the clash _ diffusion of an innovation

Allison Jones 310268141 ARIN6901 Network Society - Final Essay 1

ARIN6901 NETWORK SOCIETY – MAJOR ESSAY ALLISON JONES | 310268141

ESSAY TOPIC: Question 7 (adapted from Q6): Using the perspectives of network-related theories such as Social Network Theory or Actor-Network Theory, critically analyse the introduction and diffusion of an historical social and/or technological artefact or practice (for example, an idea, object, political movement, method, system, software or configuration).

“We didn’t have a plan…we just wanted The Clash to reach everybody.” (Mick Jones quoted in Gilbert, 2004: 213)

The Clash: Joe Strummer, Paul Simonon, Topper Headon, and Mick Jones at a New York press conference in 1981. Photo credit: Associated Press

Introduction

The story of The Clash’s trajectory from the cultural and political hotbed of 1976 West London to

large stadium and festival shows around the world will be examined primarily through the lens of

Everett Rogers’ theory of the diffusion of innovations. Biographical evidence detailed by music

historians and insider interviews will be used to illustrate the key points of diffusion theory for this

analysis. The band itself is the innovation of interest to this essay, as expressed in their musical

output, cultural impact and in their political stance. The punk music movement is the related

overarching music innovation which The Clash were initially a part of. Modern music history is

littered with bands that never found success and it is clear that the success of The Clash is due to the

combined effect of the innovation itself, media coverage and influential individuals within their


network, known as the ‘innovators’, and the interpersonal influence in the wider group of ‘early

adopters’ and the ‘early majority’ thereafter.

Watts warns that the analysis of the diffusion of an innovation should not be weighted too heavily

towards the characteristics of an innovation itself – “the structure of the network can have as great

an influence on the success or failure of an innovation as the inherent appeal of the innovation

itself” (Watts: 2004, 244). As such, the diffusion will be examined by primarily following the “over-

time sequence” (Rogers, 2003: 269) of adoption through idealised adopter categories. The influence

and impact of The Clash were significant during their 1976 to 1985 lifespan and also today, however

it would be both naïve and inaccurate to assert that the band reached ‘critical mass’ or produced a

‘global information cascade’ in Duncan Watts’ terms.

Where relevant, other complementary theory will be used, including the “bottom-up” model of

diffusion, Granovetter’s ‘strength of weak ties’ and writings by Duncan Watts. Undoubtedly, the

milieu the band emerged in, with its particular political and societal forces, also played a significant

role in the success of The Clash, informing their music and politics and providing an environment

ripe for exploitation.

In the work of abstracting the cultural impact of The Clash to an application of network theory, it is

important to note that it is not the intention of this paper to form a reductionist picture that

diminishes the complexities and personal significance of the band to individuals and wider society.

Attributes of the innovation

Rogers’ definition of an innovation is as simple as a spontaneous or planned idea or technology that

is perceived as new to an individual (or ‘adopter’). Furthermore, the diffusion of an innovation is the

process of communication over time through channels of communication and influence. The speed

of diffusion and the choice to adopt is influenced by the “attributes of an innovation.”(Rogers, 2003)

Favourable attributes are just one of the required elements for the diffusion of an innovation, a

detailed exploration of these as they apply to The Clash is contained in Appendix A.

Adopter Categories

Although Rogers warns that the adopter types are idealised and generalised to an extent necessary

for comparative purposes, his framework is still the most suitable for examining the diffusion of The

Clash. However, unlike Rogers’ generalisation stating that the earlier adopters are usually of a

higher socioeconomic group, innovators and early adopters in some innovations reverse this

generalisation. In the so-called “bottom-up diffusion model”, subcultural styles that emerge from

lower socioeconomic groups are then adopted by those in higher status groups. A younger age


becomes the symboliser of prestige in the innovator category rather than social status (Crane, 1999).

This was certainly the case with The Clash whose members were all under 25 at the time they

formed. Most of their early adopters were also in a similar age bracket, with a few exceptions.

