prog bounds (some thought involved!) - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Boundaries change in retrospect, allowing us to redefine past bands as "prog". It's just as well we do, because other nebulous clusters like "indie" and "rock" do just the same and they have a little more support. Still, as much as they do good, free work, I don't think the progarchives staff have given equal time to other styles of music with the potential to impinge on progressive rock. It might be that the word rock itself is stigmatic, here, but now's the time that almost anything can be defined as such.

Let's indulge in a little exercise...

Imagine all bands mapped as stars in a circular system. As sane heliocentrists we place King Crimson, Soft Machine, Yes et all right in the very centre. From there you may spread out in different directions clusters of bands related to genres like hard rock (where we can plot every other Englishman and Scot who wore their hair long in the '70s), techno, jazz, batcave and everything else that ever was, closer to the centre based on your reckoning of their relation to our genre - if you find blues more commonly allied with prog than disco is, then draw blues a short distance north and disco on the southern outskirts of the galaxy. Once you've mentally assigned as much music as you can, trace an estimated border around the bands listed on progarchives (consigning those further adrift to a sort of musical Oort cloud) - is the shape of your border more akin to a ring, a diamond or a lens? More plainly, has equal or inequal attention been given to these differing types of music?

I've drawn a lens - at its points we have metal and the avant-garde, while at its deepest curves we have electronics and post-punk. Notably this lens includes outliers like Slapp Happy and bands such as Kamelot while excluding Autechre and DNA. Muse are admitted but Sun City Girls shunned. Miles and Herbie are also omitted...

Does this just reflect that some genre teams are more active than others? I know that the RIO threads rarely stop moving and are always filled with thoughtful suggestions - perhaps this, and the fact that there's such a wide range of avant-garde music to choose from means this well will never run dry. As for the metal side, well, how can I put this delicately? Metal is very structured, powerful music, having few changeable parts - often, there isn't as much notable difference between the vanilla and the progressive in heavy music as there can be found between, say, Genesis and a more primitive rock band. As these teams are as active as the genres they represent, could they be doing the right thing but overshadowing music from prog genres we could call relics of past eras such as the largely defunct Canterbury scene?

Whereas on a site populated by many fans of bygone prog and hard rock, electronica and punk-influenced music is a *really* hard sell. We don't have teams for these as such; electronic prog personnel tend to busy themselves with textural, droning, psychedelic music - good work is being done, but electronic music's a goldmine and we aren't mining every vein. Now, Cardiacs and the Mars Volta *are* on progarchives, and more than a few punk-influenced post/math rock bands are present too, so if there was such thing as a prog-punk team it would have slightly more credibility because of these inclusions. Allowing in artists we all know are experimental and different like The Bad Seeds or Bjork would increase the site's standing within a greater audience - the same reason we archive bands such as Sabbath and Maiden.

If you've played along with this rather vague mental exercise and humoured the rant, let me know what shape you have drawn, and which heavenly bodies orbit its extremities!

-----

(if you want to have an argument about this post, don't do it here, because I'm not trying to start a fight; message me or respond on the copy of this article on my blog instead.)

Edited by laplace - March 15 2008 at 17:29

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
Dean Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575	Posted: March 16 2008 at 07:44
	Excellent analogy Laplace, though I think that searching the Oort Cloud may be to vague an undertaking, after all, the only objects that cross the planetary plane from there are comets that shine briefly then depart (Prog Related perhaps). We should be looking for bands closer to "home": Kuiper Belt objects if you prefer, (like Pluto, Sedna and Quaoar) - one example of which that immediately springs to mind would be After The Fire - a band that 99.9% of people would associate with 80s new-wave synth-pop (of hits such as One Rule for You and Der Kommissar), but who began life as a post-Genesis (Neo)Symphonic band in the late 70s.
	What?

