dissertation, College of William and Mary. Print.
Dougan, John. 2006. “Objects of Desire: Canon Formation in Blues Record Collecting.” Journal of
Popular Music Studies 18, 1, 40–65.
Freire, Paulo. 2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed: 30th Anniversary Edition. London: Bloomsbury Aca-
demic Press.
Furness, Zack (Ed.). 2012. “Introduction: Attempted Education and Righteous Accusations.” In
Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower. Brooklyn, NY, Minor Compositions.
Galgano, Michael J. 2007. “Liberal Learning and the History Major.” American Historical Association.
www.historians.org/jobs-and-professional-development/statements-standards-and-guidelines-
of-the-discipline/liberal-learning-and-the-history-major.
Gilmore, Mikal. 2016. “The Curse of the Ramones: How a Band of Misfits Launched Punk Rock.”
Rolling Stone. April 21.
Giroux, Henry. 2010. Rethinking Education as the Practice of Freedom: Paulo Freire and the Promise
of Critical Pedagogy. www.truth-out.org/archive/item/87456:rethinking-education-as-the-
practice-of-freedom-paulo-freire-and-the-promise-of-critical-pedagogy.
Hebdige, Dick. 1979. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. New York: Methuen.
Jones, Michael. 2017. “Teaching Music Industry in Challenging Times: Addressing the Neoliberal
Employability Agenda in Higher Education at a Time of Music-Industrial Turbulence.” In
The Routledge Research Companion to Popular Music Education, edited by Gareth Dylan
Smith, Zack Moir, Matt Brennan, Shara Rambarran, and Phil Kirkman, 341–354. Abingdon,
Routledge.
Kreuter, Nate. 2014. “Customer Mentality.” Inside Higher Ed, www.insidehighered.com/
views/2014/02/27/essay-critiques-how-student-customer-idea-erodes-key-values-higher-
education.
Marcus, Greil. 1998. Lipstick Traces: A Secret History of the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Marcus, Greil. 2014. The History of Rock ‘n’ Roll in Ten Songs. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Morrow, Guy, Emily Gilfillan, Iqbal Barkat, and Phillis Sakinofsky. 2017. “Popular Music Entre-
preneurship in Higher Education: Facilitating Group Creativity and Spin-off Formation
Through Internship Programmes.” In The Routledge Research Companion to Popular Music
Education, edited by Gareth Dylan Smith, Zack Moir, Matt Brennan, Shara Rambarran, and
Phil Kirkman, 328–340. Abingdon: Routledge.
Muggleton, David. 2002. Inside Subculture: The Postmodern Meaning of Style. London: Bloomsbury
Academic Press.
O’Hagan, Sean. 2016. “Has It Really Come to This—Punk as Heritage Culture?” Guardian.
March 16.
Powers, Ann. 1999. “In Rock’s Canon, Anyone and Everyone.” New York Times. December 26.
Robb, John. 2006. Punk Rock: An Oral History. London: Ebury Press.
Rombes, Nicholas. 2005. Ramones. London and New York: Continuum.
Sabin, Roger (Ed.). 1999. “Introduction.” In Punk Rock: So What! London: Routledge.
Sabin, Roger (Ed.). 2007. “Introduction.” In Hitsville UK: Punk in the Faraway Towns, edited by Russ
Bestley, booklet published in conjunction with the exhibition Hitsville UK at the Millais Gal-
lery, Southampton, England, April 12–May 26, 2007.
Schwartz, Jessica A. 2015. “Listening in Circles: Punk Pedagogy and the Decline of Western Music
Education.” Punk & Post-Punk 4, 2&3, 141–158.
108 • John Dougan
Shuker, Roy. 2016. Understanding Popular Music Culture, 5th edition. London: Routledge.
Sofianos, Lisa, Robin Ryde, and Charlie Waterhouse. 2015. The Truth of Revolution, Brother: An
Exploration of Punk Philosophy, 2nd edition. London: Situation Press.
Straw, Will. 1997. “Sizing up Record Collections: Gender and Connoisseurship in Rock Music Cul-
ture.” In Sexing the Groove: Popular Music and Gender, edited by Sheila Whiteley. New York:
Routledge.
Strummer, Joe, and Mick Jones. 1978. “(White Man) in Hammersmith Palais.” The Clash. Recording.
Thames Television. 1976. Notting Hill Riot. https://youtu.be/MCda7RDY9JM.
8
“Here We Are Now, Educate Us”: The
Punk Attitude, Tenets and Lens of
Student-Driven Learning
RYLAN KAFARA
109
110 • Rylan Kafara
History of Punk was a good match for the ethos behind the collective, which was
creating an informal space to share skills, interests and knowledge. The History
of Punk launched as a course offered by the Edmonton Free School. My own
involvement with the collective was restricted largely to teaching The History of
Punk, as the free school did not thrive for long, with the main organizers moved
on to other cities and projects. The History of Punk, however, continues on as a
free and accessible learning opportunity in Edmonton.
The course provides a way for like-minded people within and outside of the
academy to examine issues such as inequality, racism and environmentalism
through punk music, culture and activism. Its aim is to create opportunities
for critical thinking, and then share this approach within Edmonton’s local
punk community and on social media. Evoking and enacting the punk atti-
tude, and through what I call the “punk lens” in teaching the course, my hope
is to circumvent or at least mitigate the tendency towards a banking system
of education, a hierarchal form of learning based on the assumption that the
teacher holds all the knowledge, which they “deposit” in the student like a bank
transaction (Freire 2000). Such a vision of education can be identified within
official, increasingly normative understandings of the university’s purpose,
which focus on its role in fulfilling the needs of employers and business, and
thus upholding a nation’s prowess in the global economy. Instead of treating
learning like financial planning, The History of Punk seeks to open people up to
inquisitiveness, different perspectives and the importance of their own ideas.
This is predicated on Freire’s view of learning. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed,
Freire outlined the role of education in reacting against conformity, and in tak-
ing thoughtful action against oppression. Aspects of the punk movement were
driven by creativity and a rejection of the status quo (Rombes 2009), and as such
this drive within punk paralleled Freire’s outlook. Indeed, the punk attitude
(and lens) and Freire’s perspectives on education share a similar framework for
thinking critically and engaging with the world. This view is the foundation for
The History of Punk.
When Freire wrote his work, there were many barriers facing those whose
interest in learning did not match societal qualifications for access to education.
This remains the case today. Cost, admission requirements, age and personal
challenges can all present barriers to participating in formal education settings.
The History of Punk offers a means of resistance to these educational barri-
ers. Crucially, it also offers opportunities for learning outside of mainstream
institutions. Neoliberal policies and concurrent societal expectations demean
the value of the humanities and social sciences while placing importance on
preparation for joining the professional workforce upon graduation (Collini
2012). Higher education becomes a vocational training school for a society that
has long viewed university as a gateway to the middle and upper classes (Geiger
2015). As such, students may be required to take courses related to profession-
alization rather than critical thinking. This results in a system where, as Giroux
“Here We Are Now, Educate Us” • 111
reaction against conformity. Freire was writing for the radical, who, rather than
suffering from “an absence of doubt” like the sectarian, was someone “not afraid
to meet the people or to enter into a dialogue with them” (Freire 2000, 39). This
student was not afraid to do exactly that, and The History of Punk provided him
with an additional forum for doing so.
In Richard Shaull’s foreword to Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, he
finished by outlining how
Conformity to the system creates large cohorts influenced by social and educa-
tional conditioning, which the aforementioned electrical engineer experienced
to his detriment. The History of Punk aims to do the opposite, allowing people
the opportunity to engage with issues in a group learning setting where nobody
has to agree.
This chapter explains how the pedagogical approach of a student-driven,
non-hierarchical course was developed through the tenets and the histori-
ography of, and an attitude related to, punk. It must be acknowledged that
“punk” is a nebulous term, and this piece primarily engages with punk’s North
American manifestations. Although Freire did not originally write in relation
to a North American context, his conversations with Highlander Folk School
cofounder Myles Horton demonstrated the applicability of Freire’s ideas (Bell
et al. 1990). This chapter shows that taking professional knowledge from vari-
ous disciplines and critical perspectives, and engaging with them in a risk-free
learning environment, allows for the positive exchange of ideas between stu-
dents and teachers. Additionally, this chapter discusses the use of social media
platforms and community radio in making the ideas and information of the
class as accessible as possible. Finally, it argues that utilizing a punk framework
as the foundation for this engagement creates a form of conscientizacao helping
to resist neoliberalism’s influence on education.
began (Harvey 2005). The United States’ economic and industrial might weak-
ened with the rise of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
(OPEC), a group of countries controlling a significant amount of the world’s oil
reserves and production. Additionally, the US auto industry declined, the coun-
try was defeated in the Vietnam War and US President Nixon resigned. This
all shook the country’s myth of exceptionalism—that it was a City on the Hill,
setting an example for the rest of the world. As Godfrey Hodgson explained,
“the balance of power was shifting, from working Americans to their corporate
masters, from ordinary Americans to the very rich, and from the center Left to
the far Right” (Hodgson 2009, xi). Concurrently, the participants of the 1960s
counterculture became major consumers of mainstream culture. Popular musi-
cians lived lifestyles far removed from the everyday, consumers embraced the
music of people who played the perfect guitar solo, flew across the world in pri-
vate planes and had legions of fans fawning at their every move. In other words,
fans were connecting to a fantasy allowing them to escape their reality. Just as
punk resisted the professionalization and “celebritization” of the music industry,
The History of Punk aims to take the same approach of amateurism in resisting
the credentialism of formal education.
By the mid-1970s, in the midst of the embrace of escapism, bands such
as Talking Heads, the Ramones, the Patti Smith Group and Television had
converged on New York City music venue, CBGB. CBGB stood for “Coun-
try, Bluegrass, Blues, and Other Music for Uplifting Gormandizers” (McNeil
and McCain 1996). CBGB is where punk was nurtured initially. Richard Hell,
a member of the band Television, believed that a vital element of rock and
roll (for the term punk was yet to emerge as a definitional category) was “the
knowledge you invent yourself ” Heylin 2008, 18). It was his band that con-
vinced CBGB owner Hilly Kristal to let early punks perform there (McNeil
and McCain 1996). According to Lenny Kaye from the Patti Smith Group,
“each of the bands at CBGB was like a little idea” (Heylin 2008, 12). In response
to the excesses of mainstream culture, some musicians and artists adopted
a style of musical performance stressing passion over talent as a reactionary
counterpoint to ostentatiously virtuosic performance norms that had become
dominant (Rombes 2009). “Punk” categorized many different artists that were
diverse musically, yet were each forged in conscious opposition to the main-
stream. As such, punks were bound by the same reactionary ethos in which an
attitude of creativity and participation was established.
As for who was participating, assumptions can be made for the punk com-
munity being composed entirely of straight white men and women. Certainly,
any examination of the CBGB scene needs to include Lester Bangs’s “White
Noise Supremacists” (Bangs 1979). Thankfully, however, as the punk network
developed in North America into the 1980s and beyond, the milieu became
much more diverse. The establishment of a space for those who felt rejected
by mainstream society resulted in a mélange of races, voices, messages, out-
looks and ideas (Duncombe 1997; Duncombe and Tremblay 2011). Often, the
114 • Rylan Kafara
Here we were black homeboys checking out Rock & Roll and vice versa.
It’s all just music now, and that’s the way it’s supposed to be, all about
open-mindness. There was a lot of separatism back in the day. By check-
ing each other’s cultures out, barriers and stereotypes are broken down.
And that’s what we need.
(Blush 2001, 117)
That inquisitiveness and inclusiveness neither came easily then, nor today. It is
an ongoing process that requires constant critical thinking and self-awareness.
It also needs input from others, especially those who do not share your views,
or are willing to question them. Historically, not everyone in the punk commu-
nity got along. Not everyone had the same opportunities, or was treated fairly.
While women often participated, it was not until the Riot Grrrl scene formed
in the 1990s that women achieved a somewhat equal footing to men, or at
least carved out a scene of their own. Even then, the shift only applied to a few
women, with the majority still excluded (for struggles of women in the UK, see
Reddington 2012; for California female punks, see Gonzales 2016). However,
it is important to maintain a critical consciousness in engaging with society’s
contradictions, both in the mainstream and the underground. Maintaining this
is key to how The History of Punk tries to address the banking system of educa-
tion, social issues and the narrowing of accessibility to information and ideas in
media. This resistance was guided by punk tenets, as outlined by Craig O’Hara
(1999). He traced the development of punk philosophy and how it extends out-
side of music. He highlighted:
To those “involved” in the scene, (more than going to gigs and purchasing
records) punk becomes something else and something more. It becomes
“Here We Are Now, Educate Us” • 115
a community and a real avenue for shaping ideas and making changes
both personal and in the world.
(O’Hara 1999, 12)
engage through their own cultural and local lens (Söderman 2011). As such,
The History of Punk participants designed their own learning activities. One
student created a video on environmental protest and punk. Another student
responded to a discussion on the relationship between folk and punk musics by
drawing on her scientific knowledge of divergent and convergent evolution. In
both cases, by using other skills, interests and knowledge, The History of Punk
community as a whole broadened its understanding of myriad issues and ideas.
Reaching out to people who were interested in learning and sharing their
own knowledge was essential in widening participation. Advertising was done
through word of mouth, email and social media. When it came to planning
classes, input from students was vital. The course was designed to be collabora-
tive in both content and form, and non-hierarchical. For instance, the flow of
each class depended on the class’s knowledge of the issue under discussion. For
example, a lesson might commence with an introductory background lecture
to ensure a shared level of knowledge. In addition, the location of each class
was discussed. Again, depending on the topic, a classroom was often ideal for
a lecture or sessions requiring the use of technology. Alternatively, many fully
seminar-based classes were held as a learning circle outside.
While collaboration was essential from the beginning, the first several
classes were grounded in my research areas. This meant the classes explored
issues and music communities from North America and secondarily from
Eastern Europe during the Cold War. After the first semester, however, the
course became much more student-driven. The class itself, then, was also ama-
teur, but that was part of the point. Indeed, it was a work in progress, based on
shared interest, which itself was a process of learning. This idea of amateur-
ism, of course, is very much in the spirit of the folkbildning tradition and the
Highlander Folk School.
Central to the formation of the course was punk’s do-it-yourself (DIY) ethic
(Dale 2012), as mentioned earlier, which sought to overcome barriers to activity
and participation in culture through the creation of alternative spaces and chan-
nels. Since mainstream music institutions, such as successful venues, record
labels, magazines and radio stations, excluded punk, participants created their
own, developing a network that built a translocal milieu. It was centered on
the music originating in each local area, and when linked together, created a
medium for alternative voices that better embodied their grievances, identities
and lifestyles. Shows were held at community halls, or venues desperate for
business. Bands started their own labels, and fanzines highlighted local scenes
(see Azerrad 2001). Radio shows like Maximum Rocknroll hit the airwaves as
well. It was transmitted throughout the punk network, including being broad-
cast on Edmonton’s community and University of Alberta campus FM radio
station, CJSR 88.5, in the early 1980s. In the DIY spirit, on September 22, 2014,
The History of Punk became a weekly program on CJSR (an independent radio
station based in Edmonton), which widened participation and accessibility.
“Here We Are Now, Educate Us” • 117
Some segments mirrored specific classes, while others included course par-
ticipants and local bands as guest hosts, giving them the opportunity to curate
radio lectures on topics of interest. Not only did participants create lectures,
they gained first-hand experience in community radio and broadcasting. The
reasoning behind this is simple: if the DIY ethic could resonate throughout so
many facets of the music industry, why could it not do the same in education?
Not restricting participation based upon age was important too. All-age
venues increased access for youth in punk communities. Adopting this in The
History of Punk meant anyone could attend class, regardless of age. For stu-
dents familiar with the traditional classroom setting (students all the same
age, one teacher in a role of authority), this offered an alternative learning
environment. This “horizontal” approach towards age also extended to socio-
economic status. Making The History of Punk completely free meant anyone
could attend. Not only did students of all ages participate, but so did mar-
ginalized members of the community (unemployed, homeless, transgender
and people with mental wellness challenges). Each student came to class with
knowledge, but by engaging with different ideas, being open to questioning
beliefs or even listening to bands they had earlier dismissed, everyone devel-
oped their critical consciousness. Thus, each time participants engaged with
someone of a different age, opinion or value system, and questioned their
own beliefs in connection, they were doing what Freire argued was essential
to “transform concrete, objective reality” (Freire 2000, 39). In other words,
participants used learning as subversion against oppression, and as an aid in
people’s freedom. Furthermore, by creating a punk framework as an approach
to this learning, and utilizing ethics such as making The History of Punk all-
ages and all-welcome, the course was inherently in opposition to the learning
structure that brings the next generation of society into conformity with and
through the traditional system.
In The Philosophy of Punk, O’Hara channeled Freire in his explanation of
punk’s resistance to hegemony. As he outlined,
punk questions authority, not only looking and sounding different, but
by questioning prevailing modes of thought. The nonconformist does
not rely on others to determine his or her own reality. The questioning of
conformity involves the questioning of authority as well.
(O’Hara 1999, 28)
Figure 8.1 Paula Guerra lecturing at The History of Punk class on 8 February 2017
in Edmonton
of the time.1 For example, Phil Ochs’s “Here’s to the State of Mississippi” and
Rellik’s “Idle No More” both allow listeners to create meaning and learn about
past and contemporary issues. This is not done by only reflecting meaning from
lyrics, or by stopping analysis at what was explicitly sung. Instead, as Stuart Hall
argued when he explained the “constructionist approach”, “it is not the material
world which conveys meaning: it is the language system or whatever system we
are using to represent our concepts” (Hall 1997, 25). For instance, Rellik’s “Idle
No More” enables the listener to hear an Edmonton musician singing about
an Indigenous protest movement, from the perspective of one participant in a
particular place.
Listening creates an opportunity to construct meaning of the social, cul-
tural and political contexts of the music. Engaging with music this way further
exposes listeners to alternative history narratives, and wrestle with perspectives
outside mainstream curricula. While not the only example, punk is a perfect
example of this. It can be a point of engagement with different issues, places
and eras. This engagement shapes punk pedagogy, and highlights how lyrics
address important issues (Robertson et al. 2015). Punk songs can do this, for
example the Clash’s “Career Opportunities” from its 1977 self-titled album
highlighted the economic prospects and feelings of youth in England at the
time. The band then changed the lyrics “I don’t wanna go fighting in the tropical
heat” to “I don’t wanna die fighting in the Falklands strait” when performing the
song in 1982 during the Falklands conflict. Again, this emphasizes a concern
of the time. In this case, it was about going to fight and die in a war with which
the Clash disagreed.
Though the course utilizes music from the past to examine issues, it also
engages with contemporary music first-hand. For example, on the August 8,
2016, edition of the radio show, Josh Gibson from Edmonton punk band A
New Rhetoric performed “The Origin Spirit and Intent”, a song that highlights
Indigenous issues in Canada. Listeners heard the song, as well as thoughts from
its writer on what it meant and why the concerns it raised were important.
Then, on September 28, 2016, Gibson, a The History of Punk course partici-
pant, performed the song again in class and discussed why he wrote it, and why
Indigenous history and culture needed to be a stronger part of the Canadian
education system. Gibson was joined by an Indigenous member of the Edmon-
ton punk band Paroxysm, who also spoke on the same issue. Before the class
was held, links to readings and music were posted online so participants were
prepared to discuss the topic (see class description, readings and playlist in the
appendix).
Reading lists for many of the classes included primary sources, such as
the Berkeley, California–based fanzine Maximum Rocknroll, which encour-
aged punks from different local scenes to write reports for the fanzine. In the
November 1986 edition of Maximum Rocknroll, for instance, the “Czechoslova-
kian Scene Report” revealed challenges facing the punk community in Prague.
120 • Rylan Kafara
It was written by Lük Haas, who was visiting Prague from France (Haas gave an
address in France for correspondence with Maximum Rocknroll readers, as well
as contact information for punks he met in Prague). The narrative Haas gave
was a bleak one; those in the Prague punk community faced a divided scene
declining in membership, to an estimate of roughly 200. Haas also highlighted
police brutality, mandatory military service and the inability of Czech punks to
leave the country:
There are a lot of problems with the YB (General Security Police), who
systematically control the punks, prohibiting concerts, and acting bru-
tal (knocking them down, tearing out earrings, shaving hair, etc.) Punks
are driven to the police station, beaten, photographed, card indexed, and
sometimes even sent to psychiatric hospitals. Czech punks are very pes-
simistic and have nothing to hope for in this country.
(Haas 1986)
For people studying the scene report 30 years later, Haas’s scene report offers
a glimpse into a specific community at a certain time and from a particular
perspective. For a nuanced understanding of topics such as the Prague punk
community in the mid-1980s, wider subjects such as punk in Eastern Europe
during the Cold War, or youth culture in general, such glimpses have been
an essential part of The History of Punk since its inception. It is also useful to
examine academic punk sources from particular periods. Alastair Gordon’s
recent monograph, Crass Reflections (2016), is a perfect example. It reveals
what punk-related research was like before the internet, when information
was not as accessible. Such a source is useful for comparisons to research argu-
ments and methodology today, and for adding another historiographical layer
to the understanding of how punk developed over time (Gordon 2016).
Alongside studying earlier punk music and engaging with contemporary
songs first-hand, The History of Punk created its own sources as well. Three
fanzines have been published to date. The first two mirrored specific class top-
ics, and the third, published in June 2016, was an exercise in collaboration.
The May 2016 edition of the class was organized as a fanzine workshop, with
participants working together to create the fanzine. Locally focused, it included
articles, interviews, art and a script from an edition of the radio show. In this
respect, The History of Punk not only draws from the historiography of global
punk, but participates in its writing.