The Innovators: June 1976 onwards

Rogers states that innovators possess a characteristic of ‘venturesomeness’, with an interest in new

ideas that move them out of their existing social circles into new, more cosmopolite relationships in

their desire to experience risk and daring (Rogers, 2003). Innovators are responsible for bringing in

outside influences to form the innovation, and must be able to tolerate the high degree of

uncertainty in doing so. An innovation often involves a clique of innovators sharing friendships and

communication patterns (Rogers, 2003) - this is certainly true of the punk scene that emerged in

1976 London with Crossley identifying that it emerged from a “pre-existing, multi-layered network”

(2008: 96) that connected the actors involved in the early UK punk movement. It was this densely

connected network of actors possessing a high level of ‘degree’ (number of connections) that gave

the punk movement its early coherence and allowed it to flourish. (Crossley, 2008)

The story of The Clash features the intersection of multiple individual innovators directly involved

with the band and innovators on the periphery. The innovators were: Joe Strummer, lyricist and

lead singer; Mick Jones, lead guitarist and composer, and Bernie Rhodes, the band’s controversial

manager. Malcolm McLaren, creator and manager of The Sex Pistols, and his partner Vivienne

Westwood were considered leading lights of the nascent English punk scene, situated on the

periphery of the story of The Clash and influential as a result of their successful SEX shop which was

frequented by many young punks. McLaren and Rhodes were key acquaintances, sharing a passion

for left field politics and culture, maintaining a level of friction and competition in managing their

respective interests. As will become clear, the intersection of multiple eccentric and strong-willed

innovators was both a constructive and destructive force for The Clash. Just as the innovators helped

to propel the band from down at heel London venues and squats to supporting The Who at New

York’s Shea stadium, the friction resulting from their interaction resulted in numerous dramatic

events and the band’s eventual demise.

Watts emphasises the importance of not placing too much emphasis on the role of innovators in the

diffusion of an innovation (or “information cascade” in his terminology) – arguing that “the

difference between a hugely successful innovation and an abject failure can be generated entirely

through the dynamics of interactions between players who might have had nothing to do with its

introduction.” (2003: 250) A more detailed exploration of the innovators is detailed in Appendix B.


Opinion Leaders and Early adopters: 1976-78

Original poster for the ‘Night of Pure Energy’ gig held at London’s Institute of Contemporary Arts. Credit: The Clash

Since the punk inner circle was densely connected and insular, the challenge for the band was to

emerge from the cliquish punk scene to a wider audience. To examine this, Granovetter’s concept

of weak ties and bridges are crucial, along with a continuation of Rogers’ ‘over-time sequence’ by

looking at the early adopters.

Early adopters are described by Rogers variously as being more integrated in the social system than

the innovators, possessing a high degree of opinion leadership and respect from peers. They must

also possess greater acceptance of risk and uncertainty than later adopters (2003). The early

adopters in the story of The Clash display these traits in almost textbook fashion.

In the music industry, opinion leaders such as Artist and Repertoire (“A&R”) staff and music

journalists are employed specifically to stay ahead of the curve, yet as Rogers believes, must

maintain the respect of their followers by exhibiting sound judgement regarding the adoption and

promotion of innovations (2003). The opinion leaders in this case are considered only as good as the

last band they discover and consistently work to uncover new artists, often from the fringes of

society.

After an initial period of writing songs and playing supporting gigs, the band attracted a number of

influential and well-placed ‘opinion leaders’ and ‘early adopters’– from record company executives

to music journalists, venue managers and fans. Rhodes was keenly aware of the need to garner

support from the opinion leaders, organising a showcase gig at the band’s rehearsal space in August


1976, inviting influential music journalists. The show was a success with the Sounds review

comparing the group to “a runaway train…so powerful, they’re the first new group who came along

who can really scare The Sex Pistols shitless…” (Strongman, 207: 33). They also attracted attention

from across the Atlantic from famed American journalist Lester Bangs among others. Later, during

the 1977 White Riot tour, mainstream press coverage in the Evening Standard detailed the damage

fans had done to one particular venue, ripping out dozens of the seats. Although mainstream media

outlets were not adopters of the band in the early days, they did provide potential adopters with

information about the innovation.

