A problem I have: there seems to be a huge dichotomy between two kinds of “punk rock” to my entirely uninitiated mind. First of all, there’s the old punk rock, the one blamed by so many for killing progressive rock, which emerged in 1977 and involved many musicians with little or no talent playing simple, down-to-earth, aggressive rawk. Secondly, it seems to me that much of the underground rock scene these days calls itself “punk rock” as well - you know, high school and college-aged bands also playing down-to-earth, loud, aggressive rock. Problem is, many of these “punk” bands seem to care about composition, and actually write songs that are relatively nuanced and require some amount of instrumental skill to play. Indeed, some of the most impressively talented youth bands in my area were categorized as punkish. I don’t get it. Is there some kind of evolutionary relationship here, or is it just a convenient term?