Punk songs and sources are used to examine wider issues. For instance, the
second The History of Punk class, held on May 19, 2012, examined the Van-
couver punk scene in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The characteristics of the
Canadian city’s music community were discussed, from local bands, venues
and fanzines to record labels, stores and distribution networks. From there, we
looked at how these elements helped develop the regional scene and benefitted
“Here We Are Now, Educate Us” • 121
Figure 8.2 Two members of Jr. Gone Wild, Dove Brown (left) and Mike McDonald
about their first show or record review in a fanzine posted on The History of
Punk Twitter page. After posting Los Angeles fanzine Flipside’s review of the Off-
spring’s debut single, a member of the band, Kevin “Noodles” Wasserman, shared
the post, relating, “that’s one of the only reviews we can quote almost verbatim.
Thanks for posting that.—N”. By posting such material, an online archive of old
fanzines, photos and other information is now digital. For the people who access
it, they may be seeing it for the first time in decades, or for the very first time. For
example, an Edmonton scene report from November 1985 written by SNFU’s
Kendall “Mr. Chi Pig” Chinn was scanned and posted online. One comment on
Facebook read, “thanks for letting me re-read this from 30 years ago. I still listen
to [1980s Edmonton punk band] Down Syndrome’s 7”.
Additionally, The History of Punk often has a local focus compared and
contrasted to other geographical locations, times, issues and events. This, as
Giroux pointed out in “Lessons to be Learned”, was also vital for Freire’s form
of pedagogy (Giroux 2010). A more contemporary and local pedagogical
example is Chris Anderson’s article on changes he made to course assign-
ments. A professor in the Native Studies faculty at the University of Alberta,
Anderson argues that engaging students in discourse analysis by including
local and primary sources in research essays gives them stronger critical
thinking skills. By researching local examples of issues, students have a bet-
ter understanding of concepts such as white privilege and racism (Anderson
2012). The History of Punk addressed wider issues through the local as well.
For instance, we held a class on Idle No More during the height of the move-
ment. Along with several students who consistently attend, the topic drew
new participants who were interested in engaging with the movement in an
educational context. The class was organized as a sharing circle, and everyone
took turns talking about Idle No More from their respective perspectives. It
was placed in the wider lineage of protest movements and activism in other
grassroots communities.
The class also helped participants frame contemporary events in their historical
context. On the eve of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s visit to Edmon-
ton in March 2014, a class was held to give students the opportunity to engage with
the legacy of Canada’s Indian Residential School System. Not only did it expose
students to the country’s dark colonial past, it prepared them to participate in an
event addressing the consequences of that history. This was another goal of the
course: to utilize punk as an approach or strategy for learning about other events,
issues and ideas. Punk offers a critical pedagogical lens to examine issues. If you
can find platforms offering points of engagement, it may lead people to pursue
further learning in topics related to punk. It is important to take these local
contexts—whether Alberta or Indonesia—and think about how they relate to
forms of power and systems of oppression.
With the ability to access more information than ever before, it is also argu-
ably easier to limit sources through which people make sense of the world.
Rapid technological development, coupled with a concentration of media out-
lets, is redefining conventional journalism. Bias in the news, on blogs and on
social media makes closing one’s mind off to dissenting opinion easier. People
can have their existing beliefs and assumptions reinforced by others who per-
ceive things in the same way. Critical thinking, challenging viewpoints and
knowledge production are replaced by “alternative facts” in our post-truth era
(Frankfurt 2005; Graham 2017). In response, The History of Punk aims to raise
critical consciousness and to challenge steadfast beliefs. It is important for peo-
ple to move out of their educational comfort zone and enable themselves to
think about issues differently. This may mean a topic falls outside of the status
quo or the conventional narrative, but the punk attitude, at its foundation,
exists to react to exactly that.
124 • Rylan Kafara
Figure 8.3 Poster by The History of Punk participant Paul “Spyder” Yardley Jones
“Here We Are Now, Educate Us” • 125
Note
1. Idle No More is a resurgence of Indigenous culture and activism. Started in December 2012,
it is a grassroots movement addressing ongoing colonialism in Canada and around the world
(Klein 2013).
References
Allsup, Randall. 2015. “The Eclipse of a Higher Education or Problems Preparing Artists in a Mer-
chantile World.” Music Education Research 17, 3: 251–261.
Anderson, Chris. 2012. “Critical Studies in the Classroom: Exploring ‘The Local’ Using Primary
Evidence.” International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies 4, 1: 67–78.
Azerrad, Michael. 2001. Our Band Could Be Your Life: Scenes From the Indie Underground 1981–
1991. New York: Little, Brown.
Bangs, Lester. 1979. “The White Noise Supremacists.” Village Voice. April 30.
Bell, Brenda, John Gaventa, and John Peters (Eds.). 1990. We Make the Road by Walking: Conversa-
tions on Education and Social Change. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Bennett, Andy, and Richard A. Peterson (Eds.). 2004. Music Scenes: Local, Translocal, and Virtual.
Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
Blush, Steven. 2001. American Hardcore: A Tribal History. Los Angeles: Feral House.
Collini, Stefan. 2012. What Are Universities For? London: Penguin Books.
126 • Rylan Kafara
Dale, Pete. 2012. Anyone Can Do It: Empowerment, Tradition and the Punk Underground. Farnham:
Ashgate.
Duncombe, Stephen. 1997. Notes From the Underground: Zines and the Politics of Alternative Cul-
ture. London: Verso.
Duncombe, Stephen, and Maxwell Tremblay (Eds.). 2011. White Riot: Punk Rock and the Politics
of Race. London: Verso.
Foucault, Michel. 1977. Disipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage.
Frankfurt, Henry G. 2005. On Bullshit. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Freire, Paulo. 2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed 30th Anniversary Edition, Trans. Myra Bergman
Ramos. New York City: Bloomsbury.
Geiger, Roger L. 2015. The History of American Higher Education: Learning and Culture From the
Founding to World War II. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Giroux, Henry A. 2006. On Critical Pedagogy. London: Bloomsbury.
Giroux, Henry A. 2010. “Lessons to Be Learned From Paulo Freire as Education Is Being Taken
Over by the Mega Rich.” Truthout.org.
Giroux, Henry A. 2014. Neo-Liberalism’s War on Higher Education. Toronto: Between the Lines.
Gonzales, Michelle Cruz. 2016. The Spitboy Rule: Tales of an Xicana in a Female Punk Band. Oak-
land: PM Press.
Gordon, Alastair. 2016. Crass Reflections. Portsmouth: Itchy Monkey Press.
Graham, David A. 2017. “Trump’s Baseless Claim That the Media Covers Up Terror Attacks.” Atlan-
tic. February 6, 2017.
Hall, Stuart (Ed.). 1997. Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. London:
Sage.
Harvey, David. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haas, Lük. 1986. “Czechoslovakia Scene Report.” Maximum Rocknroll #42, Berkeley.
Heylin, Clinton. 2008. Babylon’s Burning: From Punk to Grunge. New York: Penguin.
Hodgson, Godfrey. 2009. The Myth of American Exceptionalism. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press.
Keithley, Joe. 2011. Telephone Interview.
Klein, Naomi. 2013. “Dancing the World Into Being: A Conversation With Idle No More’s Leanne
Simpson.” YES! Magazine. March 5.
Malott, Curry, and Milagros Peña. 2004. Punk Rockers’ Revolution: A Pedagogy of Race, Class, and
Gender. New York: Peter Lang.
Marcus, Greil. 1989. Lipstick Traces: A Secret History of the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
McNeil, Legs, and Gillian McCain. 1996. Please Kill Me: The Uncensored Oral History of Punk. New
York: Groove Press.
McPherson, Gary E., and Graham F. Welch (Eds.). 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Music Education.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
O’Hara, Craig. 1999. The Philosophy of Punk: More Than Noise. San Francisco: AK Press.
Reddington, Helen. 2012. The Lost Women of Rock Music: Female Musicians of the Punk Era. Shef-
field: Equinox.
Robertson, Scott, Martha Diaz, Priya Parmar, and Anthony J. Nocella. 2015. Rebel Music: Resistance
Through Hip Hop and Punk. Charlotte: Information Age.
Rombes, Nicholas. 2009. A Cultural Dictionary of Punk, 1974–1982. New York: Continuum Inter-
national.
Sassen, Saskia. 2014. Expulsions: Brutality and Complexity in the Global Economy. Cambridge, MA:
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Savage, Jon. 2001. England’s Dreaming: Anarchy, Sex Pistols, Punk Rock, and Beyond. New York:
St. Martin’s Griffin.
Webb, Peter. 2007. Exploring the Networked Worlds of Popular Music: Milieu Cultures. New York:
Routledge.
Wright, Ruth (Ed.). 2010. Sociology and Music Education. Farnham: Ashgate.
“Here We Are Now, Educate Us” • 127
Appendix
The History of Punk Wednesday September 28, 2016 7:30 PM, FREE
Humanities 2–12, The University of Alberta, All-Ages, All-Welcome, Vegan
snacks
Readings
“The Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action”
“Dancing the World into Being: A Conversation with Idle No More’s Leanne
Simpson”
“Gord Downie to play Secret Path shows to honour Chanie Wenjack”
“Dakota Access Pipeline Company Attacks Native American Protesters with
Dogs & Pepper Spray”
Playlist
Paroxysm—“Open Wounds Demo”
A New Rhetoric—“Decolonize Now” (Live on CJSR)
A New Rhetoric—“The Origin Spirit and Intent”
A Tribe Called Red—“Woodcarver”
Neil Young—“Indian Giver”
9
Laughing All the Way to the Stage:
Pedagogies of Comedic Dissidence
in Punk and Hip-Hop
JESSICA A. SCHWARTZ AND SCOTT ROBERTSON
128
Laughing All the Way to the Stage • 129
As John Dewey (1951) and others have noted, the political rationale for state-
funded public education is precisely to achieve and perpetuate the normative
ideology and power structures of society by instilling in youth a commitment
to civil participation and responsible social mores (Allsup 2016; Giroux 1989;
Illich 1978). However, the US education system (among others) maintains sys-
temic and structural inequalities with the continued use of biased measures
such as standardized testing and increased privatization (Allsup 2015; Au 2009).
Moreover, school spaces have become increasingly militarized and securitized,
with metal detectors greeting students before teachers, and are often spaces of
surveillance (Giroux 2012, 2016; Hebert 2015; Nocella 2014). Although poli-
cies vary between US states, science and mathematics are privileged over the
arts and humanities nationwide. Coupled by increasing fears that education
no longer leads to better jobs, individual teachers and students face demands
to make subject material matter. The disparate approach to lesson content that
makes some students feel distant from their education has been a long-stand-
ing problem. Education scholar Neil Postman noted this crisis in education
emerging in the 1960s, which he addressed in Teaching as a Subversive Activity
(1969). Two years later in 1971, he co-wrote with Charles Weingartner A Soft
Revolution; in this follow-up volume, he aimed to empower youth to take con-
trol of their education in the classroom. However, broader systemic failures, in
which educational institutions participate as component parts of a society that
continues to privilege the average (white, straight, able-bodied, 35-year-old)
male, have created the conditions, sustained by neoliberal policies, in which
students find their voices outside the classroom. Punk and hip-hop collectives
offer critical, artistic approaches to the material of everyday life that can seem
cordoned off by the schooling grammar of discrete subject matter (Niknafs and
Przybylski 2017).
Dewar MacLeod (2010) notes the importance of situating the emergence of
punk amid the growth of neoliberalism. Neoliberal policies loosen restrictions
on government interventions and social welfare programs. Individuals, rather
than societies, are tasked with their own mobility, which creates more diffi-
culties for non-wealthy, non-privileged or “normal” persons. We utilize quotes
around “normal” because students during the neoliberalization of Ameri-
can education in the 1970s and 1980s produced specific notions of “normal”
(normative) behavior and their corollaries in disruptive behaviours that were
deemed to require remedial and disciplinary measures (Adams 2008). Many
students often did not have alternative outlets, since after-school programs
were increasingly privatized and thus out of reach for many. MacLeod discusses
the trend under Reagan of increasing two-parent incomes and the crisis of mas-
culinity that emerged around the “ideal” authority figure of President Ronald
Reagan, that many youth rejected because they did not identify with the presi-
dent’s presentation of patriarchal masculinity. With family units and schools
shifting in composition and ideological orientation, students who felt isolated
gravitated towards each other and began to collectivize, forming scenes and
132 • Jessica A. Schwartz and Scott Robertson
bands wherein disenfranchised youth could work through their energy, artistic
capacities and critical insight, unheard by those in authority.
Hip-hop developed out of a need to be heard amid deindustrialization
and neoliberal polices that upheld racialized spaces of impoverishment (Rose
1994). To counter police brutality, poverty and unequal life chances in a US
capitalist democracy that promised otherwise, African American communi-
ties were forced to create their own spaces in which mobility was possible.
Tricia Rose (1994), Adam Krims (2000) and Murray Forman (2002) explain
the importance of place, identity and expressive dissent in hip-hop, which,
like punk, became collectivized at parties and on the streets. Music, fashion,
dancing and street art (graffiti) were the outer signifiers of cultural participa-
tion along with a DIY ethos (similar to that found in punk) that resisted the
constraints of an increasingly specialized, racist society (Shaiken 1977; Bha-
gat 1990). DIY demands an alternative to specialization that favours collective
discussion and sharing rather than formal education and schooling. Here, stu-
dents of the streets examine and understand social problems, struggles and
the beauty of life, and render their perceptions in art. Humour became a tool,
a filter to challenge social constructs by making those rules and regulations
more fluid, as seen with Flavor Flav’s clock necklace (discussed further, below).
Flav presents an artful challenge to temporal control, and acquisition of the
tools of the “ignorant master”—the schoolyard bell, the clock in front of the
classroom and the grammar of 45-minute subject-matter delivery. Flav speaks
to this irreverent approach to authoritative temporal divisions—“I always say,
I’m clockin’, I’m clockin’. “That means I’m paying attention, so you can’t get fast
on me because I know what time it is” (Johnson 2013).
While examples of humour in music abound, we emphasize how, through
collectivization in opposition to neoliberal inculcation at educational insti-
tutions in the 1970s and 1980s, in particular in major deindustrialized urban
centers, punk and hip-hop wielded comedy as a defiant learning tool, to
which young people accorded pedagogic authority (Bourdieu and Passe-
ron 1977). Unlike top-down, mass media–orientated humour—for instance
Weird Al Yankovic and the movie This Is Spinal Tap (Ellis 2009)—punk
and hip-hop culture members were connected to the production and con-
sumption of their art. Younger and newer participants in the scenes could
learn directly and indirectly from more established community members, in
contrast to the factory-manufactured, disposable pop culture seen today in
hyper-commercialized pop star “reality” shows like American Idol and The
X-Factor. These shows’ relative success is contrasted by sustained reverence
for punk and hip-hop legends such as Afrika Bambaataa and Alice Bag who
continue to play shows and parties and to volunteer. There is a collective giv-
ing back to the communities whence these performers came, and in which
communities these artists felt transformed and helped others to transform
themselves. The collective nature of punk and hip-hop enables younger
Laughing All the Way to the Stage • 133
the mid-1980s when hardcore punk and politically nuanced rap became codi-
fied, entering into the mainstream.
In addition to trends in popular culture that reflect mainstream objectifica-
tion of females, music outside the classroom often reinforces male-centered
educational norms and plays into pedagogical biases of what it means to “have a
voice” and “be expressive” (Bannister 2006; Gilman 1898; Green 1997; McClary
1991; Smith 2015). Most crucially for our argument, the bands’ male-centered
notions of humour and resistance are reproduced societally, and as such, nor-
malize the intersections of race, gender and class that lead to the formation of
judgments around how comedic dissidence sounds. In other words, when tak-
ing into account timbre, tone, associations with sex/race/age, and other markers
of othering (Bradley 2012, 2015), what does a joke sound like? Ultimately, we
argue for a robust critical engagement with punk and rap’s pedagogies of come-
dic dissidence, that asks not only about the joke and the reveal, but also which
bodies and lives become unintentional objects of jokes. How are the men and
women showcasing comedic relief in terms of exploitations and resistances?
These questions demand that educators should be inclusive of men, women,
and cis- and non-cis-gendered musicians and students.
psychedelic rock, garage rock and rockabilly. Jello Biafra’s biting lyrics tackled
sociopolitical concerns of the late 1970s and 1980s with a distinct sense of mor-
bid humour and satire. As noted on the Dead Kennedys website:
The satirical style of dissidence harkens back to the 1960s and 1970s protest
songs and grassroots political activism from groups such as the Fugs. Dead
Kennedys’ live performances were efforts to build collectivity and commu-
nity, welcoming participant proximity such as when audience members would
dance on stage with Biafra. The band was strongly opposed to Reagan’s ide-
ology and policies, and played in the 1983 Rock Against Reagan Festival in
Washington, DC. Biafra ran for mayor of San Francisco in 1979 on a manifesto
including rent control, public works programs, elected police and the sugges-
tion that businessmen on Market Street wear clown suits nine to five. He came
in fourth. Dead Kennedys’ mode of musical protest showcases desire for punks
to enter into history through means of economics and spectacle, rather than
through political force.
Dead Kennedys played their first show on July 19, 1978, at Mabuhay Gar-
dens in San Francisco. From the outset their name drew controversy. Biafra has
said (1991) that the band’s name was never meant to be an insult (invoking one
of the country’s best-known political families), but rather a statement on the
loss of the “American Dream”. The satirical stances taken by Jello often drew
in young listeners desperate for provocative engagement that students rarely
found in high school courses.
Dead Kennedys formed their own record label, Alternative Tentacles, in
1979. Their Frankenchrist album made free-speech history when, on April 15,
1986, Biafra’s apartment was raided by police officers. The singer and others
associated with Alternative Tentacles were charged in a Los Angeles courtroom
with distributing pornography (“harmful matter”) to minors under the nation’s
revised obscenity laws; the album included the H. R. Giger painting, Landscape
#XX, which features genitalia and sex acts in a surreal, assembly-line setting.
The case ended in a hung jury and was dismissed. Former L.A. deputy city
attorney Michael Guarino later admitted the case was “a comedy of errors”
(Rolling Stone 2017). In November 1986, the band released their final studio
album, Bedtime for Democracy, which covers topics from the military industrial
complex and “Reaganomics” economics policies to critiques of punk scenes.
136 • Jessica A. Schwartz and Scott Robertson
the history of the “hippie” and white appropriation of black hipness in terms of
rock ‘n’ roll. We can work through the fact that there is one black performer in
Dead Kennedys, and discuss how the spectacle of identity invites us to consider
that neither the white male figure nor the black male figure is a trope or ideal;
rather, they are human collaborators. We encourage debate on the terms and
sounds associated with stereotypical Californian liberalism and the “fun in the
sun” attitude, as they intersect with the themes and intertextuality of the song.
Public Enemy’s prophet of rage, Chuck D, keeps poor folks alert and
prevents them from being lulled into submission by placating and mis-
leading media stories and official “truths”. He holds the microphone with
a vice grip and protects it from perpetrators of false truths, speaking
directly to the poor, using indirection and symbolic reference.
(Rose 1994, 99)
Both Public Enemy and Dead Kennedys were founders of hardcore subgenres
of subcultural musical collectives, and demanded audience participation
140 • Jessica A. Schwartz and Scott Robertson
Conclusions
Punk and hip-hop emerged at a time of creeping neoliberalization and indi-
viduation from the collective spaces of protest of the long 1960s. The music
and other aspects of both subcultures offered alternative, collective modes of
belonging and learning. In contrast to traditional pedagogical approaches of
the school classroom, founded on oppression and domination (Hickey 2016;
Reay 2010), these subcultural movements afforded participants opportunities
to engage in debate and critical thinking (Dines 2015; Snell and Söderman
2014). Combining humour with political commentary and activism, the punk
and hip-hop movements invited and empowered disenfranchised youth and
young adults to be more critical, thoughtful and active civilians. Satire, irony
and hype combined with frustration, anger and diverse musical and artistic cre-
ativities (Burnard 2012) to forge a pedagogy of comedic dissidence in service
of the transformative potential of educational experience (Dewey 1938, 1951).
Stephanie Horsley (2015, 63) observes that, regrettably, music educators have
often “demonstrated a historical avoidance of issues related to politics, citizen-
ship, and social justice”. Hip-hop and punk musics offer alternatives to such
passivity. Estrella Torrez (2012, 135) describes the immensely potent pedagogi-
cal and political power of punk pedagogical praxis, noting, “Punk pedagogy
requires that individuals take on personal responsibility . . . by rejecting their
privileged places in society and working in solidarity with those forced on the
fringes. By doing so, we strive to undo hegemonic macrostructures”. Hip-hop
pedagogy equally possesses this transformative potential, harnessed by the likes
of Public Enemy. We urge educators—schoolteachers, community members and
fellow citizens—to embrace and enact such a pedagogy of comedic dissidence.
Notes
1. Although scholarly work on social justice is deemed serious, hip-hop and use of humour offers
youth an alternative perspective on understanding injustice while also creating a space for heal-
ing, expression and identity.
2. Neil Postman challenged teachers not to ask how they could better teach a subject, but rather to
put the focus on the student by asking how can they help students learn.
3. “The Cowboy President” was a title Reagan earned from his cowboy portrayals as a movie actor
in Western cowboy films. This masculine and individualistic hero has often been a neoliberal
representation of the individual(ist) standing up to “big government”. Rambo became the new
archetype in the ’80s.
Laughing All the Way to the Stage • 141
References
Abrams, Richard M. 1989. “The US Military and Higher Education: A Brief History.” ANNALS of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science 502, 1: 15–28.
Adams, Paul. 2008. “Positioning Behaviour: Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
in the Post-Welfare Educational Era.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 12, 2:
113–125.
Astley, Tom. 2016. “ ‘Laughter Is a Harlequin’: Laughter and Identity in a Close Reading of a Cuban
Punk Band.” Punk and Post Punk 5, 1: 21–37.