Complicating matters in the adoption at this stage was that some of the opinion leaders and early

adopters, including the well-placed Charles Shaar Murray of the NME, were not impressed by the

band’s performances. Punk was still considered a public nuisance and in early 1977, the band was

accused of selling out by signing to CBS. In fact, the head of CBS in the UK, Maurice Oberstein was

widely viewed to have taken a significant risk in signing The Clash, recalling that “there was a level of

hysteria within the music industry, that this is a music we shouldn’t be involved in. There is an

inherent fear of the unknown”. (Savage, 2001: 303). The band’s relationship with their early

adopters was not always straightforward: due to the nature of business strategies and the resulting

conflict with artistic integrity that often characterises cultural industries, CBS released the single

Remote Control without the band’s prior knowledge, causing significant tension and distrust.

Punk fans also took great risk in adopting the overarching punk innovation that included The Clash,

facing harassment from police and subcultural foes, Gilbert writing of the “subcultural unease” being

stirred by the new punk groups towards the more established and dominant ‘Teddy Boy’ subculture

(2004: 114). Interestingly, during the 1977 White Riot UK tour, the band were able to convert a

group of anti-punk “rugger bugger students and football yobs” who had attended a show with the

intent to cause trouble, but were converted by the band’s energetic performance and the ecstatic

reaction of sections of the crowd (Strongman, 2007: 200). Clearly, seeing the innovation in person

was enough to reduce the uncertainty that Rogers identifies as a barrier to adoption. This reduction

of uncertainty was also facilitated throughout the band’s career partly by the media exposure they

received.

The early adopters were located in disparate social groups – in radical fashion circles via the

McLaren/Westwood connection, fledgling socialist organisations, the West Indian immigrant

community of West London through the band’s appreciation for its culture, young music fans, music

journalists and others in the music business. Diversity was a recurring theme throughout the band’s

lifespan – they also made a point of employing tour support acts as diverse, and seemingly at odds

with their own music, as Bo Diddley and Grandmaster Flash. It appears that the band were


constantly striving to reach into different fan bases and also introduce their own fans to other music

genres. The diversity of their music and political leanings reduced uncertainty in potential adopters

specifically by creating a level of credible compatibility with each different group. For example, if a

fan of reggae music heard the band’s reggae-infused tracks such as Police and Thieves, they would

already be familiar with that genre and therefore less uncertain of their appreciation for it. In this

way, the band acted almost as a ‘bridge’ between disparate groups, meaning the innovation had the

chance to diffuse between groups as Granovetter proposes, allowing the band to overcome the

issue of homophily1 acting as a barrier to diffusion. Heterophily worked in the band’s favour in the

early stages of their career.

Importantly, by the end of 1977, the band had achieved considerable success in a short period of

time with a major label record deal and a UK headline tour, however Salewicz points out that “most

music fans and the music business still hated the very notion of The Clash…they were in the

slipstream of the flak thrown the way of The Sex Pistols…and also because the Establishment stuck

to their guns in insisting that the group ‘couldn’t play’” (2006: 210). Nevertheless, punk as a

movement had emerged from the underground and into the wider public consciousness, in the

process becoming a “huge, nationwide phenomenon” (Gilbert, 2004: 161). Importantly, this does

not necessarily indicate widespread adoption, rather it indicates a level of awareness of the

innovation. The innovation had some way yet to reach the later adopter categories.

Early Majority and the beginnings of the Late Majority 1979-1985

Rogers views the early majority as one of the most numerous of the adopter categories - one third of

a system belongs to this group - and they are much more deliberate than other adopter categories,

taking a substantial amount of time to adopt. Importantly, they are a key factor in the diffusion of an

innovation due to their position in the network which affords them a level of ‘interconnectedness’

although they are lacking in opinion leadership (2003).

