What's the deal about being pretentious?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=71072
Printed Date: May 17 2025 at 02:44
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: What's the deal about being pretentious?
Posted By: garla1lh
Subject: What's the deal about being pretentious?
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 06:32
|
As I have been reading many reviews, it seems that many members are giving lower ratings to albums they feel are pretentious and self-indulgent. However, if a band makes very good music that's showing off, its still good music, right? I'm not sure the personality of a band affects whether or not the music is enjoyable or not. Also, I feel being pretentious is a main characteristic of prog, that should not be frowned upon. There is a reason prog is called music for the intelligent. Please give me your thoughts! ------------- Smell the Glove |
Replies:
Posted By: The Sleepwalker
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 07:16
|
I agreed with you until I read "There is a reason prog is called music for the intelligent". That's just pretentious nonsense. ------------- 
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 07:17
|
Of all the barbs hurled at Prog, pretentious is probably the most used (and thus the laziest response to the genre from non afficiandos) I also suspect that you might confuse the 'p' word with bombastic (which I agree is one of the common characteristics of Prog) No, Progressive Rock is not music for the intelligent (just take a peek round the forums if you don't believe me  )No, self indulgence and showing off are as repellent in minimalistic ambient as they are in Prog. Yes, I agree that any misgivings on my part about the personality of an artist should not impinge on my enjoyment of their music. (e.g. I think Jon Anderson has his head firmly up his own backside, but I still love his contributions to the best music of Yes) ------------- 
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 07:22
|
Pretentious is a tired old epithet thrown at progressive rock by lazy critics.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 07:25
  |
The Sleepwalker wrote:Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 07:26
|
You want pretentious? Heavens, look at Lady Gaga! ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 07:41
|
The more pretentious the better. Music, for me is about escapism, so the further removed from the sh*t reality in which it's been made, the happier I am.
------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 09:03
 |
Posted By: spookytooth
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 09:26
|
Couldn't agree more...these are the same rock critics that berate progressive bands for trying something new on every album, but then give some cookie-cutter rockstar's album a great review, despite the ladder artist producing simple, unoriginal, uninspired music. Then again, I wouldn't expect anything less from rock critics, most which are complete morons that are completely out of touch with reality. Frank Zappa put it perfectly in words when he said "Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read". ------------- 
Would you like some Bailey's? |
Posted By: Shevrzl
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 09:28
|
Posted By: Nathaniel607
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 09:39
|
I've never heard a band that "sounds" pretentious... what does that even mean, really? Lyrics can be pretentious, but I don't really see how music can be pretentious. Pretentious
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Nathaniel607" rel="nofollow - My Last FM Profile 
|
Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 09:40
|
When we talk about progressive music being "Pretentious", it has always make me think that there must be "non-pretentious" music. Which is that "non-pretentious" music? popular music? or what Steve Hackett called "Radio Friendly" music? To me, it's just a word used by people that don't understand progressive music, and since prog is a little more (quite a lot more actually) than just a good beat and a catchy tune, it's easy to use a word like pretentious to describe it.
Personally, I prefer to use the term "Adventurous", or "experimental", which it seems more appropiate and accurate.
|
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 09:44
|
Slartibartfast is absolutely spot on. For pretentious, I give you Johnny Rotten spitting and snarling into a camera advertising Country Life butter, for goodness sake.
------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: friso
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 11:43
| It's true prog is aiming at unusual high quality compositions. And I do thing the '70 prog music was pretentious. But that's no problem. |
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 12:59
|
I don't get why a lot of people automatically thinks that skilled = pretentious (when he's trying to present these skills and attract attention, there's nothing bad about it).
------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu  Even my |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 14:13
accept that he isn't taking him self seriously unlike most prog bands in the seventies who were seriously up their own backsides..and thats why they were pretentious. But I worked out a long time that most music I really enjoy is made by silly arty farty musicians.There is and never will be any substitute for pure talent.Pretentiousness isn't a crime ,its an absolute necessity if you are going to do something different.Its either that or stick to the straight and narrow and bore the pants off everyone.
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 14:16
| I think prog is generally self indulgent and ambitious (with the likelihood of being overambitious at times) rather than pretentious. I think when critics hurled the 'pretentious' epithet at prog, they were probably referring more to the lyrics rather than the music. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 14:32
Ohhh .. I get it ... so if you are intelligent it means that the only music you can enjoy is progressive but never a Sex Pistols! ... or some rap!
Prog has nothing to do with intelligence any more than otherwise ... that's why you got so many cheap bands that would not sound like music, or at least high school bands, if you turned off all the electricity!
Intelligence, the way you describe it is actually a scary thing. And saying that Robert Fripp is progressive, or prog, because he is intelligent ... is even more scary ... ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 14:38
Mr Skeletor...who is Lady Gaga? -------------   
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 14:55
This:     A pop star. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 15:02
Awesome....my 11yr old calls her Lady Googoo Gaga.....Hopefully the left pic is not of her at a big movie premiere, cause the dude behind her probably never got his money worth trying to see over her icicle mountain head gear. -------------
|
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 15:05
|
Ewww...She looks so....processed...Is this really what the public is going crazy over? I don't even think she's attractive, she looks so fake (not to say her body isn't shaped nicely). ------------- Which of you to gain me, tell, will risk uncertain pains of hell? I will not forgive you if you will not take the chance. |
Posted By: dedokras
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 16:07
Yuck, she's the female Marilyn Manson  except Manson actually did some good songs a while ago...