Au, Wayne. 2009. Unequal by Design: High-stakes Testing and the Standardization of Inequality. New
York: Routledge.
Bannister, Matthew. 2006. White Boys, White Noise: Masculinities and 1980s Indie Guitar Rock.
Farnham: Ashgate.
Barthes, Roland. 1993. A Roland Barthes Reader. New York: Random House.
Belsito, Peter, and Bod Davis (Eds.). 1983. Hardcore California: A History of Punk and New Wave.
Berkeley, CA: The Last Gasp of San Francisco.
Benedict, Cathy, Patrick K. Schmidt, Gary Spruce, and Paul Woodford. 2015. The Oxford Handbook
of Social Justice in Music Education. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bestley, Russ. 2013. “ ‘I Tried to Make Him Laugh, He Didn’t Get the Joke . . .’—Taking Punk
Humour Seriously.” Punk & Post Punk 2, 2: 119–145.
Bestley, Russ. 2014. “Art Attacks and Killing Jokes: The Graphic Language of Punk Humour.” Punk
and Post Punk 2, 3: 231–267.
Bhagat, Sanjai, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert W. Vishny. 1990. “Hostile Takeovers in the 1980s: The
Return to Corporate Specialization.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics
1990: 1–84.
Booher-Jennings, Jennifer. 2008. “Learning to Label: Socialisation, Gender, and the Hidden Cur-
riculum of High-Stakes Testing.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 29, 2: 149–160.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2003. Firing Back: Against the Tyranny of the Market 2. London: Verso.
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1977. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture,
Trans. Richard Nice. London: Sage.
Bradley, Deborah. 2012. “Good for What, Good for Whom? Decolonizing Music Education Phi-
losophies.” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy in Music Education, edited by Wayne
Bowman and Ana Lucía Frega, 409–433. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bradley, Deborah. 2015. “Hidden in Plain Sight: Race and Racism in Music Education.” In The
Oxford Handbook of Social Justice in Music Education, edited by Cathy Benedict, Patrick
Schmidt, Gary Spruce, and Paul Woodford, 190–203. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bruno, Rosalind. 1987. Educational Attainment in the United States March 1982 to 1985. Dept. of
Commerce.
Burnard, Pamela. 2012. Musical Creativities in Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
Campbell, Patricia Shehan. 2004. Teaching Music Globally: Experiencing Music, Expressing Culture.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Dead Kennedys: The Early Years (DVD). 2002. San Francisco, CA: Target Video/MVD.
Deadkennedys.com. 2017. Accessed March 1, 2017. www.deadkennedys.com/history.html.
Dewey, John. 1938. Experience and Education. Toronto: Collier.
Dewey, John. 1951. Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New
York: Macmillan.
Ellis, Iain. 2009. Rebels Wit Attitude: Subversive Rock Humorists. New York: Soft Skull.
Forman, Murray. 2002. The ‘Hood Comes First: Race, Space, and Place in Rap and Hip-Hop. Middle-
town, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
Freire, Paulo. 2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Gilman, Charlotte P. 1898. Women and Economics: A Study of the Economic Relation Between Men
and Women as a Factor in Social Evolution. Boston, MA: Small, Maynard.
Giroux, Henry A. 1989. Schooling for Democracy: Critical Pedagogy in the Modern Age. London:
Routledge.
Giroux, Henry A. 2012. Disposable Routh, Racialized Memories, and the Culture of Cruelty. New
York: Routledge.
Giroux, Henry A. 2016. America’s Addiction to Terrorism. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Green, Lucy. 1997. Music, Gender, Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hebert, David G. 2015. “Another Perspective: Militarism and Music Education.” Music Educators
Journal 101, 3: 77–84.
142 • Jessica A. Schwartz and Scott Robertson
Hickey, Maud. 2016. The Tune of Inclusion: Why Not Change the Face of Music Education Now?
www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/35040-the-tune-of-inclusion-why-not-change-the-face-
of-music-education-now.
Hinojosa, Ramon. 2010. “Doing Hegemony: Military, Men, and Constructing a Hegemonic Mas-
culinity.” Journal of Men’s Studies 18, 2: 179–194.
Hirschfield, Paul J. 2008. “Preparing for Prison? The Criminalization of School Discipline in the
USA.” Theoretical Criminology 12, 1: 79–101.
Holmstrom, John, and Bridget Hurd. 2012. Punk: The Best of Punk Magazine. New York: Punk
Magazine, Inc.
Horsley, Stephanie. 2015. “Facing the Music: Pursuing Social Justice Through Music Education in
a Neoliberal World.” In The Oxford Handbook of Social Justice in Music Education, edited
by Cathy Benedict, Patrick Schmidt, Gary Spruce, and Paul Woodford, 62–77. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Johnson, Billy Jr. 2013. “Flavor Flav Explains Why He Wears a Clock Necklace.” Yahoo Music
Online. www.yahoo.com/music/blogs/hip-hop-media-training/flavor-flav-explains-why-
wears-clock-necklace-155453176.html.
Kane, Daniel. 2011. “Richard Hell, Genesis: Grasp, and the Blank Generation: From Poetry to Punk
in New York’s Lower East Side.” Contemporary Literature 52, 2: 330–369.
Krims, Adam. 2000. Rap Music and the Poetics of Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lerner, Ralph. 2009. Playing the Fool: Subversive Laughter in Troubled Times. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
MacLeod, Dewar. 2010. Kids of the Black Hole: Punk Rock in Postsuburban California. Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press.
McClary, Susan. 1991. Feminine Endings: Music, Gender and Sexuality. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Mcwilliams, Wilson Carey. 1995. “Poetry, Politics, and the Comic Spirit.” PS: Political Science &
Politics 28, 2: 197–200.
Niknafs, Nasmim, and Liz Przybylski. 2017. “Popular Music and (R)evolution of the Classroom
Space: Occupy Wall Street in the Music School.” In The Routledge Research Companion to
Popular Music Education, edited by Gareth Dylan Smith, Zack Moir, Matt Brennan, Shara
Rambarran, and Phil Kirkman, 412–424. Abingdon: Routledge.
Nocella, Anthony J. 2014. From Education to Incarceration: Dismantling the School-to-Prison Pipe-
line. New York: Peter Lang.
Orwell, George. 1945/2017. Funny, But Not Vulgar. Accessed March 17, 2017. http://orwell.ru/
library/articles/funny/english/e_funny.
Parmar, Priya, Anthony J. Nocella, Scott Robertson, and Martha Diaz. 2015. Rebel Music: Resistance
Through Hip Hop and Punk. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Postman, Neil. 1995. The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School. New York: Vintage.
Postman, Neil, and Charles Weingartner. 1969. Teaching as a Subversive Activity. New York: Dela-
corte.
Rancière, Jacques. 1991. The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation. Palo
Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Rancière, Jacques. 2005. The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible. London: Con-
tinuum.
Reay, Diane. 2010. “Sociology, Social Class and Education.” In The Routledge Iternational Handbook
of the Sociology of Education, edited by Michael W. Apple, Stephen J. Ball, and Luis Armando
Gandin, 396–404. Oxford: Routledge.
Regan, Patrick M. 1994. “War Toys, War Movies, and the Militarization of the United States, 1900–
85.” Journal of Peace Research 31, 1: 45–58.
Ridenhour, Carlton. 2015. “Foreword.” In Rebel Music: Resistance Through Hip-Hop and Punk,
edited by Priya Parmar, Anthony J. Nocella, Scott Robertson, and Martha Diaz. Charlotte,
NC: Information Age.
Rolling Stone. 2001. Dead Kennedys Biography. Accessed March 10, 2017. www.rollingstone.com/
music/artists/dead-kennedys/biography.
Rolling Stone. 2017. Accessed March 10, 2017. www.rollingstone.com/music/artists/public-enemy/
biography.
Rose, Tricia. 1994. Black Noise: Rap Music and Black Culture in Contemporary America. Hanover,
NH: University Press of New England.
Laughing All the Way to the Stage • 143
Shaiken, Harley. 1977. “Craftsman Into Baby Sitter.” In Disabling Professions, edited by Ivan Illich,
Irving K. Zola, John McKnight, Jonathan Caplan, and Harley Shaiken. London: Marion
Boyars.
Smith, Gareth Dylan. 2015. “Masculine Domination and Intersecting Fields in Private-sector Popu-
lar Music Performance Education in the UK.” In Bourdieu and the Sociology of Music and
Music Education, edited by Pamela Burnard, Ylva Hofstander, and Johan Söderman, 61–79.
Farnham: Ashgate.
Snell, Karen, and Johan Söderman. 2014. Hip-Hop WITHIN and Without the Academy. Lanham,
MD: Lexington Books.
Staples, William G. 2000. Everyday Surveillance: Vigilance and Visibility in Postmodern Life. Lan-
ham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Taussig, Michael T. 1999. Defacement: Public Secrecy and the Labor of the Negative. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
Thompson, Stacy. 2004. Punk Productions: Unfinished Business. New York: State University of New
York Press.
Watts, Alan. 2004. “Out of Your Mind: Essential Listening From the Alan Watts Archive.” A Place
for a Hermit. Sounds True, Louisville, CO. CD.
Younger, Michael, Molly Warrington, and Jacquetta Williams. 1999. “The Gender Gap and Class-
room Interactions: Reality and Rhetoric?” British Journal of Sociology of Education 20, 3:
325–341.
144
A Teacher’s Reflections on Zine-Making • 145
An Autoethnographic Approach
Wall (2006, 154) notes a broad range of autoethnographic approaches, from
the “conservative methodologically rigorous study [via] the personal but theo-
retically supported [to] the highly literary and evocative”. This chapter is of the
second of these types, joining autoethnographic studies described as “highly
personalized accounts that draw upon the experience of the author/researcher
for the purposes of extending sociological understanding” (Sparkes 2000, 21).
My autoethnographic approach is aligned with and embedded in the reflective
practice in which I have engaged throughout my teaching career. As part of my
teaching qualification for lifelong learning, I was required to keep a reflective
journal, during which process students were urged to reflect upon critical inci-
dents in our teaching placements, an approach that has been noted to increase
teachers’ capacity for developing critical/reflective skills (Griffin 2003). I
maintained this approach to reflective practice when working for a further edu-
cation1 provider, where formally reflecting on lessons was seen as an important
element of teachers’ continuing professional development. I had no hesitation
in writing what might be considered critical stories, and locating myself within
these, but writing in the first person singular did not always sit easily with me.
Delamont (2007) argues that because autoethnography is rooted in experi-
ence, it is not analytical, which research should be. However, this ignores the
various formats that autoethnographies can take, which (as already noted) can
include rigorous critical analysis. Having spent my post-16 and undergradu-
ate education being told never to write in the first person, when studying for a
master’s degree in women’s studies I was introduced to doing just the opposite.
I initially had a hard time adjusting to my lecturers’ insistence that I write in the
first person and “take authorship of [my] work!”, but ultimately this changed the
way I felt when writing; I felt closer to what I was saying, and found that both
critical analysis and reflection came more easily.
My initial discomfort and bafflement at the requirement to assert my author-
ship of my work were clearly results of my initial introduction to social research,
which had been very much grounded in more traditional, positivist and quan-
titative approaches. Despite critiques of such approaches emerging in the late
twentieth century (e.g. Goodson et al. 2013), and substantial qualitative, con-
structivist work occurring across the social sciences, little acknowledgement
was given to this during my undergraduate degree. While lectures involved
both positivist and anti-positivist approaches, the latter still were approached
with the implicit caveat that social research should avoid the subjective. Auto-
ethnography can, therefore, be seen as the antithesis of the positivist values into
which researchers (and social science students like myself) are often social-
ized. Feminist researchers have pursued inclusion of their own experience in
their research (Ellis 2004), and as a feminist studying women’s studies, I came
to that recognizing this experience could also be important in challenging the
146 • Laura Way
positivist dominance in social research that some feminists have found dis-
empowering to women (Ramazanoğlu and Holland 2002). Averett (2009)
highlights this affinity between autoethnography and feminist research, in that
both are underpinned by the message that the personal is political (Hanisch
1970). Another similarity highlighted by Averett (2009) is the way both still
actively struggle to be accepted in the mainstream research community.
Canagarajah (2012) argues that those who experience marginalization may use
autoethnography as a means of having a voice, suggesting that autoethnography
is an important tool for those without power, and can serve such individuals as
a source of empowerment. This potential can be seen as a common thread run-
ning through autoethnography, zine creation and punk pedagogy.
Example 1
In this first example, zine creation was used for the purposes of reflection,
for the learners and for me as a teacher. The educational institution where I
worked required learners to complete a generic survey for each of the sub-
jects they were studying about mid-way through the academic year. I was
unconvinced of the usefulness of this survey, since (among other issues) many
questions were not relevant to particular subjects. One advantage of the zine
activity, therefore, was that it could allow me to seek richer, more detailed
feedback from the learners about, for example, which topics they had par-
ticularly enjoyed. I aimed for this to feed back into my own reflection on my
teaching, as discussed later. In terms of learner reflection, I hoped that creat-
ing the zines would give them more control over what they wanted to express
while also potentially offering a more accessible alternative to language-based
feedback for some learners (Gauntlett 2007).
I decided to use zines as part of a lesson towards the end of the academic year,
as I wished to ask students to reflect on the year to date. I had created a few slides
to show them, which gave some explanation of what a zine was, and had lugged
in my own zine collection to provide tangible examples of the possible scope
in aesthetics and approach. I asked students each to create a zine that reflected
on their first academic year of studying sociology. I specified that they should
include certain elements (for example, which area(s) of study they enjoyed the
most) but otherwise gave them creative autonomy. This contradicted some-
what the “absolute” freedom usually associated with zine creation, but seemed
necessary for the (my) intended purpose of the activity. I also brought in what
I considered some necessary zine-making tools: glue, paper and newspapers/
magazines. There were some protests from one or two of the students of “but I’m
no good at art!”; nonetheless, they all busied themselves for the lesson making
zines, and all had something to submit at the end of the session.
A number of issues arose during the activity. First, it was apparent that the
learners needed longer to examine zines in order to gain a fuller understand-
ing of what was involved, as a number of them voiced concerns over what they
were actually expected to produce. This could have been remedied by having
the task spread over more than one 90-minute lesson. A learner with additional
needs in particular struggled and misinterpreted the activity. Second, there
were constraints when it came to resources—usually zine makers self-select
resources that are to hand, whereas in the classroom context these learners
were constrained by the resources selected and provided by me. This may have
limited the learners’ creative freedom, and inhibited their inspiration and moti-
vation—seemingly antithetical to DIY and anarchist pedagogical approaches. A
third issue was the public creation of the zines, with learners expected to make
their zines while surrounded by peers in close proximity, due to the constraints
of classroom space. The lack of privacy and the impact of peer pressure may
thus have limited students’ creations. Fourth, just as the learners could have
150 • Laura Way
benefitted from having longer to explore what zines were, they may have also
benefitted from more time to construct their own. Zine makers are generally
able to create zines at their own pace, rather than watching the clock as these
learners were. I would, with hindsight, prefer for my students not to have to
work under such time pressure.
Informal feedback from learners was mixed, split between those who
enjoyed the activity for its creative focus, and those who disliked it for that
very reason. Perhaps this reflected the particular zines I had shown them, and
maybe I placed too much emphasis on image-based examples composed mostly
of drawings, collages and photographs. I could have shared zines containing
mostly or entirely writing. The feedback I gathered from reading the zines indi-
cated elements of the course learners enjoyed or did not enjoy—information
the generic institutional survey would have not have provided. I was thus able
to reflect on why certain elements of the course may have struck a chord (or
not) with individuals and the group, helping me to consider course content and
particular ways of teaching.
Example 2
Reflections on the first example informed my next use of zines in the classroom,
for which I took a different approach. This took place during the following
academic year, and within the first few weeks of term. An initial lesson was
dedicated to gaining an understanding of zines; this involved some input from
me, and group work allowing learners to consider a variety of zines and identify
what these involved. I was careful this time to include examples of zines that
were text-focused, rather than image-orientated. To provide learners with more
freedom in the resources they utilized, and to facilitate privacy in their creative
activity, I set the zine-making as a homework task based on “their views of soci-
ety”. I gave no further guidelines, and hoped such a broad theme would engage
and enact as much agency and freedom as possible. My rationale for focusing
on students’ views of society was that it would develop learners’ critical, ana-
lytical skills through considering contemporary societal issues while reflecting
on and interrogating their own positionality and values. Pridmore and Har-
ling Stalker (2009) suggest that such a reflexive pedagogical approach can
assist learners in developing their sociological imagination, examining their
approach to instruction while acknowledging their social locations/positions.
All 24 learners completed the task. As was the case in the first example, one
student with additional needs appeared to misunderstand the task, highlight-
ing to me that further work was needed regarding the suitability of the task for
particular learners. Another student focused on others’ views instead of their
own, which was not what I had asked for, but this perhaps demonstrated the
power for that student of being afforded agency through the set task. The zines
produced were of varying length and formats, and utilized a range of resources.
Some focused on one main theme while others were more varied. This led me
A Teacher’s Reflections on Zine-Making • 151
underpinned my rationale for asking learners to create zines in the first exam-
ple; I was dissatisfied with the institutional learner survey they were required
to complete, and so found an alternative method of gathering learner feedback
on my course and teaching.
Critical, anarchist and punk pedagogues alike recognize and challenge tra-
ditional models of teaching and learning that position a teacher as bearer of
knowledge and students as empty vessels to be filled (Froehlich and Smith 2017;
Kallio, this volume). Torrez (2012, 133) argues that “education [should be] a
fundamentally empowering, liberating, and healing cycle of reciprocity between
teacher and learner”, relating to her vision of a punk pedagogy that breaks with
normative modes of institutional education. Similarly, Kahn-Egan (2008) pro-
poses that punk pedagogy should move away from models of passive learning.
As such, the making of zines in the classroom can be seen as empowering and
liberating punk pedagogical practice, wherein learners are active creators and
agents in their own learning; this recalls Yang’s aforementioned (2012) use of
zines in the biology classroom. Based on my own and my students’ reflections,
zines clearly have the capacity for allowing learners to be active creators; how-
ever, as I realized, care must be taken not to constrain this potential, through
ensuring the creative task is not too prescriptive, and by not limiting, or making
too many assumptions about, the resources available to learners.
As noted in my second example, zines can also provide those learners who
may not so readily vocalize their opinions and thoughts in class, an arena in
which they can “speak”—that is, a means of achieving authentic, personal
expression that traditional pedagogical models can elide. This may have been
effective in this particular example, in part because of how large the class was.
Armaline (2009) points out that an anarchist pedagogy aims to maximize the
voices of all involved—zines may provide a valuable pedagogical tool in achiev-
ing this. Zines, therefore, have the potential to empower learners who may feel
marginalized. Zines can thus help students to bring theoretical concepts to
bear upon their personal experiences, values and perspectives; in the second
example, I noted an emerging criticality among the learners when reflecting on
society and societal issues. Zines can thus provide an opportunity for learners
to demonstrate and/or develop critical awareness, drawing together their socio-
logical training and their interaction with the world. Developing this type of
consciousness (Dines 2015) and criticality (Kahn-Egan 2008) are both impor-
tant elements of punk pedagogy.
Closing Reflections
In this chapter I have discussed merits and pitfalls of using zines in the class-
room, embedded within my wider reflexive practice as an educator, feminist,
sociologist and punk. Zine making can offer learners the opportunities to feed
back to teachers in a way not available to them through other institutional
A Teacher’s Reflections on Zine-Making • 153
Note
1. “Further education” in a UK context refers to the post-compulsory education sector that offers
vocational training and/or access to higher education.
References
Anderson, Leon. 2006. “Analytic Autoethnography.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 35:
373–395.
Antliff, Allan. 2012. “Afterword: Let the Riots Begin.” In Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Actions,
Theories, and Critical Reflections on Education, edited by Robert H. Howorth, 326–328. Oak-
land, CA: PM Press.
Armaline, William T. 2009. “Thoughts on Anarchist Pedagogy and Epistemology.” In Contemporary
Anarchist Studies: An Introductory Anthology of Anarchy in the Academy, edited by Randall
Amster, Abraham DeLeon, Luis Fernandez, Anthony J. Nocella II, and Deric Shannon. Lon-
don: Routledge.
Averett, Paige. 2009. “The Search for Wonder Woman: An Autoethnography of Feminist Identity.”
Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work 24, 4: 360–368.
Boud, David, Rosemary Keogh, and David Walker. 2013. “Promoting Reflection in Learning: A
Model.” In Boundaries of Adult Learning, edited by Richard Edwards, Ann Hanson, and Peter
Raggatt. London: Routledge.
Congdon, Kristin G., and Doug Blandy. 2003. “Zinesters in the Classroom: Using Zines to
Teach About Postmodernism and the Communication of Ideas.” Art Education 56, 3:
44–52.
Creasap, Kimberly. 2014. “Zine-Making as Feminist Pedagogy.” Feminist Teacher 24, 3: 155–168.
Cubesville, Richard. No date. The Vegan’s Guide to People Arguing With Vegans. [no publisher].
Delamont, Sara. 2007. “Arguments Against Auto-Ethnography.” Paper presented at the British
Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Institute of Education, University of
London, September 5–8.
Delamont, Sara, Paul Atkinson, and Lesley Pugsley. 2010. “The Concept Smacks of Magic: Fighting
Familiarity Today.” Teaching and Teacher Education 26, 1: 3–10.
Dines, Mike. 2015. “Learning Through Resistance: Contextualisation, Creation and Incorporation
of a Punk Pedagogy.” Journal of Pedagogic Development 5, 3: 20–31.
154 • Laura Way
Duncombe, Stephen. 2008. Notes From the Underground: Zines and the Politics of Alternative Cul-
ture. Bloomington, IN: Microcosm.
