Archiving punk zines and punk culture in general can seem like a good thing. We are saving parts of our culture. What is wrong with that? Likely nothing, but such archives may produce unintended or unacknowledged effects.
When I first started to discuss this research with some folks near and far in the punk community, I was particularly surprised by the hostility of one respondent and I have come to respect their position more and more. The response was essentially this: Punk is not dead. And when it gets studied that inevitably means it gets treated like it has died: one ends up autopsying what it was. Punk deserves to respected as more than what it meant to us when we were 16 or 24 or 30. It is not some relic of the past. It is living and breathing right now.
There was a real anger in that response that comes from a proud tradition in punk that has always been hostile to outside agendas and desires. And while I might flash all the punk credentials I need, my agenda is not the agenda of punks who are building their scene, creating bands, arguing about the future, and touring the world. I’d like to think that I am still part of a collective punk desire to create community by believing in our own unique DIY spirit, but I recognize that some of the energy and preoccupations that I bring come from outside of punk culture (whether or not that is different than anyone else is a separate question for another day).
Like I said, this is a position that I have come to respect and am guided by more and more. I don’t think that creating a digital archive is an effort designed to kill punk or even necessarily something with the force to strike a killing blow. But they might wreck more than they support punk culture. And they might do so quietly and even imperceptibly by creating the impression that punk belongs to the past.
Punk is not dead. And archives should not give the impression that it is. This means that archives need to do much more than they presently do. The best archives are already doing this: the DC Punk Archive holds shows; the Barnard Zine library circulates a substantial portion of its collection so that people can read actual zines; the Crimethinc archive of Inside Front continues to romanticize revolution.
Digital archives need to do more than just archive the past. They need to do more than preserve documents of what happened, back when punk was alive. Punk is not dead and the archives we create need to reflect this. These archives need to act in the present and for the future. They need to be interactive and engaging. They need to participate in punk culture right now. They can and should lead to events and workshops. They should not imitate the dead. They should be lively. They should encourage participation from the community in archiving. They should be defined by their role in the punk community and not be defined as something that exists outside of it.
This could lead to unintended or unacknowledged consequences. Indeed, making archives part of punk culture and making sure they serve the desires of punk culture may make some of their unwelcome tendencies worse.
The revolutionary Tom Paine once said that the dead must never govern the living. The previous generation does not get to control the present generation. While archives are meant to document the past, they can also be a means of bringing back the past, giving it power over the present again. What if the design, content, and ideas of past punk zines start to substantially shape punks in the present? Surely those old zines matter, but they had their day. They should not still be shaping what we talk about now as much as they did then. Under the guise of documentation, archives might mean that the dead control the living.
Ideally, documenting the past of punk culture can and will inspire the future. And this is why I think these archives have to be active places. They need to be infused with the energy and passion of now. If old zines matter, it is because they matter to punks in the present and that means they will matter in ways that old guys like me could never have predicted.
Archives can inspire, but they can also limit the imagination. Punk and hardcore have a pretty solid track record of failing to innovate, at least after some initial success in being the newest, strangest, and baddest thing around. Archiving may mean that some are more inclined to do what has been done already rather than invent something none of us have seen before. Again, I am not convinced this has to be the case. But we need to put in the work to make archives into places that inspire those in the present to realize their own DIY ambition to transform community and build the world they want how they want to do it.
How one archives the zines of punk culture matters. Materials need to be placed into context. Their datedness needs to be emphasized at least as much as their continued relevance is stressed. So, if digital zine archives are created they:
- should inspire with examples from the past, but not limit the future
- should document a culture, not determine that culture
- should be living and breathing things that act as ongoing hubs for the punk community.
By George Grinnell
We had this idea of having a kid on the cover. There was a lot of emphasis on being young, which is pretty evident given the band was called The Teen Idles and the record was called “Minor Disturbance.” One of the reasons we were centered on the age stuff was because we were young, but also we felt dismissed by older punk rockers, and older people in general. They seemed biased against us because of our age, so we capitalized on it. We said, yeah we’re kids!, and it was nothing to be ashamed about.
Susie J. Horgan, Punk Love
Punk Pedagogy 