If anybody isn't familiar with the term groupthink, it basically means when a number of people come to a decision because each person thinks that everyone else would want to, although no one in the group actually does.

And it seems odd that by about 1977 not one member of Genesis was really playing prog. Gabriel's solo career, while undoubtedly intelligent and forward thinking, in no way conformed to any traditional expectations of progressive rock. And it need hardly be said that Genesis's efforts without Gabriel (still three members of "the" lineup) pretty much outright rejected prog - recent quotations from Collins and Hackett (is Hackett's solo work particularly in a "prog" vein? I've only listened to one early album very quietly, so I can't really judge) both contain similar sentiments, whatever the context they've been taken out of. As for Tony Banks I couldn't say, although what little I've heard seems far more to pander to a pop audience.

So my question is this: from where did the idea for Genesis to play prog come?

Can we thank "groupthink" for the happy coincidence which provided us with some years of prog music?

Did Gabriel's theatrical excesses need a prog band to match them?

Or did Hackett's/Rutherford's/Collins'/Banks' playing?

Did they all enjoy prog music at the time and later tire of it?

Or do they just pretend not to like it to sell records?

Any thoughts?

Personally i don't consider any of the individual members to be progressive artists (maybe Hackett though). But the sum is bigger than the parts.

I think their individual approach to music, made a progressive mix, all adding an aspect of progressive rock. IMO Genesis slowely turned pop with the loss of each member because the specific progressive element of the leaving member was lost with the member.

also the Zeitgeist could have played a role I reccon. I can't discard the groupthink hypothesis you suggested, could well be it.

Just some thoughts, maybe I should give it more thought, but it will suffice for now I think.

If anybody isn't familiar with the term groupthink, it basically means when a number of people come to a decision because each person thinks that everyone else would want to, although no one in the group actually does

The explanation of Genesis as a group is very simple. In almost any band the stronger personality of the group is the composer, but Tony Banks never felt comfortable in the role of leader, first Gabriel and Phillips decided what path they had to take and after that Gabriel and Hackett did.

Gabriel is very innovative and likes to experiment, while Phillips and Hackett were progressive musicians (Their solo works show that, and the fact that Hackett was searching for a Progressive band when he was recruited by Genesis), so the approach to prog' rock was absolutely logical.

They were not as strong composers as Banks but the leadership of Gabriel was beyond question and Hackett's atmospheric guitar and arrangements were Genesis trademark.

When Gabriel left, there was a balance in the band Tony with his classical formation and Hackett with his prog orientation kept doing what they did since Nursery Cryme, but the more commercial approach of Rutherford (Your Own Special Way, his solo and The Mechanics works prove this) plus Collins and his love for Motown and commercial music (he said so repeatedly) softened the style a bit.

Then came Hackett's departure and Banks accepted the new orientation that Collins and Rutherford wanted, this was more clear in later albums when Collins took the lead role alone and Genesis sounded very close to Collins solo work.

What about their solo work:

1. Gabriel was never the main composer, so he had many troubles to find his own sound, that's why his early albums sound very close to Genesis but without the bright that the rest of band and Banks compositions provided. Being alone was a new experience for him and took some time to get used to do all the work.
2. Hackett was almost always progressive, except when he decided to do something different like classical guitar and some commercial projects. From the start he never had problems because he released his first solo album when he was a Genesis member (Voyage of the Acolyte 1975) and his collaboration in W&W is very respectable.
3. Rutherford and Collins solo works are POP or Adult Contemporary.
4. Banks solo works lack of the energy and personality that the rest of the band provided to him.

Iván

Its hard to believe they were once a prog rock band, when you hear anything recorded after Duke, and for many fans, the fall into pop happened well before Duke.

The band was formed at a time when it was cool to be experimental with music. The Beatles had released their psychedelic albums, the Floyd and KC were on the move and Banks & Co wanted to be part of that. I think that everything from Trespass to Wind & Wuthering is some of the best prog to come out of the 70's.

What heppened thereafter was driven by a collective hunger to make even more money than they were, and although Rutherford was complicit, and Banks happy to go along with it, it was Collins steering the ship. Ironic considering it wasn't his ship to steer. I dont think PC was ever a prog fan and was all along just establishing himself in a band with a profile, waiting for the opportunity to realise his own dream - of being a 'pop' star. Genesis were a launch pad for him.

Despite that, I think his contribution to the band was superb, between 1971 and 1980.

I just think its a shame that we have moved on from a culture of wanting to make music that is interesting, to a culture where artists actually set out to be un-interesting.

We can discuss the tragedy of Genesis' commercialisation for pages but at least they gave us good albums throughout the 70's.