The movement of the band into the early majority and into the beginnings of the ‘late majority’ was

facilitated by four significant factors:

Firstly, levels of empathy between the band and the public were a consistent feature

throughout their career and may have played the most significant part during the ‘early

majority’ phase when those most uncertain are the ones to adopt. Rogers and Bhowmik

1 Rogers and Bhowmik define homophily and heterophily as follows: “Homophily refers to the degree to which pairs of

individuals who interact are similar with respect to certain attributes, such as beliefs, values, education, social status, etc. Heterophily is the degree to which pairs of individuals who interact are different with respect to certain attributes.” (Rogers and Bhowmik, 1970-71: 526)


believe that empathy is a powerful tool in overcoming homophilous barriers to adoption –

“when a source has high empathy with a heterophilous receiver, they are really

‘homophilous’ in a social-psychological sense” (1970-71: 534).

The story of The Clash is distinguished by the levels of empathy shown by the band towards

fans and reciprocated. During an early tour, a fan gave Joe Strummer his shirt and Strummer

returned the gesture with the jacket he was wearing (Strongman, 2007). The band were well

known for treating fans more like comrades and equals rather than subjects. In Japan, the

band insisted that they would never play there unless venues allowed fans to stand to watch

the shows rather than remain seated as was the tradition of the time (Salewicz, 2006).

Savage writes that, compared to The Sex Pistols, The Clash “were warmer and more of the

people…more human.” (2001: 231) An element of reciprocal empathy, with fans seeing

reflections of themselves in the band members, may have also been a significant factor in

individuals choosing to adopt the innovation due to the band’s insistence on treating fans as

equals, with Green and Barker noting that The Clash were the opposite of the “…rock

musicians…*who+ led glamorous lives and stayed aloof from the common people who

bought their records…” (Green and Barker, 2003: 28)

Secondly, the band’s chart positions and media coverage, both within music and more

general outlets, were increasing in frequency, meaning that the level of awareness of the

band was rising thereby delivering on Rogers’ ‘observability’ of an innovation. During this

period, the band achieved multiple top twenty singles and top ten albums including 1979’s

London Calling 1979 and 1982’s Combat Rock, featuring their biggest hit Rock the Casbah.

They also enjoyed more positive high profile media exposure in major territories, including

coverage on the BBC, Saturday Night Live and coverage on all seven New York television

channels during their mid 1981 Bonds Casino residencies which band insiders have all

identified as a key turning point in transforming the band from a “cool, alternative group to

a million-selling top ten act” (Gilbert, 2004: 294). They had even finally managed to convert

long time sceptics, including Shaar Murray of the NME who praised their London Calling

album.

Third, as previously outlined, the early adopters were in a diverse set of networks meaning

that through weak ties, the possibility of later adopters hearing about the band was high. As

filmmaker Don Letts, one of the early champions of the band and heavily involved in the

punk clique, reflected: “There were two shops on the King's Road in the 70s that attracted

disaffected youth: my shop, Acme Attractions and…SEX. Friendships were made by people


who were attracted by their differences.”

(Grundy, 2010: 1)

This seems to indicate that Granovetter’s notion of the “strength of weak ties”, allowing

information to spread across different groups, was a key factor in the adoption by early

adopters along somewhat heterophilous lines. By the time the innovation had reached the

early majority, who are considered more risk-averse than innovators and early adopters,

homophily may have played a more substantial role in influencing more adopters to take the

leap to adopt. According to Rogers, communication from media channels provides

awareness of the innovation and the influence of their near peers in interpersonal

communication then provides the final trigger for adoption (2003). Band publicist Kosmo

Vinyl, speaking of the audience members at the Bonds shows, identified that the band had

finally been adopted by a certain type of fan:

“In those days, there were bands that all the hipsters in town knew…plus they’d

bring along their friends as well…It’s not longer this…“elite”…it breaks out.” (Gilbert,

2004: 299)

Lastly, the band’s musical style softened and broadened consistently, reducing the apparent

risk to an adopter – as Duncan Watts believes, most of us are “happy to jump on to the

bandwagon once the risk of looking silly appears minimal” (2003: 227) . Gilbert writes that in

1978, the band began to soften “their abrasive punk armour” (2004: 106) and the material

they recorded became more diverse, meaning that the band “musically…could steer a

course beyond punk while retaining their credibility” (2004:107).