Ellis, Carolyn. 2004. The Ethnographic I. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
Froehlich, Hildegard C., and Gareth Dylan Smith. 2017. Sociology for Music Teachers: Practical
Applications, 2nd edition. New York: Routledge.
Gauntlett, David. 2007. Creative Explorations: New Approaches to Identities and Audiences. Oxon:
Routledge.
Giroux, Henry A. 2002. “Public Pedagogy and the Politics of Resistance: Notes on a Critical Theory
of Educational Struggle.” Educational Philosophy and Theory 35, 1: 5–16.
Goodson, Ivor, Nigel P. Short, and Lydia Turner. 2013. Contemporary British Autoethnography. Rot-
terdam: Sense.
Gordon, Alastair. 2012. “Building Recording Studios While Bradford Burned.” In Punkademics: The
Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness, 105–124. Brooklyn, NY: Minor
Compositions.
Griffin, Maureen L. 2003. “Using Critical Incidents to Promote and Assess Reflective Thinking in
Preservice Teachers.” Reflective Practice 4, 2: 207–220.
Grimes, Matt, and Tim Wall. 2015. “Punk Zines: ‘Symbols of Defiance’ From the Print to the Digital
Age.” In Fight Back: Punk, Politics and Resistance, edited by Matthew Worley. Manchester:
Manchester University Press.
Guzzetti, Barbara J., Leslie M. Foley, and Mellinee Lesley. 2015. “Nomadic Knowledge: Men Writing
Zines for Content Learning.” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 58, 7: 591–601.
Hanisch, Carol. 1970. “The Personal Is Political.” In Notes From the Second Year: Women’s Libera-
tion: Major Writings of the Radical Feminists, edited by S. Firestone and A. Koedt. New York:
Notes (From The Second Year).
Hayler, Mike. 2011. Autoethnography, Self-Narrative and Teacher Education. Rotterdam: Sense.
Kahn-Egan, Seth. 2008. “Pedagogy of the Pissed: Punk Pedagogy in the First-Year Writing Class-
room.” College Composition and Communication 49, 1: 99–104.
Kempson, Michelle. 2015. “ ‘My Version of Femininity’: Subjectivity, DIY and the Feminist Zine.”
Social Movement Studies 14, 4: 459–472.
Klein, Sheri. 2010. “Creating Zines in Preservice Art Teacher Education.” Art Education 63, 1: 40–46.
Lake, Jonathan. 2015. “Autoethnography and Reflexive Practice: Reconstructing the Doctoral The-
sis Experience.” Reflexive Practice 16, 5: 677–687.
Larrivee, Barbara. 2000. “Transforming Teaching Practice: Becoming the Critically Reflective
Teacher.” Reflective Practice 1: 293–307.
Loughran, John. 2002. “Effective Reflective Practice: In Search of Meaning in Learning About
Teaching.” Journal of Teacher Education 53, 1: 33–43.
Marcus, Sara. 2010. Girls to the Front: The True Story of the Riot Grrrl Revolution. New York: Harper
Perennial.
Pridmore, Jason, and Lynda Harling Stalker. 2009. “Reflexive Pedagogy and the Sociological Imagi-
nation.” Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge 7, 3: 27–36.
Prinsloo, Paul, Sharon Slade, and Fenella Galpin. 2011. “A Phenomenographic Analysis of Student
Reflections in Online Learning Diaries.” Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and
e-Learning 26, 1: 27–38.
Ramazanoğlu, Caroline, and Janet Holland. 2002. Feminist Methodology: Challenges and Choices.
London: SAGE.
Richardson, Laurel, and Elizabeth Adams St Pierre. 2005. “Writing: A Method of Inquiry.” In The
Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by Norman Denzin and Yvonna Lincoln.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Smith, Gareth D., and Alex Gillett. 2015. “Creativities, Innovation and Networks in Garage Punk
Rock: A Case Study of the Eruptörs.” Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts 4,
1: 9–24.
Sparkes, Andrew C. 2000. “Autoethnography and Narratives of Self: Reflections on Criteria in
Action.” Sociology of Sport Journal 17: 21–43.
Suresh Canagarajah, Athelstan. 2012. “Teacher Development in a Global Profession: An Autoeth-
nography.” TESOL Quarterly 46, 2: 258–279.
Torrez, Estrella. 2012. “Punk Pedagogy.” In Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower,
edited by Zack Furness, 131–142. Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions.
Wall, Sarah. 2006. “An Autoethnography on Learning About Autoethnography.” International Jour-
nal of Qualitative Methods 5, 2: 146–160.
A Teacher’s Reflections on Zine-Making • 155
Wan, Amy J. 1999. “Not Just for Kids Anymore: Using Zines in the Classroom.” Radical Teacher
55: 15–19.
Warren, John T. 2011. “Reflexive Teaching: Toward Critical Autoethnographic Practices of/in/on
Pedagogy.” Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies 11, 2: 139–144.
Yang, Andrew. 2010. “Engaging Participatory Literacy Through Science Zines.” American Biology
Teacher 72, 9: 573–577.
11
Give Violence a Chance:
Emancipation and Escape in/
from School Music Education
ALEXIS ANJA KALLIO
Introduction
At first glance, there may well be few things in this world less punk than the
secondary school music classroom. Indeed, it has been noted that the intro-
duction of “youth music” to formal teaching and learning has been an efficient
means to render any music as decidedly uncool (Allsup 2010)—perhaps all the
more true with punk, arguably enjoyed by more middle-aged teachers than
teenage students. Yet, popular musics have been seen in contemporary music
education philosophy and practice as an efficient means to connect with young
students, bridging the divide between music in schools and their “real world”
musical experiences. Particularly in Nordic classrooms, popular music has
been justified as a means to attend to the inherent diversity of student popu-
lations through motivating and engaging all students in accessible, authentic
music-making. As such, popular musics are constructed as particularly dem-
ocratic, playing a key role in “creating learning environments and methods,
which break the rules of tradition, the conventional, and the taken-for-granted”
(Westerlund 2002, 216). Such characterizations of a student-led, anti-hierarchi-
cal classroom may seem amenable to the inclusion of punk musics and their
associated anti-authoritarian, do-it-yourself, rebellious ideologies. Similarly,
the notion of punk pedagogies—as enquiry-based, critical approaches that pro-
mote student empowerment and social responsibility (Dines 2015, 22)—may
also align with these participatory ideals. Punk musics and/or pedagogies may
thus hold promises for teachers looking to enact the democratic potentials of
music education through challenging of the status quo—asking how we “define
music learning and what prevents people, processes, and performances from
enacting positive and meaningful transformative change?” (O’Neill 2012, 178).
However, it is important to note that the music classroom is not neutral ter-
rain across which teachers guide change in their students, leading them towards
becoming more knowledgeable, skilful, musical, socially responsible, active,
moral citizens. Although it has been argued that plurality and the possibility
156
Give Violence a Chance • 157
for change are preconditions of democracy (e.g. Westerlund 2002), the school
context does not, and arguably cannot or should not, allow for pluralities of
absolutely any sort, or changes in absolutely any direction. After all, schooling
is as much a moral enterprise as an academic one. This raises questions as to the
extent to which a punk ethos (as underlies either/both musics or pedagogies)
can serve as an arena for the democratization of music education through pop-
ular music. Do the “dialogue, shared meaning making, and sociocultural and
sociopolitical associations” (O’Neill 2012, 179) of the school community wel-
come punk on its own terms? Or is punk included only insofar as it emphasizes
a “failure to conform” (Dewey MW4: 278) to the established moral boundaries
of the classroom? Is punk accepted within certain limits—with students told,
“explore, but don’t go too far”? (Allsup 2016, 12). Drawing upon the philosophi-
cal writings of French philosopher Jacques Rancière, and the context of popular
music education in Finland, I here argue that punk musics or pedagogies may
unsettle the democratic project of music education, offering an alternative
to transformative approaches to music education that risk imposing narrow
visions of what constitutes the right and the good. I thus pose the question: if
punk can be included in a way that avoids the pasteurization of the politics so
often positioned in opposition to the progress-oriented, regulated, adult worlds
of which school is a part, what will become of our students?
schooling is to change our unreflective habits and actions that function in line
with “stupid and rigid convention” (Dewey MW14: 15).
This may sound like fertile soil for punk in the classroom, given punk’s pro-
pensity for the provocative. However, the academic and social goals of school
music education raise questions with regard to how conflict is navigated, and to
what ends. As government-funded and mandated institutions intended to serve
all and contribute towards a democratic society, schools bear a considerable
burden of social responsibility, both reflecting and constructing understand-
ings of the right and good, and also the deviant and deleterious. With this in
mind, the extent to which punk songs such as NOFX’s “Drugs Are Good”
(1995) or Pennywise’s “Fuck Authority” (2001) can, or should, be included in
school activities raises questions regarding whose values and ideals construct
the school community. Similarly, which (or whose) punk ethos one welcomes
through classroom doors holds serious implications—is the punk ethos,
by definition, “progressive”? What of the “ ‘darker side’ of punk’s politics . . .
representing right-wing and fascist ideologies?” (Phillipov 2006, 387). With-
out critically attending to popular music meanings as historically, ideologically
and also institutionally constructed, music education runs the risk of includ-
ing musics—and students—that already align with the ideals and values of the
majority, and excluding or marginalizing those that stand in opposition. Rather
than the multimusical, democratic ideals of equality whereby all students are
included, this may instead (re-)enforce “systems of domination that assimilate
and eradicate difference” (Laes and Kallio 2016, 81).
of pedagogy: “the parable of a world divided into knowing minds and ignorant
ones, ripe minds and immature ones, the capable and the incapable, the intel-
ligent and the stupid” (6). The teacher’s work is then to explicate the true and
the good, leading students out of ignorance and immorality.
The transformative work in guiding or cultivating students’ becoming can
also be seen in sociologist Howard Becker’s (1963) figure of the moral entrepre-
neur, who is “not only interested in seeing to it that other people do what he
thinks is right. He believes that if they do what is right it will be good for them”
(148). The teacher’s deliberation “between multiple and contradictory ends and
multiple and contradictory ideals” (Allsup and Westerlund 2012, 135) is then
curtailed by a priori assumptions of which (or whose) ends and ideals are desir-
able or normal. In defining the good, in which direction teachers and students
should strive, so in turn the school community defines the deviant. Deviance
here is seen as “behaviour [which includes music, if thought of as social action]
which somehow departs from what a group expects to be done or what it con-
siders the desirable way of doing things” (Cohen 2009, 35). More complex than
this, it has been noted that defining something as deviant
In this way, the teacher’s ethical deliberations are contextualised within broader
moral negotiations that draw the line between propriety and the problematic,
as “struggles over competing social definitions” (Schur 1980, 8), referred to by
sociologist Edwin Schur (1980) as stigma contests. These stigma contests arise
as individuals or social groups seek to (re-)enforce their own moral boundar-
ies in order to legitimize or normalize their own epistemological and ethical
perspectives.
As this epistemological and ethical competition produces meanings of
musics, worldviews, actions and so forth as normal, desirable and moral, so
too does it frame others as existing outside of the boundaries of propriety—
the deviant. Morality and deviance are thus two sides of the same proverbial
coin. If punk musics or pedagogies then seem out of place in the school class-
room, it is worth reflecting upon the negotiations of morality/deviance that
construct them as such. Particularly if music education is intended to be inclu-
sive, open, participatory and democratic, who holds the power to construct
what/who is considered normal, productive, moral and desirable (to become)?
Who assigns punk meaning, in which situations, and to what ends? Defining
Give Violence a Chance • 163
musics such as punk as “problem music” are, in this sense, “not just labels, or
mere words uttered in the heat of the moment, but categories of denunciation
or abuse lodged within very complex, historically loaded practical conflicts
and moral debates” (Sumner 1990, 28)—strategies of domination and control
that potentially work against the participatory ideals of thick democracy in
the music classroom.
With punk musics part of classroom repertoires, so too are the socio-cultural-
political meanings that give rise to, accompany or are borne out of these musics.
In navigating these, teachers are often directed to explicitly address issues of
power and social responsibility. Punk pedagogies, as defined by Dines (2015),
have been discussed as closely related to critical pedagogy, which offers an
important perspective in:
The goal of critical popular music pedagogy, and perhaps punk pedagogy, is
then not only the conscientization (Freire 1970) of musical meanings embedded
and produced in socio-political context, but also to take action, through music-
making, towards social justice, empowerment and social change. However, if
we are to heed Rancière’s warnings against stratifications that assume, and are
reliant upon, hierarchies of knowledge, ability, morality and so on, questions
are raised as to the direction of this change: how can we be sure that change is
for the better?
Such questions are nothing new. Indeed, the “progressive agenda” behind
much critical pedagogical work has been long criticized for its abstraction
and obscurity (e.g. Ellsworth 1989). Positioning the teacher as moral entre-
preneur or emancipatory authority appears to rely on a number of certainties
that warrant critical attention, particularly if we take into account the inherent
multimusicality and diversity of classrooms. One of these certainties is the very
need for transformation itself. Research in critical pedagogy, or social justice
in education more broadly, often focuses its gaze on those deemed disadvan-
taged, disaffected or at-risk, notably labelled as such by the critical pedagogue
themselves. For instance, in seeking to close the achievement, or opportunity,
gap, scholars have often sought ways to boost the performance of underachiev-
ing social groups—to include them in the mainstream. Such transformative
visions construct difference (or inequality) as a “retard in one’s development”
(Rancière 1991, 119) by privileging certain musics, cultures and values as the
norm to which we should all aspire to. The punk student may then be seen as
simply going through an awkward adolescent phase that they will grow out of
with guidance and maturity. Non-conformity is thus conflated with a failure to
conform—a deficiency requiring corrective action.
In Rancièrian terms, the inequality fostered here is one that ranks intel-
ligences through positioning the teacher as master, and the student as
deficient—unable to emancipate themselves—through a distribution of the sen-
sible (partage du sensible), a “system of self-evident facts of sense perception
Give Violence a Chance • 165
detritus, and its desire for shock” (Howes et al. 2016, 3) do not easily align with
the enforcement of “the rules of reason in the classroom” (Ellsworth 1989, 304)
aiming towards universal validity. Students who identify with or enjoy punk are
then not included as equal rational beings, but led by the expert teacher along
the routes of becoming towards full, democratic citizenship. Rancière’s myth of
pedagogy is thus manifest as the teacher is envisioned not as
an aged obtuse master who crams his students’ skulls full of poorly
digested knowledge, or a malignant character mouthing half-truths in
order to shore up his power and the social order. On the contrary, he is
all the more efficacious because he is knowledgeable, enlightened, and of
good faith.
(Rancière 1991, 7)
power relations inherent in the school music classroom, and the inclusion and
exclusion resulting from them, are then not necessarily bad, nor good; they
quite simply are.
Following from a recognition of power, inclusion and exclusion as omnipres-
ent, interrelated and even necessary aspects of classroom work, deviantization
is not necessarily experienced as a negative. Thinking about deviance dif-
ferently, punk may be seen to find refuge in its exclusion from mainstream
legitimized repertoires and norms, and exclusion is thus a source of power in
itself. Punk pedagogies, in this way, do not seek to overcome difference by invit-
ing the Outsiders of music education into mainstream policies and practices,
but to embrace difference as of “political value, a means of preserving certain
practices and dimensions of existence from regulatory power, from normative
violence” (Brown 1998, 314). Through enacting ruptures to the status quo, and
regarding difference as a resource for, rather than hindrance to, learning, punk
pedagogies seen through a Rancièrian perspective position equality as the start-
ing point of education rather than a goal to strive towards. Emancipation is thus
the verification of equality, “a struggle for equality which can never be merely
a demand upon the other, nor a pressure put upon him, but always simultane-
ously a proof given to oneself ” (Rancière 1995, 48). The potentials of punk
pedagogies might then lie deep within, or even beyond, thick democracy, in
the escape from the mainstreaming of majoritarian worldviews and value sys-
tems, within the school system itself. This escape is enacted by (re-)politicizing
classroom spaces as multiple and complex, engaging with disruptions that arise
through communication and conflict, interrogating the processes of devian-
tization that legitimize and exclude, and giving violence, in all its destructive
potency, a chance.
Notes
1. In keeping with Elliott’s (1995) claim that music is social action rather than artefact, the subtitles
for this chapter are drawn from musics that were, and are, part of my own becomings—Welcome
to Paradise (Green Day, 1992); The Kids Aren’t Alright (Offspring 1998); We Don’t Need Freedom
(Saccharine Trust 1981); Give Violence a Chance (G.L.O.S.S. 2016).
2. Divisions between means of engaging with musical works in the classroom have been furthered
since the mid-1970s by scholars such as Keith Swanwick (2016), who distinguishes between five
parameters of musical experience: composition, literature studies, audition, skill acquisition and
performance (30).
3. Cautions against a “quest for certainty” appear already in John Dewey’s writings, but also more
recently in those of Zygmunt Bauman for example.
4. Orner, M. (1992, 77).
References
Allsup, Randall E. 2010. “On Pluralism, Inclusion, and Musical Citizenship.” Nordic Research in
Music Education Yearbook 12: 9–30.
Allsup, Randall E. 2016. Remixing the Classroom: Toward an Open Philosophy of Music Education.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Give Violence a Chance • 169
Allsup, Randall E., and Heidi Westerlund. 2012. “Methods and Situational Ethics in Music Educa-
tion.” Action, Criticism and Theory for Music Education 11: 124–148.
Becker, Howard. 1963. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.
Biesta, Gert J. J. 1998. “Say You Want a Revolution . . . Suggestions for the Impossible Future of
Critical Pedagogy.” Educational Theory 48, 4: 499–510.
Bloom, Allan. 1987. The Closing of the American Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Bowman, Wayne D. 1998. “Universalism, Relativism, and Music Education.” Bulletin of the Council
for Research in Music Education 135: 1–20.
Brown, Nancy. 1998. “Freedom’s Silences.” In Censorship and Silencing: Practices of Cultural Regula-
tion, edited by Robert Post, 313–327. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute for the History
of Art and the Humanities.
Cohen, Stanley. 2009. Against Criminology, 4th edition. Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Dewey, John. “The Middle Works: 1899–1924 (MW).” In The Collected Works of John Dewey 1882–
1953, edited by J. A. Boydston 1969–1991. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dines, Mike. 2015. “Learning Through Resistance: Contextualization, Creation and Incorporation
of a ‘Punk Pedagogy’.” Journal of Pedagogic Development 5, 3: 20–31.
Elliott, David J. 1995. Music Matters: A New Philosophy of Music Education. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Elliott, David J., and Marissa Silverman. 2015. Music Matters: A Philosophy of Music Education, 2nd
edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ellsworth, Elizabeth. 1989. “Why Doesn’t This Feel Empowering? Working Through the Repressive
Myths of Critical Pedagogy.” Harvard Educational Review 59, 3: 297–325.
Ericsson, Claes, Monica Lindgren, and Bo Nilsson. 2010. “The Music Classroom in Focus: Every-
day Culture, Identity, Governance and Knowledge Formation.” Nordic Research in Music
Education Yearbook 12: 101–116.
Freire, Paolo. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Gandin, Luís A., and Michael Apple. 2002. “Challenging Neo-Liberalism, Building Democracy:
Creating the Citizen School in Porto Alegre, Brazil.” Journal of Education Policy 17, 2: 25–279.
Giroux, Henry, and Peter McLaren. 1986. “Teacher Education and the Politics of Engagement: The
Case for Democratic Schooling.” Harvard Educational Review 56, 3: 213–238.
Green, Lucy. 2002. How Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education. Aldershot:
Ashgate.
Green, Lucy. 2008. Music, Informal Learning and the School: A New Classroom Pedagogy. Farnham:
Ashgate.
Hirsch Jr., Eric D. 1988. Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know. New York: Vintage
Books.
Howes, Seth, Mirko Hall, and Cyrus Shahan. 2016. “Punk Matters: An Introduction.” In Beyond
No Futures: Cultures of German Punk, edited by Mirko M. Hall, Seth Howes, and Cyrus M.
Shahan. New York: Bloomsbury.
Jorgensen, Estelle. 2003. Transforming Music Education. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Kallio, Alexis A. 2015. Navigating (Un)Popular Music in the Classroom: Censure and Censorship in
an Inclusive, Democratic Music Education. Doctoral dissertation, Sibelius Academy of the
University of the Arts, Helsinki.
Kristiansen, Lars J., Joseph R. Blaney, Philip J. Chidester, and Brent K. Simonds. 2010. Screaming
for Change: Articulating a Unifying Philosophy of Punk Rock. Plymouth: Lexington Books.
Kruse, Adam J. 2016. “Featherless Dinosaurs and the Hip-Hop Simulacrum: Reconsidering Hip-
Hop’s Appropriateness for the Music Classroom.” Music Educators Journal 102, 4: 13–21.
Laes, Tuulikki, and Alexis A. Kallio. 2016. “A Beautiful Cacophony: A Call for Ruptures to Our
‘Democratic’ Music Education.” Finnish Journal of Music Education 18, 2: 80–83.
Lamb, Roberta. 1996. “Discords: Feminist Pedagogy in Music Education.” Theory Into Practice 35,
2: 124–131.
May, Todd. 2012. “Rancière and Anarchism.” In Jacques Rancière and the Contemporary Scene: The
Philosophy of Radical Equality, edited by Jean-Philippe Deranty and Alison Ross, 117–128.
London: Continuum.
