WHY DID PUNK TAKE SO MUCH LONGER TO CATCH ON IN THE US THAN IN THE UK?

user ballots

choices :

WHY DID PUNK TAKE SO MUCH LONGER TO CATCH ON IN THE US THAN IN THE UK?


[+] ballot by nuckinfutz
ACTIVE Wed May 05, 04 - Fri Dec 19, 08

When punk first broke out in the late 70s, much of it did well on the UK charts but it failed to achieve the same kind of widespread popularity (at least initially) in the US. Why do you think that is?

I don't know
I don't care
uk music culture always been more diverse
US know good shows UK may not
because it sucks


Ballot #31350 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 2.0 © BESTANDWORST.COM
smile bank:









similiar ballots:
58223. What is the best punk cover of a non-punk song?
7738. If we were to catch Osama...
42285. Childrens toys that will never catch on
74391. Did you ever catch someone looking through your window while you were naked?
86611. What will happen when our actions catch up with us?
105673. You catch your 16 yo daughter touching herself
112021. Stirling Engines : Why didn't it ever catch on?
112707. To Catch a Predator : Entrapment?
115781. Best nonsensical catch phrase
26332. Did you ever catch yourself singing along to music playing?


COMMENTS:
The division between college/underground music and mainstream music was never a big thing in the uk - obscure bands have always been more like ly to get exposure...
by waxy on Sun Jul 04, 04 11:36pm [+]

Because the British had many reasons to be pis*ed off.
by Civilian on Fri Dec 10, 04 10:05am [+]

^What he said. There wasn't the social upheaval in the U.S. like there was in Britain at the time.
by um__yeah on Fri Nov 24, 06 3:19pm [+]






About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact
© 2002-2008 BestAndWorst.com All Rights Reserved