Subway Sect Part 2

 Home >> Punk Bands >> Subway Sect >> Part 2 

Early participants in the punk purge they had no overt controversy for the nationals, weeklies or fans to pick on so steadily evolved with no fuss transforming into a fuller, more coherent sound. 

How would you describe their sound? At their best a heady mix of the Velvet Underground, Jonathan Richman and  Magazine. Subway Sect were THE true punk band. Non conformists to rock and non conformists to punk. They baffled, confused and passed through the times. Scratchy sound compared to the that heavy metal tinged assault of Sex Pistols and followers but as groovy and catchy as any of their sonic heroes.

Clash manager Bernie Rhodes appreciative of Subway Sect's angles of subversion took them under wing with a resultantly strained relationship. Their evolution however was not matched by any record releases. They lost their first drummer and got Mark Laff. They lost him to Generation X and lost impetus before gaining Robert Ward. Scratchy sounds and drab image, made audiences and critics unsure what to make of them:

Subway Sect: What do you think of our songs -what do the audiences think of us?
Steve Walsh: I dunno - they usually seem a bit confused - well I've not seen many people pogoing to you but that's good...
Zigzag

"Subway Sect nauseated me. Visually they're about as entertaining as a fly paper; musically they are as much fun as sitting inside a cement mixer with cotton wool in your mouth."
Jane Suck - Music Machine Review. Sounds 1978

Then there were 3

Then there were 4. Bob ward 2nd from right. Paris 1978

Lyrics full of muddy images of alienation, reflected the denseness of their sound. Songs like Nobody's Scared and Eastern European blurred into one. Subway Sect was a unique experience. Mark P

Their songs  were about 'subjects, ideas and theories' Zigzag quote.

I don't write any words you get in rock songs...I like those words - that seem out of place in a rock song. Vic Goddard

Where did it all go wrong?

Naive idealism in punk ..They though punk would change  music..."We wanted to change the reasons for playing rock music. We didn't want it to be rock for rocks sake. we wanted it to be a medium for ideas rather than a release from boredom"

and the belief they could short circuit the rock'n'roll circus refusing to dress like punks:
"Onstage their very normalcy of dress and uncompromising rejection of establishment rock techniques provoke reactions of, at first, alienation then stimulation." Jon Savage. Sounds 78."

We used to dye all our clothes grey in those days..in a big bath. We liked the colour." England Dreaming P219

As their two singles bombed and lack of publicity and impetus. The band folded in late 78 before Ambition was even released. While Ambition may have sold 20,000 copies and enabled the band to be paid a weekly wage of £15 for a year it didn't stop Bernie Rhodes sacking the whole band and retaining Vic Goddard as a songwriter. It was he who rejected a first album by them and released their first single 6 months after it was recorded. Its almost as if he managed them the exact opposite to The Clash. My personal opinion is that Bernie Rhodes screwed up Subway Sect. 

We've said it before here on this site countless times. The audience need the artist and the artist needs the audience or it ain't rock'n'roll. For all your fine words and theories you won't get an audience if people don't notice you and that, sorry to say, is showbiz. Without publicity you are nothing. Subway Sect deliberately didn't take that path and what did they have to show for it in the end? Bugger all! 

They wanted nothing to do with rock'n'roll yet by their very nature were part of it and the machine and they struggled to come to terms with it. As an ideas band surely more actual record releases would have been better? In the end what did they convey to the audience? 

 Back To Top