The band’s most successful album Combat Rock, which featured dance hit Rock the Casbah, was the

marker signifying the band’s entry into the late majority adopter category, achieving top ten chart

placings in both the US and UK and wide exposure in mass media channels such as MTV and Rolling

Stone magazine. Rogers notes that the late majority tend to adopt after the ‘average’ member of a

system with peer pressure a major influence in the adoption (2003). Mainstream media coverage

and high chart positions would have removed most risk for the later adopters. Drummer Topper

Headon noted that by 1982, the band had well and truly reached the mainstream: “…normal people

who did a job and went to the office would come and see us, so we were breaking into the

mainstream” (Alexander, 2008).


Joe Strummer and Mick Jones on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine,1980. Photo credit: Rolling Stone

The band had managed to break out of the ‘little worlds’ that Watts believes is inherent in the early

days of an innovation, reaching a more mainstream audience and winning over long time critics.

However, this success and the constant tension between the innovators in the group eventually lead

firstly to the sacking and reinstatement of Bernie Rhodes and then the sacking of Mick Jones in 1983,

spelling the end of the classic Clash line up before their eventual demise in 1985.

Critical Mass

Whether the innovation reached ‘critical mass’, or became self-sustaining, before The Clash’s

dissolution in 1985 is not clear. Whilst they reached the early stages of the late majority, the band’s

constant touring and promotion muddies the evidence required to prove the innovation had

become self-sustaining. Evidence from observers suggests that the band hadn’t reached a level of

ubiquity in the public’s view. According to music critic Phil Alexander, US mainstream media

appearances of the bands were characterised by a level of utter confusion, with interviewers unable

to:

“reconcile the band’s ‘punk’ reputation with their polite demeanour. Both encounters are

uncomfortable and both serve to illustrate just how far The Clash had to travel – musically,

ideologically and, in these instances, conversationally - in order to be…understood, by the

mainstream US media.”

(Alexander, 2008)


Alexander also believes that, for all their ambition, the band were never destined to be a world-

beating stadium band. Strongman adds that “The Clash…would always feel that their audience was

never quite big enough, their impact not as massive…as the sixties bands” (2007: 205). The last word

should go to bassist Paul Simonon who says “…I’m glad we stopped…when we were about to be

mega-huge and enormously rich.” (Salewicz, 2006: 25)

Conclusion

In describing the band’s widespread appeal, Nicholas Wroe writes:

“…that extraordinarily potent combination of idealistic heart-on-sleeve leftwing politics,

perfect pitch musical heritage and impeccable rebel style was utterly irresistible to a

certain sort of male who came to musical consciousness sometime in the late 70s.” (Wroe,

2006)

Whilst this type of quote is suggestive of an inevitability to the success of The Clash, as Watts

identifies, greatness “is a consensus arrived at by large numbers of individuals, each observing the

opinions of others as much as exercising their own independent judgment.” (Watts, 2003: 245).

Popular music fandom in particular has been marked as an “affective alliance”, a “coalition of shared

affection for a particular music.” (Seiler, 2000: 205)

This paper has demonstrated that diffusion of innovations generally tend to follow a particular path

of adoption through different idealised adopter categories, with the attributes of the innovation a

key factor along with the informational power of media channels and the influence of interpersonal

relationships. Importantly, none of these factors alone are responsible for diffusion, the interplay

between them is what drives the diffusion of the innovation through the network. On the balance of

evidence available, The Clash as an innovation followed the diffusion framework until their

dissolution in 1985. The innovation certainly appeared to be on the cusp of reaching critical mass.