McLaren, Peter. 2000. “Critical Pedagogy.” In Knowledge and Power in the Global Economy: Poli-
tics and the Rhetoric of School Reform, edited by David A. Gabbard, 345–352. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mueller, Justin. 2012. “Anarchism, the State, and the Role of Education.” In Anarchist Pedago-
gies: Collective Actions, Theories, and Critical Reflections on Education, edited by Robert
H. Haworth, 14–31. Oakland, CA: PM Press.
170 • Alexis Anja Kallio
North, Adrian, and David J. Hargreaves. 2008. The Social and Applied Psychology of Music. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
O’Neill, Susan. 2012. “Becoming a Music Learner: Towards a Theory of Transformative Music
Engagement.” In The Oxford Handbook of Music Education, edited by Gary E. McPherson
and Graham F. Welch, 163–186. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Orner, Mimi. 1992. “Interrupting the Calls for Student Voice in ‘Liberatory’ Education: A Feminist
Post Structuralist Perspective.” In Feminism and Critical Pedagogy, edited by Carmen Luke
and Jennifer Gore, 74–89. New York: Routledge.
Phillipov, Michelle. 2006. “Haunted by the Spirit of ’77: Punk Studies and the Persistence of Poli-
tics.” Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies 20, 3: 383–393.
Rancière, Jacques. 1991. The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation. Stan-
ford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Rancière, Jacques. 1995. On the Shores of Politics. London: Verso.
Rancière, Jacques. 2003. The Philosopher and His Poor. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Rancière, Jacques. 2004. The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible . London:
Continuum.
Rancière, Jacques. 2006. Hatred of Democracy. London: Verso.
Reimer, Bennett. 1984/2009. “Choosing Art for Education: Criteria for Quality.” In Seeking the
Significance of Music Education, edited by Bennett Reimer, 191–200. Plymouth: Rowman
& Littlefield.
Reimer, Bennett. 1993. “Music Education in Our Multimusical Culture.” Music Educators Journal
79, 7: 21–26.
Schur, Edwin. 1980. The Politics of Deviance: Stigma Contests and the Uses of Power. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Sumner, Colin. 1990. Censure, Politics and Criminal Justice. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Swanwick, Keith. 2016. A Developing Discourse in Music Education: The Selected Works of Keith
Swanwick. Oxon: Routledge.
Walkerdine, Valerie. 1985. “On the Regulation of Speaking and Silence: Subjectivity, Class, and
Gender in Contemporary Schooling.” In Language, Gender, and Childhood, edited by Car-
olyn Steedman, Cathy Urwin, and Valerie Walkerdine, 203–241. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul.
Walkerdine, Valerie. 1992. “Progressive Pedagogy and Political Struggle.” In Feminisms and Critical
Pedagogy, edited by Carmen Luke and Jennifer Gore, 15–25. New York: Routledge.
Westerlund, Heidi. 2002. Bridging Experience, Action and Culture in Music Education. Doctoral
dissertation, Sibelius Academy.
Westerlund, Heidi. 2006. “Garage Rock Band: A Future Model for Developing Musical Expertise?”
International Journal for Music Education 24, 2: 119–125.
Woodford, Paul. 2014. “The Eclipse of the Public: A Response to David Elliott’s ‘Music Education
as/for Artistic Citizenship’.” Philosophy of Music Education Review 22, 1: 22–37.
Part III
Theorizing from Punk
Pedagogical Practice
12
Being Punk in Higher Education:
Subcultural Strategies for
Academic Practice1
TOM PARKINSON
Introduction
The relationship between punk and formal education is ambiguous and com-
plex. The beginnings of punk’s narrative are typically located in the late 1970s,
against a backdrop of ostentatiously virtuosic rock music, manufactured pop
music and late free-market capitalism (Moore 2012). Punks positioned them-
selves in opposition to these cultural, political and economic status quos, and
to the mainstream institutions that were seen to support the dominant order
(Hebdige 1979). State-funded schools and universities have been portrayed by
many punk artists as an invidious aspect of institutionalized culture, mediating
knowledge in the service of state ideology. In one such example, the Suicidal
Tendencies’ song “Institutionalised” (Muir and Mayorga 1983) plays on the
idea of institutionalization by linking education with mental health. The song’s
protagonist Mike is considered mentally ill by his parents because of his frus-
tration with life and desire to remain in his bedroom all day. This exacerbates
his frustration, which in turn reinforces his parents’ belief that he is mentally
ill. As they inform him he is to be sectioned, Mike replies angrily that he has
already attended their “institutionalised learning facilities” that “brainwash
you until you see their way”, and that it is in fact they who are “crazy” (Muir
and Mayorga 1983). This vignette depicts the common punk theme of mar-
ginalization, in which outsiders are misunderstood, diagnosed and ultimately
subdued by an institutionalized system. In its antagonism towards this system,
punk can be seen as not only non-institutional but an anti-institutional coun-
terculture. The do-it-yourself (DIY) ethics espoused in punk culture promote
the rejection of mainstream cultural infrastructure, and the establishment of a
supposedly emancipated alternative social world through unmediated knowl-
edge sharing and community building (Moore 2010; O’Hara 1999). Thus punk
might be seen to constitute an alternative education system, with its own arte-
facts, practices and foundational ideologies.
173
174 • Tom Parkinson
There is perhaps an irony in Malott (2006) and Shantz (2012) calling for the
establishment of radical educational spaces from tenure-track university posts.
In later writing, Malott (2012) reflects upon his earlier resistance to “university
culture”, which denied him “any strategic room for adaptability” (Malott 2012,
65). He chronicles how, through subsequent employment in a little-known and
under-resourced institution, he found balance between his skate punk and aca-
demic identities by engaging critically with power structures and developing
links with “activist scholars” (Malott 2012, 65). Malott (2012) acknowledges the
competitive pressure to achieve prestige in US academia, but justifies his career
trajectory on the belief that the radical Left needs to be represented in elite
institutions, however much this might contradict punk ethics. Ultimately, it is
through reflective engagement with the dilemma of participation and opposi-
tion that Malott constructs his academic identity.
A similar unease is portrayed by Haworth (2012), who recounts being called
a “fucking sell-out” (1) by a student, a pivotal experience that prompted him to
interrogate his values and behaviours and critically examine the relationships
between anarchism and education. He characterizes this relationship as one
of “tension and ambiguity” (2), but argues that while formal institutions have
“oppressive tendencies”, there may be “ways to make use of the institutional
space without being of the institution” (Haworth 2012, 5, his emphasis). Miner
and Torrez (2012) likewise conceive of their presence within the university as
a form of “infiltration” (32), and like Malott (2012) justify it on the basis that
outsider perspectives need representation within the university.
Dunn (2008) argues for punk to be studied within International Relations
(IR) as an example of counter-hegemonic globalization. While the relationship
between punk and academia is not his central focus, he nonetheless argues for
punk’s pertinence to his discipline beyond its being an object of study. He jux-
taposes an IR conference and a punk show, noting that “while the discipline
of IR pontificated down the street, I swirled in the mosh pit wondering: what
relevance did I and the [conference community] have to these kids?” (Dunn
2008, 194). Dunn recalls that it was through engagement with punk as a teen-
ager that he became aware of labour struggles and the experiences of subaltern
groups, which in turn prompted him to engage proactively with current affairs.
Contrasting this with his current position as an academic, he concludes that
“academia has alienated me from the world that I am trying to understand [by]
decrying emotions and passion” (Dunn 2008, 210).
Erricker (2001) offers a more detached, third-person discussion of the rel-
evance of punk to education. His exploration is broadly epistemological rather
than ethical in emphasis and focuses on the destabilization of “knowledge sus-
tained by tradition” (74) by outsider perspectives. He defines the punk as one
who feels they do not fit with, and subsequently challenges, the institutional-
ized order and “introduce[es] the subjectivity of the knower into the frame”
(2001, 77). Accordingly he ascribes the label of punk onto Kuhn, Wittgenstein,
Being Punk in Higher Education • 177
Hayden White and Paulo Freire, on the basis that they interrogated the assump-
tions of their disciplines and disrupted the dominant conceptual order. Erricker
(2001) thus considers the intellectual (as opposed to ethical) utility of punk, and
ultimately asks: “what if we treat all epistemologies subversively and relativisti-
cally, by denying them the status they confer on themselves?” (74).
Punk is not the only form of popular culture to be explored for its academic
potential. McLaughlin (2008) identifies a “pedagogy of the Blues”, where what
she refers to as the “Blues metaphor” (xiii), in which the life narratives of blues
singers, the lyrical content of blues music and the historical associations of blues
are intertwined, is employed as a didactic framework for exploring race, class and
gender. Aligning it with critical pedagogy, McLaughlin (2008) sets it in opposi-
tion to “techno-rational” (21) curricula that delegitimize knowledge and values
that sit outside of what state administrations deem important and correct. She
asserts its potential to undermine the “banking concept” (Freire 1970) whereby
students’ minds are conceived as vessels to be filled, and to provide students
and teachers with the tools to become “uncov[er] injustices” (McLaughlin 2008,
21). Beyond this, however, McLaughlin argues for pedagogy to be approached
as art, to emancipate the learner from strictly rational modes of apprehension.
She calls for the performative characteristics of blues to be harnessed in the act
of teaching, leading to pedagogy as ‘an embodied art form in which spontaneity,
invention, and change are important com- ponents’ (2008, xv).
Bladen (2010) proposes a “gonzo” pedagogy that takes inspiration from
the writings of Hunter S. Thompson. Identifying the ideological subtext of
gonzo culture as rejection of mainstream hegemony, Bladen (2010) considers
it in relation to contemporary higher education, and via a Gramscian analysis
asserts that the pressures of student recruitment, quality assurance and league
tables have become internalized by teachers and detracted from their focus on
teaching and learning. At the same time, he argues that financial and social
pressures can impact upon students’ motivation and engagement, and that lec-
turers’ “outdated content and [. . .] unsophisticated delivery style” (Bladen 2010,
38) can compound this. Like McLaughlin (2008) with blues, Bladen considers
the application of gonzo pedagogy in terms of form as well as ideology, propos-
ing a teaching style wherein “the gonzo lecturer-as-performer uses a variety of
techniques” (38) such as personal narrative, exaggeration and humour, “to lib-
erate [themselves] from [. . .] oppressive, institutional hegemony and students
from a dry, often un-engaging educational communication style” (38).
To summarize here, it is clear that these educators have identified in punk
and other forms of popular culture ethical and aesthetic values that resonate
with their academic values, and participate in the formation of their academic
identities. It should be noted that, with the exception of Bladen (2010) and Err-
icker (2001), all of the authors reviewed here were working in US universities
at the time of their writing. Although many of the themes covered are germane
to higher education in a general sense, Malott’s (2012) and Miner and Torrez’s
178 • Tom Parkinson
The Participants
Six educators’ voices are presented in this chapter. The first of these is my own.
I am 35 years old at the time of writing and hold lecturing posts in the disci-
plines of education and music. I have been teaching in higher education for five
Being Punk in Higher Education • 179
years. Although I have never self-identified wholly as a punk (in the subcul-
tural taxonomy of 1990s South East London I was an Indie Kid), I have always
identified with punk practices, ethics and culture, all of which are woven into
my lifestyle and worldview. This study proceeds in acknowledgement of this
interested position and with the understanding that my analyses are inevitably
coloured by it.
The remaining five voices belong to academics working within UK higher
education, across a range of disciplines. Four are members of the Punk Scholars
Network, and responded to my participant call asking for teaching-active academ-
ics who self-identify as punk(s). One is a personal contact. They are as follows:
Never Mind the Bollocks: Punk Awakening and the Gestalt Shift
My analysis of interview data revealed three main themes that were of con-
cern among participants. The first related to the prevalent epistemologies and
methodological conventions within the participants’ disciplines. The second
related to the state of UK higher education, from the perceived obsession with
measurement and accountability to its time-consuming bureaucracy. The last
concerned the ideological assumptions perceived to be inherent in mainstream
curricula.
There was a sense among the participants working within the social sci-
ences (Mehmet, Vlad and Heike) that their field had become too introspective
at the expense of outward purpose. Vlad suggested that sociology had become
“a monastery commenting on itself ”, with little interest in developing “new
research that can change the world”. He felt this led to meaningless discussion
and the “horrible ritual of talking about things [we] already know anyway”:
Why waste time arguing with someone that your ontology is more valid
in a pluralist discipline that doesn’t agree on the nature of knowledge?
You can leave that to the side.
Relating this to his students’ experience, Mehmet explained that this culture
led to anxieties about “not understanding the discipline”, which in turn sapped
students’ motivation. He was keen to emphasize the primacy of conviction and
original thought over the “window dressing”. Employing the Sex Pistols’ slogan,
he recounted discussions with tutees:
Being Punk in Higher Education • 181
cos it’s a social science context, and there’s [. . .] an overwhelming back-
drop of that scientific, positivist approach, the students are freaking out
about what to put into their theoretical framework chapter and into their
methodology, and I say “never mind the bollocks, what’s your opinion?
Why do you have it, and can you lead me through the steps that led you
to it?”
If you think about the window dressing [too much] your thought will
suffer and you’ll end up thinking like a boring person, the way those
categories and conventions make you think.
Similarly, Vlad told his students that there was no need to write at length “about
theories and methodologies and so on, that’s boring”. Of greater importance
was “honesty”, which he related to punk ethics, and accordingly he encour-
aged students to write about “something they’ve lived through themselves”. He
conceded that because of its overt subjectivity “in some ways [this was not] sci-
ence”, but was opposed to the dominance of detached research within the social
sciences and sought to promote more subjective research writing:
Heike, although in agreement with Vlad and Mehmet about the need for
change within the social sciences, was more cautious about actively challenging
the dominant norms in a teaching context, “because [she] wanted the students
to graduate [and didn’t] want to fuck up their chances”; she reasoned there-
fore that radicalism needed to take on “subtler” forms, chiefly through “lifting
somebody onto a more critical plain”. Her approach was characterized by prag-
matism, but also by an anxiety of complicity in an academic culture at stark
odds with her own values, and which in her view inhibited the university’s abil-
ity to effect change.
Also reflecting upon the impact of UK higher education (HE) culture on the
“front line” of teaching, Claire spoke of “often meaningless” aims and learning
outcomes, stemming from an obsession with accountability and bureaucracy.
She felt that these strictures inhibited the live-ness of pedagogy and left “no
182 • Tom Parkinson
room for spontaneity, for interaction in the moment with one another”. She sug-
gested that the precariousness of the academic job market served to compound
this situation, since “rules [could] be used to bash you over the head with the
possibility of unemployment”. Relating this to her punk background, however,
she asserted that she had “forgot[ten] to stand in line when they were handing
out risk-adverse tendencies”.
Of most concern to Claire, Philip and Mehmet was the dominance of main-
stream worldviews that went unchallenged within curricula. Philip spoke of
assuming rhetorical positions that would lead students to engage with the pos-
sibility of different perspectives and support independent critical thinking,
something he aligned with the “punk ethos”:
I’m very fond of the avocatis diavoli kind of approach. [. . .] I’m not tell-
ing them what to think, you know. [. . .] I think it comes back to where
we started really, the punk ethos. The wonderful thing that I remember
about punk was [. . .] “don’t listen to what anyone else is saying, it’s rub-
bish”. And that was a tremendously useful starting point, particularly in
our subject areas it seems to me.
Mehmet’s approach was similar. He felt that, for all the emphasis on “critical
thinking”, not enough space was given to alternative worldviews that might
provoke students to examine their assumptions. Harnessing what he saw as
punk’s ability to awaken people to the possibility that “things aren’t always what
they seem”, he took a performative approach to teaching in which he shifted
between worldviews:
I play the punk rocker. I might play the Marxist even though I’m not a
Marxist, but that’s how you achieve the gestalt shift. [. . .] My job as a
scholar and educator is not lifting the veil as showing you the truth, but
lifting the veil on the idea of there being one truth. The punk thing to do
is say “well why are you so certain?”
her own experiences of being a student, she identified within the university a
tendency to patronise young people, and to devalue ways of knowing associ-
ated with youth culture:
They [. . .] had the attitude of “you know nothing because you are young,”
instead of thinking actually your ideas hold merit, [. . .] let’s talk about
them further.
This was in stark contrast to her experiences of the anarchist bookstore she
attended as a teenager, where “punks would take the time to talk with rather
than at a 14 or 15 year old who was incredibly shy and inarticulate”.
Vlad also spoke of the need to position students’ ideas at the centre of their
intellectual development, and to recognize their personal experiences as a legiti-
mate source of knowledge. He felt it was important to accommodate the cultural
phenomena and artefacts through which young people sought meaning, since
young people “look for the answers to their problems in popular culture”. Vlad
tried to “engage students as much as possible about their own experiences”, and
saw this as an opportunity to learn “with” and “from” students. Claire also spoke
of “learning alongside [students] and valuing their experiences”, and related
this to the autodidactic DIY principles of punk, enshrined in “the whole here’s 3
chords now go do thing—here’s the info, here’s the skills, go apply, learn, change
and educate us on your return”. She gave an example from teaching in a Theol-
ogy context:
One of the courses I created focuses on religion and conflict and it works
incredibly well doing that there. “There is the name of the country and
the religions, there is a room, go and sort it out and report back however
you want”. It becomes like an academic battle of the bands at the end of
the course.
Mehmet, together with “other punks of the department”, had seized the
opportunity to design his own module “specifically around the idea of punk
awakening”, as it offered a chance to escape the restrictive schemes of work pre-
scribed by senior colleagues. They had sought to simulate “the punk experience
for students who haven’t had it subculturally”, avoiding dispassionate analysis
and instead, like Vlad, encouraging students to engage their own ethical beliefs
in their investigations.
corresponded to different things. For Claire, this meant reasserting the social
and moral purpose of education, and shifting the emphasis away from skilling
an “elite” and towards achieving social justice:
She felt that higher education had a responsibility to protect and secure justice
for marginalized groups, a cause to which she felt punk values were particularly
applicable:
It is [being] willing to wear the mantle of the Other to make a change that
makes punk so strong, or at least potentially strong. If a bunch of snotty
nosed kids can do it, why can’t we?
The agenda of [UK] higher education is not to effect change but to train
future professionals. And that precludes or prevents radical change.
[. . .] the Anglo-American system is built on foundations that don’t want
radical change because if [they] promote radical change then [they]
undermine [their] identity and longevity.
Heike felt that in Germany (her native country), where the education system
was not reliant on student fees, the culture of higher education was in a healthier
state than in the United Kingdom and that academics “had more opportunities
to be radical”. Within UK HE however, she distinguished between academics
who were complicit in the status quo and those who sought to change it, and
suggested that the potential and responsibility for change, as in punk, lay at the
level of the individual:
Being Punk in Higher Education • 185
I can see colleagues sensing the pressure, but I refuse it at such a deep
level that I don’t even feel it anymore. I wear T-shirts of punk bands to my
lectures, and I don’t do it ignorantly, it’s a deliberate sign [. . .] about being
myself in the face of those imperatives, and getting on with projects and
engaging in those contexts despite those pressures.
Regardless of official learning outcomes that he gave little thought to, the out-
come he most desired was for students to develop a sense of responsibility for
the world:
Discussion
In general terms, the participants’ responses conveyed themes of frustration,
boredom, individual and collective responsibility, and resistance to the status
quo. These themes chimed with their understandings of the spirit of punk,
which they all spoke of applying in their academic practice. As in the literature
reviewed earlier in this paper, participants tended to reflect holistically on their
experiences, and detailed, specific examples of applying punk practices peda-
gogically were relatively sparse, but their application of punk in their teaching
can nonetheless be collated into three broad themes.
Performativity
Mehmet and Philip both spoke of acting out different roles and opinions within
the classroom to highlight the possibility of different perspectives, which
Mehmet likened to “play[ing] the punk rocker” to antagonize and disrupt.
186 • Tom Parkinson
Notes
1. This chapter was originally published as Tom Parkinson (2017), “Being punk in higher educa-
tion: subcultural strategies for academic practice,” Teaching in Higher Education, 22:2, 143–157.
doi:10.1080/13562517.2016.1226278.
Being Punk in Higher Education • 189
2. This is a reference to the famous cover of the Sideburns fanzine’s first issue, which featured dia-
grams of three guitar chords and the instruction “Here’s a chord. Here’s another. Here’s another.
Now form a band”. This slogan has now taken a place in punk lore as a mission statement
enshrining the DIY ethics of punk culture.
3. This is not to claim equivalency, and my analogy here is necessarily reductive; a more thorough
application of Butler’s theories to a discussion of punk and pedagogy would be valuable.
References
Benhabib, Seyla, Judith Butler, Drucilla Cornell, and Nancy Fraser. 1995. Feminist Contentions: A
Philosophical Exchange. London: Routledge.
Bey, Hakim. 1985. T.A.Z.: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism.
New York: Autonomedia.
Bladen, Charles. 2010. “The Gonzo Lecture: Counterculture in the Classroom.” Compass: The Jour-
nal of Learning and Teaching at the University of Greenwich 1: 35–41.
Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. London: Routledge.
Butler, Judith. 1999 [1990]. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York:
Routledge.
Butler, Judith. 2004. Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge.
Carr, David. 2009. “Revisiting the Liberal and Vocational Dimensions of University Education.”
British Journal of Educational Studies 57, 1: 1–17.
Cribb, Alan, and Sharon Gewirtz. 2013. “The Hollowed-Out University? A Critical Analysis of
Changing Institutional and Academic Norms in UK Higher Education.” Discourse: Studies
in the Cultural Politics of Education 34, 3: 338–350.
Cunnane, Sarah. 2011. “DIY Says Edupunk Star. Distortion and Sell-Out, Say Critics.” Times Higher
Education. November 17: 20–21.
Deleon, Abraham. 2012. “Against the Grain of the Status Quo: Anarchism Behind Enemy Lines.”
In Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Actions, Theories, and Critical Reflections on Education,
edited by R. Haworth, 312–326. Oakland: PM Press.
Dewey, John. 1938. Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books.
Dimitriadis, Greg. 2001. Performing Identity, Performing Culture: Hip Hop as Text, Pedagogy and
Lived Practice. New York: Peter Lang.