------------- http://mlyk.bandcamp.com/ |
Posted By: zappaholic
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 19:24
A Gaga threadjack? On ProgArchives? ------------- "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." -- H.L. Mencken |
Posted By: 40footwolf
Date Posted: September 07 2010 at 22:27
You're talking about me and my ELP reviews, right? Regardless, when people say "pretentious" they're generally talking about the dictionary definition of the term-"characterized by assumption of dignity or importance". For example, I would call the song "Tarkus" pretentious because it's 20 minutes long for no real reason-there's nothing that happens in those 20 minutes that couldn't have happened in 8, and yet the band felt the need to carry on for almost half an hour. Thus, "pretentious": not as grand as it supposes itself to be. Whereas I would NOT call "Supper's Ready" pretentious, because almost every moment is integral to the song, needed to deliver the full majesty of the music. There are a couple of minutes that aren't needed here and there, but overall not enough to be labeled pretentious, I don't think-it doesn't ASSUME it's own grandeur, it EARNS it. ------------- Heaven's made a cesspool of us all. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 01:16
|
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 01:21
 yeah bang on, as one looks back at bands like Sex Pistols, Clash, Jam they were pretentious alright. I think it makes you realize that a lot of genres could be linked to fashion and marketing hype. All good....pretentious is good! ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Anderson III
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 01:38
I believe that out of all the musicians who are pretentious, Prog artists are really not that bad! Hip Hop, Pop and probably the most pretentious of all, Punk rock, are much worse... ------------- "Music expresses that which cannot be put into words and cannot remain silent" - Victor Hugo |
Posted By: octopus-4
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 01:41
|
Vander, other than creating a genre has created a language. Can anybody be more pretentious? Can anybody say that he was wrong? To be pretentious as I interpret this word, one must have enough skill (that puts Sex Pistols out of the discussion). If one has the musical talent of Emerson, Bruford or Fripp has all the rights to be pretentious. Pretentious is not the same of self-indulgent, IMO. Sex Pistols pretended to play instruments, this is another possible meaning of pretentious  ?However I really love the Clash until London Calling included. ------------- I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 01:59
|
Good point about Lady Gaga, and really all pop in general. Same can be said with Punk And Metal ....Maybe most music (like most art in general) is pretentious by nature? Or was that just an extremely pretentious statement? |
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 03:01
|
Some humbleness is desirable in human beings themselves, but not in their works (being them works of art, of engineering or whatever kind of work we do).
Human beings pretending to be superior to the others is not a good thing, but that the products of our work aim at being superior to other preceding works is good, it's a sign of development, progress, perfectionism etc.
I think this is the source of the mistake, applying a personal attribute to a piece of art assuming that its implications are equivalent as when applied to human beings. "Pretentious" is an adjective meant for people not for things.
|
Posted By: 40footwolf
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 03:44
God, let's not play the "Who's more pretentious" game. Nobody ever wins that one. ------------- Heaven's made a cesspool of us all. |
Posted By: octopus-4
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 03:56
Ok, don't play this game, but let me just mention a couple that popped up to my mind: Ian Gillan singing Puccini's "Nessun Dorma" at Pavarotti and friends Roger Waters' Ca Ira Just remaining into our prog world. ------------- I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution |
Posted By: mono
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 04:54
|
In my opinion, pretentiousness is unwelcome when the artist actually pretends to a higher level than his actual work... not quite easy to imagine, but happens to me quite often. Gaga quite fits the description, but there are quite a few (prog or not) bands that also do. Still, it shouldn't keep you from listenning to the music itself, but it kind of puts you in a not so-great-mood... I think Akerfeldt is one the most unbearable persons live. I still like Opeth's music as much, but I won't see Opeth live anymore (also because they weren't outsanding last time I went...). ------------- https://soundcloud.com/why-music Prog trio, from ambiant to violence https://soundcloud.com/m0n0-film Film music and production projects https://soundcloud.com/fadisaliba (almost) everything else |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 07:20
|
I fail to see a correlation between intelligence and progressive rock, and even if there was, how would that affect the music? A feeling for music is natural aptitude.....you either feel it, or you don't. Don't agree? Then check out Stevie Wonder....nobody can doubt his credentials......but how many music manuscripts has he read? Music comes from the heart, not the head.
Wow......that C#m7 really looks clever, it must have gone to University.
Pah
 ------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: Rabid
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 07:58
Seconded.......and you don't see many (if any) of them releasing a decent prog album.
Perhaps they're just incapable of seeing the point.
 ------------- "...the thing IS, to put a motor in yourself..." |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 11:49
I think you make an excellent point here using "Tarkus" as an example, which I agree with.
Although does this work both ways though? I mean some prog purists will slam a band for not having those "20 minute songs" in their collections anymore, maybe in earlier releases the 20 minute epic existed...now it does not for whatever reason and "we" slam them...."they are not prog anymore!!!"
Then when the artists releases a "20 minute" epic...we slam it because it did not need to be so long??
I guess more a question for the group than a straight forward comment...
