ngw

What a beast, the hardcore prior to punk '77. Hardcore is years later; "Fresh Fruit" is often considered the first hardcore album, and that’s in '80. Punk '77, in its various forms, was innovative and a necessary breaking point; one can't limit oneself to the usual bands to sketch a historical period and fundamental artistic movement, nor confine oneself to the usual self-referential musical frameworks to talk about "innovation" (oh, they were the first to use the double bass drum, innovators!).
LC is the Clash's first major label album, and it has _absolutely nothing_ to do with punk; at the time it faced heavy criticism and was almost boycotted, seen as a betrayal for a myriad of reasons, leading to protests/fights at a Clash concert, right in Italy (Bologna) in '80, akin to a decisive attack from the Crass.
It’s a complex and varied album, extremely refined under its surface, with a focus on "sounds" that certainly clashes with any punk album of the era (the work, clearly different, can however be compared in intent to the wonderful Chairs Missing by Wire), and distinctly contaminated by Dub and Surf. A must-have album, magnificent, an irreplaceable record. Certainly not "the most important in history," but the Clash, in my opinion, were the first in this context to be influenced by very different musical genres, an attitude that would later lead to things like Zen Arcade, Energy (Operation Ivy, for those foolish enough not to know it ^^), and Nickels by the Minutemen.
Your review, however, is ugly and inaccurate (no offense, of course, just my two cents).

I forgot:

Embarrassing album; by the way, one would expect much different influences from G&R. This is just trendy rehashed by the star system they were inevitably entangled in.

I, who normally criticize everything and everyone, have a soft spot for WZ.

I agree on the unlistenable nature of certain no-wave and some noise: just take Lou Reed's "discone," a precursor as much as you want, but what a crappy record. I simply think that a 5 should be given to absolutely innovative and seminal bands, which in my opinion the SY have not been, not *as much* as other bands. However, if we were to reach a 10, I would give them a 9, just to say it's more of a problem with the voting system than with the SY themselves :)

Look at the homepage of disfu.com, for example. It must have been reprinted for a month, huh?

Okay, tell me one time when Mac Kaye hasn’t been coherent. Just one. Then, I don’t discuss tastes: do you like the "fuck the system" attitude from someone who's neck-deep in the "system"? That’s your business, I won’t interfere. The point is to pass off Vasco for what he isn’t. If you say you like his songs, that’s up to you; tastes are tastes. But to hold him up as an example of righteousness, as someone who “is against the system,” I’m ready to argue back. If you don’t like that and throw yourself into a series of pointless, aimless discussions like those above? That’s your problem. Minor Threat came up as an example of a "against the system" band after your buddy said Vasco was one, and objectively, unequivocally, the example fits; just pick any lyric, any track, any statement, any stance. For me, Mac Kaye isn’t exactly that likable, precisely because of his absolute righteousness. And I repeat, Fugazi aren’t on everyone’s lips; in fact, they are an absolutely niche band, known by a segment of people interested in the genre and the indie scene, completely unknown to the masses. Then, if you tell me they are well-known within a certain culture, I agree; which punk doesn’t follow the exploits of the major of Minor Threat? Go to someone who listens to blues, progressive, electronic music, maybe an expert, and maybe they’ve heard the name. You can twist it however you like; just repeating it won’t make it true.

Aside from the fact that such a statement reveals a rather embarrassing ignorance, activate all three of your neurons and read again until you understand: "I was talking about Minor Threat." If you can’t manage that, you can always watch MTV; sooner or later they’ll play a video of the fake stoner. And no, you don't know where consistency lives; after all, you're a fan of someone who sold "the heartfelt song dedicated to the fans" to Punto.

Matter of priorities: 5 for Daydream Nation? Alright, how about "No New York" and "Generic"? 12?

Charity is a childish attempt to sell 3 more copies, experimented by all the pop singers in this world; some have even built a career on it (ever heard of Jovanotti?). If charity were sincere, you wouldn’t know they did charity, it's as simple as that. Instead, the good Vasco makes appearances here and there with Don Mazzi (seen), all ready to say how generous Mr. "Coca" is in fighting drugs, donating 5% of the album’s proceeds to whatever association (and maybe thanks to that little maneuver selling 10% more). Major singer in Italy? I’d say definitely not, not even in sales; you can bet a kidney that Pausini and Ramazzotti sell much more than Rossi, especially in South America and Spain where Pausini sells millions and millions of copies, with plenty of radio airplay; it’s such that that bitch Pausini was the soundtrack of my last trip to Spain. By the way, I've always found it childish to justify music with something outside of music, at least until that aspect is not predominant in the evaluation of an "artist." In Vasco's case, unfortunately, it is. Blessed naivety, I was also obsessed with U2 at 20, then I got burned. It remains to be understood how such a wonderfully integrated person in the showbiz clichés can be considered "rebellious."