I think it's a fallacy to assert that Genesis ceased to be prog in the late 70s - 80s. As long as Banks and Rutherford were members Genesis remained to be a unique band with a distinct sound. They changed and modernized themselves, but they were always Genesis.

Three of the most important features of Genesis' music are the keyboard playing (the fact that Banks shifted from organ/mellotron/monosynth to mainly [digital] polysynths didn't affect the overall feeling that much), the bass playing and the guitar playing (especially Rutherford's rhythm guitar). All these features are there from FGTR (albeit not fully evolved) all the way to CAS.

The three features mentioned above are more or less missing in the solo works by Gabriel, Hackett and Collins. I don't say that Gabriel and Hackett aren't prog. Their albums just don't have the typical Genesis feel. Melodies and arrangments are also crucial and again Banks and Rutherford are the major contributors. Ironically, Hackett is the only ex-member who has rerecorded old Genesis material and incorporated classics like "Watcher of the Skies" and "Firth of Fifth" in his current live repertoire.

King Crimson, Jethro Tull and Peter Hammill also modernized themselves during the late '70s all through the '80s and the '90s and still managed to keep their own uniqueness intact just like Genesis did. It's like when a person changes his clothes, it's still the same person under the clothes, as a Progarchives reviewer recently put it .

Mategra wrote: I think it's a fallacy to assert that Genesis ceased to be prog in the late 70s - 80s. As long as Banks and Rutherford were members Genesis remained to be a unique band with a distinct sound. They changed and modernized themselves, but they were always Genesis. Three of the most important features of Genesis' music are the keyboard playing (the fact that Banks shifted from organ/mellotron/monosynth to mainly [digital] polysynths didn't affect the overall feeling that much), the bass playing and the guitar playing (especially Rutherford's rhythm guitar). All these features are there from FGTR (albeit not fully evolved) all the way to CAS. The three features mentioned above are more or less missing in the solo works by Gabriel, Hackett and Collins. I don't say that Gabriel and Hackett aren't prog. Their albums just don't have the typical Genesis feel. Melodies and arrangments are also crucial and again Banks and Rutherford are the major contributors. Ironically, Hackett is the only ex-member who has rerecorded old Genesis material and incorporated classics like "Watcher of the Skies" and "Firth of Fifth" in his current live repertoire. King Crimson, Jethro Tull and Peter Hammill also modernized themselves during the late '70s all through the '80s and the '90s and still managed to keep their own uniqueness intact just like Genesis did. It's like when a person changes his clothes, it's still the same person under the clothes, as a Progarchives reviewer recently put it .

Cant agree with that Mategra. I think the overall feel changed from the Lamb onwards..

When Banks eventually embraced the digital age, their sound changed 100%, as did their approach to songwriting. Even their longer slightly more progressive pieces, like Domino, were essentially pop in feel, in part because of the equipment Banks was using, but also how he was using it.

I dont think they have always been unique either. Some of their shorter ballads and love songs could have swapped with tracks on Collins solo albums; 'In too Deep' for example or 'Taking it all too hard' There were however times when the new Genesis sound worked well with the older approach to song writing. This is clearly evident on 'Mama' and 'Home by the sea/second home..' where you can hear all the classic Genesis drama and mystery working well with the digital/pop set up.

Blacksword wrote: When Banks eventually embraced the digital age, their sound changed 100%, as did their approach to songwriting. Even their longer slightly more progressive pieces, like Domino, were essentially pop in feel, in part because of the equipment Banks was using, but also how he was using it.

Indeed the sound changed, but the keyboards were always treated in Banks' own special way. Even if his playing technique changed a bit through the years it still sounded like Banks and no one else.

Blacksword wrote: I dont think they have always been unique either. Some of their shorter ballads and love songs could have swapped with tracks on Collins solo albums; 'In too Deep' for example or 'Taking it all too hard'

It's true that a few Genesis songs are interchangeable with Collins solo tracks, "Man on the Corner" and "Since I Lost You" for instance. But Banks' influence on "In too Deep" and especially "Taking it all too Hard" is very notable (if you listen carefully). The latter one sounds partly (the verse melody) like a typical Banks ballad like "Heathaze" and "Undertow".

I have nothing against Collins, he is also very much a unique artist, but the music he makes on his own doesn't have that special Genesis feel and it's hardly progressive (and from "No Jacket Required" and onward his albums are not very interesting either.)

A very interesting discusion ! I agree with most of what Ivan said. If you look at the old albums you see that Tony Banks is the main composer and that's why "a trick of the tail" and "wind & wuthering" still sounds pretty much as genesys with peter gabriel. I always felt that banks was drugged by colins to that popy music they did later (which is much less interesting to me).