Pretentious...hmm -------------
|
Posted By: Rottenhat
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 12:29
Couldn't agree more...these are the same rock critics that berate progressive bands for trying something new on every album, but then give some cookie-cutter rockstar's album a great review, despite the ladder artist producing simple, unoriginal, uninspired music. Then again, I wouldn't expect anything less from rock critics, most which are complete morons that are completely out of touch with reality. Frank Zappa put it perfectly in words when he said "Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read" Nice! :) I would love to put that as a signature, but that may be to pretentious...
------------- Language is a virus from outer space. -William S. Burroughs |
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 12:44
|
The only reason I listen to prog is so people think that I am intelligent. I'm actually a crack head and listen to Céeline Dion when nobody else is around. Also having a collection of almost 6000 prog albums also makes people think your intelligent when they come over to your crack house to get high on crack or get wired on heroin.
------------- |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 13:05
I thought it was get 'wired on crack' and 'get high on heroin'??
I'm confused now  -------------
|
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 13:18
|
I guess you can get wired or high on either. By the way, you look a lot like that guy from Rush.
------------- |
Posted By: Rottenhat
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 13:37
|
Speaking of Rush (and drugs). I wonder if the band ever regretted naming the band Rush as in drug rush. It maybe seemed appropriate in the early seventies, though... :)
------------- Language is a virus from outer space. -William S. Burroughs |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 13:38
I have had people tell me that before......but I fear that some on this site feel he is a bit too "pretentious", so I just say I'm taller.
BTW...prog sucks -------------
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 13:44
|
Hi,
It's a fine line this "pretentious" thing.
A lot of people called Pink Floyd pretentious ... until it sold millions. A lot of people called Jethro Tull pretentious when Thick as a Brick came out ... until it sold millions. A lot of people called YES pretentious even in their days of Close to the Edge ... A lot of people called ELP REALLY pretentious when they went after a light show and spiraling pianos and idiocies on stage ...
In the end, if my name is artist and I am composing and playing my work, I really don't care that you think it's pretentious or that it is a masterpiece ... you have absolutely nothing to do with the creative process that I, or any other artist out there, uses to create their work.
So in the end, the person that is being pretentious is the person that is not looking in the mirror. If Lady Gaga wants to prostitute herself to get attention and collect money, guess who is the bigger fool?
In the end, prostitutes come and go ... and only the music survives. And us prog'rs continue our own pretentiousness thinking of Michelangelo! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Paravion
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 14:16
hmm... I don't hope pretentiousness is an inherent feature of prog. Nor do I think there is any correlation between being intelligent and listening to prog - it's not my experience. It's all quite difficult to get hold of, and the discussion is very sensitive to what one means when ascribing the predicate "pretentious" to a piece of music, an album, a band or even a whole genre. And because of that the discussion turns out unfocused and unclear. The way I see it, there are first of all differences in levels. One can ascribe pretentiousness to a piece of music based on purely musical grounds - ie. if the music itself displays pretention. That could be misplaced overcomplification, long solos, displaying skill for the sake of it etc. (here I find much of ELPs work) When ascribing pretentiousness to an album - a wider context needs to be considered. That could be the album title, the album cover, the sleeve notes etc. (I find that GGs Acquiring the Taste displays pretention based solely on the album title and in particular the sleeve notes - the music is great and not something I find particular pretentious) To call a band pretentious requires consideration of the members' band-personalities, how they present themselves, how they usually talk about their music, how they dress and appear (here is ELP a good example of a pretentious band in my book) To call a whole genre prentious is absurd. Another thing, operating beyond level distinctions, is the distinction between being pretentious and displaying pretention. I'm reluclant (as one might have noticed) to use the former expression because of the objective connotations that it bears and feel more inclined to use the latter expression because it leaves more room for differences in opinions and is more sensitive to how a single individual conceptualizes the music, album and/or band as well as the predicate "pretentious". Finally, being pretentious is not a matter of either or, it's a matter of more or less. There are generally some traces of pretentiousness in most music (and art for that sake). In good music it's really insignificant and not disturbing the listening pleasure, which - after all - remains the only significant 'thing'. |
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 14:49
|
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 14:54
|
Gentle Giant even called one of their compilation albums Pretentious Just For Sake Of it. I guess that pretty much explains it.
