Classic masterpieces, was the public aware?

^That's one way to look at it, if you choose to. It's not a problem to me.

^I absolutely agree that it's a classic. But it's not a masterpiece. Semantics? Yes indeed, but true.

^I take it you that you might appreciate Sgt. Pepper's a bit more than myself then.

This thread gives me a few chuckles from time to time. Not because of it's intent, but because I still have a hard time accepting albums that are stated to be "classics" by the status quo. Sgt. Pepper's would fall into this category for me. I cannot deny it's importance to rock music's development, but it's an album that I rarely listened to since the day it was released.

.I recall Progressive Rock fans over..reacting to what became the classic masterpiece. For example, when Thick As A Brick was released, I bought a copy the first week it entered the record stores. I even went the distance of calling the store everyday, asking if it had arrived yet and annoying the hell out of the store owner. Everybody was waiting for the album. All the freaks in the "Art Rock" community during the early 70's were excited about Ian Anderson's music changing and had been discussing it at many social gatherings. I'm not making reference to my personal friends, but a community of proggers that met at a hall and listened to Progressive Rock weekly. A hall owned by a music teacher who was more than willing to unlock the doors twice a week and give us space for hours of Progressive Rock listening on a 3 channel stereo that featured additional speakers extended to each corner of the hall. Attending these gatherings was very good for me because it gave me hands on exposure to observe the magnitude/impact that Progressive Rock had on the youth. It's very alien to think that at one particular time in life, there was the existence of Prog communities in small stick towns of the U.S and the realization that the interest in Prog IN that type of environment was just as important as the Prog scene in Philadelphia or N.Y. ..For this was a kind of interest that developed from the hippie culture. Everyone sitting together and listening to the music, passing the album around, and discussing the music later and making observations about the lyricism and composition. When the British "Art Rock" scene exploded in the U.S., people that gathered together and listened, often crossed over into a few other styles of music and made claims that it was part of a "Art Rock" scene. I noticed it quite often when people in the early 70's often stated that Fairport Convention were part of the "Art Rock" scene more so than just being a "Traditional Folk" band. Progressive Rock, (better known as "Art Rock"), during the early 70's had a huge social impact on the youth. People began to paint when they listened to In The Wake Of Poseidon. The fact that most people who had the talent to draw or paint...began to draw or paint whenever King Crimson's music was playing was a kind of isolated ..but common world that they lived in. It was very much like an underground fad on the East coast of the U.S.  This powerful scene developed in the early 70's and prevailed over the minds and mentalities of the youth. Beyond that aspect, they took the British very seriously. Even the "bips" who listened to Grand Funk Railroad and were bent on thinking that the main character in Thick As A Brick was a real person. Classic masterpieces existed because people personally took on a role with it. In the early 70's , (particularly in the U.S.), "Art Rock"/Progressive Rock, took on a role playing game with youths. It wasn't JUST the music to think about and the lyrics intrigued people to a degree where it seemed like everyone around me was obsessed  trying to figure out meanings behind the words. It was instantaneous how people reacted and a very normal way of life surrounded by the popularity of Progressive Rock.   

Edited by TODDLER - February 05 2015 at 09:56

tamijo wrote: Yes personaly i still like most of what i liked then, but that was not the question.

TeleStrat wrote: My grandmother died in the early forties and my grandfather in the early fifties so they did not see a lot of the things your grandparents did. I do not doubt any of your facts at all. I do believe that a hundred years ago when my grandparents were a young couple in the mid west that life generally moved at a slower pace than it does now. The bottom line is that I'm a sixty-five year old man from Missouri and I'm about as stubborn as they come so it's unlikely that we will agree on this subject. But that's okay because I do enjoy our occasionally discussions and I look forward to more of the same.

Relative to the original question, i think it was as impossible to know that would "last" back then, as it is now.In the 70's when i was listning to Razamanaz, Slayed and Houses of the Holy, I would have no idear that Zeppelin would be consideret Legends, where Slade and Nazareth would be allmost forgotten within the next 40 years, Or even worse, that Slade would be remembered for a Christmas song

Edited by tamijo - February 05 2015 at 09:02

I have been told that time i relative to the current age.

Stool Man wrote: Does any band in the 2010s think about their music being heard in the 2050s? In the 1970s, longevity meant the Rock 'n' Roll revival.  The music of 40 years earlier was mostly forgotten - Louis Armstrong was that guy who sang "What A Wonderful World" in 1967, rather than that guy whose trumpet was heard throughout every decade since the 1920s. I don't think anyone thought forty years ahead when they were promoting their latest album.