APPENDIX A – ATTRIBUTES OF THE INNOVATION

Following is a detailed examination of Rogers’ ‘attributes of innovations’ as they apply to The Clash:

Relative Advantage refers to the perception that the innovation is better than that which precedes it

(Rogers, 2003). In the case of The Clash, they emerged as early exponents of British punk, a radical

new form of music. Consumption of music is often characterised by the attraction of consumers to

all that is new – genres and artists constantly emerge or die out. Visiting subcultural theory in

relation to punk suggests that the formation of subcultures is a type of ‘solution’ to the ‘problem’ of

the constrained societal settings of individuals – a solution arising from the interaction between a

“number of actors with similar problems of adjustment” (Cohen, 1955: 48).

Punk may be viewed as a solution by examining the societal context in which the innovation diffuses.

Diffusion scholars note that societal context is significant in that a high degree of traditionalism

results in “social inertia in adopting new practices and ideas” (Wejnert, 2002: 314). According to

both Savage and Gilbert, punk emerged during a period of severe UK economic problems and social

discontent centred around post-war policy failures, with Gilbert writing “there was seeping unease

about the nation itself, a deep, indistinct feeling that Britain was ailing…musically…all the real action

was happening on the periphery.” (Gilbert, 2004: 123). Britain had well and truly arrived at the end

of the “post-war consensus” which was a relatively comfortable period of social cohesion that

benefitted the country (Gilbert, 2004). Returning to diffusion theory, this solution or innovation

would only be viewed as advantageous to the innovators and early adopters in the first stages of

diffusion. It would take some time for it to be viewed in a positive light by the other adopter

categories. The Clash themselves were also a solution for their fans – according to Gilbert, “they

were like a family for the disaffected, disillusioned and dispossessed.” (2004: 365).

Compatibility is reflective of how adoption and speed of diffusion of the innovation is tied to how it

may be complementary to experiences, values and needs of potential adopters. If an innovation is

incompatible with any of these elements, a transformation in any of these elements or in the

innovation itself will need to occur to allow for adoption to take place (Rogers, 2003). Certainly, in

their early days especially, The Clash and punk as a movement were viewed as confrontational and

controversial, embodying a rejection of the hippy and student culture, the middle class and authority

(Lentini, 2003; Crossley, 2008). However, the subject matter of Clash songs was very much of a

reflection of their observations of the world around them, rather than being insular and inward-

looking. Many of their songs featured London and UK-centric subject matter, especially in their early

years and later, their scope expanded to feature more global content. This outward-looking subject

matter combined with the quality of the music lent them gravitas and credibility as a band, arguably

benefitting their perceived compatibility with potential adopters.


Complexity is a reference to the innovation’s level of difficulty to use or understand (Rogers, 2003).

The Clash’s musical output required no special knowledge in terms of usage, however in terms of

potential adopters being able to understand The Clash as a new entity, this element would

undoubtedly be more of a factor in relation to their music being part of the new, radical genre that

was punk. Additionally, The Clash held left-leaning socialist political views and oftentimes were

perceived as contradictory in attitude and behaviour, as was the case with their 1977 major label

record deal with CBS and Strummer’s choice to live in the home of Jasper Conran, part of the

wealthy Conran dynasty. This complexity resulted in a backlash from very early adopters, who

accused the band of selling out, and it continued to cause resistance from potential later adopters.

(Gilbert, 2004)

Trialability specifies that an innovation that can be trialled first before formal adoption has a higher

chance of adoption since a trial will reduce the uncertainty an adopter may otherwise feel (Rogers,

2003). Music certainly is an appropriate exemplar of this attribute – not only is there a low cost to

the adoption, with purchase of a 7” single for example, but radio play and acquaintances provided

potential adopters with avenues allowing the innovation to be trialled with no cost or significant

drawbacks. A potential adopter may purchase a 7” single before progressing to concert attendance

and purchase of full length albums. The Clash released approximately twenty diverse 7” singles

during their career and were considered innovative in their insistence of keeping the costs of their

double and triple albums to that of a single album.