------------- |
Posted By: 40footwolf
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 15:07
I guess my point is, one band could play for 20 minutes because they need that time to establish the scope of the music, and another could play for 20 minutes because one of the members wants to show off his bitchin' keyboard solos. That said, The Allman Brothers Band used to do things like that all the time when Duane Allman was alive and you never heard the word "pretentious" thrown at them. I think it's because it's possible for something to SOUND pretentious. I disagree with people who say otherwise. If that's the case than something can't sound happy or sad or intelligent or stupid either. Whether we like it or not we ascribe human traits to music, traits that they clearly don't ACTUALLY have, and if that's an unavoidable part of talking about music we may as well call things pretentious if they sound pretentious to us. I couldn't tell you what makes "Tarkus" pretentious and "Mountain Jam" not. It's just something to do with the "feel" of the music. ------------- Heaven's made a cesspool of us all. |
Posted By: Nathaniel607
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 15:54
I've already explained this man. Listen, music cannot sound as if it is grander than it believes itself to be. If music sounds grand, it IS grand - the music is the ONLY thing which effects the grand-ness of said music. Unless the lyrics are "this song is really grand!"(x80) then a piece cannot project a sense of grandness upon itself without being grand. HOWEVER what critics describe as being "pretentious" is usually merelly "uninventive" or "boring". This means the piece cannot hold the listeners interest throughout - some people seem to mistake that for it being "pretentious". The reason no one calls the 27 minute long "Whipping Post" pretentious is simply because it hold the listeners interest very well. Also, it doesn't sound "grand" at all, really. But people who use the word "pretentious" aren't usually using it this way (correctly) anyways, so I don't think that's the main reason. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Nathaniel607" rel="nofollow - My Last FM Profile
|
Posted By: Conor Fynes
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 16:16
And the wheel goes round and round... |
Posted By: Lozlan
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 16:35
|
Coming at it from an English and Lit geek perspective...the reason I often see prog associated with free-floating claims of pretension depends monumentally on the lyrical content. I was idly listening to Rush's Fountain of Lamneth the other day, and just had to shake my head...all that set dressing, all that musical virtuosity, paired with dimestore Tolkien lyricism. Similarly, 2112 is complete dreck from a lyrical perspective...cheap dystopic brooding accompanied by some amazing music. This was true in the early 70's, and it's certainly true now...I have a friend that swoons every time The Mars Volta rant about def cons of angora goats, or whatever word salad they happen to be regurgitating at the moment. Most recently I was blown away by the simultaneous oddness/pretentiousness of The Giant Hogweed, but I think that might just be Peter Gabriel having a go. It comes down to a fine point: writing songs is difficult, difficult work. And there was this extant idea that the early prog musicians were attempting to transform popular music, raising it to the level of the 19th and 18th century masters...essentially trying to set Percy Shelley's The Witch of Atlas to a twenty-minute mellotron groove. However, the vast majority of folks involved with prog at a lyrical level are not virtuosically talented Romanticist poets. Similarly, there has never been a second Bach, Mendelssohn, or Dvořák. The fact that it was the unstated (and, in many cases, the stated) purpose of prog to 'elevate' popular music beyond the simple, 'brainless' mode of pop music automatically set the genre up for a nasty fall. One can't make lofty proclamations without reaping a fair amount of critical scorn; similarly, one can't spit on other genres without suffering a backlash. I've definitely known prog fans that believe their intelligence is elevated by their choice of music. Unlike those 'idiots' that listen to pop rock, hip hop, or rap, they have actual taste, and consider themselves elevated above the unwashed masses. I often have to resist punching these people in the groin. Bottom line: music is what music is. I love prog for its overreachingness, its willingness to try everything once, its ability to stumble and stumble and suddenly open up into glorious harmony. I think the claims of pretension are very fair, but I also believe that every musical genre has mountains of egotism built up behind it (check out Kanye's twitter account once in a while). However, prog wears things on the sleeve, for good or ill. |
Posted By: 40footwolf
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 16:39
This is probably the best post in the thread. ------------- Heaven's made a cesspool of us all. |
Posted By: Nathaniel607
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 21:02
Also, you were saying that people who listen to prog often feel elevated... now, I can see what you're saying, but when it comes down to it, prog is musically (usually) more interesting than the vast amount of, say, hip-hop. Though I do think people should give every genre a try, I don't think it's a completly unwarranted claim. I think a lot of the whole "people who listen to pop rock are idiots" claim is also sort of founded. Usually, when someone has listens to pop-rock, they've NEVER heard anything else. No jazz. No prog. No metal. No techno - nothing. So they are musically more ignorant. Obviously, it's not always true - like I say, if someone has just chosen to listen to pop-rock, then that's fine by me. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Nathaniel607" rel="nofollow - My Last FM Profile
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 21:13
It's not just the 'elevating' stuff though and it's also not necessary that these bands 'looked down' on people with 'dumb' tastes. There are certainly limitations to how much you can tinker with the pop song format before you start sounding cliched. Speaking as a prog fan, I think prog musicians and prog listeners are both perhaps more sensitive to this aspect and those who are content to listen to 'brainless' pop. In my experience with trying to get people to listen to prog, most people get turned by that very aspect - they would rather listen to one more song in what I, not they, consider a cliched approach than tame a 20 minute epic which does not adhere to song form. I agree that lyrics though are one of the main reasons for calling prog pretentious. Most people derive meaning in music from the lyrics and not really the music itself, so that's not surprising.
|
Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 21:58
|
I’d like to point to the fact that most people dance to music, and progressive music is more of a listening experience, so it most be very hard for somebody who is just used to listen to the beat, all of a sudden face a piece of music which has been composed and intended to be carefully heard, analyzed, interpreted, etc. I personally feel this is why many fans believe that prog is for intelligent people, since for the majority of people, this is out of the question.
