Who was a bigger influence on the burgeoning punk scene, NY Dolls or The Stooges? Why?

" Punk " is one of the hardest genre's to really define and to really examine. Ramones Began before the term " punk" was ever used. Yet they are considered the first punk band. Now compare that to The Sex Pistols and every punk band after them was significantly different.

You could easily argue that the stones or bowie were as influential if not more so.

 

The Pistols band sound was closer to the Dolls. The Stooges music was laced with complex psychedelic guitar solos - a strictly no-go area for punk rock.
Johnny Rotten's snarling vocals were the key factor and that was closer to Alex Harvey than what Iggy or David Johansen had done.

 

Thanks everyone for all the interesting posts. I went into the question thinking that they both contributed to the beginnings of punk in their own way. Lots of great information from everybody. Kudos to you all!

 

This is the most thoughtful thread I’ve read here in a while, some great stuff.

 

The Stooges' albums sold dismally low numbers. They were a late 60's band in the shadow of the MC5. CBS dropped them by 1973, and left Iggy pretty disillusioned. Today it's easy to say the Stooges were ahead of their time, but in the 70's the general public did not feel that way. I personally love all of their records and the unreleased stuff, but I got into them in the mid 80's.

The NY Dolls had a bit more popularity. They also took the Stooges on your with them in 1973 (Stooges were the opener).

It's tough to say who really lit the spark for punk, so my answer is the Music Machine instead.

 

I'd have thought more Mott the Hoople.

 

The people I know who were in UK punk bands in the 70's and 80's always quote Iggy and the Stooges as being the main influence. So I would have to take their word for it.

There is a big body of work there from the Stooges and then Iggy's solo stuff and the Bowie albums which fed directly in to the UK punk scene both musically and attitude wise.

The Dolls, well we have the infamous OGWT performance, and of course Malcolm managed them and then brought some elements back for the Pistols, and of course the Heartbreakers were here during the Punk explosion touring with Punk bands, so that's a good claim as well.

The Dolls sound very punky and I prefer them as a band but I think the Stooges edge them out in terms of influence.

 

They were in there too.

 

Interesting

I think context has a lot to do with definitions. The UK punk scene was built upon a strict continuum of subcultures (e.g. dress, slang, music, etc.,) in line with previous UK subcultures( e.g. Teddy Boys, Rockers, Mods, orig Skins or hard Mods, etc.,) the US punk scene was much more loosely defined, as it didn't really have a dress code, slang, etc., UK punk had more roots in the previous UK glam and UK pub rock scenes, whereas the US punk scene could be seen as a supplement to the already ongoing US underground/outsider scene of music, books, films, etc., The Stooges, Dolls, Velvets, Suicide, etc., could be seen as the outsider grounding to a scene that was actually quite varied as shown by the Shirts, Pure Hell, Television, Mumps, Ramones, Blondie, Talking Heads, Contortions, etc., In some ways the US punk blast incorporated its post punk bands in its initial offerings, whereas the UK had a second wave. One thing true with most movements is that people being people sometimes are looking desiring the same things around the same time, so both UK/US and other scenes could probably seen as concurrent with cross fertilization from each.

 

Baltimore native proudly showing his Stooges influences, a punk , but not a punk, an outsider even during the time of punk.

George Brigman - Jungle Rot (1975)



It's Psychedelic Baby Magazine: An interview with George Brigman

 

Work shown?

 

Yeah. Extra credit for all involved.

 

I saw the New York Dolls open for Mott the Hoople in 1972 or 73 at the Felt Forum (now the Paramount) at Madison Square Garden. This was the first time that the Dolls were doing a concert in NYC at a major concert venue, and their fans from the NYC club scene were out in force.

There were a lot of similarities between the two bands, but Mott the Hoople was clearly the better band. Both rocked very hard in concert -- much harder than either of them ever got onto a recording. When Mott got going, they were about as hard rocking as any band I have ever seen. Both frontmen had a lot of attitude, though neither could be regarded as a great singer.

Strangely, both bands wore ballet tutus on top of their clothing; a couple of the Mott the Hoople guys also wore guns (presumably fake) in holsters. The audience was almost as entertaining as the bands. The costumes, makeup and cross-dressing were truly creative.

 

Wow! What a night of entertainment those gigs must have been!

 

Defining "Punk"
How do you define punk?

 

That was a fun show (the last of Verdan Allen?), I remember the Dolls fans upfront tossing glitter at them when they started their set.

 

Excellent post.

 

I'm running this one up the flagpole, but the various UK subcultures listed were basically teenage/early 20s movements - as was UK punk fundamentally - US punk originally wasn't as far as I can tell, though it was later on. I don't think it's always very useful to compare the two, to be honest.

 

I always thought that punks on both side of the pond worshipped Iggy.

 

Both hugely influential but I get the impression (as someone who wasn't really 'around' back then as I was about 10 years old) that it was The Dolls that really sparked the zeitgeist that became the punk movement, particularly in the UK. The marketing, the outrage, the attitude ... to me they appear to be the template (or at least pipe dream) for so many of the early UK punk bands, as others have pointed out.

If I just listen to the music and look at their personas I might conclude that it is a toss-up (or maybe even give the edge to The Stooges). But from everything I have heard and read The Dolls had the larger impact at the time. Again, I will never know as I wasn't there so I just enjoy the music.

 

This all sort of verifies my longstanding suspicion that what we called "punk" in the late 70's was really just a new generation of "glam." And Iggy had more than a toe-hold in the glam camp as well.

 

it seems clear to me more pre-1980 bands labeled punk were more apt to have the lean tuneful rhythm-gtr-pump pop tune approach of the dolls (often filtered thru ramones/pistols) than the more chthonic heavy tribal stooges thing.

 

I think I've said this before, but speaking strictly for the U.S. scene, there was no big bang of punk rock, it was all on a continuum. The line goes from early rock'n'roll/rockabilly, AM radio girl groups and soul, to 60's punk like The Standells or Chocolate Watchband, to psych (mostly the Elevators), to the Velvets, to Detroit stuff like the Stooges/MC5, to glam to glitter to the Dolls and the "street rock" scene that include bands like The Harlots of 42nd Street and Wayne County to what was happening in 1974 at CBGB/Max's with Ramones , Television and the rest.

 

The Damned worshipped the Stooges enough to cover 1970 (I Feel Alright) on their debut in '77.

 

Not everyone wants to admit it but Punk had as much to do with style and fashion as it did with any musical aesthetic. The Dolls had style in aces, but their musical approach was definitely Stones/traditional rock. The Stooges were anti-fashion (except when Iggy covered himself in silver paint) and were musically rooted in Standells/garage rock.
So... a tie?