Observability is the degree to which an innovation can be observed by individuals. The more visible

an innovation is, the higher chance it has of being considered for adoption as it tends to stimulate

conversation amongst neighbours or peers (Rogers, 2003). The Clash could be observed via existing

adopters throughout their career and via early adopters such as niche music media initially, including

the Sniffin’ Glue fanzine and Melody Maker, then finally to more mainstream media outlets, such as

the BBC, as their success grew. One early example of high profile media coverage that may have

benefitted The Clash was the December 1976 interview in which their punk peers The Sex Pistols

earned the tabloid headline “The Filth and The Fury” after a particularly incendiary television

interview. Although The Clash quickly moved on from being a straight “punk” act, in the early days

they were very much viewed as part of this scene, both benefitting from it and being hindered by it.


APPENDIX B – THE INNOVATORS

The band formed as a direct result of the actions of their manager Bernie Rhodes who pieced the

group together from a pool of talent he was grooming to fulfil “the plan fermenting inside his ever

active brain” (Salewicz, 2006: 153). He included those he had previously managed and Strummer,

who he had identified as a potential future lead singer whilst the latter was a member of the 101ers

gigging around London. Rhodes would emerge as a key figure in the band’s story, considered a risk

taker for wearing ‘Teddy Boy’ clothes in direct opposition to the punk aesthetic and someone for

whom “caution wasn’t a part of his makeup” (Green and Barker, 2000: 44). Rhodes later became the

manager of many bands with differing levels of success including The Specials and Dexy’s Midnight

Runners, clearly not someone to shy away from new, uncertain ventures. Rhodes used psychological

tactics in his management of the band, injecting harsh critique in their environment and giving

conflicting signals, ostensibly to create “creative tension” (Green and Barker, 2000: 106).

Joe Strummer, the lead singer and considered the heart and conscience of the band, is the most

obvious innovator in The Clash’s circle. Strummer was born John Mellor in Turkey, to an English

diplomat father and Scottish mother. The constant movement of the family to various diplomatic

postings, followed by the move to boarding school aged nine and his brother’s suicide in Strummer’s

later teenage years, resulted in a distinct lack of strong family ties. Reflecting on his boarding school

days, Strummer later commented: “I had to pretend my parents didn’t exist” (Gilbert, 2004: 8). In a

continuation of his lack of strong ties, at the time the band formed in June 1976, Strummer rejected

his hippy lifestyle and “Woody” pseudonym to reinvent himself as a punk troubadour, residing in

filthy London squats. Interviewed years later, Strummer said: “Part of punk was that you had to shed

all of what you knew before…we were almost Stalinist in the way that we insisted you had to cast off

all your friends, everything you’d ever known . . . in a frenzied attempt to create something new”

(Light, 2008: 1). After seeing The Sex Pistols perform, Strummer instinctively knew that this was

where the future of music lay, deciding to leave the 101ers to form The Clash, after an approach by

Rhodes and Jones in June 1976 (Gilbert, 2004).

Mick Jones, the last of the innovators to be profiled, was the creator of the band’s “zeitgeist musical

arrangements” (Salewicz, 2006: 3), forming a classic partnership with Strummer and in possession of

a wealth of recorded music not necessarily of the sort expected from a punk musician who wrote of

rejecting Elvis and the Rolling Stones: “pop music, black and white, Elvis albums sharing space with

reggae and thirties blues…” (Green and Barker, 2000: 73). He also appears to demonstrate a lack of

strong early ties, due to his parent’s divorce and his subsequent home life with his grandmother.