|
Posted By: Nathaniel607
Date Posted: September 08 2010 at 22:05
Good point! I totally agree that this is something I cannot at all relate to - I hate dancing. But it still doesn't really apply to when people listen to pop-rock on their ipod etc... ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Nathaniel607" rel="nofollow - My Last FM Profile
|
Posted By: sarge
Date Posted: September 09 2010 at 06:29
| I find that people who often sl*g off people/music/culture as being 'pretentious' tend to be pseudo-intellectual w**kers themselves. |
Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: September 09 2010 at 08:21
Yes, the Ipod thing is something I did not think about. Even that being the case, most people just listen to the song superficially, focusing on the beat and lyrics, and hardly on the arrangements, orchestration, composition, etc , which is what listening to prog is all about. Of course there are exceptions, and some people really enjoy their pop, hip-hop, rap, and other genres of music, and that's OK with me, after all, variety is a part of life, but I don't think progressive music should be considered pretentious just because is different and more challenging to listen to than the most popular forms of music. |
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: September 09 2010 at 08:39
|
Posted By: Lozlan
Date Posted: September 09 2010 at 10:44
|
I'll certainly agree with the statement that prog is, objectively, a more complicated and subtle variety of music when compared to, say, the latest Ke$ha single. However, the line between the objective observation of a genre's intricate qualities and the subjective perception of prog as thinking individual's music, separating the diehard or even casual fan from the mindless herd of pop zombies, is very thin and very easily crossed. I love progressive rock, obviously: I'm posting here, right? I think it's an incredibly valid, incredibly important genre of music. However, my fiancee hates the majority of it: there are certain bands I am absolutely forbidden from playing in her presence. She also happens to be a classically trained pianist, with a worshiper's adoration for Bach, as well as a highly accomplished grad student, well on her way to earning her PhD. A quick scroll through her iTunes reveals something funny, though: lots of girl power 90's pop, lots of Broadway musicals, lots of Pete Seeger and Woody Guthrie. Her musical taste is idiosyncratic, distinctly her: it's very likely that I'll come home to a Pink song or a sparkly early Britney tune playing in the bedroom. Now, one of the primary reasons she dislikes prog is that it's chock full of guys playing guy music. This is another key reason that I argue for the legitimacy of hip hop, rap etc: they aren't just genres of music, but expressions of race, class, and gender. Symphonic prog strives to merge Western classical composition with Western rock n' roll, in the process distancing rock from its blues (aka black) roots. Claiming that prog is superior to other varieties of music is (and I'll probably get stoned for saying this) kinda racist and kinda sexist. This feeds that pesky perception of pretension: I can't count on both hands the number of times women have told me that they find the entire genre silly, overwrought, self-concerned, and too abstract to have any meaning to their lives. It's simply not the music that stimulates them, because in many ways it wasn't made with them in mind. Obviously women do listen to prog, and obviously women play prog. Also obvious is the fact that prog is a very complex form a music when compared to the twelve-bar blues or the thumping beat of a rave tune. However, perceiving complexity as inherently intellectual is often a mistake. Someone helpfully pointed out earlier in this thread that plenty of idiots listen to prog; likewise, lots of really, really smart people enjoy pop music. Complication does not necessarily indicate brains, or even subtlety, although it often can. It can also often indicate an overweening dedication to making something really labyrinthine and complicated for the sole purpose of putting on intellectual airs. It's really up to the individual listener in the end. EDIT: btw, I'm not calling anybody here a racist or a sexist. This is a great conversation, and you guys are incredibly legit, both intellectually and rhetorically. This is one of the few message boards I've ever posted on where it seems like people have brains and know how to use them. ------------- Certified Obscure Prog Fart. http://scottjcouturier.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow - The Loose Palace of Exile - My first novel, The Mask of Tamrel, now available on Amazon and Kindle |
Posted By: MoraMx
Date Posted: September 09 2010 at 21:51
|
@Lozlan:
Beautiful post of yours, I actually felt the need to register to the forum in order to tell you this.
So, I guess this makes me officially part of the crew. WHERE'S MY WELCOME COMMITEE?
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 00:56
Reading through some of your post reminds me when I lent one of those 2 disc prog compilations to a friend. He played it in the presence of his then fiancee and she just wrote it of as 'porn music'.
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 01:13
Regardless of what exactly then constitutes guys playing music for girls, I have a question: why do such people object so much to the idea of merging rock with classical and jazz? It is an approach that opens up so many avenues for rock to explore, what is so pretentious about that? It must be noted here that at least the great progressive rock bands attempted this amalgamation in spirit and not just in superficial fluff. They emulated the brilliant use of space in great classical compositions and jazz's innate spontaneity and exploratory qualities rather than superficially pasting scales and licks which is more rampant today and, mystifyingly, much better received too. A band or its followers claiming that the very fact of their doing so makes them better is pretentious, yes, but the music, standalone and by itself, is not necessarily pretentious merely on account of attempting what it did. I find it very hard to disabuse myself of the notion that people who dislike progressive rock on principle (and not really the music of specific progressive rock bands, which I do too obviously  ) are against the idea of merging or breaking genre boundaries and think it's an assault on the system of format-based music, where everything neatly finds its assigned slot or box. If somebody told me that they thought that the idea, whatever be its merits, was not well executed, I would at least respect such a position but I cannot fathom what would be remiss about the very premise. But then, I have grown up on the works of a master progressive in his own right and in a different sense and not a big believer in genre-based appreciation, so maybe I don't know. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 01:42
I prefer women being stimulate because of me rather than for the music I listen.
Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: Bonnek
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 03:09
I'm quite sure the outfit to the left is a vintage 74 Gabriel. I think we should seriously watch where her next album is going  |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 07:28
|
^ be afraid, be very afraid - The Return of the Giant Hogwash
-------------
|
Posted By: VanVanVan
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 07:52
Finally another prog fan who thinks that! ------------- "The meaning of life is to give life meaning."-Arjen Lucassen |
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 10:22
Considering that the outfits are probably too expensive to rip them off, by the time you get her naked your arousement (if you could get any with such a woman) is already gone
|
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 10:27
|
Certainly this thing that prog is the music for intelligent people is b*hit.
