The Punk Rock Politics of Joe Strummer: Radicalism, Resistance and Rebellion 1526148986, 9781526148988

Citation preview

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer Radicalism, resistance and rebellion Gregor Gall

Manchester University Press

Copyright © Gregor Gall 2022 The right of Gregor Gall to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Published by Manchester University Press Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN  978 1 5261 4898 8  paperback First published 2022 The publisher has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for any external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

Cover design by James Hutcheson Photograph: Trinity Mirror / Mirrorpix / Alamy Stock Photo Typeset by New Best-set Typesetters Ltd

Dedication

To Hugo, our beloved rescued dog, who gave me much-needed thinking time when walking him. And to Fiona and Tomás, for all The Clash/Strummer books they bought me for birthdays and Christmases.

Contents

List of figures viii List of insets ix Preface x Acknowledgements xii Abbreviations xiii Introduction 1 1 Studying Strummer: issues and approach 21 2 Perceptions of Strummer’s politics 34 3 Strummer’s politics and philosophical perspectives 70 4 Rebel rock and its ramifications 122 5 Rocking against the rich 151 6 Advocate not activist 163 7 Straying from socialism 199 8 Strummer’s influence: secondary sources 232 9 Follower testimony 259 Conclusion 270 References 279 Index 292

vii

List of figures

1.1 Strummer with Topper Headon in the documentary Joe Strummer: The Future Is Unwritten (2007) 24 1.2 Strummer interviewed for MTV’s Spotlight in 1989 26 3.1 Strummer with Ray Gange in the film Rude Boy (1980)81 4.1 The Clash interviewed for Norwegian TV in 1984 127 4.2 Strummer appears with The Pogues on RTE’s The Session in 1987 142 4.3 Strummer with The Clash at the Us festival in San Bernardino, California in 1983 145 7.1 Strummer on WCCA TV’s Video Jam in 2001 204 8.1 Strummer on Planet Rock Profile in 2000 236

viii

List of insets

1.1 The Clash 8 1.2 Categories of bands according to their left-wing political sentiments 9 2.1 Anarchist 36 2.2 Class warrior 37 2.3 Leftist 38 2.4 Anti-capitalist 38 2.5 Communist 39 2.6 Marxist 40 2.7 Progressive 40 2.8 Revolutionist 41 2.9 Socialist 43

ix

Preface

I bought London Calling in 1980. So began a forty-year-plus fascination with Joe Strummer’s politics. When asked by a school friend how I defined myself, rather than say a ‘socialist’ I said a ‘Clashist’. No one else I knew was ‘into’ The Clash the way I was. For a long time I had only Clash records because The Clash played such a wide range of musical styles that satiated me. My burgeoning interest in left-wing politics came largely from Strummer’s influence. His lyrics and statements were a major influence in sewing together a world view which was also informed by being made aware of global inequalities when studying West Africa in A-level geography. I saw The Clash three times at Brixton Academy in 1984, being the most enthralling times of my life. For my unofficial school magazine, WOT? (11 April 1984), I reviewed the 9 March 1984 gig: ‘The high priests of political punk are back [to] … sweep away the meaningless music. Pop will die and rebel rock will rule.’ After attending those gigs, with their hard, heavy and tight performances, I was hugely disappointed with Cut the Crap, but not as dismissive as many, having at least heard how the new material could have sounded on record. Listening to the bootlegs over the years and discovering their Lucky 8 demos – and now the ‘Mohawk Revenge’ remastered album version – reinforced my view of the importance of that material, as well as what could have been. The Clash’s demise led me to look for others to fill the void. But none were capable. I missed Strummer’s Latino Rockabilly War on the ‘Rock against the Rich’ tour in Aberdeen in August 1988. When The Mescaleros played Glasgow, I saw x

Preface

them three times, missing out on the Edinburgh gig of the final tour. Those gigs were good, but not a patch on those in 1984. It was not until after his death that I began to collect Strummer materials because of the off-putting tendency to regard him as a hero. In doing so, it became evident these insufficiently studied his politics and their impact. This became the primary rationale for this book.

xi

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to those that gave testimony and uploaded material on YouTube and to the Blackmarketclash website and Internet Archive for making accessing materials possible during the pandemic. Thanks especially are due to Mark Anderson, Mark Bedford, Adam Bell, George Binette, Louise Bolotin, Colm Bryce, Colin Coulter, Andrew Dallas, Nigel Flanagan, Kris Jozajtis, John Kelly, Rose Lewis, Tim Lezard, Hassan Mahamdallie, Jim Monaghan, Jeremy Tranmer, Tony Walsh, Simon Whittle and Matthew Worley for providing further contacts and materials. Thanks are also due to Anthony Mercer for his help in improving the manuscript.

xii

Abbreviations

BBC LRW MM MTV NME NPR NZBC RAR RAtR RM RNZ SWP WNYC

British Broadcasting Corporation Latino Rockabilly War Melody Maker Music Television New Musical Express National Public Radio (US) New Zealand Broadcasting Corporation Rock Against Racism Rock Against the Rich Record Mirror Radio New Zealand Socialist Workers Party New York public radio

xiii

Introduction

In the pantheon of politically progressive rock ’n’ rollers, Joe Strummer stands tallest. Articulate, self-righteous, intense and energetic, he was no ‘ordinary Joe’. He was the most radical, politically aware and politically engaged performer of his peers. He prosecuted his politics with mass appeal, making him more successful in this task than any others from punk onwards. In 1969, radical folk singer Phil Ochs proffered that any hope of revolution lay in ‘getting Elvis Presley to become Che Guevara’ (Schumacher 1996: 227). Strummer came closer than any other to achieving this. He understood music was a cultural battleground in the fight for social justice (see Harker 1980: 23). For that, he will always be remembered. His legacy is a living one. It is one that seems to shine brighter the longer apolitical pop reigns. This helps begin to answer the question: why study Strummer? So, this is the story of Strummer’s politics: what he thought, said, meant and did. Crucially, it is also the story of what impact he had. It is the story of his politics of radicalism, resistance and rebellion against the established order. It is the story of how one determined and talented individual made such a difference to the attitudes and behaviours of so many others. Upon his death on 22 December 2002, the Guardian (23, 24 December 2002) believed he was the ‘political inspiration for a generation’ and ‘the political conscience of punk … punk’s rebel with a cause’. The Telegraph (24 December 2002) remarked he was the ‘political voice of punk … [and] the punk movement’s voice of anti-Thatcherism’ while MOJO (March 1

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

2003) argued Strummer was ‘not simply the heart of The Clash [but] also the heart of punk itself ’. Later, Hewitt (2011: 179) wrote: ‘He drove the band forwards politically, picking up on oppression all over the world and putting his anger at injustice into songs.’ Radical musician Tom Morello, in his eulogy, contended: ‘Strummer was the heart, the soul, and the conscience of The Clash.’ And the Irish Independent (1 October 2018) believed Strummer was the ‘political firebrand of punk’. But it did not take Strummer’s death to reveal his significance for rock ’n’ roll radicalism. Caroline Coon, counterculture veteran and one-time Clash manager, noted The Clash was the ‘most politically aware’ (MM 26 March 1977) of punk bands.1 After its demise, the NME (7 October 1989) noted: ‘The Clash were the greatest political pop group of all time’ while Du Noyer (1998: 1) believed The Clash was ‘the most overtly political of all punk groups’. Though the music was important and is largely attributable to Mick Jones, the cutting political edge came from Strummer as principal lyricist. Fletcher (2005: 26) observed Strummer was ‘always the most politically involved of The Clash’. Clash chronicler Chris Knowles (1994: 31) believed: ‘First and foremost, The Clash were about ideas. How many bands can you say that about now? Bands today may be about an image or an attitude or a sound, but who now feeds your head like The Clash?’. Simonelli (2002: 129) stated: ‘The Clash were the most politically committed of the punk bands, featuring songs angrily denouncing the United States, dole queue politics, racism and the apathy of people in opposition to these problems.’ Again, it was Strummer who supplied these ideas through his lyrics. From punk onwards, the most common remark made about The Clash is ‘they changed my life’.2 Yet again, Strummer played the key role in accounting for this. Tens of thousands of emails were sent to the Strummersite website within days of his death saying ‘you changed the 1 Laing (2015: 52, 54) compared the subject matter of five punk bands’ (Clash, Damned, Sex Pistols, Stranglers, Vibrators) debut albums in 1976–77 to that of the top fifty bestselling albums of 1976. The former contained 25 per cent social and political comment and the latter 4 per cent, with 62.5 per cent of the former coming from The Clash. 2 Clash Facebook groups are replete with such statements. Mescaleros’ Scott Shields (Salewicz 2006: 592) and Steve Barnard (Davie 2004: 87) reported fans told them Strummer changed their lives.

2

Introduction

way that I thought and felt about life’ (Temple 2007). Indeed, more than any other rock band, The Clash was said to have changed the lives of so many (e.g. Needs 2005: 51, RNZ 4 February 2012). During the time of The Clash, and for many years afterwards, Strummer was repeatedly told by various individuals: ‘You changed my life.’ Followers repeatedly stated elsewhere Strummer changed their lives. And yet there has been no examination of this phenomenon. Basic questions of how and why this change took place have not been asked, let alone answered, in popular, critical or academic studies. Consequently, these statements remain unsubstantiated and uninterrogated assertions. The absence of ‘when’ questions is less puzzling given much of the affected period is likely to have been during The Clash’s existence, especially from 1977 to 1985. More advanced questions might concern what specifically about Strummer, his lyrics and politics led to this change, allowing room for the musicality and Jones’s role to be included. Maybe this absence of examination is to be expected, given many Strummer studies have been written by music journalists. Yet it is more surprising among followers when examining their own followership (e.g. Davie 2004, Beesley and Davie 2019) as well as among studies by critical thinkers and academics. One partial exception exists, namely, Bedford (2014). However, it covered just ten interviewees and primarily concerned the social background of Strummer and Clash followers (see p.255). Filling this gap provides the primary rationale for this study. So, what scholarly questions arise from this phenomenon? A series of interrogatives – how, why, when, where and who – help generate the basic questions. The particular line of investigation for this study is about political change and, specifically, about Strummer’s impact on influencing and advancing left-wing politics within people’s world views. The framework used is socialist realism (see p.15). So, to expand, this study’s purpose is to examine what Strummer’s politics were and then what impact they had on people. This first task may seem to some unnecessary because many of his lyrics and statements are well known and their meaning is seen as self-evident. However, different people have different views on what exactly his lyrics and statements mean, and what their significance is. Just as importantly, Strummer’s 3

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

politics have been characterised in many different ways, from rebel to radical to revolutionary. Moreover, there has been no comprehensive study of Strummer’s politics across all his life as the few that do take an interest examine just his Clash years. The second task is much more self-evidently required as explained already. Drawing on testimony gathered from Clash and Strummer followers, this study asks the aforementioned questions. Thus, this study will not only show that both tasks are necessary but also demonstrate Strummer was a considerably more complex character than is often appreciated. The study will also show the agency of the persona of Joe Strummer was the key link between what his politics were and what impact they had. In other words, he was one of a kind, and this study will interweave his agency with the surrounding environment of space and time in order to identify and explain his influence. The need for this study becomes more apparent given the constant criticism of Strummer as a fake and hypocrite because of what was thought about his parents’ social background, fruits of his commercial success and allegations of his own myth-making. The approach taken is to acknowledge and laud Strummer’s success in popularising radical ideas and helping these have a transformative power among many followers. But this is carried out in a critical manner, recognising Strummer’s weaknesses and limitations, especially in terms of his understanding of socialism, his approach to women and gender, not delivering on promises made, and working with others. So, unlike many other studies, he will not be put on a pedestal. Rationale In addition to what has already been outlined, the most basic reason for conducting this study concerns the subject matter of music and politics where the questions are ‘why music?’ and ‘why politics?’. Strummer’s politics and their associated impact were fundamentally about trying to help create progressive social change, and his means was music as part of a cultural front in a war of politics. Here, music can have a visceral power in a way that other forms of art and culture normally do not. This 4

Introduction

is because music has a greater potential power for it can induce and incite stronger human reactions, both emotionally and intellectually. Lyrics allow recording artists to speak more directly to listeners than visual forms of art and culture do for the viewer and more succinctly than via novels. When music is performed live, the highest peaks of inducing human response can be scaled. And, when the lyrics for music and the times of the music collide conducively, the ability to induce and incite can help produce powerful progressive political phenomena. Moreover, as an introduction to basic political ideas, lyrics are generally a more appealing and less onerous format than reading political tracts or attending meetings. Therefore, taken together politics and music can comprise a potent combination. Indeed the early radical union organiser, Joe Hill, wrote: ‘A pamphlet, no matter how good, is never read more than once, but a song is learned by heart and repeated over and over … [it] will succeed in reaching a great number of workers who are … too indifferent to read a pamphlet’ (Winters 1985: 41). But it is not just a case of any politics and any music. Strummer’s persona, politics and period are critical to understanding why he had the impact he did – as he frequently recognised when he identified the significance of being at ‘the right place, at the right time, doing the right thing, saying the right words’ (Shelley 1988). In analysing his political thought, action and impact, this study will demonstrate and explain why Strummer mattered, why he still matters and to whom. From this, lessons may be gleaned more generally about how, when and why music can be used for progressive political effect. Moving beyond these concerns, it has been commonly assumed and asserted that Clash song lyrics were the primary vehicle for the change, with Strummer being their main author, and that the change was a political change, prompting the endorsement of left-wing values and, even, activism. Yet, so far, there is no substantive evidence to support this. Most writings on Strummer’s lyrics seek to analyse their content and context without recourse to examining their impact on people (e.g. Cohen and Peacock 2017a, Coulter 2019a). It is not apparent these interpretations are necessarily correct, assuming there is even one correct interpretation. 5

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

And, as Strummer’s lyrics were sometimes obtuse and complex and he did not often explain them in interviews, it is not self-evident listeners discerned and comprehended their intended meaning. However, from various conversations with Clash followers, it seemed these assumptions and assertions were sufficiently plausible to merit further investigation. In doing so, it became clear that while his lyrics were the primary means for disseminating his political world view, they were not the only means, with interviews, actions and on-stage pronouncements playing an important part. Next is that consideration of Strummer’s politics and their effects has been slight. By ‘politics’, it is meant not just what he professed his beliefs to be but also what actions he took to prosecute them. In biographical studies based on interviews and secondary materials, whether individual studies (e.g. Salewicz 2006) or as part of The Clash (e.g. Gray 2001, Needs 2005, Gilbert 2009), followership books (Davie 2004, 2018, Beesley and Davie 2019) or popular studies of Clash lyrics (e.g. Egan 2015, Jucha 2016, Popoff 2018, Wyatt 2018), his politics were not touched on in any depth because they did not constitute a central concern. Moreover, these works were by journalists, and often by those with close personal relationships with Clash members and Strummer himself, so superficiality and partiality were evident. Even with works concentrating solely on Strummer’s politics, coverage of key issues was partial. Though covering all his life but also as much about The Clash as Strummer himself, D’Ambrosio’s (2004a, 2012a) collection comprised impressionistic journalism, not scholarly writing. It lacked critical faculty, expressing itself in hyperbole, personal reminiscences and assertion. Faulk and Harrison’s (2014a) and Cohen and Peacock’s (2017a) collections primarily examined the meaning and context of Strummer’s Clash lyrics. Meanwhile, Coulter’s (2019a) collection was similar but took a more specific focus. A clutch of academic articles (e.g. Bindas 1993, Harrison 2002) does not alter this picture. Indeed, it reinforces it. So, overall, the weakness of these Strummer studies is that they look largely at his lyrics, rather than also elsewhere, so scant attention is paid to what he did and said outside of these and without examining the effect of what he said and did. No monograph, based on original research, analysing all Strummer’s politics and their effects yet exists until 6

Introduction

now. This study does this and, in doing so, examines themes and components in his politics such as those underlying his anti-fascism or his concept of ‘urban Vietnam’ and his views on capitalism, class, freedom, socialism and individual responsibility. Unlike almost all other studies (e.g. Egan 2015, Jucha 2016, Popoff 2018), this study avoids the tendency to underplay Strummer’s contribution by conflating the politics of The Clash with his politics. Garofalo (1992: 2) observed: ‘[T]he political potential of mass-mediated popular music has been largely overlooked … where ideological struggle … takes place. While there is no question … the forces arrayed in support of the existing hegemony are formidable, there are also numerous instances where mass culture – and in particular popular music – issues serious challenges to hegemonic power.’ Studying Strummer goes some way to help to redress this lacuna, so following Street’s (2012: 1) injunction to treat music not just as a vehicle for expressing political values but an expression of political values. Strummer’s situation and The Clash in context There are many recording artists providing social commentary from left-wing perspectives in their lyrics and statements (and often also supporting left-wing causes). Their perspectives have ranged across the left of the political spectrum from progressive to radicals, socialists, anarchists and Marxists. In Inset 1.2, the better-known ones within Strummer’s lifetime are listed by category. The term ‘leanings’ is used to indicate the categories are not exclusive and all-encompassing. ‘Radical, left, progressive’ covers those expressing anti-racist, anti-fascist, pro-feminist, pro-worker and social democratic sentiments. It is the most populated category because it is not only much broader ideologically than the more easily defined and, thus, narrower ones of anarchist and socialist/Marxist, but also because it is an amalgam of ideological perspectives covering humanism, social democracy and radical liberalism. Overall, Strummer with The Clash, Latino Rockabilly War (LRW) and Mescaleros would be placed within this category, because though Strummer proclaimed he was a socialist for a period, ‘socialist’ does not best describe his overall political world 7

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

view (see pp.88, 121, 208–210, 220–222) and the broadness of the category captures more adequately the diversity of his views (see Chapter 2). Inset 1.1  The Clash The Clash was formed in 1976 in London by manager Bernie Rhodes working with Mick Jones (lead guitar, vocals) to recruit Paul Simonon (bass) and Joe Strummer (lead vocals, rhythm guitar). For most of The Clash’s existence, Nicky ‘Topper’ Headon (1977–82) was the drummer, being bookended by Terry Chimes (1976–77, 1982–83) and Pete Howard (1983–85). Signing to the major record label, CBS, for a £100,000 advance, The Clash became one of, if not the, biggest punk bands. Its first single, ‘White Riot’, was released on 18 March 1977, preceding its first eponymously entitled album on 8 April 1977. Five further albums (including double and triple albums) ensued in 1978, 1979, 1980, 1982 and 1985, with highest chart positions in Britain ranging from two to nineteen, generating twenty singles. After the Sex Pistols’ implosion in early 1978, The Clash became the standard bearers of punk. Until late 1985 when folding, over 600 gigs were played in Britain, Europe, North America and Australasia. From 1978 onwards, however, The Clash no longer confined itself to punk music, becoming the forebearers of what was later termed ‘world music’. Combat Rock (1982) was the album that broke The Clash – broke it into the fabled home of rock ‘n’ roll, namely the mass American market, and began to break them apart as a band as a result of commercial success which ended their debts to CBS. This involved the sacking of Headon and Jones by Strummer and Simonon. The Clash never had a number one single in Britain during its existence – this would come about on the back of a Levi’s jeans advert in 1990. Despite numerous large financial offers to reform, The Clash, unlike the Sex Pistols, never did. Such offers ceased with Strummer’s death in 2002. This categorisation provides the foundation from which to suggest, though there were many other left-wing recording artists in Strummer’s lifetime, none had the same influence as Strummer. By influence, it is meant changing individuals’ political attitudes and behaviours in a progressive direction at micro-, meso- and macro-levels and to do so with breadth 8

Introduction

and depth over space and time. Notwithstanding any preference for particular left-wing politics, it would seem counterintuitive to believe The Clash with Strummer at its head did not have more influence than Crass or The Redskins in these terms. Yet this study, in concentrating on Strummer alone and not engaging in comparative analysis with these other recording artists, cannot conclude this with academic assuredness. That said, there would seem to be a strong case for doing so when considering the length of these groups’ lifetime, their record sales, number of gigs played with sizeable audiences attending and general media profile. When turning to the explanations for this, and setting aside the influence of the varying resources of the different record labels involved to promote The Clash, Crass and The Redskins, there are some plausible explanatory factors such as the power of the persona of Strummer, the particular and more appealing politics he espoused, the more favourable context of the period in which The Clash emerged and the musicality and synthesis of styles of the songs created by Jones in particular. Inset 1.2  Categories of bands according to their left-wing political sentiments Anarchist leanings Bad Brains, Black Flag, Chumbawamba, Conflict, Crass, Dead Kennedys, Dils, Discharge, Exploited, Flux of Pink Indians, Fugazi, Millions of Dead Cops, Poison Girls Socialist/Marxist leanings Alistair Hulett, Easterhouse, Gang of Four, Henry Cow, Marxman, McCarthy, Newtown Neurotics, Prairie Fire, Redskins, Stereolab, Coup, Hurriers Radical, left, progressive leanings* Algiers, Asian Dub Foundation, Angelic Upstarts, Au Pairs, Bikini Kill, Billy Bragg, Cabaret Voltaire, Delta 5, Downtown Boys, Dropkick Murphys, Enter Shikari, Manic Street Preachers, MC5, New Model Army, Public Enemy, Rage Against the Machine, Stiff Little Fingers, System of a Down, Beautiful South, Good, The Bad and The Queen, Housemartins, Jam, Levellers, Mekons, Men They Couldn’t Hang, 9

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Motihari Brigade, That Petrol Emotion, Pop Group, Raincoats, Red Guitars, Ruts, Specials, Style Council, The The, Three Johns, Wakes, Tom Robinson Band * Bruce Springsteen is not included because his overall politics are barely centre-left, being a Democrat and influenced by Catholicism. Lennon, Marley and Dylan are discussed elsewhere (see pp.74, 278).

Strummer’s salience Many believe Strummer’s songs are about freedom and liberty, and oppression and exploitation, and have a universality and timelessness to them. For example, reviewing ‘This is England’ (1985), The Nation (27 December 1986) stated the lyrics could be about ‘anyplace where public policy has left a community to rot’ while an UNCUT (August 2017) retrospective review of London Calling (1979) perceived its lyrics: ‘spar[ed] it … becoming a period piece tied to the fleeting causes that inspired it [because it] focused on everyday desperations of life on the urban margins’. The universality and timelessness arise for six reasons. First, enduring and commonly felt compassionate concerns under neoliberal capitalism, be they about war, poverty and injustice. Second, events and people were seldom specifically ever referred to directly so that prior knowledge of such detail was not needed to understand lyrics in the first instance (and which did not make the song seem ‘dated’).3 Two obvious exceptions are ‘Spanish Bombs’ (1979) on the Spanish Civil War and ‘Washington Bullets’ (1981) on Salvador Allende, Víctor Jara, the Bay of Pigs, Fidel Castro, and the Dalai Lama, where their effect has been, rather, to stimulate listeners to learn more about them (see p.263). Third, though Strummer was often specific about his lyrical context (America, England, Vietnam etc), he was never particularly detailed about what these lyrics meant more widely and never developed his conceptualisation of them in terms of their economic, political, physical and social connotations. Consequently, they remain at quite a general level. Fourth, Strummer’s politics were largely derived from 3 Egan (2015: 41) noted, by contrast, many of the Tom Robinson Band’s lyrics were so topical they dated quickly, losing resonance. Jucha (2016: 309) noted this also for The Dead Kennedys, Crass and Big Audio Dynamite.

10

Introduction

emotive and experiential, rather than intellectual, standpoints, and he did not seek, thereafter, to intellectualise his standpoint. This made for an effective way to construct affecting lyrics. Fifth, and following from this, his conceptualisation of liberty and freedom were often implicit, being the opposite to oppression and exploitation or freedom from oppression and exploitation (rather than freedom to). That may sound trite given lyrics are not appropriate mediums to develop treatises on the concepts of freedom and liberty. But it is to recognise he spoke in evocative general ways, testifying to his skill as a wordsmith which allowed him to succinctly present ideas and issues in poetic ways. Specifically, by being against and not for broadened his appeal. Sixth, and lastly, his lyrical obtusity (see pp.66–67) often aided the aspects of universality and timelessness. Overall, this chimes with Laing’s (2003, 2015) analysis. Laing (2003: 345) differentiated between ‘protest music’ and ‘music of resistance’, where the former concerned ‘explicit statements of opposition’ which identify a specific issue or enemy while the latter is ‘coded or opaque’. Much of Strummer’s lyrical output fell into the latter category. Laing (2015: 56) also compared The Clash’s ‘Career Opportunities’ (1977) to Chelsea’s ‘Right to Work’ (1977), concluding the latter blames unemployment on unions while the former did not ‘adopt the Left’s alternative which called for the creation of full employment to fulfil the right to work [but] emphasised instead a general critique of the work-ethic and of the powerlessness of those in the most menial occupations’. And, in summarising Hebdige (1979: 124–127) when applying to The Clash, Laing (2015: 57) suggested, in comparison with The Derelicts: ‘The lyrics of The Clash had no such specific strategy … their strength lay in the tangible images they conjured up, not in some flawless ideological argument.’ Many have characterised Strummer’s Clash lyrics as ‘social realist’ (see p.16) while Coulter’s (2018, 2019a) laid out the ‘left melancholia’ thesis. Both provide some support for the argument here that Strummer’s lyrics connect to, but also simultaneously float above, specified and specific events. They engender feelings as much as thought – in order words, emotional as well as intellectual responses. Pattison (1987: 141) stated: ‘Clash songs, always sardonically acute about what’s wrong with the world, have little to say about any political program 11

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

to make it right.’ 4 It is reasonable to take this to cover Strummer’s whole lyrical canon given he was the primary lyricist for all the bands he led and wrote in broadly the same way throughout. As such, there is much that is right and wrong about Pattison’s statement. Like many other radical lyricists, more emphasis was put on what is wrong rather than how to put it right,5 reflecting attempts to connect with people’s so-called ‘lived experience’ in the first instance. But, for Strummer, however imperfectly, inconsistently and ambiguously, his lyrics can also be read as calling for alternatives to the status quo. ‘White Riot’ (1977), ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’ (1978), ‘Clampdown’ (1979), ‘The Equaliser’ (1980) and so on point up elements of both means and ends for change. Even when taken alongside his interviews, quite what these alternatives would look like as social systems and societies was often imprecise (see p.274). But to suggest lyrics should proffer something about a political programme, as Pattison did, is to believe lyrics can do more than they can. Here, at most, they can point to political alternatives, but that would not mean laying out a programme. That is the place of political treatises and not, in essence, political poems set to music. To attempt to use lyrics to lay out programmes would be to potentially undermine the timelessness and universality discussed earlier. Strummer was wise enough to use his lyrics to acknowledge alternatives existed rather than set them out and examine their portent. Strummer’s salience has also been recognised in songs. Examples are Bankrupt (‘Come Back Joe Strummer’), Beatsteaks (‘Hello Joe’), Celtic Social Club (‘Remember Joe Strummer’), Cowboy Mouth (‘Joe Strummer’), Die Toten Hosen (‘Goodbye Garageland’), Gaslight Anthem (‘I’d Called You Woody, Joe’), Junior Prom (‘You, Me & Joe Strummer), Principe Punk Foundation (‘Joe Strummer’), The Radiators from Space (‘Joe Strummer’), 4 Rolling Stone (14 June 1982) believed: ‘Combat Rock is short on practical solutions and long on the horror of the problems’ while Topping (2004: 24,93) noted ‘Strummer was less direct about what he was actually in favour of … [offering] precious few actual solutions’. 5 An exception is The Redskins lyricist, Chris Dean. Eight of the eleven song titles on its only album were exhortations.

12

Introduction

Radical Picnic (‘In Our Blood – Tribute to Joe Strummer’), Stiff Little Fingers (‘Strummerville’), The Hold Steady (‘Constructive Summer’),6 The Stingrays (‘Joe Strummer’s Wallet’), The Vagabonds (‘John Mellor’), Wild Billy Childish and the Musicians of the British Empire (‘Joe Strummer’s Grave’) and Zips (‘Road to Strummerville’). There are also examples of other mediums such as ‘How I Spent My Strummer Vacation’, the second episode of The Simpsons’ fourteenth season, ‘Meeting Joe Strummer’ (Edinburgh Fringe 2006), ‘Strummer and Me’ (BBC Radio 4 2012). And, although not solely about Strummer, there were also many Clash tribute bands such as 1977, Know Your Rights, Guns of Brixton, Take the Fifth, Straight to Hell, London Calling, Casbah Rock, Combat Rock, Combat Rockers, Complete Clash, Counterfeit Clash, and Broadway Clash. Music and social change The perennial question facing musicians of radical bents is: ‘Can music change the world?’ Although more a journalistic than critical question, its potency derives from the prospect of the psychological power of music to move the human mind and body into action, especially with the association of popular music with the vigour of youth. When the question is asked in a blunt manner, it is almost suggested music – as a non-human force external to humankind – has the potential to change humans on the scale of humanity itself. When asked in a more nuanced manner, such as ‘Can music be a force for change?’, the question allows for music to reflect changes as well as be used to project feelings, ideas and values in ways which may be empowering and transformative. In so doing, music may help to change the way people look at the world, that is, their world views and perspectives, rather than the world itself. Thus, music can help inform, potentially changing the way people think and then act in a subjective manner (as opposed to acting directly on the world itself in an objective manner). When this happens, music may be said to capture, 6 Containing the line: ‘Raise a toast to Saint Joe Strummer/I think he might have been our only decent teacher’.

13

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

represent and project a political zeitgeist. This logic led Street (1986: 166) to remark: ‘Pop’s inability to change the world is compensated for by its ability to articulate and alter our perceptions of that world, and perhaps more importantly, to give a glimpse of other, better worlds.’ In an early Clash interview, Strummer stated: ‘None of us is going to change anything … Rock doesn’t change anything. But after saying that – and I’m just saying that because I want you to know that I haven’t got any illusions about anything … I still want to change things … For me the music is a vehicle for my lyrics. It’s a chance to get some really good words across’ (MM 26 April 1977). He made this argument elsewhere: ‘You can’t change anyone. You can only make an atmosphere. If people want to change, they will change themselves. The Clash ain’t gonna do that. Still trying is better than sitting around getting bored’ (RM 9 April 1977) and ‘All we want to achieve is an atmosphere where things can happen’ (MM 11 March 1978).7 But Strummer did not stick rigidly to this position for he then saw the actuality of music’s potential. In 1981, he said: ‘music goes directly to the head and heart … [m]ore directly and in more dimensions than the written word’ (Garbarini 1981: 51). The same year he said: ‘One thing we’ve done is to show that [music] is a political force. It always was, but a lot of people forgot’ (Sounds 20 June 1981). A year later, he told the New Zealand Broadcasting Corporation (NZBC) (8 February 1982): ‘Yes, I think you can definitely change things with [music] … I think you can do a lot with music … Music is what people are turning on to in the last thirty or forty years … not books or art [or poetry] and so we have more chance than anybody to change things.’ In 1984, he told Creem (February 1984): ‘music is going to play a part in creating an atmosphere for that struggle [between] … the haves and have-nots. But first you have to have that cultural input. First, you have to have the spirit raised before any activism can begin. … I believe that our music will play a part in that struggle’ and Toronto’s Globe and Mail (28 April 1984): ‘Capitalism needs war … in order to survive. And music 7 Nick Sheppard, then in The Cortinas and later of The Clash, stated in 1977: ‘There’s no real way The Clash are going to change anything physically’ (Cain 2007: 153).

14

Introduction

can help people become aware of that … The point is to make people feel they can make a difference.’ Occasionally, Strummer believed music had no transformative power (RM 24 July 1982). For example, in 1997, he stated: ‘[W]e weren’t going to achieve anything concrete, no shifts in power’ (Wyatt 2018: 327). Such statements undermined crude characterisations: ‘The Clash never thought they could really change things. They’re only … a rock ’n’ roll band, not a political party’ (Trouser Press February 1978); ‘[The Clash] claimed they had come not only to shake up rock ’n’ roll but also to change the world’ (Gray 2003: 505); ‘[Strummer] saw [music] as a way to change the world’ (Parkinson 2005); and ‘The Clash were convinced that they could change the world with their art’ (Egan 2015: viii, cf. Needs 2005: 89).8 Alongside pronouncing on music’s general potential, Strummer also argued its potential as a catalyst for social change lay with youth. Thus, he maintained youth was not interested in anything but music and so music was the medium they must be spoken to in (Toronto’s City TV’s New Music Program 26 September 1979, US TV interview 31 January 1984, Norwegian TV February 1984, BAM 10 February 1984, Toronto’s Globe and Mail 28 April 1984). Succinctly, Strummer encapsulated this in his simple statements that music can be a ‘midwife to ideas’ (Red Deer Advocate 12 May 1984) and ‘Music’s supposed to be the life force of the new consciousness’ (Musician September 1982). Scrutinising Strummer: socialist realism The main analytical framework underpinning this study is ‘socialist realism’. It is used to scrutinise Strummer’s art by asking what role it played in advancing the cause of socialism. For a key part of his life (1978–89), Strummer publicly professed to be a socialist (see pp.70–72), representing both the highpoint of his political radicalism and the time of his biggest political platform. He was also perceived as such by many followers and countless commentators during The Clash and after (see Chapters 2, 8 and 9). 8 Egan (2018: v) also made the same statement but without ‘with their art’.

15

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

To elucidate what is meant by socialist realism in the cultural sphere, it helps to first consider social realism where Strummer’s lyrics are seen to constitute both his body of work and legacy. Many have characterised them, especially his Clash lyrics, as constituting ‘social realism’ 9 (Frith 1977: 79, Laing 1978: 127, Rolling Stone 8 March 1979, Savage 1988, Reynolds and Press 1995: 68, Needs 2005: 53, 105, White 2007: 56–57 Gilbert 2009: 148, Peacock 2010: 5, Worley 2016: 506, Zieleniec 2017: 58, Wyatt 2018: 67, Bottà and Quercetti 2019: 212, Brunström 2019: 173, Coulter 2019a: 7,15, Toynbee 2019: 41, 43). A number particularly highlighted the social realism of the first Clash album (e.g. NME 16 April 1977, Coulter 2018: 528, 2019b: 70). ‘Social realism’ is an artistic approach describing, reflecting or representing the manifest economic, social and political conditions of not just workers and the working class but exploited and oppressed groups under capitalism. But understanding these conditions also involves critiquing the power, ideology and material interests of the exploiters and oppressors and the attendant processes and outcomes. In other words, social realism identifies both symptoms and causes but without any consequent call to act at its conclusion. By contrast, ‘socialist realism’ comprises both these components and, going beyond critique (Harker 1980: 117), makes a call to act. This would not just be to campaign to ameliorate the effects of capitalism but also to take steps to abolish capitalism itself. So, Strummer’s attitudes and behaviours are to be judged against the criterion of what they did to advance the cause of socialism in these terms (see Lukács 1963). Examples of socialist realist literature can be found in Jack London’s Iron Heel (1908), Robert Tressell’s Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists (1914) and in the trilogies of Edward Upward and Victor Serge. Here, acting constitutes not the traditionally understood socialist tasks of agitation, propaganda and party recruitment but, rather, developing the intellectual capacity to make popular arguments for socialism. So, Strummer’s role is to be judged in terms of consciousness-raising, educational development and ideological awareness. Crucially, the task is to 9 Sometimes also referred to as a form of descriptive or critical realism (e.g. Eriksen 1980, 1981).

16

Introduction

develop critical faculty for making socialist ideas and associated practice more common, popular and persuasive.10 The rider is the faculty’s function is to be able to raise questions through critique rather than merely provide definitive answers via solutions. Some of this may sound like making propaganda, but while Strummer was a generalist, it will be shown he did not provide the systematic exposition of a range of ideas that define propaganda as understood within Marxism. Nonetheless, Gramscian notions of establishing a ‘counter-hegemony’ comprising cultural, political and ideological components, in a ‘war of position’, are analogous. The overall meaning of socialist realism, therefore, is a lesser threshold of activity for advancing towards socialism as a new form of society. It is not only set at a more appropriate level by which to judge an individual but it is also a more nuanced one. So, it not one concerned with developing organisational prowess and resources. Such a measure would be appropriate to judge the influence of bands like The Redskins, given their lyrics tended towards overt socialist exhortation and instruction, prioritising logos and ethos over pathos (see Street 1986: 215–216) whereas Strummer was more concerned with pathos and ethos. Strummer is not himself viewed as a socialist realist, namely, an artist with a dominant drive to evince and expound upon the struggle for socialism through their art. In line with recognising the importance of how listeners receive lyrics (see p.58), it is the influence of his art that is of primary consideration here, rather than what Strummer himself intended or sought its influence to be (even though the latter is still significant). Strummer is not viewed as a socialist realist, conscious or otherwise, because of how he approached lyric writing (see pp.58–68), because his other pronouncements took a secondary place in public awareness to his lyrics and because of the limited duration of his socialist belief. Critically, this study is primarily concerned with his influence and this is not necessarily synonymous with what he intended. Thus, he could 10 Denisoff (1968: 229–230) and Rosenthal and Flacks (2016) argued music in the service of social movements can recruit members, mobilise and service them. This can then be adapted for creating the criteria for judging Strummer as mostly concerning recruiting new affiliates and sustaining existing ones in the cause of socialism.

17

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

be seen by followers to augment the case for socialism without being explicitly or even mainly socialistic. That said, one of the purposes of using a socialist realist framework is to seek to understand whether Strummer’s politics represented anything more than a liberal or humanist empathy for the oppressed. Another is to match him before and after against the period when he declared himself to be a socialist. In doing so, elements of change and continuity can be identified. The explanation for this seeming contradiction of potential socialist influence from non-socialist material concerns not just the perceptions of followers but the ideational nature of socialism. ‘Socialist’ is about more than just being left wing, but it still remains a broad concept in both theory and practice (see p.35). In this study, socialism is defined broadly as to comprise revolutionary socialism and (reformist) social democracy-cum-democratic socialism, parliamentary and extra-parliamentary means, and to include various liberation struggles (national, women, black and so on). Thus, socialist realism as a force for social change is, distinct from that of the official cultural activity of Soviet Union, a so-called already established ‘actually existing socialism’, between the 1930s and 1960s, and which was tied internally to party and state at the behest and benefit of the new Russian ruling class.11 Socialist realism was established by the Union of Soviet Writers as a compulsory practice in 1932 and expounded at length by Maxim Gorky in his address to the 1934 Soviet Writers’ Congress. In essence, it became a means for expounding party and state ideology in the cultural arena. Neither is the use of the socialist realist framework in this study, therefore, also tied externally to ‘socialism in one country’ and Russian/Soviet imperialism. Consequently, socialist realism in this study is conceived of as looser and more broad-ranging, but still retaining specific characteristics. It does

11 Street (1986: 57) alluded to the association between ‘socialist realism’ and folk music. Folk was favoured by communists in Britain as the preferred music for socialists as a result of the likes of home-grown talent such as Bailey, Gaughan, MacColl and Rosselson or Guthrie and Seeger from abroad. Such folk singers were sometimes party members but, if not, they were ‘fellow travellers’. Yet folk music as a genre cannot be characterised as ‘socialist realist’. Henry Cow, an experimental rock group, was also favoured by communists for its radical cultural and political stance.

18

Introduction

not make socialist realism synonymous with the subjective interests of the working class, which may sometimes be reactionary. This chosen framework is not to say that other frameworks are irrelevant (especially when concerning artistic value). Rather, it is to say this framework is the most appropriate for judging Strummer’s politics given Strummer himself and many others made an association between his views and socialism. So, alongside this analytical framework, literature examining how music and politics can interact for progressive purposes is utilised. This in itself requires some consideration of how followers choose to interpret lyrics given intended meanings of lyrics are neither always self-evident nor always received as intended. Followers The term follower is used as often as possible in preference to fan as fan derives from fanatic and because fandom denotes a subculture. Here, follower suggests a more rational set of attitudes and behaviours, depicting admiration and enthusiasm for without necessarily being an exclusive pursuit of the musician for the individual concerned and which leads to devotion. Following here denotes a sustained but not constant length of interest and which has a marked depth to it so that followers become aficionados. Different degrees of followership, thus, exist over time. Followers are not necessarily members of a collective like a fan club or other online association. Followers are the antonym to leaders (see pp.181–182) where, in the case of Strummer, following is not held to be an end in itself but a means to an end (which may involve but is not about self-gratification per se). Conclusion This is a study of political rock, not the politics of rock. It is a call Pedelty and Weglarz (2013: xi) made. Studying Strummer concerns politics through culture and politics as culture where the one of the two main questions is: what did people mean when they said Strummer (especially through 19

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

The Clash) changed their lives? Subsidiary questions follow: what was the nature of the change, how did it come about, why did it come about, and when did it come about? Prime among the questions to be considered then are: did the change set them out on a new life or political course or merely assist and affirm an existing course, and did Strummer’s influence lead to activism? In order to get to the point of asking these questions of people, some preliminary steps are necessary. One is to establish the existence of the influence of Strummer’s politics by reference to secondary sources. Doing so establishes it was likely to be worthwhile conducting the primary research (as well as supporting its findings). But this necessitates identifying what his politics were and what the perceptions of them were. This reveals important changes in his politics which were not picked up by others. Part of identifying what his politics were involved examining where they came from – in other words, what were the influences on him?

20

1

Studying Strummer: issues and approach

This chapter discusses the various challenges that studying Strummer presents. The most obvious is to avoid conflating The Clash with Strummer and, to a lesser extent, Strummer with The Clash. The latter, which is less problematic, views the impact of The Clash as a band with other members other than Strummer attributed to Strummer. The former, which is the more problematic, views Strummer’s impact, especially through his lyrics, attributed to The Clash.1 But given the dominant division of labour between Strummer and Jones, these conflations are less problematic than they may first seem because Strummer was the principal lyricist, spokesperson, singer and performance frontperson. Yet the popular academic and critical literature on The Clash abounds with statements attesting the politics of the band were this or that, when it is evident Strummer wrote the lyrics or made the pronouncements upon which these statements are based. Even recognising it is common to use the band’s name as the noun, we can take just two examples. James (2009: 132, 136) stated: ‘During the Thatcher era, and the period leading up to it, [T]he Clash was one of the most vocal and visible counter-hegemonic voices in [Britain]’ while Cedeno (2017: 101, 107) variously wrote with Give ’Em Enough Rope (1978): ‘we can see how the band’s political point of view becomes more evident’; in ‘Washington Bullets’ (1980): ‘the band expresses the impact of challenging 1 This is most obviously nefarious in Headon’s case. Green and Barker (2003: 21) noted he was ‘not interested in politics or philosophy, just having a laugh and a good time’.

21

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

societal occurrences’; and with Combat Rock (1982): ‘The Clash deliver a description of many social problems.’ This literature also is replete with statements that the political impact of The Clash was this or that when, again, it is evident its derivation was Strummer and not The Clash per se, or any other of its members. While other members of The Clash did not publicly dissent from the meaning or content of Strummer’s lyrics and pronouncements, it does not necessarily follow they completely concurred either. For example, Jones was often absent from interviews, and Simonon, when present, said little, deferring to Strummer. Only on one occasion, that of Jones’s last performance at the Us festival in May 1983, did he appear to start playing the opening chords to ‘Know Your Rights’ (1982) in order to stop Strummer from continuing his diatribe (see p.122). This is the sense in which the politics of The Clash were Strummer’s politics, as he was their originator and disseminator, and the political impact of The Clash was very much Strummer’s political impact. But even if they did agree, nonetheless, it was Strummer who formulated and articulated them (see pp.181–188). But it is also the case that Strummer was not The Clash by dint of the music being written and arranged mainly by Jones, and the appeal of The Clash’s live performances was based on a collective effort. In particular, much of the appeal of the lyrics existed alongside or on the basis of the musicality. Often, the whole was greater than the sum of the parts, with ‘White Riot’ or ‘Clampdown’ being exemplars. This chapter will now consider the other challenges. Contradictions, inconsistencies and hyperbole One is that over the course of his life, Strummer made statements which appear contradictory, highlighting a complexity. Though he stated he was a ‘truth teller’ and was thought of as a ‘teacher’ by others, he was also a ‘student’, in as much as he learnt along the way from being a young to middle-aged adult. Being a ‘student’ further allowed him to be a ‘teacher’. Seemingly contradictory statements would suggest he changed his view on issues. Ambiguity often exists here because statements were often 22

Studying Strummer: issues and approach

unelaborated upon and seldom explained in relation to previous statements. Consequently, good reasons for changing views have may not have been inquired about. The most obvious example was his changing view on Sandinista! (1980). On many occasions (NME 25 February 1984, MTV ‘120 Minutes’ March 1991, MTV Rockumentary 1991) he was sharply critical of it, while others he took the opposite view: ‘I can only say I’m proud of it … warts and all … It’s a magnificent thing … I wouldn’t change it, even if I could. And that’s after some soul searching’ (Letts 2000, see also Sounds 20 June 1981). Similarly, he called the last Clash album ‘a shitty way to end a great group’ (Guardian 10 May 2007) but he praised ‘This is England’, ‘North and South’ and ‘(In the) Pouring Rain’ (Rock&Folk 1995)2 and Julien Temple, director of The Future is Unwritten (2007), recalled: ‘There was this one line with Joe – that [the revamped Clash] was all a complete mistake and should be written out of history like so much of his past – but there were other times when he would say he was quite proud of that last album in a weird way’ (Guardian 10 May 2007). Indeed, Strummer told Guitar World (December 1999): ‘I’m proud of all our records. Even the crap ones.’ Another instance of seeming contradiction comes with the example of two statements: ‘We’re not particularly talented … we just try harder … we give it all we got – it’s as simple as that’ (Toronto CITY TV’s New Music Program 26 September 1979) and ‘We knew were better than everybody else and wanted to prove it … we wanted to be recognised as good as we knew we were’ (NYC TV interview December 1981). Discounting he was speaking for The Clash and other members may have not agreed with his statements, it would appear Strummer had blatantly contradicted himself within the space of little more than two years. But other interpretations are possible. First, he legitimately and rationally changed his view of The Clash, so no contradiction existed. Second, in a show of modesty, he did not mean what said in 1979 or, in a show of bravado, he exaggerated in 1981. Third, he was responding to particular interview situations and so the context of what he said was as important as the content of what he said. 2 The interview for the article (month undated) was with Nikola Acin in 1995.

23

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Figure 1.1  Strummer with Topper Headon in the documentary Joe Strummer: The Future Is Unwritten (2007)

Strummer seldom wrote anything other than lyrics. There was a very brief introduction to Green and Barker (2003: 9), a diary for the NME (3 March 1979) of The Clash’s first American tour, a manifesto for the NME (5 May 1979) and a short piece on his time in The Clash in Joe Strummer 001. The longest piece of text he wrote, around 5,000 words, was a humorous account of The Clash in the character of band valet, Albert Transom, for the booklet accompanying singles compilation, The Story of The Clash Volume 1 (1988). Indeed, he told the NME (26 July 1986): ‘what I do best is write doggerel’ and stated in 1988: ‘I only ever write lyrics. Maybe [I’ll write] five years after I write my last lyric’ (Shelley 1988). In 1999, he remarked: ‘I’m going to write our story one day’ (Guardian 24 September 1999) and when asked: ‘Have you ever thought about writing a book?’, he responded: ‘I do think about it but maybe you’re just blessed with one talent in life that you can really fulfil. I’ve got a knack for writing lyrics and the very nature of that means it’s like writing a telegram. … very concise … a book is like a century long, to me. It seems very difficult for me’ (While You Were Sleeping December 2001). In 2002, he observed: ‘My main strength is lyric writing … I sometimes think that I’m almost like a jingle writer. I can only think in three-minute bursts at the most … I 24

Studying Strummer: issues and approach

heavily doubt that I could write a book. I think you’re born with a knack for a certain thing maybe – and mine is writing three-minute songs’ (Hot Press 5 February 2002). While this a drawback in studying his politics and political thought, it is fortunate Strummer was frequently interviewed. Indeed, he told the Brooklyn Paper (1 April 2002) he spent ‘a third of the year talking about [the music] on the phone’. So the secondary sources used for establishing Strummer’s politics (including sometimes explaining his lyrics) and his view of their impact on others are interviews with journalists (music, non-music) for radio, television, newspapers, magazines and more latterly social media (by followers). This resulted from a combination of being asked to do many interviews and wanting to be interviewed. In The Clash, he wanted to do them for reasons of ego and politics, believing only he had the wherewithal to prosecute what was, fundamentally, his political agenda. He engineered his emergence as the main Clash spokesperson and was the main figure for LRW and The Mescaleros. When he was not in bands he remained an important cultural figure, so was still sought after for interviews. Even when other band members were present, Strummer did most of the talking. Some of the interviews were contemporaneous to particular issues and times (such as The Clash, LRW, The Mescaleros) and some were retrospective. Some were mixtures of both. Often these interviews formed the basis of feature-length articles on Strummer. The benefit of being high profile and willing to conduct interviews led to many being conducted, especially with his Mescaleros comeback. His death led to the republishing of many interviews. The main challenge in using these sources is they often lack the breadth and depth necessary for fully examining issues salient to this study.3 Many were often short and combative where it was not always entirely clear what the full context of the responses were. A further challenge comes from Strummer himself. Though he had good historical recall, he was prone to hyperbole. He did so with flair 3 This results from the motivation of the different individuals interviewing Strummer as well as these individuals not being political scientists or sociologists. Television interviews with Strummer were invariably short and, often, edited down.

25

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Figure 1.2  Strummer interviewed for MTV’s Spotlight in 1989

and conviction as part of his larger-than-life persona, lending credibility to this.4 Some instances are: ‘I must have done a million [gigs]’ (Sounds 11 June 1978); ‘I’ve talked to a billion intellectuals’ (Sounds 20 June 1981); ‘I’d say we played every gig on the face of the earth’ (RM 9 May 1981);5 ‘I have fostered one thousand groups and I’ll foster a thousand million more’ (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029); ‘We must have tried every drummer that then had a kit. I mean every drummer in London. … And that’s why we were lost until we found Topper’ (Letts 2000); and: ‘The sound of that bass hitting the stage was probably the best sound we ever made’ (MTV ‘120-X-ray’ 1989). These were relatively unimportant, but others were not. In 1981, he told Sounds (20 June 1981) Britain was a ‘police state’ and a gig in Stockholm (17 February 1984): ‘In England, we have the most fascist police force’ and repeated this on Radio Stockholm 4 Andersen and Heibutzki (2018: 27, 124) noted this was ‘common to the performer class’. 5 Strummer’s liner notes for The Story of The Clash, Volume 1 (1988) repeated this.

26

Studying Strummer: issues and approach

that day. He remarked: ‘People in England … don’t realize what a fascist, racist press, police and government we’ve got’ (The Record May 1984). He called the US ‘fascist’ in 1984 (Boston Globe 16 April 1984, White 2007: 112) and said ‘what we have in England is the most right-wing fascist media’ (Quake February 1984). In 2002, he characterised Thatcher and Reagan as having: ‘tendencies [that] leaned to the far-right if not fascism’ (D’Ambrosio 2003). Though he lied about Headon’s sacking, saying: ‘It was his decision [to leave]’ (NME 29 May 1982) and told WNYC (1 March 1984) of playing ‘good gigs’ in 1984, of the end of The Clash, he then said: I really learned it was over the day we sacked Topper, and not the day we sacked Mick. There was quite some time between them. We played a whole tour between those times. … I don’t think … we ever played a good gig after that. Except for one night in New Jersey … but I reckon that was just by the law of averages. (LA Times 31 January 1988).

Despite frequently repeating this before and afterwards (Network 7 Channel 1987, Letts 2000, McGuire 2001, Gilbert 2009: 357), this did not make it so.6 In fact, sacking Jones was a bigger blow to The Clash’s musicality, but it was not fatal, as the Lucky 8 demos for Cut the Crap indicated. Then he said: ‘[The 1985 busking tour] … to me it was the best tour that we ever did’ (Savage 1988). The point here is that in suffering guilt for his large part in breaking up The Clash, Strummer tried to over atone by taking, in the last instance, all the blame himself. This did not make for rationale assessment.7 What is the portent of this hyperbole? As with other aforementioned challenges, it means care needs to be taken with his statements and the challenges can best be dealt with by corroboration through using multiple sources to increase overall robustness and rigour. This does not mean each point made at a particular point in time can be substantiated by reference to other material, so much as each point made fits into an overall, credible 6 This may account for Strummer bailing Headon out of a £30,000 drug debt in 1983 (Salewicz 2006: 366) and helping to pay for several rehab stints (Needs 2005: 286). 7 Such untruths overshadow any of Strummer’s alleged fabrication on the origin of the title of ‘I’m So Bored with the USA’ (see Egan 2015: 19).

27

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

pattern by virtue of standing alongside other supporting points. Here, a ‘fact’ does not become a fact just because Strummer repeated it, but it does attest to his belief in it and, where beliefs and views are repeated over the course of time, this attests to his firmness in them. Secondary sources In contrast to many writings on Strummer, both popular (e.g. Salewicz 2006) and academic (e.g. James 2009, 2010a, 2010b), this study prioritises using original Strummer (secondary) sources for reasons of not only enhancing rigour but because he has been canonised by many followers, often before his death. Consequently, and especially when making critical comments on them, it is imperative to establish their veracity by citing them in the fullest terms from their original sources, rather than subjectively summarising them or relying on others’ summary and interpretation. This dovetails with another component of this study’s approach – namely, to allow Strummer to speak in his own words as much as possible. This is not only to capture the depth and breadth of what he said but also to help establish the veracity of one statement by reference to others. This also has a bearing on countering the misperceptions and misconceptions about his politics and their effect (see pp.36–44). Another reason is many of the secondary sources from which these statements derive are not now commonly available, freely accessible or easily discoverable, even on the internet.8 Indeed, many were not freely available outside their country of publication at the time of publication due to the costs of overseas mail-order subscriptions. Consequently, existing material is brought to light to a much wider audience. Many secondary sources feature verbatim dialogues (e.g. Green and Barker 2003, White 2007). Even where verbatim dialogue was not used (e.g. 8 These include the mainstream music press in Britain of the 1970s and 1980s, the new music magazines of the 1990s and 2000s and an array of non-British materials from the 1970s onwards (like Trouser Press, Paste, Pulse, Quake, Roadrunner). For Salewicz’s (2006) so-called ‘definitive biography’, many sources of US material from the 1980s, and more generally from 1999 to 2002, were absent.

28

Studying Strummer: issues and approach

Davie 2004, Swinford 2016), issues of ability to recall accurately without contemporaneous recording (diary/notebook, audio/video tape) should be borne in mind. This is particularly so when some accounts were written some decades after the events they report upon. Where contemporaneous recordings were taken by music journalists (e.g. Gilbert 2009, Needs 2005, Salewicz 2006), this is likely to be less of an issue. But in the case of studies by journalists, often interviews with colleagues and followers were undertaken after Strummer’s death. A number of other studies did not rely on primary data sources, using instead other contemporaneous secondary sources so some issues of accurate recall do not arise in the same way. Nonetheless, even where interviews with associates were conducted after Strummer’s death, there remain issues of accurate recall of distant events. And, notwithstanding any issues of distant recall, the issues of subjective recall and interpretation exist. A further feature of note is many books on The Clash and Strummer were written by those who became friends with him (e.g. Davie 2004, Gilbert 2009, Needs 2005, Salewicz 2006, save Gray 2001, 2003). That some (e.g. Needs 2005) were closer to Jones, especially after his sacking, should also be recognised. Needs (2005: 243, 244, 245, 251) refers to the post-Jones line-up as ‘bogus Clash’, saying: ‘I refused to go and see them out of loyalty to Mick (Needs 2005: 247). The ramifications of these potential biases need to be recognised. These various potential problems can best be dealt by the corroboration outlined above. Secondary sources like AZLyrics, Songfacts, SongMeanings and Lyric Interpretations, as well as various Strummer and Clash Facebook groups, where followers could discuss the meaning of Strummer’s lyrics, did not prove to be enlightening for reasons of spareness and shallowness of comments.9 This was also so with the internet discussion forums like If Music Could Talk (taken from the Sandinista! song). Dating from 2008, it is an online forum for Clash followers to discuss many different subjects. In mid-2020, it had some 1,200 members with over 583,000 posts covering over 12,000 topic threads. Other than Clash ephemera, one category, called ‘The Dictator’ (from the Cut The Crap song), deals with politics, 9 This was also the case with followers’ gig testimonies on Blackmarketclash.co.uk.

29

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

but this has not been a forum to discuss the politics of The Clash or Joe Strummer as the main Clash lyricist, but political subjects in general. However, searching on terms like ‘socialism’ and ‘socialist’ within these topic threads revealed little of value from the 40,000 posts on the 700-odd topic threads. This was not just because links were sought between views expressed and those of Strummer. It was also because the genesis of the posts, structure of exchanges and their lengths did not provide for any substantial basis for textual analysis. Yet it could be reasonably inferred at the most general level that the content of topic threads would show alignment with Strummer’s views, certainly those of his Clash years. Rather, the content was a mishmash of varying views. Of the many Facebook groups dedicated to The Clash, two things were noteworthy: one was the overwhelmingly apolitical nature of posts; the other was many political comments were not left wing and sometimes even reactionary, leading to the establishment of the ‘Clash Fans against the Right’ Facebook group in 2020 (see p.250). Thus, it would seem the meaning of Strummer’s lyrics was either ignored, repudiated or not understood. Researching during the pandemic limited access to some original secondary sources (especially radio and television interviews) as libraries were not open to allow examination of such deposits (which could not be accessed online). This deficiency was offset to some extent by what was available via YouTube and by some radio interview material being republished in music papers. The music press was extensively used. The expected qualifications exist about its use, ranging from the motivation behind seeking interviews, the nature of questions asked to selective editing of interview material, and being by journalists and not social scientists. For these reasons and others outlined above, the requirement to generate primary data was critical. Primary sources Some of Strummer’s closest associates were approached for interview. In 2012, Mick Jones effectively declined by not responding to email correspondence. Former manager, Bernie Rhodes, was not very cooperative. 30

Studying Strummer: issues and approach

However, Baker (roadie), Kosmo Vinyl (press manager), Nick Sheppard (guitarist, 1983–85), and Ray Gange (associate) were very helpful, as were the likes of Pete Morgan (Strummersite webmaster). Where no reference is given to quotes, the source is from these interviews or testimonies. The wider body of primary data for this study comes from taking testimonies from followers (see below). An obvious challenge concerns assessing its overall significance. Given the expected preponderance of white older British males, particular effort was made to secure testimony from women, younger cohorts and those outside Britain. The testimonies taken were neither randomly selected nor representative of different demographics. Testimony was sought from those identified through public platforms and personal networks as being Clash or Strummer followers. Seeking testimony did not presuppose their views of his politics and their impact on themselves. Their number was then added to by ‘snowballing’, whereby those who gave testimony were asked to recommend others. This datacollection method means the research cannot capture the extent of Strummer’s influence in quantitative or qualitative terms, either absolutely or relatively, overall or in any one period. For that, different data-generating techniques would be needed. What the research can give is a good indication of the nature (depth and breadth across time and space) of his influence, its processes and outcomes by asking respondents to reflect back on their lives and at some distance from Strummer’s death. Testimony was likely then to be less effusive, though this did not mean the impact of reverence and not speaking ill of dead were absent. Testimony was not sought from those who were not followers in order to ask the counterfactual: ‘Why were you not a follower or fan?’ While this would have provided a counterbalance, it would have been difficult to operationalise, namely, putting out a call for people to explain why they had no interest in Strummer. Probably, only a minority would have responded by saying it was for reasons other than not being aware of him. It is these informed, critical voices which would have been useful, and would probably contain views seeing him as earnest, egotistical, fraudulent and hypocritical. Among them would probably be some that were followers but then repudiated him as apostates (e.g. Ogg 2014). 31

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Fortunately, along with some secondary sources, some of these types of views have been captured through requests for testimony leading to explanations for why no testimony would be given. Those approached for testimony were, in effect, those likely to have been first inspired and/or sustained by Strummer, either at a critical period in their lives or in a more ongoing manner so that he was either an influence, a key influence or the key influence on them (where sustaining is also a form of influence). Those approached were asked to respond in writing to five questions (see p.262). Only on two occasions did ill health prevent this, so online interviews were held using the questions. The rationale for asking for written testimony was that, when contrasted to interviews (face to face or virtual, telephone), respondents were able to contemplate their responses in a more considered way, allowing greater depth and nuance. With interviews, even when the questions are given in advance, there can be a tendency to make overly broad generalisations and to exaggerate because responses are made in an instance. This is more likely to be limited with written testimony, which can be reread, revised and refined. In 2012, a pilot study of fifteen individuals who were white males in Britain of fifty years and over was conducted. All but two worked for unions. Nine responded. This was followed by a full study. A total of 174 individuals were approached, of which 43 were women, between 2018 and 2021. One hundred and eleven (64 per cent) gave testimony. Demographically, those giving testimony were mainly white males from Britain, over fifty years of age. Women represented 26 per cent and those of either sex under fifty was 25 per cent so that the intersection of, for example, younger woman was 12 per cent. Those from outside Britain (38 per cent) were from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the US. Only 8 per cent were from mainland Europe (France, Germany and Italy) and even fewer were black and minority ethic (6 per cent). Occupationally, 26 per cent worked in further and higher education (mainly universities), 32 per cent in creative professions (mainly journalists and writers), 11 per cent for unions, 23 per cent in public services, and most of the remainder were professionals in law and the voluntary sector. Very few 32

Studying Strummer: issues and approach

worked in the private sector. Outside of work, the primary loci of activism were left politics (36 per cent), unions (24 per cent) and community (13 per cent), with the remainder being either unknown, inactive or having no primary locus. For the moment, the relatively high proportion of those with public profiles, access to media and that write as part of their occupations or job is noted. Therefore, the testimonies, even with the use of snowballing, were less able to take account of those not publicly visible about being Strummer followers, or that had been but no longer were and did not publicise this. Of those who did not give testimony but gave a reason for this (7 per cent), this was because they did not feel that they had anything substantive to say on account of liking Strummer’s music but not being influenced by his politics. In total, 120 individuals gave testimony. Here, as elsewhere, a challenge is to navigate potential hazards of selective memory, romanticisation and historical distance. The first concerns faulty memory of events a considerable time ago when the subjects were likely to be less able by dint of age and maturity to understand anything more than the superficial impact of Strummer on themselves. The second concerns, especially after his death, exaggerating his influence as not just a eulogy of sorts for him but for their own youth. This would include issues of projection and ignorance concerning, especially, the post-Clash period (see p.274). The last concerns younger cohorts without the ability to have seen Strummer perform live or have access to much of the music press of his time. These were best resolved by careful and sensitive reading of testimony and by seeking to identify general tendencies that were not dependent on small numbers of testimonies. Conclusion The proposition that Strummer had influence over people for his politics led to a pilot study. When this was confirmed, a full-blown gathering of testimony was undertaken to establish the extent and nature of his influence. Unfortunately, it was beyond this study’s scope to examine whether other musicians were politically more or less influential than Strummer. 33

2

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

Strummer has universally and unanimously been characterised as being of the left. This is not disputed, even though his politics changed significantly in his last two decades, with this being seldom studied. However, thereafter there is little clarity about what type of left politics Strummer held. Almost all would agree he was a ‘rebel’. This appellation was widely used of him and by him. However, that does not take us very far in understanding his politics because rebellion is, quintessentially, against something and takes many different forms from many different perspectives. To be said to be radical is more illuminating as this is to be not only against something but also to be for something. That said, those alternatives could be right or left wing because radicalism, while tackling the fundamental nature of a situation, does not presuppose a leftward direction. So, it is fortunate the terms used to describe Strummer’s politics are numerous over and above being ‘rebel’ and ‘radical’, such as anti-capitalist, Marxist, socialist and revolutionary. But problems of definition, periodisation and evidence exist in these characterisations. Those making the characterisations seldom provided any definition of their understanding of what the terms they are using mean. Often this is not unexpected as few were political or social scientists. Yet even of those that were, seldom did. So there is no uniform, even common, precise terminology. For example, and given the importance of Sandinista! to how people perceived Strummer’s politics, we can note Andersen (2013: 4) and Andersen and Heibutzki (2018: 38) stated the Sandinistas were 34

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

‘Marxist revolutionaries’, James (2014: 245) classified them as ‘the revolutionary Sandinistas of Nicaragua’, Laing (2015: 191) wrote of ‘the revolutionaries of Nicaragua’ and Musician, Player & Listener (June 1981) called the Sandinistas ‘revolutionaries’. Many Marxists, of communist and Trotskyist heritage, would contest these characterisations, regardless of what the Sandinistas said of themselves. This definitional problem is further accentuated by the existence of legitimate differing conceptions of the same term. Here, socialism is the most important one. Draper (1966), for example, summarised the two long-standing approaches to socialism, posited as socialism ‘from above’ and ‘from below’. The former, also known as democratic socialism or social democracy, refers to a political philosophy where collectivised property is administered by an elite on behalf of, and for, the benefit of others (mainly workers). For example, the state is used to intervene in the processes and outcomes of the market to ameliorate inequalities. The latter conceives common ownership of property as administered by workers themselves and for their own benefit. The former approximates to reformism and the latter to revolutionism. Definitional matters are complicated further as revolutionists favour reforms not as ends in themselves – as reformists do – but to generate revolutionary capacity, namely, consciousness and collective action. And yet this may not always be apparent, especially in periods when revolutionary prospects are slim and the idea of revolution is abstract. Consequently, both revolutionists and reformists can want the same goals but for different reasons so that being for reforms does not necessarily equate with reformism. The other problems, of periodisation and evidence, are relatively more straightforward. Strummer’s politics are almost always derived from The Clash, where it is seldom recognised that he progressed leftwards from 1976 to 1986. Nonetheless, this period is taken to represent his entire politics. The basis of this political characterisation leans heavily on Clash lyrics. Although Strummer was able to express and articulate significant economic, ideological, philosophical, political and social concerns in his lyrics, to read his politics off these lyrics is problematic. Quite apart from underplaying or ignoring other evidence like interviews, among them are lyrics dealing with pathos as much as with ideas, so that they should 35

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

not be seen as treatises; Strummer’s meaning is not always entirely clear (as was the case with The Redskins); and with aforementioned definitional issue, listeners bring with them their own varying tools for interpreting his lyrics. An example is illustrative. If ‘White Riot’ (1977) is compared to ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’ (1978), it could be concluded Strummer moved from calling for self-activity to reliance on others as per: ‘Why not phone up Robin Hood/And ask him for some wealth distribution’ in the latter, especially when preceding lines, namely, ‘The British Army is waiting out there/An’ it weighs fifteen hundred tons’ were to be interpreted as saying rioting would be put down by force according to Strummer (Gray 2003: 251, see also p.79). However, his lyrics for various songs on London Calling (1979) and Sandinista! (1980) show he supported and advocated popular rebellion. In the latter are to be found the likes of ‘One More Time’ and ‘Corner Soul’. This chapter identities and examines the characterisations of Strummer’s politics, beginning by categorising them, then drawing out their common themes. Next, criticism of Strummer’s politics is considered, along with his responses. From here, study of his lyrics is examined. Contrasting characterisations The insets collate terms used by writers and commentators. Not all could be easily placed in just one, indicating a complexity to interpretating them. Rather than just cite the key terms, the context of their usage is given by providing the text around them. Of the terms used, some are relatively straightforward (anarchist, communist, Marxist) while others are not (leftist, progressive, socialist, revolutionist). The term, ‘class warrior’ is used to describe fighting for the working class. Inset 2.1  Anarchist Citing Strummer’s ‘White Riot’ lyrics, ‘If any political ideology could be applied to punk, then rather than socialism, it should be anarchism’ (Street 1986: 175) ‘Joe’s left-anarchist politics’ (MOJO February 2003) 36

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

‘[A]narchist rebel’ (UNCUT June 2007) ‘In so far as an ideology can be extrapolated from the lyric of ‘Career Opportunities’ it resembles those of anarchist positions’ (Laing 2015: 56) Strummer’s lyrics showed an ‘overt attempt to introduce anarchism as theory and possibility’ (Zieleniec 2017: 60) Inset 2.2  Class warrior ‘The wars The Clash are turning into music – wars of class, race, and identity – are all too real’ (Rolling Stone 9 March 1978) ‘The Clash’s working-class ideology … Joe Strummer and The Clash’s working-class, anti-imperialist rhetoric’ (Bindas 1993: 83, 85) Strummer ‘casts himself as a champion of … the working-classes’ (Harrison 2002: 34) ‘Class war classics [such] as “White Riot” [and] “London Calling” (Class War Summer 2003) ‘The Clash [album] [w]as nothing less than a call to musical and class warfare’ (Fletcher 2002: 9) ‘Lennon was her working-class hero and I would find mine in Joe Strummer’ (Antonino D’Ambrosio of his mother and himself (D’Ambrosio 2012b: xiii)) ‘[‘White Riot’] … was a call for white youth to have their own riot, but one that would be directed against the class system’ (Roberts and Moore 2009: 32) ‘Strummer’s rationale for violence is clearly articulated here: it is a direct act of class struggle’ (James 2010a: 703). ‘[I]t is clear that in a class sense he sides with them [i.e. blacks] in the class struggle. For Strummer, the world is defined predominantly by class’ (James 2010a: 703) ‘They spoke for the working-class’ (Chris Townsend, Fifth Column Clash clothes outfitter (Garcia 2013: 191)) ‘[T]he songs warned of class war, suggesting that racial and generational differences be set aside for a more fundamental confrontation’ (Andersen 2013: 2) ‘The Clash’s working-class anti-imperialist ideology’ (Wadlow 2014: 137) ‘[The Clash were] ‘working-class heroes’ (Wadlow 2017: 203, 204) 37