ES335 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: December 10 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 168	Posted: March 15 2008 at 23:18
	My (mental) picture is a vortex. You mentioned one band in orbit. The Grateful Dead and Yoko Ono are two heavenly bodies also in orbit. More on why tomorrow. It isn't as late here as it is in Italy, where it's early now, but it's late enough.
	Bible-thumping heavyweight evangelistic boxing kangaroo

Raff Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: July 29 2005 Location: None Status: Offline Points: 24392	Posted: March 15 2008 at 17:48
	Lappy, I'll readily admit I haven't read your post properly, and now it is a bit late for me to answer in a coherent way (I'd hate to lose credibility for good). However, you do make some very good points, with which I find myself in agreement. Though you know me as a hard rock/heavy metal fan, I hope you also know I am open to exploring virtually anything in music. Therefore, I share your point of view that the addition policy is definitely more biased in one sense. Bands or artists that have no recognisable ties with 'traditional' prog are shunned, even if they are objectively much more progressive than many of those who are added. I have noticed that there is a definite bias against bands associated with 'new wave' (whatever that may mean) - which made the addition of Japan highly controversial, and makes people foam at the mouth at the very mention of Talking Heads. More coming tomorrow... Almost time for bed here!

laplace Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: October 06 2005 Location: popupControl(); Status: Offline Points: 7606	Posted: March 15 2008 at 17:29
	Boundaries change in retrospect, allowing us to redefine past bands as "prog". It's just as well we do, because other nebulous clusters like "indie" and "rock" do just the same and they have a little more support. Still, as much as they do good, free work, I don't think the progarchives staff have given equal time to other styles of music with the potential to impinge on progressive rock. It might be that the word rock itself is stigmatic, here, but now's the time that almost anything can be defined as such. Let's indulge in a little exercise... Imagine all bands mapped as stars in a circular system. As sane heliocentrists we place King Crimson, Soft Machine, Yes et all right in the very centre. From there you may spread out in different directions clusters of bands related to genres like hard rock (where we can plot every other Englishman and Scot who wore their hair long in the '70s), techno, jazz, batcave and everything else that ever was, closer to the centre based on your reckoning of their relation to our genre - if you find blues more commonly allied with prog than disco is, then draw blues a short distance north and disco on the southern outskirts of the galaxy. Once you've mentally assigned as much music as you can, trace an estimated border around the bands listed on progarchives (consigning those further adrift to a sort of musical Oort cloud) - is the shape of your border more akin to a ring, a diamond or a lens? More plainly, has equal or inequal attention been given to these differing types of music? I've drawn a lens - at its points we have metal and the avant-garde, while at its deepest curves we have electronics and post-punk. Notably this lens includes outliers like Slapp Happy and bands such as Kamelot while excluding Autechre and DNA. Muse are admitted but Sun City Girls shunned. Miles and Herbie are also omitted... Does this just reflect that some genre teams are more active than others? I know that the RIO threads rarely stop moving and are always filled with thoughtful suggestions - perhaps this, and the fact that there's such a wide range of avant-garde music to choose from means this well will never run dry. As for the metal side, well, how can I put this delicately? Metal is very structured, powerful music, having few changeable parts - often, there isn't as much notable difference between the vanilla and the progressive in heavy music as there can be found between, say, Genesis and a more primitive rock band. As these teams are as active as the genres they represent, could they be doing the right thing but overshadowing music from prog genres we could call relics of past eras such as the largely defunct Canterbury scene? Whereas on a site populated by many fans of bygone prog and hard rock, electronica and punk-influenced music is a really hard sell. We don't have teams for these as such; electronic prog personnel tend to busy themselves with textural, droning, psychedelic music - good work is being done, but electronic music's a goldmine and we aren't mining every vein. Now, Cardiacs and the Mars Volta are on progarchives, and more than a few punk-influenced post/math rock bands are present too, so if there was such thing as a prog-punk team it would have slightly more credibility because of these inclusions. Allowing in artists we all know are experimental and different like The Bad Seeds or Bjork would increase the site's standing within a greater audience - the same reason we archive bands such as Sabbath and Maiden. If you've played along with this rather vague mental exercise and humoured the rant, let me know what shape you have drawn, and which heavenly bodies orbit its extremities! ----- (if you want to have an argument about this post, don't do it here, because I'm not trying to start a fight; message me or respond on the copy of this article on my blog instead.) Edited by laplace - March 15 2008 at 17:29