Dunn, Kevin. 2008. “Nevermind the Bollocks: The Punk Rock Politics of Global Communication.”
Review of International Studies 34, 1: 193–210.
Edwards, Richard. 2015. “Amateurism and Autodidactism: A Modest Proposal?” Discourse: Studies
in the Cultural Politics of Education 36, 6: 868–880.
Erricker, Clive. 2001. “Living in a Post-Punk Papacy: Religion and Education in a Modernist
World.” Journal of Beliefs and Values 22, 1: 73–85.
Freire, Paolo. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Furness, Zack. 2012. Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower. Wivenhoe: Minor
Compositions/Autonomedia.
Gordon, Alistair 2005. The Authentic Punk: An Ethnography of DIY Music Ethics. PhD diss, Lough-
borough University. https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/handle/2134/7765.
Groom, Jim. 2008. “The Glass Bees.” [blog] Bava Tuesdays blog. http://bavatuesdays.com/the-glass-
bees/.
Groom, Jim. 2010. “Edupunk or, on Becoming a Useful Idiot.” [blog] Bava Tuesdays blog. http://
bavatuesdays.com/edupunk-or-on-becoming-a-useful-idiot/.
Harland, Tony, and Neil Pickering. 2011. Values in Higher Education Teaching. London: Routledge.
Haworth, Robert H. 2012. “Introduction.” Chapter 1 In Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Actions, Theo-
ries, and Critical Reflections on Education, edited by R. Haworth, 1–12. Oakland: PM Press.
Hebdige, Dick. 1979. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Routledge.
Hey, Valerie. 2006. “The Politics of Performative Resignification: Translating Judith Butler’s Theo-
retical Discourse and Its Potential for a Sociology of Education.” British Journal of Sociology
of Education 27, 4: 439–457.
Hill, Mark L. 2009. Beats, Rhymes, and Classroom Life: Hip-Hop Pedagogy and the Politics of Identity.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Kolb, David. 1984. Experiential Learning as the Science of Learning and Development. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
190 • Tom Parkinson
Kreber, Carolin. 2010. “Academics’ Teacher Identities, Authenticity and Pedagogy.” Studies in
Higher Education 35, 2: 171–194.
Malott, Curry. 2006. “From Pirates to Punk Rockers: Pedagogies of Insurrection and Revolution:
The Unity of Utopia.” Critical Journal of Education Policy Studies 4, 1: 159–170.
Malott, Curry. 2012. “Finding Balance in the Academy.” In Punkademics: The Basement Show in the
Ivory Tower, edited by Z. Furness, 65–66. Wivenhoe: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia.
May, William F. 2001. Beleaguered Rulers: The Public Obligation of the Professional. Louisville: West-
minster John Knox.
McLaughlin, Shirley. 2008. A Pedagogy of the Blues. Rotterdam: Sense.
Miner, Dylan, and Estrella Torrez. 2012. “Turning Point: Claiming the University as a Punk Space.”
In Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Z. Furness, 27–34. Wiven-
hoe: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia.
Moore, Ryan. 2010. “Postmodernism and Punk Subculture: Cultures of Authenticity and Decon-
struction.” Communication Review 7: 305–327. doi:10.1080/10714420490492238.
Moore, Ryan. 2012. “Is Punk the New Jazz?” Chronicle of Higher Education. January 15. http://
chronicle.com/article/Is-Punk-the-New-Jazz-/130281/.
Muir, Mike, and Louiche Mayorga. 1983. “Institutionalised” [Recorded by Suicidal Tendencies]. On
Still Cyco After All of These Years [LP]. Sun Valley: Frontier Records.
O’Hara, Craig. 1999. The Philosophy of Punk: More Than Noise. New York: Autonomedia.
Olson, Gary A., and Lynn Worsham. 2000. “Changing the Subject: Judith Butler’s Politics of Radical
Resignification.” JAC: A Journal of Composition Theory 20, 4: 727–765.
Shantz, Jeffery. 2012. “Spaces of Learning: The Anarchist Free Skool.” In Anarchist Pedagogies:
Collective Actions, Theories, and Critical Reflections on Education, edited by R. Haworth,
124–145. Oakland: PM Press.
Skelton, Alan. 2012. “Value Conflicts in Higher Education Teaching.” Teaching in Higher Education
17, 3: 257–268.
Thomas, David R. 2006. “A General Inductive Approach for Analysing Qualitative Evaluation
Data.” American Journal of Evaluation 27, 2: 237–246.
Williams, Joanna. 2012. Consuming Higher Education: Why Learning Can’t Be Bought. New York:
Bloomsbury.
Williams, Joanna. 2016. Academic Freedom in an Age of Conformity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Winter, R. 2009. “Academic Manager or Managed Academic? Academic Identity Schisms in Higher
Education.” Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 31, 2: 121–131.
13
“There’s Only One Way of Life,
and That’s Your Own”1
GARETH DYLAN SMITH
flawed, and seek in my writing to challenge, for instance, rampant and unfet-
tered neoliberalization of the higher education system (Allsup 2015; Giroux
2014a; Smith 2015a), constructions of music graduate “success” (Smith 2013a),
and the sexism and misogyny that plague institutions of the contemporary
music industry and higher popular music education (HPME) (Parkinson and
Smith 2015; Smith 2015b). I was relieved recently to discover that “this attitude
of constant challenge and determination to disrupt is [an] observed feature of
the punk mindset” (Sofianos et al. 2015, 30). At least I now have a label for my
impetuosity reflex.
In early 2002 I answered an advert in the New Musical Express (NME) to
audition for a “Psycho Ceilidh” band called Neck. Playing (what I naively inter-
preted as) really fast rock music with highly virtuosic folk instrumentalists
dancing all over the top, this band seemed ideal for me, as I had been indoctri-
nated with a love (albeit somewhat undiscerning) of Celtic music and folk-rock
since my childhood. To me, this would be like playing in Fairport Convention,
only faster, which suited me down to the ground. Off the back of playing for six
months in Neck, and on the very night that we were permanently kicked out of
our hard-won residency gig at the Lord Nelson pub on Holloway Road because
the drummer was too loud for the landlord to bear, I was invited to join a second
punk band. This group had recently changed its name, sensibly, if misleadingly,
from “Speed-o-phile” to “Eruptörs”. In less than a year we were undertaking a
DIY tour of the American Midwest that set the tone and drew the road map for
our ascent to total obscurity. The Eruptörs appealed to me through their invita-
tion to play whatever I wanted, as fast and as loudly as possible. It sounded like
my perfect musical home. After making a number of records, the three mem-
bers of the Eruptörs eventually went our separate ways—geographically, if not
musically—and two of us now publish and give conference presentations about
aspects of our “punkademic” practice (Furness 2012).2
Back to School
Occupying my time as a music teacher, wannabe rock star and part-time punk,
in 2003 I undertook to learn about being an educator, motivated to do so by
my obvious skills gap in this area and because my girlfriend was considering
staying in the UK (she was visiting on a visa from the US) to complete the mas-
ter’s degree that she needed to in order to retain her New York State teaching
certification. My higher education to date consisted of just an undergradu-
ate degree in (classical) music, and I knew I should really do a PGCE,3 since
this would open numerous doors at other schools nationwide, would teach
me how to teach and would lead me inexorably to Qualified Teacher Status
and higher earning potential—traditional markers of career success. Instead
of applying for a PGCE, however, I started on an MA in Music Education at
the (now UCL) Institute of Education in central London. This programme
“There’s Only One Way of Life” • 193
seemed really interesting from the prospectus. Fame and fortune from my
drumming career were, as they surely remain today, just around the next
corner. Much better then, to have fun and learn things, I reasoned, than to
position myself for an undesired career as a school teacher. Plus, if I ended up
marrying this American girl and moving with her to the US, the Americans
wouldn’t know what a PGCE was anyway (I assumed without checking any of
the facts).
Among the people to teach me on the MA programme were educators
whose pedagogical practices were decidedly “punk”. Dr. Colin Durrant started
me attending academic conferences and publishing my writing, and set me on
the road to studying for a PhD. He was deeply passionate about family life and
choral conducting, and kept telling me that academia was “a game”, resonating
with Dines’s (2015, 30) conclusion that punk pedagogy can be and feel like lots
of fun. Drawing a parallel with Higgins’s (2012, 50–51) observations about the
participatory nature of the late ’70s British punk music scene, Colin, “dispel-
ling the feeling of elitism . . . explored, celebrated, and affirmed the identity of
those who participated” in his classes. I began to feel that there could really be
a legitimate way to combine my drumming, my instinctive critical streak, and
my need (and, I began to admit, increasing fondness) to teach.
As a classical choral conductor, I am not certain Colin would easily iden-
tify as a “punk”. However, Rashidi (2012, 84) confirms punk rock as a “genre
formulated on critical thinking”. Throughout supervising my dissertation, and
in his class on aesthetics and philosophy in music and music education, Colin
encouraged, enabled and legitimated my proclivity to problematize, dem-
onstrated the need to question all things, and pointed me in the direction of
continuous, necessary and (ir)reverent iconoclasm. He gave me a glimpse of
how it might be possible and even essential to be punk, as integral to a role in
the academic community; after all, as Parkinson (this volume) notes, punk is an
“anti-institutional counter-culture”. Torrez, too, affirms,
This was what I instinctively felt, and what Colin stoked in me.
Following a few more years working as a drummer, high school general music
teacher, peripatetic drums, guitar and clarinet teacher, and, for a spell, a driving
instructor, another round of unsolicited job applications in early 2009 led me
to receive a phone call from the Institute of Contemporary Music Performance
(ICMP). I accepted their offer of a job teaching blues drumming for an hour a
week, which rapidly led to more teaching, administration and research. In 2014,
194 • Gareth Dylan Smith
ICMP hired Mike Dines and Tom Parkinson (co-editors of this volume), and by
2015 I was employed full-time: a licensed, legitimized punk pedagogue! That
legitimation did not long survive, following a change in senior management;
just before the publication of this book, I parted ways with ICMP for what, had
we been in a band together, might be cited as “artistic differences”.
Following Torrez (2012, 135), I understand punk as “both an epistemology
(world-view) and ontology (nature of being)”—the latter being apparent to me
many years ahead of the former. I still play occasionally with Neck and the
Eruptörs, and continue to question everything I am told. Punk praxis, philoso-
phy and pedagogy appear to loom large in my life. Writing this chapter has
allowed me to put a name and a frame to it all, acknowledging, as Parkinson
(this volume) notes, “punk has manifested in academe beyond simply being
an artifact, informing research methodologies, academic publishing and peda-
gogy”. Sofianos et al. describe punk as being reactive, a mode in which people
very quickly have “moved from angst to action; a kind of philosophical short-
cut, with learning and reflection and adaptation (of both methods and ideas)
following afterwards” (2015, 26). This certainly rings true for my approaches to
teaching, in which I have adapted and adopted models to suit my ends.
Mantie and Higgins (2015, 1) ask about socio-musicologist and political
activist, Charles Keil, “Are author and person one and the same?” They conclude
in the affirmative. Without seeking to elevate myself to anything approaching
Keil’s revered academic and ethical status, this much I share in common with
him: when I write, as with when I drum, when I teach, and when I go about my
life in general, I cannot but be me. I find it hard not to be full and frank. I feel
an obligation to myself and to others to be sincere and honest in my writing (see
also de Rond 2008, xii). In this regard, and as identified by one of Parkinson’s
(this volume) participants, I “forgot to stand in line when they were handing out
risk-averse tendencies”. I hope nothing detrimental comes to me from my work,
but I always feel subservient to the process and the purpose. In the rest of this
chapter, I look at how various aspects of my work as a teacher and academic are
informed by and contribute to what might be read as a punk pedagogy.
seen to take place in the push-and-pull between serving one’s own needs and
seeking to meet those of others.
Della Fave et al. (2011, 204) explain “Aristotle’s definition of eudaimonia as
the fulfillment of one’s deepest nature in harmony with the collective welfare”.
However, extant literature on the “ethics of eudaimonism” (Norton 1976, 15)
focuses overwhelmingly on the pursuit of self-fulfillment (Ryan et al. 2008;
Smith 2016; Waterman 1993). For Dierendonck and Mohan (2006, 232), “Eudai-
monic well-being [is] related to feeling challenged and to activities that offer the
opportunity for personal growth and development”. Thus, Norton (1976, 8) sug-
gests that earnestly pursuing one’s daimion, or “eudaimonistic ‘integrity’ exhibits
a marked kinship to the ‘identity’ that contemporary men and women are said
to be searching for”. He describes people “quietly and decisively living their lives
according to their own inner imperative” (1976, xiii).
There is, then, arguably something very zeitgeist and twenty-first century
about eudaimonism, where everyone is, or is encouraged to be, an entrepreneur
(Hewison 2014). Bourdieu (2003, 30) describes this as the “myth of the trans-
formation of all wage earners into dynamic small entrepreneurs”, and explains
how, under the guise of individual empowerment, European governments have
been able:
The mainstream media perpetuate this ideal as the hegemonic new normal
(Shaiken 1977), “reciting the neoliberal gospel” (Giroux 2014b, 11).
In step with this trend, higher education institutions adopt and are increas-
ingly bound to a “conception of educational value traceable to a dominant
neoliberal meta-policy that totemizes global competition” among individuals,
departments and institutions. In this climate, “Neoliberal education constrains
the information needed for democratic participation and choice through its
development of ‘manipulated man’ ” (Horsley 2015, 71). As I have suggested
elsewhere, however:
Performativity
In Durrant’s class on philosophy in music and education, he had a wonder-
ful way of adopting any given position, to the extent that some class members
seemed fully convinced that our lecturer believed everything he said. He would
nimbly adopt a range of subtle, sometimes oppositional positionalities, deftly
navigating the classroom space in discussion, facilitating and deepening debate.
This technique seemed to get the best out of individuals and the group, as we
each were incensed, appeased or amazed by the insights and perspectives of
influential thinkers in our field. In my own teaching practice, I try to emulate
this performativity. In seminar classes where contentious issues are under dis-
cussion, I adopt the role of, for example, Bourdieu, Butler or Adorno, switching
hats as guide and referee to help students navigate the terrain. When provid-
ing written and verbal feedback on drafts of written assignments, I will also
“play the part” of an author or commentator representing a particular stance,
including sometimes just playing devil’s advocate to help students to see and
work through a problem. I use this technique in my approach to publication as
well, writing for instance about the exciting future of entrepreneurship and the
need to collaborate in a market economy (Smith 2013b; Smith and Gillett 2015;
Smith and Shafighian 2013), and then arguing to the contrary and for a more
nuanced approach from colleagues across the higher music education sector
(Parkinson and Smith 2015; Smith 2015a; Smith 2016a).
As various famous writers from Norman Mailer to Hunter S. Thompson are
alleged to have said, I often do not know what I think until I write it down—and
frequently not even then, having only articulated my thinking (through others’)
in part. Moreover, I often feel uncertain about what to think or how to think
until I have worked through it all on my laptop. The research that I publish is
always contingent—on context, on delimitations and on understandings and
experience. A punk, multifaceted performativity allows me and my students
to get inside a range of perspectives, and to understand and argue from there,
affording us insights into rationales and principles that we might not otherwise
have understood or considered.
Autodidactism
From being given carte blanche as a primary school Director of Music, through
the empowerment I felt as a fledgling academic author fashioning my mas-
ter’s dissertation for publication, to days of gleefully leafing through journal
back issues from the shelves of the UCL IOE library as a PhD student and
engaging my students in their own writing and activism, autodidactism has
been a core feature of my learning to be a teacher and academic. I should add
that the “auto”-didactism in which I engaged during my doctoral studies was
expertly and lovingly supported by the guidance and supervision of Professor
Lucy Green. As a part-time PhD student working several jobs, I was unable to
“There’s Only One Way of Life” • 199
take full advantage of the doctoral student community at UCL IOE. I therefore
sought out conferences where I could present my developing work to peers
and senior scholars from relevant disciplines and fields, immersing myself in
discourse and discussion in a collegial spirit of sharing. My approach to con-
ferencing reflected the DIY punk approach (Gordon 2012) I had become used
to among bands at punk shows and festivals, that is “more collaborative than
competitive” (Smith and Gillett 2015, 19).
Since earning my PhD and feeling the burning desire to publish,5 I have
opted mostly to write book chapters for and edit compilations that appeal to
me, for example, Burnard et al.’s (2015) Bourdieu and Sociology of Music Edu-
cation, Randles’s (2014) Music Education: Navigating the Future, Kenny and
Christophersen’s (in press) volume on musician-teacher collaborations, and
my co-edited book with Roger Mantie (2016), the Oxford Handbook of Music
Making and Leisure. Working on these projects felt like drumming in a band
whose members are working together to record an album or rehearse a stage
set, as opposed to, for instance, sending a recorded solo drumming project out
into the ether to see who “bites”; I like the frame and the direction provided for
my creativities by a book, and it is exciting to have to read and to learn. In each
of the examples listed and more, I have been privileged to work on projects
that align with other punk pedagogical ideals, in step with Keil’s conviction
that people of this generation can be “the antidote, the cure” to “the capitalist
nastiness that seems to be guiding policy and guiding people toward more war,
more nationalism” (quoted in Mantie and Higgins 2015, 2). Whereas I know
from senior colleagues that I “should”, in career terms, focus more on publish-
ing articles in particular revered journals, my approach to scholarship, which I
find incredibly creative and fulfilling (eudaimonic), reflects Cook’s (2012, 120)
observation that “Rock [musicians] prefer an intuitive approach over creativity
toolboxes”—a “punk publication” approach, perhaps.
My learning experiences on this academic journey have much in common
with the “informal” (Green 2002) and “non-formal” (Mok 2010) learning
approaches gaining traction and recognition in music education scholarship
and practice (D’Amore and Smith 2016; Green 2008b). The Music Learning
Profiles Project (2016, 65) identifies such broad-ranging, inclusive approaches
to learning engaged by contemporary institutional and non-institutional
learners as “hybridized learning”, following Smith (2013b, 26). Advocates of
hybridized learning are especially concerned with ascription of “pedagogic
authority” (Bourdieu and Passeron 1977, 19), which refers to learners’ decisions
regarding from whom they are willing to learn (Froehlich and Smith 2017);
sometimes this can be recognized teachers, but pedagogic authority refers to
the ascription of wisdom or valued knowledge to any particular source—I, for
instance, ascribe and have ascribed significant pedagogic authority to the first
four albums of Led Zeppelin, to Joseph Heller’s (1961) Catch 22, and to numer-
ous scholars and peers across music and music education.
200 • Gareth Dylan Smith
Experience
Along my career trajectory, much of my writing draws on and problematizes
my environment and my experiences—from my study of drummers (Smith
2013a) to the eudaimonic music-making of non-celebrity contemporary musi-
cians (Smith 2016a); from the exploration of gendering in the music business
and music education (2015b) and “success” in popular music (Smith 2013b)
to the discussion of relationship marketing and new models of creativities and
entrepreneurship (Cartwright et al. 2015; Smith and Gillett 2015). My cultural
psychological study of drummers stemmed from an awareness, also observed
by Hart (1990, 30), that as a community drummers were under-researched
(Smith 2013c, 11). Prior to exploring “masculine domination” (Bourdieu 2001)
throughout the music industry and my place of work, I felt “an ethical and
pedagogical obligation to write [that] chapter” (2015b, 61). My work on “(Un)
popular music making and eudaimonism” grew out of a need I felt to explain
that so many musicians of my acquaintance simply “have to make time for
making music” (Smith 2016a). My involvement in this book grew out of my
response to a call for papers so tempting as to be irresistible!
In reference to teaching (history) in a contemporary context in the US,
Ladson-Billings observes:
notable for their potency or for the capacity of the learning journey to change
and empower the authors, included an exploration of homophobic lyrics and
attitudes in popular mainstream hip-hop; work-life balance for professional
musicians with commitments to jobs and families; expressions of feminism in
different movements and “waves”; the queer and transgender punk scene in
London; the dearth of female music producers; and objectification of women
in music videos, audio recordings and performances.
and dissemination of these articles can help to effect positive change in and
through the lives of my and others’ students, so extending from my impetu-
osity reflex and eudaimonistic leanings to a perhaps more compassionate
punk pedagogy.
I feel conflicting, and perhaps complementary, responsibilities in my role
working with undergraduates who expect careers somehow related to, if not
exactly as rewards for, their studies; in my role there is a palpable tension
between training and education, between vocationalist and liberal educational
values and authenticities (Allsup 2015; Jones 2017; Parkinson and Smith 2015).
As I have noted elsewhere, I feel strongly that those of us teaching in higher
education “are obliged to use the liminal space afforded us in the classroom”
(Smith 2015b, 78) to engage in critical educational practice. With students
navigating such a fragile, significant space (Tuan 1977) as contextualizes the
undergraduate or postgraduate journey, the un-criticized status quo is simply
never good enough. I have never been consciously “anarchistic” in my peda-
gogical approach, but recognize that my behaviour could perhaps be construed
as such. I identify strongly with Antliff ’s observation that,
This is what Dines (2015, 25–26) means when he talks about “incorporating
[an ethos of punk] into pedagogical practice”. His words chime with those of
Dewey, who strongly advocated that, “the mature person, to put it in moral
terms, has no right to withhold from the young on given occasions whatever
capacity for sympathetic understanding his own experience has given him”
(1997, 38). Hear, hear.
of a liberal higher education. The advice given to these Texan faculty members
provides frightening and disappointing evidence to support Giroux’s observa-
tion that “there is widespread refusal . . . to address education as a crucial means
for expanding and enabling political agency” (2003, 96). Perhaps even more
alarming in this regard is the Professor Watchlist website that aims to “continue
to fight for free speech and the right for professors to say whatever they wish;
however students, parents, and alumni deserve to know the specific incidents
and names of professors that advance a radical agenda in lecture halls” (Turning
Point USA 2016, emphasis added).