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

‘Strummer’s … [‘White Riot’] is an incitement to the indigenous British working-class to revolt’ (Cashell 2019: 116) Inset 2.3  Leftist Strummer was still ‘of the left, for the left, by the left, forever left’ (Pulse March 1984) ‘The Clash kept up a rebellious, left-wing image through their songs and interviews’ (Denselow 1989: 204) ‘The Clash … [was] the most left-wing and militant group of 1976’ (Quantick 2000: 18) Strummer was ‘punk’s original “Man of the People”’ (Time Out 11 July 2001) ‘A true rock rebel’ (NME 11 January 2003) ‘He [was] one of the last artists who was not afraid to be on the left politically, a thorn in the side of capitalism’ (Billy Bragg (D’Ambrosio 2003)) ‘A true voice of punk resistance, Joe Strummer was a musician, recording artist and rock rebel whose opposition went beyond hollow rhetoric, phony gestures of resistance and a rad haircut’ (Ribot 2003) The Clash’s ‘critical leftist political commentary [sought] to lay the ground work for a new order built on equity and social justice’ (Dunn 2011: 30) Strummer sought ‘to develop and maintain a line of political critique somewhere between the mood of the streets and the workings of the intellect’ (Linstead 2010: 127) ‘Strummer was also a political activist who fought the rise of white supremacist groups and challenged neo-liberalism at home and abroad’ (Harden 2013: 219) The Clash had a ‘broadly leftist position … often open[ing] out populism into an anti-imperialist dimension’ (Laing 2015: 191, 202) The ‘radical political stance adopted by The Clash’ (Coulter 2018: 525) ‘The radical political agenda of The Clash’ (Coulter 2019: 23) Inset 2.4  Anti-capitalist ‘The Clash seemed the new spokesmen for an angry, anti-capitalist generation’ (Du Noyer 1998: 1). 38

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

‘If a better lyricist and frontman than political theorist, he … fashioned The Clash into punk’s version of Gramsci’s “organic” intellectuals … [attacking] racism, capitalism, and imperialism, and argu[ing] … for a more inclusive, more humane world’ (Harrison 2002: 35) ‘However vexed or unlikely a proposition – a punk rocker as Marxist theorist? – he used the media and the record industry as a means to articulate an anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist message’ (Harrison 2002: 38) ‘In the Soviet Union in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Rovesnik, the million selling magazine of Komsomol (All-Union Leninist Young Communist League) denoted The Clash as anti-capitalist, anti-fascist and anti-racist’ (Zhuk 2011: 150–151) The Clash has an ‘internationalist anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, anti-war vision’ (Andersen 2013: 7) ‘The fact that The Clash could not fulfil anti-capitalist expectations distressed Joe Strummer greatly’ (Coon 2019: 66) Strummer ‘maintain[ed] through the many phases of his career an anti-capitalist, pro-populist politics’ (Faulk and Harrison 2014: 5) ‘[N]o rock and roll songwriter of prominence managed to present such a consistently anti-capitalist position through so many phases of his career as Joe Strummer did’ (Shannon 2014: 14) ‘[T]heir mission [was] of freedom and anti-capitalist revolution’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 21–22) ‘Clash songs had a number of consistent themes … [such as] anti-capitalism, anti-consumerism, and-state, anti-police, antiimperialism’ (Zieleniec 2017: 57) ‘[O]ne of his favourite themes [was] the grind of the working man and his susceptibility to commercialism and the machinery of the capitalist system’ (Popoff 2018: 126) ‘The Clash, whose music was explicitly anti-capitalist’ (Toynbee 2019: 36) Inset 2.5  Communist Strummer was ‘the one who actually spouted the communist propaganda’ (Heartbreakers’ Walter Lure (Colegrave and Sullivan 2005: 236)) 39

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Inset 2.6  Marxist ‘The Clash are a radical, left-wing, anti-establishment, Marxist, socialist, liberal-thinking group’ (Statesman 17 June 1981) ‘The Clash give a Marxist warrior’s interpretation’ (Pattison 1987: 150) ‘One cannot help but notice the Marxist language of this song [‘The Equaliser’]’ (Bindas 1993: 87) Strummer had a ‘Marxist critique’ (Harrison 2002: 39) Strummer engaged in ‘an endless stream of Marxist name-calling’ (Knowles 2003: 238) Strummer used a ‘Marxist-inflected social critique’ (Matula 2003: 523) ‘Joe always said his politics was Marxist’ (Antonino D’Ambrosio (Billet 2006)) Sandinista! had ‘implicit Marxist sympathies’ (Rolling Stone 3 March 2011) ‘This perhaps points to Strummer’s Marxist reading of history’ (James 2014: 245) ‘The Clash’s clearest quasi-Marxist or socialist statements’ (James 2013: 5) The ‘band’s neo-Marxist ideas’ (Cohen and Peacock 2017b: 19) ‘Being a Marxist, Strummer rejects laying down one’s life for the sake of a sovereign monarch’ (2016 comment on ‘The Call Up’ on https://genius.com/The-clash-the-call-up-lyrics) Inset 2.7  Progressive ‘Without espousing a particular ideology, many of their songs call for action by working-class people against oppression, racism, imperialism, war and materialism’ (Boston Globe 1 June 1981) ‘Strummer was a social idealist’ (Topping 2004: 66) ‘The Clash added an explicitly progressive political dimension to their global explorations that was firmly rooted in the ’60s Left’ (Schalit 2000: 34) ‘[S]o the story goes, [he] became punk rock’s most articulate and, arguably, most progressive spokesperson’ (Weekly Worker 6 June 2007) ‘He drove the band forward politically, picking up on the oppression all over the world and putting his anger against injustice into songs’ (Hewitt 2011: 179) 40

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

‘For almost all the participants, Strummer has remained a progressive touchstone for over three-and-a-half decades’ (Bedford 2014: 63). ‘For the humanist Clash … [society] could be repaired for the betterment of the masses’ (Jucha 2016: 28) The Clash were ‘a force for progressive political change’ (Coulter 2019: 73) Strummer’s 1976 NME comment on what the band stood for ‘capture[d] the whole Clash manifesto in one short but crucially important statement’ (Beesley and Davie 2019: 155) ‘Strummer’s lyrics were a righteous and radical reaction to the well-documented disenfranchisement of the era, and his clarion call was consistently directed at more humanism in the world [and] not aimed at destroying the system’ (David Sanders (Beesley and Davie 2019: 167)) ‘Strummer championed the cause of the underdog … by viewing the system from the perspective of the underclass’ (Drew Hipson (Beesley and Davie 2019: 176)) Inset 2.8  Revolutionist* ‘[The Clash are] a revolutionary punk rock band’ (Ben Blake, Socialist Worker (US) February 1979) ‘American critics hail them as rock’s articulate revolutionary conscience’ (Rolling Stone 24 June 1982) The Clash have ‘a message of revolution’ (CBS New York News 31 August 1982) ‘Radio Clash’ ‘envisions the overthrow of the capitalist media networks’ (Pattison 1987: 149–150) ‘The Clash’s brand of rock … was overtly revolutionary’ (Rolling Stone 14 July 1988) ‘The social and political revolution that The Clash were meant to be leading, or at least providing the soundtrack for’ (Punk Planet March/April 2000) Strummer was a ‘revolutionary rocker’ (New Zealand Herald 15 January 2000) ‘Strummer … wanted revolution, wanted a world without tyranny and subjugation’ (Harrison 2002: 40) 41

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

‘If ever there could have been a soundtrack to an urban revolution The Clash would have been it’ (Red Saunders, Socialist Worker 14 January 2003). ‘[The Clash] … combined revolutionary sounds with revolutionary ideas’ (Tom Morello, Rage Against the Machine (New York Times 11 March 2003)) The Clash had ‘explicitly anti-capitalist revolutionary messages’ (Matula 2003: 523) The Clash had ‘revolutionary roots’ (Salewicz 2006: 382) ‘The mandate of the new Clash was nothing less than total revolution’ (Knowles 2005: 43) ‘[Generation X] just didn’t look the part of revolutionaries … The Clash did … with its “revolutionary rhetoric”’ (Heylin 2007: 244, 192) ‘Punk. Rebel. Revolutionary’ (NME 11 August 2012) Strummer was ‘a toff turned revolutionary’ (Daily Telegraph (Sydney) 28 December 2002) ‘In the summer of 1981, The Clash came to Times Square for a series of concerts at … Bond’s International Casino. The band was preaching revolution’ (New York Times 31 March 2002) ‘Joe Strummer was the Tony Benn of punk: the toff turned revolutionary’ (Daily Mail 24 December 2002) The Clash were about ‘marrying rock to the pursuit of revolution … Their mission [was] to bring ‘revolution rock’ to the mainstream [indicating] … the revolutionary political ambition of The Clash’ (Andersen 2013: 1, 5, 4) ‘[‘White Riot’] exhort[s] whites to become more revolutionary’ (James 2010a: 699) ‘Strummer, Jones and The Clash came not to save the world but to destroy and then rebuild it … [with their] … revolutionary message’ (Broe 2012: 96, 100) ‘The Clash combined revolutionary ideas with revolutionary music’ (D’Ambrosio (2012f: 263) ‘The Clash were the next wave of revolutionaries’ (Mike Laye, Clash photographer (Garcia 2013: 77)) His songs such as ‘Generations’ (1997) and ‘Ghetto Defendant’ (1982) ‘do not call for reform: they call for revolution’ (Shannon 2014: 22) 42

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

‘The Clash strengthened the rebellious, revolutionary image they had created’ (Tranmer 2017: 158) ‘The Clash were … [about] … advocating worldwide revolution … [with] the most impressive revolutionary embodiment tak[ing] the form of a poster entitled The Clash Atlas of … Give ’Em Enough Rope’ (Wadlow 2017: 204, 211) ‘[T]he revolutionary traditions The Clash drew on and extended …. an aspiring revolutionary like Strummer …’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 27, 149) * Connotations with revolution abound: Amazon’s ‘Best of The Clash’ collection used the strapline: ‘Our favourite songs from the rock ’n’ roll revolutionaries’ while ‘Revolution Rock’, influenced by the song title from London Calling (1979), was often the title given to radio and television programmes and magazine articles about The Clash (e.g., Mother Jones April 1982, NZR April 2012, Downbeat December 1982).

Inset 2.9  Socialist [‘The lyrics of ‘The Equaliser’] … probably followed Strummer[’s] … socialist political beliefs’ (Bindas 1993: 87) ‘[The Clash were] socialist rebels’ (Mulholland 2003: 44) ‘Everyone knew The Clash were a political band. A SOCIALIST [capitalisation in original] band … [with] avowed socialist policy’ (White 2007: 54, 126) Strummer had ‘far left socialist views’ (Reed 2009: 139) ‘Brimming with socialist integrity and sloganeering, The Clash …’ (Britton 2012) ‘He was anti-racist, anti-war, anti-colonialist, and pro-socialist’ (Tompkins 2012) ‘The Clash’s revolutionary socialism … the band’s revolutionary sloganeering’ (James 2013: 4) ‘Although The Clash were careful never to accept a narrow ideological label, they stood on the revolutionary socialist Left as Strummer acknowledged’ (Andersen 2013: 3) ‘The Clash were the socialist fringe of [punk]’ (Tony Kliman, The Dils (Ensminger 2013: 59)) ‘Joe’s … socialist attitude’ (Chris Townsend, Fifth Column Clash clothes outfitter (Garcia 2013: 88)) 43

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

‘Paid-up socialist like Joe Strummer’ (Myers 2004: 14) ‘The socialist-minded Joe …’ (O’Shea 2015: 153) ‘Joe’s socialistic sensibilities [and] … the Clash’s socialistic impulses … Joe encouraged his ban to adhere to socialist tendencies … his socialistic viewpoint’ (Jucha 2016: 108, 265, 284, 336) ‘The Clash’s incendiary eponymous debut album had a steadfast socialist message’ (Morning Star 14 April 2017) Strummer’s songs were ‘socialist mantras’ (Watt 2018b: 7) ‘I found parallels between [Bernie] Sanders and Joe Strummer: Both were champions of socialism and the proletariat, and both were vocal critics of injustice and the oligarchy’ (Modery 2018) ‘Joe is expressing his socialist ideals [in ‘The Equaliser’]’ (Popoff 2018: 159) ‘[T]he left-wing, socialist Clash’ (Post Pravda 12 February 2018) ‘[In ‘The Magnificent Seven’] Strummer is now critiquing the system from a clearly socialist perspective …’ (Toynbee 2019: 47)* ‘Strummer saw [punk] as the perfect mechanism for spreading his socialist ideology which, he believed, would change the world for the better’ (Taysom 2020) ‘[L]oosely on the socialist left’ (Assirati 2020: 25) * Jones commented of the song: ‘Yeah, there’s Marxism in that song’ (Mother Jones April 1982).

The varying frequency of usage is notable with those associated with ‘revolutionist’ (>25) being by far most common, and ‘communist’ and ‘anarchist’ least common (hope>action’, instead of anger giving way to resignation and despondency. Coulter (2018: 525, 2019c: 70) does not make this case, respectively suggesting the songs ‘have an especially potent political charge not in spite of their sense of melancholia but rather precisely because of it’ and ‘[i]t is … the ‘left melancholia’ of the band’s back catalogue that is the source of their radical political influence, that identifies them as the authors of ‘protest songs’ with a genuinely profound and enduring power’. At the very least, the proposition of ‘left melancholia’ indicates lyrics can be interpreted in various ways by the receivers (even if it is not clear how or why they were interpreted in different ways). And, Coulter’s (2018, 2019c: 73) case is not unambiguous for he does acknowledge The Clash ‘articulated also a sense of political optimism’. Strummer’s stated response Strummer’s responses were unapologetic, especially when facing the dilemma of necessarily criticising a commercial system needed to elevate his lyrics to a position of international influence while attempting to resist sanitisation and censorship of, and by, that system. On ‘selling out’ by signing to CBS, in 1978 he charged: ‘[W]e want to reach a lot of people. If we’d put our own label together we’d have only reached a few hundred or maybe a thousand people. … Basically, we decided to play their game but on our terms’ (MM 11 March 1978). Strummer continued to argue CBS was a means to an end to reach the masses (New York Rocker July/ August 1980, RNZ  3 February 1982, US radio 1983, NME 25 February 1984). Attacking Crass, he argued: ‘[W]e couldn’t see the attraction of being pure in a closet somewhere … If I make a good record, I want it in your local record store and that’s what a company is for me – it’s a structure to do that for me … I’m not here to be a closet case group … congratulating itself in a squat in the countryside’ (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029). 57

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Lexicon of lyrics In examining the influence of Strummer’s primary modus operandi, namely, his lyrics, it is important to recognise how their meaning is received by listeners, and is not solely in the lyricist’s hands. As Street (1986: 6, 157–158, 163, 2001: 248), Frith (1996), Roy (2010) and Laing (2015) argued, it is essential to hear from listeners about what they thought and felt about the lyrics, even if this is only to confirm the intended meaning was received. Meaning cannot be assumed a priori. Instead, it must be a posteriori. Potentially, the power of music through the meeting of the recording artist and listener can create something greater than the sum of the parts. So, music is not an objective matter, with no one meaning or singular significance. How lyricists’ intentions within or behind the lyrics are received is often beyond their control because their reception depends, inter alia, on how they are listened to, performed and interpreted – so many meanings are possible, not least because the context of how, where and why the lyrics are received in certain ways depends on a myriad of factors. This is not to suggest a postmodernist perspective but that not all listeners will feel the same about the same songs and their lyrics and neither will they take away from them the same things. This puts meat on the bones of Phillips’s (2012: 107) assertion: ‘Like all great art, The Clash’s music is open to interpretation. You take what you want from it, and you leave the rest.’ And yet, studies of Strummer’s lyrics operate from within the lyrics themselves. Put simply, once their meaning is discovered by the writer, it is assumed that others will also make – and be able to make – the same discovery or concur. It matters not here that writers’ discovered meanings are often held by them to be substantiated by reference to the events which surround the lyrics. Two outcomes then occur: assuming the discovered meaning in some unspecified way influences followers, or that there is no subsequent influence. Either way, no substantiation is attempted. Strummer recognised some of this perspective: ‘[Y]ou know what you’re thinking and you write it on a bit of paper and to you it’s as clear as a bell. But I’ve learned to double-check. You assume people know what you’re talking about – which is a ridiculous assumption’ (Hit List November/ 58

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

December 1999). Here, Clash guitarist, Nick Sheppard, made the point: ‘Joe’s talent when writing about social/political topics was the way he couched them in poetry and humour. He didn’t preach. He wasn’t simplistic. You have to work your way into his lyrics to find your meaning.’ Consequently, Jesus Arias recalled Strummer cried tears on learning US pilots inscribed ‘Rock the Casbah’ on a bomb unleashed over Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War (Hall 2014),8 while Strummer recounted in 2002: ‘You know the US military played this song in the first Gulf War to the troops and now are using it again as they prepare for war’ (D’Ambrosio 2012c: 13; see also Needs 2005: 299, D’Ambrosio 2006, Andersen 2013: 5). ‘White Riot’ was also favoured by the National Front (Tranmer 2010, D’Ambrosio 2012e: 127, Adams 2019: 100),9 and the US army repeatedly played ‘Rock the Casbah’ at ear-splitting volumes when trying to dislodge Panamanian president, Manuel Noriega, in late 1989/early 1990.10 Strummer was also annoyed by the reception to ‘Know Your Rights’, saying in 1999: ‘[I]t was supposed to be ironic but nobody understood that which still makes me angry’ (Strummer et al. 2008: 340). This consideration provides a foundation for discussing how Strummer’s lyrics may be received where the presumption is they have the capacity to inform and educate with descriptive analysis and explanation as well as intimate values and encourage certain actions. The changing contours of his lyrics’ reception are worth considering. Their role for understanding Strummer’s politics has increased over time as a result of issues of availability and accessibility relative to other sources of information. During The Clash, Strummer’s world view could be discerned not just from his lyrics but from his many interviews and live performances. The balance between these changed, and it was not until his last years (1999–2002) with The Mescaleros that the balance returned to something similar. Despite a slew of Strummer books after his death, the importance of lyrics has increased again in relative 8 Topping (2004: 129) noted at the time the song became ‘one of the most requested songs on US radio’. 9 Shannon (2014: 19) believed ‘White Riot’ ‘likely struck many listeners as a call for white unity against black people rather than with them’. 10 Gray (2001: 438) suggested it was instead ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go’.

59

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

terms. These are more easily accessible on the internet and more easily found than his interviews. In contemplating the array of attempts to discern the meaning of Strummer’s lyrics, several points stand out. More often than not, commentators try to discern the meaning from the lyrics alone, without recourse to interviews and other pronouncements.11 That said, as his lyrics were sometimes difficult to understand and he did not often explain them in interviews, the ability to substantiate an interpretation by way of other evidence was limited. Therefore, it is not self-evident listeners discerned and comprehended their intended meaning nor that of the discerned meaning established by others. For example, the non-academic listener is unlikely to have the time, skills and resources to create for themselves anything more than superficial understandings. This suggests lyrical analysis should be couched in substantially more conditional terms than it has been and that other sources of evidence such as interviews should be given a greater role in helping to discern and analyse Strummer’s politics. Of the many studies of Strummer’s lyrics, some analyse just one or two songs (e.g. Coulter 2018, 2019a, James 2009, 2010a, 2010b, 2013, 2014, Cohen 2017, Peacock 2010, 2017) while others look at particular albums (e.g. Davies 1996, Gray 2009, Gelbart 2011, Satchwell 2016, 2019, 2021) or his Clash canon or more (e.g. Gray 2003, Topping 2004, Fletcher 2005, 2012, Egan 2015, Popoff 2018, Wyatt 2018, Assirati 2020). Their deficiency is that Strummer’s lyrics often bear more than one interpretation and some belie much direct interpretation at all. This complexity arises because Strummer seldom dealt with just one subject in a song; sometimes he was quite obtuse, and often both his live and recorded vocal renditions did not make his lyrics discernible.12 Therefore, it is erroneous to believe 11 This includes the various websites like Songfacts (established 1999), SongMeanings (2001) and Lyric Interpretations (2003). 12 Over and above this, the first two Clash albums did not contain the lyrics as London Calling, Sandinista! and Combat Rock did. Cut the Crap only included three sets of lyrics. Only four of The Clash’s nineteen singles contained their lyrics in whole or part. The three Mescaleros’ albums did contain all the lyrics. Even though two Clash songbooks were published in 1978 and 1979, covering the music and lyrics of the first two albums respectively, it has only been with the widespread development of the internet that by the early 2000s lyric and lyric meaning websites have emerged.

60

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

proffered interpretations are shared, where known of by others. The significance of this is Strummer’s influence cannot always be directly read off his lyrics as is often implied. These aforementioned studies do not examine how the lyrics are variously received by followers or how attitudes and behaviours are potentially influenced and affected. The most that is achieved is some of the studies suggest some other artists have been influenced in their songwriting, such as M.I.A. (Coulter 2018, 2019a) and Rancid (James 2009). Peacock’s (2010) analysis of ‘Ghetto Defendant’ is written as the definitive meaning. He is seldom conditional, stating: ‘It is not difficult to imagine that “strung-out committee” also refers to the politicians within the Reagan administration responsible for the ratcheting up of the “War on Drugs” announced in 1982’, where previously he wrote: ‘the line which bookends the whole verse: “Strung-out committee”. This phrase of course refers to the addicts of the ghetto, but also connotes the coalition of city planners and business interests whose misguided and bigoted actions precipitated the developments of New York ghettos in the sixties and seventies’ (Peacock 2010: 10, 9). Quite apart from it being likely that the vast majority of listeners would not generate this depth and breadth interpretation, there are also examples where there is ample ambiguity. Peacock (2010: 9–10) states: ‘“Forced to watch at the feast” (“feast” refers to both the glut of drug addiction and the addiction to profits garnered from real estate development) they are then asked to “sweep up the night”, to arrest users at street level, clear up the “broken bottles” left behind and, one might insinuate, turn a blind eye to the corporate grafts changing hands all around them.’ But an equally credible and likely more common, generalised interpretation is this: through the lens of not being aware of New York’s history and politics, ‘Forced to watch at the feast/Then sweep up the night’ can be taken to mean poorly paid serving staff (waiters, cleaners) watching the rich eat and then having to clean up after them. Though Strummer’s lyrics tended more often than not towards social realism in The Clash, this did not necessarily mean they were easily comprehended because of their multidimensionality, contrary to Paul Simonon’s assertion in 1981: ‘I think [people] only need to listen to the 61

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

lyrics and they’ll get the full understanding of what the song is about’ (NYC TV interview 1982).13 For example, ‘I’m So Bored with the USA’ (1977) deals with US cultural imperialism (the widespread importation of American crime shows onto British television) as well as US political and military imperialism, domestic political corruption, and US imperialism’s aftereffects (e.g. Vietnam veteran drug addicts) as Strummer explained (Savage 2009: 261, 268). Something similar can be said about the diversity of subjects dealt within ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’ (fascism, wealth redistribution, sanitised reggae, music industry conformity). ‘London Calling’ describes the threats of nuclear catastrophe, environmental disaster, starvation and war. By contrast, and from Sandinista!, ‘The Magnificent Seven’ deals largely with the alienation and exhaustion of work while ‘Up In Heaven (Not Only Here)’ deals with substandard housing for workers. Alienation, exploitation and oppression from work and employment are also included in ‘All the Young Punks’, ‘Clampdown’, ‘Bankrobber’ and ‘Pouring Rain’. Meanwhile, ‘Straight to Hell’ deals with deindustrialisation, US soldiers having children with Vietnamese women in Vietnam, and the effects of drugs on poor American urban communities. The concerns about immigration and poverty found in many Combat Rock lyrics were carried into those Strummer penned for Jones’s second Big Audio Dynamite album, No. 10 Upping Street. (1986), such as ‘Beyond The Pale’, ‘Ticket’ and ‘Sightsee MC!’. On Cut the Crap, ‘This is England’ covers deindustrialisation, poverty, racist violence and police brutality, while ‘Three Card Trick’ covers deindustrialisation, poverty and police brutality. Strummer’s social realism was initially more personally and directly based, so being London- and British-centric, but then began to move outside these parameters with his interest in global politics and the interaction of foreign and domestic politics in his ‘urban Vietnam’ landscapes. Sometimes, from London Calling (1979) onwards, he created characters to speak through to do this, these being the oppressed and dispossessed like migrants and the homeless (e.g. ‘Something About 13 Shortly afterwards, Simonon told NZBC (8 February 1982): ‘Maybe a lot of them don’t understand what we’re saying but I think just by the mere spirit they understand what we’re on about.’

62

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

England’, ‘Broadway’, ‘Bankrobber’ and ‘Shatkar Donesk’). Nonetheless, some songs on Sandinista! (like ‘Up In Heaven (Not Only Here’) and Cut the Crap (‘This is England’, ‘North and South’) continued emphasis upon domestic concerns such as unemployment and deindustrialisation. This overall transition was occasioned by changes in his material circumstances (indicated by moving from penniless punk squatter to full-time, houseowning major touring musician), his wide reading and film watching, and meeting people when touring abroad like Moe Armstrong. Indeed, Strummer told a US radio station in 1983: ‘[Travelling the world] gave me a wider view on life that is [being lived] by many different peoples.’ Needs (2005: 205) observed Strummer’s lyrics on Sandinista! and Combat Rock moved from ‘vérité’ to cinematography, largely as a result of his cultural fascination with America and Vietnam and no longer living in poverty and substandard housing. With ‘White Riot’, Strummer was most often given opportunities to explain his lyrics (see p.119) but fortunately also on some others too. One case was ten songs on Sandinista! (MM 13 December 1980). Normally, occasions were much more fleeting. Examples were briefly explaining ‘Last Gang in Town’ and ‘Guns on the Roof ’ were critical of violence (MM 25 November 1978, 29 December 1979, Rolling Stone 8 March 1979); ‘“Lover’s Rock” with “The Tao of Love” seems a pretty reasonable book … it’s pretty unreasonable to make somebody horribly depressed all through her life or make her fat or suicidal’ (Roadrunner February 1980); ‘Straight to Hell’ (Sounds 17 July 1982); ‘Techno D-day’ being ‘about police trying to shut down a rave in Cornwall’ (Select October 1999) while ‘Forbidden City’ is ‘about the Tiananmen Square revolt’ (New York Times 6 July 1999); and ‘Johnny Appleseed’: The Brooklyn Paper (1 April 2002) ventured it was about ‘corporate takeover, especially of artistic outlets’ to which Strummer replied ‘Yeah!’ Lastly, of ‘Bhindi Bhagee’ (2001), Strummer said: ‘We were recording the album in Willesden, and I could see people from 15 or 20 different nations getting along – proof to all those idiots that integration can work’ (Metro 6 June 2002). Nonetheless, there remains ample room for ambiguity and multiple interpretations of some of Strummer’s lyrics. Only on a very few occasions 63

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

did Strummer explain his perspective on lyric writing: ‘I always understood that you had to be personally involved. Or, you have to feel for something before you can write about it. If you really feel for something then you don’t write slogans, you write truths. … Obviously … the situation’s gotta be simplified down from’ (NME 3 January 1981) and ‘I don’t try and speak dogmatically. I understand you have to attract people first’ (NME 25 February 1984). He also told SongSong (March 1982) he wrote for an imaginary white youth who was not an existing fan, and another interviewer that year: ‘You have to have something you care about [and] you have strong feelings for … [like] … I see unfair things in the world … emotions have to drive you.’ 14 Later, he stated: ‘If you can write a song in twelve lines that ain’t rubbish and tells the truth, I think it’s the highest form of writing prose. … You boil it down to its purest form’ (Robinson 2013: 210–211). Then, he reiterated: ‘You’ve got to live something to sing about it in a convincing way. It’s experience that writes songs’ (Rachel 2014: 302). But later, and referring to non-personal subject matter, he stated: ‘I plug into the world and when I hear about the terrible things that are going down, it throws me into a rage and it prompts me to sing songs about it’ (Montreal Gazette 19 April 1984). That said, Strummer also alluded to the importance of his stream of consciousness: ‘when I write a really good song, it’s a blur in my mind when I actually wrote it. I know the song exists, ’cause I can play it for my friends, but I just can’t remember what happened between thinking of the idea of the song and finally playing it for my friend’ (Garbarini 1981: 57). Strummer then explained this to the Melody Maker in 1988: ‘I write from line to line. If I get to line four and find I’ve gone onto another subject completely, I have to go back otherwise it would be completely indecipherable’ (Gray 2009: 104). Later, he recounted his ‘3 am thoughts’ made for good lyrics (The NewMusic 2001) and some of his lyrics ‘only make sense in the moment’ (Davie 2004: 19). Not only did commentators believe the meanings of Strummer’s lyrics could be identified and understood, they also made quite scathing criticisms 14 Pistol-shaped picture disc, TL60, undated (but from 1982).

64

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

of them. For example, reviewing Combat Rock, the Washington Post (17 June 1982) argued: [I]n some instances The Clash does oversimplify and sensationalise for theatrical impact. Complex social and political concepts are boiled down to catchy phrases, chorus hooks. Pop convention and stylisation are allowed to infect and inflect the manner of expression, occasionally vulgarising and depersonalising the issues. … It’s a two-edged sword. It has helped bring Clash’s messages to a wider audience than more ideologically pure, stylistically uncompromising groups. On the other hand, it has devalued the information being transmitted.

Here one of the concerns was directness and subtlety. The Ottawa Citizen (29 December 2002) proffered: ‘Strummer knew that three-minute rock songs are about statement, not debate’, while Peacock (2010: 15) believed: ‘Strummer’s lyrics on Combat Rock become more overtly political’ and Toynbee (2019: 41) stated: ‘There is an extraordinary directness about Clash lyrics.’ In the case of Cut the Crap, others called the directness ‘lazy and empty’ compared to earlier being ‘sharp and clever’ (Worst Album Ever 14 August 2014). Before looking at Strummer’s views here on directness, it is worth recalling Street (1986: 158–159, 165) argued the more direct and explicit a song is in its political content, the more it will only preach to the converted, being unable to engage with a wider audience, especially where assertion exists over explanation. While this can be questioned for three of Strummer’s most influential lyrics – namely, ‘White Riot’, ‘Clampdown’ and ‘Washington Bullets’ (see Chapter 9) – the point remains valuable. There was an evident strain of complexity and subtlety in Strummer’s lyrics. As argued below, this sometimes shaded into obtusity. From quite an early point, Strummer advocated subtlety, telling Rolling Stone (8 March 1979): ‘I’d like to think that we’re subtle; that’s what greatness is, innit? I can’t stand all these people preaching, like Tom Robinson. He’s just too direct’, repeating this argument again later that year (MM 29 December 1979).15 He made the same criticism of Prairie Fire, saying: ‘they’re so heavily Communist it 15 Strummer was critical of Robinson’s lyrics being ‘dry, humourless, po-faced, gloomy [and] boring’ (MM 20 May 1978).

65

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

turns you off ’ (Garbarini 1981: 56). Of third-wave punk bands, he remarked: ‘[T]hey didn’t put any intelligence into what they were doing. They didn’t take five minutes to write their lyrics like ‘No government! No government!’ Is that going to make us have a blinding flash? What is that going to do for us?’ (BAM 10 February 1984). He was also similarly critical of Angelic Upstarts’ lyricist Thomas ‘Mensi’ Mensforth. Mensi recalled Strummer told him: ‘[S]top hitting people in the face with bricks and start poking them in the eye with pins’ (Inner Edge Music 26 September 2016).16 But in 2001, Strummer went further: ‘I’d hate to be sitting on a record that anyone would understand’ (SPIN May 2001). The source of the obtusity was Strummer’s fascination with the way Bob Dylan and Captain Beefheart wrote their lyrics (Salewicz 2006: 459, Needs 2005: 12, 207).17 By the time of Sandinista! (1980), Jucha (2016: 17) believed Strummer was ‘as surrealist as Captain Beefheart, and this is where he eventually settled as a lyricist’. Meanwhile, Quantick (2000: 69) noted: ‘how surreal Strummer’s lyrics were compared to other punk songs’. Strummer’s contributions to the Permanent Record (1988) soundtrack, No. 10 Upping Street. (‘V Thirteen’, ‘Limbo the Law’) and his first and only solo album, Earthquake Weather (1989), were often both obtuse and highly personal (see also Gray 2003: 452). Yet Earthquake Weather’s lead track, and the first of its only two singles, was ‘Gangsterville’, which Strummer recounted was ‘about the Mafia electing the President’ (Salewicz 2006: 468). While telling a tale of a powerful elite looking after their own interests, Strummer’s aforementioned message was not apparent. Spellicy (2015: 25) characterised Earthquake Weather’s lyrics as often ‘surreal’. For example, the only clue to its ‘King of the Bayou’ saluting Corazon Aquino for leading the ‘people power’ revolt that toppled Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines in 1986 (Spellicy 2015: 25) is the twice mention of ‘Cory’ as her moniker. The extant degree of obtuseness continued into many Mescaleros songs. An example is ‘At the border, guy’ from Global a Go-Go (2001), which is not obviously about ‘Mexican migrant workers’ as Salewicz (2006: 608) stated. 16 See also p.248 on his relationship with Strummer. 17 With Dylan, this was largely true of his later lyrics after his early folk protest songs of the early 1960s.

66

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

In regard of ‘Forbidden City’, Needs (2005: 306) went further by stating the song is about ‘the last vestiges of communism in China’, while Jucha (2016: 354) characterised it as ‘an anti-communist China rant’, but neither were apparent. Similarly, Gray (2003: 488) and Needs (2005: 312, 313) stated ‘Johnny Appleseed’ (2001) was about ‘worker exploitation’ and ‘exploitation of workers’ respectively (cf. p.148) and ‘Cool ’n’ Out’ (2001) was ‘questioning the warmongering mindset’ and ‘basically an anti-war song’ respectively. Meanwhile, Jucha (2016: 359) and Wyatt (2018: 206) believed ‘Ramshackle Day Parade’ concerned 9/11. Again, these were very far from being self-evident. Around the time of Sandinista!, there was more evidence for his lyrics for Ellen Foley’s Spirit of St. Louis (1981) – ‘The Shuttered Palace’, ‘Torchlight’, ‘The Death of the Psychoanalyst of Salvador Dali’, ‘MPH’, ‘Theatre of Cruelty’ and ‘In the Killing Hour’ – being highly obtuse. On Sandinista! itself, the feeling evoked by ‘Rebel Waltz’ is about the futility of work, but the references to particular wars are so opaque as to make any contextualisation difficult. Another case in point is ‘Atom Tan’ from Combat Rock. Toynbee (2019: 47) noted ‘The Magnificent Seven’ contained ‘surrealist wit’ and Peacock (2010: 15) observed Strummer’s Combat Rock lyrics were ‘at times plain obscure’. Yet there are examples that pre-date this. For example, in ‘English Civil War’ it was not clear ‘The new party army’ was a reference to the growing fascist threat, even though Strummer did explain this at one point (Salewicz 2006: 232).18 Allied to the move away from social realism, Strummer also wrote some love songs like ‘Love Kills’ for Sid and Nancy (Cox 1986) and ‘Trash City’ for Permanent Record (Silver 1988), as well as ‘Boogie with Your Children’ (Earthquake Weather), ‘Nitcomb’ (Rock Art and the X-ray Style, 1999) and ‘Coma Girl (Streetcore, 2003). This showed a move away from Rhodes’s earlier instruction about not writing love songs (see p.76) and Strummer’s own statement: ‘Too many songs have been written about love already … Subject’s covered’ (Tomorrow with Tom Snyder, 5 June 1981) and ‘In this age, every record 18 The New Party was a proto-fascist party formed by Oswald Mosley in 1931. It dissolved in 1932 to form the British Union of Fascists.

67

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

must contain politics. You can’t write love songs with a Tory government kicking all and sundry in the teeth’ (NME 9 May 1981). Love clearly became something he cared about, it was not all ‘covered’ and politics did not have to be in all songs. Given the emphasis on multidimensionality, subtlety and obtusity, it may be thought this discussion of Strummer’s lyrics suggests they were often difficult to understand and did not necessarily prima facie make much sense. It would then be foolhardy to expect there would be any marked and identifiable influence upon individuals, especially of a left-wing political nature. That might be a reasonable inference if individuals knew all Strummer’s canon, were not selective in choosing their favourite lyrics, did not focus on particular lyric parts, and were not intrigued by mention of certain things to investigate them. Just as importantly, it might also be a reasonable inference if listeners did not interact with the lyrics in emotive ways where the music was also important. Feelings evoked can be just as important as – or certainly supplementary to – thoughts evoked. They may provide a sense Strummer still cared about humanity and the underdog even if this was not clear from each line of his lyrics, especially in the period of LRW and The Mescaleros. Indeed, the influence of his lyrics is all the more noticeable and remarkable given the multidimensionality, subtlety and obtusity. The testimonies (see Chapter 9) saw respondents quote lyric excerpts, speaking to their psychological effect upon themselves, suggesting they as listeners were selective in focusing on certain lyrics and parts of their lyrics, so there were key songs for them in Strummer’s canon. Moreover, any ambiguity in lyrics or difficulty in discerning meanings did not prevent songs overall evoking strong feelings, this dovetailing with the same characteristics in his politics. Thus, both his lyrics and politics were within a broad left parameter, and this was a strength and not a weakness given followers’ perceptions and projection (see p.274). Conclusion This chapter examined how others perceived Strummer’s politics. While criticism dogged him, it never overcame him, so he was commonly and 68

Perceptions of Strummer’s politics

credibly seen as being of the radical left, often as a socialist. This task of examining perceptions precedes considering Strummer’s politics themselves because of the importance of how followers as listeners receive and understand lyrics. The chapter indicated many projected onto Strummer world views that aligned with their own, or frameworks they were familiar with, even when his lyrical canon was not always straightforward in its meaning. That said, the projections and characterisations were never completely implausible given Strummer’s politics often came across as somewhat ill-defined, and key terms and concepts used were and are commonly broadly defined.

69

3

Strummer’s politics and philosophical perspectives

Countless commentators, journalists and writers as well as academics pronounced Strummer’s politics were during and after The Clash socialist and often Marxist (see Chapter 2). This chapter examines what Strummer said about socialism, Marxism and revolution generally and in terms of the working class, unions, social movements and political parties specifically. The significant changes in Strummer’s political perspective, where his radicalism dimmed and he moved towards humanism, are explored in Chapter 8. So, although at the end of his life, he made several ‘revolutionary’ sounding statements (see pp.202–203) these were not part of an attachment to socialism but rather to a humanism. In this chapter, his move towards socialism and understanding of it take prime position. The chapter begins by examining what Strummer said about himself and his formative political influences. Subscribing to socialism Notwithstanding earlier definitional issues (p.35), Strummer saw himself as a socialist. In late 1980, he stated: ‘I’m a socialist, not by persuasion but from my own experiences’ (MM 13 December 1980) and early in 1981: ‘I believe in socialism because it seems more humanitarian, rather than every man for himself and “I’m alright Jack” and all those arsehole businessmen with all the loot. … I made up my mind from viewing society from 70

Strummer’s politics

that [‘have-not’] angle’ (NME 3 January 1981).1 Then he told Sounds (20 June 1981): ‘I believe in the socialist way. I don’t know any more than that. I don’t know any system to save the world but I believe that socialism at least has more humanity in it … I’ve decided from my own personal experience that I do not believe in right-wing capitalist pressure groups [or] government.’ This was a clear development from Strummer explaining where he and The Clash stood in 1976: ‘I think people ought to know that we’re anti-fascist, we’re anti-violence, we’re anti-racist and we’re pro-creative. We’re against ignorance’ (NME 11 December 1976). This stance was reiterated frequently before 1980. Responding to the question, ‘How do you define yourself politically?’ with ‘anti-fascist’ (Temple 2015); ‘We seek to expose the lies of our society and fascism is the greatest of them all’ (Stockholm interview 15 June 1977); ‘What I’m aimed against is all that racist, fascist, racialist, patriotism type of fanaticism’ (MM 11 March 1978); and ‘We’re against fascism and racism. I figure that goes without saying’ (Rolling Stone 8 March 1979). But it did not take Strummer four years to become a socialist, for on Something Else (BBC 2 11 March 1978) he outlined a rudimentary version of socialism: ‘I reckon if you got rid of all the people that own the factories … the factories would go on working ’cos the workers are doing the work.’ His statements in 1980–81 are buttressed by identifying himself as a socialist in later interviews (LA Times 22 January 1984, Fort Worth Star-Telegram 29 January 1984, BAM 10 February 1984, Boston Globe 16 April 1984, Sunday Times 8 October 1989). It is interesting to note Strummer’s move towards socialism flowered after Rhodes’s sacking in September 1978 and before returning in March 1981. As explained below (pp.79–80), Strummer’s belief in socialism from 1978 to 1989 was not of the type embodied by the Soviet Union. As a result of discounting ‘actually existing socialism’, Strummer struggled somewhat to articulate 1 This was preceded by Strummer stating in 1978: ‘I find myself going even further in that [anti-establishment] direction as things become clearer to me’ (MM 15 July 1978), reiterating this in Roadrunner (March 1981) and Trouser Press (April 1981): ‘Well in Western society I see that the way it’s set out is every man for himself. If you haven’t got a job, you can’t have any money. So how are people going to feel socialistic, if that’s what they have to deal with?’

71

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

what exactly the type of socialism he favoured would look like, saying: ‘[T]here’s no control experiment to compare it with’ (Sounds 20 June 1981). This was all the more so as he rejected the likes of the Trotskyist SWP (see pp.94–97) which was not only critical of the Soviet Union as a ‘state capitalist’ society but also sought to emulate the Russian Revolution before Stalin’s counter-revolution. Looking back on his Clash years, Strummer agreed he had been a ‘romantic rebel’ more interested in the politics of Woody Guthrie than those of Trotsky and more concerned about caring for fellow human beings than communism (Rock&Folk 1995). Of The Clash, he recalled in 1999: ‘[W]e were always of the left. But, having said that, we didn’t have any solutions to the world’s problems … we were trying to grope in a socialist way towards some future where the world might be less of a miserable place than it is’ (Letts 2000) and ‘I’d like to think The Clash were revolutionaries but we loved a bit of posing as well. We were revolutionaries on behalf of punk rock’ (MOJO March 2003). In 1983, he characterised himself as ‘I was becoming a professional rebel’ (in Gilbert 2009: 332) and then later of his Clash days as being ‘professionally paid to be a rebel’ (Mills 2001). Political influences Strummer’s world view, judged by his lyrics, pronouncements and actions, was derived from several influences, whether particular individuals, personal experiences and associated epiphanies, or interpretation of domestic and foreign events. These influences had both positive and negative effects. Though it would be easy to assume individuals and events were externally generated influences, it should be recognised Strummer was a conscious agent in deciding which he chose to be influenced by. As Binette (2007b: 61, 62) observed correctly: ‘[Being] thin on analysis … Salewicz sheds little light on Strummer’s political influences’, this section provides such analysis. Beginning with his interpretation of world events, Strummer stated of the late 1960s and early 1970s: 72

Strummer’s politics In 1968, the whole world was exploding. There was Paris; Vietnam; Grosvenor Square; the counter-culture. I think that gave me an edge to put into punk. … It was a great year to come of age. They had their summer of love. By 72/73, it was all over. I always thought it was like coming on the field of a great battle twelve hours after [it] … was over so the casualties were lying all [around]. (Letts 2000) In 1968, I took my O-levels and the whole world was exploding. There was Paris, Vietnam, Grosvenor Square, the counter-culture and it seemed normal because we had no other frame of reference. We thought that 1968 was the norm, and that was the year I came of age. It was like riding a rocket but I didn’t realise how lucky I was until later. (Strummer et al. 2008: 20)

He added: ‘May ’68 was a moment that showed me anything was possible and what followed in the ’70s was a mess’ (D’Ambrosio 2012f: 141). However, one caveat should be entered into here. Strummer said of The Rolling Stones’ ‘Street Fighting Man’: ‘We just accepted it as a fantastic song. I don’t think we had the faculty to take on board what it was saying’ (Needs 2005: 11–12). The song is about Tariq Ali, anti-Vietnam War demonstrations and the emerging revolt in Paris. Though released in August 1968 as a single in the US, it was not released as a single in Britain until July 1971 (though it was available on the Beggars Banquet album from December 1968). These two aspects – understanding and timing – suggest either Strummer exaggerated the impact of 1968 on himself or only recognised its significance retrospectively. This points to a slightly more complex situation than might be assumed from the main thrust of his comments. Then D’Ambrosio (2012c: 5) recalled Strummer recounted a wider array of events influencing him when interviewed in April 2002. These included Italy’s ‘hot autumn’ and the election and overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile. Earlier, D’Ambrosio (2003) made a different emphasis, stating these incidents were ‘just some of the key events’ that politicised Strummer. In retrospect, Strummer expressed his political association with rebellion as a teenager, his hope for social and political change and his disappointment, even disillusionment, at the lack of change. In these, he attributed this failure of change to the hippies: ‘The hippy movement was a failure. All 73

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

hippies around now just represent complete apathy. There’s a million good reasons why the thing failed … But the only thing we’ve got to live with is that it failed’ (MM 13 November 1976). His ‘Hate and War’ lyrics represented this perspective. One cultural manifestation of ‘68’ influence was John Lennon (Salewicz 2006: 4, 58, 223, 485). Salewicz (2006: 4, 485) characterised Lennon as a ‘hero’ of Strummer’s. Lennon was left wing in his lyrics of the late 1960s/ early 1970s and an activist for peace and justice, mixing with the International Marxist Group in London and Yippies in New York, albeit briefly (Denselow 1989: 112–116, Street 1986: 75–76). However, this activism did not influence Strummer (see Chapter 6). Bob Dylan was another cultural influence, with Strummer saying in 1982: ‘[W]e probably wouldn’t have done the kind of music we have if it hadn’t been for Bob Dylan … he showed … music could take on society, could actually make people want to save the world’ (Musician September 1982). However, before ‘it was all over’, Strummer had the experience of other influences which became building blocks for his world view. First, ironically, was his father with whom he had a strained relationship because of his father’s disciplinarianism and decision to send him to boarding school (MM 13 November 1976, LA Times 22 January 1984). His father had quite left-wing views (Temple 2007, Gilbert 2009: 9) but was not a quasi-Marxist or socialist as Salewicz (2006: 38, 44, 69, cf. Shannon 2014: 15) believed. Second was a Trotskyist art school lecturer who Strummer was close to (Salewicz 2006: 80). It was in this time Strummer adopted the ‘Woody’ moniker in tribute to Guthrie. Third was being forcibly evicted from his shared rented flat in London in early 1972 largely because his Irish landlord took offence at Strummer allowing a homeless black man to stay in the flat. The landlord was assisted by the police. Strummer was shocked at his eviction and the ignoring of his legal rights by the landlords and police, saying: ‘It was when I started to learn about what was justice and what wasn’t’ (Savage 1988). Rather than become anti-Irish, he concluded property-owners’ rights trumped those of tenants: ‘I’ve been fucked up the arse by the capitalist system

74

Strummer’s politics

… that’s your lovely capitalist way of life: ‘I own this and you fuck off out of it’ (Sounds 20 June 1981).2 The experience of police brutality was reinforced for Strummer by deportation for busking, and the threat of arrest for busking on the Underground. Fourth was a Marxist whose flat Strummer moved into after the eviction (Salewicz 2006: 98, 116), where he again experienced eviction. Fifth was his association with the Communist Party in Newport, Wales, in 1972 (Salewicz 2006: 105). This involved selling the Morning Star newspaper associated with the party. There were limits to this association with the party though (see p.95). Sixth, back in London and forced to squat due to lack of money, Strummer squatted at 101 Walterton Road, becoming part of the squatters’ movement in west London (Savage 2009: 254). Gilbert (2009: 66) downplayed the political ramifications of squatting, suggesting it was neither anti-capitalist, anarcho-libertarian nor hippy utopianism to do so. Even if there was some truth here, many did see the need to squat in political terms – namely, enforced on them through poverty as Strummer did: ‘There were hordes of people in London who couldn’t afford to pay rent … The only thing to do was to kick in these abandoned buildings and then live in them … We were absolutely penniless’ (in Letts 2000). Strummer put a lot of his political views at this time down to such personal experiences (see pp.70–71). Of his second eviction, he took a case unsuccessfully to a rent tribunal, saying: ‘I was the only one of our group who really cared to follow things through’ (Savage 1988). Seventh, with The 101ers, he came into the orbit of Chilean political refugees – two were 101ers members (Savage 2009: 249). Ditching the moniker of ‘Woody’ and becoming ‘Joe Strummer’ in May 1975 did not represent a backwards political step, even though ‘Strummer’ was how he characterised his low level of guitar playing ability. Gilbert (2009: 69) observed it represented ‘no essential change in his ideology’. When asked where his politics came from, Strummer played down his own reading (see p.78), knowledge and understanding: ‘The politics 2 Gilbert (2009: 21) said Strummer saw this instance in ‘simple Marxist terms’.

75

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

were on the street in front of us … I didn’t have anywhere to live … I washed plenty of dishes. I dug graves. I cleaned the toilets … I didn’t have nothing behind me’ (LA Times 31 January 1988). In his time with his bands, The Vultures and The 101ers, Strummer showed no propensity to write political lyrics of any sort despite his growing politicisation in a leftward direction.3 Strummer commented he had moved towards such political lyrical content by ‘singing about VD and squatting’ (NME 10 October 1981)4 but also remarked: ‘I was changing up my vibe so I dumped everything that I had [written] in order to go forward’ (UNCUT February 2003). Strummer was recruited by Rhodes as the frontperson and not for his political songwriting. This dovetailed with Strummer: ‘I wanted to be the star of the show’ (MM 13 November 1976). On joining The Clash it was Rhodes who encouraged Strummer, as Strummer recalled: ‘All he said was ‘Don’t write love songs, write something that you care about’ (NME 3 January 1981). Strummer reiterated this (e.g. Savage 2009: 259, 2685, MTV ‘Spotlight’ 1989, MTV ‘120 Minutes’ March 1991, Letts 2000). Rhodes confirmed Strummer’s understanding (MM 9 July 1977). Rebuffing the likes of Lydon, Strummer made clear Rhodes ‘never actually said write about this or that’ (Savage 2009: 259), ‘[A]s for the actual songs, it was strictly down to me and Mick’ (UNCUT February 2003) and ‘Bernie’s input was direction, not content’ (Salewicz 2006: 167). Rhodes provided lectures and reading materials on Marx and Marxism for Strummer, according to former Clash member, Keith Levene (Egan 2018: 31), a tour manager (Gilbert 2009: 277) and Salewicz (2006: 298). Clash roadie, Baker, observed The Clash’s ‘early political ideologies … were a statement of Bernie’s thought processes’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 41) while Needs

3 Examples were ‘Letsagetabitarockin’, ‘Silent Telephone’, ‘Motor Boys Motor’, ‘Sweety of the St. Moritz’, ‘Keys to Your Heart’, ‘Sweet Revenge’, and ‘Rabies (From the Dogs of Love)’ which Gilbert (2009: 71) characterised as having ‘an American, cars ’n’ girls feel’. 4 See p.135 on the former. 5 The interview was from 30 May 1988 and also featured in Savage (2001: 232). The quote was replicated in Reynolds and Press (1995: 68) and Gilbert (2009: 99) from the first (1991) edition of England’s Dreaming. Jones confirmed Strummer’s recollections on Rhodes (UNCUT October 2013) as did Simonon (MOJO March 2003).

76

Strummer’s politics

(2005: 119) believed Rhodes ‘politicise[d] and inspire[d] the band’. Both overstate Rhodes’s influence because Strummer had other intellectual and political resources to draw on for his lyrics (see pp.72–73, 78–81), with Strummer putting his politicisation down to ‘experience, plus Bernie Rhodes … [he] made me realise [politics] could sung about’ (NME 10 October 1981).6 So, Rhodes’s influence was not straightforward. While enamoured with Situationism, Situationism was not discussed collectively in The Clash according to an early roadie (Gilbert 2009: 108), and Rhodes was not a Marxist or revolutionary as his ‘The Clash are interested in politics rather than revolution’ statement attests (see p.79 and Gilbert 2009: 91, 109, 195, cf. Doane 2014: 15, 128). Rhodes was against playing the Rock Against Racism (RAR) gig on 30 April 1978 (see p.171). Strummer was also an avid reader so was open to other views. For example, he read George Orwell, the Bible and Jack London novels (MM 29 December 1979, NME 10 October 1981, Needs 2005: 19, Salewicz 2006: 243). It is likely Orwell’s Animal Farm and 1984 would have reinforced Strummer’s criticism of ‘actually existing socialism’ (see pp.79–80), Homage to Catalonia his anti-Stalinism (see p.80) and The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius his sense of patriotic socialism (see p.229). He also listened to the speeches of Martin Luther King (Nationwide 18 February 1980). Aside from painting slogans on clothes early in The Clash (Salewicz 2006: 159), where Rhodes might yet have had a more deep-seated influence on Strummer via Situationism was in regard of anti-authoritarianism and libertarianism (see pp.96, 222). Situationism refers to constructing ‘situations’ which are tools for the liberation of everyday life, a method of undermining the pervasive alienation accompanying the ‘spectacle’ of mass culture in the mass society of late capitalism. Situationism was also critical of Trotskyism, Marxism–Leninism, Stalinism and Maoism.

6 A number of Clash associates (Tymon Dogg, Mickey Gallagher, Mike Laye, Kris Needs, Chris Salewicz, Jock Scot, Chris Townsend) believed Strummer had in Rhodes a ‘father figure’ (Garcia 2013: 38, 87, 140, 141).

77

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Strummer’s socialism Where did his belief in socialism come from? In addition to his formative influences, Strummer indicated initially he was not well read in socialist literature, telling The Leveller (July/August 1977) in 1977: ‘I don’t know no Marx, no Trotsky, no nothing. I know about fascism and I don’t like it, but I don’t know about communism’, and the Sunday Times (17 July 1977): ‘I don’t know anything about Marx.’ This was followed by: ‘I know very little Marxism, Trotskyism or Leninism’ (MM 15 July 1978) and ‘We never heard of Friedrich Engels’ (LA Times 31 January 1988). His subsequent accounts of his knowledge of Marxism are contradictory. He said: ‘I’ve been reading Marx a lot’ (MM 13 December 1980) and ‘I’m interested in … how much people work for … who the fuck’s getting the profits … I’m into Karl Marx’ with the journalist adding: ‘Joe runs quickly and accurately through Marx’s Theory of Surplus Value’ (NME 3 January 1981). Interviewed by Garbarini (1981), Strummer showed he had read some Marx. The lyrics of ‘The Magnificent Seven’ from Sandinista! also showed an awareness of Marx’s life: ‘Engels lent him the necessary pence’. Yet later he claimed not to have read any Marx but then contradicted himself, showing he had difficulty comprehending it: ‘I’ve never read any Marx, except for that comic book. I can understand Ruis [Marx for Beginners] but when he gets to dialectical materialism, I have to read through the actual definition from Capital ten times before I can begin to suss it’ (Mother Jones  April 1982). In 1978, when in hospital, he had with him Trotsky’s three volume History of the Russian Revolution (NME 25 February 1978), and in 1988, in claiming not to be ‘political’ (see p.120), he showed he knew of John Reed’s (1919) Ten Days That Shook the World about the 1917 October Revolution (LA Times 31 January 1988). A decade later, he stated: ‘Like Karl Marx said, let the workers have the means of production and then we’ll see the world change. That’s why dance music is fucking great because anyone could get into it’ (Classic Rock October 2017). But what did he mean by socialism? Was it a Marxist understanding? His Something Else (BBC 2 11 March 1978) statement suggested socialism as a form of workers’ self-management, even if not arising from revolution.7 78

Strummer’s politics

Indeed, and indicating a somewhat strange understanding of Marxism, he said in 1981: ‘I read this thing in Marx that really hit me about why is the person who owns the factory allowed to take more of the profits than the person who does all the work? It’s an equal input – you own the factory and I do the work – so we should split the profits’ (Garbarini 1981: 54).8 This suggested some form of social democracy, maybe of a Yugoslavian version of workers’ self-management, and not socialist revolution. This was reinforced in 1984 by Strummer saying: ‘I’m talking about … finding a decent economic order where the poor are taken care of ’ (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029). Elsewhere, he made clear he did not favour Soviet-style socialism. In 1978, a scene from Rude Boy (Hazan and Mingay 1980) provided Strummer with an opportunity to speak his mind: ‘In Russia … it’s exactly the same as it was before they had the revolution. Just a new load of people driving around in blacked out cars. And all the other people are walking.’ 9 Then 7 Worley (2016: 81) incorrectly attributed these words of Rhodes to Strummer: ‘The Clash are interested in politics rather than revolution. Revolution sets a country back a hundred years. Revolution is very, very dangerous. I don’t think we ever were revolutionary. I think we were always interested in the politics of the situation. And I think we still are. But I think that England’s less interested’ (NME 10 October 1981). Rhodes also told a music paper the year before: ‘I think you could have a cultural revolution, but not an actual revolution. The culture side of it is the interesting thing. That’s possible. The other one isn’t’ (Gray 2003: 374). Yet it is not improbable his thinking influenced Strummer, for example, on Strummer’s attitude towards the Soviet Union (see pp.79–80) and Strummer’s comment: ‘I was trying to talk about revolution, and how we weren’t ever going to have one, because who had an answer to the British Army?’ (Gray 2003: 251). 8 Marx did not advocate splitting profits, but all profits should go to workers because workers create all value even when in the form of dead labour, namely, capital. This deficient understanding was highlighted in ‘The Equaliser’ (see p.89). Strummer did not criticise Marx as ‘something of an old fart’ as Topping (2004: 65) believed. Topping is referring to the quote: ‘Marx was something of an old fart. He was an authoritarian and a centralist, and what he proposed was essentially the same as capitalism, except with a different set of people in charge. In any kind of realistic political change you have to start on the inside, by changing the central value system. You can’t start by changing the structure, change has to be a personal choice’, which was from Robert Fripp (Garbarini 1981: 54). Although plausibly a Strummer statement (see pp.84–85), the mistake arose from how the text was transferred electronically to a website. 9 In vouching for the authenticity of much of the film, Strummer (Strummer et al. 2008: 174) did not suggest his monologue was inauthentic.

79

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

in 1980, following Simonon’s visit to Moscow which highlighted shops for the elite, Strummer said Russia was ‘as unequal as anywhere else’ (MM 13 December 1980). In ‘Stop the World’ (1980), he referred to ‘the Kremlin’s crook of crooks’. This was followed in 1981 by: ‘I don’t believe in Soviet Russia at all, because there’s hardly any choice. You’ve still got a ruling class riding around in big cars. … Tourists and party members have special shops, but your normal Joe Russian isn’t even allowed in the bloody shop, never mind that he’s got no dough to spend in them’ (NME 3 January 1981). The next year, he said of the Russian state: ‘They’re a big bunch of fuckers. But I’m sure if we came across an average Russian who didn’t think he was going to be jailed, I bet he’d spit on Brezhnev’s picture. They’re not into the[ir] government any more than left-wing people here are into Thatcher’ (Mother Jones April 1982). Similarly, he said the experiment in Russia had failed with the continuation of an upper class (Sounds 17 July 1982, NME 24 July 1982). In continuing this line of reasoning, he conflated Stalinism with Marxism (Sounds 17 July 1982), saying his politics were ‘socialist but not Marxist. What I have against Marxism is that it attempts to thrust the system upon an ignorant population rather than to educate the population … As a means to an end, [Marxists] will do anything’ (Miami Herald 2 April 1984). When asked: ‘What do you think about the fall of communism?’, Strummer remarked: ‘I would say it was a bloody good idea. The thing is this: Any idea that has to be enforced by the secret police is a bad one’ (Penthouse June 2000). He made similar remarks to Egan (2018: 329) in 2000: ‘Stalinist organisations … if you did give these people power – the first thing they’d do is put you up against a wall and shoot you for being a degenerate.’ On other so-called socialist countries, he said: ‘But you can’t bring socialism in with orders. I mean, look at the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. They just massacred and butchered the whole country to make them to do what they were told. That’s ten times worse than the shit we’ve got going on here’ (NME 3 January 1981). In 1984, Strummer said: ‘America and Russia are more or less identical in lots of ways. That does not make me feel “Why bother?” … Just because the extremes are identical doesn’t mean there’s not somewhere in between where people can live in fairness’ (BAM 10 February 1984). Earlier in 80

Strummer’s politics

Figure 3.1  Strummer with Ray Gange in the film Rude Boy (1980)

1982, he put the ‘plague on both your houses’ perspective: ‘What do I think is an important political goal? … Anti-imperialism … From Russia and America’ (Roadrunner February 1982). Interestingly, this perspective on Soviet Russia did not endear him to the SWP’s analysis of Russia as ‘state capitalist’ and its third way position of ‘Neither Washington nor Moscow but international socialism’. This was because of other features of the SWP (see pp.94–97). Strummer was criticised for allegedly equating Soviet and Chinese imperialism with that of the US (Eriksen 1981: 28) by taking an overly simplistic position of neither Washington, Moscow nor Peking. Notwithstanding that and his criticism of Trotskyist groups (see pp.94–97), one of Strummer’s attractions for the Trotskyist left was in his rejection of American capitalism and Soviet state capitalism. Revolution What did Strummer mean by ‘revolution’? What did he understand it to be? Was it a socialist revolution transcending capitalism or just a cultural one within capitalism? And what would it look like when achieved? There are few direct clues. In a Sniffin’ Glue (October 1976) interview, Strummer was asked ‘d’you want a revolution?’, to which he replied: ‘Well … yeah!’ 81

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

And in 1976 he was asked how much change he wanted, to which he replied: ‘Total change’ (Temple 2015). But tellingly an art school friend, whose father was the Morning Star’s foreign editor, recalled: ‘Woody wanted revolution although that was the mood of times. It was all very unspecific … We were both so naive’ (Salewicz 2006: 84). Journalist, Pete Silverton, felt Strummer covered rock ’n’ roll in revolutionary pretensions (Salewicz 2006: 139). In ‘Washington Bullets’ (1980), it could be said Strummer equated revolution with a left-wing national liberation struggle rather than a workers’ insurrection (see p.97), for he wrote: ‘When they had a revolution in Nicaragua’. But as just a snatch in a lyric, it was a leap for James (2014: 245) to conclude: ‘Strummer put his hopes in the revolutionary Sandinistas of Nicaragua’, especially as Strummer could also be somewhat dismissive of the Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional (FSLN). According to him, they were ‘hotheads from the university with their Marx and Lenin’ (Rock&Folk 1995) who constituted ‘a teenage revolution’ (Letts 2000, Temple 2007) and were ‘a bunch of Marxist teenage hooded rebels’ (Guitar World December 1999). But this dismissiveness also contained a disdain for the ability of workers to make a revolution. He told Roadrunner (February 1982): ‘I define revolution as when students and real workers respect each other. Then you have a potentially revolutionary situation. At the moment the students all over the world are only interested in beer, women, each other.’ Tellingly, he said: ‘I don’t believe that an armed revolution is ever an actual revolution. The revolution is in our minds’ (Edmonton Journal 3 May 1984). When asked by Rock&Folk (1995) whether the middle class could make a revolution for the working class, he agreed. Meanwhile, in ‘Gangsterville’ (1989), his meaning is unclear with ‘The Revolution came and the Revolution went’. This could, inter alia, refer to what some saw a period of world revolt in his lifetime – namely 1968–74. In neither case was a clear correlation made to socialism or revolution. In 1985, he stated: ‘We’re gonna have to have an English revolution in about ten year’s – I think that’s possible and I’d like to be involved’ (BBC Radio York 9 May 1985). While he was firm on what was not, for him, a socialist revolution, be it the Soviet Union or China in the 1980s, we do not know where Cuba 82

Strummer’s politics

stood in his thinking (even if it bore similarities to Nicaragua in terms of anti-imperialism). From his lyrics for ‘White Riot’ and ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’, there was sufficient ambiguity, for these could be interpreted as calls for reformism or revolution (or even reforms as a transitional means to revolution). The same could be said for the three human rights (to life, speech and food) in ‘Know Your Rights’ (1982) in terms of whether it was a call for socialism – as per capitalism cannot deliver them – or humanism – as per this is what a humane society should be – or whether socialism and humanism were or were not bound up with each other. This merely highlights the problem of using lyrics alone (see p.6). But the same is true of statements in 2002 like: ‘[W]e wanted no part of what was being offered to us, which seemed to be dead-end jobs that did very little for the working class … and we were frustrated because we had no voice in a political system that was more a tool for the ruling class’ (D’Ambrosio 2012f: 141). Much could and was read into such statements, ranging from rebellion and radicalism to socialist revolution, among others. We can, however, look at the issue of Nicaragua in more detail in order to assess what Strummer thought of it as an experiment in progressive social change. He clearly welcomed the overthrow of US-backed dictator, Anastasio Somoza: ‘We were really thrilled at them getting of Somoza’ (MTV Rockumentary 1991). Strummer learned of the Nicaraguan situation from Moe Armstrong (NME 3 January 1981, Needs 2005: 177), a supporter of the Sandinistas from 1976, Vietnam vet, Daddy Longlegs member, and counterculture participant. This was after meeting Armstrong in San Francisco in 1979. Strummer characterised the Sandinista revolt as one against poverty and imperialist oppression and recognised the new regime made huge advances in education, healthcare and housing (Jamming May 1984, Film Comment July/August 1987, Sounds 2 April 1988) despite making ‘every mistake in the book’ (Sounds 2 April 1988). He defended both overthrowing the Somoza regime and the attempt to do so to the junta in El Salvador with ‘one word: self-determination. They have to be given the chance to self-determine’ (Sounds 20 June 1981) given their US financial, military and political backing. Naming the fourth Clash album 83

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Sandinista! was an attempt to give people ‘something to find out about’ (NME 3 January 1981). Strummer told BBC Radio 1 in 1981: ‘To me, it’s a powerful word and one that people should know … The Sandinistas … managed to get rid of dictatorship … by themselves [so] I wanted to put it about because [it’s like] there’s an unofficial D-notice [in the press] on it unless in a detrimental article.’ His considered take on the Sandinistas was that they were ‘a leftist government … [which will] always be more central than extreme Maoist’ (Film Comment July/August 1987). So, there is no evidence that he considered the Sandinistas to be socialists or revolutionaries despite his earlier characterisations (see p.82). Consequently, we know little about what type of revolution, if any, Strummer favoured from the available options. Turning back to how his belief in socialism might come about may shed some light on what he meant by revolution. Strummer did not necessarily see a parliamentary road to socialism, suggesting to some less of an evolutionary and more of a revolutionary path. Asked in 1982 whether he had ever voted, Strummer responded: ‘Never lived anywhere long enough [to register to vote] and there ain’t that many elections. Or much choice. Besides, [formal] politics is bullshit. The graffiti that says: ‘If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal’ just about sums it up’ (Mother Jones April 1982). This attitude softened the longer the Conservatives were in office (1979–97) because he increased his support for Labour, even as it become more parliamentaryorientated (see pp.92–94). Yet he still did not endorse a fully parliamentary road to socialism or social change. In a US radio interview in 1983, he stated: ‘I would like to have some mass insurgency, some mass revolt some kind of realisation … There ain’t gonna be any movement away from that [the system of subordination and enslavement] until there’s a mass movement.’ Allied to this, he led the ‘Rock Against the Rich’ (RAtR) and ‘Green Wedge’ tours in 1988 which were avowedly hostile to Labour (see Chapter 5). The issue of ‘realisation’ for revolt was to be found in ideas (see pp.101–106). So, in 1980, he argued: ‘I believe you can’t give orders. People have got to want to do it, and to want to do it you’ve got to be educated enough to think about it. I’m talking about any kind of socialist society’ (MM 13 December 1980) and, along with his earlier ‘The 84

Strummer’s politics

revolution is in our minds’ comment (p.82), he stated: ‘Real revolutions take place in the mind. They’re not based on fear and intimidation’ (Toronto’s Globe and Mail 28 April 1984). Agents of change When it came to which social group was accorded prime place as the agency for change in Strummer’s conceptualisation of socialism, it was not the working class per se, much less the organised working class (see also pp.89–92). Rather, it was a disparate collection of the disaffected, downtrodden, displaced and dispossessed. Understandably, and for many years, his focus was on youth in relation to these groups, punks especially. While Strummer told a US radio station in 1983: ‘We’re plugged into the young people of the world’, others (NME 10 October 1981, Faulk and Harrison 2014b: 2–3) noted he looked to youth as the rebels. Looking back in 2002, Strummer remarked: ‘Punk rock for me was a social movement … we tried to do the things politically we thought were important to our generation and hopefully would inspire another generation to go even further [where he sought to ensure] our music [w]as a loud voice of protest … punk rock at the heart of it … should be protest music’ (D’Ambrosio 2012c: 5, 4). This contradicted somewhat his earlier assessment that: ‘I don’t think [punk] was ever coherent enough to make a statement … We’re all looking for the great solution, but a bunch of loonies high on speed aren’t the people to supply it’ (The List 5 August 1988). An emphasis on youth was to be expected because of Strummer’s age and that of his audience during early Clash years, the influence upon his thinking of the May 1968 events and the like, his belief in the self-induced demise of the hippie movement as a result of drug taking, and his part in the emergence of the punk movement as a ‘year zero’ phenomenon. But as youth is neither a permanent state of affairs nor a particular world view, it was to be expected Strummer, after punk’s demise as a movement, would look to other social groups as his preferred agents for change. Here the disaffected, downtrodden, displaced and dispossessed became the working poor, immigrants, unemployed, lumpenproletariat and the like. 85

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

And, despite his stated aversion to movements in 1977 (see p.96) and his belief the hippy movement had failed (pp.73–74), Strummer’s favoured form of social change and movement towards socialism came from grassroots rebellion through social movements. In the notebook reproduced in his Joe Strummer 001 (2018) album, he wrote: ‘I am representing, as best I can, a group of people, in fact a large section of the population who I will call the dispossessed. The people who have been denied.’ This put him on a par here with Johnny Cash in his ‘Man in Black’ (1971): ‘I wear the black for the poor and the beaten down/Living in the hopeless, hungry side of town’. This orientation followed from his empathy with, and involvement in, the squatting and Chilean solidarity movements (see p.75). So, the locus of Strummer’s politics was the street-cum-community, and not the workplace, union, political party or intellectual circle. His ‘street politics’ were identified by others (e.g. Schalit 2000: 34, Ensminger 2013: 29, Assirati 2020: 91). Lyrically, Strummer’s ‘street politics’ were embodied in the likes of ‘White Riot’, ‘Clampdown’ and ‘Ghetto Defendant’.10 What was pointed was his preferred groups were not themselves organised into social movements so that the prospect for social change was, therefore, necessarily limited. Moreover, as the 1980s and 1990s progressed, Labour became more of a focus for him as the agency of change, albeit politically but not lyrically (see pp.92–94). It was not that his belief in the centrality of social movements was jettisoned but rather reprioritised. The effect was that he paid no attention to social movements and mass campaigns of this era in Britain (e.g. against rate capping, abolishing the Greater London Council, poll tax, fascist British National Party, Criminal Justice Bill or Liverpool dockers’ sackings). This disinterest continued after he became dispirited with ‘new’ Labour as he showed little interest in the anti-neoliberal globalisation movements. Although Strummer identified some agencies for 10 Although written by Rhodes, as Strummer confirmed (Denselow 1989: 205), the October 1985 Clash ‘Communique’ on Cut the Crap displayed Strummer’s orientation: ‘RADICAL social change begins on the STREET!! so if you’re looking for some ACTION, CUT THE CRAP and get OUT there’, even if Strummer said: ‘I didn’t much care for the sleeve ‘communique’ nor for the title’ (Denselow 1989: 205).