However I must say Ivan is wrong in one point. gabriel's first solo does not sound like genesys ! it has some prog feeling in some of it (humdrum & here comes the flood) but it sounds to me closer to the songs greg lake used to write (hey, it's a compliment !) and not to genesys classics.

Golden Earrings song Ce Soir lyrics documents a little of how evil the industry had become,1975.

Rolling Stones Fingerprint Files 1974, is Mick Jagger tongue in check expressing some of his feelings about the guys in dark glasses.

Remember music was getting to revealing in nature and was educating masses toward protests against governments activities. Maybe this pressure had something to do with it!

we used to have these same discussions in the early 80's and it is amazing how different your ideas are 20+ years later.

But then again horseflop does look like applebutter from a distance!

Mantegra wrote:

I think it's a fallacy to assert that Genesis ceased to be prog in the late 70s - 80s. As long as Banks and Rutherford were members Genesis remained to be a unique band with a distinct sound. They changed and modernized themselves, but they were always Genesis.

I believe this is not acurate Mantegra, at Invissible Touch (except for The Brazilian, Genesis (Mama included) and We Can't Dance have no connection with Progressive Rock, those are pure POP albums, and this was accepted even by Genesis members.

Phil Collins even started to talk sh!t about Prog', saying that he rather listen a punk album than any Pink Floyd or Yes release and that the arrival of punk made prog' bands fall of the trees as bad apples (Genesis a History).

But it's not  only that, the shorter format their approach towards ballads, repetitive structure almost without variations and if you add the use of drum machines, it's clear that Genesis became a POP band.

Mantegra wrote:

Three of the most important features of Genesis' music are the keyboard playing (the fact that Banks shifted from organ/mellotron/monosynth to mainly [digital] polysynths didn't affect the overall feeling that much), the bass playing and the guitar playing (especially Rutherford's rhythm guitar). All these features are there from FGTR (albeit not fully evolved) all the way to CAS.

This is mostly truth in any band but not in the case of Genesis. This peculiar band created the base of their sound blending Steve Hackett's guitar with Tony Banks keyboards, achieving almost what a so called symphonic (Or Midi I believe) guitar does digitally today.

This created the main feeling or atmospheric sound that was Genesis trademark mostly until Foxtrot, even when in The Lamb and later albums is present but less evident.

Without Hackett, the feeling or atmosphere was gone, despite the keyboard that he could use, even on stage because Daryl Stuermer or Mike Rutherford were never atmospheric players; so there was no way that a band with only one surviving composer (During Gabriel era Rutherford and Collins contribution was almost 0, plus the fact that without the original frontman & Lyricist and a real guitar player on studio (Rutherford is a bassist) could ever sound as the band from the Gabriel era.

Lostrom wrote:

All prog bands fell in the end of the seventies, it's a comman known fact, shared by the bands themselves....A corious feeling, Smallcreep's day and perhaps PG 1). Since most solo-works came later, they couldn't be prog, couse they times didn't allow it (they

In many cases this is true, but not in all, UK is from the late 70's and was totally prog', Steve Hackett's works continued being Prog'.

The case of Peter Gabriel is different, he always was an innovative/experimental composer more than simply progressive, the logical way of being innovative during the early 70's was Progressive Music, in the 80's Peter found his own style.

The difference between Peter and Genesis is that the first one almost always experimented,  kept creating artistic music and pushing the boundaries despite if his music was prog' or not, this went so far that he economically broke and Genesis had to make a reunion (Six of the Best) to help him, but Genesis went only for commercial success forgetting artistic music.

Omri wrote:

Tony Banks is the main composer and that's why "a trick of the tail" and "wind & wuthering" still sounds pretty much as genesys with peter gabriel

Plus the fact that two tracks from ATOTT (Mad Man Moon and A Trick of the Tail) are Gabriel era songs that were never included in any album.

Omri wrote:

However I must say Ivan is wrong in one point. gabriel's first solo does not sound like genesys

Didn't say his music sounds exactly like Genesis, bur it's clear that the influence was still present in PG 1, 2 and 3. Just one example, Solsbury Hills would perfectly fit in A Trick of the Tail.

Iván

Of course this discussion all depends on knowing exactly what prog is. Domino ,Driving The Last Spike and Home By The Sea are all prog tracks in my book.The album 'Calling All Stations' to me is the least prog sounding album Genesis made..ever.So where is the demonic one known as ''Phil Collins'' on that one then?  

Genesis just found they could make a few more bucks if they had hit singles.Its a lot easier than prog and you have more fun making the videos that go with them.Plus more women turn up to the concerts..a massive incentive if you ask me