Post-Prog tag: should we take it seriously?

Gallifrey wrote: ExittheLemming wrote: If the wider progressive music community (whatever that may be, but as Micky states, of which neither of us is convinced PA plays any part) deems 'post-progressive' as reflecting developments in the real world, then yes, perhaps it does have some value as indicating a distinctive contemporary sound. In discussing this topic with prog fans around the web, most accept that what I have defined as post-prog is a thing and needs to become a thing, most of the skeptics just hate the name. Which is a valid point, the name sucks. A few people think we should call it "Alternative Prog" but that implies a direct fusion of alternative and progressive, which isn't necessarily the case.

Although the fledgling definition you have provided was very thorough and certainly thought provoking, I do have an issue with a couple of points:

Like the original 70’s progressive rock movements, these bands are taking the sound and stretching it to its structural limits – some only slightly, and some a great deal. But despite this, their links to the original progressive rock genre are fleeting,

I don't get this from listening to Muse or Biffy Clyro (as both use very traditional song structures and rock forms to my ears, which neither stretch to any demonstrable limits plus 'the sound' is divorced entirely from 70's progressive rock movements - BTW how can you 'only slightly' stretch something to its structural limits?) The Mars Volta, by way of contrast, do appear to dispense entirely with historical rock forms on occasion and approach borderline RIO/Avant on something like Frances the Mute. You do however state that links to original Prog are 'fleeting' so kudos are due there.

If a band were stretching the structural limits of the original 70's progressive rock movements, I can't fathom why you would predict the resultant music to be relatively accessible and radio friendly? Given the pivotal role that you afford TMV in the creation of a genre they spearheaded, I don't understand how their very inclusion would now be open to question? (Is this like the opposite of Genesis going from Prog to Pop?)

Isn't 'post-progressive' just another way of demarcating progressive rock groups who sound neither like 1st Gen early 70's Prog or the Post-Punk/indie/alt brigades that followed? Surely the plain vanilla rock music of the likes of Muse and Biffy Clyro is malleable enough to withstand the sort of developments you describe withour recourse to demanding yet another label being stuck on the jar?.

I don't even take prog seriously....