86

Strummer’s politics

social change, there was still a sense of utopian socialism in his world view where ideals and morality in themselves were seen as drivers of change (see also his humanism pp.220–222). In other words, forms of collective struggle (like class struggle) were neither seen as crucial and nor was the critical connection between the ideals and these struggles recognised. Hippieness has been characterised as a form of utopian socialism (Creagh 1983). This is not only because it rejects the authority and norms of mainstream capitalist society but also sees social change towards peace, liberty and harmony deriving not from class struggle, political revolution or even reformist action led by the state but through the creation, powered primarily by ideas, of a counter-society of a progressive character within capitalism made up of libertarian communes. Within hippieness, there is room for a human spirituality. The idea of the communes is to be at peace with the planet in terms of a de-urbanised ‘back to nature’ form of environmental protection. Strummer characterised himself as a hippie at the beginning and end of his life: ‘I was a bit of hippy when I left school’ (MM 13 December 1980) and ‘I started out a hippie and I ended up a punk’ (Salewicz 2006: 583). However, in the 1990s, he stated: ‘Quite frankly, I am a hippie. I wanna be a hippie’ (Temple 2007). This was confirmed by Strummer’s wife, Lucinda (Guardian 11 June 2003, Irish Independent 1 October 2018) and Simonon (GQ October 2003). And, showing Strummer was neither a Marxist nor a materialist during the period when he selfidentified as a socialist, he revealed he believed in superstition (NME 15 July 1978, 24 July 1982, Big Talk 15 June 1984, Salewicz 2006: 231, MOJO June 2006), spiritualism (MM 13 December 1980, Needs 2005: 307, Salewicz 2006: 524, 551, Chimes 2013: 66), and an afterlife (MM 13 December 1980, NME 3 January 1981, Jardin 2012) which are often commonly part of hippieness. These beliefs would still be evident later. Along with his love of creating campfire communities at music festivals, Glastonbury especially, Strummer asserted: ‘Surely karma must be one of the few things we can believe in … in the spirit world, it does exist. I do think it operates in this world’ (McKenna 2003). Given strands of autonomy and anarchism within hippie thinking, what place did anarchism play in Strummer’s politics? Initially, he was dismissive: 87

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

‘I don’t believe in all that anarchy bollocks! … I’m just not into chaos’ (Sniffin’ Glue October 1976). This resulted from populist perceptions of anarchy espoused by opponents and by The Damned and Sex Pistols. As anarchism is often equated especially with the absence of coercive power and a state, his response was then much more considered in 1978: ‘What I believe in ultimately is the absence of all government and all restrictions’ as it was before the RAtR tour in 1988 (see Chapter 5). In late 1983, he wrote ‘Galleani’ about Luigi Galleani, an Italian anarcho-communist in early twentieth-century America who advocated the propaganda of the deed in the form of violent direct action.11 However, he did not perform this on RAtR. But, by 1999, in response to the suggestion he had ‘left anarchist politics’, he said: ‘I’m more of a Merry Prankster type than a committed anything’ (MOJO March 2003). Billy Bragg connected an anarchist aspect to Strummer’s politics from his squatting (Salewicz 2006: 384) and Pete Townsend of The Who observed because of the failure of post-war social democracy: ‘The Clash would feel compelled to turn their backs on both right and left and appear to be anarchistic’ (Gilbert 2009: 124). Zieleniec (2017: 60, 58) went further, believing there was ‘an overt attempt to introduce anarchism as theory and possibility and not only as symbol, slogan or fashion accessory’ in Strummer’s lyrics for The Clash because they made ‘reference to alternative regimes and historical movements’ and amounted to ‘an anarchist philosophy if ever there was one [because they were] proselytising propaganda for taking and assuming self-control’. This was doubted by others (see p.51). So if there was an appellation that could credibly be given to Strummer politics, it would be Maoism (albeit without a Maoist vanguard party) where the organised working class is not accorded the primary revolutionary agency.12 Instead, it was other social groups such as the dispossessed and displaced and more generally ‘youth’, the ‘people’ or ‘masses’. If the appellation of Maoism has some accuracy, then the conception of socialism is not a revolutionary Marxist one as societies in China and Cuba indicate. 11 ‘Galleani’ was not included on Cut the Crap but is found on the Lucky 8 demos. 12 This does not seem to have a direct bearing upon the Maoist representations on the cover of Give ’Em Enough Rope.

88

Strummer’s politics

Strikes While the overall level of strikes in Britain by days not worked fell from the early 1970s, it was not as though there were not still significant strikes occurring, whether with 1977–78 firefighters’ strike,13 public sector workers in the 1978–79 Winter of Discontent and the 1980 steel strike. Yet these did not impinge upon Strummer’s lyrics, even though he showed he was aware of them (McKenna 2003, UNCUT February 2003). For a selfconfessed socialist, pronouncing ‘Death to the bosses, equality in everything’ (Rolling Stone 19 August 1982) this was strange, indicating much about his preferred modus operandi. Indeed, the only lyrics he wrote about strikes were somewhat obtuse, being ‘The Equaliser’ (1980) from Sandinista! and which did not balance out his earlier advocacy of rioting as a non- or pre-union form of action in the much better known ‘White Riot’. ‘The Equaliser’ has the refrain of ‘Put down the tools’: ‘No! Gang boss, no!/…/ Till half and half is equalised/Put down the tools/…/Stay at home’. How might this be explained? Though Rhodes gave him guidance (see pp.76–77), Strummer had little experience of regular work prior to The 101ers. It was, for him, short-term, low-paid itinerant work (gravedigging, toilet cleaning, gardening, sign painting, carpet cutting, farm labouring) so union membership was unlikely or unlikely to have made much impact on him.14 He had no experience of striking15 and was only affected by strikes as a citizen. So, he had no (positive) personal experience of the organised working class in this respect. Moreover, he saw work as a trap not to fall into, saying in 1977: ‘If people are working and got their nose in the factory for forty hours a week, they’re going to be more harmless than someone who doesn’t have their nose in the factory for forty hours 13 The Sex Pistols played a benefit gig on 25 December 1977 for families of striking firefighters in Huddersfield (Guardian 8 September 2021). 14 It could not be ascertained from the Musicians’ Union whether Strummer was a member. 15 It could not be manifestly said that Strummer went ‘on strike’ when he sat out his CBS contract in the 1990s. The same is true of the week off in between San Francisco and New York when mixing Give ’Em Enough Rope which Jones characterised as he and Strummer ‘went on strike’ (Gilbert 2009: 208) for it was a case of taking a break. Lastly, this was also the case with Rhodes’ falsehood about The Clash going on strike in 1978 over lack of radio airplay for their records (Needs 2005: 118).

89

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

a week. That’s what jobs are for’ (Temple 2015). This attitude was exhibited in ‘Clampdown’ (1979): ‘The men at the factory are old and cunning/You don’t owe nothing, so boy, get running/It’s the best years of your life they want to steal’. Consequently, Strummer’s lyrics often focused on the alienation caused by work under capitalism in the likes of ‘Janie Jones’, ‘Bankrobber’, ‘All the Young Punks’, and ‘Career Opportunities’. The apex of Strummer’s lyrical output here is ‘The Magnificent Seven’: ‘Ring! Ring! It’s 7:00 AM!/Move y’self to go again/…/Clocks go slow in a place of work/Minutes drag and the hours jerk/… /So get back to work an’ sweat some more/…/It’s no good for man to work in cages/Hits the town, he drinks his wages’. Although not a standard form of social realism, Strummer stated he was trying to explain the alienation of work, soullessness of accompanying mass consumerism, and how the mass media tried to cover up the reality of the former with the latter (MM 13 December 1980). Often Strummer’s lyrics here seemed to look to a world beyond work as it was then understood.16 Though supportive of strikes (see pp.91–92), his attitude to them at this time was a pessimistic one: ‘A lot of people can never dream of anything apart from just surviving the week. Who wants to go on strike when there’s fifty blokes going “I’ll have your job. I don’t care if we don’t get a pay rise. I’ll take it”’ (Mother Jones April 1982). Little has been ever been made of ‘The Equaliser’. Of those that did, Eriksen (1981: 28) believed it called ‘for a general strike … intimating the need for establishing a classless society’ while Mother Jones (April 1982) argued it ‘questioned the structure of work itself ’. Topping (2004: 66) saw it as a ‘proposed call to arms to the oppressed workers of the world to … go on strike’. Fletcher (2005: 57) merely noted it called for ‘equal rights and equal pay’ while for Wyatt (2018: 158) it was a general ‘calls to arms to the oppressed workers of the world’, and Assirati (2020: 75) remarked it was the ‘most overtly “Socialist” lyric by The Clash’. Meanwhile, Bindas (1993: 79) did not pick up on this meaning and Tom Morello (Music Radar 10 December 2012) only noted its ‘class-war subtleties’. Though 16 For example, rather than demanding the right to work, Strummer’s lyrics embodied the right not to work.

90

Strummer’s politics

sympathetic to workers, Strummer’s engagement with and support for unions in Britain, the US and elsewhere was tenuous, notwithstanding playing two miners’ benefits gigs in 1984 and one for the striking firefighters in 2002.17 Before the miners’ strike, his almost sole act was in 1980 to donate a Cadillac he won in a bet with a BBC Radio 1 presenter to the people of the recession-hit steel town, Corby. Occasionally, he would dedicate songs at gigs to striking workers as he did in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on 16 February 1979, where staff at WBCN had struck after the station’s new owners fired half of the workers in order to break the union. In 1984, asked by Creem (October 1984) about allegations he crossed a picket line of striking house technicians in Long Beach, he responded: ‘Well, if there was picket line, it must have been manned by ants … I didn’t see any picket line … I’ve usually got an eye for those picket billboards … I can spot a picket line 200 yards up the road. Even when it’s only manned by two or three people, I can spot it … Still, I guess if it’s true, we have to take it on the chin.’ Over the following years he showed some concern for workers’ plight, but this was little more than words. For example, ‘You got to be angry to care. I get angry at how much they pay the teachers, the nurses and the firemen’ (NME 7 October 1989). At the Acton firefighters’ benefit gig, he left the stage saying: ‘Give the firemen the money and the nurses and the teachers too’ (The List 2 October 2006), and told the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) general secretary, Andy Gilchrist: ‘We’re with you. I’m sure it’s time someone in government will start realising that you’ve got to pay people decent money for doing essential things, and I hope the nurses and teachers and everyone like that comes with you – let’s get sensible and have a proper society’ (McDonald and Miles 2003, see also Binette 2003: 50).18 Gilchrist recalled Strummer also called for getting 17 This makes Salvo’s (2017: 239) comment: ‘The Clash represent the freedom to bemoan the loss of a way of life – trade unionism and collective bargaining’ bizarre. Prévot and Sinclair (2017: 83) correctly observed: ‘[A]t no time in their [Clash] lyrics do they offer direct support to the traditional defence organisations of the working-class – the trade unions [despite] … mak[ing] it clear from the outset that they were on the side of the working-class.’ 18 This was naive given the dispute was lengthy and Blair sabotaged a settlement, and the hope contradicted his view of ‘new’ Labour (see pp.206–207).

91

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

‘the coppers’ out too, indicating an ignorance of the situation.19 Despite the union-organised boycott of News International newspapers after the Wapping strike (1985–86), Strummer still spoke to its journalists. Labour During the Thatcher era, Strummer increasingly identified Labour as ‘socialist’ despite his reservations about its 1974–79 government. So, in 1976, he opined: ‘The whole of government is old fashioned … big business and the government are stacked against everyone’ (Temple 2015) and, on Something Else (BBC 2 11 March 1978), argued ‘all the parties look the same’. Having already rejected the Tories, and with Labour in office when the world economy faltered after the post-war ‘long boom’, Strummer could sound very much against the whole ‘system’: ‘There’s so much corruption – councils, governments, industry. Everywhere. It’s got to be flushed out. Just because it’s been going on for a long time doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be stopped. It doesn’t mean that it isn’t time to change’ (MM 11 March 1978). In Punk (May/June 1979) he argued of Labour in government: ‘We ain’t got no socialist system in England. Now they’re talking about socialist millionaires. … What the fuck is a socialist millionaire?’ In 1981, he exclaimed: ‘Kick Thatcher out. Get [Labour left-wingers] Foot or Benn in’ (NME 3 January 1981). Strummer told a Düsseldorf gig on 19 February 1984: ‘I’m telling you: pretty soon it is going to be Margaret Thatcher Über alles’ and encouraged people to vote, and on 9 and 16 March 1984 told the Brixton Academy audience: ‘Old men ain’t gonna do anything for us … so fucking get the vote out’  and, in reference to Thatcher, ‘Let’s get rid of her before she gets rid of us.’ So it was clear he thought Labour was, unconditionally, the only alternative. The next month in the US, he was more explicit: ‘We’re trying to get people to vote and we’re encouraging them to vote Labo[u]r which is the socialist alternative 19 In Britain, polices strikes only occurred in 1918 and 1919. Thereafter, police were banned from taking industrial action, joining a union, and a staff association was established instead.

92

Strummer’s politics

to Thatcher, even though when they get into power they’ll probably be indistinguishable from the others’ (Albany Student Press 27 April 1984). The next month he was even more explicit: ‘The Labour Party is a labour party now … They’ve gone left … so I’d say that was a radical alternative … they’re about the only ones who’ve got a crack at Thatcherism … I would urge anybody to vote Labour because let’s start somewhere … the alternative to voting Labour is not voting at all’ (Jamming May 1984). In the case of the US, he favoured the electoral route with the likes of Jesse Jackson as the ‘better’ Democrat leader (Creem October 1984). In 1985, revising his earlier views, he called the 1974–79 Labour government ‘socialist’ (Greek TV interview 1985). In this interview, he called the Greek equivalent of Labour, the PASOK government, ‘socialist’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 316). The following year, he was dismissive of Red Wedge: ‘If after all these years of Thatcher, you aren’t going to vote Labour then you’re beyond help’ (NME 26 July 1986). Despite playing the Class War-organised RAtR tour (Chapter 5), he stated: ‘I would love Labour to get in’ (Sounds 6 August 1988) and ‘There is light at the end of the tunnel now. The polls are looking good … We just have to hope that Kinnock doesn’t do anything stupid’ (NME 7 October 1989). But he then said Labour ‘has no future … it couldn’t change the world in a thousand centuries’ (BBC Scotland Ex-S 14 December 1993), likely reflecting the disillusionment of Labour’s loss of the 1992 general election, when it ‘snatched defeat from the jaws of victory’, according to a popular saying. Strummer’s increasing support for Labour could be taken as defining his socialist beliefs as social democracy rather than revolutionary socialism. And, when tying this to his opposition to Stalinism, his social democracy may be characterised as democratic socialism. However, matters are not necessarily that straightforward. Part and parcel of the struggle for socialism as a future society is the struggle for reforms under capitalism in the present. The struggle for reforms is not synonymous with reformism per se and is not necessarily a negation of revolutionary socialism. Struggling for reforms can ameliorate exploitation and oppression and may also generate the collective capacity and consciousness to fight for socialism – even if it brings with it the challenges of incorporation into, and 93

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

satisfaction with, capitalism. Strummer never pronounced on these issues so it is difficult to know how to take statements like: ‘What we are trying to say is, “Let’s have some social justice.” We want to make that idea more attractive and important to kids than all the other stuff that is thrown at them’ (LA Times 22 January 1984) or ‘My politics lie with justice … I want justice and I don’t want a few to pocket the gross. I reckon there’s enough for every person in the world’ (Jamming May 1984). Left-wing parties Though Strummer was critical of Labour before 1979 as well as after 1997 (see Chapter 7), he also had a long-standing aversion to joining, or closely associating with, any other left political party.20 This was because he believed they constituted a break on free thinking (including his), rather than seeing them as an ideological resource for fighting capitalism and its inequities. This was in spite of many such parties welcoming The Clash (Worley 2014: 83). In 1977, he told The Leveller (July/August 1977): ‘The Socialist Workers Party, you know, they keep coming up to us and saying “Come on, join us” – but they can fuck off, the wankers, that’s just dogma. I don’t want no dogma.’ In 1984, he associated RAR and the Anti-Nazi League (ANL) with the SWP saying: ‘They are a bunch of cunts … I don’t trust them … they are dodgy … they tell me all about Trotsky but they’re dead [inside]’ (Radio Stockholm 17 February 1984).21 Much later, he claimed ignorance about the SWP.22 Denselow (1989: 148) recounted: ‘The SWP started sending them congratulatory telegrams, announcing, “We’re standing beside you”, but they didn’t win The Clash as converts [with Strummer saying:] “We just thought ‘who the hell are they?’ We didn’t know who they were.”’ In Punk (May/June 1979), Strummer exclaimed: ‘Let me tell you my politics are and have always been and always will be to the left. 20 Jucha (2016: 302) went too far in stating: ‘The Clash never supported left- or right-wing political organisations.’ 21 See also Tranmer (2014: 99–100) and Bottà and Quercetti (2019: 214). 22 This took the form of a letter in 1987 to Denselow for his book, after he asked for an interview.

94

Strummer’s politics

… But I don’t wanna say I am a socialist or that I am a communist ’cause I fuckin hate parties and party doctrine.’ 23 Then, in 1981, he commented: ‘I think there’s gotta be a plan, and a party. I mean, I’ve always hated parties because I don’t believe in toeing the party line. But there must be some way that we can get ourselves together here, not let Thatcher walk all over us’ (NME 3 January 1981). Later that year, he proffered: ‘Toeing any line is obviously a dodgy situation, because I’m just not into a policy or I’d have joined the Communist Party years ago. I’ve done my time selling the Morning Star at pit heads in Wales, and it’s just not happening’ (Garbarini 1981: 54). In 1985, on the busking tour in Sunderland, Strummer responded to the attempt to recruit him to the SWP in the same way (White 2007: 232–233). Earlier, in 1981, Strummer was also dismissive of the SWP’s weekly newspaper: ‘[I]f you think we read Socialist Worker you must be out of your mind. I can’t read that journalism [Socialist Worker] because it’s so slanted and biased that it’s worthless’ (Tobler and Miles 1983: 68). On the busking tour, White (2007: 232–233) recounted Strummer believed he had more influence as an unaffiliated socialist and valued his own freedom to set his own politics. In 1999, he recalled: ‘When they saw that we were making hay, the SWP tried to jump on the bandwagon. We didn’t rebuff their overtures. We just didn’t respond to them. We were just going “Fuck off, man! Smoke a bloody joint!” We were into getting the Rizlas out and playing Chuck Berry riffs!’ (MOJO March 2003). There was one exception to Strummer’s aversion to left political parties, namely his willingness to play for the Italian Communist Party and the French Trotskyists, Ligue communiste révolutionnaire, because they were paid for gigs (see p.171). 23 In 1979, The Clash spurned overtures from actress Vanessa Redgrave on behalf of the Workers Revolutionary Party (WRP) – not Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) – as Green and Barker (2003: 182) stated. Strummer spurned the Maoist American RCP in the same way he did the British SWP (Sounds 17 July 1982) though he agreed to be interviewed for its paper, Revolutionary Worker. Topping (2004: 153), therefore, was wrong to state: ‘[W]hen they first toured the US Strummer … made a serious effort to talk to activists and members of various underground political groups.’ Callahan (2001) attributed the RCP’s keenness on The Clash to finding a successor to his band, Prairie Fire, after its demise, as the ‘vanguard of proletarian culture’.

95

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

The primary reason Strummer’s ire was focused on the SWP, and not the Communist Party,24 was the SWP showed an earlier, keener interest in punk’s possibility as a politically progressive social movement (Smith 2011, 2012, Tranmer 2013, Worley 2012, 2016). That said, Worley (2012: 345) noted: ‘[M]any punk and, later, 2-tone, Oi! and post-punk bands were willing to declare their opposition to racism and the politics of the [Nazis] … but remained suspicious of the motivations and objectives of leftist groups seeking to channel such protest into more formal support’, so Strummer was not unusual here. And, though The Clash’s political leader, Strummer was not alone his attitude of steering clear of (left) political parties. Jones took the same position (NME 3 September 1977, 14 April 2012, Music Radar 10 December 2012, UNCUT October 2013), saying in 2004: ‘Overtures were made by left-wing people and parties. We didn’t really want to know’ (Needs 2005: 100). This attitude was shared by others in The Clash (Green and Barker 2003: 182, Tranmer 2014: 101). Somewhat strangely, in 1977, Strummer also said: ‘We do not believe in movements [emphasis added] or parties. As soon as people begin to tell you what to and not to do, so stop all thinking and it is the most dangerous thing there is’.25 Though this was before his RAR involvement of April 1978 (see p.167), it likely indicated he found many political activists of the organised left within movements he had experienced rather unpalatable. But, just as importantly, it indicated his aversion to political parties did not mean a blanket endorsement of social movements as the obvious alternative. This was because there was a libertarian element to him, not only in his attitudes (see MM 26 March 1977) but in his preferred form of behaviour and occupation as an artist. Nonetheless, Strummer did see the value of collective mobilisation. Responding to the question ‘What was punk’s great failure?’, he stated: ‘That we didn’t mobilize our forces when we had them and focus our energies in a way that could’ve brought about concrete social change – trying to get a repressive law repealed, for 24 This was an interesting conjuncture given Gramsci was becoming a major influence on the Communist Party (through its journal, Marxism Today) and its Young Communist League-associated organisation engaged with punk (Worley 2012, 2016). 25 Interview, Stockholm 15 June 1977.

96

Strummer’s politics

instance’ … We never had any real power, either, other than in an abstract, poetic way. … But it would’ve been nice to have the power to say, ‘Fifty thousand people down to the Houses of Parliament now! We might’ve been able to get 1,500 people at the height of our power’ (McKenna 2003). Class, socialism and Marxism Following Marx and Engels’ Communist Manifesto (1848), classical Marxism is premised upon three critical components. First, class is a product of the relationship to the means of production, distribution and exchange, where their ownership and control provide benefit. It is an objective relationship and not a subjective one, thus, not concerned with, for example, consumption or attitudes. Consequently, and in simple terms, under capitalism, there are two primary classes: the working class who have no resources other than their ability to sell their labour, and the ruling class who own the means of production, distribution and exchange. Second, capitalism’s raison d’etre is accumulating surplus value, namely, profit. Third, the fundamental character of (revolutionary) socialism results from the emancipation of the working class where this is an act of the working class itself and signifies the working class moving from being a ‘class in itself ’ (an objective state) to ‘a class for itself ’ (a subjective state) as a result of engaging in class struggle and its changing collective consciousness. Strummer did not accord the working class such a role in his socialist world view. He mostly saw social groups based upon being ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’, ‘rich’ and ‘poor’, ‘the many’ and ‘the few’ in a populist, anti-elite manner.26 Lyrically, these representations could be found in numerous songs. In ‘White Riot’, he wrote of ‘All the power’s in the hands/Of people rich enough to buy it’ with its B-side, ‘1977’, saying ‘Ain’t so lucky to be rich’.27 Here, Strummer (Temple 2015) contrasted how a person might be 26 In this regard, he was no different from Weller. In his more overtly left-wing songs such as ‘Walls Come Tumbling Down!’ (1985) and ‘The Lodgers’ (1985), Weller used the term ‘class’ once. In the former, he wrote: ‘The class war’s real and not mythologized’, and this was preceded by ‘Those who have and who have not’. 27 The ‘White Riot’ sleeve quotes: ‘A clash of generations is not so fundamentally dangerous to the art of government as would be a clash between rulers and ruled.’

97

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

attacked in different areas of London: for the poor with ‘knives in W11’ and ‘Sten guns in Knightsbridge’ for the rich. In ‘Garageland’ (1977), he wrote: ‘I don’t wanna hear about what the rich are doing/I don’t wanna go to where the rich are going’. ‘Guns on the Roof ’ from Give ’Em Enough Rope (1978) stated: ‘A system built by the sweat of the many/Creates assassins to kill off the few’ and ‘Bankrobber’ (1980): ‘Some is rich, and some is poor’. There were many similar allusions to the rich/poor dichotomy on Sandinista! (1980) like ‘Something about England’ and ‘Up in Heaven (Not Only Here)’. The coda of ‘Version City’ from Sandinista! features the terms, ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’. In ‘Stop the World’, B-side to ‘The Call Up’ (1980), he wrote of those that could survive a nuclear holocaust as ‘Down in the bunkers in the crust of the earth/Now crouch the wealthy and the noble of birth’. In interviews, Strummer professed: ‘Whoever’s got the money’s got the power’ (MM 13 November 1976); ‘The poor blacks and the poor whites are in the same boat’ (NME 11 December 1976); and ‘Eight per cent of the people own the country’ (Record Mirror 9 April 1977). Interviewed by the Sunday Times (17 July 1977), he said private schools were where ‘rich people send their rich thick kids’. In Rude Boy, he pronounced: ‘Why I think the left wing is better than the right wing is because at least it’s kind of not just for the few – the many slaving for the few. … What’s the point of becoming one of the few?’ (Hazan and Mingay 1980).28 He told the NME (3 January 1981): ‘[I]t’s not the blacks, it’s the rich white people that are to blame, the white fat cats. The Stock Exchange and Wall Street.’ Early in 1982, he stated about nuclear war: ‘The cream of every country is ready to be whisked down the shelters while we lot are all left on the surface’ (Roadrunner February 1980). In a late 1982 interview, he repeatedly used the terms, ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’, saying that ‘haves’ vote Tory and ‘have-nots’ vote Labour while identifying himself as a ‘have’ who was previously a ‘have-not’.29 When asked in a 1983 US radio interview, ‘What would be the catalyst for revolt?’, Strummer responded: ‘It’s called 28 In Punk (May/June 1979), he reiterated this point: ‘I’m not into fuckin’ people working away in factories doing useless boring jobs just for some cunt to take the rake off.’ 29 Pistol-shaped picture disc, TL60.

98

Strummer’s politics

Reaganomics, it’s called Thatcher-anomics, it’s called government for the rich by the rich, it’s called the “haves” and “have-nots”.’ Later, he told Creem (October 1984): ‘We know there is going to be a struggle between one economic order and another – the haves and have-nots will come to a conflict’ and the Toronto’s Globe and Mail (28 April 1984): ‘I think there’s really going to be an armed struggle between the have-nots and the haves of the world’. And yet many have taken this language as evidence of a class analysis of a socialist or Marxist kind (see pp.45–46). Broe (2012: 102) is one example in terms of ‘Garageland’ while Laing (2015: 110) saw a ‘traditionally defined ruling class [in] The Clash’s lyric [of ‘Career Opportunities’]’. Strummer clearly recognised social divisions, but whether these were class divisions and which type of class divisions is less clear, not just in terms of language like ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ but also in terms of derivation. While money and wealth were paramount, in Strummer’s world view, it was not clear what these were derived from, such as land, property and productive capacity (the means of production, distribution and exchange) or inherited wealth. He told Rolling Stone (19 August 1982): ‘Money is power: it can make things possible.’ Meantime, Marx insisted in The Poverty of Philosophy (1847): ‘Money is not a thing, it is a social relation.’ The use of the terms money and wealth, therefore, obscure their derivation, detaching them from being part of capitalism as an economic system. And class analysis is not synonymous with Marxism, as the likes of James (2010a, 2014) implied. This is because it can take Weberian or other forms of structuralism, leading to complex class stratifications (like lower, upper middle and working classes).30 While it is possible Strummer used the aforementioned terms as ciphers for working and ruling classes in a populist manner, there is little evidence to suggest this was so. He was not a Marxist (see pp.78–79) and it is not even clear he was Marxian or Marxisant (see p.45). Indeed, he so seldom used the term ‘class’ as to make it doubtful that he saw it as an important concept, whether of a Marxist or non-Marxist variety. Had he been a Marxist or influenced by Marxism to any significant extent, he would have understood the necessity of using the term ‘class’ 30 Strummer used the term ‘upper-middle class’ (see Rolling Stone 19 August 1982).

99

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

and ascribing it to more than accent, tastes and behaviours. Of the less than twenty identified uses, four were just before he died and only five were at the apex of his political radicalism in the early to mid-1980s. On one of these occasions, he also used ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ (Rolling Stone 19 August 1982). None were in his lyrics. Only two instances of Strummer using ‘ruling class’ in interviews were in his socialist period (i.e. NME 3 January 1981, Pulse March 1984). In a US radio interview, not long after Combat Rock was released, he argued: ‘You’ve got to be glamorous in this world … you’ve got to go out there and get some attention … you’ve got to attract people … if it doesn’t get through to the middle class, the working class and the people in the cities then it’s a storm in a teacup.’ On US NPR (National Public Radio) (30 October 1999), he stated: ‘We knew that Thatcher was coming somehow and she created an underclass of people in order to frighten normal voters into voting for her.’ In 2002, in discussing hip-hop, he commented: ‘No doubt about it, particularly in respect to addressing the ills of capitalism and providing a smart class analysis, underground hip-hop, not the pop-culture stuff, picked up where punk left off and ran full steam ahead’ (D’Ambrosio 2003)31, and elsewhere told the same interviewer: ‘[A]s we moved to this more fragmented society with more emphasis on technology the state was looking for us to work according to our class … it all seemed about controlling class, particularly the lower classes’ (D’Ambrosio 2003). These few examples do not contradict the argument above. Rather, they support it. How is Strummer’s absence of using the concept of class to be explained? Writing of the period 1976–79, Worley (2014: 89, 91) noted Strummer’s ‘inability to draw on class’, and his ‘rebellion was not built on class expression; nor was it theorised’. Presumably Worley meant ‘working class’. That in itself might have been necessary, but it would not have been sufficient. Indeed, Strummer could have drawn upon his middle-class background and experience as a result of parentage and schooling. But with Strummer, matters are often not so simple. After leaving school, he 31 He earlier criticised hip-hop for celebrating ‘yuppie’ wealth (Rapido ’88 1988) and ‘a lot of rap’s subject matter is about ego’ (Pistol-shaped picture disc, TL60).

100

Strummer’s politics

did experience poverty for a decade, whether by virtue of squatting or working low-paid, dead-end jobs before he started to become a financially successful musician. His estrangement from his parents meant he did not have much of a safety net. Just as importantly, Strummer was well read for a punk musician, giving him the intellectual resources to draw upon in order to use the concept of class if he wished. And while it could be argued Strummer implicitly recognised objective class divisions within lyrics with ciphers, this is far from convincing and may be explicable by the absence of (subjective) class consciousness in Britain and the US during most of his adulthood. In other words, class relations were objective if sometimes subterranean, while working-class subjectivity was largely subterranean. Lastly, Strummer’s ‘The Future is Unwritten’ slogan and drawing (see Needs 2005: 225) could be taken as an expression of Marx’s dictum from The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon (1852) that, to paraphrase, people make their own history, but not in circumstances of their own choosing. This might not be fanciful given Strummer created it in 1981, and he was then most aware of Marxism if Garbarini’s (1981) interview is a good representation. But, equally, it could be his slogan was merely a way of stating change is possible if people organise collectively, and which while potentially radical is not necessarily Marxist. Indeed, it could be interpreted as ‘life is what you make it’ on an individual basis or his appeal to humanism in later life (see pp.220–222). Truth, human nature and consciousness Marxism and much socialist thought is based on dialectical or historical materialism, where following Marx, consciousness is a reflection of political economy. Thus, individuals’ world views tend to be shaped by their political and economic circumstances. Marx argued: ‘It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness.’ This has become paraphrased as ‘life determines consciousness, not consciousness life’. As Strummer was neither a Marxist nor influenced by Marxism in this 101

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

way, he did not subscribe to this. Instead, he believed in an object truth which false consciousness prevented people from seeing. In turn, false consciousness derived from ideas and not material circumstances. This section examines his belief system with regard to truth, human nature and consciousness. A ‘telling it like it is’ tradition exists in some strains of rock and folk (Street 1986: 143–144, Eyerman and Jamison 1998). Punk emerged as a reaction to existing rock, especially ‘prog rock’, as it was perceived to have dispensed with ‘truth telling’ because it was telling tales of fantasy or the lives most could not relate to. Consequently, punk had a mantra of ‘Gimme some truth’. Though punk was often said to have a ‘year zero’ philosophy, thus, it showed elements of continuity with what went before. So, some strains of punk sought to be tellers of truths in the tradition of social realism. It was, therefore, no surprise Strummer reflected this and was a principal exponent of it (Edmonton Journal 3 May 1984, Greek television interview, London, 1985, Sunday Times 8 October 1989, The NewMusic 2001, McKenna 2003). Jones also took this approach (NME 2 April 1977) and commented: ‘Joe spoke the truth’ (Q Classic February 2005). For Strummer, the truth was a tool in the battle for progressive politics. He believed the ‘haves’ had vested interests in not telling the truth, untruths were told to hold the ‘have-nots’ in check and the truth could be used to mobilise them to oppose the ‘haves’. He told Sniffin’ Glue (October 1976): ‘I’d just like to make loads of people realise what’s goin’ on. Like, all those secrets in the government and all that money changing hands … I’d like to get all that out in the open … I just feel like no one’s telling me anything, even if I read every paper, watch TV and listen to the radio!’ In 1979, he stated: ‘[S]omebody’s got to say the truth and it’s a hard job to say the truth’ (Revolutionary Worker 28 September 1979). Then he told New York’s 5-News (June 1981): ‘Half of Europe is listening to the same rubbish … all of America is listening to the same rubbish. Get all this rubbish out of the way so we can see what is really going on.’ This perspective continued, with Strummer remarking in 1982: ‘No truth is ever told [by the press or media]. That is why we use songs to try to say something because they 102

Strummer’s politics

are not being said anywhere else … [in order to] wake people up’ 32 and ‘I want them to see how they have all be tricked by the structure of the world … you go to school not to be educated but to learn how to stay in line, to learn how to get to your job on time and how to do repetitious work … in order to run the factories’ (CNN Report 1982). He continued with this line (US 1983 radio interview, US cable TV interview January 1984, US TV interview February 1984, BAM 10 February 1984, Greek television interview, London, 1985). Reflecting back on ‘I’m So Bored with the USA’ (1977), he said ‘it says a lot of truth’ (Savage 2009: 261). Strummer’s stance on the truth was recognised by others. Needs (2005: 53) observed: ‘Joe likened The Clash to a public broadcast system bringing the truth’ and Sniffin’ Glue (April/May 1977) ended an article by saying: ‘The Clash tells the truth’. After The Clash, Strummer said he believed in ‘the truth’ in this way, saying of ‘Johnny Appleseed’ (2001) it was ‘a howl for some kind of truth in our lives’ (Salewicz 2006: 608). There are objective truths, being not merely that day follows night or tides ebb and flow. However, the ability of a ‘truth’ to be seen as such is largely based on consciousness, especially collective consciousness, where Marxism suggests significant shifts in the ability to see ‘truth’ result from changes in class consciousness, most specifically, the move from the working class’s objective state of being ‘a class in itself ’ to being ‘a class for itself ’. Such shifts arise from collective (class) struggle by workers. Consequently, ‘knowledge is [not] power’ in and of itself, for consciousness determines whether knowledge becomes a wellspring for power in as much as it helps encourage collective mobilisation. Yet Strummer’s perspective was there were incontestable and incontrovertible ‘objective’ truths, and when they were revealed to people a new oppositional ‘common sense’ would be created. Only twice did he genuflect to the notion of subjective truth, saying The Clash was about: ‘Telling the truth as we see it’ (RM 1 July 1978) and ‘If the people feel it, they’ll do it’ (Fast Forward March 1982). Overall, this was not a case of ‘speaking truth to power’ in order to appeal to the ‘haves’ to be more humane to the ‘have-nots’, but rather one of 32 Interview Pistol-shaped picture disc, TL60.

103

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

speaking ‘truth’ to ‘have-nots’ so the scales would fall from their eyes. Accordingly, Strummer saw his role as a teller of such truths, and fundamental truths at that. To the extent Strummer recognised ‘have-nots’ had a consciousness, it was a false one. But Strummer did not merely seek to reveal truths to them for he also, like much of punk itself, believed in the mantra of ‘question everything’. Here, ‘have-nots’ were not simply empty vessels to be filled up with truths for they had a part to play in their own cognitive liberation (even if this questioning also opened them up to the ‘truth’). He argued in 1977: ‘We encourage our audience to study – and I mean the society around them and not some school books – for without the knowledge they cannot change their situation’ 33 and ‘Just think about who’s doing what and what you’re going to do about it’ is all we’re saying. Think for yourself!’ where he sought to raise questions in lyrics: ‘I’m not interested in singing about love and kisses. I’m interested in why? Why I can’t do this or that’ (Boston 1978: 35, 39). A few years later, he implored: ‘[We] are encouraging rather than preaching, arousing interest in the likes of, say, the Sandinistas, so that people can investigate for themselves’ (RM 9 May 1981); and ‘we’re trying to get people to think and at least discuss topics’ (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029). Strummer repeated this to US NPR in 1981, Paste in late 1983, and on RAI Milan (27 February 1984): ‘Think for yourself … recognise that you’ve been brainwashed so therefore you can’t trust your own thinking, therefore, do some research – find all sides of the argument … and make your own mind up … a lot of people do it the easy way – they heard an accepted statement and [go with it and use it] but that’s not a real critical process in the mind.’ Earlier, he made the same point from the other side of the argument: ‘Making out like you’ve got the answers to everybody’s problems – it’s impossible, of course. … everybody must sort out their own problems — that being the key to everything. The energy to sort your problems out comes from when you sort them out. You sort the problem out and you get the will to go on and sort another one out. But 33 Interview, Stockholm, 15 June 1977.

104

Strummer’s politics

you can’t expect any help’ (Roadrunner February 1980)34 and ‘Only the lazy ones look to us for a solution’ (Trouser Press March 1980). This approach was not entirely dissimilar to Jones (see Sniffin’ Glue October 1976, NME 11 December 1976, RM 9 April 1977, Mother Jones April 1982). However, Jones believed, because of Strummer’s approach, The Clash a had ‘stern, preaching message’ (SPIN March 1986) even though Strummer believed: ‘You cannot preach … you cannot lecture because your message will not go home.’ 35 But looking back in 2003, Jones commented: ‘Nearly every song was about something … [They] ask questions. We may not have had the answers’ (McDonald and Miles 2003). And, in 1999, Strummer remarked: ‘[B]ut we did try to pose those sort of questions [on power and politics]’ (Letts 2000). So, Linstead (2010: 126) noted Strummer’s ‘ambition to make great music that would challenge people to question the way they thought and acted’. Yet, overall – and especially in his socialist and rebel rock periods – the balance between posing questions and providing answers was more heavily slanted towards the latter. Strummer believed the main way false consciousness was created was through a ‘con’ – a confidence trick played out on people. Prior to expounding this, seldom did he refer to other causes. Only thrice did he refer to the fetishism of materialism and embourgeoisement. The first was: ‘white men, they just ain’t prepared to deal with the[ir] problems [as black men are] – everything’s too cosy. They’ve got stereos, drugs, hi-fis, cars’ (NME 11 December 1976), and during Tony Parson’s interview in April 1977: ‘no one feels bad enough to have a white type of riot about what we have a beef about … it was a dig at white people cos everyone’s got a nice pay cheque, enough dope …’ (Temple 2015). He later reinforced this by saying: ‘Our goal was to prod those people who were complacent and comfortable’ (D’Ambrosio 2012e: 125). In 2001, he asserted resistance to change happened because people are ‘afraid of the new and the unknown, and familiarity is comforting … fear is the corrupting agent’ (McKenna 2003) and saw 34 This meant some band support members would not be helped by Strummer to sort out their problems when caused by others (Green and Barker 2003: 226, Davie 2004: 135, Salewicz 2006: 251). 35 Pistol-shaped picture disc, TL60.

105

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

the media as promoting moral panics (Salewicz 2006: 608). So, Strummer believed most people were living under ‘the con’ but tried to express it in an empathetic, populist way (see Mother Jones April 1982, Rolling Stone 19 August 1982). He continued with this perspective: ‘Before we talk about revolution, let’s talk about the fact that everybody is fast asleep, you’re running way ahead of yourself there … otherwise why would all the cons be foisted on us?’ (Toronto tour bus interview April 1985). He then proceeded to list the cons including business, city living, the army and, even, rock ’n’ roll. Strummer attributed dissemination of the ‘con’ to the media being ‘right-wing fascist’ (Quake February 1984) and ‘ninety per cent of the papers are right-wing and brown-nosing’ (MM 30 September 1989).36 Once false consciousness was removed, Strummer believed the inherently good human nature could prevail (Salewicz 2006: 524–525, Andersen 2013: 20). However, he was not always quite so sure for he also speculated on other sides to human nature including laziness, wickedness and power seeking (Music Planet 2001, UNCUT September 2012). Capitalism and industrialism In Strummer’s world view, there was ample ambiguity about the source of humanity’s ills, particularly with regard to work and employment (see also p.48). It was not, therefore, self-evident that: ‘Through his songwriting Strummer consistently critiqued capitalism’ (D’Ambrosio 2003). Often, he seemed to attribute ills to industry, industrialisation and industrial society and not capitalist industry, capitalist industrialism or capitalism itself. As with the concept of class, it was not clear if Strummer used the term ‘industrial society’ as a more easily understood cipher for capitalism. In a US radio interview in 1983, he stated: 36 Strangely, Strummer preferred the Sun to the Guardian or Mirror (Sunday Times 17 July 1977, Search & Destroy June 1978), allowed it to be used as the official news medium for the revamped Clash (White 2007: 151–152) and ran two London marathons (1981, 1983) where the first was sponsored by the Sun and the second was in a Sun team running to raise money for the Leukaemia Research Fund (Gilbert 2009: 330, Revolution Rock: All You Need Is Music 28 January 2018).

106

Strummer’s politics [W]e’ve all been had by an industrial society that only needs workers to fuel the factories and furnaces … man has a better destiny … for the past two hundred we’ve all been had and there’s a better life to be lived by everybody and for everybody … All our schooling and upbringing which are generally all the same throughout the Western world has been totally aimed at eradicating the individual … the industrial society has no need of individuals – all the world wants now is robotic workers who shut up and do what they are told … anybody who steps out of this line is [put] on skid row … What we’re trying to say is … we don’t have to be like this … do you want to work to you drop like your old man did? Is it necessary? I still don’t believe that every person born on this planet is an infant factory worker which is what they trying to tell us.

But the year before, he told Sounds (17 July 1982): ‘[T]he capitalist system is unfair to the people that do the work … we could take care of people better’ and then the next year Quake (February 1984): ‘There’s no way that capitalism is gonna work either here or in England or in Europe or in West Germany. There’s gotta be some humanity ’cause we’re all going straight for a nuclear power, either a meltdown or a nuclear war, and that is capitalism.’ At this time, Strummer clearly identified himself as a socialist. Later, in 2002, Strummer maintained: ‘Industrial society offered nothing really’ (D’Ambrosio 2003). His non-capitalist emphasis changed from industrialisation to corporatisation as the source of the ills (see pp.207, 209) with his solution moving from socialism to ethical capitalism (see pp.208–209). This may be seen as a part of his critique of modern a-capitalist society where he argued: ‘Authority is supposedly grounded in wisdom. But I could see from a very early age that authority was only a system of control. And it didn’t have any inherent wisdom. I quickly realised that you either became a power or you were crushed’ (Letts 2000). Anti-imperialism, violence and terrorism Strummer’s anti-imperialism saw him side with national liberation movements and what capitalist states termed ‘terrorists’. His support for underdogs in domestic British and American politics was matched by support outside those countries for oppressed nations. Though generally 107

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

a position taken by socialists, supporting national liberation struggles was also often undertaken by the liberal left. In his anti-imperialism, Strummer recognised the difference between the violence of oppressor and that of the oppressed. As capitalist states have an almost complete monopoly on the means of violence and use their power to legitimise this, any challenges to it through violence, whether internally or externally, are deemed ‘terrorism’ to delegitimatise its use and those using it. In siding with national liberation movements and ‘terrorists’, Strummer’s empathy with anti-imperialism and armed insurgence was compatible with deprioritising working-class struggle through unions and political parties (see pp.89–92). Two brief examples show how Strummer believed violence could legitimately be used by the oppressed against oppressors. In 1979, while in Washington, Strummer talked about wiping out the leadership of American imperialism by violence (MM 24 February 1979), and then on 19 January 1984 in California, at the revamped Clash’s first gig, he told the audience: ‘I’d like to dedicate this one to Santa Barbara, the only town in America where the Bank of America was burned down!’ (Rolling Stone 1 March 1984). This section examines his promotion of anti-imperialism and support for ‘terrorism’ (see pp.143–147 on his own violence). It seemed Strummer recognised Ireland as Britain’s oldest colony as he supported ‘troops out’ and united Ireland positions. For declaring this in the NME (5 May 1979), he received a death threat from the loyalist Red Hand Commandos (Green and Barker 2003: 183, Salewicz 2006: 254–254, Gilbert 2009: 243). Though it is not clear whose initiative it was to start The Clash’s ‘Out of Control’ in Belfast on 20 October 1977,37 there was no doubt Strummer himself decided to wear an ‘H-Block’ T-shirt in 1978 and then dedicate the 28 April 1981 Madrid gig to the ‘struggle of the Irish people for freedom in their own country’ with H-Block republican political prisoner, Bobby Sands MP, on hunger strike (Salewicz 2006: 311). Sands died a week later. Of the attempt to start the tour in Belfast, Strummer said: ‘If I go to Belfast, I’m going to stand in front of one of those cages, 37 The gig was cancelled shortly before it was to begin due to insurance cover issues, leading to a so-called riot.

108

Strummer’s politics

’cos to me it’s all about showing people what’s going on’ (Hot Press September 1999). However, by 1981 Strummer was more reticent to pronounce on Northern Ireland (Boston Rock June 1981) and this continued (Hot Press September 1999). Sandinista!, especially its ‘Washington Bullets’ but also its ‘Ivan Meets GI Joe’, ‘Charlie Don’t Surf ’ and ‘The Call Up’, has been recognised as an effective critique of imperialism, particularly US imperialism. Eriksen (1981: 27) characterised it as ‘one of the clearest progressive anti-racist and anti-imperialist statements ever put on vinyl’, while Schalit (2000: 34) remarked it was ‘one of the most politically sophisticated critiques of American imperialism to have surfaced in rock ’n’ roll’. Fletcher (2005: 58) and Cohen (2017: 137) respectively proffered ‘Washington Bullets’ was ‘one of the most informed – and informative – lyrics The Clash ever mustered’ and ‘might be the most informed and informing song on [Sandinista!]’.38 Suggested by Jones, Strummer said of the title: ‘I just look at it as a space on a piece of cardboard that will be [viewed] all over the world … I wanted to put something [out] that means something, and perhaps people will investigate what it is’ (Smash Hits 25 December 1981); ‘I feel what we’re bringing is good news: Nicaraguan people taking their country over for a change instead of the US-supported dictator running it’ (Roadrunner March 1981); and ‘It was certainly not the product of a great depth of research … or deep political thought … it was more an emotional decision … it was about it not being publicised at the time so we thought it was important to call our record Sandinista!’ (CBS New York News 31 August 1982). The desire to inform was based on countering ignorance and giving hope: ‘I go to radio stations and say, “Look, 92% of Americans have no idea where Central America is or what’s happening there,” and they go, “Yes, but tell us about your new hairstyle”’ (Rolling Stone 1 March 1984) and ‘Do you realise President Reagan is out there in Central America, gunning down people, in the name of America, and only eight percent of the population of this country have any idea of what 38 Assirati (2020: 75) merely noted it was ‘the most explicitly political song by a political band’.

109

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

side, or what is going on, out there. And meanwhile you’re shouting freedom and democracy … you’re all shouting you’re scared of communism … the fact is that the rich are too rich and the poor are too poor’ (Quake February 1984). He repeated the same message in Jamming (May 1984). As Chapter 9 indicates, individuals investigated the Sandinistas as a result. However, the next album was only named Combat Rock (by Strummer) late in the day due to the Falklands War. Strummer explained: ‘I’d call this [next] one “El Salvador” but that’s just preaching to the converted’ (Roadrunner February 1982). Contrary to the views of the likes of Jake Burns of Stiff Little Fingers, who stated ‘some of his political ideas [were] somewhat naive … I [am] referring to his terrorist chic’ (UNCUT December 2003), Strummer did not engage in naive terrorist chic by wearing a Brigade Rosse/Red Army Faction T-shirt at the RAR gig or by writing ‘Tommy Gun’.39 Strummer got the T-shirt made because: ‘I didn’t think they were getting the press coverage they deserved. Personally, I think what they’re doing is good because although it’s vicious and they’re murdering people … they go around killing businessman and the people they see as screwing Italy up … what they’re doing is good because it’s a brutal system anyway, and people get murdered by the system every day and no one complains about that’ (RM 1 July 1978). Later, he stated: ‘I support them for this reason … ’cos they are acting … And even though they kill people …. It’s followed like 20 years of negotiating, and people who go out and start shooting people are like, desperate’ (RM 2 December 1978). Strummer also explained he wore the T-shirt to expose those bands playing at being radical but who were phony (RM 9 May 1981, RAI Milan 27 February 1984). Taysom (2020) commented: ‘“Tommy Gun” … took aim at terrorism in true punk fashion’ because the lyrics were a criticism of terrorism in 39 It is forgotten Jones frequently wore a ‘Red Guard’ armband in 1977 – as seen on the first album’s cover – but was not criticised for this though the movement was an armed Maoist youth organisation during the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Popoff (2018: 56) suggested Strummer’s criticism of terrorism in ‘Tommy Gun’ was a response to his alleged glorification of the German and Italian left terrorists.

110

Strummer’s politics

as much as they could elicit hero worship of the few acting on behalf of the many in unaccountable, vanguardist ways: “I’m cutting out your picture from page one/I’m gonna get a jacket just like yours/And give my false support to your cause/Whatever you want, you’re gonna get it”.’ But Strummer was rightly not dismissive of the roots giving rise to terrorism: The bad thing is they go around murdering bodyguards and innocent people but you’ve got to hand it to them for laying their lives on the line for the rest of the human race. They’re doing it for everybody, trying to smash the system that has broken everybody. (MM 15 July 1978)

and: Right now, there’s loads of people out there in their country mansions getting ready to go grouse shooting. And at the same time, there are millions of old-age pensioners who have to wrap themselves in bits of cardboard to keep warm because they’ve got no heating. … And those people in West Germany and Italy, they decided the only way they can fight it is to go out there and start shooting people they consider to be arseholes … I’m impressed with what they’re doing and at the same time I’m totally frightened by it. (MM 25 November 1978)

Strummer somewhat revised his position (Boston Rock June 1981), and accepted the Red Army Faction ‘gives the left a bad name’ (RAI Milan 27 February 1984). Later, he commented: ‘The rebel chic, the Belfast photos, H-Block T-shirts and Baader-Meinhof shirts: they were all my fault’ (NME 26 July 1986) and ‘Terrorist chic? Yeah, that was probably down to me’ (Guitar World December 1999). But this was not anything to do with a Marxist approach of disdain for small group elite actions when compared to the potential for mass movements to secure political change. Nonetheless, Strummer continued to seek to understand the social conditions leading to ‘terrorism’: It’s a dumb move blowing innocent people up – it doesn’t get them anywhere. But I try to understand the feeling behind it. Terrorism only occurs when the people holding power won’t negotiate. After World War II, the super powers divided up the world … and thought they’d solved things, but all they did was create long-running problems. What did they think people were going to do? Suppose we were Palestinian – what would we do? I’ll 111

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer tell you what I’d do – exactly what they’re doing. They can’t get anybody to even sit down at the table, so what else are they going to do? (The Record June 1984).

Cultural contestation There is no evidence Strummer studied the way in which culture can be used to disseminate socialist politics in a Gramscian way or the practice of socialist parties having cultural peripheries around their political activities. Gramsci (1971) theorised combatting ruling class hegemony required a ‘war of position’, where revolutionaries occupy strategic positions within the capitalist system, including its cultural artefacts, to create a ‘counter hegemony’. Thus, culture is a site of struggle for socialism. But if Gramsci was missing,40 Guthrie was not. On top of taking his earlier moniker from Guthrie, Strummer was also aware of Víctor Jara, Phil Ochs, Pete Seeger, Dick Gaughan, Johnny Cash, Joan Baez, Leon Rosselson, Roy Bailey and Ewan MacColl as radical folk-type singers who sought to popularise radical and socialist ideas through music.41 From this, Strummer’s lyrics could be seen to embody some of the characteristics of what folk musicians sought to do in their lyrics (see Street 1986: 155). He knew of Jara from his Chilean exile friends, referencing him in ‘Washington Bullets’, while doing so similarly with Phil Ochs in ‘Up in Heaven’, both on Sandinista!42 However, Jara and Ochs were far more activists than Guthrie, organising rallies and benefit gigs in addition to being musicians and cultural figures, and far more closely aligned with left political parties. Guthrie did not join the Communist Party but was closely associated with the cause of communism (Kaufman 2011). It is possible Strummer chose to be influenced by Guthrie’s stances here (see pp.94–97). 40 Gramsci has not been used to analyse Strummer (e.g. Faulk and Harrison (2014a)), with Cohen and Peacock (2017a: 17, 51) and Coulter (2019a: 133) making only fleeting mention. 41 D’Ambrosio (2012f: 141–143, 145) added to these, Silvio Rodriquez, Caetano Veloso and Mercedes Sosa, following interviewing Strummer in 2002. 42 Strummer selectively used a verse of Ochs from ‘United Fruit [company]’ as the last verse about substandard housing and the drudgery of work.

112

Strummer’s politics

Strummer’s class background Strummer never claimed to be working class, stating: ‘I’m not working class at all’ (MM 23 April 1976). He could not credibly do so given his social class background. But, equally importantly, he never denied his background. This did not stop some from describing him as ‘working class’ (e.g. McKenna 2003, James 2009: 234, Wadlow 2017: 203, 204). At the earliest opportunity, he recounted his family and social background. Although he claimed to have attended a public school in Yorkshire initially (MM 13 November 1976), he was open about his public school attendance in Surrey and why his parents sent him there. They were peripatetic because of his father’s job and the state paid for his schooling as a boarder. Only here did he lie. It was not to deny his father’s occupation but, rather, to exaggerate it. His father was not a diplomat, that is, one conducting diplomacy whether of a high-level nature or not,43 as Strummer initially claimed (MM 26 April 1977), but, rather, a career civil servant in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. His father started as a clerical officer in 1948 and rose to become a – not the – Second Secretary of Information by 1966, receiving an MBE in 1970 (Needs 2005: 11, Salewicz 2006: 55, 61, Gilbert 2009: 12). Salewicz (2006: 37) reported Strummer’s father was initially a decoder of encrypted messages. In Strummer’s own words, his father was ‘in the Foreign Office’ (Letts 2000) and ‘at a very junior level in the Foreign Office’ (Strummer et al. 2008: 16). In response to ‘Did you come from a family where your father was a diplomat?’ he told WNYC (1 March 1984): ‘He wasn’t exactly a diplomat. He was in the Foreign Office’. He told Pulse (March 1984): ‘His father was with the Foreign Office’ and then the LA Times (31 January 1988) his father was merely ‘in the Foreign Office’. Later, Strummer repeatedly corrected his mistruth. In an interview in 2000, he said: ‘When I did my first interview and said my 43 A diplomat is appointed by a state to represents its interests to other states. This may, for example, involve negotiations over treaties. Calling his father a ‘diplomat’ when he was a Foreign Office civil servant is like saying a Home Office civil servant is a mandarin when this term only applies to the most senior civil servants. Gray (2003: 90) characterised a ‘Second Secretary’ as a ‘middling sort of grade’, though he later (2009: 433) quoted Strummer’s father as a ‘Foreign Office diplomat’.

113

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

father was a diplomat, I was over-egging it a bit, but I did it because I was dead proud of what my father had done and I knew he’d love to be described that way … I’m afraid I talked it up a bit much’ (UNCUT February 2003). He also told McKenna (2003): ‘In my first ever interview in Melody Maker, when I was suddenly regarded as “somebody”, I said that my father was a diplomat simply because I wanted to give him his due for one time in his life. … he was basically a low-level worker in the hierarchy of the British embassy.’ But Strummer’s exaggeration haunted him. Those wishing to denigrate his politics, their authenticity and his commitment to them engaged (see Ogg 2014) in a false narrative that to be a left-winger or socialist, the espouser had to be working class (given the belief the working class was exploited and oppressed and would be the beneficiary of these politics) (see Harker 1980: 187). Conversely, if a person came from a middle-class background, their politics had to reflect its class interests and any diversion was viewed as youthful naivety, fakery or opportunism. Neither allowed for individual agency nor for responses to the environment leading to that agency being exercised in counterintuitive, subversive ways. So, without negating the influence of material conditions, class background cannot be taken as the sole determinant of individuals’ political world views. Moreover, humans do not choose their parents and neither do children chose their schooling. Strummer made such an argument along the lines of ‘It’s not where you’re from but where you’re going’: ‘[I]t’s where you’ve been and what you’ve been through’ (Sounds 17 June 1978). That so many criticised Strummer for his father’s alleged occupation and Strummer’s schooling not only indicated a poor understanding of the dialectical interplay of agency and environment but also a distorted orientation to authenticity, a prejudice via inverted snobbery, and a willingness to attack left-wing values. These issues of classism and politics continued when Strummer established his own independent class location, centred around his wealth and property (see Chapter 5). As Strummer stood by the punk mantra of ‘gimme some truth’ (see p.102), the effect of the debacle over his father’s occupation was to undermine perceptions among many of his authenticity, sincerity and truthfulness. 114

Strummer’s politics

Strummer’s father was overwhelmingly, but wrongly, identified as a diplomat.44 Only a few were more accurate such as the NME (10 October 1981) which stated his father worked ‘in the diplomatic service’. Occasionally, he was even promoted beyond this inflated rank. For Bindas (1993: 70), he became a ‘low-ranking English foreign minister’ and for Knowles (2010: 213) ‘a genuine spy with the Foreign Office’. Seldom was this couched in outright condemnation, but the inference was there. The repetition of the mistruth showed journalists and writers did not carry out much research. This is particularly noteworthy when his closest confidants believed Strummer’s father was a diplomat – including his daughter, Jazz (Telegraph 11 August 2012), roadie and drum technician, Baker (2013b), collaborator, Don Letts (2017: viii), Chris Salewicz (2006: 3, 42, 47) and Clash guitarist, Vince White (Richards 2010). More concerning is that followers and studiers repeated the falsehood. Among these are former music journalist, Gary Bushell (Robb 2006: 470); music journalists, Jon Savage (2001: 112), Steven Wells (2004), Alexis Petridis (Guardian 10 May 2007), John Aizlewood (ARTE 2010), Paolo Hewitt (2011: 183), Tommy Tompkins (2012), Lisa Robinson (2013: 198) and Martin Popoff (2018: 95); political supporters (D’Ambrosio 2012j: 322, Socialist Review May 2007, July/August 2007, Fancy 2016), and followers (Beesley in Beesley and Davie 2019: 14, Bertsch 2012: 121, Broe, 2012: 96, Fletcher 2002). The academics include Harrison (2002: 33,34), Matula (2003: 524), Nehring (2007: 8), Barsanti (2014: 166), Cogan (2014: 32, 43, 44 The following were randomly selected: Village Voice (9 January 1978), Burchill and Parsons (1978: 44), New York Rocker (April/May 1978), Rolling Stone (8 March 1979), Mother Jones (April 1982), Fort Worth Star Telegram (29 January 1984), Boston Globe (12 April 1984), Time Out (11 July 2001), BBC News Online (23 December 2002), MTV (23 December 2002), Telegraph (24 December 2002), NME (11 January 2003, 11 August 2012), Variety (6 January 2003), Green Left Weekly  (15 January 2003), Knowles (2003: 19), Musician (June 2003), Sunday Herald (14 December 2003), Fletcher (2005: 5), Parkinson (2005), The Word (October 2006), The List (24 May 2007), LA Times (30 June 2007), Monthly Review (28 September 2007), Guardian (14 November 2007), Chicago Tribune (9 November 2007), Independent (20 May 2012), Scotland on Sunday (16 December 2012), NPR (20 December 2012), Independent (1 October 2018), Rock&Roll Globe (1 October 2018) and the Belfast Telegraph (6 October 2018). As a consequence, it is no surprise Vampire Weekend wrote a song called, ‘Diplomat’s Son’ (2010), with the lines: ‘He was a diplomat’s son/It was ’81’.

115

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

45), Doane (2014: 37), Faulk and Harrison (2014b: 1), Raha (2014: 111), Vayo (2017: 65), Salvo (2017: 226), Peacock (2017: 247) and Coulter (2018: 538). Gray (2003: 82, 84, 90), Parker (2013) and Worley (2014: 89,91) were among the few to be accurate using the terms: ‘clerical officer’ and ‘Second Secretary’, ‘an administrator in the British Foreign Office’, and ‘foreign office employee’ and ‘foreign office official’ respectively. Others were Morning Call (20 April 1984): ‘worked in the Foreign Office’; Grunebaum (2001): ‘British Foreign Office employee’; Martin (2002): ‘Foreign office employee’; Binette (2003: 12, 2007a): ‘middle-ranking foreign office civil servant’; Topping (2004: 18): ‘middle-ranking civil servant’; Lynskey (2010: 341): ‘Foreign Office civil servant’; Coulter (2019c: 70-71): ‘a career civil servant in the Foreign Office’; Harden (2013: 219): ‘clerical officer in the British Foreign Office’; Egan (2015: 59): ‘man in the Foreign Office’; O’Shea (2015: 56): ‘clerical officer with the British Foreign Office’; and Jucha (2016: 336’): ‘a Foreign Office clerical officer’. This was far more accurate than even Heylin’s (2007: 61) ‘low-level diplomat’. Just as worryingly, Coulter (2019c: 82), Needs (2005: 10), Gilbert (2009: 5,8), Quantick (2000: 83) and Salewicz (2006: 3, 42, 47) still called Strummer’s father a diplomat even though they (Coulter 2019c: 71, Needs 2005: 11, Gilbert 2009: 6, 267, Quantick 2000: 5, Salewicz 2006: 300) earlier recognised he was in the case of Coulter, Needs and Salewicz, ‘Second Secretary of Information’ or by Gilbert and Quantick: ‘a clerical officer in the Foreign Office’ and ‘clerk in the diplomatic service’. Jones and Simonon Jones and Simonon were not apolitical (cf. Gilbert 2009: 121 on Simonon) but politics was not central to their being as it was for Strummer. Neither saw the need to make their personal politics particularly public nor to use the platform given to them to prosecute these. Being ‘much less committed politically’ (Wadlow 2017: 214) and though contradicting his Sniffin’ Glue (October 1976) statement of ‘Yes, we’re definitely political!’, Jones downplayed the political nature of The Clash, stating: ‘We don’t consider any of it a political statement. We just consider it statements of 116

Strummer’s politics

… life through our eyes’ (NME 3 September 1977); ‘I wouldn’t consider it political rock. It’s just contemporary rock ’n’ roll with contemporary lyrics. I wouldn’t say it was overtly political’ (New York Rocker April/May 1978) and ‘The Clash have been pigeonholed – everybody’s favourite political band on the scene at the moment. We are sick to death of hearing all this kinda crap shoved at us. We are not Top of the political Pops’ (RM 23 July 1977). In other words, he saw the limits to political pronouncements being social commentary in lyrics. In the Radio Times (9 March 1978) previewing Something Else (BBC 2 11 March 1978), Jones stressed his anti-politics politics, condemning the mainstream parties and the far left and far right, commenting: ‘We’re just making statements about things that happen around us.’ Such statements were repeated (Daily Sun News 24 May 1981, MM 6 June 1981, Mother Jones April 1982, NME 15 February 1986, Needs 2005: 100, iJamming May 2005, BBC 4 2012). An RAI Milan (June 1980) television interview was revealing for, although Strummer was the main interviewee, Jones interjected: ‘[The Clash] shouldn’t be considered as left- or right-wing, but rather as … pro-working class … with their lyrics based on “social” not “social-ist” politics’ (Bottà and Quercetti 2019: 214).45 Subsequent to The Clash, Big Audio Dynamite’s more political lyrics were written by Strummer or Don Letts46 while Jones was involved in ‘Justice Tonight’ benefit gigs for the ‘Hillsborough 96’ and Bragg’s ‘Jail Guitar Doors’ initiative along with often playing one-off benefit gigs. O’Shea (2015: 186) concluded Jones had ‘always been more chaise longue than Che Guevara’. In similar ways, Simonon was more interested in politics being about morality (NME 15 July 1978) and personal and not party politics (see Rolling Stone 17 April 1980, GQ October 2003, UNCUT October 2013). Echoing what he said to Rolling Stone (17 April 1980), he told Musician, Player & Listener (June 1981): ‘We’re neither right nor left … Our music is about politics, sure, but it’s spelled with a small “p”’, where providing information to those that would otherwise 45 Quercetti confirmed Jones authored these quotes (personal correspondence, 1 December 2020). 46 While Carbon/Silicon lyrics were often not apolitical, it was not clear whether Jones or Tony James wrote them, or which ones.

117

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

remain ignorant of it was critical (MM 13 November 1976). Simonon was involved in Greenpeace activism (Guardian 16 November 2011, 5 October 2013) and played a number of Love Music Hate Racism gigs (as did Jones). Strummer initially could be said to have been similar to Jones and Simonon in his outlook: ‘I think about who’s doing what and what I’m going to do about it – that’s what I call politics’ (MM 26 April 1977), but he moved speedily and far from this limited perspective while Jones and Simonon did not. How political was The Clash? There were many occasions when Strummer, as chief lyricist, leader singer and spokesperson, engaged in self-denying ordinances to protest that The Clash were primarily musicians, and not particularly political. For example, in 1977, he stated: ‘We aren’t political … We don’t have any politics’ (Search & Destroy May 1977) and ‘People say our songs are political now because we deal in things that affect daily life, but I ain’t got no major plan to change the world’ (Sunday Times 17 July 1977). Sometimes this was a defence mechanism. Sometimes it depended on the definition of politics. In Sounds (17 June 1978), Strummer stated the political de-emphasis was: a defence thing. I’m prepared to talk about it more realistically now … about us being a political group. … We never thought of what we were doing as political. What all those politicians are up to is what we thought politics was. And when people say we were political, that was what we though they meant. And we didn’t want anything to do with those bastard boring cunts … We just thought politics was like the Socialist Workers Party and the Communist Party. And the people you meet from those organisations … are just deadly boring, really just deadly fucking boring.