The concept of individual freedom and agency was core to the Levellers’
political philosophy in seventeenth-century Britain, and strong traces of this
unsurprisingly remain in the politics of (former British colony) the United
States. In the fictional dystopian, totalitarian North American state of Gilead,
Margaret Atwood suggests a dichotomy of “freedom to and freedom from”
(1986, 34); while over-simplistic, as binary oppositions are wont to be, this
notion highlights the perennial tension in punk and anarchist ideology between
freedom and responsibility. In government and state ideological terms, this can
be bifurcated as the libertarian/authoritarian dichotomy. As Atwood’s charac-
ter, Aunt Lydia, says, “In the days of anarchy, it was freedom to. Now you are
being given freedom from” (1986, 34). The Levellers’ (the folk-punk band’s)
insistence that there is “one way of life, and that’s your own” highlights the neces-
sary balancing act for governments, citizenry and perhaps especially educators,
between empowering individual agents or actors and accepting responsibility
towards other individuals. This issue is at the core of eudaimonism’s apparent
conundrum, indicated earlier—a stance that is at risk of being an “ethics of the
selfish” (Smith 2016b).
I take solace in Antliff ’s affirmation, “Changing society anarchically through
learning . . . is a process of ‘becoming anarchist’ that necessarily eludes any
final resolution” (2012, 328). As well as trying to be punk, it is a lifetime’s work
continually to become punk. Fortunately, there remain numerous punkademics
(Furness 2012) who see it as their vocation to take this road and effect change.
Niknafs and Przybylski (2017), for example, write about a need for actively
“de-institutionalizing space” in universities, and Kaltefleiter and Nocella (2012,
203) urge and envision:
Notes
1. The title of this chapter is taken from the chorus refrain of the Levellers’ song “One Way” from
their 1991 album, Levelling the Land.
2. We also still make music together, although rarely in the same physical space. We now average
about three years between each rehearsal/recording session.
3. Postgraduate certificate in education (PGCE), the UK’s gateway qualification to teaching for
those with undergraduate degrees outside of education.
4. Levelling the Land is the title of the Levellers’ second album, released in 1991.
5. Alongside the pressing need to write in the “publish or perish” world of academia.
6. “Modules” on degree programmes in the UK are typically referred to as “courses” in, for exam-
ple, the US.
References
Allsup, Randall E. 2015. “The Eclipse of a Higher Education or Problems Preparing Artists in a
Mercantile World.” Music Education Research 17, 3: 251–261.
Antliff, Allan. 2012. “Afterword: Let the Riots Begin.” In Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Actions,
Theories, and Critical Reflections on Education, edited by Robert H. Haworth, 326–328. Oak-
land, CA: PM Press.
Atwood, Margaret. 1986. The Handmaid’s Tale. London: Jonathan Cape.
Barrett, Margaret S. 2011. A Cultural Psychology of Music Education. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Bayard, M. 1999. “Introduction.” In The Philosophy of Punk: More Than Noise! edited by Craig
O’Hara, 8–13. London: AK Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2001. Masculine Domination. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2003. Firing Back: Against the Tyranny of the Market 2. London: Verso.
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1977. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture,
Trans. Richard Nice. London: Sage.
British Broadcasting Corporation. 2011. The Levellers and the Tradition of Dissent. Accessed Janu-
ary 10, 2016. www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/civil_war_revolution/benn_levellers_01.shtml.
Cartwright, P. A., A. Gillett, and G. D. Smith. 2015. “Valuing Networks for Emerging Musicians.”
In Les Tendances Technico-économiques de la Valeur, edited by Valérie LeJeune, 129–160.
Paris: l’Harmattan.
“There’s Only One Way of Life” • 207
Cook, Peter. 2012. The Music of Business: Business Excellence Fused With Music. Gillingham: The
Academy of Rock.
D’Amore, Abigail, and Gareth D. Smith. 2016. “Aspiring to Music Making as Leisure Through the
Musical Futures Classroom.” In The Oxford Handbook of Music Making and Leisure, edited
by Roger Mantie and Gareth D. Smith, 61–80. New York: Oxford University Press.
Della Fave, Antonella, Ingrid Brdar, Teresa Freire, Dianne Vella-Brodrick, and Marié P. Wissing.
2011. “The Eudaimonic and Hedonic Components of Happiness: Qualitative and Quantita-
tive Findings.” Social Indicators Research 100: 185–207.
DeLorenzo, Linda C. 2015a. “Introduction.” In Giving Voice to Democracy in Music Education:
Diversity and Social Justice, edited by Lisa C. DeLorenzo, 1–12. New York: Routledge.
DeLorenzo, Lisa C. 2015b. “Conclusion.” In Giving Voice to Democracy in Music Ducation: Diversity
and Social Justice, edited by Lisa C. DeLorenzo, 252–262. New York: Routledge.
De Rond, Mark. 2008. The Last Amateurs: To Hell and Back With the Cambridge Boat Race Crew.
Cambridge: Icon Books.
Dewey, John. 1997. Experience and Education. New York: Touchstone.
Dierendonck, Dirk van, and Krishna Mohan. 2006. “Some Thoughts on Spirituality and Eudai-
monic Well-Being.” Mental Health, Religion and Culture 9, 3: 227–238.
Dines, Mike. 2015. “Learning Through Resistance: Contextualisation, Creation and Incorporation
of a ‘Punk Pedagogy’.” Journal of Pedagogical Development 5, 3: 20–31.
Dylan, Bob. 1963. “Blowin’ in the Wind.” The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan. Columbia/Sony,
B0001M0KDO: CD.
Dylan, Bob. 1967. “John Wesley Harding.” John Wesley Harding. Sony, B009MBANUU: CD.
Dylan, Bob. 1968. “Chimes of Freedom.” Another Side of Bob Dylan. Sony, B009M94H7C: CD.
Dylan, Bob. 1975. Blood on the Tracks. Sony, B009MBBJK8: CD.
Foxley, Rachel. 2013. The Levellers: Radical Political Thought in the English Revolution. Manchester:
Manchester University Press.
Froehlich, Hildegard C., and Gareth D. Smith. 2017. Sociology of Music Teachers: Practical Applica-
tions. New York: Routledge.
Furness, Zack (Ed.). 2012. Punkademics: The Basement Show in the Ivory Tower. Brooklyn, NY:
Minor Compositions.
Giroux, Henry A. 2003. “Utopian Thinking Under the Sign of Neoliberalism: Towards a Critical
Pedagogy of Educated Hope.” Democracy and Nature 9, 1: 91–104.
Giroux, Henry A. 2007. “Utopian Thinking in Dangerous Times: Critical Pedagogy and the Project
of Educated Hope.” In Utopian Pedagogy: Radical Experiments Against Neoliberal Global-
ization, edited by Mark Coté, Richard J. P. Day, and Greig de Peuter, 25–43. London, ON:
University of Toronto Press.
Giroux, Henry A. 2014a. Neoliberalism’s War on Higher Education. Chicago: Haymarket.
Giroux, Henry A. October 10, 2014b. “Beyond Orwellian Nightmares and Neoliberal Authoritari-
anism.” Academia.edu. www.academia.edu/9474333/Neoliberal_Violence_in_the_Age_of_
Orwellian_Nightmares.
Gordon, Alastair. 2012. Building Recording Studios Whilst Bradford Burned. In Punkademics: The
Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness, 105–124. Brooklyn, NY: Minor
Compositions.
Green, Lucy. 2002. How Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education. Aldershot:
Ashgate.
Green, Lucy. 2008a. Music on Deaf Ears: Musical Meaning, Ideology, Education. London: Abramis.
Green, Lucy. 2008b. Music, Informal Learning, and the School: A New Classroom Pedagogy. Alder-
shot: Ashgate.
Hart, Mickey with Jay Stevens. 1990. Drumming at the Edge of Magic: A Journey Into the Spirit of
Percussion. New York: HarperSanFrancisco.
Hewison, Robert. 2014. Cultural Capital: The Rise and Fall of Creative Britain. London: Verso.
Higgins, Lee. 2012. Community Music: In Theory and in Practice. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Holy Bible. Bible Hub. Accessed January 9, 2016. http://biblehub.com/john/14-6.htm.
Horsley, Stephanie. 2015. “Facing the Music: Pursuing Social Justice Through Music Education in
a Neoliberal World.” In The Oxford Handbook of Social Justice in Music Education, edited
by Cathy Benedict, Patrick Schmidt, Gary Spruce, and Paul Woodford, 62–77. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Jones, Michael. 2017. “Teaching Music Industry in Challenging Times: Addressing the Neoliberal
Employability Agenda in Higher Education at a Time of Music-Industrial Turbulence.” In The
208 • Gareth Dylan Smith
Routledge Research Companion to Popular Music Education, edited by Gareth D. Smith, Zack
Moir, Matt Brennan, Shara Rambarran, and Phil Kirkman, 341–354. Abingdon: Routledge.
Kaltefleiter, Carline K., and Anthony J. Nocella II. 2012. “Anarchy in the Academy: Staying True to
Anarchism as an Academic-Activist.” In Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Actions, Theories,
and Critical Reflections on Education, edited by Robert H. Haworth, 200–216. Oakland, CA:
PM Press.
Ladson-Billings, Gloria. 2015. “You Gotta Fight the Power: The Place of Music in Social Justice
Education.” In The Oxford Handbook of Social Justice in Music Education, edited by Cathy
Benedict, Patrick Schmidt, Gary Spruce, and Paul Woodford, 406–419. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Levellers, The. 1991. “One Way.” Levelling the Land. China, B0000925P3: CD.
Levellers, The. 1991. Levelling the Land. China, B0000925P3: CD.
Lynch, Kathleen, Margaret Crean, and Marie Moran. 2010. “Equality and Social Justice: The Uni-
versity as a Site of Struggle.” In The Routledge International Handbook of the Sociology of
Education, edited by M. W. Apple, Stephen J. Ball, and Luis Armando Gandin, 296–305.
Oxford: Routledge.
Mantie, Roger, and Lee Higgins. 2015. “Paedeia Con Salsa: Charles Keil, Groovology, and Under-
graduate Music Curriculum.” College Music Symposium 55. http://dx.doi.org/10.18177/
sym.2015.55.fr.10885.
Mantie, Roger, and Gareth Dylan Smith (Ed.). 2016. The Oxford Handbok of Music Making and
Leisure. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mok, Annie. 2010. Enculturation and Learning in Music: The Attitudes, Values and Beliefs of Four
Hong Kong Socio-Musical Groups. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of London.
Niknafs, Nasim, and Liz Przybylski. 2017. “Popular Music and (R)evolution of the Classroom
Apace: Occupy Wall Street in the Music School.” In The Routledge Research Companion to
Popular Music Education, edited by Gareth D. Smith, Zack Moir, Matt Brennan, Shara Ram-
barran, and Phil Kirkman, 412–424. Abingdon: Routledge.
Norton, David L. 1976. Personal Destinies: A Philosophy of Ethical Individualism. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Parkinson, Tom, and Gareth D. Smith. 2015. “Towards an Epistemology of Authenticity in Higher
Popular Music Education.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 14, 1: 93–127.
Rashidi, Waleed. 2012. “Punk Rock Docs: A Qualitative Study.” In Punkademics: The Basement
Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness, 66–85. Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions.
Ryan, Richard M., Veronika Huta, and Edward L. Deci. 2008. “Living Well: A Self-Determination
Theory Perspective on Eudaimonia.” Journal of Happiness Studies 9: 139–170.
Shaiken, Harley. 1977. “Craftsman Into Baby Sitter.” In Disabling Professions, edited by Ivan Illich,
Irving K. Zola, John McKnight, Jonathan Caplan, and Harley Shaiken. London: Marion
Boyars.
Smith, Gareth D. 2011. “Freedom to Versus Freedom From: Frameworks and Flexibility in Assess-
ment on an Edexcel BTEC Level 3 Diploma Popular Music Performance Programme.” Music
Education Research International 5: 34–45.
Smith, Gareth D. 2013a. “Seeking ‘Success’ in Popular Music.” Music Education Research Interna-
tional 6: 26–37.
Smith, Gareth D. 2013b. “Pedagogy for Employability in a Foundation Degree (Fd.A.) in Creative
Musicianship: Introducing Peer Collaboration.” In Collaboration in Higher Music Education,
edited by Helena Gaunt and Heidi Westerlund, 193–198. Farnham: Ashgate.
Smith, Gareth D. 2013c. I Drum, Therefore I Am: Being and Becoming a Drummer. Farnham: Ashgate.
Smith, Gareth D. 2015a. “Masculine Domination and Intersecting Fields in Private-sector Popu-
lar Music Performance Education in the UK.” In Bourdieu and the Sociology of Music and
Music Education, edited by Pamela Burnard, Ylva Hofstander, and Johan Söderman, 61–79.
Farnham: Ashgate.
Smith, Gareth D. 2015b. “Neoliberalism and Symbolic Violence in Higher Music Education.” In
Giving Voice to Democracy: Diversity and Social Justice in the Music Classroom, edited by Lisa
C. DeLorenzo, 75–84. New York: Routledge.
Smith, Gareth D. 2016a. “(Un)popular Music Making and Eudaimonia.” In The Oxford Handbook
of Music Making and Leisure, edited by Roger Mantie and Gareth D. Smith, 151–170. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Smith, Gareth D. 2016b. Be True to Who You Are: Eudaimonism and the Ethics of the Selfish.
Accessed March 20, 2017. www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-0XoatzTzM.
“There’s Only One Way of Life” • 209
Smith, Gareth D., and Colin Durrant. 2006. “Mind Styles and Paradiddles—Beyond the Bell Curve:
Towards an Understanding of Learning Preferences, and Implications for Instrumental
Teachers.” Research Studies in Music Education 26: 51–62.
Smith, Gareth D., and Alex Gillett. 2015. “Creativities, Innovation and Networks in Garage Punk
Rock: A Case Study of the Eruptörs.” Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts 4,
1: 9–24.
Smith, Gareth D., and Atar Shafighian. 2013. “Creative Space and the ‘Silent Power of Traditions’ in
Popular Music Performance Education.” In Developing Creativities in Higher Music Educa-
tion: International Perspectives and Practices, edited by Pamela Burnard, 256–267. London:
Routledge.
Sofianos, Lisa, Robin Ryde, and Charlie Waterhouse. 2015. The Truth of Revolution, Brother: An
Exploration of Punk Philosophy. London: Situation Press.
Songlyrics. 2015. The Levellers One Way. Accessed December 28, 2015. www.songlyrics.com/the-
levellers/one-way-lyrics/.
Sonu, Debbie. 2012. “Illusions of Compliance: Performing the Public and Hidden Transcripts of
Social Justice Education in Neoliberal Times.” Curriculum Inquiry 42, 2: 240–259.
Torrez, Estrella. 2012. “Punk Pedagogy: Education for Liberation and Love.” In Punkademics: The
Basement Show in the Ivory Tower, edited by Zack Furness, 131–142. Brooklyn, NY: Minor
Compositions.
Turning Point USA. 2016. Professor Watchlist. Accessed March 20, 2017. http://professorwatchlist.
org/.
Waterman, Alan S. 1993. “Two Conceptions of Happiness: Contrasts of Personal Expressiveness
(Eudaimonia) and Hedonic Enjoyment.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64:
678–691.
Wermund, Benjamin. 2015. “UH Faculty Suggest Steering Clear of Some Topics If Students Armed.”
Houston Chronicle. Accessed February 28, 2016. www.chron.com/local/education/campus-
chronicles/article/UH-faculty-may-drop-topics-from-curriculum-as-6849002.php.
Woodford, Paul. 2005. Democracy and Music Education: Liberalism, Ethics, and the Politics of Prac-
tice. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Wright, Ruth (Ed.). 2010. Sociology and Music Education. Farnham: Ashgate.
14
From Punk Ethics to the
Pedagogy of the Bad Kids: Core
Values and Social Liberation
TIAGO TELES SANTOS AND PAULA GUERRA
Introduction
A sense of crisis is often felt as a normative part of people’s everyday lives
(Streeck 2016). For this reason, the social, political and economic catalysts
that shaped the emergence—and probably the most visible era—of punk in
the 1970s seem to make more sense now than ever. Punk’s notoriety made it
into a cultural form that echoes through time with its characteristics resem-
bling those of Ozymandias in Shelley’s (1818/2008) sonnet; like “the king of
kings”, its ability to stand above the chaos makes it a perfect habitat for the
emergence of oppositional ways of thinking. This chapter presents and dis-
cusses a set of characteristics of punk that render it simultaneously a rich
object of study and a starting point for pedagogical modalities that enable
the social inclusion and empowerment of individuals lying on the margins of
society. Understanding punk as a cultural form defined by a set of values in
opposition to normative and mainstream cultural modalities—as a “space” of
freedom—we start by presenting our own perspective on punk; as a means
to mount a critique of formal models of education, focusing on inequalities
inherent in or associated with these models and addressing the “hidden cur-
riculum” (Apple 1999b), the ideological apparatuses of the state and new
forms of “pedagogy of the oppressed” (Freire 1970). We contend that for-
mal schooling does not work effectively for everyone in the same way; hence,
we propose that the core values of punk—and particularly its do-it-yourself
(DIY) ethos—might undergird the pedagogies of non-formal education to
provide individuals with skills, perspectives and attributes that enable them
to assume control over their own lives, and to find alternative strategies for
integration and empowerment.
210
Pedagogy of the Bad Kids • 211
As such, we argue that punk has a critical role to play in the theory and prac-
tice of education as it enables and reiterates a critical opposition to the status
quo, permitting multiple resistance stances and contributing a counterhege-
monic voice through its informal and de-centralized networks and activities.
These have historically included a flux of music, fanzines and styles; the liveli-
ness of labels and stores; bands’ recording and releasing of their own music;
participation in social movements; the revival of community centres and vol-
unteering; and the engagement in professions centred on an ethos of resistance,
among other features and indicators. Taken as a whole, these have enabled punk
as a form-cum-movement to develop strategies for maintaining high degrees of
independence and evade the constraints of neoliberalism (Guerra and Quin-
tela 2014; Guerra 2014; Guerra and Silva 2015). Our approach is based on a
theoretical itinerary focused on the contributions of writers such as Foucault
(1986), Bourdieu (2007), Freire (2005) and Apple (1999a, 1999b). From this we
will draw ideas for reflection and discussion about individuality and difference
that are key aspects of punk (Sofianos et al. 2015, 23) while presenting what we
believe to be the core values of a punk ethos and ethic, and the way these might
be mobilized in school curricula and educational practices.
Punk is a space of and for resistance. According to Foucault (1997), the act of
resisting is not detached from power; there is no exteriority, no absolute exte-
rior to power. In this way, power relations depend on a multiplicity of points
of resistance that fulfil the role of the adversary, the place of the target. For
Charlesworth (2000, 17), “the world is a particular world, come to be known
in a particular way: a way that makes possible the realisation of life projects”.
This “particular world” is based on the being-in-the-world and on a set of non-
cognitive attitudes that refer to what Merleau-Ponty (2004) defines as the world
of perception, or, in other words, the world that is revealed to us through our
senses in our daily lives. This world of perception, despite being referred to as
an illusion by Merleau-Ponty (2004), is the one that we know, the one upon
which we act and from which we receive information. It is this world that forms
and transforms our lives, and upon which existence is defined. In this con-
text, space is social and is a central element in the definition of the universe of
possibilities—the limits of the thinkable (Castoriadis 2000).
For Lefebvre (2010), social space is a product of a sequence and set of opera-
tions that cannot be reduced to the place of one object or product among others;
social spaces contain multiple products that collectively frame their interrela-
tions. According to Bourdieu (2010a), if physical space is defined by the order
of the coexistences, social space is defined by mutual exclusion, or distinction,
of the positions that constitute it while it structures the juxtaposition of social
positions. It is this inescapable struggle for distinction between individuals and
groups—resonating with and actualizing Foucault’s understanding of power—
that shapes the social world. The significance of this concept is that space serves
as a locus for everything else; what is comprised in the world is “a body to
which there is a world, which is included in the world, according to a form of
inclusion irreducible to the simple material and spatial inclusion” (Bourdieu
1998, 199). To this point we have two different, complementary perspectives
regarding space and the world, one presenting the world from the perspective
of individual, perceived experience, and the other situating individuals in the
field (Guerra 2015).
Written into the world of their own description, in a reduced reality of
significations and frameworks, how is it possible for individuals to deal with
the dissonance between identities and wills, and the context in which they are
inscribed? The myth of Tiresias worked, for Schutz, as a springboard to exam-
ine the way in which the thoughts of men and women anticipate future events
and, moreover, to operate as a distinction between the kingdom of the social
world that stands beyond human control and the one upon which individuals
can act (Schutz, in Auyero and Swistun 2009). Nevertheless, unlike Tiresias,
confronting the world that is imposed on them and which escapes their control,
a world on which their existence depends, human beings create anticipations
in the shape of fears and hopes. At this point we propose that punk can serve
as a shelter that enables individuals to take the present into their own hands, to
Pedagogy of the Bad Kids • 213
change the course of their lives by their own will while reclaiming no future,3
instead creating and enacting a different future (Santos 2012; Guerra and Ben-
nett 2015).
In this way, punk offers opportunities for people to recognize collective
cultural and political desires as their own (Thompson 2004). This operates in
contrast to the identity crisis facing contemporary society, which, according to
Fromm (1999), reflects the crisis produced by its members’ becoming instru-
ments without individual personalities, whose identities are reliant on their
participation in corporations. One of punk’s structuring characteristics, one
that makes it a stronghold for hope, is its perpetual refusal to stop imagining
the world as other than it is (Thompson 2004). Neoliberalism is neither natural
nor necessary—this is a guiding principle for many punks who cannot fully
imagine how a better world might be, but who refuse to accept that this one
cannot change (Thompson 2004).