If the only intelligent people in the world were the proggers, the world would be a very nasty place to be indeed...
|
Posted By: thehallway
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 11:24
|
Surely, ALL music is "pretentious" to the degree that we have all heard it, meaning somebody who wrote it wanted it to be heard by performing and distributing it.
If some music is more pretentious than other music, does it really matter? It's kind of impossible anyway, as someone said earlier- sounds can't suggest importance. And if lyrics can, then they should be the focus of this discussion. Lyrics and Music are like apples and oranges; they can be mixed but not compared.
Gaga and ELP both sought attention in very different ways and on varying levels of self-indlugence or whatever you want to call it. That is the job of a musician.
Music must be heard. And the personalities of the creators are irrelevant. That's why they're called "musicians" and not "personalities" right?
|
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: September 10 2010 at 14:02
|
I don't see how people are missing the point about what being overly pretentious is. The kind of stuff people are talking about as overly pretentious is when musicians play things for the sake of showing off and not because it's good music. I never understood how complex/long music was pretentious, but it sure as hell bothers me when someone just starts shredding to show me how fast they can play. When showing off how technically inclined you are takes precedence over the quality of the music, THAT is being too pretentious. (later ELP is a great example) ------------- Which of you to gain me, tell, will risk uncertain pains of hell? I will not forgive you if you will not take the chance. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 02:00
|
Posted By: OT Räihälä
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 05:22
|
True art is never pretentious. That would be a conceptual impossibility. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/osmotapioraihala/sets" rel="nofollow - Composer - Click to listen to my works! |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 06:18
|
Pretension is in the mind of the beholder. Enjoy your little cell you pretender critics...
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Deleuze
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 08:01
|
Pretension always comes with emotional insecurity...never forget ------------- 
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 09:46
I merely pretend to be pretentious and I feel like such a failure. 
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 10:42
Yes, but I felt even ELP were bigger offenders live rather than in the studio. There are no 'w**k' notes by Emerson even on Karn Evil 9, I would say Children of Bodom sounds a lot more show offy than that. Maybe because they are so mediocre, people couldn't even be bothered calling them pretentious. Anyway, what guitarwork I have heard on old prog albums is not as show offy as the rock music of the same time, let alone shred. Maybe something that you don't really understand is pretentious? I mean a figurative you here, just to clarify. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 18:16
|
Having worked in a couple of radios, I dealt with lots of critics who call Prog "Pretentious, Self Indulgent or arrogant", but the truth is that after talking with them, they didn't knew a damn thing about Rock in general. Most of them had a program about POP and confessed to me that they never understood Progressive Rock", but being that people sees them as experts in Rock, they can't admit they don't understand something, because they believe will loose credibility. And it's OK in American Idol or even in the radios, I don't listen radio (except some football games in the car), but I can't understand people that come to a Progressive Rock site to claim it's too pretentious, if you like simpler music (and it's OK), then don't come here to ruin our enjoyment and tell us that we are listening is wrong and that we must feel guilty. Prog says a lot to me, motivates me, has helped me when I was alone or depressed and made me happy, it's part of my life, and I won't feel guilty, if you think it's too pretentious or says nothing to you, just avoid Prog Archives, but don't try to change us. I don't go to a Rap site to say "Hey idiots what you listen is mediocre crap", then have the same respect, listen whatever makes you feel good, but leave us with our own music. If people don't like Prog it's OK, it's their choice, if Prog doesn't say anything to them, it's their God given right, but I'm tired of listening the word pretentious to describe musicians who can play more than a fifth note and do it well. Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Lozlan
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 18:23
I know of very few people (having difficulty thinking of any, actually) who actively object to prog on principal. Most people that I've encountered who hold a pre-existing impression of prog heard from a friend of a friend of a friend that it was pretentious or boring or overblown, and that has impacted their impressions. Again, it takes all types to people the world, and I think the majority of people who make uninformed (and, yes, in some cases informed) decisions to dislike prog are simply not interested in the work it is doing. This may manifest as a denial that prog is doing anything worthwhile (we are a confrontational species, after all), or they might just shrug and say, 'Not my thing.' In my experience the latter is far more likely, although I have met quite a few people that sniff at prog, labeling it worthless. For some reason most of these people only listen to Radiohead. Go figure. What is comes down to is the difference between objective and subjective appreciation. I can say that I hate Dickens (and I do), but I can't really deny his extraordinary influence on 20th century literature, nor the objective quality of his prose, which has inspired generations of authors, critics, and scholars. Similarly, most people that I know sort of shrug at prog, or regard it with disinterest. Those who actively condemn it often view its complexity and its fusion of classical and jazz forms to be elitist and exclusionary; essentially, the views that gave rise to the punk movement, a movement that I similarly sympathize with ideologically but really never listen to. ------------- Certified Obscure Prog Fart. http://scottjcouturier.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow - The Loose Palace of Exile - My first novel, The Mask of Tamrel, now available on Amazon and Kindle |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 11 2010 at 22:15
But isn't this dismissing prog on principle, essentially? Unless you can give some coherent reasoning for why fusing jazz and classical with rock is all that elitist and exclusionary, you are simply dismissing it without trying to consider whether those musicians could actually make this fusion work. The argument that it's too complex for 'laymen' doesn't wash with me because even I have never formally learnt music. And by that token, a lot of classical and jazz would go right over most laymen too. If those too are elitist and exclusionary forms, then may I suggest such people are just enemies of good music? Anyway, I still think the biggest problem is simply that prog doesn't fit into neat formats. A lot of people are simply at a loss when the music doesn't fit any slot like R&B, country, etc and a lot of prog, especially classic prog, floats in some grey area between rock, jazz and classical, not sounding a whole lot like the quintessence of either. But again, I fail to see how making such music is in any way pretentious. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 07:18