In 1981, he stated: ‘First and foremost what people don’t understand about us is that we’re into music and play music. And that’s number one. We do all those other things after that fact. We don’t play music in order to do those things (NYC TV interview March 1982). The same year, he told Rolling Stone (19 August 1982): ‘It’s music first and political thought next. We wouldn’t be here if we didn’t like to play those guitars. Obviously, we 118

Strummer’s politics

have a political bent, but the sound of music infects us. Then, when we’re playing guitars, we’ve got to know what to say, and so we try to make good use of our space.’ And in various interviews, like Toronto’s CITY TV’s New Music (26 September 1979) or the Tomorrow Show (5 June 1981), he avoided answering questions posed about The Clash’s political nature and its message. Grudgingly, he admitted in 1981: ‘We’re political in the sense that our words don’t deal with love all the time but if you think we read Socialist Worker you must be out of your mind’ (Tobler and Miles 1983: 68). But then he remarked in 1982: ‘It’s all too easy to say “No, [music] doesn’t change anything – let’s go to the bar” which is probably what I have been saying to make it easier’ (NZBC 8 February 1982). Many other such self-denying comments were made (MM 11 March 1978, 15 July 1978, RM 2 December 1978, 1979 US PM magazine television programme, US radio interview late 1983, Creem October 1984). After saying of ‘White Riot’: ‘The only thing we’re saying about the blacks is that they’ve got their problems and they’re prepared to deal with them. But white men, they just ain’t prepared to deal with them’ (NME 11 December 1976) and giving the same type of explanation in Letts (2000), on one occasion, when asked if ‘White Riot’ was not political in the way he had spoken about elsewhere, he responded: ‘No, it fuckin ain’t’, before giving a matter-of-fact account of the Notting Hill Carnival events that day, concluding ‘That’s all there is to it’ (The Leveller July/August 1977). He also denied that ‘Clampdown’ was similarly political. Echoing what he had written earlier (Green and Barker 2003: 176), Johnny Green said Strummer told him the lyrics were about ‘car parking regulations’ and parking clamps (BBC Radio 6 13 October 2019), even though Strummer told D’Ambrosio (2003): ‘[T]his song [Clampdown] and our overall message was to wake up, pay attention to what really is going on around you, politically, socially all of it … before you know it you have become what you despise.’ Asked after its demise, ‘Was The Clash as political as people made it out?’, Strummer responded: Probably not. I always tried to stress that in the later interviews. I didn’t want to pretend to be somebody I wasn’t. I kept saying, ‘Hey you know, 119

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer we’re drug addict musicians.’ That’s what I used to say to journalists – ‘Hang on, don’t get the wrong idea that were carrying around ‘Das Kapital’ and loads of pamphlets’ … I often felt that all got a bit unbalanced. I kept trying to stress that – ‘Hang on, we’re be-bop guys … We’re not in there with John Reed and ‘Ten Days That Shook the World’ … I often felt worried that people thought we were Che Guevara. (LA Times 31 January 1988)

Strummer’s responses reflected buckling under constant media questioning over whether he had the answers to questions like ‘Can music change the world?’ (see p.13) and contrasted markedly with his ‘rebel rock’ phase statements where the point was the politics (see p.126). Strummer often felt his fingers got burnt with his political pronouncements, resulting from criticism for alleged naivety, immaturity and posturing as well as the weight of expectations and responsibilities. Added to this was his revulsion against formal politics. Strummer remarked: ‘[W]e have worked ourselves into a corner and for a while we couldn’t move’ (MM 11 March 1978) and ‘We always go on the defensive when confronted with this political stuff. We see it as a trap, a hole to get shut up in’ (NME 25 February 1978). He told Denselow (1989: 147): ‘I’m getting really worried … I just happened to say I supported what [the Baader-Meinhof gang] were doing, and people took me to task for it. It’s made me think twice’ and ‘People call us a politics group but we don’t know anything about it. How can we? We’re a load of idiots. People say we’re naive, but what do they expect? At least we’re trying to say something about something. It may be a mistake, but it’s too late to stop now.’ Following his complaint that: ‘Everything we do is scrutinised’ (Rolling Stone 8 March 1979), in 2002, he commented: ‘The media scrutiny was intense … it took the steam out of us and made us at times somewhat reluctant to speak out’ (D’Ambrosio 2012e: 131).

Conclusion This chapter has established Strummer saw himself as a socialist for most of the period The Clash existed, amounting to nearly all of the most important period of his life, and he used the platform the group gave 120

Strummer’s politics

him to expound on his socialist politics. This did not mean his socialist world view was entirely comprehensive, consistent or coherent. But it was thought out and developed enough to provide the basis for assessing his influence using socialist realism. To reiterate, this does not mean or require that Strummer saw himself as a socialist realist (see pp.15–19). Strummer was not a revolutionary socialist or Marxist as defined by Draper’s ‘socialism from below’. Instead, he was more of a reformist socialist, combining elements of Maoism and social democracy with aversion to political parties, thereby giving his socialist belief anarchist and libertarian tinges. A flavour of this can be taken from his statement about The Clash: ‘Our strength is to challenge the accepted order of things’, both inside and outside of the music business (BBC Radio 1 5 July 1982). Spurred on by sacking Jones due to Jones’s popstar lifestyle, increasing aversion to rock ’n’ roll and little regard for making political pronouncement via music, Strummer set out on a clear course of self-styled ‘rebel rock’. As the next chapter shows with Strummer, music as politics, often as socialistorientated politics, became much more pronounced.

121

4

Rebel rock and its ramifications

Here we are in the capital of the decadent US of A. This here set of music is now dedicated to making sure that those people in the crowd who have children there is something left for them later in the centuries. … I know the human race is supposed to get down on its hands and knees in front of all this new technology and kiss the microchip circus. But it don’t impress me over much – there ain’t nothing but ‘You buy. You-make-you-buy-you-die’. That’s the motto of America – you get born to buy it. And these people out in East LA – they aren’t going to stay there forever. And if there’s anything going to be in the future, it’s gonna be from all parts of everything – not just one white way down the middle of the road.

Under banners proclaiming ‘Sex Style Subversion’ (but not socialism) and ‘Clash Not For Sale’, this was how Strummer greeted the 150,000 attendees at the three-day Unite Us in Song (Us) festival in California on 28 May 1983. Organised and financed by Apple oligarch Steve Wozniak, it was the largest live audience The Clash ever played to. Headlining the first day, The Clash was paid $500,000 for performing for an hour and a quarter, coming on two hours late after a dispute about increased ticket prices (from $17 to $25) led to negotiations to force Wozniak to donate $100,000 to a project for deprived children in Los Angeles. Eventually, the sum of $32,000 was agreed (The Record June 1984). Strummer was angry and agitated. This can be taken to mark the beginning of Strummer’s self-proclaimed ‘rebel rock’ period for The Clash and it would last until the band’s disintegration in late 1985/early 1986. It was Jones’s last Clash gig, paving the 122

Rebel rock and its ramifications

way for Strummer’s total dominance, save Rhodes’s influence. Announcing the return of the revamped Clash line-up to Britain, Strummer stated: ‘We’ll smash down the number one groups and show that rebel rock can be number one’ (NME 25 February 1984). ‘Rebel rock’ was the most politicised period of The Clash because, over and above his lyrics of new and old songs, Strummer took the opportunity in these years to hector and harangue on what he saw as the necessary and critical political purpose of the band. Doubts he harboured about the wisdom of being explicitly political or doing more than merely asking questions were more often than not downplayed. Marcus (1993: 305) was wrong, therefore, to say: ‘He wasn’t saying anything terribly different from what he … had said in 1976 and [19]77.’ The move to ‘rebel rock’ was spurred on by Jones’s acrimonious sacking by Strummer and Simonon in September 1983 over irreconcilable differences arising from disputes over musical styles, lifestyles, commercial success and the place of politics.1 The Clash was now much heavier and louder, aided by two lead guitarists, Nick Sheppard and Vince White. But it was also spurred on by the re-election of the Thatcher government in 1983, Reagan’s re-election as president in 1984 and the dominance of ‘saccharine pop’. This chapter examines not just hitherto unconsidered aspects of this period but also a number of other facets such as Strummer’s views on women, his propensity for violence and his support for environmentalism. The rationale for examining these issues here is the Us festival monologue – its opening gambit and continuation throughout the set – provided one of the most wide-ranging spoken manifestos Strummer would ever make. Us festival The significance of the Us festival monologue was its breadth, containing messages of anti-consumerism, anti-militarism and anti-racism, among 1 However, it was still somewhat disingenuous to then state, as Strummer and Simonon did, that Jones had ‘drifted away from the original idea of The Clash … allow[ing Strummer and Simonon] to get on with the job The Clash set out to do from the beginning’ (NME 10 September 1983). All had matured and developed over the previous seven years.

123

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

others. Potentially, many were synonymous with others, especially anticonsumerism with anti-capitalism. But it was also possible they were not (see pp.106–107). Tellingly at the end, Strummer suggested while he could flag up the questions, neither he nor others had the answers to those questions. Indeed, less than a year later, he said: ‘I have no answers’ (The Tennessean 27 March 1984) despite calling himself a socialist. After the festival, Strummer frequently explained the reasons behind seeking to ‘spoil the party’: wanting to challenge The Rolling Stones and The Who by delivering rebel rock as a political challenge to the establishment; exposing the fallacy behind trying to relive the hippy ideal of Woodstock when commercialism was rampant and drug use allowed Reagan to remain unchallenged; and attacking growing inequality (KNAC radio 24 January 1984, Quake February 1984, WNYC 1 March 1984, Toronto tour bus interview April 1984, Toronto’s Globe and Mail 28 April 1984, The Record June 1984, Creem October 1984). He was not ‘deranged’ as Jucha (2016: 369) alleged. 1984: Brave new world US audiences were subjected to a sustained barrage of ‘rebel rock’ first as The Clash toured across the country in early 1984, with Strummer continuing his diatribes against war, imperialism, militarism, racism and what became known as neoliberalism (then called monetarism and privatisation). This was on the basis of arguing: We’re a group with a message … trying to do something out of the ordinary … trying to say to people … you’ve all been had … we’re brought up to be obedient and punctual … we’ve all been had by an industrial society … our message is important, that’s why The Clash is important … we’re trying to make some difference here … I’m sick of people saying ‘Do you really think your music can change the world?’ Of course, it can’t … but it could be a chink in the blind … if we didn’t take everything that is given to us so willingly there could be some hope … The idea of The Clash is that music can deal with anything … because popular music is the art form that everyone is plugged into. (1983 US radio interview)

At gigs, he introduced songs with greater commentary and extemporised more within them. In San Francisco (21 January 1984) he introduced the 124

Rebel rock and its ramifications

new song, ‘Dictator’, with ‘Ronald Reagan’s favourite hobby is smashing Central America to fuck’. Such monologues led Beano (March 1984) to observe Strummer provided ‘on stage rants’ in San Francisco. Meanwhile, in Atlanta (3 April 1984), he stated: ‘They just had a survey asking American teenagers how frightened they are of nuclear war. 53% said frightened. 47% I suppose weren’t or didn’t know about it. Well, we have a song called “Are you ready for war?”.’ Other new songs like ‘Sex Mad War’ were similarly introduced: ‘Something for the ladies in the house tonight. This is calling special attention to the men [because] … women can’t go to the corner in the dark, go to the park, ride the subway, go to the shops … why the fuck shouldn’t they … coupled with the fact … pornography is rape’ (Seattle 30 May 1984) (see also pp.135–136) while older standards like ‘Spanish Bombs’ were announced with ‘somebody went to Spain in 1936 and fought the Spanish war of liberation against Hitler and Franco’. On radio and television and in print, he continued to press his case. Consequently, he told US TV in early 1984: There is no time for a vacation … Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher – their fingers are like that over the button … it’s time to have responsibility … use your vote, you count, you’re a person … Reagan likes hippies and drug takers because they let him get on with his job and his job is trying to press the nuclear button … he wants the Fourth of July from here to Timbuktu … when we’re all about to be microwaved and the flesh about to be flayed off our faces by a firestorm.

and KNAC radio (24 January 1984): I can remember when I was at school reading about the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement and all the marches on the streets of Chicago in 1968. I know people don’t remember that any more. It’s all got lost in a haze of marijuana fog. All we are trying to say is music [then] was directly tied to that feeling [so] let’s get the music back on its feet [to that] … I’m only urging the world to [create] … the structures that care for other people like the poor, sick and mentally ill … The capitalists … are so busy winding us up to support armies and nuclear bombs and weapons. All the money going is going on that stuff and it’s being wasted … why defend a country if there’s nothing worth defending? 125

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

He also stated: ‘Music can help people become aware of that brutality in our society. … I see The Clash as continuing what it’s always been – an experiment of a kind, that’s never succeeded – in making rebel music for a mass audience. The point is to make people feel they can make a difference’ (Toronto’s Globe and Mail 28 April 1984). Strummer put it more succinctly: ‘We want Reagan and Thatcher out. We want a change in the system. We’re not saying we have the answer though, not at all’ (Andersen and Heibutzski 2018: 293). And, to Rolling Stone (1 March 1984): ‘Truth is illegal. I sit there looking at the Declaration of Independence … You get rid of the lousy British … and you said, “We are the land of the free” … in 200 years, you’ve turned it around. If anyone shows any individuality whatsoever, he’s fired. And this is the place that was going to be the land of the individuals. [Your] government … [is] smashing around the world … crunching people’s hopes, condemning them to starvation and ignorance, still waving the banner that says DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM, when back home, truth is illegal.’ Indeed, Strummer would often say: ‘We have a saying, ‘He who dares wins’, but we changed it to ‘He who dares gets fired’ (RAI Milan TV 27 February 1984). The significance of this for The Clash was demonstrated in a television interview in February 1984 in Norway. Asked ‘What’s most important to you? To be rebels or to be rock musicians?’, Strummer responded: Music isn’t the point. … We see The Clash as … hav[ing] a mission … we have to bring rebel rock … to [make it] bigger than music that has no meaning such as heavy metal or makeup music … rock ’n’ roll is the only medium that young people are looking at or listening to or tuned into so how can it be abandoned to meaningless things? … Music is not the point … what matters is how much spirit you put into it, how much intelligence you put into it, does it have any meaning, will it communicate to other people … all we’re doing is trying to communicate something … it’s not about the music.

Then in response to the question about whether the band is trying to communicate ‘revolution’, Strummer retorted: ‘No, no, no, all we are trying to communicate is … you’ve been brainwashed since the day you were born [and] you’ve got to do a lot of work to do any of your own 126

Rebel rock and its ramifications

Figure 4.1  The Clash interviewed for Norwegian TV in 1984

thinking … we’re trying to communicate that destiny is within our hands [and that] independence of any outside agency is what counts.’ And yet, he still maintained: ‘We’re a rock ’n’ roll band with a message … rather than the other way around’ (RAI Milan 27 February 1984) and ‘I’m a rock ’n’ roller who says political things not a politician using music’ (The Tennessean 27 March 1984). And, the mantra of ‘rebel rock’ made one of the songs, ‘Movers and Shakers’, on Cut The Crap (1985) unusual because it extolled the poor working hard just to survive in an almost Thatcherite way: ‘He shines glass and he cleans chrome/He’ll accept what he gets thrown/This man earns ’cos it’s understood/Times are bad and he’s makin’ good/Down on him but he’s got it beat/He’s working coin from the cold concrete’,2 and it sat alongside ‘North and South’: ‘The South is up/But the 2 This was picked on by Fletcher (2005: 75), Needs (2005: 253) and UNCUT (August 2017). Lines such as ‘So don’t complain about your useless employment/Jack it in forever tonight/ Or shut your mouth and pretend you enjoy it/Think of all the money you’ve got’ from ‘Clash City Rockers’ (1978) also indicate an unusual perspective compared to Strummer’s other lyrics about work.

127

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

North is down/…/Trying to feed that child/Without a coin in their hand/ And so we say/Have you no use/For eight million hands/And the power of youth?’ Busking tour For two weeks in May 1985, The Clash played forty-four free gigs touring northern England and Scotland. It was a further means to get back to its roots and to take the temperature of the political situation in Britain, representing a ratcheting up of ‘rebel rock’ in a manner dedicated to the part that was not ‘on the up’. Strummer extolled rebel rock in terms of ‘We are fighting against Thatcherism in music’ (York Press 10 May 1985) by which he meant the forces of greed, profit, consumption and consumerism within the music industry. But then he went one considerable step further in what he called ‘the second phase of The Clash’: [We want] to have a clear political direction. We want to work with a party, an organisation … [we want to] check out all the left-wing organisations … We want to try to change things instead of just moaning about them. I’m looking for something really different – something that is going to transform the state of the country. England needs a revolution – it’s not had one since Cromwell [in the 1640s] and in ten years that could be a possibility. That is what my music is trying to reach for. But it never focused it – it was always pointing … I am getting redder by the day – there is only once chance left to us and that is that [if] Thatcher is going to ‘die’ then we are going to live. (York Press 10 May 1985)

The same day on BBC Radio York (9 May 1985), he proffered: ‘We want to know if rock ’n’ roll means anything and this is an attempt to find out if it still does … We’re gonna have to have an English revolution in about ten years. I think it’s possible and I would like to be involved … We’re not being really preachy … I like rock ’n’ roll – to hell with the lyrics but if they come in handy, if they are topical and mean something to real life, then that’s extra.’ As Strummer dismissed Labour as one of

128

Rebel rock and its ramifications

the parties or organisations to be considered (York Press 10 May 1985), he would have to look further to the left. However, it was not to be the SWP as White (2007: 232–233) recounted of the conversation between Strummer and SWP members in Sunderland the next day. Nothing came of Strummer’s epiphany and he reaffirmed his long-standing hostility to joining or associating with political parties (see pp.94–97). Nonetheless, in Edinburgh, the Wester Hailes Sentinel (May 1985, reprinted in Sounds 8 June 1985) noted The Clash had ‘strong socialist principles’ with Strummer saying: ‘As a group with flash appeal, we can use our privilege to get the message over: “Tell the people to rise up” … You saw the spirit of the crowd tonight … They have the potential and energy to change the system. We want Thatcher and Reagan out, a change in the system. We don’t have the answer, not at all. That’s why we’re doing this tour, to talk to people and maybe find the way to create change. … by pulling together they can achieve something – improve their situation.’ However, on the issue of system change, Strummer was rather less certain of it two years later (Sounds 6 August 1988). Lone rebel rocker For a musician who liked being part of a collective, Strummer was often a lone voice with few able allies in terms of other musicians and artists and saw himself as such. Already in 1978, he had stated: ‘I only feel I’ve got responsibility to myself to say these [political] things, not to anybody else. … This is what I’m about, and I’m in The Clash, so, of course, that’s what The Clash is about’ (MM 15 July 1978). In early 1984, he stated: ‘There’s no one there to take the weight … I’ve called it upon myself … no one is twisting my arm’ (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029); ‘I aim to outwork all those people … The Clash were elected to do a job’ (NME 25 February 1984); ‘I’ve been elected. I seriously believe I’ve been elected to say the truth and stamp out all the bull’ (Rolling Stone 1 March 1984); and in 1985: ‘I’ve been elected to do a job’ (White 2007: 232). Consequently, this was one of the major reasons why he never sought

129

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

to form something like ‘Rock against Thatcherism’ 3 to emulate RAR’s success. His and The Clash’s involvement with RAR was just one gig while he showed no interest in either ‘Music for Socialism’ (MFS) (Piekut 2019) which was formed by Henry Cow members in 1977 and organised a Socialist Festival of Music, or in ‘Rock in Opposition’ which was another short-lived international collective of progressive groups formed in 1978, also initiated by Henry Cow members, in opposition to the conventional music industry (Cutler 1985: 157–160). It is likely Strummer would not have countenanced involvement because the musicians were largely folk, associated with the Communist Party, and were not prepared to sign to major labels. But even The Clash was seen as a lone body. Strummer told Rolling Stone (8 March 1979): ‘We’re trying to do something new; we’re trying to be the greatest group in the world, and that also means the biggest. At the same time, we’re trying to be radical … and maybe the two can’t coexist, but we’ll try.’ He repeated this ambition again in 1984: ‘We decided we were going to be bigger than anyone else but still keep our message’ (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029) and ‘Our intention – right from the outset – was to be as big as we could. We wanted to remain radical, but to take on the heavyweights – The Rolling Stones and The Who or whomever – and beat them at their own game’ (Toronto’s Globe and Mail 28 April 1984). According to Strummer, no other bands could do what The Clash could under his leadership. He was dismissive of U2, Big Country, and The Alarm, saying they were ‘the acceptable face of The Clash … I feel we have to come back to say “well, you’ve had the imitator, now here’s the originator” (Beano March 1984) and they were impostors: ‘None of these groups have backed us up. They like to have the glory 3 ‘Rock against Thatcher’ did briefly exist in 1981 (UNCUT April 2013) as did ‘Rock Against Reagan’ and ‘Rock Against Bush’ in the US and ‘Rock Against Howard’ in Australia. There was also a ‘Rock Against the Poll Tax’. Strummer showed no interest in them. Of these, ‘Rock Against Reagan’ was the most substantial. Formed by the Youth International Party (‘Yippies’), which was founded in 1967 as part of the radical counterculture, it took its inspiration from the US RAR version which the Yippies established in 1979 and involved The Dead Kennedys and Millions of Dead Cops playing where there were also voter registration stalls, information and speakers.

130

Rebel rock and its ramifications

of being the new Clash … but they won’t take the hardship that goes with it’ (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029). The Alarm, according to Strummer, was an ‘imitation of a shadow of The Clash’ (NME 25 February 1984). More long-standing bands like The Mekons, Pop Group and Gang of Four or The Three Johns made no difference for Strummer. It would seem this was due to being a combination of being ‘post-punk’ and rather more ‘art school’, in contrast to his more muscular rock and seemingly more direct lyricism. Billy Bragg, The Redskins and Easterhouse were the obvious exceptions with their explicit left-wing lyrics. While Bragg and The Redskins opened for The Clash, Strummer was not prepared to be part of Bragg’s major political initiative, Red Wedge, nor engage with the SWP. Something similar may be said of Easterhouse and its relationship to the RCP. Partly this may result from Bragg as a solo artist being a relatively late starter, in 1983, and The Redskins and Easterhouse only forming in 1982 and 1983 respectively. Neither Bragg,4 The Redskins nor Easterhouse became major international acts by the time of ‘rebel rock’.5 In 1986, Chris Dean, of The Redskins, partially recognised this tendency: ‘The Clash sincerely believed that they’d do so much on their own’ (Bloodred summer 1995). The only other potential ally of any stature and longevity was Paul Weller in regard to his social realist lyrics for The Jam and the more overtly political content of the Style Council,6 as well as playing benefit 4 Tranmer (2008) surveyed Bragg’s breadth of activism as a musician, writer and commentator on patriotism and constitution. Subsequent to this study, Bragg engaged in anti-fascist, pro-environmentalist and pro-prisoner initiatives (see McLeod 2013). 5 The Redskins folded in 1986 and Easterhouse by 1990. 6 From Our Favourite Shop (1985) ‘Walls Come Tumbling Down!’ and ‘The Lodgers’. In the former, Weller sings: ‘They take the profits, you take the blame’ and in the latter ‘No peace for the wicked – only war on the poor/They’re batting on pickets – trying to even the score/…/Oh an equal chance and an equal say/But equally there’s no equal pay’. By contrast, The Style Council’s previous album, My Ever Changing Moods (1984) had far fewer political songs given that four of the thirteen tracks were instrumentals. The two most overtly political songs were ‘The Whole Point of No Return’ and ‘Gospel’. However, with its call for a general strike, ‘Transglobal Express’, from The Jam’s The Gift (1982), indicated Weller had written equally radical lyrics before.

131

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

gigs and doing other fundraising for various progressive causes (see pp.178–179).7 Recalling Weller’s statement in 1977: ‘We’ll all be voting Conservative at the next election’ (Sniffin’ Glue May 1977) and then citing The Jam as an example of ‘Tory Rock’ (MM 13 December 1980), Strummer said of him in 1987: ‘My admiration goes out to P. Weller for turning left. It shows that progress is possible’ (Denselow 1989: 149). But before that The Clash sent him a telegram saying: ‘Maggie will be proud of you. See you in South Africa for gun practice’ (Heylin 2007: 247) and Weller disappointed Strummer lyrically (Sounds 17 July 1982). Strummer also said: ‘I don’t think much of what The Style Council is doing is worth tuppence’ (BAM 10 February 1984) and in a 1988 Rapido interview, Strummer stated: ‘We’ve had nine years of Margaret Thatcher and now is the time we need somebody to say something sensible about something because we’re not getting it from the pop charts that we have in Britain …. the message must be about people that can’t feed themselves or taking care of people who can’t defend themselves.’ Although not directed specifically at Weller, the comment did include Weller and The Style Council, in spite of Our Favourite Shop. Earlier, Strummer made withering criticisms of Weller and The Jam in ‘Garageland’ and ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’. It did not help that Weller’s most overtly political Style Council songs were rather whimsical and Jones’s whimsy was what Strummer had rejected in Sandinista! and Combat Rock. Neither would Weller helping Bragg form Red Wedge in late 1985. This was all despite Strummer’s influence on Weller. At various points, Weller said: ‘Around ’76 Joe Strummer told me that people have gotta start writing about more important issues. That made an impression’ (Trouser Press June 1981) and ‘I was really influenced by a lot of things Joe Strummer said’ (Rachel 2017: 21). Only on one occasion did Weller respond in equally critical terms, accusing The Clash in 1981 of selling out (Salewicz 2006: 316). 7 Weller is a much more deserving comparator than Elvis Costello, Jerry Dammers or Tom Robinson because their political engagement was less wide-ranging, for a shorter duration and less impactful.

132

Rebel rock and its ramifications

Women and gender Strummer had a masculine persona, with a male entourage (Salewicz 2006: 266–267, 298, Davie 2004, Ogg 2014: 73). For some, as part of and alongside The Clash, this shaded into machismo and sexism (Coon 2019: 63). Coon (2019: 63, 64) spoke of ‘The Clash’s outward-facing sexism’ and showed it had an internalised aspect too. Jucha (2016: 213) believed Strummer could not accept Coon as a woman manager. Laing (2015: 137) observed: ‘The Clash maintained a certain radical machismo in each shift of style.’ However, others like Phillips (2012) detected evidence of feminism and support for women’s rights by virtue of supporting women musicians. Nonetheless, Raha (2014: 110,118,119) argued while Strummer embraced other social and political liberation movements, he neglected feminism, amounting to a ‘glaring omission’, and Prévot and Sinclair (2017: 87) noted The Clash’s ‘lack of engagement with women’s issues’ despite countless opportunities to do so, including union struggles by women workers. Although Strummer’s attitudes and behaviour towards women were not ignored in many of the studies of him, the full scope of these attitudes and behaviour has not been brought together before now. If a defence of Strummer is to be mounted, the starting point concerns fellow musicians as so much is often made of the number of times The Clash chose the all-women Slits, to open for them as an indication of the progressive attitude towards women held by Strummer (and other band members) (Raha 2014: 112, 113). Raha (2014: 112) stated Strummer had a ‘long history of supporting and promoting female musicians’. The Slits opened for The Clash some seventy times between 1977 and 1981. Sometimes, it is also mentioned that Strummer taught Ariana Foster (Ari Up) and Viv Albertine to play the guitar (Raha 2014: 113) or that for a short time a woman, Caroline Coon, managed The Clash after Rhodes was sacked. It was not just The Slits opening for The Clash that provides, for some, evidence of Strummer’s feminist persuasion here for other all-women bands also did so such as The Belle Stars, Lous, Modettes, Sirens and two groups that were all-women bar one male – ESG and The Innocents. 133

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

If having all-women bands open for The Clash is to be considered evidence of Strummer’s support for women’s rights, several issues need considering. First, it is not clear what Strummer’s part in having these bands open for The Clash was. He clearly was not against having them open, but that does not mean he took the initiative. Only in the case of two bands, The Bloods and Bush Tetras for the Bond’s residency, is there any evidence he did so (Raha 2014: 115). Second, with The Slits, there are issues to do with Strummer and Jones for some of the time being in relationships with Palmolive (Paloma McLardy) and Viv Albertine, respectively, and how this may have impacted on the willingness to have The Slits open so many times for The Clash. Third, The Slits themselves were not keen to talk about issues of women’s liberation, instead preferring to let their music speak for itself and to mix only with like-minded people (Coon 1982: 106, 107). Consequently, it was not as though The Slits were an openly feminist band, using The Clash’s platform to advance feminist politics. Moreover, supporting women musicians in this way does not represent the most exacting criteria, so other evidence for Strummer being a supporter of women’s rights needs to be found. Though Raha (2014: 118) mentioned Strummer’s (and The Clash’s) ‘active personal support of feminism [but which] was not publicly acknowledged’, she did not examine his lyrics, public statements or actions. Neither The Clash nor Strummer played benefit gigs for Rock Against Sexism (established in 1978 out of RAR), the National Abortion Campaign (as X-Ray Spex did) or victims of domestic abuse (charities, campaigns etc) or go on Reclaim the Night marches and the like. In terms of lyrics, Eriksen (1981: 29) argued Clash lyrics, of which Strummer was the principal author, were ‘non-sexist’ rather than ‘anti-sexist’, so, limiting their potency for progressive political change. Lester Bangs (NME 17 December 1977) called the band ‘not sexist’. Reynolds and Press (1995: 67, 68) formed a similar view: ‘Along with their desperate search for heroic role models, The Clash’s world view was homosocial in the extreme. It’s not that their songs are misogynist, but rather that they seem to have nothing to say to, about, or for women’, then adding: ‘Yet The Clash’s

134

Rebel rock and its ramifications

songs ache with a lust for glory and are riddled with highly charged militaristic imagery. All The Clash’s role models are young, masculine, and in some sense at war – sometimes literally … sometimes symbolically’. Mother Jones (April 1982) noted: ‘Unfortunately for half the human species, The Clash’s music has virtually ignored the subjects of women and sexuality … feminism has not yet exerted a major influence on the band’s songwriting’. Later, Phillips (2012: 107) remarked of The Clash’s music: ‘It’s inspirational, but not unproblematic – especially for women.’ Most Clash songs which touched on (heterosexual) relationships, and, thus, tangentially, gender issues where covered were written by Jones. The closest Strummer came here were ‘Lover’s Rock’ from London Calling, ‘The Street Parade’ from Sandinista! about his temporary breakup with his partner, Gaby (UNCUT October 2010), and ‘Fingerpoppin’ from Cut the Crap.8 Eriksen (1980) noted ‘Lover’s Rock’ concerns, inter alia, birth control pills and sexual responsibility where unwanted pregnancies are not regarded as simply women’s responsibility,9 while Shaar Murray (NME 15 December 1979) remarked Strummer could not write credible songs about male–female relationships with Jones (Musician, Player & Listener June 1981) noting Strummer’s weakness here, saying: ‘[E]veryone says we can’t write about women.’ ‘Red Angel Dragnet’ (1982) took on violence against women in terms of women’s freedom to walk alone at night. Strummer’s next foray was ‘Sex Mad War’ (B-side to ‘This is England’ (1985))10 where the opening lines when played live were: ‘Going to the party, never made it to the party, she was gone’ and then changed to ‘Equal rights and French lace tights, so vacant’

8 With LRW (Permanent Record (1988), Earthquake Weather (1989)) and The Mescaleros, Strummer wrote some love songs like ‘Leopardskin Limousines’ with the former and ‘Nitcomb’ with the latter (see also p.67). 9 Nonetheless, Wyatt (2018: 151) still regarded it as ‘sexist’. Strummer’s ‘Rabies (from the Dogs of Love)’ (1975) – about venereal diseases – was woman-blaming such that Topping (2004: 122) called it a ‘nasty misogynistic song’. 10 When recording for Cut the Crap, the title was changed to ‘Sex Mad Roar’, reflecting Rhodes’s control of production.

135

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

come its recording. When played live, Strummer introduced it with the likes of ‘This is dedicated to all the victims of the sex mad war, either woman or woman or woman!’ (San Francisco 21 January 1984) and this is ‘dedicated to … the hope that some men realise that pornography is rape which women already realise [as] they can’t walk home in the dark … yeah, you just go and ask them’ (Eugene 29 May 1984). Strummer said something similar in Vancouver on 31 May 1984 (Vancouver Sun 1 June 1984). Creem (October 1984) noted Strummer told the Detroit gig-goers that ‘Sex Mad War’ is dedicated to ‘a time when a woman can walk alone in the park at midnight without being afraid – which is her divine right.’ On another occasion in 1984 at a US gig, he dedicated the song ‘to all the women in the audience with the hope that a new antisexist, anti-racist human being is emerging’ (Boston Globe 16 April 1984, White 2007: 112). However, such pronouncements were only at the time of ‘rebel rock’ and, in Italy in 1984, he introduced the song at one gig by ‘praising ‘the nice-looking women in Italy … bella, bella, bella!’ and calling a female on-stage translator at the same gig ‘baby’ and ‘honey’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 198, 197). Such sexist-tinged language was not an isolated feature, as will be shown. Elsewhere, Strummer made clear his basic level of sympathy for women: ‘Women are really great and they get a really shit deal. I hate macho men … I hate men raping women … I’d like to protect women somehow, make men realise that everything they believe is bullshit’ (Mother Jones April 1982); criticised heavy metal for only providing ‘hard [guitar] licks and woman-bashing lyrics’ (US 1983 radio interview); and said ‘I wanna get through to those idiots who are buying beating up women music’ (RNZ 7 February 1982, see also Gray 2003: 386 and Topping 2004: 185). He also criticised the way Rastafarians (and other religions) treat women (High Times August 1979). Yet he never delivered upon his promise of: ‘Someday I’ll write a whole album about sexuality!’ (Mother Jones April 1982) and his statement: ‘We’re stepping into a few areas we’ve left untouched like sexuality’ (NME 20 October 1979) only yielded ‘Lovers’ Rock’. His weakness here was in stark contrast to, for example, Paul Heaton who, between 1988 and 2007 for The Beautiful South, examined the plight of women 136

Rebel rock and its ramifications

and provided many lines for his female co-singers.11 In Strummer’s one excursion outside music during The Clash, the silent film, Hell W10 (1983), where he had full creative control because he wrote, directed and funded it, women hardly figured even as secondary roles, where the subject matter was drugs and pornography conducted in a rather macho way. Baker (2013c) commented: [F]emale characters in Hell W10 have no real agency, or play any meaningful part in the narrative; they’re merely portrayed as throwaway characters, devoid of any intelligence or significance. Whether this was Joe unwittingly imprinting his own male-centric state of mind onto the movie or not is unclear, but the entire piece plays like an episode of  The Sweeney, with women consigned to serving as mere plot devices.

Then there is also the no small matter of Strummer’s personal behaviour. The personal becomes quite political when public stances of supporting oppressed groups are taken and the two can never entirely be divorced from each other. Issues of authenticity, sincerity and consistency abound. And though the evidence of his support for women’s rights is slim, it is still salient to examine his behaviour, especially because of how he was perceived and the expectations of him. His behaviour here was far from exemplary, where Strummer remarked to Salewicz (2006: 399) women were unfaithful and distrustful. Strummer was an unfaithful and unreliable partner.12 The mother of his two daughters, Gaby Salter, recounted when she began the relationship just after her seventeenth birthday in 1978, Strummer, nine years her senior, told her: ‘I’ve been to bed with over a hundred woman’ and ‘Joe was one of the most unfaithful people I could have possibly met’ (Salewicz 2006: 241). She repeated this: he was ‘one of the most unfaithful people 11 Such as ‘A Little Time’, ‘Perfect 10’, ‘36D’, ‘The Prettiest Eyes’, ‘Bell Bottomed Tear’ and ‘How Long’s a Tear Take to Dry?’ Heaton attempted to work with Strummer but was unsuccessful as Strummer would not relinquish control of lyric writing (Davie 2004: 79). Even when working with Bono and Dave Stewart for the Nelson Mandela tribute song, ‘Long Walk to Freedom’, Strummer wrote the lyrics. 12 Prior to Salewicz (2006), Strummer’s infidelity and flaws were not widely known. Salewicz (2006: 642) concluded: ‘those who knew Joe Strummer … knew he wasn’t Saint Joe’.

137

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

I could ever have met’ (NME 11 August 2012). This included numerous sexual relations with other women, including one of her friends, and a long-term affair (with Danielle von Zerneck who was thirteen years his junior) while with Salter (Salewicz 2006: 432, 439, 456). Record Mirror (9 May 1981) noted: ‘Strummer womanises’. Salter recounted Strummer would disappear, go off on ‘benders’ and be emotionally distant (Salewicz 2006: 493). In addition to witnessing his infidelity, one-time close associates Pearl Harbour and Pennie Smith, respectively, recalled Strummer ‘was only special in the way he treated people in general, not women … going with so many girls’ and ‘with girls he was an emotional bully … He had a strange attitude to girls: they were there to be used … I think he needed to prove he was liked and, therefore, women came in useful’ (Salewicz 2006: 285, 299). Baker recounted: ‘Joe often treated women as things to be used sexually … Joe had a ‘love ’em and leave ’em’ attitude. By 1983, Joe’s attitude towards women was probably 15 years out of date’, while Don Letts remarked Strummer ‘was a sneaky fuck sometimes. In fact, most times. Particularly to women’ (Salewicz 2006: 187). Deborah Van Der Beek (Temple 2007) told of how prior to The Clash, Strummer was not accountable to partners, going off without telling them for extended periods. All told, Salewicz counted seven such incidences of infidelity in Strummer’s relationship with Salter. This did not include being ‘on the pull’ during the RAtR tour (Class War Summer 2003), hitting on the partners of others like Simonon and Jem Finer (Salewicz 2006: 389, 425, 497), becoming ‘romantically involved’ (Wyatt 2018: 189) during filming Straight to Hell in 1987, and beginning a relationship in 1993 with Lucinda Tait (who he then married in 1995 and who was ten years younger) while still with Salter (Salewicz 2006: 510).13 Strummer married South African, Pamela Moolman, on 16 May 1975 for £100 in order to allow her to stay in Britain (Salewicz 2006: 131). He never married Salter (Sounds 17 July 1982), telling her he could not find Moolman in order to gain a divorce, even though he said he would at the time ‘get the divorce through in about two years’ (MM 26 July 1975). He told an interview in 1982 he had 13 He continued to flirt after marrying Tait (Salewicz 2006: 538).

138

Rebel rock and its ramifications

been trying to find her but the bar of evidence to show he was trying to find her was very high.14 He told Sounds (2 April 1988): ‘I’ve been with Gabrielle for ten years and we don’t need a piece of paper to tell us we’re together.’ 15 Somehow he managed to find Moolman in order to marry Tait (Salewicz 2006: 522). Also of note is that his two daughters took his last name, as did Tait (and her daughter) when they married. Salewicz (2006: 66, 80) noted Strummer’s relationships had ‘a pattern’ of having much younger partners and Strummer was critical of older lecturers hitting on younger women when at art school. Turning to the raising of his children, Strummer told the NME (26 July 1986) he was ‘watching my youngest grow up’, and the LA Times (31 January 1988): When you see you become part of the cycle of generations, you lose your ego in the process, because you ain’t nothin’ special … When you devote all your interest into another person, you lose your self-obsession, and that’s when you understand what it is. You don’t know (anything) without that moment. You don’t want anything to harm this helpless being. That’s a fantastic change. And that’s when you understand what’s happening. I never understood anything until my first baby looked at me. … Now I understand.

In 1999, he told the Sunday Times (26 September): ‘It seemed like a lousy swap to have a career but not see your kids grow up, so I’d stuck around the ranch’, repeating this several times (Penthouse June 2000, McGuire 2001, MOJO March 2003). These comments suggested he was a devoted and present parent as Martin (2002) believed, giving them ‘peace and love’ as he wrote on ‘Boogie with Your Children’ (1989). In fact, he was far more of an absent and distant one according to Salter and close friends (Salewicz 2006: 465, 493, 628). Salter’s mother commented Strummer was ‘not there’ physically and mentally (Temple 2007).

14 Pistol-shaped picture disc, TL60. 15 Sometimes Strummer said they were married (McKenna 2003) and referred to Salter as his ‘wife’ (San Antonio Current 1 February 2003). Topping (2004: 99) erroneously stated Salter was ‘his fiancée’.

139

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Jazz was born on 18 November 1983. This did not stop Strummer from touring extensively and spending long periods alone in Granada and Madrid from October 1984. Only once did Gaby and Jazz accompany him on tour and once to Spain. Gaby threatened him with not seeing their next child, Lola, in order to get back to London for the birth on 14 January 1986. Later on, he was abroad in Spain and Nicaragua without them for months on end and without contacting Gaby (Salewicz 2006: 432). In the case of Nicaragua for filming Walker, it was six months. Before then, he went AWOL for many weeks to co-write and remix Big Audio Dynamite’s second album (Needs 2005: 263, Salewicz 2006: 419–420). Only when recording Earthquake Weather (1989) in Los Angeles did he bring them with him. Touring twice with The Pogues in 1987–88 and 1991–92 continued his absences. When he was at home in London, he spent much of his time drinking in The Warwick Castle (see p.153) and not looking after his young kids. Asked to describe his average day in 1988, he responded: ‘I go down the boozer at lunchtime, have a cider, low alcohol. No stiff drinks. Then I might go and stand by the paper stand and talk to Pete; then I might go to a couple of coffeehouses on the [Ladbroke] Grove where I know people sitting around talking … Then come evening time, properly go back to the boozer, chat to a few people, drink Brown Ale, call it a day. I like to move around, talking, get out of the house’ (Shelley 1988). Needs (2005: 281) recorded by 1992 he was still spending ‘a lot of time in The Warwick Castle’.16 When present, he was often withdrawn and depression accentuated these absences (Salewicz 2006: 453). Jazz recalled: ‘[He] was around when he was around’ (NME 11 August 2012) and Lola: ‘[he] was quite vacant – he wasn’t really around much anyway’ (Guardian 28 July 2012). When he did parent, his perspective was borne of libertarianism as Jazz put it: ‘Dad came from a strong authoritarian background … so he decided [we] would have no rules and he wasn’t going to read any of our school reports. I was expelled from 16 The only extenuating circumstance was that his relationship with Salter was breaking down and she increasingly ignored him as a way to deal with his lack of presence in their relationship. This did not absolve him of his responsibility to parent his children.

140

Rebel rock and its ramifications

the local nursery school for being naughty, which was embarrassing for my mum’ (Telegraph 11 August 2012). His daughters told this resulted in behavioural problems, leading to needing to move school (Guardian 28 July 2012). Both were sent to private day and then boarding schools after the family left London in 1992 (Salewicz 2006: 498,499). Nonetheless, Jazz founded the Shoreditch arm of the Women’s Institute because she ‘got really impassioned about women’s issues and women’s rights. I think because The Clash were so political and Dad had such strong opinions about equality and stuff, it affects you. But equally, he was a great inventor of things – he was always making things happen. So, I think more important for me was his passion. He’d have an idea and then do whatever he could to make it happen. I think that’s what really rubbed off for me’ (Guardian 28 July 2012). In likely recognition of his mental and physical absences, he told McKenna (2003): ‘I don’t think I’ve taught them anything, and don’t feel like I’ve been a very good father.’ In his relationship with Tait (and her very young daughter, Eliza), Strummer kept his own hours, with Tait remarking: ‘He’d always come to bed between two and five in the morning, and get up between one and two in the afternoon’ (Independent 20 May 2012) and ‘He was an owl and I was a lark. … Joe would kind of wander down between 11am and 1 o’clock, depending on how late he had gone to bed’ (Irish Independent 1 October 2018). On top of this, Strummer exhibited sexist behaviour and used sexist language. In one instance, he said: ‘[I]f you’re just after having sex, why not pull an ugly bird who will be so pleased to be wanted? It’s the most flattering thing a human can say to another. “I find you attractive. I like you.”’ (Green and Barker 2003: 92). He sought to use ‘prostitutes’ for himself and others (White 2007: 177, Green and Barker 2003: 240, Gilbert 2009: 349). At this time, ‘prostitutes’ were also used by The Clash’s roadcrew (Green and Barker 2003: 232). His language was peppered with sexist remarks about women despite his earlier pronouncements. This ranged from ‘old bag’ (‘Garageland’) and ‘sulking is popstar-ism … it’s like being in a group with a load of old women’ (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029) to calling women ‘birds’ (MM 29 December 1979, Roadrunner February 1980, Sunday Times 26 September 1999, Hit List November/ 141

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Figure 4.2  Strummer appears with The Pogues on RTE’s The Session in 1987

December 1999, Salewicz 2006: 281). Indeed, though he used the term ‘chick’ to describe Moolman in 1975 (NME 26 July 1975), he told Creem (June 1980): ‘You can call them girls … or birds or women but you can’t call them chicks.’ In a Search & Destroy (May 1977) interview, Jones stated: ‘We don’t call them chicks, to start with. Girls. Women. Birds’ to which Strummer responded: ‘When we get drunk, we call them Tarts’. He often greeted audiences with the appellation: ‘Ladies and gentlemen’ and used the term ‘lady’ in lyrics like ‘Passport to Detroit’ (1989). Then he told UNCUT (September 1999) The Mescaleros ‘aren’t a bunch of vegetable chewing pussies’ and used the term to abuse a fan on stage in 1999 (Salewicz 2006: 575). He also used the term ‘pussy’ (Boston Globe 12 April 1984) and ‘pussy-men’ (Salewicz 2006: 404) to describe those that did not stand their ground. Strummer also did an interview for the soft porn magazine, Penthouse (June 2000). At the Acton gig (see pp.168–169), he referred to ‘firemen’ not ‘firefighters’, given the presence of women firefighters and 142

Rebel rock and its ramifications

that two women firefighters, Linda Smith and Ghada Razuki, requested The Mescaleros play the gig. In regard of objectivising women’s bodies, he told the Edmonton Journal (28 October 2001): ‘[Y]ou can’t expect everyone to be the same. It would be incredibly boring. Blink-182 – they’re talking about [women’s breasts], and there are a lot of young men out there thinking about [women’s breasts]. And why shouldn’t they? It takes all sorts.’ Other matters of sexual politics, like LGBTQ+, also did not make any significant appearance in Strummer’s lyrics or public activities. ‘Baby the Trans’ (1988) is not about transgender, while Strummer used Travis Bickle’s homophobic rant from Taxi Driver (1976) in ‘Red Angel Dragnet’ (1982): ‘All the animals come out at night. Queens, fairies, dopers, junkies, sick, venal. Someday a real rain will come and wash all the scum off the streets.’ The line ‘boy, tran or girl’ in ‘Diggin’ the New’ (1999) is one of the few references to non-binary gender identification but has to be set alongside downplaying LGBTQ+ as he greeted audiences with the likes of ‘Ladies, gentlemen and cross-dressing, whatever’ in Philadelphia on 24 November 1999. Violence Despite his ‘anti-violence’ (NME 11 December 1976) statement for The Clash and on stage condemning violence at gigs with pronouncements like: ‘All of you who think violence is tough – why don’t you go home and collect stamps? That’s much tougher’ (MM 13 November 1976) and ‘This is for those of you that think violence is funny’ at the LRW gig on 23 July 1988,17 Strummer was frequently physically violent towards other band members, crew, journalists and followers, especially when playing live. Consequently, he could be accused of hypocrisy which, in turn, could undermine his politics, platform and influence. His violent behaviour ranged from attacking audience members at a 101ers gig (Gilbert 2009: 17 To this could be added condemning bouncers’ violence at Glasgow Apollo on 5 July 1978 (Vive Le Rock November 2015). And yet at the RAtR Newcastle gig (10 August 1988), he said to some fans ‘to punch [the] faces in’ of others.

143

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

69) and Clash gig on 5 November 1976 (Savage 2009: 265, 375), punching Sid Vicious (Savage 2009: 672), reporting in his US tour diary that upon hearing Vicious was dead from the tour manager, ‘I grab him by the throat. “What do you mean[?]” I snarl’ (NME 3 March 1979), punching Mick Jones for refusing to play ‘White Riot’ at the Sheffield Top Rank on 27 January 1980 (Green and Barker 2003: 230, Needs 2005: 173–174, Gilbert 2009: 265) and at a gig in Glasgow,18 striking a fan over the head with his guitar in Hamburg on 20 May 1980 (MM 13 December 1980, Gilbert 2009: 277, Salewicz 2006: 297–298), hitting a gig-goer in the face with his guitar in Montreal in 1980 (Gazette 13 October 2001), kicking the drum riser at the Us festival in 1983 in order to show his anger towards drummer Pete Howard, throwing a microphone stand at drummer Luke Bullen at the Fleadh in 2002 for missing a cue (Salewicz 2006: 624–625, Green and Barker 2003: 257),19 and lashing out at a camera operator at Glastonbury and breaking his lens in 1999 (Guardian 24 September 1999).20 At the Hamburg gig, he also kicked someone in the face for trying to untie his shoelaces and was arrested for fighting after striking the fan with his guitar (SPIN November 1999). In total, over thirty such incidents exist (see also NME 15 July 1978, Davie 2004: 15, 17, 18, 21, 40, 69, 70, Needs 2005: 170, Observer 29 December 2002, Salewicz 2006: 273, 228, 584, 18 Strummer recounted: ‘[A]t the Glasgow Mecca [Apollo] … We’d done a raging set, stormed off, the crowd’s all shouting for more. I said right, “Let’s do ‘White Riot’” … And Mick says: “No! I refuse!” I said “Come on, where’s your respect?” Mick said: “You haven’t got any respect for the stage” and threw his orange juice on me. [so] … I planted one right on him … and won the argument! We played it’ (Shelley 1988). The History of Rock (January 1984) recalled a dispute between the two in 1981 when Jones went to the US to be with Ellen Foley with Strummer infuriated, but ‘their differences were resolved after what Strummer called ‘a simple common or garden punch-up’. 19 Throwing things at band members for missing on-stage cues was a common Strummer behaviour (Salewicz 2006: 582). 20 ‘I’m singing to the crowd and this huge hydraulic arm sweeps in … with a guy with a camera on it … I flipped right out … I grabbed the mic stand, and rushed at the nearest BBC television camera and began smashing it. Then I ran across [across] … the stage and began to smash the other one. And then I saw the hydraulic arm and began to smash at it. … [W]hat I was trying to say was, “They are trying to film me singing to you, but in the act of them filming me, I can’t sing to you because they’re getting in the way!” … I’ve had to write letters of apology to the BBC cameramen’ (Hit List November/ December 1999).

144

Rebel rock and its ramifications

Figure 4.3  Strummer with The Clash at the Us festival in San Bernardino, California in 1983

Gilbert 2009: 69, 116, 250, 253, 292, 304, Doane 2014: 101, Jucha 2016: 194).21 This shows how ill-conceived it was for Kitson (2012) to write: ‘The only time Strummer ever used his fists came some 20 years earlier, when … [Jones] refused to go on stage to perform the same song.’ Strummer also showed a propensity towards threatening behaviour (see Davie 2004: 14, 69). In 1977, he threatened to ‘smash in’ a journalist’s face (Sounds 14 May 1977); in 1988, he threatened to attack anyone gobbing on him with his Telecaster (Sounds 2 April 1988); he challenged a fan to fight on stage in Cologne in 1999 and provoked a bouncer in New York in 1999 (Salewicz 2006: 575, 586). At the Brixton Academy on 16 March 1984, he shouted: ‘Are you a gobber? Have you spat on me? … I’m prepared to murder someone tonight! I don’t give two fucks! I want some fucking human respect … I’m prepared to kill someone!’ (Classic Rock July 2020). This was followed by the New York Times (6 July 1999) reporting Strummer 21 Gray (2003) noted other such instances, including biting Simonon (Gray 2003: 318).

145

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

responded to calls for Clash songs by ‘threatening to shove his fist into a loud fan’s mouth’, and the Daily Variety (25 October 2001) remarking he ‘picked a fight with a rowdy patron … onstage. The fan was pulled up on stage and Strummer challenged him to some fisticuffs, the singer’s hand motions indicating he took offense at the fan putting his hands in his face.’ There were other times when violence was in the air because of Strummer’s actions and he advocated violence to resolve personal problems (see Salewicz 2006: 245). This may be hard to accept for those canonising Strummer as a peaceloving, anti-imperialist, especially when, after the Hamburg gig, he stated: ‘I’m in Gandhi’s army and Luther King’s army … So, from that day on, life was teaching me something and Luther King and Gandhi were right, you can’t fight violence with violence’ (MM 13 December 1980); ‘I began to think that I’d overstepped my mark. And that’s what I mean by it was a watershed – violence had really controlled me for once. I became very frightened that violence had really taken me over. So since then, I’ve decided the only way you can fight aggro in the audience is to play a really boring song’ (NME 3 January 1981) and ‘[A]fter that I realised that never again would I combat violence with violence’ (Radio Hallam interview in Ogg 2014: 72). Some will dismiss this as just unconstrained performing passion (see MOJO June 2006). While it does show a difference between the public espousal of being anti-violence from 1976, there was also an ambiguity from early on. In that same NME (11 December 1976) interview, Strummer proffered: ‘Suppose … I smash his face up and he learns something from it. Well, that’s, in a sense, creative violence.’ Earlier, he stated he enjoyed ‘violence with honour’, saying ‘there’s nothing better if you’re having an argument that won’t resolve itself one way or the other than smashing someone’s face in’ (MM 26 April 1977). In 1984, he told Creem (October 1984): ‘I’ve seen people come to blows over The Clash, and that made me feel great. What else can we really argue about that would inflame our passions to the point of physical violence. And more power to it.’ But these instances differed from support for popular uprisings using violence against oppressors (see p.83). For example, Strummer commented: ‘[T]hat’s practical violence. Somoza ain’t going to go unless 146

Rebel rock and its ramifications

you shoot a few hundred of his guards. … I think in Nicaragua the situation certainly demanded it’ (Garbarini 1981: 54–55).22 Environmental enthusiasm Neither academic Strummer studies (e.g. Faulk and Harrison 2014a, Cohen and Peacock 2017a, Coulter 2019a) nor more popular studies (e.g. Needs 2005, Salewicz 2006, Gilbert 2009) examined Strummer’s ‘green credentials’. There are just a few examples of where this was not the case, such as D’Ambrosio (2006). Yet, even here, these are fleeting mentions when Strummer had already made clear his view of ‘greed-driven, money-feeding bastards raping the planet and standing round laughing about it’ (Sunday Herald 14 December 2003). This is all the more marked given environmental concern was part and parcel of Strummer’s humanist world view for humankind and the planet. It was most evident in his opposition to war and nuclear weapons in terms of the destruction of the environment humans would then have to live in. But it was equally evident in other aspects from the mid-1980s onwards. For example, in the 1999, he remarked: ‘[M]oney runs this nonsense and they gonna feed us gasoline and oil until the world is a dead shell’ (Salewicz 2006: 576). The year before his death, he commented: ‘You could describe the area where I live as nothing but an agri-business abattoir – all you see is people wearing masks, riding tractors and spraying god knows what onto the ground’ (McKenna 2003). This section examines the evolution and nature of Strummer’s ‘green’ politics and what he did to prosecute them. He became a vegetarian at the Glastonbury music festival in 1971, aged 19. Though he was coming of age politically at this time, in retrospect, this decision can be seen as opening up a vista in his world view about wider ecological concerns. Most obviously, there were the lyrics he wrote such as ‘London Calling’ (1979). In it, Strummer wrote presciently not just of environmental dangers but of ecological collapse: ‘The ice age is coming/The sun’s zooming in/ 22 Jones showed a far less favourable attitude towards violence (see O’Shea 2015: 70, 123, 158) even though he earlier thought inter-fan violence was acceptable (Sunday Times 17 July 1977).

147

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Engines stop running/The wheat’s growing thin’. ‘Gangsterville’ (1989) features lines about ‘chemical rain’ and ‘Pelicans dying strangling on a six can strap’ while ‘It’s a Rocking World’ (1998) contains a line about the rape of the earth: ‘He takes all our honey and it’s the Garden of Eden that’s got to pay’. ‘Johnny Appleseed’ (2001) takes its title from pioneering American tree planter and conservationist, John Chapman’s nom de plume. In it, Strummer wrote repeatedly: ‘If you’re after getting the honey, hey then you don’t go killing all the bees … there ain’t no berries on the trees’. This accords with Jucha’s (2016: 336) interpretation. On live performances of ‘Clampdown’, he would extemporise against nuclear power given its lyrics mentioning Harrisburg and saying ‘Begging to be melted down’ in reference to the partial meltdown of a nuclear reactor there in 1979 at Three Mile Island where Harrisburg was the nearest city. But it was not just in song Strummer pushed a ‘green’ agenda. His greeting at the Us festival had a wider resonance than just a nuclear holocaust. Five years later, with LRW, he played on the Green Wedge benefit tour (see p.151). Green Wedge was an environmental take on Red Wedge but without aligning to a particular political party, which fitted with Strummer’s stance (see pp.94–97). He told Well Red (August 1988): ‘I would play for Red Wedge but I’d far rather play for Green Wedge. For me, Thatcher/Kinnock isn’t what it’s about anymore. If we could get an environmentally conscious policy that would be great. I wouldn’t care if it was Thatcher or Kinnock who implemented it. While we’re squabbling over the niceties of our political system, there wouldn’t be anything worth squabbling over.’ While this showed a certain naivety about either Labour or the Tories going ‘green’, it was heartfelt and sincere as, in interviews from the late 1980s onwards, he bemoaned the waste inherent in consumerism, suggesting he saw that environmental destruction as intrinsic to modern society. He told Sounds (6 August 1988): ‘I wish Labour would make that [the environment] a number one [priority] in their manifesto … Ultimately, we’d all like to live in a land, or world, without nuclear weapons, without spoiling the planet or looting it or radiating it.’ The same year he told Rapido ’88, after spending time in Nicaragua: ‘I see the world completely differently now … [because] we waste everything. 148

Rebel rock and its ramifications

Everything comes in wrappings and plastic packaging and we just throw it in the streets. In Nicaragua, they use everything because there is nothing in the country … because they are so poor … I felt ashamed of the way we live in the West’ (see also NME 7 October 1989). Though now looked upon with disdain by many environmental campaigners as a form of misguided ‘green capitalism’, Strummer helped pioneer carbon offsetting. Around the Glastonbury campfire in 1995, he mused: ‘Bands must be contributing to global warming by their buses, equipment trucks and the diesel used to power the stages. Can you imagine how much CO2 the pressing and the distribution of a CD creates? What shall we do about it?’ This led supporting Future Forests (now Carbon Neutral Company) founded by Dan Morrell in 1992, which plants trees, to absorb CO2 emissions and allow companies to ‘go green’ by paying to offset their emissions. Strummer decided he would have his own forest on the Isle of Skye planted to offset the emissions from his CDs and became the world’s first carbon neutral artist. The first trees were planted in 2003 to coincide with the release of his posthumous Mescaleros album, Streetcore. According to Morrell, Strummer was also the world’s first carbon neutral citizen, saying: ‘Strummer’s spontaneous support proved a tipping point. Such was the admiration and respect he commanded many others were eager to follow his lead. From that point it was the leadership of the artistic community that amplified the idea of Carbon Neutral in the public domain.’ 23 Strummer occasionally made odd turns, like telling a journalist: ‘There’s only 10,000 days of oil left!’, to which the journalist responded: ‘What does that mean? Only 10,000 days left to discover an alternative energy source?’ Strummer replied: ‘Nahhhhhh – only 10,000 days left to play rock ’n’ roll!’ (MOJO March 2003).24 Another was the Global A Go-Go (2001) album cover. Featuring plastic cigarette lighters on both sides, 23 https://www.danielbjmorrell.com/portfolio-item/future-forests/ and https://www. danielbjmorrell.com/carbon-neutral/ 24 The interview was from 1979 with the NME (30 June 1979) version being more about coming to terms with humanity’s end: ‘10,000 days to play guitar … Everyone’s got to spend that time in their way.’

149

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Strummer marvelled at how they had become an international phenomenon without recognising they represented one of the biggest throwaway uses of plastic. Consequently, they form part of the Great Pacific garbage patch (also known as the Pacific trash vortex) and thousands of seabirds ingest the brightly coloured items, leading to their death due to blocking their stomachs. Strummer did not become a vegan, wore leather and ate seafood (Chimes 2013: 70, Irish Independent 1 October 2018). Though a dog owner, after moving to Somerset from London (via Hampshire), he did not engage in any animal rights or protection work other than playing a benefit gig for the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International in 2002. Neither did he engage in direct action of the likes organised by Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth (as Simonon did in 2011). But, overall, he was an early supporter, and in some respects pioneer, of environmental awareness and supportive action among recording artists. Conclusion ‘Rebel rock’ was the period when Strummer most extensively prosecuted his socialist world view as leader of The Clash and without much recourse to others inside and outside the band. Although without a new record, The Clash toured more extensively in 1984 than in any previous year other than 1982. The chapter considered three areas not covered in previous or subsequent chapters. Here, Strummer was unable to write about women and gender from a (radical or socialist) feminist perspective because he had neither the appropriate world view here nor the motivation in contrast other subjects. It was his blind spot. Notwithstanding some contemporaneous contradictions, ‘Sex Mad War’ was the fleeting ‘feminist’ highpoint during the ‘rebel rock’ years. This represented a yawning gap for a socialist of the period and for social realism overall. The import here was not and could not be offset by environmental concerns. These were more based on ethical capitalism than systemic change (see Chapter 7). Although his violent behaviour may be seen as resulting from his machismo, its implications for socialist realism would depend on how it was perceived by followers. 150

5

Rocking against the rich

In mid-July 1988, Strummer set out to ‘Rock Against the Rich’ (RAtR). The occasion was a twenty-three date British tour which he part-funded and fully fronted on behalf of London Class War, an anarchist group, with his new band, Latino Rockabilly War (LRW). Strummer had just finished playing seven benefit gigs in and around London during late June and early July 1988 for Green Wedge. The first ever gig for LRW was a Green Wedge benefit (Guardian 21 June 1988). LRW had already played two gigs for RAtR in London before its tour started. Given black is associated with anarchism, Billy Bragg referred to RAtR as ‘Black Wedge’ (Rachel 2017: 472). In addition, Strummer also played an Amnesty International benefit called ‘The Festival of Youth’ in Milton Keynes in June 1988 to mark the fortieth anniversary of the UN Declaration on Human Rights and to launch Amnesty’s youth network. All told, the summer of 1988 was the most prolonged and intense period of Strummer’s political activity. Yet it stood at a particular point in Strummer’s political trajectory, between the end of The Clash in early 1986 and the beginning of his so-called ‘wilderness years’ at the end of 1989. As the last chapter demonstrated, since mid-1983 Strummer had become more politically and radically outspoken. Yet when Strummer struck out on this his most radical and sustained political intervention, he faced a much-diminished audience standing on a much-diminished platform because his star had waned. Some believed his time had passed, being ‘yesterday’s man’. This was even though he believed he still had something to say and could still make a 151

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

contribution towards achieving social justice. Class War egged him on in this. But this most sustained political intervention made Strummer neither an activist nor an initiator of action (see Chapter 6). Even though Salewicz (UNCUT September 2012) called RAtR controversial, his treatment of it was cursory, mixing it up with Green Wedge (Salewicz 2006: 446–448). Meantime, Gilbert (2009) ignored it and Needs (2005) all but ignored the politics of it. This was, in the case of Gilbert, due to the tour being ‘ill-advised’ (MOJO June 2006). The tour hardly figured in two collections about Strummer’s politics, namely, D’Ambrosio (2004a, 2012a) and Faulk and Harrison (2014a). Often, where RAtR was mentioned, the details were incorrect. For example, Binette (2003: 28) cited it as ‘Bash the Rich’, saying it was ‘a fundraising exercise for squatters’. ‘Bash the Rich’ demonstrations were earlier Class War actions while RAtR beneficiaries were many and various, even if the first Class War gig Strummer played was for evicted squatters. D’Ambrosio (2012d: 84) was oblivious to Class War’s anarchism, saying the tour was about: ‘promoting … socialist economic policies’. This chapter first recalls the context of the tour before looking at it and its outcomes. Political and personal context With a renewed mandate from her 1987 general election victory, Margaret Thatcher continued with the programme of privatisation and deregulation. Her ‘big bang’ reforms of the City of London in 1988 epitomised the times, sanctioning the mantra of ‘Greed is good’ of the Gordon Gekko character in the 1987 film, Wall Street. To the consternation of many more than just those within the ranks of Class War, City brokers as archetypal ‘yuppies’ flaunted their wealth. Meantime, Strummer had moved his family to Los Angeles for some two years, putting together LRW, and writing and recording songs for the 1988 Permanent Record film soundtrack and his first post-Clash album, Earthquake Weather (1989). Songs on Earthquake Weather covered, inter alia, the cruelty of the rich and powerful (‘Gangsterville’), the mix of multiculturalism, urban decay and poverty (‘Shouting Street’), alienation and consumerism (‘Jewellers 152

Rocking against the rich

and Bums’) and the cult of celebrity (‘Slant Six’). But the lyrics for these songs were more obtuse than many of his earlier songs, many other songs on the album were not political and the album’s title was strangely apolitical (see pp.66, 205). The Warwick Castle discussions In early 1988, Ian Bone from London Class War was drinking with fellow anarchist Darren Ryan in The Warwick Castle.1 They were discussing standing a candidate in a forthcoming local by-election in Kensington as part of the group’s ‘Bash the Rich’ activities. The pub was also Strummer’s regular haunt and, since The Clash’s demise, he spent an increasing amount of time there (see p.140). Bone asked Strummer one Saturday afternoon to do a benefit gig for Class War in order to make good on the politics of ‘White Riot’. The idea of a single gig became a tour. Though Strummer recounted: ‘I started talking to people in the boozer and decided to play a benefit at the Hackney Empire for homeless people there. It was good, so I agreed to a tour’ (Sunday Times 17 April 1988), later he recalled in 2000: ‘Then when the word came through that the council wouldn’t have it [the Hackney Empire] … or it was cancelled, the drunken pub-talk escalated until it was, “Well fuck them, we’ll go on a tour”’ (Egan 2018: 329). Each gig would see local bands support LRW, with door money split between local Class War groups and deserving local causes, as well as providing Class War with the opportunity to sell its publications. One example of a good cause was a defence fund for those charged with stealing coal off a coal train for heating their homes. Another was for sacked and victimised miners following their defeated strike. Bone’s own recollection of the encounter in 2003 was essentially the same: ‘[We] bumped into Joe … and asked him to do a benefit for the Stamford Hill squatters who’d just suffered a big eviction. Joe agreed to do it at the Hackney Empire without hesitation. The day after we thought we’d chance our arm and ask if he’d do a gig in Brixton as well. Again, he agreed immediately. 1 The following account is largely based on Ryan (2014).

153

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Finally, we asked him to do a whole Rock Against the Rich tour.’ 2 Strummer himself, later in 1989, gave his own take on the conversation: The simple fact is I was having a drink with Ian Bone and we were feeling a bit deflated ’cos the Hackney Empire had pulled the plug on a squatters’ rights gig we’d planned, saying ‘Oh, it’ll be far too loud for us’ meaning, of course, ‘We don’t want your sort here’. So, I, like a bright spark, said ‘F*** ’em. Let’s do a nationwide tour instead. (NME 7 October 1989)

Opposition to the tour came from other Class War groups, mainly on the basis of the big financial commitment the poverty-stricken organisation would have to make to fund the tour. However, Strummer agreed to underwrite any losses incurred so any criticism of a wealthy individual being involved was resolved by the dictum, according to Ryan: ‘He is a means to an end’. This meant Strummer paid for the tour bus, bringing his band across from the US, along with paying for their accommodation and wages, and in the middle of the tour bailing it out by £11,000 (Class War summer 2003).3 Strummer told the Sunday Times (8 October 1989): ‘[T]hat tour cost me thousands of pounds. All the English guys on it were working for nothing, but the guys in my band came from Los Angeles. I had to fly them over, put them up, pay them a musicians’ wage.’ Bone corroborated this (Glasper 2014a: 529). Strummer’s motivation Before RAtR kicked off on 13 July 1988, and in a far cry from his earlier denunciation of anarchy in 1977, Strummer repeatedly talked of his many motivations for doing the tour: ‘It’s fashionable not to give a monkey’s. To have a job, buy a Porsche and stop anyone in your way. For me, it’s a question of all rising together or it’s not worth a tuppence’ (Sunday Times 17 April 1988), and: 2 Blackmarketclash Bristol, 18 July 1988 gig page. 3 £11,000 equated to around £30,000 at 2020 prices. The next year, his British, European and US tour promoting Earthquake Weather left him £24,000 in debt (Needs 2005: 275, Egan 2018: 330). This was the equivalent of nearly £66,000 at 2020 prices.

