Syracuse Ska Forum

I contend that waves in ska do not exist. I maintain that they are Amero-centric and incredibly inaccurate, to the point of being silly. They are nothing more than the invention of modern American "ska" groups in a vain attempt to latch their non-ska music onto the ska collective by painting it as "the next wave", and show an intrinsic lack of understanding of ska on the part of the user. Thus, most of the argument comes down to the term "third wave" since it wasn't until the term "third wave" was coined that the original ska era and the 2tone revival were coined the "first" and "second" waves, respectively.

The crux of my argument is solidly based in the very observable fact that the three wave theory of ska is at best a blunt tool attempting to measure a very continuous, fluid movement. The first problem lies in the ever-shifting definition of "third wave". Some claim it to mean the beginning of the "ska boom" in the mid 90s here in the US, and others claim it to mean the beginning of ska in the United States back in the mid 80s. Both are inherently flawed.

If one means "third wave" as the mid 90s ska rape (and the subsequent bands and fans), then one can only apply the term to those bands that suddenly sprung up during the money frenzy in the US (and the current bands that emulate the style). This is an incredibly narrow slice of American ska, and thus the term "third wave" is pointless, only describing a tiny slice of ska in the country. Why have a special term for such a minority? This is, of course, assuming these bands were ska - most were not, but I disregarded that point for the sake of argument.

Furthermore, ska kids sometimes argue that the "waves" monkier is justified because it describes times when ska got popular. Seeing as how "waves" suddenly appeared in the US in the mid 90s, let's look there. A wave is a highpoint of the water around it; the same substance, but more energy, more power (or in our ska case, more mainstream attention). The bands to suddenly appear in the mid 90s that spearheaded the "third wave" had no roots in American ska up to that point. This was not attention suddenly bestowed upon an underground scene. This was bands who suddenly appeared for fame and fortune, such as Save Ferris, Reel Big Fish, Goldfinger, Less Than Jake, and many others. They were not composed of the "same stuff" as the decade-old ska scene around them. They were an alien entity - this was not a wave of American ska. It was a newly-created entity. Thus, this new popularity was not a wave of ska.

There are issues with those who consider "third wave" as any American ska. They often make reference to bands like the Toasters, Bim Skala Bim, Donkey Show, and others. This interpretation of "third wave" also has holes. First, how can a single term "third wave" describe the many different sounds in American ska at the time? You had traditionally oriented bands like Donkey Show, obciously 2tone influenced bands like the Toasters, as well as bands mixing ska with many influences, like Jump With Joey (jazz, swing, latin). How can this one magical term encompass all of these different styles? "Third wave" is close to useless in this instance.

The dates involved also draw confusion between "second" and "third" wave. The Toasters released "Beat Up" in 1984. Why aren't they "second wave"? The Selecter and Bad Manners had releases after that. Why aren't they "third wave"? Kids often refer to the "first wave" for the orginal ska era of 60-66. Thus how can we use waves to describe modern bands who play authentic ska? We can't, as we'll see in the Dr. Ring-Ding example below.

Furthermore, how can these bands be a "wave" when they themselves didn't say so? Check the liner notes of these albums - "wave" doesn't appear until the mid 90s. "Waves" are a invention of the mid 90s corporate "ska" bands; if the "third wave" started in the mid 80s, we'd expect the bands to have noted this and not have to wait for it to be bestowed upon them by ignorant kids 15 years later.

At this point, we can clearly see that the whole "wave" theory is incredibly inaccurate. Regardless of how you describe "third wave", it's a useless term that does more harm than good in terms of clairifying a certain kind of ska. Seeing as how "third wave" doesn't exist, there's no reason to number any sort of "wave" before it. However, there is one larger flaw in both interpretations that I purposely withheld until this point. Namely, waves are Amero-centric. Seeing as how "waves" are the product of the mid 90s American corporate-led "ska revival", one easily sees the ignorance in the true nature of ska all over the world.

After the 2tone revival in UK, ska became a strong, cohesive underground movement in Europe, from the mid 80s to the present day. That has spread virtually all over the world (although I have yet to find a ska band from China or India). Thus, when kids use the term "second wave" or "third wave" to describe bands, they're missing out on literally most of the ska that has ever existed since 2tone.

Imagine a dialogue between two American "ska" kids, of course decked out in checkers and a Five Iron Frenzy tshirt. One kid says "I heard of this band called Dr. Ring-Ding and the Senior All-Stars", and the other says "what kind of ska are they?" Can the kid say "first wave"? Certainly not, "first wave" ended in the 1960s! Can the kid say "second wave"? Nope. They're much too late for that! Can the kid say "third wave"? Nope, because regardless of which definition you use of "third wave", they both only work when talking about American bands! "Ska" got popular in the US in the mid 90s, remember, not Europe. So we can't called Ring-Ding "third wave" since they (and every other ska band outside the US) were not part of that. How useless is that? Ironically, these kids call people like me elitist, yet they support a structure of ska literally defined around American music! That sounds pretty elitist to me Smile

Let's do another example. Let's take the Strange Tenants from Australia, a band from the early 90s. Are they "first wave"? Of course not. Are they "second wave"? Nope, much too late for that. Are they "third wave"? No again, because they don't fit into either definition of "third wave".

For emphasis: "waves" are incredibly Amero-centric and simply don't work once you leave the limited scope of American mid 90s trumpet punk. Seeing as how most of the world's ska, past and present, was not on MTV in the mid 90s here in the US, why are we use a structure for ska history all relative to it? Any structural pattern for ska that ignores and does not work for most of the ska in the world shouldn't even exist! Thus, it's clearly and invention of these mid 90s "pop punk with horn" bands and have absolutely no use for the ska world. Our two hypothetical kids, above will thus have to abandon the "wave" theory to talk about ska and use more workable terms. I can think of more ska bands that don't fit into the wave theory than do.

Like I said above, some kids argue "waves" are fine because it describes when ska was popular in the mainstream. I would comdemn that as short-sighted and petty. Why should we describe ska by it's mainstream attention? The underground scenes have given much more to ska than mainstream attention ever could. The underground scenes have kept ska culture alive while mainstream attention just profited from it. To put ska relative to only when it was popular is an insult to the genre and its fans and bands.

In closing, I have one more point to make. I contend that the "wave" theory persists so much amongst American "ska" youth out of ignorance. They do not know about the incredibly strong and, more importantly, continous ska scene in Europe since the decline of the 2tone revivial. On a more basic level, these kids don't understand how popular ska is all over the world, and has been for a couple decades. Since they don't see these continuous "connectors", they hear just about the Skatalites, the Specials and Reel Big Fish, and consider that the only ska to ever exist. There is tons of great ska to exist between these "waves", often better than the "waves" themselves. Like I said in an old thread, I find the late 80s European ska much more enjoyable than the 2tone revival.

So that's my discourse. Waves are inaccurate, unworkable, and Amero-centric. They fail in every way imaginable and show a fundamental misunderstanding of the genre.

I believe it was Noah Wildman who once theorized that ska (trad), ska-punk (2Tone) and ska-punk-punk (you do the math) were the three main branches (at that time). He expanded on the idea in the article (which I clearly no longer have), and I remember it being fairly well developed.

Well, the thing I thought was most interesting about that take was that he was recognizing (in a way that many people don't) that the Specials (and the like) were very influenced by punk rock.