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 09:18
Although I have some sympathy for this view I really can't agree with it. Lots of social and cultural aspects came into play to enable Punk to happen but one of it's main driving forces was as a reaction against the perceived excesses of Rock superstars (prog or otherwise) hopelessly cloistered from everyday mundane life. Take a few too many double concept albums based on esoteric myticism or the foundation of the universe, add in a global economic downturn, allow to simmer and you've got yerself an entire generation of disaffected 'youth' who are looking for heroes to articulate their cultural values. They certainly ain't in the mood for Jon Anderson's woolly kaftan babble or Pete Sinfield's cramped hippy cosmology. Yes I agree that 95% of Punk was inarticulate poseur crap but 95% of all insurgency fashion is inarticulate poseur crap. (Year zero Maoist fervour by music journalists etc) Why do we Prog lovers always fall into the trap of equating simple music with simple ideas ? Even if you heartily loathe someone like say, Bob Dylan, Lou Reed, Tom Verlaine or maybe Stan Ridgway, there is more sophistication, nuance, emotion and textual complexity in the latter's '3 chord' songs than practically the entire lexicon of Progressive Rock (IMO )-------------
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 09:30
But in both cases, this is referring to the lyrics. I cannot comment on the lyrics but certainly musically Bob Dylan is not all that far out at all. A good example of complacent acoustic strumming stuff in largely pop form that has more to it than meets the eye would be Joni Mitchell. Also, excepting stuff like TFTO, Yes is not musically inarticulate. So to that extent, I agree with richardh and Ivan. Critics, like audiences, have always found it easier to talk about the lyrics rather than the music so they latched onto Anderson or Seinfeld's verse to dismiss it without getting into the music. Instrumental music is just pretentious tosh anyway...I mean, that's sort of what they say. |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 10:04
|
Well yeah I agree with some of that (perhaps) but 'complacent acoustic strumming' ain't complacent if yer giving it yer all and you move the listener deeply Like yourself I suspect, I get bored quite quickly with rudimentary song structures UNLESS they are negotiated by some of the writers on a par with those I cited in the previous post. I just find it irritating that we are often guilty on PA of elevating the technical aspects of virtuosity above those of emotion, feel, candour and insight. But yes we are at least all in agreement that popular music journalists have always paid more attention to the frame than the painting.
-------------
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 10:09
You got me wrong, I am a fan of Mitchell, I was just trying to contrast her approach to that of prog. Yes, absolutely, emotion should take precedence over technicality (having said which, I find more of compositional complexity than incredible technical accomplishment in classic prog and have always been at a loss where prog's obsession with technical virtuosity comes from). It's also true that a lot of prog doesn't achieve much emotionally. The difference is in my eyes so too doesn't much basic rock and roll or a myriad of other popular music forms. When the emotions being projected are cliched, they no longer resonate. I think the common feature for most progheads like us is that our tolerance for cliches within popular formats is very low, so we would rather feast on prog cliches. Not that I personally dig prog cliches so much either. However, long drawn out instrumental interplay holds my attention better than a procession of similar sounding generic songs in pop form. |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 10:36
You got me wrong too I heartily loathe Joni Mitchell but that's beside the point. Getting back on topic, there is another element to the music press contempt for Prog that even Keith Emerson hinted at in his autobiography:He has always felt there was an unwitting strand of racism in their dismissal of the genre i.e. because Prog was not built primarily from black american popular musical forms (RnB, Rock and Roll, Soul, Gospel, Motown, Funk etc) they recoiled from it's assimilation of influences sourced from areas completely alien to their narrow sphere of expertise (classical, jazz, avant-garde etc) It now seems wearyingly predictable that they would react to rock musicians exploring these uncharted waters by branding them 'pretentious' : How dare you use different ingredients when baking my puddy (Yuch !) (Even worse, what the hacks ordered wasn't even on the menu). -------------
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 10:43
Ha ha, that is what I have always thought too, but I wasn't around then to know what really happened. Not surprised to hear Emerson say so. I have never heard the word pretentious slapped on Herbie Hancock for instance and have never understood why experimentation in white hands should somehow be pretentious. Whether it has quality or not is beside the point, at the most, an artist attempting more than he can pull off would be overambitious, not pretentious. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 13:29
Keith Emerson's book is called "Pictures of an Exhibitionist" and he's trying to shock in order to sell, plus lets face it, him saying something doesn't mean it's true. There are several genres that are not based in black American popular music, take Country Rock, or Rockabilly, which is mainly white...Is this mus9ic also racist because they don't play Funk?. Take European Folk Rock, it's also essentially white...because the people in Europe is essentially white. Why must everybody play R&B, Gospel or Funk? Why can't musicians from different part of the world take the influences that are more natural in them. And with the pardon of Emerson, what he says is absurd for two reasons: 1) Prog doesn't dismiss Blues, by the contrary, a lot of Prog has a blues based essence, Prog doesn't dismiss Rock, it blends Rock with other influences, which makes it wider. 2) He says that Prog dismisses Black USA music, but everybody accepts Prog is directly influenced by the "elitist" Jazz.......As far as I know, Jazz is a black USA genre with strong roots in African music. This proves that most of the allegations are un based and irrational, because hoiw can you be a "musical racist" and embrace Jazz? Iván-------------
|
Posted By: SMSM
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 14:16
First, their are too many pseudo-intellectuals out there who would give great ratings to music because they read a review on how it was intelligently created, not on how it actually sounded.