154

Rocking against the rich The [tour’s] title is a bit of a misnomer … I see it more as a way of starting a debate or stirring things up or bringing people out of the woodwork … they need a well-known person to generate any interest … because the debate about anarchism should really be taken more seriously … because although we now have a fine capitalist system where everyone is happy so-called … because it is still another system, it deserves intellectuals to consider it … because any kind of criticism of this government is hammered with a huge mallet. (Channel 4 5 May 1988) I have a terraced house in Notting Hill that I bought for £74,000 in 1983. I think I am well off but I’m not a millionaire … Hypocrite might be relevant if you just look at the title, ‘Rock against the Rich’, but I don’t see why someone who has been successful can’t … raise some money for people who are not. To me, it’s not directed against private people but against corporate brutality. (New Statesman 20 June 1988)

Later, he reiterated his view the tour ‘needed someone with a name’ (Well Red August 1988) and then made a more telling point: ‘[Our rulers] can handle stuff like Mandela and Amnesty because it’s about things going on in faraway places. None of these are about people trying to change things here … [the tour] is about people fighting back and standing up for themselves … I hope it’ll encourage more to do likewise’ (Class War spring 1988). He was supportive of Class War, but not unconditionally: ‘I wasn’t advocating total support for Class War’s politics but thought they deserved a bit of a shout’ (NME 7 October 1989); and during the tour, he told Sounds (6 August 1988): ‘[Class War is] espousing an anarchist philosophy … I don’t see why that shouldn’t be taken as seriously as Keynesian economics’ (see also Gray 2003: 447). But he also revealed other motivations: ‘Basically, what I’m trying to achieve is just getting up and having a look round’ (The List 5 August 1988). Indeed, Ryan believed: Although it looked like we were using him, it worked both ways: He needed something raw injected into his act that would wipe out the jaded ‘rock ’n’ roll rebel’ image he’d snagged for himself at the time. Remember, in the late ’80s, rock had zero street credibility … Class conflict … raged the length and breadth of Britain. Strummer recognised this, and saw in the Class War people he met the passionate intensity that he lacked and needed. He 155

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer tried to use the media’s fixation with Class War to re-launch his career with a radical edge. And to a degree it worked well for him.

The tour and its outcomes Judged by the setlists in Aberdeen, Birmingham, Bristol, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Liverpool, Manchester, Merthyr Tydfil, Newcastle and Nottingham, there was an even mixture of Clash material, his new LRW material and covers. One of the covers was anti-fascist song, ‘Viva la 15th Brigade’. Strummer introduced it in Edinburgh on 11 August with: ‘It’s about the [international] brigade that fought the fascists in Spain.’ Strangely, neither ‘White Riot’ nor ‘Clampdown’ were played given their lyrics (see pp.56, 119).4 What was also notable was Strummer made few on-stage political pronouncements as he did during his ‘rebel rock’ period. He said relatively little at each gig, other than giving thanks to the audience for coming and to the support acts. This was only partly explained by each gig being introduced by Class War’s Darren Ryan or Ray Jones (along with the reading of some of Jock Scot’s own political poems). Ryan said his job ‘was to stir up the crowd with a rabble-rousing speech just before Strummer came on’. Yet he found Strummer ‘to be a pretty reserved character, who let his music do most of the talking for him’. In echoes of Vince White’s (2007) criticism, there was some hostility to Strummer fronting the tour. He was thought of as a fraud because he was believed to be rich according to a member of ‘The Crow People’ band at the Doncaster gig (Douglass 2003), the Doncaster Class War group (Sounds 6 August 1988), some London Class War members (Ryan 2014) and some New Age Travellers at the Poole gig (Swinford 2011). Lydon later added his criticism.5 This opposition was offset by an enthusiastic audience response. For example, Bone recalled: ‘There was a particularly 4 The setlists for the 1989 Earthquake Weather British and European tours contained a similar set of songs, including ‘Viva la 15th Brigade’. 5 ‘[H]ow dare he preach class war … Living in a huge house … He was trying to con us … once you start lying, it carries on’ (Contactmusic 2 February 2006).

156

Rocking against the rich

memorable gig at Brodsworth Miners Welfare Club near Doncaster where the miners and Strummer raised the … roof in mutual solidarity. Afterwards Joe said the best organised tour he ever did was organised by anarchists!’ 6 and ‘at the Brodsworth Miners Welfare Club … All these miners who really respected The Clash and Joe, all stood there cheering him, like a mutual love fest … he was there for hours after the gig meeting them all’ (Glasper 2014a: 529). Given all this, ‘the tour prov[ing] to be very successful’ (Welt 2003) and Class War claiming it as a ‘great success … and … a reasonable amount of money being raised for a variety of good causes [for] … sacked miners, community resistance and anti-poll tax groups in Scotland’ (Class War autumn 1988), it had little impact in building political capital for Strummer or Class War. The tour did not rekindle Strummer’s position as the ‘voice of a generation’. Nor did it elevate Class War into a more significant political organisation – for that, it would have to await resistance to the poll tax and the associated London riot on 31 March 1990. Though there was ample media coverage before and during the tour, the numbers attending the twenty-one gigs was small. Based on a generous estimate of the venues’ size, no more than 10,000 saw the shows – the equivalent of The Clash playing just the two nights at the Brixton Academy on the miners’ benefit gigs in December 1984. And, only a third of the gigs were sold out (Class War autumn 1988). Reflecting on the tour afterwards, Strummer said it ‘was not a very clever thing to have done. I’m a socialist … But a lot of people just said, “Oh shut up, you millionaire”, because they confuse legends with pay packets’ (Sunday Times 8 October 1989). Years later, he recalled: I remember once being asked to do a benefit gig for Class War and when I turned up to do the show, there were all these people picketing outside. They didn’t recognise me so I asked them what they were protesting against and they said ‘We’re against Joe Strummer playing this gig and when he arrives in his limo, we’re going to tell him that because he has had hit records and signed to a major label record company [so] he shouldn’t play the show’. What a shambles. (Irish Times 29 April 2000) 6 Blackmarketclash Bristol, 18 July 1988 gig page.

157

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Echoing Bone who recalled ‘Like all good ideas, it got watered down in some ways, and the confrontational nature of the tour was lost’ (Class War summer 2003), Ryan (2014) wrote: It was now a rock tour not a riot tour. This should have been the beginning of Class War launching ‘Rock Against the Rich’ as a permanent musical wing of its political activities. It should have also been the launch of Class War’s merchandising on a huge scale as a permanent fundraiser to help people in prison, their families and to pay for loads of propaganda stuff … I look back in anger at it, as we had such great ideas for it, and it still gets my blood boiling the way it was turned from potentially dangerous to pleasantly adventurous by people who used it as their ticket into the music industry.

One of the bands playing a number of dates was Welsh language punks, Anhrefn. Its members were Clash and Strummer followers. From the band, Sion Sebon recalled: I don’t know how many of the … audience knew what the whole thing was about. There was one guy … who introduced the bands, who would sometimes try to explain what it was all about, but the crowd would just be going ‘Strummer, Strummer, Strummer’. So, I think a lot of the crowd were just there to see Joe Strummer because he used to be in The Clash, and didn’t really know what was going on, even though they gave out leaflets, most of the leaflets would be on the floor by the end of the night. (Stephen 2019)

There are ways to understand the outcomes which go beyond simply stating Strummer was a spent force, attendees were more interested in music than politics, and Class War was too small compared to the larger SWP (vis-à-vis RAR). Here, Street’s (2012: 71–74) schema for understanding music’s capacity to engage can be used, where i) organisation concerns the processes, resources, institutions and architecture by which musicians can engage in politics and with politicians; ii) legitimation concerns not just the credibility of the message but also that of the messenger in terms of being a representative for a certain cause; and iii) participation concerns the process by which citizens as attendees and followers participate in the intended political ramifications of the performance which they attend. 158

Rocking against the rich

Organisation Though Strummer and Bone were previously unacquainted, an alliance was formed, giving Strummer access to Class War’s network and organisation and Class War access to Strummer’s financial and political capital. This meant Strummer did not need a commercial promoter. Unlike RAR (see Frith and Street 1992, Street 2012: chapter 5) or Red Wedge (see Frith and Street 1992, Street 1988), RAtR was a much more limited affair, so it would be expected to achieve much less. It was of a much shorter duration in time and space, with a much more limited purpose of propagandising against the ‘rich’ and raising funds for local ‘good causes’ as opposed to encouraging action, whether to fight Nazis or elect Labour. But there was also a less well-defined aim where ‘the rich’ was less of an easily identified focus and certainly not an organising one (compared to those of RAR and Red Wedge – see Frith and Street 1992). Thereafter, it needs to be recalled that RAtR did not emerge out of a relatively much larger and better resourced sister organisation-cum-movement – the Anti-Nazi League (ANL) in the case of RAR. Indeed, Class War was a federated organisation comprising local groups and not a tightly disciplined Leninist organisation. The resource-poverty was emphasised by Strummer having to part-fund and then bail out RAtR. RAtR was more comparable to the shorter-lived Redskins’ 1985 ‘Kick out Apartheid’ tour. Comprising twelve dates, and operating as an attempt to engage radical youth of the anti-apartheid movement with the SWP’s analysis of apartheid, the tour was more similar in size and available resources to RAtR, whether in terms of the nascent ‘redskins’ movement and the SWP (whose leadership was uneasy about The Redskins’ success). These similarities existed despite the then rising tide of the anti-apartheid movement in Britain.

Legitimation Though there was criticism of Strummer as the tour’s frontperson and LRW was little-known, there are more important factors concerning 159

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

legitimation. Strummer was still something of a ‘name’ with political and moral capital and his voice still resonated with the media and followers. He sought to use his platform to connect with a politically progressive issue and open up some political space for it. Yet, with RAtR, he was not operating in the context of a social movement, whether a rising or falling one, and his star had somewhat waned judged by the frequency of public performances, interviews and pronouncements. This compares to the social movements of squatting (The 101ers) or punk (The Clash). Anarchism at this point did not comprise a social movement nor much of a political movement either. Indicating the divisions within anarchists and recognising remaining anarcho-punk bands like Chumbawamba and Conflict had less appeal and profile than desired, it was noteworthy Strummer was approached. London Class War itself had also experienced decline since its ‘Bash the Rich’ and ‘Stop the City’ activities of the early 1980s, and the anarcho-punk movement was disintegrating after Crass disbanded in 1984. The anti-poll tax campaign had yet to substantially come into being. Underlying these factors, RAtR was primarily a propaganda act, and not even the ‘propaganda of deed’. Drawing on social movement studies, political mobilisation as a collective action takes place when, inter alia, there is a sense of grievance or injustice – rather than just mere discontent – with an agency being held responsible for creating the grievance or injustice, collective or group identity exists precipitating a form of social organisation, and an opportunity to act exists. These conditions did not exist and so any possible roots RAtR might plant – other than to confirm their existing politics – would be shallow and slight. Strummer had experienced a profound personal and political disorientation (see Chapter 7). So, his reticence to on-stage rabblerousing resulted from loss of personal self-confidence rather than a move away from the views themselves. It seemed he now saw himself playing a lesser part in promoting the ideas he had about achieving progressive social change. In early 1988, he stated, in filling in for guitarist Philip Chevron of The Pogues, he was more than happy to stand on the sidelines and away from the frontline when performing.

160

Rocking against the rich

Participation The tour highlighted the challenges facing politically engaged musicians when performing. Some attended just because of the music – in other words, their motivation was no more or less than a pleasurable psychological experience. Indeed, many clearly wanted Strummer to reprise nothing else but The Clash itself. Some attended for this reason and because of their political affiliation to the lyrical content of the songs and Strummer’s perceived politics. The sense of disappointment with Cut The Crap still hung in the air, and without the vigour occasioned by a new record to promote – Earthquake Weather was not released until 1989 – it is likely many did not even participate at the most basic level of attendance. While some may have gone to the gigs in small groups and others as fairly atomised individuals, there was no evidence even the more politically minded agreed collectively to sign up to engaging in the activities of a social movement or political campaign. To expect otherwise sets the bar too high even for such a political tour as RAtR was (rather than sought to be).

Conclusion Emerging out of drunken bravado rather than an activist-orientation on the part of Strummer, the tour was a tale of well-intentioned energy and passion, where Strummer sought to open up space for subversion but produced little in the way of further political capital for himself or the radical left, despite being his most sustained political activity. Previously, he had mostly played one-off benefit gigs for various causes. Ironically, it was at this time that Strummer’s his lyrics tipped further away from social realism (see pp.61–62). What stands out is Strummer’s ability to mostly finance the tour and his reticence to make on-stage political pronouncements so that the positive psychological impact of his previous rabblerousing was absent. As such, RAtR was a poor attempt to make propaganda and raise the level of oppositional consciousness. What is also notable is that Strummer was politically heterodox. He was capable

161

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

of supporting Labour as an increasingly parliamentary party, which he saw as ‘socialist’ when he thought this was merited. Most obviously, this was at times of elections. But he was also capable between times of advocating forms of collective direct action and community self-help. RAtR indicated this, and that contrary to what he had stated earlier, he saw anarchism as a legitimate credo. What united the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary practices was Strummer’s belief in the importance of idealism and truth-telling (see Chapter 3), where action is not in itself spurned, but where ideas and knowledge are believed to have power in themselves.

162

6

Advocate not activist

Many have characterised Strummer as some kind of activist. Some instances giving an indication of this are Moore and Roberts’s (2009: 273) statement: ‘As the lead singer and principal songwriter for The Clash, Joe Strummer was at the center of punk rock’s politicised protests in the late 1970s and early 1980s’; Rifer (2003: 34) writing: ‘Clad in a Brigade Rosse T-shirt, performing at anti-racist rallies …’; Douglas (2003) remarking: ‘He was a great fighter for the working class’; Bond (2003) stating: ‘He fought, always, against the injustices of the world’; Roctober (Winter 2003) proffering: ‘Joe was the Rebel General making revolution rock, dropping leaflets over the crowd’; Parkinson (2005) believed Strummer ‘was involved with several anti-racist campaigns’; Dunn (2011: 30) commenting after the RAR gig, The Clash – and thus, Strummer – ‘continued to be active in anti-racist causes’; and Andersen (2013: 5) stating The Clash, and thus, Strummer, ‘created tunes that could … move bodies into action in the streets’. Similarly, Rachel (2014: 301) remarked: ‘The Clash were all about action’.1 These are suggestive characterisations. Tranmer (2014: 107) noted his ‘image as an activist’. Gray (2001: xiii) was rather more certain: ‘[The Clash was] originally conceived and marketed as street-level political activists who happened to have chosen rock ’n’ roll music as the medium for their message’ with Strummer being an ‘angry-activist’ in the early Clash when he had not 1 Film Comment (July/August 1987) also noted Strummer and The Clash were ‘a cadre of urban guerrillas raging against Britain’s social malaise [that] later developed their iconography into that of a more internationally alert agitprop army’.

163

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

been before (Gray 2003: 486, 93). So too was D’Ambrosio, categorising Strummer as a ‘political activist’ (2003, 2004a: back cover) and a ‘creative activist’ (2012b: xix, 2012f: 140) imbued with ‘left-wing political activism’ (2003), ‘creative activism’ (2002, 2003) and ‘cultural activism’ (2012a: back cover). Only once did D’Ambrosio (2012f: 139) more accurately call Strummer a ‘political musician’. Toynbee (2019: 49) declared, without any evidence or qualifications about the different members: ‘In their role as cultural workers The Clash were exemplary activists … [engaging in] cultural activism’ while SPIN (December 1999) stated The Clash embodied ‘rebel activism’. The same month Guitar World (December 1999) declared Strummer was a ‘campaigner’, with The Clash being ‘political agitators’. NME (11 January 2003) called Strummer a ‘political activist’ as did Harden (2013: 219). Meantime, Keating classified Strummer as a ‘preacher-agitator’ (The Roundtable 13 November 2007) while Smith (2009: 154) called The Clash ‘snarling activists’.2 Few were critical of Strummer’s lack of perceived activism (see p.177). There is no doubt Strummer saw music as a way to advance left-wing politics, but that did not make him an activist, even if he advocated individuals should become politically active and activists themselves. Consequently, these characterisations are wrong. By showing what Strummer was not, this chapter will demonstrate what he was. So the locus for identifying and understanding Strummer’s influence is to be primarily found in what he said – the words he spoke in his lyrics, interviews and on-stage pronouncements – and not in what he did, because he was not an activist prosecuting his politics by turning words into deeds. Activists seek to generate countervailing power through their actions. Chapters 8 and 9 examine the other side of this equation – namely, his followers. 2 Others made similar allusions. Imarisha (2014: 147) misrepresents Tanz (2007: 113). Tanz wrote: ‘But none of this mattered. Public Enemy deftly blurred the line between activism and entertainment, creating unignorable art with the passion, urgency, anger, and antiauthoritarian attitude of punk legends such as the Clash and the Sex Pistols.’ In the hands of Imarisha, this became: ‘Tanz compares Public Enemy to both The Clash and other British punk icons, the Sex Pistols, saying all three “deftly blurred the line between activism and entertainment, creating unignorable art with the passion, urgency, anger, and anti-authoritarian attitude”’.

164

Advocate not activist

So, this is in spite of Strummer’s ‘White Riot’ call to action. It was almost his only direct lyrical ‘call to action’ with ‘Clampdown’ and ‘Corner Soul’ (1980) coming close behind.3 And, it is in spite of him saying of ‘White Riot’: ‘In its clumsy way it’s trying to say to white people, if we’re going to do anything, we’re going to have to become anarchists or activists, we can’t just sit around and be pummelled by society, or plastered over’ (Strummer et al. 2008: 105).4 This absence of activism is also in spite of imploring audiences to become active themselves, whether at The Clash’s fifth gig on 5 September 1976 with: ‘I’d just like to protest about the state of affairs, so any of you in the audience who aren’t past it should get out and do something, instead of lying around’ (Salewicz 2006: 173) to the first ‘Out of control’ tour gig in Glasgow on 10 February 1984 with: ‘I’ll tell you: become activists! Yeah, any damn thing is better than nothing. Read Che Guevara, paint furniture pink and superglue it to the sides of city buses, anything … become an activist! … [Let’s] get rid of Thatcher before she gets rid of us!’ 5 Another example was a 1984 gig in Davenport, Indiana, when he urged the audience to attend a demonstration outside an armaments factory a few days later (Daily Dispatch 21 May 1984). The only sense that Strummer came close to being an activist was in trying to establish some new cultural infrastructure (see pp.190–191). Here, his efforts were lacklustre. Rather, Strummer was an advocate. More specifically, he was a rhetorician, that is, one who speaks to impress with a somewhat exaggerated style. Consequently, and notwithstanding the unwarranted conflation of Strummer with The Clash, Coulter (2019c: 73) was on firmer ground in seeing The Clash as ‘advocates and maybe even the agents of some radical 3 ‘Do It Now’ (1985) was not a ‘paean to pro-activism’, as Gray (2001: 396) believed. 4 Of ‘White Riot’, he also said: ‘[I]t was important to join the struggle with those groups being beaten down and who were willing to do something about it’ (D’Ambrosio 2012e: 125) for reasons of solidarity and self-interest. Strummer repeated the song’s basic message of ‘get active’ in a MOJO interview: ‘white people [have] to become activists’ (Topping 2004: 159). 5 Future socialist Member of the Scottish Parliament, Colin Fox, attended the gig as a Labour Party Young Socialists (LPYS) activist, recounting Strummer made this statement after picking up the LPYS leaflet distributed at the gig.

165

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

political alternative’. Few recognised advocacy. Chase (1985) was one: ‘Instead of being satisfied with commenting on society … Strummer apparently has decided to advocate action for social change.’ Ironically, given Gray’s (2001: xiii) earlier statement, a few lines later he proffered Strummer ‘never stopped preaching and proselytising’. Tranmer (2014: 92, 108) made a fleeting distinction between Strummer being perceived as an advocate and activist of anti-racism and anti-fascism with RAR, concluding limited involvement in RAR and the depoliticisation of music made Strummer look better than he was in this regard. An advocate proselytises for a world view and its associated components like values and beliefs. Part of this necessarily involves encouraging others to act. While activists proselytise, they also necessarily engage in deeds which they encourage others to engage in. The internet has not fundamentally altered this. These deeds are campaigning and mobilising based upon agitating and organising. Even though there are scales of activism, this is an active and not passive pursuit. A person who does so for remuneration or through their employment is not an activist but a paid organiser. Recalling the socialist realist framework (see pp.15–19), Strummer would not have been expected to be an activist in these terms. However, he would be expected to be involved in consciousness-raising, educational development, ideological awareness and engagement with others. This could have been within the forums created by his music and the bands he led, such as his followership and the music press. Or, it could also be outside these forums. Correcting the misperception-cum-misconception matters in order to understand the relationship between Strummer’s politics and influence. First, if Strummer had been an activist, he would have been expected to have taken initiatives and measures to organise followers in order to give effect to his views and values and create leverage for realising them. As he did not, two things follow: one is his politics can be seen as necessary but not sufficient for creating social or political change; the other is that his influence existed on a particular plane of ideas and emotions and not actions. Despite this, many of those who characterised Strummer as an activist did so because they projected their desired agency of activism 166

Advocate not activist

onto him as a means of legitimation and affirmation of their world views and activism’s role in achieving its goals. Second, as Strummer neither provided a ‘road map’ on how to operationalise his politics nor sought to operationalise one by taking initiatives, his influence was counterintuitively less constricted than it might otherwise have been. Salewicz (2006: 491) commented: ‘There was never anything especially specific in his satirical grumbling, apart from “Get on with it!’”.’ Third, the lack of his specific actions to prosecute his politics meant that his politics were never tested in any concrete way, remaining at the level of being ideas and emotions. These last two reasons are key factors in explaining the breadth of his influence. The arc of activism Activism is not synonymous with activists because activism in itself does not necessarily imply the higher, more sustained and consistent levels of activism that activists carry out and which constitute being an activist. Consequently, activism could be more short-term, episodic and fragmented. This is salient for disavowing the activist thesis not only because of Strummer’s self-imposed period of hibernation denoted as his ‘wilderness years’, but also because he was a musician first and foremost, even if a politically engaged one, so that his time was taken up with this. With this in mind, and to provide an overall critique of the combined misperception-cummisconception of Strummer as an activist, the notion of an ‘arc of activism’ is used. It is largely based on aggregating together perceptions of Strummer as an activist which emerged after his death. The occasion of Strummer’s death prompted many to piece together elements to provide the basis for an artificial, unbroken arc. Quintessentially, it stretched from participation in the August 1976 Notting Hill riot and ‘headlining’ 6 the RAR gig on 30

6 Many including as Binette (2003: 16), Socialist Worker (4 September 2004), D’Ambrosio (2012h: 265) and Letts (2021: 165) wrongly believed this to be the case. The Tom Robinson Band headlined, playing after The Clash. Though Stiff Little Fingers and Elvis Costello also played major RAR gigs, no one attributed the same significance to their performances.

167

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

April 1978, all the way through to playing his supposedly last gig at Acton Town Hall in 2002 for the hardship fund of striking firefighters.7 Looking back on his life, the Washington Post (24 December 2002) called Strummer ‘punk’s first and most influential activist’, Variety (6 January 2003) called him an ‘activist’ and Ribot (2003)8 entitled his obituary ‘Remembering Joe Strummer, Guitarist and Activist’ for the newsletter of the American Federation of Musicians’ New York chapter. However, leading exponents of the arc ranged from self-described activist, writer and artist, D’Ambrosio (2003, 2012a) to Billy Bragg (2003). D’Ambrosio (2004b: xiii) labelled Strummer an ‘indefatigable political activist’, charging: He became involved in many different movements and supported many causes before they were fashionable. The Clash were at the forefront of the Rock against Racism movement … Strummer pushed The Clash to support publicly the H-Block protests in Northern Ireland … He performed for the last time … at a benefit for striking London firefighters. (D’Ambrosio 2012c: 5)9

Here, D’Ambrosio misconceives, through exaggeration, the breadth and depth of alleged activism.10 Meanwhile, Bragg (2003) wrote: ‘He drew us, thousands strong, onto the streets of London in support of Rock Against Racism … [and] his final gig … was a benefit concert for the firefighters’ union’.11 At the Southampton ‘Strumming for England’ gig on 22 February 2003, Bragg laid out the arc of activism thesis at great length. A Razorcake obituary (13 January 2003) recounted Strummer’s ‘tireless political activism’.

7 Even if it was his last gig, it would have been just serendipity given he died of a congenital undiagnosed heart defect. Strummer covered the costs of staging the gig (Socialist Worker 4 September 2004). 8 Ribot (2003) wrote Strummer was ‘a true voice of punk resistance … [and] … a musician, recording artist and rock rebel whose opposition went beyond hollow rhetoric [and] phony gestures of resistance’. 9 D’Ambrosio (2003) also wrongly twice stated the Acton gig was ‘Strummer’s final public performance’. He did not correct this when the article was reprinted (D’Ambrosio 2012c: 1: 13). 10 D’Ambrosio (2012e: 124) similarly with The Clash: ‘They took a prominent role in Rock Against Racism [which was part of] … the group’s anti-racist activism.’ 11 Bragg made similar points in UNCUT (March 2003).

168

Advocate not activist

The Clash Magazine (December 2012/January 2013)12 not only proffered without any evidence: ‘[H]is words were not merely empty slogans, but keenly felt commitments that were backed by actions … Whatever form his activism took, it reached out directly to people’, and then projected forwards: ‘If he was still with us, it is likely that he’d have involved himself in campaigns such as Occupy and opposed governmental oppression and economic exploitation across the globe’. Bedford (2007) believed: ‘Acton will always attest to a political commitment that went beyond words’. D’Ambrosio and Bragg were not alone in wrongly stating the FBU gig was Strummer’s last, and in doing so giving succour to the artificial arc of activism. Others were Toronto’s Globe and Mail (28 December 2002), Telegraph (24 December 2002), Guardian (31 December 2002), Green Left Weekly (15 January 2003) and SPIN (April 2003). Then leading SWP member, John Rees, commented it was ‘[e]ntirely fitting then that his last gig was in support of the firefighters’ (Socialist Review January 2003).13 The then FBU general secretary, Andy Gilchrist, remarked: ‘[I]t turns out that [Acton] … wasn’t the last public performance he made, but my story tells it as so.’ For argument’s sake at this point, if an arc of activism did exist it began with Strummer’s first 101ers gig on 6 September 1974 and ended with his fourth last ever gig. The former was organised by the Chile Solidarity Campaign (CSC) as a fundraiser for Chilean exiles after the 1973 coup.14 The latter in Bridgwater was a benefit to raise money for The Engine Room film and media centre on 17 November 2002. His last ever gig, the final night of his last tour on 22 November, was at Liverpool University. On this tour, three of his eleven last gigs were benefits. Interestingly, in this arc of activism, RAtR is strangely absent given it comprised twenty-three gigs which Strummer headlined. More 12 Founded in 2004, it had no relationship to The Clash. 13 National Union of Journalists general secretary Jeremy Dear, on his blog (19 November 2007), did similarly. 14 See also Gilbert (2009: 66). The 101ers’ second gig was also a CSC benefit gig (Salewicz 2006: 127). Strummer did play the major role in establishing the Charlie Pigdog Club, a weekly gig for the 101ers in a west London pub (Needs 2005: 19).

169

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

can be added to this such as his 101ers playing numerous benefits gigs for the squatters’ movement, other Chilean solidarity campaigns, a law centre and prisoners (Needs 2005: 22, 24, Guardian 24 December 2002) to Strummer playing Rock for Refugees’ on 16 April 1994 in Prague for those displaced by the Bosnian war. In 1999, he played at the fundraiser to save Greater London Radio (Observer 10 October 1999) and a Tibetan freedom concert in Amsterdam. As with all the benefit gigs other than his role in the RAR gig, there is no evidence Strummer played any role in initiating them.15 Strummer also contributed to benefit albums like that for the Human Rights Action Centre and Free the West Memphis Three (Needs 2005: 296–297, 318). There was also much to be subtracted from the ‘arc of activism’ with regard to Strummer’s inactivity in his ‘wilderness years’ from 1989 to 1999 in regard of campaigning against the poll tax, the first Gulf War, pit closure programme and Criminal Justice Bill. But his particular plight in the ‘wilderness years’ accounts less for his inactivity than his inactivism per se. Nonetheless, playing what amount at best to no more than a handful of benefit gigs per year did not constitute activism, especially when Strummer played no part in initiating or organising those gigs.16 Whether for the 101ers, Clash, LRW or Mescaleros, activists and campaigners overwhelmingly approached Strummer to play the gigs, not vice versa. So, he did not solicit such gigs. When The Clash toured the US for the first time in 1979, they played three benefits gigs. In only one case, the San Francisco RAR chapter, did Strummer take the lead by offering to play. Commies from Mars organised the Brixton benefit gig in support of the FSLN and to raise money for the Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign

15 See, for example, Salewicz (2006: 248, 250, 257, 279). 16 Strummer turned down one request for a benefit gig in the US: ‘[A] group of fans followed The Clash from city to city, hoping to convince the band to play a revolutionary May Day benefit. Although Strummer eventually passed, he heard the fans out, and taped “1 May Take a holiday” to his guitar for the band’s US TV debut on ABC’s … “Fridays” in April 1980’ (Joe Strummer (official) Facebook page 1 May 2020). Unwittingly, Gray (2003: 343), Needs (2005: 223) and Jucha (2016: 296) read it as ‘I May Take a holiday’ because they did not realise 1 May was the May Day workers’ holiday.

170

Advocate not activist

at which Strummer played on 7 August 1985.17 The gigs played for the Italian Communist Party in 1980, 1981 and 1984 and Ligue communiste révolutionnaire in 1978 were paid gigs. Notwithstanding his role in initiating RAtR (see pp.153–154), the closest Strummer came to playing a part in helping organise a benefit was ensuring The Clash played RAR, despite Rhodes’s opposition (Red Pepper June 2006, Socialist Worker 14 January 2003, Green and Barker 2003: 65–66, Salewicz 2006: 217, Tranmer 2014: 96, Baker 2018). Baker (2018) recalled: ‘[Strummer] had been originally approached by John Dennis of the ANL and Red Saunders of RAR, after Saunders had been thoroughly declined by Rhodes who’d dismissed them as “a collection of students playing politics”. Joe nevertheless was adamant and pressed for participation in the event despite the internal politics being played out.’ The lateness of Strummer’s intervention is highlighted by The Clash only being added to the bill a week before the gig, so its name did not feature on the publicity posters (Tranmer 2018: 89–90). The only other known instance of Strummer taking an initiative was reported by Dennis (Rachel 2017: 143): ‘I got a call from Joe Strummer … saying … “I want to put a gig together with all the big names in punk and record it for an LP to sell to support RAR. Can you book Hyde Park?”’ Strummer (NME 30 June 1979) substantiated this. This may have been the origins of RAR’s 1980 LP Greatest Hits. Strummer reported The Clash and The Who were trying to organise benefits gigs for Misty after the band was attacked by racists and its equipment smashed (NME 30 June 1979). A gig with Aswad and The Members then took place on 29 July 1979.18 When The Clash was neither writing, recording 17 In this regard, Jello Biafra of the Dead Kennedys was only partly right to charge: ‘It’s one thing to call an album Sandinista!, it’s another thing to do something about the situation in Nicaragua’ (Ogg 2014: 70). Though Tranmer (2017: 152) noted neither Strummer nor any other Clash member ‘bec[a]me involved in any way with the [British] Nicaragua Coordinating Committee [which became the Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign in 1980]’, out of this benefit gig came the proposal by film producer Eric Fellner to tour Nicaragua with the same musicians in August 1986. This fell through due to financing problems. 18 This gig is not to be confused, as Gilbert (2009: 236) did, with the Southall Defence Fund gig of 14 July 1979, which The Clash, among others, played, for black youth arrested on an earlier anti-Nazi demonstrations.

171

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

nor touring in early 1983, Strummer wrote and directed Hell W10 which had no obvious left political content or purpose (see p.137). In this period, for example, Strummer had the opportunity to support the Greenham Common Women’s Peace Camp, the first major anti-nuclear campaign of the 1980s. The camp attempted to prevent the deployment of American cruise missiles. Even though he had recently supported CND by virtue of ‘Stop the World’, B-side to ‘The Call Up’ (1981), with its royalties going to CND, and advocated unilateral disarmament (NME 3 January 1981), Strummer was dismissive of CND and the Greenham Common Peace Camp, saying: ‘We just figured [the marches were] … a release [of steam]’ (NME 25 February 1984) and ‘We are not interested in them’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 195, see also Needs 2005: 205). He and The Clash also declined to play an anti-nuclear New York benefit on 12 June 1982 (Rolling Stone 19 August 1982). This reflected his fatalism and pessimism for the prospects of the campaigns being effective (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 195). When the anti-capitalist or anti-globalisation movement took off in 1999, Strummer made no connection with it, as an activist would be expected to do, especially given these years saw his return to the stage with The Mescaleros and his lyrics on global inequality. In terms of anti-fascism and anti-racism, if Strummer was an activist then it would have been expected he would have picketed the house of National Front leader, John Tyndall, in 1977, with Jones and Simonon (along with Glen Matlock and two members of Steel Pulse),19 or that he would have been at the demonstration to stop the National Front marching in London on 13 August 1977 known as The Battle of Lewisham. He was on neither.20 There is ambiguity as to the role Strummer played in arranging for Aboriginal rights activists to speak at The Clash’s Australian tour gigs in 1982. Simonon (Strummer et al. 2008: 335) recounted Aboriginal activists approached him initially. By contrast, Maloney and Grosz (The Monthly December 2013/January 2014) contend Strummer phoned the leading 19 Binette (2003: 17) wrongly implied Strummer was involved. Tranmer (2014: 97) was wrong to state Strummer was present. Photographs attest to this (Needs 2005: 93). 20 According to Gray (2003: 246), neither Strummer, Simonon nor Jones attended the demonstration because they were recording.

172

Advocate not activist

Aboriginal activist, Gary Foley, and then invited him to the band’s hotel to educate him on Australian politics. Having met, according to Maloney and Grosz: ‘Strummer ended up asking Foley to share his thoughts on stage during that night’s gig.’ Music journalist, David Langsam (Gall 2020),21 disputes this, stating he took the initiative of getting Aboriginal activists to speak at the gigs by connecting Strummer with Foley.22 Similar questions exist over whether Strummer played a role in getting activists from the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador to speak at the Bond’s residency in New York in 1981. Gilbert (2009: 298) asserted he did, even though Strummer told Sounds (20 June 1981): ‘They asked if they could set up a stall and we said yeah and then one of them felt brave enough to say he wanted to make a speech on stage. I hate speeches, politicians stuffing it down people’s throats, so I thought it would be better if they just did it over the music.’ The occasion was ‘Washington Bullets’ where, mid-song, Strummer repeatedly shouted ‘El Salvador’ to cue in the activist saying: ‘A message from Central America: we bring revolutionary greetings because The Clash is the only rock group that supports a revolution in central America [cheers from audience]. We believe that nothing will stop our revolution, not even thousands and thousands of bullets from Washington.’ Boston Rock (June 1981) confirmed Strummer’s version. In terms of workers’ struggles, and unlike Paul Heaton (The Housemartins), Jimmy Somerville (Bronski Beat), The Redskins, Weller and Bragg, Strummer did not visit any picket lines during the year-long miners’ strike.23 The Clash played two benefit gigs for the miners on 6 and 7 December 1984. These were far too little and far too late to undo 21 For an analysis of the impact of these gigs on political consciousness, see Gall (2020) and pp.256–257. 22 Solis (2017: 174) asserted: ‘None of the members of The Clash had expressed any significant … interest in Indigenous issues (in Australia or elsewhere) prior to this tour’, but The Clash Atlas with Give ’Em Enough Rope did highlight awareness of Aboriginal rights (Wadlow 2017: 211). Due to a printing error, it was withdrawn, but its image is widely available on the internet. Foley spoke at the Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide gigs and Bob Weatherall at the Brisbane one. Strummer also mentioned the plight of the Aboriginal people in radio interviews (e.g. BBC Radio 1 5 July 1982). 23 The same could be said about the 1986–87 year-long strike against News International at Wapping.

173

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

the record of inactivity. So, Strummer did not front a national tour to support the miners even when the Out of Control tour of Britain, Europe and the US ended in May 1984.24 From May until September 1984 The Clash did not play any gigs, and the next they played were paid for gigs for the Italian Communist Party. The busking tour took place after the strike but not did not visit any other picket lines (Andersen and Heibutzski 2018: 287). Nor did Strummer seek to provide other financial and moral support as Weller did with The Council Collective’s ‘Soul Deep’ single of late 1984. Where Strummer was politically left wing in this period, it took the form of writing lyrics for Cut the Crap. As the miners’ strike was the highest and most intense period of working-class struggle in 1980s, Strummer’s inactivity stands out like a sore thumb. For this reason, Bragg rightly commented: ‘Where was The Clash? They were AWOL, missing in action, nowhere to be seen’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 190), though ‘missing in inaction’ would have been more appropriate. Having gone on marches to support the miners, Clash guitarist Nick Sheppard did his own miners’ benefit gig in Bristol as The Clash was so slow to move (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 185). He also reported Strummer’s motivation to do miners’ benefits gigs was a ‘good publicity stunt’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 220). What explains these absences of activism? It was Simonon, not Strummer, who gave vent to the tension between being musicianship and activism: ‘What do they mean “we should be out there organising?” We shouldn’t be out there organising anything … How can we make records if we have to do that all the time?’ (Fast Forward March 1982).25 For Strummer, there were other reasons during the miners’ strike and afterwards. Only part of this concerns his personal predicament. In February 1984 his father died; from late 1984 onwards his mother was terminally ill; and his two children were born in late 1983 and early 1986. Strummer made his first 24 A letter to the NME (15 September 1984) essentially made this point, and Strummer was criticised in 1985 for having done so little for the miners (Jones 2009: 164). 25 Piekut (2019: 85) observed: ‘Working musicians coordinating their own gigs, tours, recordings, and publicity were too burdened with their own affairs to bring a consistent discipline to [the] MFS [organisation]’.

174

Advocate not activist

trip to Granada in October 1984, returning in December 1984 straight after the miners’ benefit gigs. He returned to Spain twice in June 1985, then later in the same year. Some of the time in Spain he produced 091’s second album. Such personal challenges, along with the attempt to escape The Clash’s accelerating implosion, occasioning his depression and alcohol dependency, are proffered to explain why Strummer was not more involved in supporting the miners’ strike and the like. But that is to not see the wood for the trees. Strummer was not an activist prior to or after these personal and political events. For example, during the period of ‘rebel rock’ in Britain and the US, and though he urged registration and voting, he did not even insist on voter registration or left-wing literature stalls at gigs.26 As Andersen and Heibutzki (2018: 150–151) argued, with the upcoming 1984 US presidential election: ‘Only moral support was given, divorced from practical politics.’ Strummer often commented he was not an activist: ‘[Y]ou’re talking about activism, I’m not pretending to be an activist. That’s … another thing completely’ (Creem October 1984) and ‘It’s all talk and no action with me’ at the Bologna Festa de l’Unita (4 September 1999). Bragg further added to his criticism by noting in 2007: ‘You can talk, you can write, but do you actually do anything?’ (Follos 2007). However, there were other reasons for Strummer not being an activist. Asked in the late 1980s, ‘Did you ever want to take your role as a punk figurehead any further, in a political sense maybe?’, he responded: ‘No. I just know I could never be any good. I think you have to know yourself fully, make your decisions on what you find out. I just know I’d never be a good committeeman or submit to any kind of discipline’ (Film Comment July/August 1987). In a 2001 Music Planet interview, he commented: ‘I’m probably like every other person … I’m not a particular expert on any given area … compared to [Bono and Bragg whose personalities fit their activism] … I operate exactly at my right level … you can only complement your personality by the things you do.’ Instead, Strummer was an advocate 26 At one gig in Florida in April 1984, fans leafleted, urging voter registration (St Petersburg Times 2 April 1984).

175

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

through his words not deeds, remarking: ‘I’m really a lyric man’ (HBO ‘Reverb’ 23 November 1999, New York Hangover March 2000) and ‘I would consider myself mainly a lyric guy’ (UNCUT February 2003). The artificial arc of activism is matched by another phenomenon, namely, the ‘curve of continuing conviction’, stretching from 1976 to 2002. It comprises the view that not only was Strummer consistent in his oppositional stances but also ‘was there’ as a psycho-ideological support. Examples are ‘a rebel to the last’ (Guardian 31 December 2002), ‘a lifetime of rebellion’ (NME 11 January 2003) and RAR cofounder, Red Saunders’s appreciation: ‘Joe’s solidarity with west London’s multicultural proletariat … was where the roots lay of the many progressive adventures he undertook for the rest of his life … “Keep the Faith” said … the badge. Joe Strummer did just that’ (Socialist Worker 14 January 2003). But there are also further plentiful instances: Musicians’ Union officer, Keith Ames: ‘Joe never ever let you down. And somehow you knew he never would’ (Musician June 2003) and comedian, Mark Steel: ‘The Clash didn’t just legitimise anger; they politicised it … The sadness in Joe Strummer’s death is not that he was an icon for a generation – that’s relatively easy. It’s that 25 Thatcher- and Blair-dominated years later, Strummer was still fuelled by his original passions, principles and humility. He never let us down’ (Binette 2003: 60).27 Others included John Rees: ‘Joe Strummer was bigger than the movement he did so much to direct. He never left our side’ (Socialist Review January 2003); Bragg: ‘Right to the end he held on to his ideas’ (MOJO March 2003) and ‘He walked it like he talked it’ (McDonald and Miles 2003); Direct Action (Winter 2003/2004): ‘It is typical though of the man … still showing the commitment he had from the punk days’; activist, Alexander Billet (2007): ‘These types of events [benefit gigs] were standard fare for Strummer’; then National Union of Journalists (NUJ) general secretary, Jeremy Dear: ‘Joe had always stood out against the racists, for public services not private profit, for co-operation not competition’;28 fan and writer, Joe Swinford: ‘Joe continued to support the common man 27 He repeated this, saying: ‘He never really let us down’ (McDonald and Miles 2003). 28 Jeremy Dear blog, 19 November 2007.

176

Advocate not activist

up until his death’ (Louder Than War 3 January 2012); writer, Peter Ross: ‘[H]e continued to support political causes, playing benefits for striking fighters and so on’ (Scotland on Sunday 16 December 2012); and author, Tommy Tompkins: ‘From his first days with The Clash till his last days on Earth he was openly political. He was anti-racist, anti-war, anti-colonialist, and pro-socialist … he never stopped trying to equal the score either’ (SPIN 17 December 2012).29 Finally, union officer Geoff Martin (Binette 2003: 53) claimed: ‘Joe Strummer came into our lives as he left it. Standing up for the underdog against the machine’, while Baker commented: ‘And even to Joe’s bitter end he was still playing benefits, still fighting for the underdog’ and D’Ambrosio (2012c: 4) remarked: ‘Living true to his words, Strummer held on to his political beliefs throughout his life’. Other such examples can be found among Bedford’s (2014: 59, 60, 63) interviewees. There were only a few contrary voices (e.g. Knowles 2003: 17). Like the arc of activism, the continuing curve of conviction is misguided too for it ignores his years of hibernation and the extent to which he changed his world view from the 1990s onwards (see Chapter 7). It also ignores Strummer was the keenest to reform The Clash, probably for financial security given his rationale for forming The Mescaleros (see p.181). UNCUT (September 2012) recounted: ‘[S]ubsequent attempts to reform The Clash have always been initiated by Strummer, not Jones, to which he readily admits [saying:] ‘Yeah, but I’m not that big on pride’. There was criticism of Strummer’s lack of activism (Creem October 1984). In addition to Bragg, and before the miners’ strike, Redskins lead vocalist and lyricist, Chris Dean, criticised Strummer (and Weller) for merely singing about ‘picket lines’ rather than taking direct action by making protests ‘something that they themselves go down to’ (MM 11 February 1984). Paraphrasing Marx, and with the likes of Strummer in his sights, Dean (Open Eye Films 2017) argued there are ‘too many rock ’n’ roll philosophers. The point is not to interpret the word but change it.’ A sense of what activism and activists among musicians look like can 29 Tompkins is author of the ‘33 1/3’ book on London Calling (Continuum 2016).

177

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

be gained by looking at other individuals. This indicates the only sense in which Strummer could be called an activist would be as ‘armchair activist’ 30 – not as a keyboard warrior in the age of social media – but as a lyricist using a typewriter. The Derelicts, which former 101ers’ member Dan Kelliher joined, were an ‘agit-prop’ band ‘linked closely with the politics of claimants’ unions … and of squatting’ (Laing 2015: 26, 57). Their ‘agit-prop songs … were designed to satirise figures of authority and raise the spirits of those struggling against the system’ (Laing 2015: 57). The key aspect of active engagement with social movements and campaigns is highlighted by considering the period of the early to late 1980s, where two individuals and one band stood out for their activism compared to Strummer. They were active not only in taking their music and associated views out to a wider set of audiences than would normally attend their gigs but did so in a way that attempted to make firmer and more productive connections between the politics of their music and political campaigning. These were Bragg, Weller, and The Redskins, but their activism did not necessarily make them activists (see also p.173). They were, for musicians, heavily involved in campaigning, inter alia, against apartheid, nuclear weapons, and youth unemployment, and for the miners, and in Red Wedge. Yet, with exception of Red Wedge, those activities involved little more than playing benefit gigs. The political parties associated with these activities were Communist, Labour, Militant and SWP. Other than The Redskins, with two of its three members SWP members, Bragg and Weller were not activists in any conventional sense. Redskins’ members, for example, visited miners’ picket lines regularly, but recounted playing live frequently made it difficult to continue being activists. Selling Socialist Worker at early morning workplace sales after returning back home late from out-of-town gigs became unmanageable (Socialist Worker 10 January 1987). For Bragg and Weller, this same activist challenge did not exist. Nonetheless, Bragg, Weller and The Redskins were active as musicians who were socialists, using their music and its 30 This phrase is used as Creem (October 1984) commented The Clash probably embodied ‘armchair activism’.

178

Advocate not activist

platform to promote their politics. The one exception was Red Wedge where Bragg and Weller personally initiated the organisation and were heavily involved in its early management and promotion. Unlike Weller and The Redskins (which split in 1986 with its members ceasing to become musicians), Bragg continued his activism, whether by creating the initiative to supply prisoners with guitars called Jail Guitar Doors, safeguarding the right to busk or advocating for constitutional reform. Whether in terms of being a political activist or as a musician who was politically active, Strummer did not compare favourably with Bragg, Weller and The Redskins, as Tranmer (2014: 107) concluded: ‘Strummer’s activism pales into comparison to the sustained nature of those he influenced.’ 31 However, as argued above, a more searching assessment would not register Strummer on any scale or spectrum of activism. D’Ambrosio (2004a, 2012a) and others were not only ignorant of Strummer’s limited extent of political involvement by comparison to Bragg, Weller or The Redskins, but also have tenuous definitions of ‘activist’ and ‘activism’, projecting onto Strummer what, in effect, they wish he was. And yet, despite all this, Strummer was far more influential as an artist and cultural figure, judged by the criterion of socialist realism (see pp.15–19). Considering The Redskins especially highlights that while activism and musicianship are not incompatible, the activism of musicians is likely to take certain, limited forms compared to that of activists more generally. Consequently, it is improbable musicians can also be activists even in the case of The Redskins in which, according its bassist, Martin Hewes, ‘politics [wa]s the purpose’ (Open Eye Films 2018). In the US, there were examples of L7 being instrumental in setting up ‘Rock for Choice’, as a series of benefit concerts between 1991 and 2001 to support the abortion rights movement, while Tom Morello and Zach de la Rocha of Rage Against The Machine advocated and played benefits gigs for immigrant rights, Zapatistas and Occupy, among others. Morello cofounded Axis of Justice in 2007 as an organisation to bring together 31 Prévot and Sinclair (2017: 83) also commented with relevance to Strummer: ‘The Clash were never activists or members of the Anti-Nazi League’.

179

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

musicians, music fans and grassroots progressives to fight for social justice. Boots Riley of The Coup established the Young Comrades organisation in Oakland, California. The Dropkick Murphys have been vocal supporters of workers’ and union rights in the US, sometimes raising money for such causes. However, the best example of musician activism came from Prairie Fire in the 1970s in the US. Its two members joined the Revolutionary Communist Party. Inspired by The Clash, Prairie Fire at one point for two years played on average two benefit gigs per week (Callahan 2001). These were anti-war ones and for strikers and black liberation struggles. Prairie Fire echoed a tradition of the folk song musician activism in the US from the 1960s onwards of the likes of Fred Stanton who wrote songs for and about strikes and protests and played them to these strikers and protestors. A more contemporary and global Billy Bragg-like figure is Manu Chao who has had an equally activist bent with Mano Negra and on his own (Red Pepper August 2008). One of the biggest challenges to the thesis of Strummer as an activist lies in a further aspect of his personal predicament. He frequently admitted to being lazy and disorganised (e.g. Rolling Stone 19 August 1982, Wyatt 2018: 327). As part of The Clash, this disorganisation became almost legendary (Sounds 20 June 1981, UNCUT September 2012). In 1989, he stated: ‘If I had to do something proper, it’d be a disaster. I’m useless for anything except what I do [i.e. writing lyrics]’ (Sounds 8 October 1989). The laziness was particularly a feature of his ‘wilderness years’ and afterwards as Strummer admitted (CD Now September 1999, Johnstone 2006: 113, McGuire 2001, Montreal Gazette 13 October 2001). Asked in 2002 by McKenna (2003): ‘What’s the biggest obstacle you’ve overcome in your life?’, Strummer responded: ‘I wouldn’t say I’ve overcome it yet, but it’s my sheer laziness. I’d rather sit and watch … cartoons than do anything.’ This did not mean he did not read but even reading was a relatively leisurely activity: ‘I like to read because it’s the opposite of being on the go. Reading is the perfect antidote’ (Kenney 2001). This stands in contrast to his statement in 1999 of The Clash: ‘We weren’t a lazy band’ (Letts 2000). Turning to the issue of his own disorganisation, one-time Clash manager Johnny Green stated: ‘Joe wasn’t a very organised man’ (The 180

Advocate not activist

Quietus 22 December 2012). Speaking of The Clash, Strummer said ‘we’re not very organised … we’re erratic’ (BBC Radio 1 1981). In 1988, he told Well Red (August 1988) ‘My problem is I don’t plan anything’; in 1989: ‘I can make a simple thing difficult. It’s something I learnt in The Clash – to go up a hill backwards’ (MTV ‘120-X-ray’ 1989), and then in an interview for Rock&Folk (1995): ‘I’m not a plan thinker or reasoner’. Finally, in 2000, he stated: ‘I’m not very practical really’ (Egan 2018: 323). This was reinforced by Strummer’s comment about being ‘disorganised’ in 2002 (UNCUT September 2002). One aspect of the arc of activism is Strummer did not need to come back (with the Mescaleros), but chose to. For example, Tammy Peterson, of the US Strummer website, stated: ‘Joe didn’t have to come back but he did’ (Parkinson 2005). However, this belies Strummer’s own words. Asked by the Guardian (24 September 1999) ‘Why has he chosen to come back now?’, Strummer responded: ‘It was mostly financial. … I live on royalties, which can come in a flood or dribble depending on the year. It’s a precarious way to live.’ Similarly, asked by Hot Press (20 December 2018) in 1999, he replied: ‘The honest answer? I’ve run out of money. I still live off my songwriting, but you can’t cut your cloth according to your means ’cos you don’t know what your means are. There’s a Clash live album coming out in October which’ll probably mean I receive a big cheque in 2001, but I’ve no idea what I’m due this year.’ These statements were reinforced by similar subsequent ones (CD Now September 1999, Musikbyrån Swedish TV 3 May 2000, McGuire 2001, Metro 6 June 2002, Daily Yomiuri 26 September 2002). Leadership This chapter now turns to look at Strummer’s role as an advocate, focusing on the aspect of leadership. He was, according to Parkinson (2005): ‘the undisputed leadership’ of The Clash. The essence of leadership is to be able to guide and direct followers so that influence is exerted over them and, thus, wider society. This normally involves functions such as agenda setting, caucusing, strategising, communication, motivation and 181

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

organisational administration. The more effective styles of leadership are held to be transformational and participative rather than transactional and authoritarian. In doing so, leaders help frame followers’ identities and values. The interrelationships and dynamics are complex. So, in setting an agenda for followers to follow, leaders must also be able to reflect followers’ desires and values – as Strummer acknowledged in 1997 (Wyatt 2018: 327) – as well as simultaneously shaping them. Agreement is necessary, but insufficient, for consequent action is required. Thus, motivation and stimulus are needed. Here, that followers must want to follow is paramount. This section examines the salient aspects (agenda setting, communication, motivation) of Strummer’s leadership practice where he played the major role. Some other aspects are not considered for others carried out these functions or carried them out more fully (like Rhodes, Vinyl, CBS). From relatively early on, Strummer became the dominant leader of The Clash in terms of its public manifestations (lyrics, interviews, on-stage pronouncements). This continued with his subsequent bands, LRW and Mescaleros. In The Clash, he became the principal lyricist by the time of the second album and maintained this until The Clash ended in 1986. Even when other members of The Clash or other of his bands were present, he took the lead in interviews, being the principal spokesperson. Equally importantly, he took most of the interviews himself. Yet Strummer was more than the principal spokesperson. The term suggests he conveyed what band members had collectively agreed on. Rather, Strummer was the dominant force in determining what the band decided its politics were. Indeed, he often seemed to unilaterally determine them. For this reason, the Sunday Times (26 September 1999) recognised Strummer as ‘The Clash’s mouthpiece and conscience’. His leadership style within the bands he led was not participative. In the arena of personnel, Strummer carried out the sackings in all the bands he led (see pp.192–193) and brought about Rhodes’ reinstatement in 1981, despite Jones’s opposition. However, outside of these bands and in relation to his followers, his style was transformational and participative. This section begins by examining his leadership within the bands he was part of. 182

Advocate not activist

Lyrics Lyrics are the primary means by which musicians express their world views and values, even if interviews and on-stage pronouncements supplement them. This signals an external dimension, but the concern here is their authorship within a band as an internal dimension. On a number of occasions, Strummer made it clear he mostly wrote the lyrics and Jones mostly wrote the music for The Clash (MTV ‘Spotlight’ 1989 and MTV ‘120 Minutes’ March 1991, Salewicz 2006: 167). Jones confirmed this (Parkinson 2005, The Word November 2005, Temple 2007, 2015) and noted Strummer had a ‘fantastic turn of phrase’ (Temple 2015) and was ‘a fantastic lyricist’ (GQ November 2011). Jones said: ‘I was just happy to provide the vehicle for them’ (BBC Radio 6 6 October 2013). On one occasion, Strummer said Jones was ‘totally useless on lyrics’ (Uncut September 1999), and, on another, threw away Headon’s lyrics for what would become ‘Rock the Casbah’, saying: ‘I write the bloody words’ (Gilbert 2009: 306).32 This aspect of leadership cannot be seen solely in quantitative terms, important though that is. The qualitative aspect is also critical. Strummer wrote nearly all of the politicised Clash lyrics and those which were heard as political songs. Strummer told Record Mirror (1 July 1978): ‘If I write a song, I don’t write about the lovely girl I saw, I write about other things. He [Mick] does a bit more than I do’, to which Jones responded: ‘Yeah, I do’. Jones is well known as lyricist for ‘Stay Free’ (1978), ‘I’m not Down’ and ‘Train in Vain’ (both 1979), and ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go?’ (1982). The first was about his friendship with Robin Crocker (Banks) and the latter two are interpreted as about his relationships with Viv Albertine and Ellen Foley respectively. Jones was also the lyricist for early songs like ‘Remote Control’, ‘City of the Dead’, ‘Complete Control’, ‘The Prisoner’, ‘Jail Guitar Doors’ 33 and ‘Protex Blue’. Only the first three were political, 32 Other Clash members (Levene, Chimes, Howard, Sheppard and White) did not write any lyrics, though Levene and Strummer dispute this with ‘What’s My Name?’ (UNCUT February 2003). Levene and Chimes both left as a result of disagreeing with Strummer’s politics and perspective for the band (UNCUT February 2003). 33 Musically, this was a 101ers’ song which Jones revised the lyrics for, with some assistance from Strummer (Q Classic February 2005).

183

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

albeit in limited ways (see p.224). Consequently, it is clear Strummer was the lyricist for all of the most political Clash songs, the most obvious from consecutive Clash albums being ‘White Riot’, ‘English Civil War’, ‘Clampdown’, ‘Washington Bullets’, ‘Straight to Hell’ and ‘This is England’. Before The Clash, Strummer was also the principal lyricist with the 101ers, but these lacked political content (see p.76). After Jones’s sacking in 1983, Strummer collaborated with various musicians within the bands he led. While remaining as the only lyricist, in the case of The Clash post-1983 and LRW, he provided only a very basis musical outline of what he sought, leaving the musicians to fill it in. In The Mescaleros, the non-lyrical collaboration was of a more equal partnership, but within limits (see pp.192–194 on band democracy). Interviews While interviews are intended for external audiences, their internal aspects are salient here. So, while Jones was the ‘most verbal of the trio [Jones, Simonon, Strummer]’ (MM 26 March 1977) and Green and Barker (2003: 106) observed Jones was more influential at the beginning, Lester Bangs (NME 10, 17 December 1977) noted Strummer was the leader, although Strummer denied this, and the NME (11 December 1976) remarked: ‘Strummer does most of the talking’.34 So, initially, there appeared to be some semblance of equality between Strummer and Jones (but not Simonon)35 during interviews over the band’s politics. Each played a leading 34 The balance of power between Strummer and Jones was not static (Gilbert 2009: 119), Gilbert (2009: 141,311, 329) noted in preparing to record The Clash’s first album there was ‘a strong impression that Joe is “the leader”, and in 1982 in Australasia ‘there was a definite sense of Joe taking charge’ (see also Needs 2005: 217, 220). One-time manager Peter Jenner saw Strummer as the band’s ‘political commissar’ (Gilbert 2009: 245). Johnny Green disputed this, believing: ‘it’s a complete misconception of The Clash that Joe was the leader’ (Gilbert 2009: 182, see also Needs 2005: 199–200). 35 Strummer noted: ‘Paul didn’t have much to say’ (MTV 120 Minutes March 1991) and, though present, Simonon did not contribute to the Sniffin’ Glue interview (Gilbert 2009: 113). He did contribute to the first major group interview (MM 13 November 1976). This lack of being forthcoming was commonly attributed to being inarticulate and not very politically motivated (e.g. Gilbert 2009: 113, 121).

184

Advocate not activist

role. The Sniffin’ Glue (October 1976) interview, and that conducted by Tony Parsons in 1977 on London Underground and at Rehearsal Rehearsals, were examples of this. However, from 1978–79 the balance changed, with Strummer normally taking the lead. Radio and television interviews were mostly either with just Strummer – as were many music and mainstream media interviews – or he was the lead voice when Simonon was alongside or all band members were present. Two instances from 1980 are illustrative of Strummer’s dominance and his particular political purpose. On the 16 Tons tour, a backstage visitor overheard the end of an argument between Jones and Strummer, with Jones shouting: ‘Joe, it’s not fair. I’ve got a voice. You never let me say anything. You have to say everything. Why’s it always got to be you?’ (Salewicz 2006: 282). Callahan (2001) recalled: ‘[M]y disillusionment with the whole political scene I was involved with probably began with a long, intense discussion with … Jones. [He] told me … they were just musicians, saying what they wanted to say but with no illusions about leading any kind of revolution.’ With these thoughts, Jones revealed himself to be different from Strummer in many regards (see also pp.116–118). After sacking Jones, Strummer became ever more the only public voice (see pp.192–194 on band democracy). This was noted by the San Francisco Examiner (23 January 1984): ‘[He] assumed even more of a leadership role’; Atlanta Constitution (4 April 1984): he was ‘the leader now’; and Detroit Free Press (4 May 1984): he was the ‘undisputed leader’. When other band members were present, he did almost all the talking and often did interviews on his own. Thereafter, and before he died, there are no instances of other band members in LRW or The Mescaleros being interviewees alongside Strummer or on their own. This reflected the demand for interviews with Strummer, his willingness to be interviewed and his control over the processes involved. External leadership Turning to external aspects, Strummer was identified as the leader because of his combined roles of chief lyricist, lead singer and principal 185

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

spokesperson. Compared to his more transactional style for internal matters, which was based on force of personality, charisma,36 political authority and sometimes a bullying manner, his style for external leadership was both transformational and participative. He sought to transform individuals through their at-distant participation in their own epiphanies in a process of cognitive liberation. While gigs were important to this process, more important were his lyrics and interviews. While these processes and outcomes are examined later (see Chapters 8 and 9), one example is illustrative at this stage. D’Ambrosio (2012b: xiv) explained his own case: I looked at The Clash not as a band or as music of the moment, but as a harbinger of the future. … only The Clash made me believe. Each song became an anthem delivering me from anguish, teaching me not to waste a moment of my life. The world is not ending. It is just beginning. This is a truth I learn every time I hear Strummer launch into ‘London’s Burning’.

Strummer’s external leadership was not unproblematic in terms of the expectations followers had of him. Recalling NME (5 May 1979) readers voted for Strummer to be their ‘fantasy prime minister’, these expectations were greater than Strummer was able to deliver, even if he was partly responsible for raising them. Strummer was commonly labelled as the ‘voice’ and ‘spokesperson’ of and for ‘a generation’.37 The sense being conveyed was he both directly expressed and indirectly gave expression to the concerns of a certain cohort without voice, but who wanted their voices heard, whether over unemployment, racism or imperialism. This still meant he was an advocate, 36 Strummer’s charisma was noted by many – e.g. Gilbert (2009: 14, 21, 22, 172, 201), Letts (2008: 223), Needs (2005: 9), Salewicz (2006: 163, 186), White (2007: 34, 42), Deborah Van Der Beek (Temple 2007) and Albertine (2015). 37 See, for example, BBC News Online (23 December 2002), CNN (23 December 2002), Telegraph (24 December 2002), Billy Bragg (BBC News online 2 January 2003), NME (11 January 2003), Jake Burns in ‘Strummerville’ from Stiff Little Fingers’ Guitar and Drum (2003), Sun (Needs 2005: 330), Kris Needs (Needs 2005: 9 50, Parkinson 2005), Letts (2017: viii), Independent (20 May 2012), Examiner (21 August 2012), Atlantic (September 2013), and Nick Sheppard (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 301). Rock&Roll Globe (21 August 2020) called him the ‘vital voice for disenfranchised people in all corners of civilization’.

186

Advocate not activist

not activist. The terminology of generation is problematic. First, it plainly did not mean all members of the same generation. A generation is commonly understood to cover twenty to thirty years. This means a broad range of people would be covered by a single generation, where generation takes no account of class, race and gender or changes in those over the span of a generation. Consequently, it is implausible to consider Strummer as a voice or spokesperson for women or black and minority ethnic groups or for those, through social mobility, that moved from precarious low-paid to secure well-paid employment. The situation with regard to class is further complicated for alienation of youth can be experienced by workingand middle-class members. Second, generation is a not a fixed entity in an important respect. The intention behind the use of ‘a generation’ was to suggest Strummer was a voice or spokesperson for youth, but either over Strummer’s lifetime or time in The Clash (1976–86) this generation grew up and matured into adulthood. Third, where generation might have a bearing is to consider those of teenage years and early adulthood when The Clash existed. So, those born between 1953 and 1973 may be thought to have had greater disposition to The Clash and Strummer. But even this does not equate to Generation X, namely, those born between 1965 to 1980. Therefore, what is presumably meant by ‘voice’ and ‘spokesperson’ of – and for – ‘a generation’ is, in fact, particular strata of alienated and discontented youth who were susceptible to left-wing – not right-wing – political conclusions drawn from this predicament. This amounted to much less than a generation at the time and afterwards. Occasionally, commentators were more specific if not accurate in terms of the dispossessed young (Telegraph, Herald, Independent 24 December 2002). A similar but slightly different erroneous version was being deemed a ‘man of people’.38 Quite apart from the sexist overtone because there is no equivalent of women leaders, the term, when applied to Strummer, means someone who is a champion of people’s rights. Even if this is taken to mean ordinary people’s rights to give it a soft ‘class’ dimension, it is still problematic 38 Examples are ‘people’s troubadour’ (Gilbert 2009: 69), ‘punk’s original Man of The People’ (Time Out 11 July 2001) and ‘man of the people’ (Liverpool Echo 15 November 2002, Telegraph 24 December 2004, McKenna 2003, Gilbert 2006: 81, Cogan 2014: 45).

187

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

because it is more a case of interests rather than rights and the championing takes place only through – in the case of Strummer – advocacy and not action. In other words, it is lazy hyperbole. Strummer frequently reflected on his experience of expected leadership. In 1988, he commented: ‘[P]eople expect too much from me. There is a lot of pressure to live up to other people’s expectations, to be their ‘leader’ or something. It just can’t be done. You always end up letting someone down and then you get slagged off. … why do they expect me to know everything? … I’m just a bloke who plays guitar, badly … Nobody asks tennis players what they think about this and that, so why expect me to know all the answers? (Class War summer 1988). In October 2001, he said: ‘I’m not a spokesperson. Never was to anybody’ (Mills 2001), despite saying earlier in 1988: ‘I was just a spokesperson for a generation’ (Salewicz 2006: 455). In 2002, he commented: ‘To someone who says to me, “You were a spokesman for your generation and you fucked it up”, I say, yeah, but we tried – whether we succeeded or failed is immaterial – we tried’ (D’Ambrosio 2012d: 85). The thrust of Strummer shying away from explicit leadership was underlined by Johnny Green: ‘It was a burden to Joe that people expected him to change the world. … [He was often asked] “What are you going to do about it, Joe?” … he got it non-stop … I don’t think he expected to change the world … and it was a very exhausting business being the man that was about to change the world … he was interested in changing the way people think about the world [rather than changing the world itself] … he didn’t shy away from the problem of being the figurehead of that change but if you were asking for a saviour or a messiah … he didn’t want it’ (Parkinson 2005) and ‘People were already seeing him as some kind of spokesman. He wore that hat very reluctantly … He wanted to be in a successful band … but he still wanted to have his regular life, he didn’t want to be isolated from that’ (The Quietus 22 December 2012). Strummer’s situation was similar to that of Weller. As leader and chief lyricist for The Jam, with its social realist songs, Weller did not like becoming cast as a ‘spokesperson’ or ‘voice’ for a generation because of the responsibility, expectations and scrutiny (Watts 2006). 188

Advocate not activist

As lyricist for ‘White Riot’ and ‘Clampdown’, which urged collective resistance, including rioting, Strummer was lambasted for not being involved in the riots of the early 1980s – e.g. Brixton (April 1981), Southall (July 1981) and Toxteth (July 1981) – as he had been in Notting Hill in 1976 (Gilbert 2009: 291, UNCUT September 1999). When asked about the irony of The Clash being in New York for their Bond’s residency in May and June 1981, when widespread rioting erupted, Strummer sarcastically responded: ‘Where were we during the riots? Where was Karl Marx in 1917?’ (NME 10 October 1981) and ‘I don’t think it matters. I don’t think I’d have done anything even if I had been in Britain … I ain’t no leader for that shit. I just sing a song’ (RNZ 3 February 1982). In a similar vein, he told the US press in 1980: ‘I am not Che Guevara’ (Parkinson 2005). In an interview in Toronto on 5 September 1982, Jones deferred to Strummer when asked about his responsibility as a public figure to their followers, with Strummer responding: ‘I just don’t feel strong enough to carry out anything at the moment let alone anything like that.’ In Sounds (20 June 1981), Strummer stated: ‘I know that I’m here to sing. … I’m not here to die in the El Salvador jungle.’ Asked why he was sitting in the Groucho Club in London in 2001 when rioting was taking place in northern England, Strummer stated: ‘Do you think it’s down to one man forever?’ (Gilbert 2009: 5). His responses were indications of the unrealistic expectations Strummer felt others had for him. Often people would look to him for leadership by way of asking ‘What would Joe Strummer say?’ or ‘What would Joe Strummer do?’ about a given issue or situation or simply state: ‘We need Joe Strummer now’.39 However, Henry Rollins (KEXP radio 7 February 2017) took a more activist perspective, saying about Trump: ‘This is not a time to be dismayed, this is punk rock time. This is what Joe Strummer trained you for. It is time to go.’ Turning to the weight of expectations, Tony Kliman of The Dils recalled of The Clash’s third ever US gig on 9 February 1979: ‘People expected too much of The Clash when they came out here. They thought they were like the deliverance … not 39 There was a blog called What Would Joe Strummer Do? Although a spoof, it did indicate the question was commonly asked.