In this sense, we might see punk as a large family, with different people and
weird uncles, that accepts, protects and often (although not always) welcomes
its different elements. Punk is informed by points of view, experiences, trajec-
tories, ideals, expectations and contexts, orbiting around one another to form
collective and shared experiences. Coming from different social, generational
and geographical backgrounds, individuals can share a culture of resistance—
resistance to the status quo and to politics, and, above all, resistance against
the impacts of both in everyday life. In a society in crisis, that is shattering at
both social and personal levels, one can share a culture of opposition, a culture
that can either exist only at the level of discourse or can be actualized. Here,
the strength and modality of one’s relationship with punk can be the key to
understanding this ambiguity. For those who maintain a strong connection and
high levels of participation, the discursive strength is reflected in their daily
lives and everyday practices. When the level of participation and contact with
the scene, or identification with punk’s everyday life and mode of functioning
are reduced, the practical impact of the ideals diminishes also, resulting in a
platonic affiliation, a kind of non-actualized relationship where one becomes
more detached from day-to-day practice but still identifies with a concept or
an idea (Santos 2012).
Nevertheless, punk is also made from these antitheses and antagonisms. If
its ideological matrix opens the door for a crowd, sometimes punk only has
room for a few. In this way, there are individuals for whom punk became its own
antithesis, meaning that punk adopted some of the mechanisms that structure
the same world it criticizes (Silva and Guerra 2015). Otherwise, in a context of
crisis (both personal and global, perfunctory or more sustained), the familiarity
that punk seems to offer its “militants” is a result of its ability to frame different
feelings and the possibility for individuals to be “punk” while being different
from other punks. Punk thus becomes a space able to guarantee shelter, and
to be a support base for those who, for one reason or another, feel different or
214 • Tiago Teles Santos and Paula Guerra
displaced (Santos 2012). This is possible because of punk’s deep embrace of the
logics of social and political positioning through negotiation between individu-
als’ or groups’ identities and the dominant order, dissent and opposition to such
order, and a celebration of self-initiative as the DIY philosophy (Guerra and
Silva 2015; Sofianos et al. 2015).
Punk has been declared dead,4 but punk survives. It took time to reveal
itself, and soon after faked its own death. However, punk was here long before
it acquired its name.5 It is therefore possible to look at punk based on the idea
that it “existed before it existed”, as an attitude that prefigured its definition and
that enabled it to survive its own “death”, maintaining the “punk attitude” at its
core. In the words of Clark:
Gone the hair, the boutique clothes, the negative rebellion [. . .]. Gone the
name. Maybe it had to die to receive its own life insurance. When punk
was declared dead it left as a legacy to its successors—punk itself—a new
subcultural discourse. [. . .] By freeing itself from its own orthodoxies—its
costumes, musical rules, behaviours and thoughts—punk incorporated the
anarchism to which it aspired.
(Clark 2003, 234)
and selfish society (Apple 1999a) wherein the pillars of stability are shattered
and global uncertainty reigns, accompanied by shifting political events that
invoke some of humanity’s worst memories: fear and loathing of the other, the
resurfacing of populist right-wing movements, the decaying value of knowl-
edge and information, and of values like truth and honesty. These are complex
times, lived in a society inhabited by “people visibly unhappy: alone, anxious,
depressed, destructive, dependent—people who are joyful to kill the time we so
eagerly try to save” (Fromm 1999, 17).
School and education play a key role in this project, one that we discuss with
two cases and from two points of view: the internal and the external. According
to Bourdieu and Passeron’s work (1978), the schooling system can be under-
stood, despite its professed goals of equality and social mobility, as the centre
of social reproduction mechanisms, operating in order to sustain the order of
things, with all the inequalities that it involves. Discussing pedagogic action,
they posit that the dominant cultural forces tend to remain in a dominant posi-
tion, defining and imposing the value of the economic and symbolic market
upon the dominated classes. In this way, pedagogic action is always constituted
as symbolic violence as it works to impose and inculcate certain significations
and exclude others by selection (Bourdieu and Passeron 1978; see also Illich
1971). According to Bourdieu:
For the most and least favoured in this system to remain as such, it is necessary
and sufficient that school ignores, at a curriculum level and in its methods,
techniques and evaluation criteria, the cultural inequalities between individuals
from different social backgrounds (Bourdieu 2007, 53). Bernstein (1996) helps
us understand the grounds for these affirmations in his analysis of pedagogi-
cal discourse. Codes, classifications and frameworks fulfil an important role
in education. While the code is a “regulative base, acquired tacitly, that selects
and integrates relevant meanings, ways of realisations and evocative contexts”
(Bernstein 1996, 143), the classification and framework are used, respectively,
to describe the power and control relations of what is taught and learnt and the
ways in which these relations influence how the teaching/learning process is
conducted. Bernstein further demonstrates that children from different social
origins develop different codes, or forms of speech: children from a working-
class background usually demonstrate the use of a restricted code, a discourse
deeply imbricated in their own specific cultural context. Their particular world
216 • Tiago Teles Santos and Paula Guerra
is perceived as guided by evident norms and values that, consequently, are not
usually expressed in their language. Here, language is useful to communicate
practical experiences but not so useful to discuss abstract ideas, processes or
relationships. Middle and upper class children’s socialization, by contrast, usu-
ally permits the acquisition of an elaborate code, a style of language where the
meaning of the words can be individualized in order to adapt to the demands
of particular situations. It enables children to deal with the unexpected and to
become more adaptable to different situations (Bernstein 1996). We see with
Bourdieu and Passeron that the schooling system’s pedagogic action is derived
from the dominant classes. Bernstein reveals the basic level at which disadvan-
tages operate.
Following Bernstein, Abrantes (2010), writing about the Portuguese reality,
argues that while the existence of multiple intelligences can be acknowledged,
the school only acknowledges a limited range:
“skills” but also the reproduction of its subjection to the ruling ideology
or of the “practice” of that ideology, with the proviso that it is not enough
to say “not only but also”, for it is clear that it is in the forms and under the
forms of ideological subjection that provision is made for the reproduc-
tion of the skills of labour power.
(Althusser 1971, 89)
Paulo Freire’s (2005) work is in alignment with Althusser in this regard. Freire’s
banking concept of education describes the process of depositing knowledge by
Pedagogy of the Bad Kids • 217
Many students, especially those who are poor, intuitively know what
the schools do for them. They school them to confuse process and
substance . . . The pupil is thereby “schooled” to confuse teaching with
learning, grade advancement with education, a diploma with compe-
tence, and fluency with the ability to say something new. His imagination
is “schooled” to accept service in place of value.
(Illich 1985, 16)
In spite of these critiques, school has (little) room for knowledge and educa-
tion. However, it has become clear that education is under new management
and the neoliberal ideology pervades this ISA (Parkinson and Smith 2015).
Michael Apple explains that “the calls for a focus on ‘hard’ rather than ‘soft’
subjects and a call to return to ‘real curricula’ and to rigorously police the teach-
ing of them, are visible both in government and in the media” (Apple 2013, 211;
Department for Business Innovation and Skills 2016). Making use of rhetorical
devices, profit making is gaining ground in education, transforming the state
and its forms, and commodifying schools, students, knowledge and policies
(Allsup 2015; Apple 2013, 211). Apple (2013, 2016) suggests it is possible to
observe the emergence of a new “hegemonic bloc” constituted by four move-
ments: neoliberalism, pressuring for a dependency between education and
corporate models; neoconservatism, demanding a common and consensual
culture; new managerialism, committed to audit cultures and “very reductive
forms of accountability and testing in schools”; and “authoritarian populist”
religious movements, assuming “ultraconservative positions in education and
the larger society” (Apple 2016, 130). This development is felt especially in the
reform of education and social services:
set of economic goals. It has created an umbrella that not only involves an
alliance of a number of powerful groups but also is extremely creative in
the ways in which it connects with people’s common sense.
(Apple 2016, 129)
Through the use of what Apple describes as “corporate style accountability pro-
cedures” (2016, 130) and an uncritical point of view to the work of teachers and
to curricular knowledge, this new model for education and school—visible in
the charter schools and vouchers market in the USA, the academy schools in the
UK, even in the public school system in Portugal—focuses on producing a new
type of student and citizen similar to those presented by Fromm. Individuals are
“malleable rather than committed, flexible rather than principled—essentially
depthless” (Ball in Soudien et al. 2013, 455), “within the interstices of perfor-
mativity through audits, inspections, appraisals, self-reviews, quality assurance,
research assessments, output indicators and so on” (Ball in Soudien et al. 2013,
455). Also, within this process of instituting “thin” forms, neoliberalism desta-
bilizes its opposition through a process of disarticulation and rearticulation
(Ball in Soudien et al. 2013), or opposition (Žižek 2002), emptying words of
their original meanings—of their substance—and filling them with new ones.
Neoliberalism thus renders opposing it very difficult, through reinforcement of
the new language that substantiates and supports it:
Thus, through long-term and creative ideological work in the media and
elsewhere, “thick” meanings of democracy grounded in full collective
participation are replaced by “thin” understandings where democracy is
reduced to choice on a market and to constantly providing evidence that
one has successfully made the right decisions . . . These new understand-
ings are accompanied by major shifts in identity. Subjectivities are slowly
but ultimately radically transformed.
(Soudien et al. 2013, 458)
Guerra and Silva’s study of Portuguese punk texts analysed the lyrics of 264
punk songs, gathered from interviewees. From the 130 most cited songs,
220 • Tiago Teles Santos and Paula Guerra
In “Há que violentar o Sistema”, the Aqui d’el-Rock hymn, the band sings:
“Think/ And guess/ What is what/ That being old/ As shitting/ Is new/ Or
still to be invented/ Worse than good/ Better than bad/ That for changing so
much/ Keeps the same/ (The system)/ So/ There’s a need to force the system”6
(in Silva and Guerra 2015, 105). Crise Total, in their song, “Assassinos no
Poder”, another one of the most-cited, sing, “And now what to do/ Assassins
in power/ Society’s to blame/ For what’s about to happen/ Assassins in power/
Assassins in power/ Everything we want/ Will go down the drain/ If we won’t
take out/ The assassins from power”7 (in Silva and Guerra 2015, 107). These
excerpts highlight the oppositional potential of punk and a strong political
stance. Both these bands are associated with the emergence of Portuguese
punk, and their songs accompanied the history of the scene.8 In others we
can observe the strong spirit of union and community, like in the following
excerpt from X-Acto’s song “Somos uma só voz”: “Everyone equal, only one
voice!/ From every race, only one voice!/ From every sex, only one voice!/
You can have the right clothes/ You can have the right albums/ But if it is not
from the heart, then it is not hardcore!/ Don’t stop, never shut up, never stop
to resist/ And if it’s not about respect, then it is not hardcore!” (in Silva and
Guerra 2015, 118).
Freire (2005) proposed a “problem posing” education as a “revolutionary
futurity”, one that helps individuals to transcend themselves via knowledge and
awareness of the world (Freire 2005, 84). This “problem posing” education, “as a
humanist and liberating praxis, posits as fundamental that the people subjected
to domination must fight for their emancipation” (Freire 2005, 86). Education
only succeeds as a relationship that overcomes authoritarianism through the
becoming of both the teachers and the students as subjects of the educational
process, and through the use of dialogical action focused on cooperation, unity,
organization and cultural synthesis (Freire 2005, 86).
How can this be achieved in the scope of a punk pedagogy? We agree with
Woods’s assertion that the critical pedagogues’ “aim [is] to empower students
Pedagogy of the Bad Kids • 221
Conclusion
By approaching punk as a free space, we aim to pave the way for discussing
punk pedagogy inscribed in punk, and its characteristics; moreover, we have
attempted to discuss a pedagogy that draws its tenets from punk in order to
constitute itself. Punk’s oppositional nature and its disaffiliation, its ethos and
its networks, its texts and discourses, its influences and what it influenced,
make it a melting pot for new things to come. In a world in transformation,
whose key structures are evolving to become unrecognizable, destroying the
places whence punk emerged, punk seems like it can be/become one of the “old
world’s” safe havens, preserving an ethos that contains ideals of freedom and
equality, community and empathy (Santos 2012; Guerra and Bennett 2015).
Punk is a form of music and a bearer of aesthetic, cultural, political and
symbolic meanings that have withstood innovation and dissent. It mapped
new undergrounds and spread itself through the streets while shouting that
anyone could be a part of it. Punk, for the UK at least, was a cultural and aes-
thetic movement that sprang from dynamics of the post-war consensus and its
eventual breakdown. From Rab Butler’s Education Act of 1944, the formation
of the Welfare State and the challenges of decolonization, anti-imperialism
and the Cold War, punk emerged as a unique underground phenomenon.
It is a singularity positioning itself on the fringe of, or as an outlier to, the
222 • Tiago Teles Santos and Paula Guerra
Notes
1. Writer and Portuguese poet (Porto, June 9, 1900–Lisbon, February 8, 1985). Authors’ translation.
2. Herberto Helder was a Portuguese poet, considered the “greatest Portuguese poet” of the second
half of the twentieth century. Authors’ translation.
3. No future was one of the most significant banners in punk’s emergence, one immortalised by the
Sex Pistols’ eponymous song.
4. After its 1977 boom, punk suffered from a process of institutionalization and commodification
that led to it being declared dead by some of its prominent figures. Standing against the system
and institutions this process was perceived as a hard blow to its core tenets. Regarding this mat-
ter see Crass’s seminal song “Punk is Dead” from their 1978 album The Feeding of the 5000.
5. Greil Marcus (1989) posits punk as a contemporary label for an ethos or cultural phenomenon
that is traceable across several centuries of Western history.
6. Our translation.
7. Our translation.
8. Punk arrived in Portugal soon after the country’s Carnation Revolution that paved the way for
democracy. Answering to what some perceived as a dull everyday life and a lack of cultural alterna-
tives, punk was well established among youth. Nonetheless it was not until the mid-1980s and the
beginning of the 1990s that it boomed and you could see a relevant number of bands and fanzines
emerging. It is still a broad movement in Portugal where it was never much institutionalised—apart
from a couple of bands that came from a punk background but soon became something else—and
keeps on offering a counter-hegemonic and anti-system alternative.
Pedagogy of the Bad Kids • 223
References
Abrantes, Paulo. 2010. “Desigualdades Sociais na Educação Básica.” In Desigualdades Sociais
2010—Estudos e Indicadores, edited by Renato Miguel do Carmo, 135–143. Lisbon: Editora
Mundos Sociais.
Allsup, Randall E. 2015. “The Eclipse of a Higher Education or Problems Preparing Artists in a
Mercantile World.” Music Education Research 17, 3: 251–261.
Althusser, L. 1971. Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Apple, Michael W. 1999a. Educação e Poder. Porto: Porto Editora.
Apple, Michael W. 1999b. Ideologia e Currículo. Porto: Porto Editora.
Apple, Michael W. 2013 “Between Traditions: Stephen Ball and the Critical Sociology of Education.”
London Review of Education 11: 206–217.
Apple, Michael W. 2016. “Introduction to ‘The Politics of Educational Reforms’.” Educational Forum
80: 127–136.
Auyero, Javier, and Déborah Alejandra Swistun. 2009. Flammable: Environmental Suffering in an
Argentine Shantytown. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ball, Stephen J. 2012. Global Education Inc.: New Policy Networks and the Neoliberal Imaginary.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Bernstein, Basil. 1996. A Estruturação do Discurso Pedagógico: Classe, Códigos e Controle. Petrópo-
lis: Editora Vozes.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1998. Meditações Pascalianas. Oeiras: Celta Editora.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2007. Escritos de Educação. Rio de Janeiro: Vozes.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2010a. A Distinção: Uma Crítica Social da Faculdade do Juízo. Lisbon: Edições 70.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2010b. The Weight of the World: Social Suffering in Contemporary Society. Cam-
bridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1978. A Reprodução: Elementos Para Uma Teoria do
Sistema de Ensino. Lisbon: Editorial Veja.
Burawoy, Michael. 2005. “For Public Sociology.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 56:
259–294.
Castoriadis, Cornelius. 2000. Figuras do Pensável: As Encruzilhadas do Labirinto. Lisbon: Instituto
Piaget.
Charlesworth, Simon J. 2000. A Phenomenology of Working Class Experience. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Clark, Dylan. 2003. “The Death and Life of Punk, the Last Subculture.” In The Post-Subcultures
Reader, edited by David Muggleton and Rupert Weinzierl, 223–236. Oxford: Berg. Cap.
Department for Business Innovation and Skills. 2016. Success as a Knowledge Economy: Social
Mobility and Student Choice. London: Department for Business Innovation and Skills.
Dines, Mike. 2015. “Learning Through Resistance: Contextualisation, Creation and Incorporation
of a ‘Punk Pedagogy’.” Journal of Pedagogic Development 5: 20–31.
Dunn, Kevin C. 2008. “Never Mind the Bollocks: The Punk Rock Politics of Global Communica-
tion.” Review of International Studies 3: 193–210.
Ferreira, David. 2012. Interview With Es.Col.A da Fontinha. July 7. Accessed June 5, 2016. https://
theoccupiedtimes.org/?p=5743.
Foucault, Michel. 1986. “Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias.” Diacritics 16: 22–27.
Foucault, Michel. 1997. Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth: The Essential Works of Michel Foucault 1954–
1984. Vol. 1. New York: New Press.
Foucault, Michel. 2002. The Order of Things: An Archeology of the Human Sciences. London: Rout-
ledge.
Freedman, William. 1986. “Postponement and Perspectives in Shelley’s ‘Ozymandias’.” Studies in
Romanticism 25: 63–73.
Freire, Paulo. 2005. The Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Fromm, Erich. 1999. Ter ou Ser? Lisbon: Editorial Presença.
Giroux, Henry A. 2014. The Violence of Organized Forgetting: Thinking Beyond America’s Disimagi-
nation Machine. San Francisco: City Lights.
Giroux, Henry A. 2016. America’s Addiction to Terrorism. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Guerra, Paula. 2010. A Instável Leveza do Rock. Génese, Dinâmica e Consolidação do Rock Alterna-
tivo em Portugal (1980–2010). PhD diss., University of Porto, Porto.
Guerra, Paula. 2013. “Punk, Ação e Contradição em Portugal. Uma Aproximação às Culturas Juve-
nis Contemporâneas.” Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais 102/103: 111–134.
224 • Tiago Teles Santos and Paula Guerra
Guerra, Paula. 2014. “Punk, Expectations, Breaches, and Metamorphoses.” Critical Arts 28: 195–211.
Guerra, Paula. 2015. “Keep It Rocking: The Social Space of Portuguese Alternative Rock (1980–2010).”
Journal of Sociology 51: 615–630.
Guerra, Paula, and Andy Bennett. 2015. “Never Mind the Pistols? The Legacy and Authenticity of
the Sex Pistols in Portugal.” Popular Music and Society 38: 500–521.
Guerra, Paula, and Pedro Quintela. 2014. “Spreading the Message! Fanzines and the Punk Scene in
Portugal.” Punk and Post Punk 3: 203–224.
Guerra, Paula, and Augusto Santos Silva. 2015. “Music and More Than Music: The Approach to
Difference and Identity in the Portuguese Punk.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 18,
2: 207–223.
Helder, Herbert. 2013. Os Passos em Volta. Lisbon: Assírio e Alvim.
Illich, Ivan. 1971. Deschooling Society. London: Marion Boyars.
Illich, Ivan. 1985. A Sociedade sem Escolas. Petrópolis: Editora Vozes.
James, Kieran. 2009. “ ‘This Is England’: Punk Rock’s Realist/Idealist Dialectic and Its Implications
for Critical Accounting Education.” Accounting Forum 33: 127–145.
Laing, Dave. 2015. One Chord Wonders: Power and Meaning in Punk Rock. Philadelphia: Open
University Press.
Lefebvre, Henri. 2010. The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.
Marcus, Greil. 1989. Lipstick Traces: A Secret History of the 20th Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 2004. The World of Perception. London: Routledge.
Parkinson, Tom, and Gareth D. Smith. 2015. “Towards an Epistemology of Authenticity in Higher
Popular Music Education.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 14, 1: 93–127.
Santos, Tiago T. 2012. “Bad Kids. Para uma compreensão dos universos simbólicos e materiais de
existência: referências punk na cidade do Porto.” MA dissertation, University of Porto, Porto.
Shantz, Jeffery. 2012. “Spaces of Learning: The Anarchist Free Skool.” In Anarchist Pedagogies: Col-
lective Actions, Eheories, and Critical Reflections on Education, edited by Robert J. Haworth,
124–144. Oakland, CA: PM Press.
Shelley. 1818/2008. “Ozymandias.” In Rosalind and Helen—A Modern Eclogue With Other Poems.
Abdul Press.
Silva, Augusto Santos, and Paula Guerra. 2015. As Palavras do Punk. Lisbon: Alêtheia Editores.
Sofianos, Lisa, Robin Ryde, and Charlie Waterhouse. 2015. The Truth of Revolution, Brother: An
Exploration of Punk Philosophy. London: Situation Press.
Soudien, C., Michael W. Apple, and Sheila Slaughter. 2013. “Global Education Inc: New Policy Net-
works and the Neo-liberal Imaginary.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 34: 453–466.
Streeck, Wolfgang. 2016. “On the Dismal Future of Capitalism.” Socio-Economic Review 14, 1:
164–170.
Thompson, Stacy. 2004. Punk Productions: Unfinished Business. New York: State University of New
York Press.
Tucker, Brian L. 2008. Punk and the Political: The Role of Practices in Subcultural Lives. MA dis-
sertation, Ohio University.
Zerzan, John. 2007. Futuro Primitivo. Porto: Deriva Editores.
Žižek, Slavoj. 2002. Welcome to the Desert of the Real. London: Verso.
Index
225
226 • Index