The Sex Pistols and Buddhism

Tonight we here at Blogagaard watched "The Filth and the Fury: A Sex Pistols Film" (released in 2000 I think). I like this documentary title for several reasons:

A) It is taken from an actual Sex Pistols British tabloid headline
B) It implies there is an entire sea of Sex Pistols fims, a veritable cornucopia of rage punk angst multimedia coverage. It may be one of many, many films that will cover ever facet of the Sex Pistols story.
C)It is a play on words, whether intentional or not, of The Sound and the Fury by Faulkner. Would Faulkner like the Pistols? I think so. Faulkner wrote like a harbringer of change, did he not? Someone should write a science fiction time travel story wherein "Sid vicious"travels back in time to party with Faulkner on his cotton plantation. Do it, Nerd Boy!

Okay, I'm getting distracted. My argument:

The Sex Pistols were unintentionally revolutionary in their despair. So was "Sid" Buddha. While the Pistols took stock of the political economic situation and found reason to be angered by the marginilization of the Britt middle and lower classes, Buddha took stock of man's plight in the universe, the eventuality of physical decay and the loss of everything and everyone you love, and found reason to reject his rich, materialist existence. Both the Pistols and Buddha rejected everything that came before them and proceeded to act, in a very real and visceral way, to reclaim the world as they believed the world should be. The Sex Pistols spit on people and swore a lot and, on at least one occasion, even used a bass guitar to bash a crazed fan's head. They tore up stuffy, 1976 British society like no one had before them, not even the wild and crazy Beetles (ha ha ha), and lo, they reaped the rewards. Meanwhile "Sid" Buddha, taking a calmer approach, actually rejected anger and went into the wild, where he sat under a tree for a long, long time, until he reached some mutherfuckin enlightenment. "Sid" Buddha rejected his own attachment to things, to the devils of Lust and Anger and the Rich Man's Gold. He became a simple man. A really, really simple man. Not much fun at parties. But a good man, just the same. Honest.

Maybe Johnny Rotten was a Zen Buddhist at heart. He really was the style, and brains, and whatever, behind the Pistols. Vicious was a just a bad bass player, a pretty boy who joined late and somehow stole the show. If this was GNR, he was like a successful, heroin OD'd Dizzy Reed to Rotten's Axel Rose. I know this sounds like heresy, but fuck you, watch the movie, and disagree then. Rotten was the insecure bastard who took his demons and turned them into the trappings of a cutting edge rock frontman. Rotten was rotten, and he made this anti-cool, anti-attractive, anti-Sting mentality so fucking cool. Rotten made getting hit with a shoe thrown by an angry crowd such a fantastic moment, a moment of Zen.

What the Pistols did in the short span of two productive years "Sid" Buddha would surely have approved of. How does one shed the Self? Throw the Self into a whirlwind. Tell the self, "Fuck you. I can do better than you. I can shed you, like a snake shedding its slimy, corporate ridden skin."

Only then does one began to work towards something new. Something that has been created, not reprocessed, and sold for 10% off.

9 comments:

neha said...

actually rejected anger and went into the wild,

anger is the reaction when any desire (legitimate or not) does not get fulfilled.
desire is something you want to make yourself happy.
this assumes that 'something' can make you happy.
sid buddha said happiness (or bliss) is 'my' inherent nature; therefore i do not need anything else to make me happy; therefore i do not have desire; therefore i cannot be made angry.
this brings us to...

How does one shed the Self?

funny way of putting it, because how can you shed the self, you can only shed the non self. which brings us to 'who am i?' well, in relevant literature, you'd find that people generally identify with the body - saying - 'i am the body' eg. the people who keep the plastic surgeons in business. other people identify with what is called the mind (or the heart), the emotional part of our thinking capacity. they identify with the whims of their mind. e.g. I love ice cream. and then, there are those who identify with the intellect, which is the decisive, logical part of the thinking capacity. e.g. I am a physicist.
(Incase you noticed, from the body to mind to intellect, the example becomes less tangable, less easier to grasp.)
in anycase, sid buddha approached the problem in a different way (as opposed to 'who am i'), he said, is there no permanent happiness in the world?
and his answer to the problem was same as to the question 'who am i' (which the most glorious thing, if you see it).
This Self is Bliss

So, then who is the self? and if i am the self why dont i experience bliss?

...
now i, the author, dont know if anyone is really interested or not so, i'll leave it here... but if you'd like me to continue, i'll be happy to

David Oppegaard said...

If the self is bliss, good Neha, why then did Johnny Rotten's self-distaste propell him so far into rock-n-roll history? Maybe if he'd been self-satisfied he'd never have been in a rock band to start with.

David Oppegaard said...

Hmmm. Donde esta mes sparrows? Nosotros nosotros!

neha said...

Hi david,

firstly, i know nothing about sex pistols or johnny rotten. I responded to the Sid Buddha part of your post. I think you equated someone acting according to their idea of right as buddha.
My idea of the thing was - well, acting according to the your belief of the right is an extremely difficult and extremely noble thing. but buddha went a step forward and alligned his idea of the right, with the TRUE RIGHT.

ok, i am distracted again. but just one more thing before i end - this idea of giving up desire is not a morbid idea, living like a dead stone neither wanting anything, nor expecting anything, nor doing anything - living in the wild and shunning company. giving up desires is not living like a stone.
giving up desires means a more fuller way of living, living life as a giver not as a begger. i dont want anything from life, i really dont want anything from life or people. neither do i want them to say - hey! you are doing a great job; nor do i want them to live life like i think is right.

yes, i think that my response was not so so related to your post. :D

and so yes, i am sorry for scaring your regular commenters away!!

neha said...

as, i have monopolised your comment section for this post, may i continue, to explain, that in the above the 'i' kept shifting from i, the author to i, the generic person or i, the enlightened buddha.

my goodness, it is almost surreal the way no one else has said anything...
what just happened, david? (may i dare ask?)

David Oppegaard said...

I don't know. This happens to my friend Mike, too, actually almost every time he comments. It's okay. No big deal, dude Thanks for all the thoughts to chew on....

Anonymous said...

Too deep to comment on? I was very interested in what you both had to say though.

And, Dave, I think it happens when Mikey comments (other people not commenting) because he knows you so well & it feels like intruding on a personal conversation. But I love it when he comments & the two of you go at it. Cracks me up.

Anonymous said...

:)

Amethyst Vineyard said...

In the book 'An Interview with Shane McGowan', McGowan, former lead singer of the Pogues, postuates that the Sex Pistols might have primarily been an advertisement for the clothing store Sex, which featured the designs of one Vivienne Westwood.

Post a Comment