189

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

the second coming, but the first coming. … They expected the world to be turned upside down by The Clash being there’ (Ensminger 2013: 60). This led Kliman to comment: ‘The Clash weren’t the saviors of anything, and they never claimed to be. A lot of people put that weight on them’ (Ensminger 2013: 61). Andersen (2013: 15) remarked Strummer and The Clash: ‘rarely seemed to focus resources in a consistent way toward concrete projects … they never delivered on early promises to build a club or radio station to actualize their vision in an influential sustained institutional way’. This highlighted one of the firmest promises Strummer made himself and for The Clash. In 1976, he stated: ‘I’m going to start a radio station with my money. I want to be active’ (MM 13 November 1976). He repeated this to the NME (2 April 1977), and the NME (30 June 1979) reported he was trying to establish a musician-owned venue (to be called ‘Buckingham Palais’) and a rock ’n’ roll show on London Weekend Television (LWT). Before Record Mirror (27 December 1980) reminded Strummer of his promise to establish a radio station, he explained an absence of finance prevented it from being created because the £100,000 CBS advance had been used to fund tours and pay for damage caused at gigs (MM 11 March 1978, 13 December 1980). Needs (2005: 144) recorded The Clash was in debt to CBS in 1979. This would continue until at least Combat Rock (1982) as a result of The Clash’s policy on ticket and record prices. So there was no ‘Radio Clash’ in this time. Strummer did support pirate radio stations in London though: ‘[W]e shoot money into some of [them] … we’ve helped replace some of their gear [that] was confiscated or smashed up’ (KNAC radio 24 January 1984).40 But the issue of creating a radio station did not go away. At the time of The Mescaleros, he stated: ‘If I had five million pounds, I’d start a radio station because something needs to be done. It would be nice to turn on the radio and hear something that didn’t make you feel like smashing up the kitchen and strangling the 40 Gilbert (2009: 325) noted some of the Us festival fee was given to London pirate radio stations. Strummer also told The Record (June 1984) the money would be used to start the venue. Jones also supported the ideas of a radio station and venue but did not receive any flack for their failure to be realised (see Flexipop February 1983).

190

Advocate not activist

cat’ (Harrison 2002: 41). He may not have had five million pounds but his estate was valued at nearly one million pounds (Daily Mail 7 January 2007)41 and the cost of establishing a radio station – broadcasting via the internet – had fallen considerably. On the venue, the NME (3 January 1981) asked Strummer: ‘Are you any nearer opening the club you’ve been talking about for three years?’ He responded by explaining the venue under consideration fell through as a result of the landlord’s stance. Then, the NME asked: ‘What happened to the TV show you were planning to launch?’ He replied: ‘I haven’t found anyone who’s interested’, which he put down to being an outsider without much influence. However, interviewed for BBC Radio 1 in 1981, Strummer admitted to be being disorganised and erratic so that ‘we’ve got some plans coming along very slowly … perhaps we can give birth to another type of show’. The Casbah Club was the name of The Clash’s 1982 British tour, not a club. Despite part of his justification for playing the Us festival being to help create this kind of venture (Beano March 1984, The Record June 1984, Needs 2005: 238), nothing was established. Had it, Strummer would have been more of an entrepreneur than activist. What he and The Clash did spend some of their money on was, respectively, producing Hell W10 (see p.137) and Don Letts’s Clash on Broadway. The latter only saw the light of day in small sections after the master tapes were destroyed (Salewicz 2006: 317). So, Strummer was found wanting on delivering on plans and promises, no matter whether they were wise statements to have made or realistically achievable.42 Fortunately, these were relatively minor offences compared to what he delivered upon elsewhere. By contrast he, along with other members of The Clash, did deliver upon promises of keeping album prices low, most obviously with London Calling and Sandinista! With the latter, and to accommodate its three LPs, The Clash agreed to waive royalties on the first 200,000 copies sold in Britain, and 41 Salewicz (2006: 4) noted Strummer ‘became a millionaire’. White (2007: 193) recalled drummer, Pete Howard, had worked out Strummer was a millionaire in 1984. 42 Strummer also proposed The Clash and The Blockheads establish a publishing rights company in order to stop recording artists from being exploited but, ultimately, nothing came of this (Gilbert 2009: 284).

191

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

any royalty paid thereafter was based on Sandinista! being a single album (NME 3 January 1981). A final aspect of Strummer’s external leadership was his engagement with followers before and after gigs. As Simonon (BBC Radio 6 6 October 2013) noted, followers wanted to speak to Strummer, not himself or Jones, about politics while when Jones was confronted by a fan about the band’s politics, he responded: ‘Look, mate, I only play guitar … If you want to know about that, ask Joe. Otherwise, leave me alone’ (MM 6 June 1981). Band democracy Many inside and outside the bands Strummer led expected they would operate in alignment with the values from his politics. In other words, there would be democracy. Gray (2003: 383–384) indicated Strummer was ‘autocratic’, while revamped Clash guitarist Vince White (2007: 4, 81, 2009, Richards 2010) labelled Strummer a bully and hypocrite in these regards.43 Instead, and recalling Strummer’s statements, ‘I became a bully at boarding school’ (Salewicz 2006: 473) and ‘it was bully or be bullied … I was one of the principal bullies’ (Temple 2007), a situation something more akin to ‘dictatorship of the Strummertariat’ prevailed with rule by fiat (see p.184 on his relationship with Jones between 1976 and 1983). This became most apparent in respect of Strummer being an inveterate sacker of people, unilaterally determining setlists for gigs,44 being the only one making onstage pronouncements and not being prepared to share lyrics writing duties with any member after 1983. So, betraying any sensibilities of workers’ rights, there was no consultation, negotiation or right of appeal 43 White (2007: 4) called the band an ‘oppressive totalitarian dictatorship’ where Rhodes came in for severe criticism (White 2007: 81). While Howard and Sheppard suggested White overstated his case, nonetheless, they believed there was some truth in it, especially with regard to bullying and mistreatment – see, for instance, that at hands of Strummer (White 2007: 35, 83–84, 174, 180–181). White (2007: 60, 114, 153) also believed the band was a cult around Strummer and Rhodes. 44 Jones testified to this for his time in The Clash (Guardian 24 May 2013) and ZigZag (April 1984) reported Strummer was dictatorial at soundchecks.

192

Advocate not activist

on sackings. They were often instinctive (see Salewicz 2006: 565). Salewicz (2006: 146, 174, 255, 344) noted Strummer’s sacking of personnel throughout his career became a ‘characteristic’, ‘pattern’ and ‘habit’ (cf. Jucha 2016: 285). In addition to sacking Headon and Jones (Salewicz 2006: 344, 377, Gilbert 2009: 341), Strummer also sacked manager Caroline Coon, Clash guitarist Keith Levene, 101ers guitarist, Clive Timperley, various A&R representatives, three drummers (Pablo LaBritain, Willie McNeil, Steve Barnard) (Salewicz 2006: 146, 174, 254, 466, 470, Gilbert 2009: 104, 380 Needs 2005: 310, Savage 2009: 262). Strummer reckoned he sacked fortyeight people (Temple 2007). With Headon’s and Jones’s sackings, the initial reasons given were not the fullest descriptions of the situations (see pp.27, 123). However, all may not be quite as it seemed if one takes account of the duties and responsibilities of leadership and the person pulling the ‘trigger’ did not necessarily do so without consulting with others who ‘loaded the gun’. Simonon made it clear he wanted Jones sacked (Gilbert 2009: 341) and with Headon’s sacking there was some consensus (Salewicz 2006: 344) as there was over sacking Rhodes and Levene. In 1988, Strummer said: ‘It was me that told [Headon] … The others were too fucking chicken’ (Shelley 1988). If there was a positive aspect to his ruthlessness, it was in most of these cases he showed he was sufficiently determined to carry out these acts in pursuit of his bigger project of producing politically progressive music. Revamped Clash guitarist Nick Sheppard reported, as a result of being ‘hired hands’, neither he, Howard nor White were allowed any lyrical input and, when Strummer took the lead in all interviews, the band was consulted beforehand with only a little influence on what he was going to say: ‘He’d run it all past us in the pub after rehearsal, and we would discuss his views, and, sometimes, he would add an idea one of us came up with or change his stance slightly’, though Richards (2010) recounted such political discussions were sparse. Prior to this, Kosmo Vinyl recalled from 1979 to 1983: ‘There were no formal discussions before interviews or about interviews, not ever. We all talked to each other all the time so everyone had a pretty good idea of where everyone else “was at”. I never heard anyone say to anyone else or me: “Don’t say that in an interview” 193

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

so that Strummer said what he wanted to say.’ After 1983, when Sheppard was a member, Vinyl believed: ‘As far as Joe went, there would be no formal discussion or briefing about what he was going to say.’ This discrepancy is likely because Vinyl was around the band less compared to Sheppard. Given Strummer determined the setlists, it was also the case that when he made his onstage pronouncements these ‘normally related to the subject matter in the next song’, according to Sheppard. In LRW, Strummer chose the personnel. With The Mescaleros, Strummer gave the illusion of democracy. Grunebaum (2001) noted Strummer believed ‘the band operates as a democracy’ and the Phoenix New Times (11 October 2001) remarked that Global a Go-Go was ‘democratically written and recorded’, while BBC News Online (13 November 2001) reported: ‘He says he makes musical decisions “democratically” with the new group.’ Ironically, Strummer told the Times (16 July 2001): ‘I didn’t want it to be me and a backing band. I wanted to be a member of a group of equals again.’ Yet guitarist Scott Shields revealed: There was a time when we thought we’d lost him. We started recording what would be … Streetcore … we wanted to rein it back and be more like The Clash. … we wanted to make jumpier tracks. He didn’t want it and he took the hump. We were taking a bit too much control and he disappeared for two weeks and we couldn’t find him. He didn’t answer his phone. … It was his way of dealing with things when they went out of his control. When we finally found him, he read us the riot act. He said: ‘This is my project. You are a very big part of it. But if I don’t feel in control, it’s not going to work.’ (Daily Record 5 October 2012)

Davie (2004: 61, 63, 71, 78, 80–81, 125, 139) also reported on Strummer’s behaviour causing tensions. Part of his behaviour here related to an erratic trait. Headon recalled: ‘One minute he’d be all over you, your best mate, and the next he’d be snarling at you’, while Scott Shields remembered: ‘Sometimes he was like your father, sometimes he was like your devil, sometimes he was somebody you just couldn’t understand’ (Salewicz 2006: 195, 582).

194

Advocate not activist

Playing Joe Strummer Strummer played the character of Joe Strummer so there was a difference between John Graham Mellor, the person, and Joe Strummer, the persona (see Gilbert 2009: 6). Strummer recognised this: ‘When you’re touring you become another person … I have another personality to slip on when I’m touring’ (CBS New York News 1982). Band and crew members reported Strummer prepared himself before gigs in order to psyche himself up to be Joe Strummer on stage (Green and Barker 2003: 84, 198, 245, 263, Salewicz 2006: 384, 486, 592, The Word October 2006, UNCUT September 2012, White 2007: 75). For example, Baker (2013b, 2013a) commented: ‘[H]e worked hard at keeping his previous life at arm’s length and adopting the punk persona’ and before performing: ‘Joe was quiet [which was] unusual’, while Mescaleros guitarist, Scott Shields commented: ‘He switched into character about an hour before the gig. … Until we got back on the [tour] bus, he was in full Joe Strummer mode’ (Scotland on Sunday 16 December 2012), and Mescaleros drummer Luke Bullen noted: ‘He turns up to the show and plays the part of Joe Strummer’ (Salewicz 2006: 625). Strummer himself said he ‘like[d] to get into a mental panic before the show – to really wind myself up before I go on stage’ (Garbarini 1981: 54) and he ‘g[o]t possessed like a demon [on stage] (WNYC 1 March 1984.). Others recognised Strummer being ‘possessed’ (e.g. Detroit Free Press 4 May 1984, Toronto Sun 22 November 1999). Meanwhile evidence cited by Gilbert (2009: 17, 23, 69), Needs (2005: 27, 112, 172, 202) and Salewicz (2006: 5, 137, 163, 227, 298, 424) from bandmates and other close collaborators highlighted Strummer played the persona more generally, so that it was more than a stage act. Clash associate Robin Crocker stated: ‘[His] public persona was enormously at odds with the real John Mellor [who] was a very private person and in a lot of ways a very shy person’ (Parkinson 2005). Manager Johnny Green reinforced this: ‘He was a paradox between being a very private man alone with his thoughts and being a very open man sharing them … there was no way of knowing which way that would go … he was a man that could just shut down, alone with his thoughts

195

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

… and I knew very well and didn’t know him’ (Parkinson 2005). The situation may have been even more complex as his long-term partner, Gaby Salter, commented: ‘[H]e was a chameleon – he was exactly what you wanted him to be. People they think know Joe but everyone got a different part of him’ (Salewicz 2006: 245). Playing the character of Joe Strummer did not suggest Strummer was fraudulent, but that in public – on stage and in interviews – he embellished certain of his traits in order to make them more than they ordinarily would be. The construction of the Joe Strummer persona developed in The Clash from being quite taciturn early on, then becoming very loquacious. As such, playing Joe Strummer was a fundamental part of the appeal and connection as Faulk and Harrison (2014b: 2) recognised, commenting the persona ‘created a strong affective link between performer and audience far exceeding the conventional bounds of rock music’. The other side here was followers, who taking certain aspects, projected onto him what they wanted to project and made them a much greater part of his perceived persona (see Chapter 9). Conclusion Strummer was not an activist and engaged in very little that could be described as activism, whether of a political or cultural kind. In Strummer’s case, Street’s (2012) definition of political activism does not stand up well to scrutiny. Street (2012: 45–46) argued: ‘Musicians can become involved with politics in one of two ways … [denoted as] political activism and political argument … The first describes … people who happen to be musicians, and … hav[ing] acquired a public presence or status … use [it] to support causes or candidates. The second … [concerns] those who use their music to give expression to their political views. The two may be linked … but they are not necessarily so.’ Applied to Strummer, this threshold of activism is a relatively low and passive one, because supporting causes and candidates may merely involve endorsement in interviews rather than campaigning for them. Fundraising and awareness-raising through playing benefits gigs would sit somewhere in between the two. But playing 196

Advocate not activist

benefits gigs – as distinct from organising them in any way – better falls within the category of the politically engaged musician. Indeed, Street (2012: 53, 54) implicitly acknowledged this: ‘The particular role of the artist as champion or advocate of political cause, their endorsement of candidates and campaigns’ and of ‘the politically engaged musician’. However, in stating ‘the political activism … of Marvin Gaye’ and musicians can ‘perform the role of political activist in their creative life’ (Street 2012: 55, 58), he undid this because Gaye did not do any more than use his music (at a particular time) to give expression to his political views, and being an activist has a much higher threshold than that of activism.45 It does not help either that ‘political activist’ went undefined. How Street conceived the relationship between artist and activist simultaneously underestimated the significant resource (time, energy, initiative) implications of being an artist for being an activist, and vice versa. Though many exaggerated Strummer’s activism and misconceived his advocacy as activism, it is ironic Coulter (2019b: 11) noted: ‘It was widely anticipated among fans … that The Clash would be in the vanguard of cultural resistance to Thatcherism’ if resistance was taken to be more than lyrics. Tranmer (2014: 108) went too far the other way in concluding with regard to RAR: ‘It would be appropriate to describe Strummer not as an … activist but as a punk rock star with an interest in political and social issues’ because this ignored Strummer’s advocacy. Coon (2019: 53) correctly noted: ‘Joe Strummer and The Clash chose to do their politics with and through the artistry of their music’. This could be applied to Strummer per se. In his role as advocate and recalling the socialist realist analytical framework, Strummer was variously commentator, educator, satirist, framer, provocateur, populariser and tribune of the oppressed. He was seldom analyst, theorist, tactician or strategist for how people might seek 45 Similar weaknesses are found elsewhere. Though Garratt (2018: 128–129) recognised the challenges of defining activism, neither he nor Pedelty (2013) defined the parameters of musical political activism (sic) by musicians. This is even where Garratt (2018: 135–136) denoted Dylan as an ‘auteur-activist’, based around what he wrote rather than what he did, and Pedelty (2013) denoted Peter Gabriel as a ‘masked activist’ based on doing a little more than writing.

197

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

to prosecute what influence they took from him. His contribution was far more ideational – even if not always highly intellectualised – than activist-orientated. So, to adapt Street’s (2012: 1) terms, Strummer was an expressor not an organiser. While he made frequent political interventions, these were from afar in terms of various social movements with no specific orientation on workers. This position of advocate and not activist was reinforced by his personality type and an underlying belief in idealism and its power as a particular form of utopianism. Here, Strummer believed in something of a singular objective truth which could be unveiled (see Chapter 3).

198

7

Straying from socialism

Based on a single interviewee’s comment that the Acton firefighters’ benefit gig of 2002 was more of a ‘socialist’ act than supporting an anti-racist campaign by playing RAR in April 1978, Bedford (2014: 62) commented: ‘[Strummer] became, if anything, more radical at the end of his life.’ This is a thin argument for it also does not consider a welter of other material, quite apart from incorrectly treating union struggles as synonymous with socialism (given non-socialists do support union struggles) and equating socialism with economism. Strummer’s comments at the gig (see pp.91–92) give no evidence of a belief in socialism although he summarised his own position that night by saying: ‘I’m still a man of the left’ (Salewicz 2006: 636). The idea of growing radicalisation is matched by an equally fallacious one, namely that Strummer maintained his radicalism to the end (see Chapter 6). This chapter examines how Strummer strayed from the radical road he previously set out upon, best exemplified by his stoutly held sense of socialism in the early to late 1980s. The chapter shows not that Strummer became right wing, in favour of neoliberal individualism (cf. Egan 2015: 188), but that he became disillusioned with the prospects for traditional left-wing politics and the collectivism used to pursue these politics. The last known time he identified himself as socialist was in the Sunday Times of 8 October 1989. This was just before the fall of the Berlin Wall on 9 November 1989, followed by the dissolution of the Soviet Union on 25 December 1991. Though Strummer rejected ‘actually existing socialism’ (see pp.79–80), these events still depressed socialists as a result of the 199

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

seeming triumph of capitalism, and this is likely to have been the case with him. Indeed, he told the Irish Times (29 April 2000): ‘I still hold firm to my personal and political beliefs. It’s just there’s no left wing any more.’ It also meant Pat Gilbert (MOJO June 2006) was correct to say Strummer was ‘no trenchant socialist’ at the end of his life. And, given the socialist realist framework used here for assessing Strummer, it would seem his straying from socialism would have grave implications for his ability to advance the cause of socialism. Indeed, it might seem his later stances would undermine and undo his earlier socialist stances. But the social reproduction of Strummer tells another story. It is one where his socialist period associated with The Clash not only eclipses all others but is also the rose-tinted lens through which all his adulthood is viewed. This chapter begins by examining the predominant messages Strummer dispensed in the last years of his life, before considering his views of ‘new’ Labour, neoliberalism and the ‘new’ imperialism, along with his alternative of decentralised, small-scale, ethical capitalism. The transition from socialist to non-socialist is explained by his personal disposition moving from certainty to uncertainty, occasioning a reorientation. This leads on to assessing his views on humanism, opinions, freedom and liberty, and his national identity. The message is ‘there is no message’ Asked in 2001 ‘Do you have a message for people?’, Strummer responded: ‘No, I don’t have any message … except “Don’t forget you’re alive” maybe … this can get easily forgotten in the routine of life … [and] this is the greatest thing’ (The NewMusic 2001). He also proffered here: ‘To make people’s lives more interesting … that’s really the job you’ve got [as a musician].’ Asked by Penthouse (June 2000) ‘If you could stand up on-stage in front of the whole world and give the people one message, what would that message be?’, Strummer replied: ‘I’d say, “Loosen up.” That’s all. Just loosen up.’ There was no mention of resistance, rebellion or radicalism, let alone socialism or revolution. Consequently, the Guardian (24 September 1999) opined: ‘the scourge-of-the-establishment persona is more sartorial 200

Straying from socialism

than ideological these days’, while the Washington Post (25 July 2001) observed: ‘the middle-aged Strummer is a more complex artist’ and the New York Times (31 March 2001) noted: ‘Strummer is as political as ever but … calmer and more contemplative now, prone to singing parables about a world in flux rather than fist-pumping chants of discontent.’ The response to ‘Do you have a message?’ – and following remarks – indicate Strummer experienced a profound disillusionment about the prospect for broad, deep-seated radical social change. There was more, politically speaking, to his familiar phrase of ‘You can’t hold on to the past if you want any future’ – as told to the Irish Times (29 April 2000) – because this perspective was often understood to be about musical and personal reinvention. Disillusionment led Strummer to undergo a political reorientation, moving away from his preference for social movements as the motor of change in favour of a more individualised form of ethical consumerism. However, he did not capitulate to the ‘there is no alternative’ of ‘capitalist realism’ (Fisher 2009). He maintained some sense of hope, telling Rock&Folk (1995): ‘Cynicism is a refuge of the world weary and know-it-alls.’ The change in his political orientation was linked to his professional and personal standing. After the failure of Earthquake Weather, judged by critical and commercial criteria, he entered what he called his ‘wilderness years’ where he suffered a crisis of self-confidence. This followed on from the blow to his self-worth and belief after the break-up of The Clash in 1986. So, Strummer still believed in the need for social change, believing resistance was not futile. But the scale of the ambition here lessened and narrowed. Though this change in political direction dated from at least the early to mid-1990s, it was not until the late 1990s/early 2000s, when his profile rose again with The Mescaleros, that he expounded on these views through media interviews. Indeed, the sense of political regression can perhaps be charted from the late 1980s. Denselow (1989: 148) reported: ‘In 1987, ten years on from the first Clash LP, I asked Joe Strummer to update his views. His reply came in the form of a letter … saying … he’d seen The Clash’s aims like this: “For better or for worse, we felt we had a mission. For Human Rights and against racism. For democracy and freedom 201

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

and against fascism. For good and against evil.”’ This was an interesting reflection because it was markedly different from that he gave in Westway to the World (Letts 2000): ‘We were trying to grope in a socialist way towards some future where the world might be less of a miserable place than it is.’ The significance of this change from outspoken militant to somewhat becalmed moderate is two-fold. First, and contrary to popular perception about the unbroken thread of his politics (see Chapter 6), the Strummer of this period was different to the Strummer of before. Second, writers like D’Ambrosio (2012a), Faulk and Harrison (2014a), Gilbert (2009) and Needs (2005) have neither identified nor interrogated this shift. Even Salewicz in his so-called ‘definitive’ biography paid little attention to this change, briefly noting Strummer had become more spiritual (Salewicz 2006: 551) and favoured a kind of primitive environmentalism of back to living with the land (Salewicz 2006: 554, 576, 583) which was anti-industrial and, potentially, also anti-capitalist. But there were still messages Towards the end of his life, Strummer could sound revolutionary: ‘I’m completely out of control now because I have nothing to lose and this makes a man very dangerous’ (Bizarre festival TV interview 21 August 1999) and ‘I’m far more dangerous now, because I don’t care at all’ (Salewicz 2006: 6, 19). He told Hit List (November–December 1999) ‘I’m far more extreme now than I ever was – I think we should smash the whole world up and start all over again … I think we should burn every building that was ever built to the ground, plough it into the turf and just live like Comanches. I wanna wander over endless greens.’ He also said in 1999: ‘What I’d like to do personally is to start all over again. If I had a red button here and if I pushed it everything in the world would vanish’ (Salewicz 2006: 576). And he told Penthouse (June 2000) ‘My new vibe is to destroy everything.’ Referring back to these statements in 2001, he was asked ‘What’s the most controversial view that you ever espoused?’, to which he responded: ‘I once said that we should tear the whole world 202

Straying from socialism

down and start over again. That’s about as far as you can go.’ 1 Other than the allusion to a primitive form of environmentalism, Strummer did not make it clear what form these references to seeming revolution should take. More importantly, these remarks did not concern socialism and they were overshadowed by others in line with the likes of ‘Don’t forget you’re alive’. Consequently Strummer, in focusing on musicianship rather than politics, remarked: ‘If I could give any advice, I say “get into a position where you own your own work” … we can only blame our own stupidity for [not] figuring out what’s in a contract’ (Planet Rock ‘Profile’ 2000). Then, in 2001, when asked ‘Do you have needs or expectations different from two decades ago?’, he replied with: ‘Every day’s a new day, really. And you can’t walk around with expectations. I don’t like to know where we’re going’ (Mills 2001). In the same year, when asked ‘What do you think you represent to the people who admire you?’ and ‘What’s the most one can hope for in life?’, he responded: ‘Maybe they see a good soul’ and ‘The sense of having accomplished something’ (McKenna 2003). In a 2001 Video Jam interview with Dick Rude, again he was asked if he had a message for viewers, responding with: ‘Keep jamming and support your local voice [newspaper].’ In 2002 he was asked ‘And how would you classify yourself?’, replying: ‘A loony and a rebel’ (Hot Press February 2002). Three years earlier, he replied to the question ‘So, where would you put yourself politically these days?’ with: ‘In the DMT [psychedelic drug] universe. I’m in the Psychedelic Home Rangers … I’m more of a Merry Prankster type of person than a committed anything. I realised that I didn’t know anything about anything’ (Salewicz 2006: 576, 575). In the same year, speaking to NPR (30 October 1999) about whether there was a unifying theme to the content of his songwriting, he said: ‘Not that I can tell. I just write ’em … My face is buried deep in the mud … I can’t see the trees or the woods or the valley or the hills. You can only follow what’s on your mind. In fact, a song is something you write because you can’t 1 This interview, part of which appears in Let’s Rock Again! (Rude 2004), took place at Chateau Marmont, Hollywood, in mid-2001.

203

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

sleep unless you write it.’ Also in 1999, he opined on world politics: ‘Everything is fucked. It’s down to individual people to make life enjoyable. I don’t have anything more to say than that. I think people should avoid fucking up the world. … You’ve got to live life and enjoy it’ (Rude International March 1999). A further interview in 1999 revealed other similar stances. Asked ‘What kind of legacy do you think The Clash left behind?’ and ‘What’s your own future? What do you look forward to?’, he replied: ‘A big pile of empty hair gel bottles for one. Some pretty happy people too. Some people connected. What more can you want?’ and ‘I look forward to things like last night – we stayed up all night writing songs. … I get my energy from the idea of ideas. The notion of a good idea or the thought of a good idea. That’s when I perk up’ (CD Now September 1999). After the release of Global a Go-Go (2001), Strummer stated: ‘I hate to be pinned down and asked about the message … I try to wriggle out of it’ (New York interview 4 April 2002).

Figure 7.1  Strummer on WCCA TV’s Video Jam in 2001 204

Straying from socialism

These responses make an interesting juxtaposition to Billy Bragg’s observation on Strummer’s death: ‘His most recent records are as political and edgy as anything he did with The Clash. His take on multicultural Britain in the 21st century is far ahead of anybody else’ (BBC News 24 23 December 2002). BBC News Online (24 December 2002) chimed in with: ‘Strummer had created a musical internationalism that he served up as an antidote to capitalist globalisation’, as did similarly the Press of Atlantic City (7 October 2001) and the Guardian (22 November 2001). Not all agreed though. For example, Binette (2003: 29) noted: ‘The [Mescaleros albums’] lyrical concerns were less overtly political.’ Indeed, the political edginess had been dialled down in favour of a humanist appreciation of multiculturalism on his last three albums. Although some of the concerns about migrants could be found on Combat Rock, Strummer now talked less about rich and poor, haves and have-nots, and more about freedom, liberty and immigration.2 The title of the second Mescaleros album, Global a Go-Go (2001), reflected this. He said of it: ‘We were recording the album in Willesden, and I could see people from 15 or 20 different nations getting along – proof to all those idiots that integration can work. The song, “Bhindi Bhagee” [about multiculturalism], is a song of hope’ (The Metro 6 June 2002). Introducing it at a gig, he said ‘This is for all the people looking to start a new life in places like Canada’ (Edmonton Journal 30 July 2001), and in 2002 ‘[My] most recent work takes into account a much more global approach not only to racial injustice but ethnic and immigrant discrimination’ (D’Ambrosio 2012e: 133). But there were also significant examples where there was little political meaning. Earthquake Weather (1989) was so-called because the studio in which it was recorded in Los Angeles was subject to earthquakes, and Rock Art and the X-Ray Style (1999) reflected his fascination with primitive times as a form of better and unspoilt human and planetary coexistence. As for the name of his new band, it was not a gesture of sympathy with native American Indians: ‘I just stole [it] from a cowboy film I was watching one night. So, um, really, doesn’t have any meaning to the direction’ (Hultsfred Festival 1999). 2 An earlier precursor of this was the 1985 demo of ‘Czechoslovak Song/Where Is England?’ from Joe Strummer 001 (2018).

205

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

‘New’ Labour and neoliberalism From being hostile to Labour in the mid- to late 1970s, Strummer became supportive of the party in the 1980s and early to mid-1990s, indicating he saw the political terrain had changed dramatically. Any extra-parliamentary struggles were subsumed to Labour’s parliamentary one. But by the late 1990s, he had become hostile to Labour again because of the ascendancy within it of an authoritarian neoliberalism under Blair. He saw Blairism as the bastard offspring of Thatcherism. In 1999, he stated: I’m bewildered by this Blair development. … There is no alternative. … Blair’s machine is so perfect that I reckon that if we can get rid of him in 15 or 20 years, we’ll be lucky. … You can’t even have an opinion in the party. … There’s no debate there. … We don’t have any dissension. Blair might as well be Stalin. … Maybe we have to come to learn that all leaders want is power … I came up with this nickname for him the other day. I thought: ‘Let’s call him Tony Baloney!’ He’s a lot of baloney … So, I went to this party after … [the Westway to the World] film [in 1999] and I drew on my tee shirt ‘Let’s get rid of Tony Baloney – The Tuscan Liberation Front’ because Blair goes on holiday to Tuscany. (Schalit 2000: 36–37)

As a result of publicity over this, he told the Bologna Festa de l’Unita on 4 September 1999: ‘We got to forget the governments – there’s no point getting involved even. Tony Blair has thrown us a shuffle – we were happy to elect him and then he became very strange … we’re trying to get beyond the government. Somewhere there’s a world of politics outside the government – it’s to do with living outside the law.’ However, Salewicz (The List 2 October 2006) recalled, ‘At one point Joe even seriously considered running in the London mayoral election.’ Similarly, nothing came of his rebel Wessex idea: ‘If Wales can do it and Scotland can do it, why can’t the West Country? We’re gonna secede from the union and say “Fuck off Tony Blair, you’re a Victorian in the cyber age”’ (Real Groove December 1999).3 The same year, asked about which political leaders he admired, he responded: 3 Strummer said a website was established (Salewicz 2006: 554) but did not indicate whether contact was made with the long-standing Wessex Regionalist party.

206

Straying from socialism Political people … to get elected you’ve got to be on a power trip and you can’t trust anyone on a power trip. I can’t see a way out of this … [Politics has] moved … into this incredibly spin doctored PR thing where no one in the party or the government or the Houses of Parliament is allowed to say anything that doesn’t tow the party line … There’s no debate or discussion in England. They’ve just taken democracy in England and flushed it down the toilet. (Rude International March 1999)

This was reinforced by stating: ‘They’re anti-democratic, those politicians, they want power for as long as they can hold it, and it’s going to take an earthquake to rid of ’em. And then we got nothing to replace ’em with. We’re fucked’ (MOJO March 2003). In 2001, he argued: Now we’ve got Blairism. We are so completely confused. If you think of England as a patient laying on the couch in a shrink’s office, I’d say it’s time for the strait jacket. Imagine the party we had in England when Blair got into office after all those years of Thatcher. … The Blair administration just wants to get into bed with the richest corporations, and the very notion of Labour has vanished … I think people are feeling a bit cheated and frustrated. They’ve come to realise voting is basically useless because either side you vote for has no more than a shade of difference from the other side, and ultimately politics is about nothing but the mighty dollar. (McKenna 2003)

Strummer became a trenchant critic of a key hallmark of neoliberalism, namely corporate control of government: ‘The truth is that corporations buy governments. That’s the point of attack – to admit what’s really going on and bring that stuff out into the open. I’d like to see an Exxon candidate for [the] Twickenham East [by-election]. That would reflect what’s really going on’ (MOJO May 2001); ‘I like the fact that it’s so easy to see that corporations buy governments. At least it’s all on the table now. I suppose it’s always the way they ran the world but it had never been apparent’ (Independent 13 July 2001); and ‘Never before has it been laid so bare as it is now. Corporations contribute to political funds, [these politicians] get elected, rules get made in favour of corporations’ demands. That’s the way the machine has probably always worked, but it’s never been so laid out for all to see’ (Rolling Stone 1 October 2001). In articulating his anger with Blair, he indicated he hoped a political class outside the ranks of working people could bring about progressive 207

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

change, calling for ‘more intelligent leadership in the world’ through songs like ‘Shakhtar Donetsk’ (D’Ambrosio 2012f: 147). His anger did not lead him back to his earlier ‘street’ politics but rather on to his ill-defined sense of ethical capitalist communalism. His partner Lucinda commented: ‘He felt totally betrayed by this Labour government. When they got in, he was so ecstatic, and [then] he felt totally betrayed’ (Salewicz 2006: 571). In 1999, Strummer voted for the UK Independence Party (UKIP) in the European Union elections, saying Blair was ‘getting rid of democracy’ (Guardian 24 September 1999).4 He remarked he did not vote in the 2001 general election because: ‘Where I live in Somerset me voting wouldn’t make a blind bit of difference’ (Gilbert 2009: 5). Strummer revealed he was an ‘avid Telegraph reader’ (Telegraph 24 December 2002). He also sent a letter to Boris Johnson, and Johnson said on Desert Island Discs (30 October 2005): ‘The highest moment [of my journalistic career was] when Joe Strummer sent me a letter saying how much he’d admired a column I’d written, about hunting.’ Strummer was particularly angered that ‘new’ Labour did not repeal the Tory Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, covering this in ‘Techno D-Day’ (1999): If I invited nine friends over to my house right now and put on an acid house record, and we stood in the garden listening to it, we’d all be arrested and fined a thousand pounds each, because in the United Kingdom it’s illegal for ten or more people to listen to repetitive beats! … People in Britain are much less free than people in many other countries because we’ve got really repressive laws. (McKenna 2003)

This feeling of disenfranchisement led Strummer to expound his new manifesto of ethical capitalist consumerism (MTV ‘120 Minutes’ 10 March 1999, CRCRadio 2002). This meant: I’m gonna pull out of my pocket one vote … this is our only vote. I’m saying that because we got democrat votes and we voted in [Blair] … and he’s become… what he was not supposed to be. We can’t get rid of him … 4 See also Sunday Times (26 September 1999). As the Referendum Party, founded by multimillionaire James Goldsmith, was only active from 1994 to 1997, the reference to ‘Referendum’ was to UKIP which was founded in 1993.

208

Straying from socialism So, it occurred to me that since my real vote is useless [and] we ain’t gonna start runnin’ down the street burnin’ and a-lootin’ either ’cause our ass is gonna get canned. So that leaves the only vote anybody’s got, this dollar bill … I’m not gonna go to a fast-food joint. I’m going to go to a place where people own it, where the owner is standing behind the bar … This is my new philosophy … It’s time we stopped giving it in the bucket-loads to these giant corporations. They’re not to be trusted with that amount of money … They’re gonna crush us and pulverize us. (CD Now September 1999) I’m going to shop locally – that’s how I’m going to use my dollar bill as a vote – I’m not going to give it to the corporations. … Every time I spend it in a small, independent, local spot, it’s like one less dollar I’m giving to massive global corporations. The only vote we’ve got is the dollar bill. (Schalit 2000: 37)

But suggesting his new manifesto had made little headway, he commented: ‘We’re stuck in a kind of horrible holding pattern now, and it seems to me that the only way to change it is if we get hipsters to stay in one place long enough to get elected. The problem is that no hipster wants to get elected’ and ‘whatever happens next is going to be bland unless you and I noise everything up. This is our mission, to noise everything up! Get in there and noise it out, upset the apple cart, destroy the best laid plans – we have to do this!’ (McKenna 2003). A milieu more receptive to Strummer’s ideas here would not emerge until almost a decade after his death in the form of the Occupy movement. It was more compatible with his ideas than the anti-capitalist and anti-globalisation movements of the early 2000s. He had little to say about those movements other than this on the G8: ‘Because they decide everything before they go there … it’s almost like a photo opportunity … you can see why people are angry because they can’t affect anything because everything is decided behind closed doors … that leads to rage and anger’ (New York interview 4 April 2002). Nonetheless, Strummer never laid out how his idea of an alternative of small-scale, decentralised ethical capitalism would come about. Though he read Chomsky,5 there was no evidence of him reading others similarly described as libertarian socialists and anarchists like Michael Albert and 5 George Binette visited Strummer’s home after his death, observing Chomsky’s books there along with those by George Orwell (personal correspondence 28 January 2020).

209

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Murray Bookchin, who might have helped. While Strummer was not an intellectual, he had sufficient intellectual capacity, and suggesting an alternative did come with such a responsibility. Though it came nowhere close, Strummer’s fascination with campfires – which he ‘came to believe … had a certain primal force that broke down social barriers and opened channels of communication’ (Binette 2007a) – and the reverting to hippytype communes (see p.86) were likely to synthesise both the means and the ends to what Strummer envisaged. Strummer was recognised as The Clash’s ‘intellectual’ (Mother Jones April 1982) and ‘punk’s radical thinker’ (Barsanti 2014: 169) but some downplayed his intellectual abilities. Roman (2004: 288) commented he ‘wasn’t an intellectual’, while music critic Robert Christgau remarked The Clash were ‘not political science professors’ (Doane 2017) and Worley (2016: 91) believed ‘[h]is rebellion was not … theorised’. Following Strummer himself (McKenna 2003), Binette twice commented Strummer ‘was not a political thinker but he thought a lot about politics’ (McDonald and Miles 2003, Parkinson 2005). Salewicz (2006: 2, 304) was dismissive, calling him a ‘pub philosopher’ and his political ideals ‘indisputably a little bit “student”’. Strummer himself often downplayed his role and abilities, stating: ‘I don’t think about things I do too much. I just do ’em’ (NME 3 September 1977) and ‘There wasn’t any thinking, or intellectual process, to it [political statements]. We just did it’ (UNCUT September 1999). His personal predicament from 1986 onwards accentuated this downplaying: ‘I’ve never been any kind of intellectual thinker. I’m more of an instinctive worker … I [act] without self-consciousness … I think you have to have some education to think for yourself but I think you can be over-educated [and] it doesn’t seem to do anyone any good … I don’t know nothing about nothing’ (Rock&Folk 1995). This was followed by a Music Planet interview in 2001, where he commented: ‘I don’t feel like a big shot political thinker … I feel as dumb as everyone else’. And then, in response to the question in 2001, ‘What’s the most widely held misconception about you?’, he responded ‘That I’m some kind of political thinker. I definitely am not [but] I think about politics all the time’ (McKenna 2003). His belief in instinctiveness is examined below (see pp.219–220). 210

Straying from socialism

Anti-imperialist to B52 liberal? Strummer’s response to militant Islam was rather surprising. Though he had been critical of it in ‘Rock the Casbah’ (1982), this was with regard to suppressing citizens’ choice of music in Iran (Salewicz 2006: 324).6 After 9/11, he took this to an unprecedented level, in the process appearing to reverse his previous hostility to American imperialism. He could have condemned 9/11 and pointed out it was the reaping of a bitter harvest as a result of American imperialism. But in a 12 October 2001 interview in Worcester, MA, Strummer unreservedly supported bombing the Taliban, although not Afghanis, arguing the Taliban ‘rule by terror … put women back into the Stone Age, they’re worse than Hitler, they make Hindustanis wear yellow stars … we’re bombing the Taliban’. The next month he stated: ‘I think you have to grow up and realise that we’re facing religious fanatics who would kill everyone in the world who doesn’t do what they say. The more time you give them the more bombs they’ll get. Bin Laden is going to try and kill more people’ (BBC News 13 November 2001). The next year, he continued this line of response. Asked by the Brooklyn Paper (1 April 2002), ‘What do you think of the US response to the attacks?’, he replied: Well, I think that it had to be done, because we shagged around in Europe when Hitler – Hitler was putting his machine together from about … [19]33 – so we gave Hitler six years really, to build that thing into a gigantic machine, and each one of those tanks we had to fight, each one of those shells and bullets we had to take on, … And so … you get brought up with that feeling of ‘Next time we don’t let ’em get away with it’. … next time we’ll do the guy in [19]36 and not wait until 1939 … So … from over here in Europe we’re very much of the ‘nip it in the bud’ school.

His friend Dick Rude provided further confirmation of this hardened stance (Salewicz 2006: 615). When The Mescaleros played the Worcester 6 Baker (2013b) believed the song represented ‘a thinly veiled rallying cry to the Muslim world to rise up and defy their fundamentalist oppressors … [being] … one of Joe’s most cleverly crafted and covertly worded declarations of revolution’. He translated ‘king’ as ‘any one of the western-appointed rulers in the Middle-East’, ‘boogie men’ as ‘oil barons’ and ‘raga’ as ‘religious dogma’.

211

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

gig, Strummer chose to have ‘a large US flag hung behind the stage’ (Rock&Roll Globe 24 August 2018). And the Morning Star (26 January 2002) called providing a rendition of ‘The Minstrel Boy’ to the Black Hawk Down (2001) soundtrack ‘[t]he final tragedy … It is all a long way from The Clash’s anti-imperialist epic Sandinista!’. These reactions drowned out his others (including staying clear of the subject (see Davie 2004: 120)). On 11 October 2001, Strummer provided a more balanced response: ‘Well, everybody’s freaking out all over the world … So, you gotta try and find a sort of bright side to the cloud. … I’m trying not to get too freaked out – keep it in hand. I reckon as time goes by, we’ll be able to get it into more perspective, take a … stead[ier] view of things’ (Mills 2001). A few days earlier he had argued: ‘Nothing like this has ever happened before, and people are freaked. But I think that’s a temporary situation. I think people will get cooler and confront the whole situation and stop lashing out’ (Sunday Telegram 7 October 2001) and ‘Even though there are extremists in the world, if we represent the sane people of the world, then we’ve got to hold on to our sanity and not allow ourselves to get crazed with vengeance and make an inopportune movement’ (Grunebaum 2001). Binette (2007b: 63) noted: ‘His ideological compass … veered wildly – in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 he appeared to support the war in Afghanistan, though later interviews suggest he had reversed that position.’ And yet, setting those exceptions aside, the earlier comments were the basis on which his friend, director Julien Temple, suggested Strummer ‘thought the [impending Iraq] war was a good thing’ (UNCUT June 2007). Indeed, at the Acton benefit gig Strummer said: ‘I’m not against America’ (Salewicz 2006: 636). Turning point – certainty to uncertainty It would be easy to think Strummer’s ‘wilderness years’ from Earthquake Weather (1989) to Rock Art and the X-Ray Style (1999) was the period when he underwent a crisis of self-confidence, and this had the knock-on effect of lessening his political radicalism and his platform for it. Thus, Strummer no longer had the same strength of political platform for his 212

Straying from socialism

views, which in turn fed into his declining confidence in his own political views as he set much store by being able to communicate with a mass audience. In other words, he believed if people could not or did not want to hear what he said then there had to be a problem with what he was saying. But while there is substantial evidence for the ‘wilderness years’ being such a period, the situation is more considerably more complex. First, evidence of a changed focus of what his ‘message’ was predated 1989. Second, the crisis of self-confidence also predated 1989, with the disintegration of The Clash having a huge impact. Third, evidence of Strummer’s political disillusionment begins in the mid-1980s, despite ‘rebel rock’. Fourth, the hegemony of ‘new’ Labour and its version of social neoliberalism in the 1990s accelerated that process of disillusionment. Fifth, his uncertainty continued after he re-emerged from his ‘wilderness years’, as his response to a question in 2001 indicates – asked ‘Over the years, which of your perspectives have changed?’, he replied ‘Probably everything’.7 Consequently, it is more accurate to think of the shift as one from Clash certainty to post-Clash uncertainty. This section examines these components, starting with the repercussions of his musical nadir. One manifestation of the shift to uncertainty was, as noted earlier of RAtR, that Strummer’s custom of saying less on stage than he did during the later Clash years became more of a habit. At most, Strummer said a few short sentences, increasingly concerned with introducing the next song by saying something about its lyrics rather than making general political statements. Introducing ‘Shakhtar Donetsk’ (2001) at Tower Records, Sunset Strip, in August 2001 was therefore somewhat unusual: When we were making a record, we read a horrible thing in the newspaper, when 58 Chinese people were found suffocated in a container lorry. They were trying to get from France into Britain and the … [driver] closed the vents so the customs people wouldn’t hear anything. So, this song’s about the movement of people to try to find a new life and about how shitty their old life must have been for them to risk life and limb just to get there. 7 Interview, Chateau Marmont, Hollywood, mid-2001.

213

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

He did the same for the song at the Fleadh in 2002.8 When he did not make any political statements at all, he reverted to the likes of his opening of ‘Oh welcome, I’m glad to see you’ve come out of your homes on a night like this’ in Boston on 13 November 1989 as part of the eleven-date US tour promoting Earthquake Weather. He also extemporised less during songs like ‘Armagideon Time’ and ‘Clampdown’. His extemporising had grown mostly notably since 1980 (Salewicz 2006: 282), although it was something he started in the 101ers (UNCUT August 2017). His attitude was more now to let the music do the talking. Although CBS did not provide support to get Earthquake Weather widely into record shops, Strummer’s sense of diminishing self-worth was not helped by its low worldwide sales – ‘only just over 7,000 copies’ (Salewicz 2006: 476). This was fewer copies than for the relatively unknown soundtrack of the Alex Cox film, Walker (1987), which Strummer wrote and which achieved around 15,000 sales in the US (Shelley 1988). CBS would not release Strummer from his contract (from The Clash) and so after Earthquake Weather he was, in his own words, ‘waiting out his contract’ (Salewicz 2006: 548) having seen the unsuccessful and costly lengths George Michael went to in order to be released from his Sony contract. In this context, and turning to where his main focus seemed to lie, in 1988 he told Rapido: ‘Let’s just get on with life … this next second has never been lived by anyone  [i]n the world before … that’s what’s exciting about living.’ This was reminiscent not only of the ‘Don’t forget you’re alive’ 2001 statement but also much earlier statements: ‘Everyone has got to realise you can’t hold onto the past if you want any future. Each second should lead to the next one’ (Sounds 17 July 1982) and ‘Rock ’n’ roll exists to deliver this truth … it needs to be constantly delivered … it reminds us of this unspoken message: it is fun to be alive. It’s a hell of a lot better than being dead’ (Haimes 1995). In 2002, his remark was even starker: ‘I don’t see myself as having any influence left, or any message left really’ (Davie 2018: 322). However, somewhat buoyed up by his Mescaleros return, Strummer told McKenna (2003): ‘Every time I think “you’ve had 8 See also Needs (2005: 313), Davie (2004: 6, 11) and Bedford (2007).

214

Straying from socialism

your lot, now just shut up”, a larger part of me says, “No, there are things you can say better than anyone, and you must say them”’ and the Liverpool Echo in late November 2002: ‘I want to keep going forward, I still have something to say to people’ (Guardian 24 December 2002). Strummer’s declining sense of self-worth can be dated to 1985/1986 with the disintegration of the revamped Clash. He told Channel 4 (6 May 1988): ‘I had to disassemble myself, examine all the pieces and put myself back together again. I really felt completely destroyed by that experience.’ Then he remarked to Rolling Stone (12 November 1989): ‘I didn’t have the heart to get up and start another group.’ Looking back from further afield, he said: ‘I didn’t have any more to say because we’d done eight slabs of long-playing vinyl inside a five-year period. I think I was exhausted – mentally, physically … I did find it very rough, being out of fashion’ (Mirror 15 October 1999); ‘I was completely discombobulated … I felt totally unable to do anything for a few years or formulate any sort of sensible idea’ (Daily Yomiuri 26 September 2002); and ‘It took ten years to recharge my batteries’ (Times 16 July 2001). Asked in 1988 what the worst moment of his life was, he stated: ‘Of the whole shebang? For me, it’s Cut the Crap. [It] just didn’t work, it was a very big fuck up. It took me a long time to get over it.’ This led him to say in the same interview: ‘‘I change my mind every week … I really just want to be normal. I want to walk forward in life like everyone else … I’d love to shut up for a while’ (Shelley 1988). Just over a decade later, he told the Guardian (24 September 1999): ‘We had the bloody golden apple in our hands, and threw it away. For a long time, I did other stuff to avoid thinking about it.’ Finally, in 2002 Strummer summed up his situation after 1986: ‘I took a long breather after The Clash broke up, and I had a really hard time about half way through that. I needed a rest, so I was kind of grateful for the break, but at a certain point I became overwhelmed by a sense of self-doubt’ (McKenna 2003) and ‘I had a crisis of self-confidence around ’85’ (MOJO March 2003). Added to this: ‘Earthquake Weather … didn’t sell any copies so I sort of took a confidence knock-down … the press w[as] kicking me and saying “you’re over and g[o] away”’ (Real Groove December 1999). In this context, back in 1982 Strummer gave a rather 215

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

odd definition of rebellion – odd because it focused almost entirely on individual responsibility without much of a stated political objective: ‘real rebellion is … something more personal than [cultural revolt]. It’s not giving up. Rebellion is deciding to push ahead with it all for one more day. That’s the toughest test of revolt – keeping yourself alive, as well as the cause … in the end, I realised it’s the only rebellion that counts – not giving up’ (Musician September 1982). Given this, he came close to giving up, especially after 1989. In fact, the first signs of his political disillusionment can be traced to the early 1980s, not long after stating his socialist stance. An early clue was to be found in ‘Kingston Advice’ (1980): ‘In these days I don’t know what to sing/The more I know the less my tune can swing’. Strummer told Boston Rock (June 1981): ‘I like to play music. I don’t know about the rest of it’ and Sounds (17 July 1982): ‘I’ve been on [US] radio shows … and they’ve asked me political questions I just haven’t had an answer for … I just feel uncertain, confused.’ Somewhat contradictorily, Strummer told CNN Report in 1982: ‘I’m not saying we have any answers ’cause we don’t. We are just as confused as anyone else … [but] we see the power in this medium as a power to be used for a constructive purpose.’ His loss of fighting spirit was also becoming apparent in early 1984: The world is marching backwards faster all the time … everything I read is bad news apart from the Sandinista thing in Nicaragua. … In [Britain] … we’re returning to Victorian ideals – that’s the government message … in the United States, it’s the bible belt … Everything is going backwards to something that doesn’t really exist. Supposedly, technology and science was going to save the world and we’d be going forward to a bright future [but] it’s recession, close the factory down, throw people out of work. (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029)

Here, we can recall his ‘I have no answers’ comment (The Tennessean 27 March 1984, see p.124). Even at the Us festival, Strummer concluded his diatribe on a despondent note: ‘I’m here to tell you that all the people that are on this stage, and are gonna come on, and have been on it already, we’re nowhere, absolutely nowhere. Can’t you understand that?’ In 1984, he told Vince White (2007: 216

Straying from socialism

194): ‘[W]hat you gotta understand is there’s always two sides to a story. When I was younger I was like you. Everything [was] black and white. There is right and there is wrong but now I’ve grown up a bit I think differently now. There’s always another side to consider. Take Ronald Reagan for instance. Before I would have thought smash the American state … but now … I have to admit the guy has a pretty cool haircut.’ This was a big contrast to his outward ‘rebel rock’ perspective, and would be followed by praise for another Republican, Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani, and his ‘civic clean up’ of 1994 to 2001, following earlier criticism: ‘I think he was really just magnificent [in response to 9/11] … I’m … like a street rat moaning about it down on the street but you know, perhaps you’ve got to look at the wider aspects of getting the city free of fear and crime’ (Brooklyn Paper 1 April 2002). In 1986, he stated: ‘[A] large percentage of people like me are idiots … just because I scribble the odd ditty who says my thoughts are more thought out than other people’s?’ (NME 26 July 1986), and ‘I’ve really thought about politics and all that, and it seemed suddenly so adolescent to me, the way we were all gibbering away, shouting. [But it wasn’t pointless] ’cos there’s something about adolescence that’s an essential part of rock ’n’ roll … it’s not thought, it’s all spirit’ (MM 18 October 1986). Of the forces of British patriotism, Strummer asked: ‘[H]ow can our adolescent gibbering with a guitar ever even make a bridgehead upon this established tradition?’ (MM 20 December 1986). Then he remarked to Sounds (6 August 1988): ‘Britain [now] seems a far meaner place. Put it this way – the quality of life has declined, [Britain] has become somehow more mean-spirited. The general drift has turned toward the individual concentrating on him or herself, rather than say 20 years ago, when people had more interests in … causes.’ This perspective fed into the lyrics for songs on Earthquake Weather. For example, though there was a slight expression of hope in ‘King of the Bayou’ (see p.66), the lead track and its first single was ‘Gangsterville’ with its ‘The Revolution came and the Revolution went/…/Wanted: one man to lead a crusade/Payment: a bullet on a big parade/…/Final decisions are made by the club/And implemented by the shadow of a glove’. 217

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Another way of interpreting the change in Strummer is that he ‘matured’ as he grew older as part of a mellowing out process, so that in middle age he was no longer the ‘angry young man’ of before – or in his own words: ‘When I was a youth, I was an extreme on the left. A complete and utter rebel … I fiercely believed the opposite, say ten years ago’ (CD Now September 1999) and ‘In the rush of youth you assume too much – and so it should be’ (McKenna 2003). However, this wrongly conflates cause and effect. Strummer’s early radicalism was born more out of his youthful influences and the political nature of the time rather than youthfulness per se. Similarly, the move away from radicalism resulted from disillusionment with a deteriorating political situation for progressives and not older age in itself. Gilbert (2009: 2) suggested the source of Strummer’s political disillusionment came from incorporation, believing the line, ‘He who fucks nuns will later join the church’ from ‘Death or Glory’ (1979) indicated: ‘Joe was conceding that young rebels are ultimately doomed to become part of the establishment they once railed against. It suggested all revolutions, including his own, will ultimately end in failure.’ UNCUT (August 2017) also surmised from the song Strummer believed rebels’ fate is either ‘defeat or co-option’. Roots of reorientation In contrast to the firmness with which he attacked ‘new’ Labour and neoliberalism, Strummer also became less certain and more indecisive, changing his views as he argued the complexity of the world was increasing. This indicated his reorientation had further components other than just political disillusionment with ‘new’ Labour and neoliberalism. One was a sense of information overload, where as the quantity rose, the quality declined: I think about politics all the time, but it’s become increasingly difficult to know what’s going on in the world. … I’m finding it more and more difficult to come to those kinds of conclusions – possibly because we’re getting more information and we have to sift through it. I used to believe it was possible to learn what was going on in the world by reading the newspaper, but that 218

Straying from socialism began to change around the time that the Balkans thing kicked off. Either the newspapers aren’t up to snuff or I’m losing my mind, but I found it very difficult to get a grasp on what was going on there. (McKenna 2003)

This buttressed an earlier statement: ‘The world is so complex … I feel more confused now than I did when I was a teenager’ (The NewMusic 2001). But another component, more importantly, was the rejection of intellectualism as a form of reason and rationale. This would cover political philosophy from socialism to social democracy and liberalism. He contended: ‘The new century is not going to be about intelligentsia or the intellect – the new century is gonna be about the intuitive, the instinctive’ (Real Groove December 1999) and laid this out at greater length elsewhere: I like to quote … Shaun Ryder … if I may. He’s goofing off on that [Hues Corporation] ‘Rock the Boat’ song. He goes ‘don’t rock the boat, baby. FUCK THE BOAT – PUSH THE BOAT OVER!’ That to me, says more than any philosopher, any intelligentsia person has come out with or is going on in the Sunday papers for six pages. I challenge the intelligentsia to beat that concise message. That is the message of the 20th century. (CD Now September 1999) Somewhere between intuition and instinct, and very far from intellectualism, lies true intelligence. … Whatever [The] Clash did, it was derived from another part of intelligence that hasn’t been formally recognised yet because you can’t learn it in a university … It’s not intellectual intelligence, its instinctive, intuitive intelligence … It’s far more powerful … This is the area we need to access in the brain because all out intellectualism has only led us on a merry dance. We still have war and famine. None of our intellectuals can help us – they can only keep confusing the issue. … I’ve only just figured this out. (BBC Radio 4 22 September 1999) The only thing we can agree about is that everything is wrong … This country’s intelligentsia are so smug and self-satisfied. But all their education is nothing to what a bunch of dirty hippies out of their minds on drugs have done for the world. Or dirty punks, for that matter. Any misfit lunatic has done more for this planet than all the toffs and their snidey newspaper articles. (Sunday Herald 26 September 1999). I am completely anti-intellectual. I am pro-intuition and pro-instinct. We’ve already given too many props to intellectualism. The intellectuals’ time is 219

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer over. They’ve done nothing for us. They write long, boring philosophy books that no one can understand except themselves. All we’ve ended up with is a world full of jet airplanes screaming overhead with laser guided bombs and rockets. I figure that all the intellectuals should go off to an island somewhere and wear woolly clothing. They’re too complicit with the status quo. (Schalit 2000: 39)

These ideas provided the reasoning behind one of his widely known comments: ‘It seems to me that origination is, perhaps, instinct not intellect’ (Letts 2000). Applied to his music, he told a journalist at the Italian Rockol music festival in 2001 of Global a Go-Go: ‘The concept is there is no concept. This is a new concept … it is a question of really going inside the music and being influenced by the moment … I like to work on my feet [and] in the moment … I’ve realised now how to think more clearly.’ 9 This manifested itself in his hero worship of Bo Diddley. Though Strummer had been a fan of his since his earliest days, towards the end of his life he elevated him to ‘hero’ (Mills 2001, MOJO March 2002) and his major source of inspiration (Against The Current March/April 2003, McKenna 2003) because he saw him as an innovator. Previously, Strummer had said his political hero was Lawrence of Arabia for ‘coming out of England and leading the Arabs’ (RM 9 April 1977). Humanism Strummer’s humanism is examined here because, though present for many years in his world view, it came to the fore in his later years. Indeed, it is reasonable to suggest that an element of humanism existed prior to 1976, given his hippy period, and it was picked up on by Bangs (NME 10 December 1977). Thereafter, it tended be subsumed within his socialist belief before re-emerging as the most important part of his world view. Recalling his support for socialism and his particular conceptions of it (see pp.70–71), he articulated several aspects of his (secular) humanism and humanitarianism. By these, he meant valuing the agency of human beings, 9 Rockol Italian music TV interview, 2001.

220

Straying from socialism

individually and collectively, stipulating human freedom is necessary for this agency to occur, freedom and agency are critical for human progress, and humankind must bear the ethical and physical responsibility for its actions. Benevolence was also a key part of his humanism and for similar moral, altruistic reasons. Although humanism is concerned with the actions of humans, the order of causation for making human progress bears the hallmark of utopianism (see p.87). After his death, Strummer was popularly perceived as a humanist and humanitarian, as tributes from Flea (Red Hot Chili Peppers) and Chrissie Hynde (Pretenders) indicated. This often resulted from a popular meme taken from The Future Is Unwritten (Temple 2007) where Strummer stated: ‘Without people you’re nothing.’ This was part of a longer monologue from his BBC World Service programmes: And so now I’d like to say – people can change anything they want to. And that means everything in the world. … People are running about following their little tracks – I am one of them. But we’ve all got to stop just following our own little mouse trail. People can do anything – this is something that I’m beginning to learn. People are out there doing bad things to each other. That’s because they’ve been dehumanised. It’s time to take the humanity back into the centre of the ring and follow that for a time. Greed, it ain’t going anywhere. They should have that in a big billboard across Times Square. Without people you’re nothing.

The meme was buttressed by other statements: ‘I believe in human beings’ (Andersen 2013: 20); ‘There’s no tenderness or humanity in fanaticism’ (CRC radio 2002); and ‘I don’t think there’s any point in being famous if you lose that thing of being a human being’ (McKenna 2003). Much earlier, Record Mirror (9 May 1981) noted: ‘[Strummer] tells me … the band have no concrete political ideology other than “human rights”.’ After his attack on modern states providing nothing more than an illusion of human rights in ‘Know Your Rights’ (1982), Strummer provided ‘Generations’ (as Electric Dog House) to the album Generations, Vol I: A Punk Look at Human Rights (1997), because of his ‘admiration for [Amnesty International’s] Jack Healey’s Human Rights agenda’ (Daily Trojan 19 March 1997). Two of Strummer’s strongest last statements here were: 221

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer The essence of being a punk is being in a state of concern with humanity, because punk, as with any decent movement, is a protest movement … They’re protest movements against the way the die is cast. You wouldn’t bother to do that without being concerned with basic questions of truth or humanity, or trying to get at ‘What the fuck is all this about?’ ‘Why are we alive?’ ‘Is it only to be wage slaves?’ (Hit List November/December 1999). The message of the album [Global a Go-Go] is that we’re all going to have to learn to live together and develop a greater tolerance and to get rid of what our fathers gave us in the way of hatred between nations. It’s about all of us sharing one world and celebrating our unity as well as our differences. I’m not out to preach but I’m definitely into nudging people. … Refugees enrich a culture and bring talents and abilities with them. (Times 16 July 2001)

Strummer’s humanism was recognised by a number of writers including Harrison (2002: 34). Bedford (2007) depicted him as a ‘humanist critical-realist’ while D’Ambrosio (2006) believed: ‘His later work moved further toward humanism’, commenting: ‘Joe always said his politics was Marxist but I always thought it was humanist before anything else’ (Billet 2006). Worley (2014: 91) characterised Strummer as a ‘liberal humanist’ in his socialist period. Accompanying humanism was also a strand of libertarianism as a concern for human freedom in its widest sense against the constrictions of states and economic systems (including restrictions on smoking and rave music). Bedford (2007) argued this ‘allowed right-wing politicians like Boris Johnson and Mathew Parris cynically to venerate Strummer as a symbol of individual freedom’. However, in his time with The Clash, White (2007: 4, Salewicz 2006: 383, Garcia 2013: 150) found little evidence of Strummer’s humanism in the form of the expected humanitarianism. Though Strummer proclaimed a belief in socialism (which involved rejecting Soviet ‘socialism’) and gravitated towards humanism, there is no evidence he believed in ‘socialist humanism’ or ‘humanist socialism’ as disseminated in Britain by the likes of New Left Review and Harry McShane in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Indeed, his humanism seemed to eclipse his socialism, so the two could not marry. 222

Straying from socialism

Opinions It would seem to follow from Strummer’s stress on truth (see pp.101–106), especially during the ‘rebel rock’ period, that the importance of opinions would be downgraded. But his disavowal of opinions did not occur until much later and was bound up with his diminishing self-confidence and political disillusionment. Indeed, before the late 1980s, opinion and truth intermingled, highlighting the subjective nature of his ‘objective’ truths. This, towards the end of his life, did not mean he held no opinions, but rather he was often less forthright and certain in expressing them. His disavowal of opinions began with: ‘My opinions are no more important than anyone else’s – they carry no more weight than anyone [else’s]’ (NME 7 October 1989). He told Sounds (8 October 1989) something similar: ‘I’m definitely not someone who’s worth worshipping.’ This was followed in 1993 with: ‘I’ve learnt never to have opinions’ (Salewicz 2006: 509). In 1999, he stated: ‘I … just sneer … at the whole idea of opinions. … And I start thinking what a bunch of bullshit our opinions are. ’Cause mine change’ (CD Now September 1999). The pace quickened and the firmness of this view increased in the new millennium: ‘I think opinions are a straightjacket. I detest them more and more. I contest everything I’ve ever thought.’ (MOJO May 2001) and then: I’m a bit worried about fanaticism because if your opinions are too rigorous it can lead you into fanaticism and that will prevent you from seeing the truth about situations so I like to keep flexible and I like to hear all sides of a given issue to try to make sure that any opinion that I form will have some merit to it. (The NewMusic 2001) [A] … person said that he didn’t like opinions because they prevented him from seeing things clearly. I knew instantly what he meant. When you are young, everything is in black and white, and it prevents you from seeing a situation outside your own context … Opinions tend to filter the truth more to one’s own liking.10 I don’t have any opinions about British politics. I resent being asked about anything. I’m quite happy not being asked about anything. … I get rid of 10 Interview, Chateau Marmont, Hollywood, mid-2001.

223

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer my opinions! Because some clever guy said, ‘If you have opinions, you cannot see’ meaning that opinions will … blinker you to see the truth about any situation. [laughing] Opinions aren’t worth the paper they’re written on! (Mills 2001)

Finally, in 2002, he stated: ‘The more opinions you hold, the less you can see.’ 11 But these statements make clear Strummer still believed an objective truth could be found if searched for carefully and long enough. Freedom and liberty Musicians often criticise the music industry for stifling their freedom to exercise their creative capacities. But their criticism, though often expressed as against money-making, should not necessarily be taken as criticism of its capitalist nature or of capitalism per se. This is especially because these criticisms pertain to their own personal experiences, and without similar creative capacities among others, it is not self-evident their criticisms are applied or applicable to those outside the music industry. A case in point is Jones. Early on he emphasised the importance to himself of free speech and personal liberty (NME 2 April 1977). His two most political and politically left-wing lyrics were ‘Remote Control’ and ‘Complete Control’. The former deals primarily with the interference from local councils in preventing many of the ‘Anarchy’ tour gigs from taking place, along with the restrictions of record companies.12 The latter is mainly about CBS’s decision to release ‘Remote Control’ as a single without the band’s agreement, and their fractious relationship with CBS. Jones’s other Clash lyrics were essentially love songs and the most political songs by Big Audio Dynamite, Jones’s post-Clash band, were written by Strummer (see p.62). Even though Strummer experienced many creative battles with CBS from 1976 to 1996, this tension was not a wellspring of his political outlook and lyric writing. 11 ‘Joe Strummer 001 – Brand new footage and unreleased songs’, Joe Strummer Official YouTube, 21 August 2018. 12 Towards the end of the song, the vista opens out to an attack on Parliament for being distant from the populace it is supposed to serve.