Lastly, the innovators launch the new idea in the social system by importing the innovation from

outside the system’s boundaries (Rogers, 2003). Indeed, it is widely acknowledged by punk

historians that the UK punk scene was influenced to an extent by external forces including US ‘punk’2

bands The New York Dolls and The Stooges, by garage rock, reggae, 1950s rock music and was also

considered to incorporate elements of Situationism and Dadaism (Crossley: 2008). Westwood and

McLaren were inspired by the gay and fetish underground scenes in the creation of the clothes sold

at SEX shop that they hoped would reach a wider market. More specifically, The Clash appropriated

many diverse music and fashion styles in the development and progression of the band, including

Jackson Pollock style paint splattered clothes, militaristic symbols and of course, the many musical

styles from rockabilly to rap.

2 These bands were not generally considered to be ‘punk’ at this stage as the scene did not yet have a label to

identify itself. Refer to Crossley.


REFERENCES

Alexander, P. (2008) The Clash Versus America, Accessed from: http://www.mojo4music.com/blog/2008/10/the_clash_versus_america_1.html Last accessed: 9/10/10

Cohen, A. (1955) ‘A General Theory of Subcultures’ in Gelder, K. and Thornton, S. (eds) (1997), The

Subcultures reader, pp.44-54, Routledge: London Crane, D. (1999) ‘Diffusion Models and Fashion: A Reassessment’, in Annals of the American Academy of

Political and Social Science, Vol. 566, pp. 13-24 Crossley, N. (2008) ‘Pretty Connected: The Social Network of the early UK punk movement’ in

Theory, Culture and Society, Vol. 25(6): 89–116 Gilbert, P. (2004) Passion is a Fashion : The real story of The Clash,

Aurum Press: London

Granovetter, M. (1973) ‘The Strength of Weak Ties’ in The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 78, No. 6 (May, 1973), pp. 1360-1380

Gray, M. (2004) The Clash: Return of the last gang in town, Helter Skelter: London

Green, J. and Barker, G. (2003) A Riot of our own: Night and Day with The Clash, Orion Books: London

Grundy, G. (2010) This much I know: Don Letts

Accessed at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/aug/22/don-letts-this-much-know Last accessed: 9/10/10

Light, A. (2008) Punk Deluxe Accessed from: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/07/books/review/Light-t.html?_r=1&ref=the_clash Last accessed: 9/10/10

Lentini, P. (2003) 'Punk's Origins: Anglo-American syncretism' in Journal of Intercultural Studies, 24: 2, pp.153 — 174

Rogers, E. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed),

Free Press: New York Rogers, E. and Bhowmik, D. (1970-71) ‘Homophily-Heterophily: Relational Concepts for Communication

Research’ in The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 523-538

Salewicz, C. (2006) Redemption Song: The definitive biography of Joe Strummer, Harper Collins: London

http://www.mojo4music.com/blog/2008/10/the_clash_versus_america_1.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/aug/22/don-letts-this-much-know

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/07/books/review/Light-t.html?_r=1&ref=the_clash

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/07/books/review/Light-t.html?_r=1&ref=the_clash


Savage, J. (2001) England’s Dreaming, Faber and Faber: London

Seiler, C. (2000) ‘The commodification of rebellion: Rock culture and consumer capitalism’ in Gottdiener , M. (ed)New forms of consumption : consumers, culture, and commodification, pp. 203-226, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers: Lanham, MD

Strongman, P. (2007) Pretty Vacant: A History of Punk, Orion Books: London

Watts, D. (2003) Six Degrees: The sciene of a connected age, Vintage Books: London

Wejnert, B. (2002)’Integrating Models of Diffusion of Innovations: A Conceptual Framework’ in Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 28: pp. 297-326

Wroe, N. (2006) Hits and myths Accessed from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2006/dec/09/biography.popandrock Last accessed: 9/10/10

http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Oek-PyR-70UC&oi=fnd&pg=PA203&dq=%22critical+mass%22+%22popular+music%22&ots=n2zAD9xXEe&sig=IOk8XX5D0QlHl14cDGHmzKpqAFU

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2006/dec/09/biography.popandrock

the clash _ diffusion of an innovation

Documents