This was the group a lot of bands and record companies used to release certain recordings to, recordings created, not by intelligent thought, but by a drug induced jam session.
I always thought prog was music one could listen to a song/composition 10,000 times and counting and still enjoy listening to it, likewise the musicians who have to play the song.
Nothing to do with intelligence, just a heck of a lot to do with common sense
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 15:35
BTW: I laugh when Punks say Prog is pretentious, I'm 30 something years in Prog but never seen a Prog fashion, people go to concerts dressed as they want, and artists don't use a fashion (Early Yes for example dressed as hippies) or used COSTUMES for theatrical effect, but on the other hand, let's talk abour Punk:
 or
 or
http://www.rennieellis.com.au/gallery/images/Punk_Fashion_Prahran_1987.jpg">
 or
 or
http://www.punk77.co.uk/graphics/echenberg/baycity.jpg">
 Please.....And they dare to laugh of how Prog artists dress?
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 16:43
Ivan, Emerson was merely stating that he thought they (they* meaning the music press NOT Prog musicians ) displayed a mild racism towards genres that were not so obviously based on black american popular musical forms. That's all - I really can't fathom why you would jump off the deep end in the way you have here?-------------
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 17:52
Honestly I haven't read Emerson's book and really not interested, but I heard those comments about Prog being music for white eltist racists hundreds of times.
And always have this same answer, a musical genre can't be racist per se.
Surely didn't read your quote well. sorry for that, but my opinion stays (Not for Keith) because many believe this.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: GY!BE
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 18:57
|
In prog you maybe "feel" that the artists are being pretentious but in fact it's probably a feeling of inferiority facing the majesty of the music. For them, they're just doing their thing, nothing more.
------------- It is all a dream, a dream in death... |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 19:02
That's not what Emerson said at least according to what ExittheLemming has mentioned. He seems to have suggested that the CRITICS considered prog more of a white domain and discriminated against it. I very largely agree with that, because, regardless of funk or jazz influences, it is very reasonable to say prog draws on 'white' influences. I must hasten to add, before you explode again, that I don't see this as making the genre racist in any way and I don't think Exit..suggested that either. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 19:55
That's not what Emerson said at least according to what ExittheLemming has mentioned. He seems to have suggested that the CRITICS considered prog more of a white domain and discriminated against it. I very largely agree with that, because, regardless of funk or jazz influences, it is very reasonable to say prog draws on 'white' influences. I must hasten to add, before you explode again, that I don't see this as making the genre racist in any way and I don't think Exit..suggested that either. [/QUOTE] Have you read my second post?
I apologised for having read the quote wrong before you wrote your reply.................Isn't that enough for you or you want me to ask pardon on the knees? I accept when I make a mistake.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 19:57
"but I heard those comments about Prog being music for white eltist racists hundreds of times. And always have this same answer, a musical genre can't be racist per se." This seems to suggest that you didn't/don't quite still get what Emerson meant. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 12 2010 at 21:08
Please, read my post:
I mentioned
I think it's clear I'm not referring to Emerson. Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 13 2010 at 04:48
Fellas, this whole comedy of errors has gotten beyond a joke hereabouts. For the sake of clarity these questions are addressed to Ivan (and I just know I'm gonna regret this but hey ho): Do you think some PROGRESSIVE ROCK FANS believe Prog is 'white elitist racist music?' Do you think some PROGRESSIVE ROCK CRITICS believe Prog is 'white elitist racist music?'; Do you think some PROGRESSIVE ROCK MUSICIANS believe Prog is 'white elitist racist music?' (I can't believe I'm actually typing this....) Please advise cos I ain't got a bloody clue what any of your responses have to do with sectors of the music press dismissing Progressive Rock as 'pretentious' based primarily on what they see as the lack of black american pop styles referenced in the genre. -------------
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 13 2010 at 10:06
Now,
Have I heard non Prog critics saying Prog is racist , elistist music? Hundreds of times
I know I misunderstood the EL's quote about Keith Emerson, I already accepted it twice, but I wouldn't had said a word if I hadn't heard this deivel before
Just in case, we have here a few threads:
So a lot of Prog fans believe at least Prog is an elitist genre. -------------
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67101&KW=Eliti&PN=1 - 1 http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67101&KW=Eliti&PN=2 - 2 http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67101&KW=Eliti&PN=3 - 3 http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67101&KW=ElitiPN=8 - 8 http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67101&KW=Eliti&PN=9 - 9 
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=44884&KW=Eliti - Rate yourself! (Prog Posted By: ProgBob
Date Posted: September 13 2010 at 16:41
That's the first time I have seen the Bay City Rollers described as punk!------------- Bob |