224

Straying from socialism

Freedom and liberty were the most important and constant combined themes of Strummer’s lyrics from 1976 onwards. ‘Guns on the Roof ’, about oppression and exploitation, stipulated ‘Freedom’s always on the run’, while ‘Know your Rights’ stated: ‘You have the right to free speech/As long as you’re not dumb enough to actually try it’. In ‘This is England’, he asked ‘When will we be free?’ Other references to freedom and liberty can be found in ‘Rock the Casbah’ and ‘Charlie Don’t Surf ’. In ‘Yalla Yalla’ (Arabic for ‘come on, let’s go’), he wrote ‘Well, so long liberty/Let’s forget you didn’t show/Not in my time’ while in ‘Johnny Appleseed’ he opined ‘Lord, there goes Martin Luther King/Notice how the door closes when the chimes of freedom ring’. On ‘Shakhtar Donetsk’, he charted the limitations on migrants’ freedom to escape poverty and seek a better life (as he had done earlier with ‘Beyond the Pale’ and ‘Ticket’ in 1986). Talking of his first Mescaleros album, Strummer said when he looked at all the lyrics: ‘I realised it was about freedom’ (‘EPK’ Puma TV 2000). This corresponded to his sense people were being politically oppressed by political systems – as opposed to calling this neoliberal capitalism – and were seeking freedom outside of politics. He was especially perturbed by ‘new’ authoritarianism as it related to ‘rave’ culture in ‘Techno D-Day’ (1999): ‘And this is all about free speech’, with the album it is on dedicated to ‘all freedom fighters’. In 2001, he commented: Let’s forget politics and get into drugs or skateboarding – anything that passes the time and gives you some sense of freedom. People want to feel free, and it’s a hard feeling to come by in this world. People have a right to change their consciousness, too, and in the back of their minds they know they have that right. So, people are gonna flout the laws established to prevent them from smoking marijuana or experimenting with ecstasy, because they know that nobody … has the right to tell you what goes on in your mind. (McKenna 2003)

Earlier, Strummer stressed: ‘The only thing I’m interested in is my personal freedom. Obviously, it ain’t no use me having the right to choose unless everybody else [has it too]’ (MM 26 April 1977). It would be a stretch to say this was a reworking of Marx’s dictum: ‘The condition of the freedom of the individual is the condition of the freedom of all’, given 225

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Strummer said this in 1977. Nonetheless, and compared to Jones, this was one of the very few times when Strummer spoke about his own freedom (save his contractual wrangles with CBS). More significantly, the lyrics he wrote concerned freedom from oppression and exploitation in terms of economic, political, physical and social connotations. But they were rather more about freedom from than freedom (and liberty) to. This was because he was never particularly detailed about what his lyrics meant, never developing his conceptualisation of them either in subsequent lyrics or interviews (see p.11). Moreover, his conceptions of freedom and liberty were more often implicit than explicit, being simply the opposite to oppression and exploitation. To the extent the nature of freedom can be discerned in Strummer’s lyrics, it is often about the freedom to enjoy life, sometimes in a hedonistic way, but without considering the resources necessary to do so. This assessment may again sound trite given song lyrics are not the place to develop treatises on the concepts of freedom and liberty, because lyrics seek to connect to existing, externalised feelings and thoughts through evocation. But it is to recognise he spoke in generalities, and in evocative ways, testifying to his skill as a wordsmith and thus the lyrics’ universality and timelessness (see p.10). Strummer’s national identity From his Clash anti-racist manifesto in 1976 (see p.71) to his ‘Czechoslovak Song’ (1985) and then ‘Bhindi Bhagee’ and ‘Shatkar Donesk’ from Global a Go-Go (2001), which empathised with the plight of migrants and celebrated multiculturalism, Strummer is commonly perceived as a cosmopolitan citizen of the world who was tolerant and welcoming in his political attitudes to those from elsewhere and appreciative of what they brought to Britain. Moreover, his love of reggae and other world music was well known, especially from his BBC World Service broadcasts. This suggested he was very much free of any nationalist prejudices or chauvinism. In 1982, he said ‘[We’re] trying to make a universal music for a world without governments. Or a better way of putting it is to say for a world under One World Government. All this nationalism, these border wars, they’re 226

Straying from socialism

going to erupt into the death of us’ (Musician September 1982). Strummer had earlier stated his desire for a ‘world under one government’ (Sounds 17 July 1982). And, on Westway to the World (Letts 2000), he stated of The Clash: ‘We weren’t parochial, we weren’t narrow-minded, we weren’t “little Englanders”. At least we had the suss to embrace what we were presented with, which was the world and all its weird varieties, and we tried to reflect that into the tracks.’ He is then also thought of as an internationalist by those on the left, though ‘transnationalist’ might be a better characterisation. However, he adopted different guises of national identity over time, ranging from British and English to Scottish. Capturing this complexity early on, David Mingay, Rude Boy co-director, commented Strummer ‘managed to be both ultra-British and anti-British at the same time’ (Salewicz 2006: 5). As an anti-racist and anti-fascist, Strummer was critical of British and English, though not Scottish, patriotism (see pp.229–230). He stated he was against ‘all that racist, fascist “patriotic” type of fanaticism’ (MM 11 March 1978). However, this does not mean he did not frequently self-identify as English and sometimes proudly so. He stated: ‘I’m English and I live here’ (MM 13 December 1980); ‘If I am English and if I don’t mean anything to English fans then it makes me feel sick to my stomach’ (Stay Free radio programme 28 March 2019), while in the mid-1980s he commented: ‘I come from England. That’s where I am and where I must always go back to’ (BAM 10 February 1984) and ‘You must know that we are English, right?’ to an Italian audience (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 194). He also made many associations with England in song titles: ‘English Civil War’ (1978), ‘Something about England (1980)’, ‘Where is England?’ (1983), ‘This is England’ (1985) and ‘England’s Irie’ (1996). Other than ‘England’s Irie’, these were either angry laments for a better society or about the dangers of patriotism. Often Strummer conflated England with Britain, especially in the US (e.g. Quake February 1984, Hit List November/ December 1999, McKenna 2003). Seldom did he say, as in late 1983, ‘A lot of people are trying to make a cult out of England or Britain as we should call it’ (US radio interview). In 2001, in Germany, he rather confusingly exclaimed: ‘Wait, I’m British! My mother is from Scotland – from 227

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

the far north, I grew up in the south, I did not know that before, but at the moment I really value being considered a Briton. It’s about this kind of togetherness that has not really existed since World War Two’ (Gaestleliste internet music magazine 2001). This indicated another side to Strummer. In 1981, he castigated the far right and Nazis for using patriotism to recruit to their ranks, saying: ‘If anyone gives me a patriotic pitch … I know he’s trying to have one over on me’ (NME 3 January 1981). But he also went on to say in the same interview: ‘I’ve only been able to detect [patriotism] in myself in the last couple of years. … As far as I saw it, we’re all earthlings – not English or French … That’s how I used to think. I still do, mind, but I do feel patriotic … when England does something good. But what about Northern Ireland, how can you feel patriotic with all that going on?’ 13 Strummer backed retaking the Falkland Islands (Sounds 17 July 1982). In 1996, he was approached to produce Morrissey’s next album (Needs 2005: 295). For this, as he explained, he saw Morrissey support Bowie at Wembley (The Big Take-Over Fall 2000). Though the project did not happen due to artistic differences, it was interesting Strummer did not rule it out given Morrissey’s actions at the Madstock festival in 1992 and his ‘Asian Rut’ (1991), ‘Bengalis in Platforms’ (1988) and ‘National Front Disco’ (1992) songs, showing signs of regressive attitudes on race. In 1996, Strummer also wrote ‘England’s Irie’ for Black Grape for the 1996 European football championship, and twice broke his boycott of ‘Top of the Pops’ to appear on it singing and wearing England football T-shirts.14

13 Topping (2004: 139) remarked ‘Something About England’ was ‘patriotic without being xenophobic’. In the special edition of The Armagideon Times in The Clash’s Sound System (2013) box set, Strummer, in characteristic upper case, wrote: ‘BRITON [sic] TODAY … SHOULD BECOME AGAIN A LEADER FOR A TIME AND LEAD THE WORLD AFRESH. NOT IN THE FIELDS OF GUNS AND EXPLOITATION AND INHUMAN CRUELTY AS IN THE DAYS GONE BY BUT IN THE FIELDS OF LOGISTICS, HUMANISING IDEAS, THE FINAL DESTRUCTION OF MEDIAEVAL INSANITY.’ 14 Strummer was not involved in Fat Les’s ‘Vindaloo’ single for the 1998 World Cup (cf. Salewicz 2006: 557) but was involved in its next single, ‘Naughty Christmas’ (NME 21 November 1998, Guardian 9 December 2007). Strummer lamented this (Hot Press November 1999) and was chastised for it (CD Now September 1999).

228

Straying from socialism

For Strummer, there was also an association between Britishness and violence. On ‘Play to Win’ (1985), he responded to the line ‘Yeah, well if it’s hooligan you want’ with ‘We British will tear upon the street’. UNCUT (August 2017) noted this was a case of ‘apparently trading xenophobic insults’. At that time, he told White (2007: 88) what made Britain different: ‘You see, we’re an island. Hundreds of years of fighting invaders. It makes the people violent. It’s innate. That violence, it seeps into the culture. It’s part of the mindset. … It’s been instilled into us over generations.’ In 1986, Strummer was stirred by patriotism: ‘The other week I happened to be walking … past Buckingham Palace … Along came mounted horsemen … and … bagpipers … as they came past, I suddenly realised the truth, that I would have followed them anywhere, even over the top … On the Somme, I would have gone over the top with them, like so many did. It was too powerful’ (MM 20 December 1986). This was the background to his comment: ‘I get a strange swell of pride when I hear of our football hooligans causing trouble abroad’ (NME 7 October 1989). It was for these reasons that UNCUT (June 2007) could call Strummer a ‘proud patriot’. So, Strummer’s orientation towards English nationalism and national identity was not of the type associated with Bragg (2006) as a so-called ‘progressive patriot’, and neither was it a developed one like Bragg’s (see Tranmer 2008) even though Strummer read Orwell (MM 29 December 1979, Needs 2005: 19) as Bragg had. And, though Strummer mainly identified as ‘English’, towards the end of his life he elevated his Scottishness, primarily as a result of reconnecting with the Scottish side of his family, rather than as a rejection of reactionary ‘Englishness’. For him, this had some peculiar political portent. Three weeks before he died, he proclaimed: ‘I’ve been a terrible Scotsman but I’m going to be better’ (Salewicz 2006: 21). Back in 1977, he declared he was half-Scottish and only a quarter English (Salewicz 2006: 216), and occasionally before the mid-1990s he mentioned his Scottish blood (e.g. Roadrunner February 1980, LA Times 31 January 1988), showing he had some emotional attachment to Scotland: ‘If I hear a bagpipe band I feel tremendously moved, though I’ve never lived in Scotland’ (Roadrunner February 1980). But in the main, he professed to be English. After the mid-1990s, he more commonly mentioned his 229

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Scottishness (e.g. BBC News Online 13 November 2001). His Scottishness, he believed, imbued him with hardy resilience. In the early 2000s, he explained: ‘My mother’s from the north of the north of the north of Scotland. … The Romans built two walls all the way across England … just to keep my people out … I feel proud when I see Hadrian’s wall ’cause that wall was built to keep my forefathers out and it shows what motherfuckers we are’ (McGuire 2001). And when asked ‘What forces played a role in shaping your sense of morality?’, he responded: ‘My mother was Scottish, and a no-nonsense kind of woman, and maybe I got some vibes from her’ (McKenna 2003). He attributed his belief, ‘The way you get a better world is, you don’t put up with substandard anything’ (Bizarre Festival interview 21 August 1999) to his Scottish ancestry by saying: ‘I’m from the north of the north of Scotland. We don’t put up with any shabby treatment’ (SPIN November 1999). Strummer also had a penchant for using offensive terms such as ‘wops’, ‘nips’, ‘Chi man’, ‘queer’ and ‘kebab Greeks’ in his lyrics and elsewhere. He repeatedly used the term ‘Pakis’ in a High Times (August 1979) interview. Introducing ‘Police and Thieves’ at RAR, he said: ‘Last week 119,000 people voted National Front in London. Well, this next one’s by a wog. And if you don’t like wogs, you know where the bog is’ (Widgery 1986: 70). Johnny Green (Gilbert 2009: 136) believed he used such terms to confront and challenge racist ideas while Baker (2013a), in discussing Strummer’s Hell W10, suggested something else was also present: ‘The racially charged comments in the movie’s captions are also entirely consistent with Joe’s ’70s street-vernacular style … This all provided a further glimpse, perhaps unintentionally, into Joe’s anachronistic world view and confrontational nature.’ Accompanying this, Strummer did not glorify black ‘sufferation’ and was prepared to make criticism where he understood underlying social inequalities. So he was more than willing to critically observe black people, albeit from a left perspective, as was evident in ‘White Riot’ (‘Black man gotta lot a problems/But they don’t mind throwing a brick’), ‘Last Gang in Town’ (‘The white heart flipped his pocket dipped/’cause a black sharp knife never slips), ‘Safe European Home’ (‘I went to the place where every white face/Is an invitation to robbery’ (see also RM 11 March 1978)) 230

Straying from socialism

and ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’. Of course, he was also critical of white people being somewhat supine: ‘[‘White Riot’] … is saying white people are so fucked up and intellectual that they can’t seem to get any unified thing together’ (Parker 2003: 6).15 Conclusion Strummer strayed from his earlier self-professed socialist standpoint but that did not mean he capitulated to neoliberalism and ‘new’ Labour. The reverse was true, and in sketching out an alternative he proffered an ethical form of decentralised, small-scale capitalism imbued with humanism, highlighting that though he said he had no answers, he did offer answers. So, while he frequently retreated from making grand political statements, this side of him still remained. But the change in balance indicated the transition from socialist to non-socialist belief was underlain by his personal disposition moving from certainty to uncertainty. This transition was also evidenced in his somewhat complex and changing self-identity, combining at different times different degrees of Britishness, Englishness, Scottishness and global transnationalism. Indeed, his socialism as a form predominantly of left-populism, being predicated on ‘have-nots’ against ‘haves’, allowed him intellectually to make this transition because it was somewhat ill-defined, fluid and broad. In other words, certain strains of his world view were prioritised and deprioritised depending on the period.

15 See also p.119.

231

8

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

The criteria for assessing Strummer’s influence are its depth and breadth across space and time. In other words, where, when and for how long and in what manner did he influence people? Was it, for example, deep-seated and long-lasting or was it short and superficial – whether, for instance, in Britain or the US – and in what time period did this occur? And in what ways did Strummer change people’s attitudes and behaviours? These questions concern the qualitative and quantitative aspects, without for the moment examining the ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions, which are better suited to be answered through analysis of the testimonies from followers. Consequently, this chapter looks at the evidence available from secondary sources to map the extent and nature of Strummer’s influence. First, it looks at what Strummer said about his own influence in general and specific terms. Then it considers what others said about his influence on themselves and others, before moving on to look at perceptions of heroism and prophecy. Finally, the small handful of studies of Strummer/Clash followers are assessed. Given this study’s socialist realist framework, each ‘where’, ‘when’ and ‘how’ question also pertains to advancing the cause of socialism. Before proceeding, it is worth noting Strummer’s influence could potentially be multifaceted. One form it might take is seeing Strummer as exhorting individuals, paraphrasing, to ‘make something of yourself: be creative; do what you want; don’t be put down by the system’. This could represent calling on individuals to create routes out of situations through self-belief and determination, leading to personal fulfilment and/ 232

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

or social mobility within existing economic and political structures. Here, there would be nothing intrinsically left wing in character. There are examples of this with business leaders and politicians that are not of the left (see pp.249–250). Notwithstanding his endorsement of an ethical form of capitalism (see pp.208–209), this study is focused on individuals who took Strummer’s influence to be a left-wing one and acted in a compatible manner. Before proceeding, it is also worth considering listening figures to provide a backdrop to assessing Strummer’s influence. Record sales are likely to indicate slightly more of a connection to the songs, given the relatively more demanding acts of seeking out and purchasing when compared to YouTube and Spotify usage. By contrast, and even with changing technological mores, YouTube (free) watches indicate relatively less connection. The likes of Spotify sit in between the two. That said, for YouTube it is evident Clash songs are popular, albeit not at the level of billions or hundreds of millions for some other recording artists. However, what is immediately evident is a small number of Clash songs are more popular than others. Taking the most watched video for each song by mid-May 2021, ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go?’ (MJ) was watched 91m times since being uploaded four years previously, while ‘Rock the Casbah’ (JS) was watched 73m times since being uploaded eleven years previously.1 By contrast, ‘London Calling’ was watched 43m times (JS, uploaded eleven years previously), ‘Bankrobber’ 6.9m (JS, uploaded eleven years previously), ‘Train in Vain’ 4.5m (MJ, uploaded five years previously), ‘Complete Control’ 4.2m (MJ, uploaded seven years previously), ‘Guns of Brixton’ 3.1m (PS, uploaded five years previously), ‘This is England’ 2.3m (JS, uploaded eleven years previously), ‘White Riot’ 2.3m (JS, uploaded four years previously), ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’ 1.8m (JS, uploaded seven years previously), ‘Straight to Hell’ 1.8m (JS, uploaded three years previously), ‘The Call Up’ 1.1m (JS, uploaded eleven years previously), ‘The Magnificent Seven’ 1.0m (JS, uploaded four years previously), ‘Clampdown’ 0.84m (JS, uploaded four years previously), ‘Know Your Rights’ 0.79m (JS, uploaded 1 The length of time since uploading the song has a bearing on the number of views.

233

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

ten years previously) and ‘Washington Bullets’ 0.19m (JS, uploaded seven years previously). Given changes in technology and people’s preferences for particular platforms, data from Spotify in mid-May 2021 is also relevant. The top nine listened to Clash-composed songs – at a much higher level than YouTube – were ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go?’ (558m), ‘Rock the Casbah’ (191m), ‘London Calling’ (194m), ‘Train in Vain’ (72m), ‘Guns of Brixton’ (34m), ‘Lost in the Supermarket’ (31m) ‘Straight to Hell’ (24m), ‘The Magnificent Seven’ (21m) and ‘Charlie Don’t Surf ’ (17m). Turning to The Mescaleros, the figures are ‘Mondo Bongo’ (Spotify 13m, YouTube 5m, uploaded thirteen years previously), ‘Johnny Appleseed’ (Spotify 4m, YouTube 0.5m, uploaded thirteen years previously), ‘Coma Girl’ (Spotify 3m, YouTube 0.6m, uploaded eleven years previously), ‘Get Down Moses’ (Spotify 3m, YouTube 0.5m, uploaded eleven years previously) and ‘Bhindi Bhagee’ (Spotify 1m, YouTube 0.1m, loaded fourteen years previously). What becomes evident, and has some bearing on the size of Strummer’s potential constituency of influence, is many of the lyrics of the most popular songs on YouTube and Spotify were either written by Mick Jones (MJ) or are the less ‘political’ ones. By contrast, those written by Strummer (JS) and the more ‘political’ songs were less frequently watched/listened to.2 Strummer’s post-Clash output was far less watched/listened to. Data on single sales or their airplays is not available but it is clear that in the US, the biggest national audience market, other than ‘Rock the Casbah’, the biggest ‘hits’ there were London Calling’s ‘Train in Vain’ and Combat Rock’s ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go’. Lyrically, they were not ‘political’ and both were written by Jones. Lastly, as Strummer said he understood his role to be ‘raising the consciousness’ (White 2007: 232), it is worth recalling his thoughts on his audience: And say every other night, we do a show and we see two thousand people maybe – with that potential audience you get a chance to say something 2 Those not written by Strummer or Jones include ‘Police and Thieves’ (2.8m, uploaded five years previously), ‘Police on My Back’ (2.7m, uploaded five years previously) and ‘I Fought the Law and the Law Won’ (20m, uploaded five years previously). On Spotify, the latter had 67.5m listens.

234

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources concrete or constructive about a state of affairs, and that’s what we’re taking the opportunity to do. We get invited to radio stations. We get our records maybe sometimes on the radio. Everywhere we go we try and use the time that we’ve got to use it constructively. (Revolutionary Worker 28 September 1979) I’d rather preach to the deaf ears than the converted as who knows when their hearing might come back? … I’ve got half an ear of some young people who will have a say in the destiny of the world. My role is use that as best I can. (Jamming May 1984) Let me tell you, I’d rather talk to a naive person than a cynic. Sure, there are a lot of young naive people out there, but at least they can be moved, their ideals can be inspired. … We’re writing for the young ones … because they carry the hope of the world a lot more than a few critics or cynics. Those young ones can go away from our show with a better idea of a better world. At least they haven’t written it all off yet. Their ideals can still be inspired. (Musician September 1982).

Part of Strummer’s strategy was also to meet and mingle with as many followers as possible. He variously commented: ‘After the show, we have people backstage … because I’m interested in identifying my audience as human beings because where you are up there on stage with all those lights on you it’s dehumanising … people say: “Don’t you get tired [of meeting all these people]” but I’d rather do that than … go back to the hotel without knowing who the hell was out there … [because] you begin to get an idea of who you are reaching’ (US radio interview 1983); ‘I’m very wary of thinking I’m doing more than I’m doing … I want to know what per cent of people get it’ (Beano March 1984); and ‘When people come up and say that changed this or that changed that [then] it got through because some of the time you don’t know … because sometimes it seems gigs [come and] go … in a puff of smoke’ (Planet Rock ‘Profile’ 2000). So he took the task of finding the extent and nature of his influence seriously. Given he put more emphasis on meeting followers, unlike others (such as Jones), this source is particularly useful. Indeed, in 2001 he stated: ‘I’ve found that when music makes a difference, it’s necessary for me to talk directly with the people involved, and I’ve repeated that a thousand 235

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Figure 8.1  Strummer on Planet Rock Profile in 2000

times’ (Gaestleliste internet music magazine 2001). This indicates that he was trying to understand how, why and when this influence occurred. However, a critical appraisal of this information requires recognising followers may exaggerate the extent of Strummer’s influence, because some may have wanted to project onto him both what they wanted and what they thought he wanted. Moreover, those he spoke to were self-selected. Strummer’s evidence and estimation Though, as recognised before, it is difficult to entirely disentangle Strummer’s influence from that of The Clash as a whole, Strummer’s own estimation of his influence is a good starting point to examine his influence per se. In this, influence can cover a range of personal and political matters, or any combination of the two. Strummer often made upbeat, positive statements such as: ‘[W]e’ve all lost count of the number of kids who have come up to us and said something like: “Your songs have changed my life”’ (Evening Standard 21 October 1981) and:

236

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources Our effect is unmeasurable … I don’t mean in its immensity … you can’t tell it, find it or speak of it. But I know it’s out there as I get letters … and I talk to a lot of people … I know what effect we have … I know we have changed people’s minds. We’ve changed the direction of people’s lives. (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029) I’ve changed more people’s lives than you’d ever believe. I’ve made people take political science courses at university. I’ve made them stop jumping out of the window, go back and do their exams. Changed the whole direction of their lives. (NME 25 February 1984)

He made the same kind of point elsewhere (NZBC 3 February 1982, RNZ 7 February 1982, Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029, Toronto’s Globe and Mail 28 April 1984, Channel 4 5 May 1988, NME 7 October 1989, New Zealand Herald 15 January 2000, The Times 16 July 2001, Gilbert 2009: 366). But he was also often at pains to stress the lack of progressive political impact he and The Clash made on followers (NME 27 May 1980, MM 13 December 1980, Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029, The Tennessean 27 March 1984, Sydney Sun Herald 8 April 1984, The Record May 1984, Denselow 1989: 205, D’Ambrosio 2012i: 271) as well as on the wider world (NME 26 July 1986, Sunday Age 29 December 2002). Sometimes, he took solace in having reached just a few individuals (Mother Jones April 1982, Musician September 1982, Knowles 1994: 3, White 2007: 232). His estimation of the limited extent of listeners hearing the message was given in several downbeat assessments: [In America] 5% of the audience know what we are saying and I’d say 40% in England. Still not significant … We say things and give a message but whether or not it does any good I don’t know. … Whether anything is gonna change by … us bringing it up on vinyl, I don’t know … But it just seems better to mention it and to face it rather than ignore it. (BBC Radio 1 5 July 1982)3

3  This chimes with Baker’s (2013d) view: ‘This was 145,000 Californian hippies with a possible 5,000 true Clash fans dotted around’. The New York Rocker (July/August 1980) believed US audiences were ‘conservative and close-minded’. Bindas (1993: 83–84) cited lyrical content analysis and sales and surveys to support these kinds of estimation.

237

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer I’m trying to put it as bluntly as possible in the songs without repelling people … too few people are getting [our message] in America for my liking. … I’ve quoted the figure of 5% of our audience knows what we are on about which is harsh but probably true. I’m interested in trying to increase that percentage. (US radio 1983) Even my own audience which specifically knows The Clash is trying to make some kind of change point … I’d say 70% of that audience is still mostly unaware that we are anti-racist, anti-fascist, anti-capitalist even … they think they’re just listening to another rock ’n’ roll band. (Picture disc 10 February 1984 BAK 2029)

Yet these were followed by more upbeat assessments: Depending on the town, it’s sometimes 50/50, sometimes there’s a greater amount there just for the music … We like to confront this. We don’t like pretending that we’re getting through … [not getting through] takes the wind out of you. (Toronto tour bus interview, April 1984)

and ‘People always used to ask us if they listened to the lyrics in America. I think it’s rash to presume they didn’t. I think they knew damn well what was going on’ (MOJO August 1994). The frequency of Strummer’s statements attesting to his influence does not necessarily make the correctness of his belief any more valid. However, as he counterbalanced these assessments with others and engaged in frequent intelligence-gathering, his statements, both positive and negative, do appear credible. Evidence and estimation of others This section examines the extent of Strummer’s influence in terms of general observations and self-reported self-influence. The former concern ‘guestimates’ for they are not based on data. The latter are more reliable but necessarily anecdotal. Two individuals (Billy Bragg, Mensi) are studied in more depth. Again, some qualification is necessary here. Mention of The Clash is not synonymous with Strummer, but he was the larger and largest part of The Clash when it came to its politics. 238

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

General statements This part lays out the general assessments from others to substantiate – to some degree at least – the sweeping statements respectively of Needs (2005: 232), Salewicz (2006: back cover), Gilbert (2009: 364–365) and D’Ambrosio (2012b: xx, 2012e: 133): ‘He changed lives and attitude[s]’; ‘[Strummer] … really did change the way the world thought’; ‘Politically, The Clash’s impact was seismic … The Clash politicised thousands of individuals … [giving] lessons in cultural, social and military history’; and ‘He was a person who changed countless lives by becoming the unofficial leader of a people’s movement … somewhere along the way people understood his message and changed the way they thought and acted.’ Numerous commentators have stated that, via The Clash, Strummer changed the course of many people’s lives, albeit often in unspecified ways (MOJO October 1995, NPR 23 December 2002, Morning Star 24 December 2002, New Statesman 13 January 2003, Musician June 2003, Observer 10 December 2006, Daily Record 5 October 2012, Doane 2014: xx), while many others have claimed Strummer politicised many (Scottish Socialist Voice 17 January 2003, Socialist Review February 2003, Counterpunch 26 January 2008, Linstead 2010: 143, Independent 20 May 2012, The Clash Magazine December 2012/January 2013, Worley 2014: 92, Raha 2014: 109, Letts 2017: ix, Watt 2018a: 3, Rock&Roll Globe 24 August 2018, Morning Star 14 December 2019). If not stated, the inference was politicisation of a leftward direction. Others noted Strummer’s role as educator and imparter of knowledge (NME 11 January 2003, New Statesman 13 January 2003, News and Letters January/February 2003, Razorcake April/May 2003, NME 11 August 2012, Coulter 2019b: 26). Smaller numbers have identified that Strummer gave confidence to individuals to do what they wanted in their lives (NME 11 January 2003, The Quietus 22 December 2012), sustained individuals in their leftwing views (Davies 2003, Binette 2007b: 61, James 2009: 128, 132) and influenced activism among followers (NME 19 July 2007, Andersen 2013: 17, Coulter 2019c: 73), and his influence was often to be found among union activists (Morning Star 24 December 2002, Evening Standard 28 239

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

May 2012) and academics (Matula 2003: 523, Coulter 2019b: 5). Just one specifically noted the influence was to reaffirm existing politics rather than inspire new politics (Fancy 2016). In contrast to The Clash’s following being ‘ideologically developed and dedicated’ (New York Rocker April/May 1978), others reported audiences were either not interested in or not aware of the politics of Strummer and The Clash (NME 17 December 1977, production notes in booklet for Rude Boy (Hazan and Mingay 1980: 8), NME 20 June 1981, 22 December 1984). Here, the Bond’s residency in 1981 was a good measure of a snapshot in time in New York. Audience members were antagonistic towards black and female support acts like Bad Brains, The Treacherous Three, Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five and The Slits (NME 20 June 1981, Sounds 20 June 1981, Trouser Press September 1981, Imarisha 2014: 156)4 and made paper planes out of the leaflets given out on the El Salvadorian liberation struggle or just left them on the floor (NME 20 June 1981, Mother Jones April 1982, Boston Rock June 1981, NPR 20 December 2012), even though there was at least some cheering to the statement from the activist along with booing (Quarter Notes December 1981). Strummer’s concerns about US followers appear grounded judging by the twelve vox pops conducted in New York (Lifetimes 1980, CBS New York News 31 August 1982, Temple 2007). More were concerned with the music rather than the politics. Only one fan stated the music was ‘lower-class music’, with another saying the ‘lyrics are excellent and very intelligent’. Only two were more explicit: ‘The Clash represent the rebellious youth today and the revolution that is brewing all over this country and the world’ and the lyrics were about ‘the nuclear arms race [and] individual rights’. The majority spoke in terms of The Clash being, in the words of two, ‘so happening, so now’ and ‘kick ass rock ’n’ roll’, while another stated: ‘I don’t know why I like them. That’s why I like them. You don’t have to know everything.’ This chimes with Bindas’s (1993: 83, 84) analysis: 4 In early 1984, Los Lobos received a hostile reception from US audiences when supporting The Clash (Andersen and Heibutzski 2018: 96). Rhodes claimed to have chosen the Bond’s residency support acts (MOJO November 2008).

240

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

‘American punks identified less consciously with The Clash’s [politics] … and focused more on their music … its calls for political and social activism fell on deaf ears … few embraced The Clash’s ideals. The audiences seemed, to them, apolitical.’ That said, when Nick Sheppard was asked ‘Did you come across fans that said Joe and his lyrics “changed my life” or “saved my life”?’, he responded: ‘Changed yes. Often. Never saved. Quite often, especially in America, it would be political. I think the political aspect of the band was more “important” over there, probably because there wasn’t much else in the way of a credible opposition to the political and social status quo.’ Personal reflections: non-musicians A number of individuals reported Strummer had a large positive political impact on them. Among these were Geoff Martin, union officer (Morning Star 24 December 2002, Independent 25 April 2008), John King, novelist (New Statesman 13 January 2003), academics (Matula 2003: 524, Zieleniec 2017: 60–61), Tony Walsh, poet (BBC Radio 6 6 October 2013), Grant Fleming, photographer (Louder Than War, 26 February 2014), Nick Toczek, journalist (Glasper 2014a: 759), Martin McDonagh, playwright (Guardian 13 September 2015) and Robert Gordon McHarg III, artist (BBC News 13 December 2019). Among those who reported Strummer had a large unspecified impact on them were Pat Gilbert, journalist (Gilbert 2009: 1), two unknown individuals (Independent 24 December 2002, Guardian website comment 21 December 2012), Joe Swinford (Louder Than War 3 January 2012), Ray Gange, Richard Chorley, journalist and co-founder of ‘Clash Fans against the Right’ Facebook group (Louder Than War 23 November 2019), Alan Parker, author (Parker 2003: 1), Tony Parsons, author and journalist (Mirror 30 December 2002), Jonathan King, film maker (RNZ 4 February 2012), Adam Holt, Universal Music NZ (RNZ 4 February 2012), Garry Bushell, journalist (Glasper 2014b: 534) and Angelina Jolie, actor (BBC Radio 4 28 December 2018). Coulter (2018: 525, 2019c: 69) noted unspecified others. Only one, Paulette

241

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Goudge (Guardian 12 February 2008)5 indicated Strummer reaffirmed her views. A small number cited Strummer as a key influence on their activism: Geoff Martin, union officer (Independent 25 April 2008), D’Ambrosio (2012c: 4), Stephen Wright, novelist (Overland 26 September 2012), Mark Andersen (2004: 159, 2013: 8, Vol. 1 Brooklyn 2018, Andersen and Heibutzski 2018: 21), Lauren Modery (2018) and Michael McCaughan, journalist (Irish Times 31 August 1999, 24 February 2021). Just one identified Strummer as an explicit educator (Dunn 2010: 197). Strummer has also been a positive political influence on comedians and performers like Rob Newman, Mark Thomas, Mark Lamarr and Mark Steel. With the exceptions of Lamarr and Phil Jupitus,6 the others are professionally known for their left-wing and socialist beliefs and behaviours, and some connection exists between Strummer and these beliefs. There are also various dedications – for unstated reasons – to Strummer. But given the dedications were for outputs concerned with politics, it is not unreasonable to think they derived in some way from Strummer’s political influence. These are McCaughan’s The Battle of Venezuela (2011), Coulter and Coleman’s The End of Irish History?: Critical Approaches to the Celtic Tiger (2003) and Mark Steel’s Vive la Révolution (2003). Personal reflections: musicians This part lays out the self-identified influence of Strummer on musicians. Among those testifying to Strummer’s positive political influence on themselves as political musicians are Moby (Moby’s Journal 23 December 2002), Billy Bragg (Sunday Age 29 December 2002, BBC Online 2 January 5 Following correspondence with Paulette Goudge, Tranmer (2017: 158) revealed the Guardian, in her words, ‘somewhat exaggerated’. She bought Sandinista! after seeing The Clash in 1984, but was already interested in Nicaragua and involved in left-wing politics. 6 Though he nominated Strummer for ‘Great Lives’ (BBC Radio 4 3 April 2007), after the early 1990s Jupitus ceased being politically active as he had been in the 1980s and became known for his non-political radio and television work.

242

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

2003, MOJO March 2003, Red Pepper June 2008), Jim Ward from Sparta (Punk Planet March/April 2003), Amy Ray from The Indigo Girls (Punk Planet March/April 2003), Attila the Stockbroker (Rachel 2017: 187), Manu Chao (El Pais 15 October 2005, D’Ambrosio 2012f: 140), Rachid Taha (Guardian 31 March 2007, 13 September 2018), Tom Morello (PRX 2008, Morello 2012: 192, 193, Classic Rock July 2016), John McClure from Reverend and the Makers (Socialist Review October 2008),7 Chuck D of Public Enemy (D 2012: 216, D’Ambrosio 2012c: 15, BBC Online 21 May 2019), Michael Franti of The Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy/Spearhead (D’Ambrosio 2012g: 198, 200), Steve Ignorant of Crass (Glasper 2014a: 20), Nick Assirati (2020: 137) and James Dean Bradfield of The Manic Street Preachers (NME 3 August 2015).8 By comparison, Norman Cook,9 Roddy Frame,10 Bobby Gillespie,11 Michael Hutchence (JBTV Music Television 1993), Wendy James (Guardian 8 June 2020) and Tracey Thorn (Rachel 2017: 147)12 all stated they were influenced by Strummer without taking on board his message in his lyrics and pronouncements as a left-wing political spokesperson. Something similar can be said about a number of other musicians where Strummer exerted an influence but not necessarily 7 In criticising unpolitical bands, McClure proffered: ‘Why look like Joe Strummer when you could be Joe Strummer’ (Big Issue Scotland 23 July 2009). 8 Bradfield first came across Víctor Jara through Strummer’s lyrics, and wrote and recorded an album about Jara called Even in Exile (BBC News Online 13 August 2020). 9 See UNCUT (December 2003) and O’Shea (2015: 218). Heaton was the Housemartins’ lyricist. 10 For Aztec Camera, Frame wrote in ‘Walk out to Winter’ from High Land, Hard Rain (1983): ‘Faces of Strummer that fell from your wall/And nothing was left where they hung’. 11 Gillespie said he ‘really connected with the lyrics … anti-establishment, anti-military, anti-work, especially the anti-work’ but there was no consequent obvious left-wing impact on his lyrics or his work, and his socialist, union official father was more of an influence on him (The Quietus 30 April 2013, see also Gillespie 2021). The Singles box set (2006) contained testimony from nineteen musicians and writers. Of these, only Gillespie, Carl Barat, Richard Archer and Tim Burgess recognised the political dimension of Strummer’s lyrics but did not indicate any influence of this on themselves. Moreover, the likes of Ian Brown (Stone Roses) as well as Flea (Red Hot Chili Peppers) were influenced musically but not politically by Strummer. Although about gigs, From Here to Eternity (1999) contained eighteen fan vignettes. Of those, a similar number – five – mentioned the politics of the lyrics or the impact these had on them. 12 She attended the RAR Victoria Park gig and was involved in Red Wedge (New Statesman 1 November 2016).

243

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

an overtly political one that was self-described: Al Barr of The Dropkick Murphys (Seacoastonline 24 December 2002),13 Jake Burns of Stiff Little Fingers (U2 Interference site 24 December 2002, Louder Than War 11 September 2017, Peekaboo music magazine 23 May 2019), Pete Wylie, singer/songwriter (UNCUT December 2003), Anthony Roman, Radio 4 singer/guitarist (Roman 2004: 284), Dave Clarke, Slam DJ-producers (Needs 2005: 306), Mescaleros guitarists Antony Genn and Scott Shields (Salewicz 2006: 559, Daily Record 5 October 2012), Brian Fallon of The Gaslight Anthem (Guardian 4 April 2014) and singer Emily Capell (Music Crown 2 June 2015). Indeed, Headon was among these (BBC Radio 6 8 December 2019).14 Just one reported Strummer affirmed her existing politics (Forces of Geek 9 January 2013), while Paul Heaton (The Quietus 16 August 2017, Rachel 2017: 346) and Robert Howard of The Blow Monkeys (Rachel 2017: 337) saw Strummer as an explicit educator. The Redskins thanked Strummer on their first single as he had been an influence on the band. The breadth of acclamation of Strummer’s influence is evident, but again it straddles influence of a personal, musical and political nature. Billy Bragg Because of Strummer’s influence, Bragg said he wanted to be a ‘one-man Clash’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 109) but his relationship with Strummer was not a simple one. The impact of seeing The Clash at The 13 But see also p.180. 14 Although Headon said he could ‘relate to The Clash on a political level’ (MM 7 April 1977) and ‘I agree with their political stance’ (Rolling Stone 8 July 1982), he was the least ‘political’ long-standing member and had some unacceptable views. It was just as well, as he commented: ‘with … the politics … I was totally superfluous’ (UNCUT October 2010). New York Rocker (April/May 1978) noted he had to be convinced he would not have to deal with politics when joining. Strummer vetoed his choice of the South African flag for the band’s 1978 stage backdrop (Green and Barker 2003: 116) and Headon graffitipainted a swastika (Green and Barker 2003: 226, Salewicz 2006: 251). This puts a different slant on the stated reason for his departure being ‘a difference of opinion over political direction the group will be taking’ (Billboard 5 June 1982) when it is commonly understood it was because of his heroin addiction (Needs 2005: 227, Gilbert 2009: 320). Jones and Vinyl alluded to some political reasons behind the sacking which were more to do with the politics of drug use than wider political issues (BBC Radio Derby 20 July 1982).

244

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

Rainbow on 9 May 1977 on the ‘White Riot’ tour meant, in Bragg’s (2006: 189) words, he ‘would never be the same again’. He attributed that gig to being the ‘catalyst’ to forming Riff Raff (Bragg 2006: 193), though Collins (1998: 43–44) suggested the gig [merely] helped kickstart Riff Raff into becoming a more serious enterprise. Seeing The Clash play RAR on 30 April 1978 was for Bragg: ‘the first political activism I ever took part in, and I went because The Clash were playing. It totally changed my perspective’ (Andersen and Heibutzki 2018: 50). ‘Joe to me personally was a great political inspiration. The first political thing I ever did was to go a Rock Against Racism concert … and I really went along to that just to see The Clash and they kind of politicised me’ (BBC News Online 2 January 2003). Bragg repeated his epiphany on other occasions (McDonald and Miles 2003, New Statesman 23 April 2007, Guardian 20 April 2008). However, elsewhere he presented a different emphasis: My initial feeling was ‘Why are these gays at this anti-racist thing? It’s about black people.’ But the penny dropped. The fascist raving xenophobes were against anybody who was different. It didn’t matter whether it was colour, gender or attitude. I made a promise to myself to be as different as possible and annoy those people if I could. It really changed my politics. I didn’t hear any speeches, but it was Tom’s song, not The Clash, that changed my perspective on the world and what pop culture can do. It can’t change the world per se, but it can change your perspective on it. Thanks to The Clash for bringing me there, thanks for the gay men brave enough to express their sexuality in a field full of Clash fans – that gave me the politics I have today. (Robb 2006: 432) When I went to that gig, Tom Robinson closed the gig, and he has a song called, ‘Sing if you’re glad to be gay’. And when he sang that song, all the geezers around me and my mates started snogging each other on the lips. My initial feeling was, ‘Why are these gays at this gig?’ But it didn’t take me long to understand that the fascist, the racist, is afraid of anything that is in any way different, and that it’s all part of the same struggle. So, I pledged from that day to be as different as I could, to ask as many questions as I could. (Red Pepper June 2006)

He gave this interpretation again to Red Pepper (June 2008). Nonetheless, it was therefore strange for Bragg to produce music with Riff Raff that was 245

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

not political, and even stranger that he joined the British army in May 1981. After completing three months’ basic training, he bought himself out for £175. Bragg explained his reasoning: ‘When Riff Raff broke up in 1980, I thought everything was fucked. In order to escape from having to go back home I joined the army. I pressed the eject button on my previous existence. While in the army I was writing more songs, and I came out of the army with a real attitude, thinking I’d got to carry on doing this’ (Robb 2006: 530). During the 1980s, Bragg was less than enamoured with Strummer and The Clash. As a result of supporting The Who on their 1982 stadium tour and playing the Us festival, Bragg frequently chided the band for ‘turning rebellion into money’ by saying: ‘I’ve not been such a fan of The Clash since they dropped the ‘L’ from their name’ (Ann Arbour News 21 June 2012).15 This did not stop him supporting The Clash on 13 February 1984 in Bristol and 17 May 1984 in Chicago. But, although he dedicated The Progressive Patriot (2006) to The Clash with ‘the flame you lit is still burning bright’, in the book he recounted his disappointment with The Clash after the RAR gig: ‘Their failure to engage fully with politics was central to my decision to work closely with the Labour Party in the hope of defeating the Tories in the 1987 election. The sad realisation that The Clash were much better at posing than they were at politics forced me to overcome any fears of being seen as “uncool” and take the flak I attracted for founding the Labour-supporting collective of musicians and artists known as Red Wedge’ (Bragg 2006: 198–199). Earlier he stated: ‘Red Wedge represents an attempt to bring popular culture and mainstream party politics together. It … comes from my conclusion as to why The Clash failed to change the world, as they’d clearly promised me they’d do … They never applied the ideas in their songs to a mainstream political party that had a chance of winning political power’ (Denselow 1989: 231). He gave the message elsewhere: ‘The Clash were a mass of contradictions: they wanted to change the world but they didn’t want to endgame with the political mainstream … that was a great failing. … I know the Labour 15 See also Gray (2003: 458). The Clash also had this accusation from others – for instance, in the US one group leafleted a gig in Detroit in early 1980, saying: ‘THE CA$H SOLD OUT’ (Creem June 1980).

246

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

Party were not particularly exciting, but at least they were a vehicle and an opportunity to get rid of Thatcher’ (Robb 2006: 531). But the supposed failure was not a failure. It was a deliberate choice (see pp.94–97). On Strummer’s death, Bragg dropped the criticism (see also p.174). This may have been because of not wishing to speak ill of the dead, or standing back with a longer perspective. So, he commented: ‘Within The Clash, Joe was the political engine of the band, and without Joe there’s no political Clash and without The Clash the whole political edge of punk would have been severely dulled’ (BBC Online 23 December 2003). He then wrote: The Clash were the greatest rebel rock band of all time. Their commitment to making political pop culture was the defining mark of the British punk movement … no-one struggled more manfully with the gap between the myth and the reality of being a spokesman for your generation than Joe Strummer. … he too believed in the righteous power of rock ’n’ roll. And if he didn’t change the world, he changed our perception of it. … Were it not for The Clash, punk would have been just a sneer, a safety pin and a pair of bondage trousers. Instead, the incendiary lyrics of The Clash inspired 1,000 more bands on both sides of the Atlantic to spring up and challenge their elders and the man that we all looked to was Joe Strummer. … One of the hardest things to do in rock ’n’ roll is walk it like you talk it. Joe Strummer epitomised that ideal and I will miss him greatly. (BBC Online 2 January 2003)

Bragg also commented: ‘Joe was my Woody Guthrie’ at a Strummer tribute gig in Southampton called ‘Strumming for England – Part 1, The South Coast’ (22 February 2003). The emphasis on changing the perception of reality – as opposed to reality itself – was reiterated: ‘The Clash taught me a valuable lesson [at Victoria Park] … although you can’t change the world by singing songs and doing gigs, the things you say and the actions you take can change the perspective of members of the audience’ (Bragg 2006: 199). One issue where Bragg was at odds with Strummer was in supporting ‘new’ Labour and voting against the Tories even if this meant voting Liberal Democrat: ‘Yeah. That’s it, that’s what’s on offer. You either get that or the Tories. I think you have to, unfortunately, hold your nose and do what you can to stop things sliding back … Wherever you are, 247

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

you have to vote against a Conservative candidate. That will stop the Tories taking seats off Labour. That’ll increase the Lib-Dems’ seats’ (Red Pepper April 2005). Angelic Upstarts Although of much less stature, Mensi, former Angelic Upstarts lyricist and lead singer,16 also had a troubled relationship with Strummer. The band was formed by Mensi after seeing The Clash on the ‘White Riot’ tour in Middlesbrough, although the initial motivation was about music, not politics (Inner Edge Music 26 September 2016). Mensi told MPRV (13 March 2018): ‘His beliefs live through me … he lives through me’ and wrote a song dedicated to him called ‘Joe, where are you now?’ (from Power of the Press, 1986). Mensi recounted: ‘I worshipped The Clash, still do, but Joe Strummer broke my heart [by saying] “Mensi tries to sing with soul, when he is soulless. He is a shouter, not a singer.” Can you imagine your hero, [and] a god to me, saying that about you? … I never really got over it’ (Lancashire Telegraph 19 July 2018). Summary The evidence suggests Strummer, especially via The Clash, had a large and long-lasting broad radical leftist influence on many individuals. It would appear the nature of the influence tended towards inspiration rather than affirmation, and among those more affected were youth, union members and those in Britain. The educative influence was on a par with an activist influence. But investigation cannot stop there. Whether this meant an all-encompassing influence is open to doubt. For example, and despite his disappointment with ‘new’ Labour, Bragg supported it against the Tories and others (Red Pepper June 2008). This case highlights that although individuals declared Strummer’s influence, how they interpreted it or continued to hold to it over time may not have straightforward 16 He died on 10 December 2021 due to complications from COVID-19.

248

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

outcomes. By contrast, Manu Chao was critical of organised party politics (Red Pepper June 2008), which approximates more to Strummer’s thinking. Meanwhile, of those above who were influenced by Strummer, over a dozen were active in far-left politics (communist, Trotskyist) in Britain and the US. And, if D’Ambrosio’s film, Let Fury Have The Hour, which accompanied his revised book (D’Ambrosio 2012a), can be taken as a snapshot of Strummer’s influence given the vox pops contributions from the likes of Jesse Malin and Shepard Fairey, it is one which is about humanism, harmony and human rights as well as tolerance and inclusion, and not about activism, radicalism or socialism. Indeed only one contributor, Jack Healey, former executive director of Amnesty International, made a connection, saying Strummer called for activism and action and ‘we need more Strummers’. This dialling down of Strummer’s radicalism was highlighted in Gilbert’s assessment of Strummer’s legacy being: ‘questioning authority, personal dignity and treating people with respect’ (Parkinson 2005), which is not so different from his (Gilbert 2009: 225) assessment of The Clash’s creed: ‘question authority, involve yourself in the political process, think for yourself ’. Hero In addition to the media labelling Strummer a ‘hero’ (e.g. Guardian 16 January 2013), individuals from different social, economic and political backgrounds, in different countries and across different decades, called Strummer a ‘hero’ of theirs. Others recognised him as a ‘hero’ to others. This section first examines evidence of self-reported heroism. (It should be borne in mind that Strummer was not necessarily the foremost or singular hero for these people.) Entrepreneurs Jeff Horton (100 Club owner)17 17 Louder Than War 16 September 2012 and ‘Jeff Horton, 100 Club Owner – North London’, Ferry Perry website, n.d.

249

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Shepard Fairey (Obama ‘Hope’ poster designer, commercial artist and clothing entrepreneur)18 Dave McGeachan (club and gig promoter, Scotland on Sunday 16 December 2012) Alan McGee (Creation Records founder, Huffington Post 21 December 2011) Musicians Jakob Dylan, The Wallflowers (thewallflowers.com bulletin board, December 2002) James Dean Bradfield, Manic Street Preachers (MOJO March 2003) Jamie T (on his musical style, Canvas 27 September 2007) El Vez, The Zeros (Ensminger 2013: 76) Vic Bondi, Articles of Faith, Alloy (Ensminger 2013: 292) Emily Capell (Music Crowns 2 June 2015) Richard Jobson, The Skids (Wyatt 2018: 319) Andrew Roachford, Roachford (Wyatt 2018: 320) Politicians Boris Johnson (Desert Island Discs 30 October 2005)19 Tim Farron (Liberal Democrat MP 2005, BBC News Online 16 July 2015) Writers James Brown (journalist, founding editor of Loaded ‘lads’ mag’, Independent 24 December 2002) 18 On his Facebook page, 17 November 2016. 19 During Strummer’s lifetime, Johnson was editor of the Spectator, a Telegraph journalist and Tory MP. He stated The Clash was ‘unquestionably the most important band ever’ (BBC Radio 6 20 May 2011). Johnson repeating his admiration in the 2019 general election (NME 13 November 2019), and the populating of Clash Facebook groups by members who did not embody its progressive politics, led to the establishment in 2020 of ‘Clash Fans against the Right’ in 2020. Repeated emails to Johnson asking him to explain his view on Strummer went unanswered.

250

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

Eric Rifer (journalist, Razorcake April/May 2003) Mark Steel (comedian, McDonald and Miles 2003)20 Mark Thomas (comedian, Morning Star 7 June 2017) Others Scott McLemee, writer (Against The Current March/April 2003) Anthony Davie, writer (Davie 2004: 183, Parkinson 2005)21 Jeremy Dear, NUJ general secretary (blog, 15 November 2007) Antonino D’Ambrosio, writer (D’Ambrosio 2012b: xiii) Matula (2003: 523), writer Guy Trelford (Robb 2006: 474), Rhoda Dakar (Rachel 2017: 65) and Stephen (2019) were among those identifying Strummer as a hero for many others. Though reasons were seldom given, many acclamations resulted from somewhat romantic assessments of what Strummer stood for after he died. Some of these can be put down to the emotional effect of his early death. He was also referred to as a ‘saint’ (Phillips 2012: 108), while some recognised he was elevated by others to being an almost religious icon (Telegraph 7 June 2007, Cogan 2014: 31, Ogg 2014: 68). Such elevations are redolent of a deeper phenomenon which existed before he died, for he was lionised by others who saw in him the advance of their own personal and political desires. And, while some of this lionisation could amount to rather emotive talk, underneath it lay aspects of admiration. One was he had the self-confidence to lead a band with considerable charisma. Another was about the content of what he said. Underneath this was something more profound given the punk motto ‘no more heroes’, as per its DIY ethic. What this amounted to was low levels of oppositional consciousness and collective confidence at large, and especially among younger cohorts. The sense was Strummer was able to do things for his followers that they could not do themselves. 20 He repeated this (Steel 2008: 50), saying ‘Strummer was my hero’, and referred to him as ‘hero’ on two other occasions. 21 Strummer follower, Davie (2004: 192, 195, 206, 164, 166) showed no interest in Strummer’s politics (or the firefighters’ strike) and highlighted his own ‘little Englander’ attitudes. He also used sexist language.

251

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

Prophet Strummer was not only regarded as the ‘voice of his generation’ (see pp.186–187) but also as a prophet as a result of his lyrics and pronouncements (e.g. Needs 2005: 213). He was seen as a prophet of dangerous and dystopian times – whether of fascism, social breakdown, global poverty, nuclear war or environmental collapse – rather than of a socialist future (although their negation could be perceived as support for this). This perception takes the form of individuals seeing him as prophet for themselves (e.g. D’Ambrosio 2012b: xv) or commentators recognising others seeing him as such (Sunday Herald 26 September 1999, Needs 2005: 42, James 2009: 134). David Mingay saw him as ‘the prophet of his generation’ (Salewicz 2006: 253). In the listener’s ear, Strummer’s prophesies were based on taking events and trends, magnifying them and projecting forward. So they were also matters of social realism in describing existing phenomena, which explains why Coulter (2018: 527, 534) considered the songs more ‘heraldic’ than ‘prophetic’. Evidence for prophesying started with ‘1977’, ‘White Riot’s B-side, with its prediction of ‘Knives in W11’ and ‘Sten guns in Knightsbridge’. The coda counted down from 1977 to 1984. Similar predictions were made about the threat of the rising popularity of fascism in ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’, ‘English Civil War’ (1978) and ‘Clampdown’. To this could be added ‘Last Gang in Town’ about rising urban violence. Others concerned the theme of ‘urban Vietnam’ – communities at home and abroad ravaged after the US war in Vietnam of 1965–75 – ranging from ‘I’m So Bored with the USA’ (1977) to ‘Straight to Hell’ (1982). Another example was nuclear war and environmental collapse in ‘London Calling’ (1979) and ‘Stop the World’ (1980). Strummer reinforced impressions of prophecy in his interviews. Of ‘White Riot’: ‘That was a song written about the future’ (MM 25 November 1978). He told Record Mirror (9 April 1977): ‘I see army conscription returning, less personal freedom, identity card[s]’. Of ‘English Civil War’: ‘What I was trying to say is the war’s just around the corner. Johnny 252

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

hasn’t got far to march. That’s why he’s coming by bus or underground’ (RM 1 July 1978) and ‘It’s already started’ (NME 15 July 1978) when referring to far-right racist violence. He told another music paper: ‘Things will get tough. I mean a fascist government. But people won’t notice like you won’t notice your hair is longer on Monday than Sunday’ (Miles 1981: 8).22 In this regard, James (2009: 132) noted: ‘Strummer’s prediction of an English Civil War cemented his position as one of the UK’s leading social and political commentators … [he] was indeed vindicated, in the eyes of many commentators by the [1981] Southall and Brixton … riots’. Of ‘White Riot’, Jones commented: ‘Joe was the prophet … [Prophets] recognise what’s happening and imagine it in the future … I just put the music to it’ (Sabotage Times 22 December 2011). Strummer could also be seen as an early prophesier of neoliberalism, with examples being: ‘Cooking up the books/A respected occupation/The anchor and foundation of multi-corporations’ (‘Midnight Log’ (1980)) and ‘People used to go to university to further the human race, now they go there to get a job’ (Radio Stockholm 17 February 1984). But as with being ‘the voice of a generation’, Strummer did not wear this hat easily, telling the NME (10 October 1981): ‘A prophet is never welcome in his own land’ and The List (5 August 1988) noted his ‘reluctance to be seen as a political prophet’. Studies of followers Following from these statements by others, four questions arise. First, how representative were these personal reflections of others vis-à-vis breadth, depth and longevity? Second, what was the evidence for the statements made that many others were influenced by Strummer? Third, how did this influence come about? And fourth, was this evidence only about Strummer’s time in The Clash? Questions about changes in not just attitudes but also behaviours will be looked at later. And, although 22 Strummer wanted the ‘Cost of Living’ EP (1979) to have a photo of Thatcher superimposed on a swastika (Gilbert 2009: 227).

253

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

none of these questions can be satisfactorily answered from existing evidence, there is some material that helps begin to provide the basis for doing so. This consists of follower testimony gathered by the BBC and by Bedford (2014) and two books about Clash followers by Clash followers (Davie 2018, Beesley and Davie 2019). BBC BBC News Online published tributes left by Strummer followers on 2 January 2003. The page for this was opened shortly after his death on 22 December 2002 and closed the day before publication, amounting to about ten days. Tributes were unsolicited other than the page asked for self-selected comments. Around five hundred were published. Of those, just over two hundred were usable for this study as they were comments about Strummer’s political significance. That said, they were brief and insubstantial. The only demographic characteristics available were gender and geographic location – most contributors were male and from either Britain or North America. The main message was Strummer was an inspiration and teacher for their progressive personal politics. Some recognised him as a voice for the voiceless. For others, his integrity and honesty were the hallmarks they recognised. None called him a socialist, Marxist, revolutionary or even leftist. Only one called him ‘anti-capitalist’. His politics were mostly couched in terms of being anti-racist and anti-fascist – while, for example, being ‘a true champion of the poor, dispossessed and plain misunderstood’ and ‘open[ing] up the world of politics, class struggle and right and wrong to lots of people who needed it – myself included’ were exceptions. A few tributes stood out in linking inspiration to influencing behaviour. For example: ‘The Clash inspired me to go to Nicaragua in the eighties to pick coffee in support of the Sandinistas. Joe’s lyrics were like a reference book for a generation of downtrodden people’ and ‘I have a degree in political science because of Joe Strummer’s influence on my young mind.’

254

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

Bedford’s study Bedford (2014) interviewed ten Clash followers in 2011 to examine their family and social class backgrounds in relation to the influence of Strummer and The Clash. He found for six their receptiveness was embedded in parental influence while for the other four it was found independently. Consequently, there was both affirmation and inspiration. All but one was from a working-class background. Interviewees commonly agreed Strummer provided a pole of attraction for left-wing views among youth in the late 1970s. Unlike the four other studies considered here, Bedford did seek to examine Strummer’s post-Clash career, finding that several interviewees considered Strummer to have been politically (left wing) consistent. Here, a number of interviews lionised Strummer’s last London gig being for striking firefighters.

BBC recollections project In a project for the BBC, Davie (2018: 10) solicited recollections, especially about seeing The Clash live, through using the contact lists of three websites (one each for Strummer, The Clash, The Mescaleros). In total, eighty-three of these contacts responded in varying length, again mostly male and from Britain and North America. Fewer than twenty spoke of Strummer’s politics in relatively explicit terms, with only one using the term ‘socialist’. A dozen spoke of Strummer as a teacher or truth-teller who changed their lives or was a significant influence on them. Among these were: I grew up the son of a working-class socialist so The Clash spoke directly to the politics I had come to accept since childhood. Strummer’s knowledge of history and culture introduced me to the Spanish civil war, Allende’s Chile. (Ewan Butler, England (Davie 2018: 94)) Politically, I was still forming my own views and The Clash were fundamental in looking left … my politics, outlook and viewpoint is still influenced by them … The Clash changed me and for the better. (Howard Young, Scotland (Davie 2018: 129, 131))

255

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer No other song by The Clash would open up my eyes more widely to the world’s geo-political affairs than ‘Washington Bullets’. It’s fair to say that it contributed to the shaping of my personal politics. (Stephen Rioux, Canada (Davie 2018: 216))

Beesley and Davie In their book Ignore Alien Orders Beesley and Davie (2019) presented contributions from around sixty followers. This included some limited replication with Davie (2018). Though contributions were generally lengthier and more detailed than those in Davie (2018), they were no more illuminating on the personal or political influence of Strummer. There was some recognition of the left-wing political nature of Strummer’s lyrics but mostly contributors recollected live performances and their musical tastes within The Clash canon. So, references to the politics of The Clash and Strummer were relatively few and far between. Where they did exist, they were shallow: these contributors agreed the politics of The Clash and Strummer were rebellious and anti-establishment. There were just a few instances of Clash gigs being said to shape people’s lives, as there were that Strummer confirmed or reinforced an existing orientation or perspective and that his role was seen as an unofficial teacher who led fans to question the world around them and its orthodoxies.

Australia 1982 Drawing on two studies of The Clash’s 1982 Australian ten-gig tour by Solis (2017) and Moliterno (2019), Gall (2020) examined the impact of Strummer and Aboriginal rights activists speaking at the gigs. Largely utilising contemporaneous newspaper reporting, Solis (2017) and Moliterno (2019) cast doubt on the size and longevity of this impact, believing the impact was small due to media hostility to reporting on the gigs. The ensuing discussion in the comments section for Gall (2020) by those who attended the gigs brought out the point the gigs and the speeches by Aboriginal rights activists may have reaffirmed the politics of those that 256

Strummer’s influence: secondary sources

attended (especially in Brisbane) as much as convince new converts to the politics on offer. Summary These studies provide limited evidence of Strummer’s political influence on testimony givers, especially from his Clash days, and they did so from a basis of vague and broad notions of what his politics were. The BBC and Davie studies were based on either completely or largely self-selected and self-induced testimonies while the other two (Bedford, Beesley and Davie) were based on selected testimony. Bedford’s study highlighted issues of influence in terms of affirmation and inspiration. Nonetheless, there is a sufficient basis from which to proceed, in as much as some evidence of influence is provided although that evidence is not rigorous or robust. Counterbalances Ian Dury, of Ian Dury and The Blockheads, believed: ‘You won’t come out of a Clash gig left wing’ (Cain 2007: 268) while Adams (2019: 99–100) noted: ‘[I]t was quite feasible for a young person to be a fan of The Clash and immune, or even hostile, to the progressive political messages they hoped they were communicating.’ Such evidence was found in music papers (e.g. NME 15 July 1978, MM 29 July 1978), Nationwide (18 February 1980), the reception to support bands at Bond’s (see p.240), and the fact one fan who assiduously followed the band on tour was a Nazi sympathiser, finding some support among the audience when he revealed himself as such (Green and Barker 2003: 231).23 James (2019: 151, 154) was an example of someone for whom the politics was not the attraction as a teenager, while roadie Steve Connolly (aka ‘Rodent’) was sympathetic to Hitler but was disavowed of this by Strummer (NME 2 April 1977). Beesley and Davie (2019: 187, 192, 240) noted racist abuse towards support acts 23 Simonon also testified to the racist Clash followers (Search & Destroy September 1978).

257

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

in Britain, pro-nuclear fans in Sweden and three followers who joined the police, seeing it as an attempt to advance social justice. In addition to the racist abuse to support acts (see p.240), the French all-women band, The Lous, experienced marked hostility including violence (RM 4 February 1978). Even Clash guitarist, Vince White (2007: 19, 54, 115, 188, 266, 2009, Richards 2010) showed no sympathy – and even hostility – towards Strummer’s politics. Conclusion Frith (1983: 19–20) argued: ‘The tragedy of punk was not that it “failed” to change pop but that so many people (musicians, followers, commentators) thought that it could’ and ‘Post-punk music has “failed” … to mobilise a political pop audience’. Strummer with The Clash especially, and as a punk rock band that changed to become a post-punk one, did not directly seek to change pop music and did not seek to mobilise a political pop music audience. Rather, during and after The Clash, he sought to use largely rock-orientated music to inform and educate with a view to raising political consciousness and generating the capacity to mobilise. Hyperbole was often evident in the comments of followers as well as those of students and studiers on Strummer’s influence. Ironically, this was less the case with Strummer himself. Nonetheless, it would be wrong to lessen the import of their comments. Rather than judging them by the criterion of whether they are objective statements or not, their significance lies in what they show in the subjective realm about how individuals felt about Strummer and what connection they made with him (as opposed to the connection he made with them). The evidence in this chapter indicates Strummer had an influence which was often artistic rather than political. But in terms of political influence, the evidence provides a credible basis for believing Strummer was influential in informing the world views of what are likely to be significant numbers of individuals. However, this evidence is based on somewhat unsubstantiated and unexplained assertion, making the generation of robust and rigorous evidence essential. This is the task of the next chapter. 258

9

Follower testimony

Having examined Strummer’s political influence using secondary sources, where little explanation and almost no substantiation were provided by those making ‘you changed my life’-type statements, this chapter turns to assessing the primary data generated for this study. In doing so, it examines the self-reported evidence of his influence on the basis of self-reported perceptions of Strummer and his politics. A key task is to examine whether his socialist period and his move to humanism were detected, and what impact these had. This chapter begins by examining the pilot study testimonies before analysing the full study testimonies. One rider to recognise is death has a tendency to venerate. This phenomenon is likely to be all the more pronounced when the key part of someone’s life, and the time when they made their potentially biggest impact, was when they – in this case, both Strummer and his followers – were full of more youthful vigour. Pilot study testimonies Pilot testimonies were conducted in 2012, based on asking the limited questions of ‘What did Strummer mean to you?’ and ‘What influence did he have on you?’ This provided the basis for casting the net wider in order to ask a set of relatively more detailed questions for the full study. Thus, fifteen individuals on the left, primarily in unions, were approached, with nine giving responses of varying lengths. This was considered to be 259

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

sufficiently useful in quantitative and qualitative terms to merit the fuller study. Though non-random, the pilot study highlighted some significant points: inter alia, Strummer’s importance to those in senior positions in unions, their then youthful working-class social background in the late 1970s, the longevity of his influence, the perception Strummer called on people to become politically active, political education gained from his lyrics and the consequent desire to learn further. Respondents variously recounted: ‘I was influenced by the class politics of “Career Opportunities” and the wider politics of “(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais” … There is still a resonance in the lyrics of Garageland [about the rich]. The music and politics of The Clash has stayed with me and my generation. … In my role as a union lawyer, I looked to the inspiration of “I Fought the Law” but with a twist – that the unions won’; ‘I was definitely influenced by The Clash and Strummer in particular. It would be hard to say this lyric or that song but the feel around the band, the energy, the anti-racist gigs, the value-for-money ethic’; ‘Each time you left inspired and full of the energy he had expended at the gig to fight for change’; ‘Joe’s performances were inspiring [and] intense. … The band’s songs dealt with dead end jobs, US imperialism and indolence among white youth. They chimed with my burgeoning political consciousness. The Clash’s positive activist stance appealed to me … He performed at loads of gigs to support the politics he espoused’; and ‘Strummer and The Clash were a major influence on me … the very first demonstration I ever went on was the Rock Against Racism march … I was a teenager and had an interest in politics but never had any idea what to do with it until that point.’ Others remarked: ‘The Pistols had anger. The Clash had that [and] crucially also had answers … inspirational lyrics contained in great riffs … was a brilliant grounding for a naive young man like myself ’; ‘The Clash’s Rock Against Racism performance changed me forever, from just being interested in rebel music and hating the society that I was living in to doing something about it. A lot of that was down to the inspiration of Joe … [his] politics inspired me, and made me want to do something to help make a better society. … [what] still stands out for me, summing him and his politics up … is the best line of any song I 260

Follower testimony

have ever heard: “All the power’s in the hands of the people rich enough to buy it”’; and ‘Joe Strummer’s lyrics gave us a soundtrack to survive Thatcherism … Our values weren’t transformed but validated, made relevant to our generation and connected to a wider world outside our everyday experience.’ One respondent’s testimony provided more illuminating biographical detail, so is worth recounting more fully: Politics were boring before punk. … Nothing to do with working-class kids. ‘White Riot’ told us black people knew how to throw a brick while we went to school to be taught how to be thick. It said all the power was in the hands of the people rich enough to buy it. Suddenly, we knew what side we were on. Or at least we knew we were not on the side of the rich and powerful or the [then] Labour government … The Clash would politically educate us … about racism, alienation and oppression. And, that was just the first album. Within a year of buying ‘White Riot’, I jacked in my apprenticeship, started contributing to a fanzine, soon after created my own, bought a bass, formed a band and decided that my future lay in some form of political activity. I was 17. My ideas would be shaped by each new Clash record. … ‘(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais’ remains not only my all-time favourite song but my personal political anchor … Sandinista! took us to the anti-imperialist struggles in Central America … With every album, single and interview, issues were raised challenging us to think, debate and understand for ourselves. Friends would discuss what lyrics meant … The Clash didn’t tell us what to do or what to think but to think, work it out for ourselves, and then act on it. By the time … Combat Rock arrived, some of us [were] no longer waiting for a hero to tell us what to think [as] we could largely do it for ourselves.

These pilot testimonies generated another important insight, namely some had an existing political awareness as a result of parental or community influences. Talking of his own situation, Nick Sheppard stressed that while he had ‘always liked The Clash. It was mainly the music/songs’, his political outlook was already set: ‘My parents’ politics were left-wing socialist. They marched with the CND, were trade unionists, voted Labour and brought me up with those values.’ Five basic questions were then developed to either elicit specific replies or to inform and structure an overall response for the full study. Rosenthal 261

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

and Flacks’s (2016) schema (see p.17) underlaid the criteria for judging Strummer’s influence as mostly concerning recruiting new affiliates and sustaining existing ones in the pursuit of the cause of socialism. The first and last questions sought to open up these issues. The request for testimony emphasised Strummer’s lyrics and other forms of pronouncements in regard to discovering or reinforcing left-wing politics, before leading to the five questions on how respondents characterised Strummer’s politics; what role Strummer played in their political education; what role he had in influencing their activism; whether they detected any change in his politics over his lifetime; what skills he had to prosecute his politics; and what impact Strummer’s politics had on others. Most responded directly to the five questions, with a minority replying in more general terms about what Strummer meant to them. In addition to the pilot study, 111 individuals gave testimony (of whom 77 per cent were male, 76 per cent were over 50 years of age and 62 per cent were from Britain) between 2019 and 2021 (see also p.32). Full study testimony Among the issues explored were: i) was there awareness of Strummer’s political stances such as being a socialist for a limited period (between 1978 and 1989) as well as the changes towards the end of his life (such as ethical capitalism and humanism); ii) was he a revolutionary and, if so, what kind; iii) was his influence just contemporaneous to The Clash’s existence or was it continuous thereafter; iv) did his influence on individuals exist alongside that of others; and v) were there geographical dimensions to his influence? Here, issues pertaining to perception and definition are thus examined in terms of their depth, breadth and longevity. For example, when respondents classified his politics, was this for his entire adulthood?; or when describing his influence over others than themselves, did they prioritise breadth over depth? Lastly, how did the primary data relate to that derived from secondary sources in regard of his (alleged) activism, Marxism and the like?

262

Follower testimony

Socialism Strummer was overwhelmingly (69 per cent) seen as being on the left and mostly as a socialist. Some 49 per cent saw him as some kind of socialist (‘democratic’, ‘revolutionary’, ‘reformist’, ‘moral’, ‘left-wing’) and 20 per cent as being on the left (including using the ‘broadly’, ‘mostly’, ‘radical’ prefixes) where ‘socialist’ was not cited. Only 4 per cent saw him as not being a socialist and only 7 per cent saw him as being an anarchist (though another 15 per cent detected anarchist leanings vis-à-vis libertarianism and anti-authoritarianism). Only one respondent saw him as a ‘quasi-Marxist’. Most of the remainder (20 per cent) saw his politics as defined in terms of what he was against: anti-capitalist, anti-establishment, anti-fascist, anti-imperialist and anti-racist. Just a handful defined his stance in terms of social justice, egalitarianism and internationalism, with some mentioning his empathy for the ‘underdog’, oppressed and exploited when expanding on his politics. His politics, however classified, were commonly couched in terms of being more instinctive, impulsive and morally and emotionally based (as in empathic) rather than being scientific (as in scientific socialism or historical materialism). Speaking of his socialism, only a handful saw him as a reformist, with many more seeing him as a revolutionary (and of these only a small number saw him more as a ‘cultural’ than ‘political’ revolutionary, albeit some saw him as more concerned with ‘revolution in the mind than revolution in the streets’ as one put it). Through these classifications, an emphasis on being hostile to party politics was common, as was favouring extra-parliamentary actions. The way in which respondents defined these terms resulted from combinations of the Sandinistas being deemed socialists (possibly as a result of Strummer’s influence) or the political parties respondents joined, such as the SWP, delineating revolutionary socialism from social democracy. Where commented on, there were differences of opinion about how ‘deep’ Strummer’s politics ran. Two remarked: ‘He was anti-capitalist in the sense that he was anti-exploitation, but I resist thinking of him in terms of socialist

263

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

and/or Marxist because I believe his anti-capitalism was more of an impulse than a fully-grounded philosophical commitment’ and ‘His critique of capitalism ran deeper than a social-democratic/reformist view of the need for “better” policies to improve things. The capitalist system itself was the root of the problem.’ Influence A third of respondents believed Strummer’s key influence on them was educational and consciousness-raising by ‘broadening’ horizons, ‘widening’ world views, ‘opening eyes’ and sparking interest to ‘find out more’ about the rest of Britain and countries outside Britain. This was often put down to specific instances, mostly notably Sandinista! (especially ‘Washington Bullets’) and ‘Spanish Bombs’. Consequently, respondents visited bookshops and libraries, and some joined Nicaraguan solidarity campaigns or visited Nicaragua, or read Orwell’s Homage to Catalonia. Respondents made comments like: ‘Strummer’s horizons just kept broadening and he kept challenging his audience to broaden theirs’; ‘Joe was opening my eyes to what was going on in the wider world’; and ‘listening to The Clash was sometimes like hearing transmissions from an alternative media, this global pirate satellite … I wasn’t hearing about any of this current or historical stuff on the news, nor in school.’ A quarter of respondents described Strummer as ‘validating’, ‘confirming’, ‘cementing’, ‘reinforcing’, ‘sustaining’ and ‘legitimising’ a political path of radical, left-wing views which they were already developing, often as a result of parental, community and other musical (like Weller via The Jam/Style Council and Two-Tone) influences. With a stronger original influence than just ‘broadening’ horizons and ‘widening’ world views, two-fifths reported Strummer had a seminal role in variously ‘guiding’, ‘awakening’, ‘shaping’, ‘forming’, ‘inspiring’ and ‘being a catalyst’ for their various hues of left-wing politics. A small number talked of Strummer’s influence developing alongside others. Around half attributed to Strummer a major influence on themselves becoming ‘activists’ because of their perception his lyrics suggested ‘a wake-up and do something about it’ perspective, as one put it. For example: 264

Follower testimony

‘Strummer probably helped press me towards a belief in pro-activism and “on-the-streets” public protest/action, so at least going beyond simply having a political leaning and using my vote’ and ‘If I had to choose a lyric that influenced my activism, it would have to be “Let fury have the hour/Anger can be power” from “Clampdown”’. For around a third of respondents, Strummer had such a continuing significant influence on their world views because they believed he provided them with a foundational framework which they revisited throughout their lives, especially in the form of an internal self-dialogue. This was, in essence, using the content of his lyrics to establish an individual moral code against which to ‘check’ oneself. They drew in particular from ‘Garageland’ with its ‘bullshit detector’ and not valuing wealth, ‘White Riot’ with ‘taking over or taking orders’, ‘Clampdown’ with wasted lives and ‘anger can be power’, and ‘Death or Glory’ in regard to straying from a path of non-conformity, as per ‘He who fucks nuns will later join the church’. Some respondents’ comments illustrate this in relation to ‘Garageland’: ‘I guess what I liked the most was what he called his “bullshit detector”. I try to make sure mine is kept up-to-date and in good condition’; ‘From a personal point of view, Strummer and The Clash gave me a “bullshit detector” – a punk version of a crash course in critical thinking in which “who says”, “why”, “who’s paying” and “what are they after” are necessary responses to just about any statement’; and ‘“Back in garage with my bullshit detector” is an essential tool in your kit bag in showing up farce and folly.’ Meanwhile, several kept excerpts from such lyrics on their fridge doors or walls for this checking purpose. One was the slogan ‘The Future is Unwritten’. This related to another aspect of the perception of Strummer’s political philosophy, namely encouraging individuals to question the status quo even if sometimes Strummer was not perceived as having the answers to these questions. In sum, many viewed his stance as being about ‘the need for us to change the way we think and see things rather than rely on others [to do so for us]’, in the words of one. However, others expressed the view that he was firmer on what the answers were, because: ‘Strummer was more than the sound of the rebel, the anti-capitalist, the anti-authoritarian. He 265

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

was for something: socialism, communism, perhaps anarchism’, as one put it. A complexity arose when respondents considered at what level Strummer had answers, and what they were. Even if he was seen as a socialist – whereby socialism was the future systemic answer to capitalism – this did not necessarily make clear whether socialism had the answers to the individual ills of capitalism in the present. If Strummer was not seen as a socialist, the same issues arose. If the answer to US imperialism was supporting national liberation struggles, it was not clear what form national liberation should take. Despite Strummer’s aversion to joining political parties, 45 per cent of respondents were or had been members of left-wing political parties (Labour, communist, Trotskyist) while a smaller number (30 per cent) consciously chose not to be members of such parties but were comfortable joining pressure groups or campaigns – with the remainder unknown.1 Nonetheless, most were politically active in some way and, recalling the demographic character of respondents, many saw their occupations as an extension of their politics, whether in terms of public services (public sector) or agenda setting (professionals, writers). Change over time and temporal dimensions of influence A greater number detected change in Strummer’s political disposition towards the end of his life than thought he remained the same. A third of respondents remarked he moved towards humanism and humanitarianism, with his demeanour becoming less ‘militant’, ‘confident’ and ‘outspoken’ and more ‘mellow’, ‘subdued’ and ‘softened’. One respondent believed: ‘Strummer grew less strident and less set-in-stone certain – he matured, he was disappointed, he disappointed himself, he gained experience. And, he began to admit how much he didn’t know, or how confused and conflicted he was’, while another remarked: ‘I did note a change not so much in his politics as in his confidence to make political statements or 1 It is not clear whether respondents who joined such parties knew of this aversion or ignored it. In terms of Strummer’s lack of engagement with unions, again it is not clear whether those respondents that were active in unions were aware of this or how this might have affected their behaviour.

266

Follower testimony

to focus his energy there.’ By contrast, only 15 per cent detected no change in terms of remaining true to his ‘core values’ from his earliest Clash days. Examples of those perceptions include: ‘he was mostly steadfast in his socialist beliefs’; and ‘he became more focused and straightforwardly socialist’. The majority were not able to offer an opinion on the issue. However, these types of responses (‘change’, ‘no change’) are not necessarily opposites, as they depended on how his politics in particular periods were classified. For example, some perceived his humanist streak as emanating from his early years so he could be said to be a humanist at the end of his life, thus registering no change. Several suggested that his motivation to be a socialist came from a moral, humanist impulse, thus allowing for some degree of perceived continuity in his politics. In addition to being able to address effectively what were regarded as important domestic and overseas issues primarily in his lyrics, Strummer’s key personal qualities were commonly seen to be his charisma, conviction and confidence in allowing him to consciously prosecute his politics by using the platform he created. He was described as being, inter alia, ‘highly articulate’, ‘a brilliant wordsmith’, ‘an electrifying performer’ and someone that embodied sincerity and integrity. For example, one respondent stated: ‘When you hear him sing, you can feel that he believes every word. His ability to express himself through his music ran incredibly deep and this is why he has had such a lasting impact.’ Very few (less than 5 per cent) saw him as an activist in any form. Where some form of activism was mentioned, it was weakly concerned with playing benefit gigs, reading out excerpts from leaflets on stage about causes and demonstrations or advocating activism. As expected, Strummer’s influence in the US was narrower, shallower and built more on the later Clash years, especially post-Combat Rock. One respondent recalled: ‘In April 1981, I spent all night in line outside Bond’s waiting for tickets to go on sale and I remember a debate breaking out about whether or not The Clash were a political band. That anyone could argue The Clash were not political was beyond my belief, but I offer this as further evidence that many Americans did not hear the message.’ Another that attended these gigs said: ‘[The El Salvador representative] 267

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

went down like a lead balloon with a majority of the audience.’ However, where individuals ‘heard’ or ‘got’ the message, Strummer’s influence could be deep, as thirty-one North American respondents highlighted, where those with sufficient interest went back to earlier Clash albums and those discovering Strummer at a much later point often devoured his entire back catalogue. Some Australian respondents highlighted the political importance of having Aboriginal rights activists speak (see p.172–173), while in Italy one recalled: ‘In Bologna, the left-wing [football] firm of the local supporters have adopted The Clash and in particular the image and aura of Joe Strummer as one of their emblems to mark their anti-racism and their opposition to the rise of neo-fascist groups within their own terrace and … against European hooliganism.’ The view of the respondents’ peer groups was that over the long term, far more (by a ratio of 2:1) liked the music of The Clash than had their political outlook sparked by or reinforced by Strummer. These people were often viewed by respondents as having ‘fallen by the wayside’. This is not unexpected as respondents were more likely to have been more heavily influenced by Strummer and for longer. So, one commented: ‘I know a fair few people who were so deeply and so genuinely affected by The Clash as kids, and who bought into the political thing so much, that they are almost embarrassed about it now … Meanwhile, I know some people who were fired up by The Clash’s example enough to do things like join CND and Labour’s Young Socialists in the early 1980s, and then do things like set up youth clubs in their communities and they still carry all those attitudes with them.’ Strummer’s influence could be not only enduring or occasional, but also episodic – many respondents reported returning to Strummer’s lyrics at certain points in their lives and for certain purposes. Conclusion Recognising the importance of understanding how listeners receive lyrics as the main means of musicians’ messages, the 120 testimonies (9 pilot, 111 full study) represent a form of ethnographic social science research, 268

Follower testimony

placing emphasis on exploring the self-perceptions and self-understanding of what Strummer meant to testimony givers. The testimonies provided significant evidence Strummer was seen as a socialist, with all believing he was of the left. While cognisant of the relatively small, non-random sample of testimonies, substantial evidence was generated of Strummer having a deep and broad influence on that basis, whether largely of affirmation or inspiration, and that for many this influence lasted, certainly outlasting the youth of many testimony givers.2 Preaching to the converted served a role in culturally sustaining the converted as well as gathering new members of the congregation. The testimonies also indicated what Strummer said and did were perceived in different ways, albeit within a radical left-of-centre parameter. While his liberal, cosmopolitan humanism was picked up on by some, his disillusionment with radicalism – by, for example, advocating ethical capitalism – was not. How does this data relate to the secondary sources? On the basis of earlier setting out what Strummer’s politics were and how these have been misperceived, the testimonies were relatively accurate in recognising Strummer’s politics were not Marxist or revolutionary, and were of a more general leftist nature, overall and by periodisation. He was not identified as an activist either. That said, the testimonies still overstated his degree of being far left. On the issue of influence, the testimonies confirm Strummer was an influencer and specified the different aspects of the nature of influence. For example, they confirm Coulter’s (2019b: 26, 2019c: 73) belief: ‘The Clash opened the eyes of many people to the injustices of the world’ and ‘In the eyes of many fans, The Clash, were – indeed are – an affirmation of the power of popular music to be a force for progressive political change … The sense of political optimism that attended the band … It is little wonder then that so many of those that saw the band live were inspired to become involved in a range of progressive cultural and political causes’. Finally, this chapter offers support to Strummer’s own assessment of his influence and its geographic dimensions. 2 This then provides the first extensive substantiation to comments like: ‘What The Clash, and their music, changed was not the world, but rather, some people within it … [where] the listener’s world was altered’ (Topping 2004: 31).

269

Conclusion

This study provides the first extensive examination of Strummer’s politics and their influence, using a socialist realist framework. Following Street (1986, 2012), it has been premised on the notion musicians can not only exert political influence, but those who display left-wing views can influence others to become or stay left wing. Strummer’s political significance stems from using music as a means to communicate radical ideals which were shown in this study to have had influence, varying from an influence, to a key influence to the key influence on individuals. For about a quarter of respondents, Strummer’s influence was deep and continuing. The primary and secondary data could not establish either the absolute or relative quantitative dimensions of this influence, but it is reasonable to infer it was substantial over and above that which has been demonstrated in this study. In all likelihood Strummer influenced thousands, and maybe tens of thousands, around the world. It is more difficult to draw a firmer inference about the qualitative nature of this influence other than to say that it likely recruited to, pushed towards or sustained many on the left. On this basis, it can be reasonably ventured he has been the most influential left-wing political musician in Western culture since the mid-1970s because his influence has breadth and depth in developing oppositional, including socialist, consciousness. However, it is also likely to be evident that tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, who bought Clash records and went to Clash gigs were not influenced in any discernible way in terms of their political outlook. For these people, the music was more 270

Conclusion

important and for a particular period in their lives. Indeed, many ceased being followers after successive albums where punk was increasingly relinquished. Geographically speaking, it also seems evident Strummer’s influence has been strongest in Britain followed by other English-speaking countries, although the difference between Britain and the US seems to be quite wide. This conclusion seeks to draw together the different threads of the previous chapters. What is noteworthy about this influence is that it has often been premised on Strummer being perceived as more left wing than he actually was, highlighting that subjective judgements by followers were as important as what Strummer actually said and did. Cover and context The cover to this study is appropriate for two reasons. First, the photograph was taken on 16 January 1981 when Strummer was at the apex of his stated socialist belief. Second, the use of the pink (but not red) and green colouring, though playing on the cover of London Calling, is a good approximation of Strummer’s overall politics. This emphasises the importance of the subtitle: radicalism, resistance and rebellion, but not revolution. For example, ‘Revolution Rock’ (1979), though a cover with lyrics mostly by Strummer, is not about revolution, whether socialist or any other kind. Then, the vantage point of 2022 for Strummer’s socialism has important implications for existing and new Strummer followers. Professing to be a socialist in the 1980s was significant but not unusual. The likes of Neil Kinnock and Gordon Brown did so, albeit as democratic socialists (i.e. social democrats). But doing so at that time now takes on greater significance given the retreat of any kind of socialist beliefs. No matter his imprecision over capitalism, class and consciousness, matched and aided by that of followers, Strummer’s statement of socialism meant he exercised socialist realist influence. This is an important counterbalance to the view of Strummer’s liberal legacy put forward by Parkinson (2005), Gilbert (2009: 225), Doane (2014: xxi), Jucha (2016: 222–223), Wyatt (2018: 332) and Assirati (2020: 9). Humanism is the link between this view and the 271

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

actuality of Strummer’s changed world view. Consequently, it can depend for some on not just which period of Strummer’s life is looked at, but also how this period is looked at, as to whether his legacy is more than just being anti-authoritarian, anti-racist and pro-multicultural and whether he went further than being anti-establishment to becoming anti-capitalist. Reasons for influence Over and above Strummer’s stanzas, statements and swagger, and notwithstanding his weaknesses over women, there are several reasons why he was so influential with numerous people. Recalling when he came to adulthood and his influences helps focus on the tumultuous times that were his formative years. Strummer had the benefit of being able to draw on the heritage of 1968 and hippiedom during the crisis of the post-war social democratic settlement and the beginnings of neoliberalism in order to establish and prosecute his politics in a potent context. He represents a particular combination of the individual (agency) and time and space (environment) albeit mediated and manifested in an idiosyncratic way. Put another way, the person, period and politics made a potent potion. Here, the importance of punk as a social movement in mid-1970s Britain was as crucial as was Strummer being neither Jones nor Simonon. Though he was critical of the likes of the SWP and Soviet Union, he was not prescriptive directly or indirectly (by setting an example through being an activist) about what followers should do. They could, thus, apply themselves to a variety of forums. And much effort was put into providing people with the ideological and intellectual resources to ask questions of their situation and wider issues rather than providing the definitive answers. However, Direct Action (Winter 2003/2004), Worley (2014: 91) and Beesley (2019: 9) went too far in proffering that he was ‘always asking questions but never telling people how to think’; ‘Strummer never pretended to have any answers to the crises he depicted’ 1 and ‘The Clash did not offer 1 Though Worley (2014) focused on 1976–81, his conclusions covered a wider period, including this quote.

272

Conclusion

the answers to social and political change. They merely inspired their audience to search for them’ because Strummer told ‘truths’ and was not just against the status quo but also for economic, social and political change, and markedly so in his ‘rebel rock’ period. It is true Strummer did not have a blueprint for – or roadmap to – a just, humane society. Thus, overall, he gave more in the way of introduction than instruction so that followers were free to interpret as they wished. This helps explain both why those ranging from union leaders2 and activists to academics, journalists and writers, and cultural entrepreneurs (artists, musicians) could all take some kind of inspiration or sustenance from Strummer. In all this, it was more important he proclaimed to be a socialist than he believed in a specific, specified form of socialism. Sustaining socialism Using a socialist realist framework to assess whether, how, why and to what extent Strummer, as a self-stated socialist at the peak of his political radicalism, helped prosecute the struggle for socialism reveals he made a large, positive contribution. In this regard, arguably, the depth of influence was as significant as its breadth. This means his lyrics and associated paraphernalia (interviews, on-stage pronouncements etc) were used to do more than merely engage in social realism. He successfully engaged in the tasks of consciousness-raising, educational development and heightening ideological awareness. The conundrum at the heart of Strummer’s socialist influence is he identified as a socialist for only a short period of time, and displayed a relatively superficial socialist analysis of capitalism, yet had an enduring socialist influence. The conundrum is deepened by Strummer becoming increasingly uncertain, being inactive on the music scene for many years, being a sayer and not a doer, and moving rightwards politically. Ideologically, he recruited some to the cause of socialism and sustained others in its cause by providing cultural props. 2 There were particular concentrations of influence among the FBU and RMT unions in Britain.

273

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

This could be explained by a generational aspect: namely, those becoming socialists due to Strummer’s influence at the time Strummer proclaimed he was a socialist have continued to be socialists because of Strummer’s influence. But this is not the full story as there was evidence of younger cohorts influenced to become socialists by Strummer well after his socialist period. Here, his lyrics alone had a greater relative impact. But something more profound underlies this, revolving around issues of definitions of socialism and projection. Recalling Draper’s (1966) dichotomy as an indication of the basis for the ‘broad church’ nature of socialism as concept and practice, Strummer had an imprecise definition of socialism, with ample ambiguity (unlike The Redskins, who then spoke to a much narrower constituency). This was matched by the definitions used by commentators and respondents. So, socialism was broadly defined per se, and also by Strummer, which in turn allowed followers to see in Strummer the kind of socialism they wished to see and were inspired by or affirmed by. Part of this involved Strummer’s humanism, which spanned before, during and after his period of socialist belief. This dialectical relationship underlies the importance of how listeners received Strummer, projecting onto him what they wished him to be. Here, projection was aided by Strummer’s and followers’ imprecise and varied conceptualisations, allowing the perception of Strummer to be made somewhere in between them, and taking different forms that could appeal to revolutionary socialists and social democrats and those primarily favouring political parties or social movements. Although a weight of expectations was placed on Strummer as a doer for those that could not do, and an audible voice for those whose voices were inaudible, significant numbers interpreted his message as a call to become activists, pursuing socialism even though he was not an activist and strayed from socialism. Here, the ensuing self-liberation went beyond just the cognitive. Here ‘Strummer’s law’ as it became known stated: ‘No input, no output’.3 In essence, for socialist realism, Strummer was seen as a socialist and had influence over others as such, which led these 3 Strummer stated in Smith (1991: 31): ‘To get output, you must have input.’

274

Conclusion

individuals to struggle for socialism, however defined, in terms of fighting the symptoms and causes of capitalism. Music and movements Music can both reflect and reinforce social movements. In this context, Eyerman and Jamison (1998) and Mattern (1998) were rather reductive in framing the relationship between music, politics and social movements through focusing on more general social and political forces. Recognising this means acknowledging punk was as much a social movement as many others, even if it was transitory, short-lived and constituted a subculture. It provided Strummer with a basis to work from in his task of political education for progressive purposes because he was a central part of it. The Clash, through Strummer, was able to give punk a leftward political direction. That did not mean all punks followed, but many did and in particular ways as this study has outlined. After The Clash, and with the dissolution of punk as a social movement, Strummer continued to provide leadership for radicals, but this became more of an individual, fragmented and retrospective form where he tended to be less of a creator of radical social forces and more of a reflector-cum-sustainer of those forces. Thus, it was not a case of a social movement creating the context in which his music could assume such a contemporaneous political role. Recalling Street (2001: 247, 2012: 1), music can be not just the vehicle for expressing political values but the expression of those political values themselves, and music does not simply reflect politics but can also establish a lens through which to view politics. Here, music embodies political values and organises responses to society in terms of thought and action. As a form of agency, music’s purchase is not solely reliant on the environment, as Eyerman and Jamison (1998) and Mattern (1998) tended to suggest. Indeed, agency reified helps form the environment. This suggests a more dynamic and dialectical relationship, something which Roy (2010) elaborated when studying US folk music, where he compared its use by the communist left in the 1930s and 1940s to that of the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Roy concluded music affects social movements 275

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

– rather than vice versa – and depends less on issues of content and more on the social relationship within which it is embedded. Rosenthal and Flack (2016) looked at music in the same way. Very few bands are formed for specifically political reasons. The most influential ‘political’ musicians are those who write about social issues from a progressive standpoint but who are first and foremost musicians. In this regard, Jon Langford of The Three Johns commented: ‘We all have socialist convictions and obviously that comes through … but we’re not a socialist band. We’re a group of socialists who are in a band. It’s a fine distinction but an important one’ (Larkin 1995: 357). For similar reasons, social movements explicitly based on music – and political music especially – are infrequent. Even RAR was the expression of an existing social movement, the ANL. In other words, political music and music with political portent of any significance seldom emerge from the intention of musicians to be overtly political. Yet Strummer would come close to being an exception, albeit when music with political portent has significant political influence it is because of the conducive, dynamic interplay between agency and environment. Recalling Inset 1.2 (pp.9–10), this helps explain why a plethora of politically motivated bands did not make much of a cultural-political mark with their work in comparison to Strummer with The Clash. It also helps explain why the attempt to fashion ‘Rock Against’ movements – even by deploying existing bands – came to little. This deepens and broadens Street’s (2012: 45-46) distinction between musicians who exercise some political influence when they make public statements because of their status and profile and those whose political influence is derived from the lyrics and music of the songs they perform. Flowing from this, most political songs – and the most important ones – are not ‘protest songs’ which are explicit in their political diagnosis and prognosis. Post-democratic neoliberalism Crouch (2004) denoted the era of ‘post-democracy’ where formal institutions and processes of democracy remain but are colonised and hollowed out by elites under neoliberalism. Strummer straddled the democratic 276

Conclusion

and post-democratic periods. In both, he sought to encourage popular political participation and give expression of voice for others, so that beyond the parameters of socialism, Strummer was seen as a teller of fundamental truths, disseminator of knowledge and conveyor of progressive political traditions. But although he was disillusioned by post-democracy, because of it he also found something of a renewed role with The Mescaleros with his populist appeal as a voice of dissent. This speaks to his wider influence again as inspiration and sustenance for progressive politics, where he was more than just a critic because he also proffered alternatives, no matter how ill-defined. Futures remain unwritten This study has examined Strummer’s political appeal and influence until his death and twenty years thereafter. But will they continue to endure? While many have stated since 2002 there was a need for Strummer (Salon 3 March 2003, MOJO March 2003, The Word October 2006, NME 11 August 2012) and some expect them to continue (Bedford 2007, D’Ambrosio 2012b: xv, 4, Letts 2017: x), there are obvious potential limitations to his lasting political appeal and influence. It would be overly simplistic to suggest they will wither and perish as those who came of age as punks in the late 1970s and early 1980s retire and die. It would equally be overly simplistic to suggest they will continue, as Strummer spoke to enduring universal humanist concerns about inequality and so on. Here, we can note videos of Mescaleros’ gigs in the US indicate a much younger (but largely white male) audience than might have been expected (see also Davie 2004: 75, 125).4 Ultimately, the matter cannot be settled until looked back on in retrospect, say in 2052, with the aid of research like that undertaken here. However, several considerations for such a study can be specified in advance. First, there are stimulants by which new cohorts or generations may come know of and be influenced by Strummer. These could take the form of, for example, existing songs being given a new lease of life by being used 4 By contrast, Jucha (2016: 190) believed ‘relatively few people in America remember Joe Strummer’.

277

The punk rock politics of Joe Strummer

culturally (in films etc) or by becoming popular anthems as a result of political or economic events and the social movements which may emerge in response.5 Second, individuals will need to seek out material to study and understand Strummer’s politics in a way that, despite the internet, is more demanding than reading the music press during his lifetime was. Third, initiatives like Strummerville/Joe Strummer Foundation, and celebrations of Strummer (like the Strummer of Love, Strummercamp, Strummerfest and Strummerville festivals and International Clash Day) will need to continue for a generational transition to be possible. Equally, other initiatives like the Facebook group ‘Clash Fans against the Right’ will be necessary though not sufficient. The significance of these initiatives is heightened by the fact it is unlikely any new films about Strummer, or new, unknown original recordings by him will be released, for the reserves of material for these appear to have been used up.6 Other cultural representations of Strummer in other artists’ songs, art, literature and the like will be needed to buttress these. Lastly, comparisons with the deceased Guthrie, Lennon and Marley (as opposed to the living Dylan and Springsteen) would help identify further lines of investigation. This would also facilitate drawing out wider conclusions about music as an important terrain of struggle for the left in so-called ‘culture wars’. Such studies are necessary because care has been taken in this study not to claim Strummer provided irrefutable, generalisable lessons about the power of music per se, or about the power of particular genres in certain historical epochs or associated with specific social movements. This is because this study concerns a single musician who operated as a lone lyricist, where the combination of the person, politics and period were paramount to understanding his influence. 5 For example, and apropos of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, his lyrics for the anti-war ‘The Call Up’ took on a renewed relevance, especially because of the line: ‘Maybe I want to see the wheat fields/Over Kiev and down to the sea’. With the prospect of a nuclear escalation in this war, the b-side, ‘Stop the World’, would also have renewed relevance. But ‘London Calling’ took a strange turn with its use to support a countermilitarism when re-imagined by a Ukrainian punk band (Observer 20 March 2022). 6 For example, Joe Strummer: The Future is Unwritten (Temple 2007) and The Rise and Fall of The Clash (transcript: Garcia 2013) seem to complete the filmic possibilities and Joe Strummer 001 (2018) and Assembly (2021) the recording possibilities (cf. Wyatt 2018: 329).

278

References

Adams, R. (2019) ‘“Are you Going Backwards, Or are you Going Forwards?” – England Past and England Future in 1970s Punk’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 89–106. Albertine, V. (2015) Clothes, Clothes, Clothes. Music, Music, Music. Boys, Boys, Boys, Faber & Faber, London. Anderson, M. (2004) All the Power: Revolution without Illusion, Akashic, New York. Andersen, M. (2013) ‘The Clash and Fugazi: Punk Paths Toward Revolution’ in M. Pedelty and K. Weglarz (eds) Political Rock, Ashgate, Farnham, pp. 1–22. Andersen, M. and Heibutzki, R. (2018) We Are The Clash: Reagan, Thatcher and the Last Stand of a Band that Mattered, Akashic, New York. Angio, J. (2013) Revenge of the Mekons [film], Music Box Films, Chicago. ARTE (2010) The Clash, ARTE, Strasbourg. Assirati, N. (2020) The Clash: Every Album, Every Song, Sonicbond Publishing, Tewkesbury. Baker (2013a) ‘Echoes of a Lifeless Arena’, The Baker, 13 April. Baker (2013b) ‘… Not Minding That It Hurts’, The Baker, 26 April. Baker (2013c) ‘The Making and Meaning of “Hell W10” – Art Imitating Life’, The Baker, 18 May. Baker (2013d) ‘Armagideon Time – The US Festival’, The Baker, 28 May. Baker (2018) ‘Punk Meets Reggae in The Park – April 30th 1978’, The Baker, 25 April. Barsanti, C. (2014) ‘Mystery Train: “Joe Strummer” on Screen’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 165–176. BBC 4 (2012) Punk Britannia – part 1, British Broadcasting Corporation, London. Bedford, M. (2007) ‘A Sound Clash: Revising Joe/Remembering Strummer’, Vertigo, 3/7, Autumn. Bedford, M. (2014) ‘“This is Joe Public Speaking”: Why Joe Strummer’s Passion is Still in Fashion’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 49–64. Beesley, T. (2019) ‘Introductions’ in Beesley and Davie 2019, pp. 9–10. Beesley, T. and Davie, A. (2019) Ignore Alien Orders: On Parole with The Clash, Days Like Tomorrow Books, London. 279

References Bertsch, C. (2012) ‘Always Paying Attention: Joe Strummer’s Life and Legacy’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 115–122. Billet, A. (2006) ‘The World is Worth Fighting For: The Legacy of Joe Strummer’, Monthly Review online, 22 December. Billet, A. (2007) ‘Rebel’s Requiem: The Legacy of Joe Strummer Five Years On’, Dissident Voice, 31 December. Bindas, K. (1993) ‘“The Future is Unwritten”: The Clash, Punk and America, 1977–1982’, American Studies, 34/1: 69–89. Binette, G. (2003) The Last Night London Burned: Joe Strummer and The Mescaleros, FBU Benefit, Acton Town Hall, Ethical Threads, London. Binette, G. (2007a) ‘Politics and Lure of Fame’, Weekly Worker, 7 June. Binette, G. (2007b) ‘Of the Left, Always of the Left’ – One Combative Rocker’, Permanent Revolution, 3: 61–63 Bond, P. (2003) ‘Obituary: Joe Strummer of The Clash, Dead at 50’, World Socialist Web Site, 13 January. Boston, V. (1978) Punk Rock, Penguin, London. Bottà, G. and Quercetti, F. (2019) ‘Brigade Rosse: The Clash, Bologna and Italian Punx’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 209–222. Bragg, B. (2003) ‘The Joe I Knew’, BBC News Online, 2 January. Bragg, B. (2006) The Progressive Patriot: A Search for Belonging, Bantam Press, London. Britton, A. (2012) ‘Situationism Explained! And its Effect on Punk and Pop Culture’, Louder Than War, 20 July. Broe, D. (2012) ‘Clash and Burn: The Politics of Punk’s Permanent Revolution’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 95–106. Brunström, C. (2019) ‘“Up and Down the Westway” or “Live by the River”? Britishness, Englishness, London and The Clash’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 161–177. Burchill, J. and Parsons, T. (1978) The Boy Looked at Johnny: The Obituary of Rock and Roll, Pluto Press, London. Cain, B. (2007) ’77 Sulphate Strip: An Eyewitness Account of the Year That Changed Everything, Ovolo Books, Huntingdon. Callahan, M. (2001) ‘Prairie Fire: Rock Maoists’, Bad Subjects, Summer. Cashell, K. (2019) ‘Retrieving the Messianic Promise of Punk: The Clash in 1977’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 107–128. Cedeno, D. (2017) ‘The Clash: Sociological Imagination and Critical Philosophy’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 95–112. Chase, J. (1985) ‘Full of It’, The Harvard Crimson, 23 November. Chimes, T. (2013) The Strange Case of Dr Terry and Mr Chimes, Wilkinson Publishing, Melbourne. Cogan, B. (2014) ‘From the 101ers to The Mescaleros, and Whatever Band was in-between: Joe Strummer’s Musical Journey (Or, Why Woody?)’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 31–45. 280

References Cohen, S. (2017) ‘Washington Bullets: The Clash and Vietnam’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 131–146. Cohen, S. and Peacock, J. (2017a) (eds) The Clash Takes on the World: Transnational Perspectives on the Only Band that Matters, Bloomsbury, London. Cohen, S. and Peacock, J. (2017b) ‘Introduction: The Transnational Clash’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 1–27. Colegrave, S. and Sullivan, C. (2005) Punk: The Definitive Record of a Revolution, Thunder’s Mouth Press, New York. Collins, A. (1998) Still Suitable for Miners – Billy Bragg: The Official Biography, Virgin Books, London. Coon, C. (1982) 1988: The New Wave Punk Rock Explosion, Omnibus Press, London. Coon, C. (2019) ‘The Clash and Musical Artistry: Against the Corporate Voice’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 52–68. Coulter, C. (2018) ‘Straight to Hell: The Clash and the politics of Left Melancholia’ in A. Dillane, E. Devereux, M. Power and A. Haynes (eds) Songs of Social Protest: International Perspectives, Rowman & Littlefield, London, pp. 525–540. Coulter, C. (ed.) (2019a) Working for the Clampdown: The Clash, the Dawn of Neoliberalism and the Political Promise of Punk, Manchester University Press, Manchester. Coulter, C. (2019b) ‘Working for the Clampdown: An Introduction’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 1–32. Coulter, C. (2019c) ‘Up in Heaven (Not Only Here): The Clash, Left Melancholia and the Politics of Redemption’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 69–86. Cox, A. (1986) Sid and Nancy [film], Initial Pictures, London. Creagh, R. (1983) Laboratoires de l’utopie: Les communautés libertaires aux ÉtatsUnis, Payot, Paris. Crouch, C. (2004) Post-Democracy, Polity, Cambridge. Cutler, C. (1985) File Under Popular: Theoretical and Critical Writings on Music, November Books, London. D, C. (2012) ‘Strange Bedfellows: How The Clash Inspired Public Enemy’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 215–216. D’Ambrosio, A. (2002) ‘Passion is a Fashion’, Clamour, July/August. D’Ambrosio, A. (2003) ‘“Let Fury Have the Hour”: The Passionate Politics of Joe Strummer’, Monthly Review, 55/2: 34. D’Ambrosio, A. (ed.) (2004a) Let Fury Have the Hour: The Punk Rock Politics of Joe Strummer, Nations Books, New York. D’Ambrosio, A. (2004b) ‘Acknowledgements’ in D’Ambrosio (2004a), pp. xiii–xvii. D’Ambrosio, A. (2006) ‘Joe Strummer, Terrorist?’, The Nation, 20 April. D’Ambrosio, A. (ed.) (2012a) Let Fury Have the Hour: Joe Strummer, Punk and the Movement that Shook the World, Nation Books, New York. D’Ambrosio, A. (2012b) ‘Introduction to the First Edition: The Future in Unwritten’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. xi–xxiv. 281

References D’Ambrosio, A. (2012c) ‘Let Fury Have the Hour: The Punk Rock Politics of Joe Strummer’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 3–16. D’Ambrosio, A. (2012d) ‘The Rebel Way: Alex Cox, Jim Jarmusch, and Dick Rude on the Filmwork of Joe Strummer’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 73–85. D’Ambrosio, A. (2012e) ‘White Riot or Right Riot: A Look Back at Punk Rock and Anti-Racism’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 123–133. D’Ambrosio, A. (2012f) ‘You Can’t Have a Revolution without Songs: The Legacy of Victor Jara and the Political Folk Music of Caetano Veloso, Silvio Rodriguez, and Joe Strummer’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 137–148. D’Ambrosio, A. (2012g) ‘The World is Worth Fighting For: Two Creative Artists, Michael Franti and Tim Robbins, Continue Joe Strummer’s Legacy’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 197–208. D’Ambrosio, A. (2012h) ‘“The Only Band that Mattered” … Still Does: The Story of The Clash as Told by The Clash’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 261–266. D’Ambrosio, A. (2012i) ‘Evolutionary Street Poetry’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 267–282. D’Ambrosio, A. (2012j) ‘Notes’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 317–328. Davie, A. (2004) Joe Strummer and The Mescaleros: Vision of a Homeland, Lund Choos Publishing, Delhi. Davie, A. (2018) This is Joe Public Speaking, Lund Choos Publishing, Delhi. Davies, J. (1996) ‘The Future of “No Future”: Punk Rock and Postmodern Theory’, Journal of Popular Culture, 29/4: 3–25. Davies, N. (2003) ‘Joe Strummer, 1952–2002’, Workers’ Action, February/March, 20: 18. Denisoff, S. (1968) ‘Protest Movements: Class Consciousness and the Propaganda Song’, Sociological Quarterly, 9/2: 228–247. Denselow, R. (1989) When the Music’s Over: The Story of Political Pop, Faber & Faber, London. Doane, R. (2014) Stealing All Transmissions: A Secret History of The Clash, PM Press, Oakland, CA. Doane, R. (2017) ‘“The Clash on The Clash” Is a Smorgasbord of Contradictions’, Pop Matters, 3 November. Douglass, D. (2003) ‘Sad Death of Joe Strummer, Lead Singer of The Clash’, Miners’ Advice, January. Draper, H. (1966) ‘The Twin Souls of Socialism’, New Politics, 5/1: 57–84. Dunn, K. (2010) ‘Never Mind the Bollocks: The Punk Rock Politics of Global Communication’, Review of International Studies, 34/S1: 193–210. Dunn, K. (2011) ‘“Know Your Rights”: Punk Rock, Globalization and Human Rights’ in I. Peddie (ed.) Popular Music and Human Rights, Vol. I: British and American Music, Ashgate, Farnham, pp. 27–38. Du Noyer, P. (1998) The Clash, St Martin’s Press, London. Egan, S. (2015) The Clash: The Only Band that Mattered, Rowman & Littlefield, London. 282

References Egan, S. (2018) The Clash on The Clash: Interviews and Encounters, Chicago Review Press, Chicago. Ensminger, D. (2013) Left of the Dial: Conversations with Punk Icons, PM Press, Oakland, CA. Eriksen, N. (1980) ‘Popular Culture and Revolutionary Theory: Understanding Punk Rock’, Theoretical Review, 18: 13–35. Eriksen, N. (1981) ‘British New Wave’, Theoretical Review, 24: 27–30 Eyerman, R. and Jamison, A. (1998) Music and Social Movements: Mobilizing Traditions in the Twentieth Century, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Fancy, C. (2016) ‘Anarchy in the UK? The Politics and People that Produced Punk Rock’, RS21, 27 November. Faulk, B. and Harrison, B. (eds) (2014a) Punk Rock Warlord: The Life and Work of Joe Strummer, Ashgate, Farnham. Faulk, B. and Harrison, B. (2014b) ‘Introduction: John Woody Joe Mellor Strummer: The Many Lives, Travails and Sundry Shortcomings of a Punk Rock Warlord’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 1–9. Fisher, M. (2009) Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? Zero Books, Winchester. Fletcher, T. (2002) ‘Joe Strummer: A Tribute’, 31 December, http:// www.ijamming.net/2003/01Jan1-5.html#Joe%20Strummer%20tribute [accessed 31 January 2022]. Fletcher, T. (2005) The Clash: The Complete Guide to their Music, Omnibus Press, London. Fletcher, T. (2012) The Clash: The Music That Matters, Omnibus Press, London. Follos, T. (2007) ‘Johnny Clash: Billy Bragg’, Washington Post Express, 22 October. Frith, S. (1977) ‘Beyond the Dole Queue: The Politics of Punk’, Village Voice, 24 October. Frith, S. (1983) ‘Post-Punk Blues’, Marxism Today, March, pp. 18–21. Frith, S. (1996) Performing Rights: On the Value of Popular Music, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Frith, S. and Street, J. (1992) ‘Rock Against Racism and Red Wedge: From Music to Politics, from Politics to Music’ in R. Garofalo (ed.) Rockin’ the Boat: Mass Music and Mass Movements, South End Press, Boston, MA, pp. 67–80. Gall, G. (2020) ‘Getting the Young Punks to Join In: Gary Foley and The Clash’, Overland, 15 July. Garbarini, V. (1981) ‘Rude Boys: An Interview with Joe Strummer and Robert Fripp’, Musician, Player & Listener, 33: 50–57. Garcia, D. (2013) The Rise and Fall of The Clash, Thin Man Press, London. Garofalo R. (1992) ‘Introduction’ in R. Garofalo (ed.) Rockin’ the Boat: Mass Music and Mass Movements, South End Press, Boston, MA, pp. 1–13. Garratt, J. (2018) Music and Politics: A Critical Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 283

References Gelbart, M. (2011) ‘A Cohesive Shambles: The Clash’s “London Calling” and the Normalization of Punk’, Music and Letters, 92/2: 230–272. Geldof, B. (1986) Is That It?: The Autobiography, Pan Books, London. Gilbert, P. (2006) ‘The Man Who Wasn’t There’, MOJO, June, pp. 80–88. Gilbert, P. (2009) Passion is a Fashion: The Real Story of The Clash, Aurum Press, London. Gillespie, B. (2021) Tenement Kid, White Rabbit, London. Glasper, I. (2014a) Day the Country Died: A History of Anarcho-Punk, 1980–1984, PM Press, Oakland, CA. Glasper, I. (2014b) Burning Britain: The History of UK Punk, 1980–1984, PM Press, Oakland, CA. Gramsci, A. (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebooks, International Publishers, New York. Gray, M. (2001, 2003) The Clash: Return of The Last Gang in Town, Helter Skelter Publishing, London. Gray, M. (2009) Route 19 Revisited: The Clash and the Making of London Calling, Random House, London. Green, J. and Barker, G. (2003) A Riot of Our Own: Night and Day with The Clash and After, Orion, London. Grunebaum, D. (2001) ‘Rock Warrior’, Metropolis, November. Haimes, T. (1995) Punk – The History of Rock ’n’ Roll [TV series], Andrew Solt Productions, Los Angeles. Hall, N. (2014) I Need a Dodge! Joe Strummer on the Run [film], Tindog Films, Barcelona. Harden, J. (2013) Quiet No More: New Political Activism in Canada and Around the Globe, James Lorimer, Toronto. Harker, D. (1980) One for the Money: Politics and Popular Song, Hutchinson, London. Harrison, B. (2002) ‘The Cultural Offices of Joe Strummer’, Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies, 1/1: 33–56. Hazan, J. and Mingay, D. (1980) Rude Boy [film] with promotional fanzine, Freemantle Media, London. Hebdige, D. (1979) Subculture: The Meaning of Style, Methuen, London. Hewitt, P. (2011) Scuse Me While I Kiss the Sky: 50 Moments that Changed Music, Quercus Publishing, London. Heylin, C. (2007) Babylon’s Burning: From Punk to Grunge, Viking, London. Hultsfred Festival (1999) ‘Joe Strummer Hultsfredsfestivalen Hultsfred Broacast Date 19 Jun 1999 Ex The Clash’, YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=HVqwdEyNRw4&ab_channel=RollingRockvideos [accessed 7 February 2022]. Hunter, W. (2005) ‘Punk in England’ Prized Writing, University of California, Davis. Hurchalla, G. (2016) Going Underground: American Punk 1979–1989, PM Press, Oakland, CA. 284

References Imarisha, W. (2014) ‘Culture Clash: The Influence of Hip-Hop Culture and Aesthetics on The Clash’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 147–164. James, K. (2009) ‘“This is England”: Punk Rock’s Realist/Idealist Dialectic and its Implications for Critical Accounting Education’, Accounting Forum, 33/2: 127–145. James, K. (2010a) ‘“Who am I? Where are We? Where do We Go From Here?”: Marxism, Voice, Representation, and Synthesis’, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 21/8: 696–710. James, K. (2010b) ‘Living the Punk Life in Green Bay, Wisconsin: Exploring Contradiction in the Music of NOFX’, Musicology Australia, 32/1: 95–120. James, K. (2013) ‘Working-Class Consciousness in the Work of SoCal Punk Band Rancid’, Social Science Research Network, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=2275725 [accessed 7 February 2022]. James, K. (2014) ‘Working-Class Consciousness and Connections to Place in the Work of Rancid’, Punk & Post Punk, 3/3: 243–255. James, M. (2019) ‘“The Beautiful People are Ugly Too”: The Clash as My “True Fiction”’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 144–160. Jardin, G. (2012) Joey Ramone – Ya Know [documentary], BMG, Berlin. Johnstone, N. (2006) The Clash: ‘Talking’, Omnibus, London. Jones, G. (2009) Last Shop Standing: Whatever Happened to Record Shops?, Proper Music Publishing, London. Jucha, G. (2016) The Clash FAQ: All That’s Left to Know about The Clash City Rockers, Backbeat, Milwaukee, WI. Kaufman, W. (2011) Woody Guthrie: American Radical, University of Illinois Press, Champaign, IL. Kenney, S. (2001) ‘Joe Strummer Interview’, While You Were Sleeping [magazine], No. 12. Kitson, R. (2012) ‘“Instinct Not Intellect”: Johnny Green Remembers Joe Strummer’, The Quietus, 22 December. Knowles, C. (1994) Clash City Showdown [fanzine], 1/1: 1–32. Knowles, C. (2003) Clash City Showdown: The Music, the Meaning and the Legacy of The Clash, Secret Sun, Boston. Knowles, C. (2005) ‘The Last Crusade’, Classic Rock, 80: 43–60. Knowles, C. (2010) The Secret History Of Rock ‘n’ Roll: The Mysterious Roots of Modern Music, Viva Editions, Berkeley, CA. Laing, D. (1978) ‘Interpreting Punk Rock’, Marxism Today, April, pp. 123–128. Laing, D. (2003) ‘Resistance and Protest’ in J. Shepherd, and D. Horn (eds) Continuum Encyclopaedia of Popular Music of the World, Continuum, London, pp. 345–346. Laing, D. (2015) One Chord Wonders: Power and Meaning in Punk Rock, PM Press, Oakland, CA. Larkin, C. (1995) The Guinness Who’s Who of Indie & New Wave Music, Guinness Publishing, London, second edition. Letts, D. (2000) Westway to the World, SMV Enterprises, London. 285

References Letts, D. with Nobakht, D. (2008) Culture Clash: Dread meets Punk Rockers, SAF Publishing, London. Letts, D. (2017) ‘Foreword’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. iii–x. Letts, D. with Peach, M. (2021) There and Black Again, Omnibus Press, London. Linstead, S. (2010) ‘Turning Rebellion into Money: The Clash, Creativity and Resistance to Commodification’ in B. Townley and N. Beech (eds) Managing Creativity: Exploring the Paradox, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 125–148. Lukács, G. (1963) The Meaning of Contemporary Realism, Merlin, London. Lydon, J. (2016) Anger is an Energy: My Life Uncensored, Simon & Schuster, London. Lydon, J., Zimmerman, K. and Zimmerman, K. (1994) Rotten: No Irish, no Blacks, no Dogs, Plexus Publishing, London. Lynskey, D. (2010) 33 Revolutions Per Minute: A History of Protest Songs, Faber, London. Marcus, G. (1993) Ranters and Crowd Pleasers: Punk in Pop Music, 1977–92, Doubleday, New York. Martin, G. (2002) ‘Strummer is Dead; Long Live The Clash’, Counterpunch, 24 December. Mattern, M. (1998) Acting in Concert: Music, Community and Political Activism, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick. Matula, T. (2003) ‘Joe Strummer, 1952–2002’, Popular Music and Society, 26/4: 523–525. McDonald, G. and Miles, A. (2003) The Last Night London Burned [film], Obtuse Productions/Proper Gander, London. McGuire, J. (2001) ‘Joe Strummer interview’, Punk Magazine, https://www. punkmagazine.com/stuff/morestuff/joe_strummer.html [accessed 31 January 2022]. McKenna, K. (2003) ‘A Man That Mattered: Joe Strummer’, Arthur, March. McLeod, D. (2013) ‘Billy Bragg: Mixing Pop and Politics’ in M. Pedelty and K. Weglarz (eds) Political Rock, Ashgate, Farnham, pp. 91–105. Miles, B. (1981) The Clash, Omnibus Press, London. Mills, F. (2001) ‘Remembering Joe Strummer’, https://ainhoaaristizabal. wordpress.com/2014/01/24/httpwp-mep2sum5-3ug-2/ [accessed 31 January 2022]. Modery, L. (2018) ‘How Joe Strummer and The Clash Have Helped Me Through the Trump Era’, Medium, 6 February, https://hipstercrite.medium.com/howjoe-strummer-has-helped-me-through-the-trump-era-9aa0c3113944 [accessed 7 February 2022]. Moliterno, A. (2019) ‘The One Struggle: The Clash, Gary Foley, Punk Politics and Indigenous Australian Activism’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 194–208. Moore, R. and Roberts, M. (2009) ‘Do-It-Yourself Mobilization: Punk and Social Movements’, Mobilization, 14/3: 273–291. 286

References Morello, T. (2012) ‘The Clash Legacy: Speech to Induct The Clash into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, 2003’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 191–193. Mulholland, G. (2003) This is Uncool: The 500 Greatest Singles since Punk and Disco, Cassell, London. Myers, B. (2004) John Lydon: PiL, Pistols and Anti-Celebrity, Independent Music, London. Needs, K. (2005) Joe Strummer and the Legend of The Clash, Plexus, London. Nehring, N. (2007) ‘“Everyone’s Given Up and Just Wants to Go Dancing”: From Punk to Rave in the Thatcher Era’, Popular Music and Society, 30/1: 1–18. The New Music (2001) ‘Joe Strummer Interview’ The New Music [TV programme], YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyCPVuECrEQ&ab_ channel=DarbyWheeler [accessed 7 February 2022]. Ogg, A. (2014) ‘Saint Joe: An Apostate Writes’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 65–78. Open Eye Films (2017) Redskins: A Flame that Can’t be Dimmed [film], Open Eye Films, London. Open Eye Films (2018) Redskins Interview [film], Open Eye Films, London. O’Shea, M. (2015) Mick Jones – Stayin’ in Tune: The Unofficial Biography, Eleusinian Press, Newhaven. Palmer, M. (1981) New Wave Explosion: How Punk Became New Wave, Became the 80’s, Proteus Books, London. Parker, A. (2003) The Clash: Rat Patrol from Fort Bragg, Abstract Sounds Publishing, London. Parker, J. (2013) ‘Joe Strummer and Punk Self-Reinvention’, The Atlantic, September. Parkinson, M. (2005) Viva Joe Strummer: The Clash and Beyond [film] with accompanying booklet, WHE International, London. Pattison, R. (1987) The Triumph of Vulgarity: Rock Music in the Mirror of Romanticism, Oxford University Press, New York. Peacock, J. (2010) ‘A Tale of Too Many Cities: The Clash’s “Ghetto Defendant” and Transnational Disruptions’, Symbiosis, 14/1: 19–41. Peacock, J. (2017) ‘From a Long Way Away: New York and London in The Clash’s “Red Angel Dragnet”’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 183–202. Pedelty, M. (2013) ‘Peter Gabriel: The Masked Activist’ in M. Pedelty and K. Weglarz (eds) Political Rock, Ashgate, Farnham, pp. 23–36. Pedelty, M. and Weglarz, K. (2013) ‘An Introduction to Political Rock: History, Genre, and Politics’ in M. Pedelty and K. Weglarz (eds) Political Rock, Ashgate, Farnham, pp. xi–xxv. Phillips, A. (2012) ‘A Brother in Revolution: Women in Punk Discuss Joe Strummer’s Influence’ in D’Ambrosio (2012a), pp. 107–114. Piekut, B. (2019) ‘Music for Socialism, London 1977’, Twentieth-Century Music, 16/1: 67–93. Popoff, M. (2018) The Clash: All the Albums, All the Songs, Voyageur Press, Minneapolis, MN. 287

References Prévot, N. and Sinclair, G. (2017) ‘The Clash Sell Out: Negotiating Space in the Ideological Superstructure’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 81–94. PRX (2008) ‘Revolution Rock’, PRX radio, 26 February. Quantick, D. (2000) The Clash, Unanimous, London. Rachel, D. (2014) Isle of Noises: Conversations with Great British Songwriters, Picador, London. Rachel, D. (2017) Walls Come Tumbling Down: The Music and Politics of Rock Against Racism, 2 Tone and Red Wedge, Picador, London. Raha, M. (2014) ‘The Last Gang in Town: Masculinity, Feminism, Joe Strummer and The Clash’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 109–119. Reed, J. (2009) Paul Weller: My Ever-Changing Moods, Omnibus, London. Reynolds, S. and Press, J. (1995) The Sex Revolts: Gender, Rebellion, and Rock ‘n’ Roll, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Ribot, M. (2003) ‘Remembering Joe Strummer, Guitarist and Activist’, Allegro, April. Richards, D. (2010) ‘Rock Rebels “Clash” Were Corporate Puppets: Interview with Vince White’, Henry Makow site, 9 October. Rifer, E. (2003) ‘A Tribute to Joe Strummer’, Razorcake, 13: 33–41. Rimbaud, P. (2004) Love Songs, Pomona Publishing, Keighley. Robb, J. (2006) Punk Rock: An Oral History, Ebury Press, London. Roberts, M. and Moore, R. (2009) ‘Peace Punks and Punks Against Racism: Resource Mobilization and Frame Construction in the Punk Movement’, Music and Arts in Action, 2/1: 21–36. Robinson, L. (2013) There Goes Gravity: A Life in Rock and Roll, Riverhead Books, New York. Rock&Folk (1995) Interview with Strummer, online in ‘Joe Strummer Very Rare Lost Interview’, YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQmDpBA5rZE [accessed 7 February 2022]. Roman, A. (2004) ‘Get Behind the Struggle Right Now!’ in D’Ambrosio (2004a), pp. 283–289. Rosenthal, B. and Flacks, R. (2016) Playing for Change: Music and Musicians in the Service of Social Movements, Routledge, Abingdon. Roy, W. (2010) Reds, Whites, and Blues: Social Movements, Folk Music, and Race in the United States, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Ryan, D. (2014) ‘Rock against the rich 1988: Darren Ryan gives the lowdown’, 6 April, https://ianbone.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/rock-against-the-rich1988-darren-ryan-gives-the-lowdown/ [accessed 7 February 2022]. Salewicz, C. (2006) Redemption Song: The Definitive Biography of Joe Strummer, HarperCollins, London. Salvo, M. (2017) ‘Mick Went Disco and Joe Sang Campfire Songs: Punk After-Parties and the Politics of Forking Paths’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 221–241. Satchwell, T. (2016) Combat Ready – The Clash, Stay-Free Publishing, Impington. Satchwell, T. (2019) All The Peacemakers – The Clash, Stay-Free Publishing, Impington. 288

References Satchwell, T. (2021) Move Up Starsky – The Clash, Stay-Free Publishing, Impington. Savage, J. (1988) ‘Unpublished Joe Strummer Interview’, 30 May, https:// fromtheothersideofthemirror.com/2009/06/03/unpublished-joe-strummerinterview/ [accessed 31 January 2022]. Savage, J. (2001) England’s Dreaming: Sex Pistols and Punk Rock, Faber & Faber, London. Savage, J. (2009) The England’s Dreaming Tapes, Faber & Faber, London. Schalit, J. (2000) ‘Joe Strummer: Clash of the Titan’, Punk Planet, 35: 32–39. Schumacher, M. (1996) There but for Fortune: The Life of Phil Ochs, Hyperion, New York. Shannon, E. (2014) ‘“Don’t Call me Woody”: The Punk Compassion and Folk Rebellion of Joe Strummer and Woody Guthrie’, in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 13–24. Shelley, J. (1988) ‘Strummer Speaks’, http://jimshelley.com/music/joe-strummer/ based on transcript from http://jimshelley.com/music/joe-strummer-qa/ [accessed 31 January 2022]. Silver, M. (1988) Permanent Record [film], Paramount Pictures, Los Angeles. Simonelli, D. (2002) ‘Anarchy, Pop and Violence: Punk Rock Subculture and the Rhetoric of Class, 1976–78’, Contemporary British History, 16/2: 121–144. Smith, C. (2009) 101 Albums that Changed Popular Music, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Smith, E. (2011) ‘Are the Kids United? The Communist Party of Great Britain, Rock Against Racism, and the Politics of Youth Culture’, Journal for the Study of Radicalism, 5/2: 85–117. Smith, E. (2012) ‘When the Party Comes Down: The CPGB and Youth Culture, 1976–1991’, Twentieth Century Communism, 4: 38–75. Smith, P. (1991) The Clash: Before & After, Plexus, London. Solis, G. (2017) ‘Punk Politics, Blackness, and Indigenous Protest: The Clash’s Australian Tour, 1982’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 165–182. Spellicy, A. (2015) ‘Earthquake Weather – Joe Strummer’ in T. Dalton and R. Koss (eds) Album Rescue Series (Vol 1), DaltonKoss Publishers, Hampton, Victoria, pp. 20–28. Steel, M. (2008) What’s Going On?: The Meanderings of a Comic Mind in Confusion, Simon & Schuster, London. Stephen, C. (2019) ‘Joe Strummer vs the Rich: When Anarchy Met The Clash Hero’, Everything Gone Green blog, 4 March. Street, J. (1986) Rebel Rock: The Politics of Popular Music, Basil Blackwell, Oxford. Street, J. (1988) ‘Red Wedge: Another Strange Story of Pop’s Politics’, Critical Quarterly, 30/3: 79–91. Street, J. (2001) ‘Rock, Pop and Politics’ in S. Frith, W. Straw and J. Street (eds) Cambridge Companion to Pop and Rock, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 243–255. Street, J. (2012) Music and Politics, Polity, Cambridge. 289

References Strummer, J., Jones, M., Simonon, P. and Headon, N. (2008) The Clash, Atlantic Books, London. Swinford, J. (2011) ‘Strummertime Is Here Again Pt 1’, Louder Than War, 24 December, https://louderthanwar.com/strummertime-is-here-again-pt-1/ [accessed 7 February 2022]. Swinford, J. (2016) Searching For the Young Joe Rebel, [no known publisher, no known place of publication]. Tanz, J. (2007) Other People’s Property: A Shadow History of Hip-Hop in White America, Bloomsbury, New York. Taysom, J. (2020) ‘The Story Behind the Song: The Clash Take Aim at Terrorism on “Tommy Gun”’, Far Out Magazine, 28 November. Temple, J. (2007) The Future is Unwritten: Joe Strummer [film], Nitrate Films, Bridgwater. Temple, J. (2015) The Clash: New Year’s Day ’77 [film], Nitrate Films, Bridgwater. Tester, K. (1994) Media, Culture, Morality, Routledge, London. Tobler, J. and Miles, B. (1983) The Clash, Omnibus Press, London. Tompkins, T. (2012) ‘Joe Strummer’s Complex Legacy: 10 Years After The Clash Leader’s Death’, SPIN, 17 December. Topping, K. (2004) The Complete Clash, Reynolds and Hearn, Richmond. Toynbee, J. (2019) ‘The Clash, Revolution and Reverse’ in Coulter (2019a), pp. 35–51. Tranmer, J. (2008) ‘Reclaiming Englishness for the Left: The Case of Billy Bragg’ in F. Reviron-Piégay (ed.) Englishness Revisited, Cambridge Scholars Press, Newcastle, pp. 189–204. Tranmer, J. (2010) ‘“Nazis are No Fun”: Punk and Anti-Fascism in Britain in the 1970s’ in B. Horgby and F. Nilsson (eds) Rockin’ The Borders: Rock Music and Social, Cultural and Political Change, Cambridge Scholars Press, Newcastle, pp. 117–138. Tranmer, J. (2013) ‘Rocking Against Racism: Trotskyism, Communism and Punk in Britain’ in R. Adlington (ed.) Red Strains: Music and Communism outside the Communist Bloc, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 267–282. Tranmer, J. (2014) ‘The Creation of an Anti-Fascist icon: Joe Strummer and Rock Against Racism’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 93–108. Tranmer, J. (2017) ‘Spouting Slogans for the Sandinistas? The Clash and International Solidarity’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 147–164. Tranmer, J. (2018) ‘Rock Against Racism, Punk and Post-Punk’, Études Anglaises, 71/1: 85–101. Vayo, I. (2017) ‘Turning Rebellion into Money: The Roots of The Clash’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 65–80. Vol. 1 Brooklyn (2018) ‘Inside “We are The Clash”’, Vol. 1 Brooklyn, 22 August, https://vol1brooklyn.com/2018/08/22/inside-we-are-the-clash/ [accessed 7 February 2022]. Wadlow, J. (2014) ‘“I am so Bored with the USA”: Joe Strummer and the Promised Land’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 123–145. 290

References Wadlow, J. (2017) ‘The Last Gang in Town: The Clash Portrayed in New York and Paris’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 203–220. Watt, S. (2018a) ‘Introduction’ in S. Watt (ed.) Ashes to Activists – A Poetic Celebration of Joe Strummer, Joe Strummer Foundation, St Leonards-on-Sea, p. 3. Watt, S. (2018b) ‘Tribute’ in S. Watt (ed.) Ashes to Activists – A Poetic Celebration of Joe Strummer, Joe Strummer Foundation, St Leonards-on-Sea, pp. 7–8. Watts, S. (2006) Paul Weller: Into Tomorrow, Double Jab Productions, London. Wells, S. (2004) Punk: Young, Loud & Snotty – The Stories Behind the Songs, Thunder’s Mouth Press, New York. Welt, M. (2003) Politicization of Popular Culture under Thatcherism, GRIN Verlag, Munich. White, V. (2007) Out of Control: The Last Days of The Clash, Moving Target, London. White, V. (2009) ‘Were The Clash Bullshit?’ Vice blog, 29 October. Widgery, D. (1986) Beating Time: Riot ‘n’ Race ‘n’ Rock ‘n’ Roll, Chatto & Windus, London. Winters, D. (1985) Soul of the Wobblies: The IWW, Religion, and American Culture in the Progressive Era, 1905–1917, Greenwood Press, Westport, CN. Worley, M. (2012) ‘Shot by Both Sides: Punk, Politics and the End of “Consensus”’, Contemporary British History, 26/3: 333–354. Worley, M. (2014) ‘Revolution Rock? The Clash, Joe Strummer and the British Left in the Early Days of Punk’ in Faulk and Harrison (2014a), pp. 81–92. Worley, M. (2016) ‘Marx-Lenin-Rotten-Strummer: British Marxism and Youth Culture in the 1970s’, Contemporary British History, 30/4: 505–521. Wyatt, M. (2018) This Day in Music’s Guide to The Clash, This Day In Music, Huntingdon. Zhuk, S. (2011) ‘“Fascist Music from the West”: Anti-Rock Campaigns, Problems of National Identity and Human Rights in the “Closed City” of Soviet Ukraine, 1975–1984’ in I. Peddie (ed.) Popular Music and Human Rights: Vol. II: World Music, Ashgate, Farnham, pp. 147–160. Zieleniec, A. (2017) ‘Politics, Pastiche, Parody, and Polemics: The DIY Educational Inspiration of The Clash’ in Cohen and Peacock (2017a), pp. 43–64.

291

Index

Allende, Salvador 10, 73, 255 anarchism 8, 9, 36-37, 44, 51, 53, 87-88, 121, 151, 152, 153, 155, 160, 162, 165, 209, 263, 266 anti-fascism 7, 11, 71, 156, 166, 254 anti-racism 71, 109, 123, 136, 163, 166, 172, 199, 238 Baker, The (Barry Auguste) 31, 76, 137, 138, 171, 177, 195, 211, 230, 237 Bragg, Billy 131-132, 168, 174, 176, 178-179, 205, 229, 242, 244-247 capitalism 45-46, 48-49, 81, 87, 93, 94, 97, 99, 100, 106-107, 149, 150, 200-201 anti-capitalism 34, 38-39, 47-48, 75, 124, 172, 202, 209, 238, 272 ethical capitalism 200, 208-209, 231 Chile 73, 75, 86, 112, 169, 170 Clash, The 7-8 conflation with Strummer 21-22 post-Jones version 122-129 Class War (organisation and newspaper) 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160 Communist Party (Britain) 75, 95, 96, 118, 130

Coon, Caroline 2, 39, 133, 194, 197 Crass 9, 52, 53, 57 Cuba 47, 82, 88 D’Ambrosio, Antonino 6, 40, 47, 50, 73, 106, 115, 147, 152, 164, 167, 168, 169, 177, 179, 186, 202, 222, 242, 243, 249, 252 Dylan, Bob 24, 66, 74, 197, 278 Easterhouse (band) 9, 131 Gilbert, Pat 200, 241 Gramsci, Antonio 39, 96, 112 Gramscian 17, 112 Green, Johnny 23, 119, 180, 184, 188, 195 Green Wedge 84, 148, 151 Guevara, Che 1, 117, 120, 165, 119 Guthrie, Woody 18, 51, 72, 74, 112, 247, 278 Headon, Nicky ‘Topper’ 7, 8, 21, 27, 136, 137, 173, 183, 193, 194, 244 Heaton, Paul 136, 137, 173, 244 Howard, Pete 144, 183, 191, 192, 193 humanism 8, 18, 70, 83, 147, 249, 259, 267

292

Index Redskins, The 9, 12, 17, 36, 52, 54, 131, 159, 173, 177, 178, 179 reformism 18, 35, 47, 83, 87, 93, 121, 263, 264 revolution 1, 35, 47, 48, 79, 81-85, 126, 128, 263 revolutionaries 35, 41, 72, 112 revolutionary 4, 35, 45, 51, 88, 121, 202 revolutionist 35, 41-43, 47 Revolutionary Communist Party (American, British) 95, 131, 180 Rhodes, Bernie 7, 30, 71, 76-77, 86, 89, 133, 135, 171, 182, 192, 240 Rock against Racism 94, 96, 130, 134, 158, 159, 163, 166, 167, 170, 171, 197, 199, 245, 246, 276 Rock against the Rich 84, 88, 93, 138, 143, 151-162, 169, 171, 213

Jara, Victor 10, 112, 243 Jones, Mick 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 21, 22, 27, 30, 62, 89, 115, 121, 122, 123, 132, 224, 234 politics of 96, 116-117 relationship with Strummer 102, 105, 184-185, 192, 193, 253 Latino Rockabilly War (LRW), The 8, 25, 68, 143, 151-153, 156, 159, 170, 182, 184, 185, 194 left-wing recording artists 9-10 Leninism 78, 82 Lennon, John 10, 74, 278 Letts, Don 115, 138 libertarianism 77, 87, 209, 263 lyrical analysis 5-6, 58 lyrics, power of 5 Maoism 77, 84, 88, 95, 110, 121 Marley, Bob 10, 278 Marx, Karl 78, 113, 115, 225 Marxism 17, 45-47, 51, 75, 78-80, 82, 97-99, 101 Marxist 8, 9, 35, 40, 174 Mensi (Thomas Mensforth) 66, 248 Mescaleros, The 2, 8, 25, 59, 60, 66, 68, 135, 142, 143, 149, 170, 172, 177, 181, 182, 184, 190, 194, 195, 201, 205, 211, 214, 225, 234, 244, 277 Morello, Tom 2, 42, 90, 179, 243 Morning Star 75, 95 music, as a force for change 7, 13-14, 112, 124 Needs, Kris 29 Nicaragua 35, 46, 47, 82, 83-84, 109, 147, 149, 170, 171, 216, 254, 264 Ochs, Phil 1, 112 primary data, for studying Strummer 30-33

Salewicz, Chris 28, 72 Sandinistas 34-35, 82, 83, 84, 104, 110, 216, 254, 263 secondary sources, for studying Strummer 28-30 Shields, Scott 2, 194, 195 Sheppard, Nick 14, 31, 59, 123, 174, 183, 186, 192, 193, 194, 241, 261 Simonon, Paul 7, 8, 22, 61, 62, 80, 87, 116, 123, 138, 145, 150, 172, 174, 184, 185, 192, 193 politics of 117-118 social democracy 8, 35, 46, 49, 79, 93, 121, 263, 264, 271, 272 social realism 11, 16, 61-62, 67, 90, 102, 131, 150, 161, 188, 252, 273 Socialist Worker 95, 119, 178 socialism 16-18, 35, 47, 70-71, 83-84, 86-87, 93, 263, 271, 273-274 socialist realism 3, 15-19,121, 150, 179, 193, 197, 200, 232, 270-274 Socialist Workers Party (SWP) 54, 72, 81, 94, 95, 96, 118, 129, 131, 178, 263, 272

293

Index Soviet Union 18, 71, 72, 82, 199, 272 Springsteen, Bruce 10, 278 Stalin, Joseph 206 Stalinism 77, 80 Strummer, Joe activism, criticism for lack of 177-179 activist, myth of 163-174 agents of social change, views on 85-88, 87-101 anarchism, views on 88, 155 anti-imperialism, views on 107-109, 211-212 anti-intellectualism 210, 219-220 benefit gigs, playing of 169-171 broken promises 190-191 capitalism, attitude to 106-107 charisma, his 186, 251, 267 children 139-141 characterisation of his politics 36-50, 51 class background 113-116 class, role of in his thinking 97-101 cognitive liberation, attitude to 101-106, 126-127 comparison to other musicians 131, 174, 179, 197 contradictions of 22-23 criticism of 51-57 denial of political impulse 118-120 environmentalism, support for 147-150 ethical capitalism, advocacy of 208-209 father, his 46-47, 74, 113-116, 174 freedom and liberty, views on 96, 121, 140, 222, 224-226 hero, as a 249-251 humanism 205, 220-222, 267 hyperbole, use of 22-23 impact on others, his estimation 236-238 294

impact on others, others’ estimation 238-249 impact, studies of 253-257 impact on others, testimonies from followers 259-269 inactivism, explanation for 174-176 inconsistencies 22-23 intimate relationships 137-138 John Graham Mellor and Joe Strummer 4, 5, 9, 26, 133, 195-196 Labour Party, attitude to 92-94, 205-208 laziness 180-181 leadership in bands 181-184, 192-194 leadership, external aspects 185-190 left-wing parties, attitude to 94-97, 129 lone leader 129-132 lyrical salience 10-12 lyrics, analysis of his 34-35, 59-63, 64-65, 66-68 lyrics, his view on as a force for change 14-15 lyrics, his view on writing his 10-12, 24, 63-64, 65-66, 225 Marxism, attitude to 78-80 national identity 226-231 parenting, his 139-141 political disillusionment 200-205, 223-224 political influences on 72-77 political tributes to 1-2 political violence, views on 110-112 politically most outspoken period 122-123 prophet, as a 252-253 revolution, attitude to 81-85 socialism, attitudes to 70-72, 77-81 socialist belief, move away from 199-200 strikes, attitudes to 89-92 studies of 6 studying, issues in 22-28, 34-35

Index uncertainty, new found 212-218 unswerving commitment, myth of 176-177 vegetarian 147 violence, attitudes to and behaviour 143-147 wealth 75, 155, 181, 191 women, attitudes to 133-137, 141-143 working class, attitude 97-101 youth, his 72-74

Three Johns, The 10, 131, 276 Trotsky, Leon 72, 78, 94 Trotskyism 35, 48, 72, 74, 77, 78, 81, 95 Weller, Paul 56, 97, 131-132, 173, 174, 177, 178, 179, 188, 264 White, Vince (Gregory White) 192, 193, 216, 258

295