|
Unsung Forum » Prog Britannia |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
zphage 3378 posts |
Jan 01, 2009, 02:11
|
||
|
keith a wrote: Revisionism us a wonderful thing. I saw The Damned in '77 and believe me there was nothing retro about them. It#s easy to re-write it all and label them as cartoon-like (which is only half the story) but they were scary back then. True, back in the day when, Southern Rock was king in the US, tHE EAGLES, aerosmith, tULL, AND YES COULD EACH DO 2-3 nights in a major US city, punk was scary.
|
|||
|
machineryelf 3681 posts |
Jan 01, 2009, 10:51
|
||
|
Dog 3000 wrote: But Rotten had to struggle to get his ideas heard in the Sex Pistols -- Malcolm wanted titilating songs about bondage, while Steve & Paul just wanted to be the Heartbreakers or the Ramones. I would argue it wasn't til Johnny got into the more "progressive" PIL that his music became "extraordinary." (In a lot of ways Sex Pistols career almost seems based on the Monkees anyway: Svengali gets together 4 "charismatic" young lads, creates an image for them, and works the media to produce instant fame. Band breaks up when one of them gets "serious about being an artist" instead of continuing to act like a cartoon character according to the original plan. Face it, the Pistols were always more about the marketing than the music.) The Pistols made one great album, the rest was just grubbing about to part the punters from their cash, not everything that punk was responsible for was a good thing. But NMTB was as far as I'm concerned the point at which the lead singer as a pretty boy who could sing died, fair enough there were bands before who easily fitted the role but punk & Rotten were mainstream.Your granny knew who Johnny Rotten was, even half the punks in 77 didn't know who Iggy was, Rotten was exceptional from the start, I was no great punk fan myself but the Pistols, Damned & Magazine completely rewrote the book for me Dog 3000 wrote: The Damned were great, but kind of retro (60's and Stooges covers from the get-go.) A classic punk band in that they were a throwback to 60's garage rock, which is not progressive it's reactionary! "They did it better back during the golden age." As KeithA has pointed out The Damned were way more than some 60s revisionists, I'm honestly wondering what you are listening to if you think such a thing, dig out a copy of the first album and tell me that that came from the 60s!!! Dog 3000 wrote: The Clash did Sandinista! . . . why, that's almost a prog-punk album. Longer than Tales From Topographic Oceans! They are sort of the exception that proves the rule (and so it's no wonder they're probably the most popular and influential of their peers 30 years later -- unlike most of those UK punk bands, they were "progressive".) Of course a lot of bands were derivative, what's new, so were 99% of all prog/metal/hiphop/you name it acts, but using your Clash/Yes comparison look at the range and bredth of musical styles covered by each band, well fuck me the somewhat derided and ''unoriginal'' Clash win by a country mile Dog 3000 wrote: Punks (the popular class of '77 bands in particular) generally did not push the envelope MUSICALLY -- whatever "cultural" impact that movement had (hairstyles, clothing, making it cool to start your own band, etc.) is sort of beside the point, at least to me. In a lot of ways I think the concurrent DISCO trend was much more important! (Popularizing beat-driven and DJ/producer music, which leads to hiphop and house and rave and all that . . . what did punk lead to, MTV? Hair metal?) Actually they smashed the mould entirely musically, and much as we would all like it to be just about the music it isn't. I would say that punk led to the massive growth of independent labels, the general acceptance that you could release one single that led to the wider spread of dance music. It also rised the public awareness of Reggae a thousandfold. As for MTV, Hairmetal, the bad things that came from punk areas numerous as the good things, SAW,Simon Cowell both owe their livelihoods to the ripples that punk started in the big music lake, for every Joy Division there is a Simple Minds. U2,Guns N Roses,Madonna love 'em or loathe them they exist because of 77. You could argue that they would have existed anyway but not i think as we know them Dog 3000 wrote: And yes there are a zillion more exceptions -- Lydia Lunch, Wire, Black Flag, Chrome, etc. -- even in a scene that strives for extraordinary-ness (or it's opposite), there are always some who are going to be more extraordinary than others. ;-) Anyway, happy new year all!! Indeed there are, and a lot of punk can be traced back to the Stooges, Krautrock, The Bay City Rollers et al. But IMHO the class of 77 were the ones who stood up and took the flak like no o0ne had since probably 67 or before that Elvis in 57.Prog may have pushed the envelope but it was already on a path well trodden, in 77 punk drove a brand new motorway right up rocks flabby arse and the shit is still flying today happy 2009 everybody
|
|||
FOMouse 228 posts |
Edited Jan 02, 2009, 14:44
Jan 02, 2009, 14:44
|
||
If prog was a samwidj it'd be mega
|
|||
|
Moon Cat 9577 posts |
Jan 02, 2009, 14:48
|
||
|
I hope it's not just me that finds it quite funny that most of the posts on this thread have gone on longer than a Steve Howe solo. Ps, I like a lot of 'prog' as it happens, despite the still-perjorative connotations the phrase seems to be weighted with. Perhaps we should call the stuff we like "Music with nice widdly bits" and the stuff we don't as "Cack!")
|
|||
|
Moon Cat 9577 posts |
Edited Jan 02, 2009, 14:56
Jan 02, 2009, 14:54
|
||
|
Tish and Fie! Looks like I'm gonna be out and miss this. Still, it's on BBC4 so doubtless it'll be repeated a few times. I'm interested to see how they approach the whole 'punk killing prog' thing because that's always struck me as being something of a load of twaddle. For sure punk made prog almost terminally uncool for a long time but in real terms it's not as if a lot of the prog-behemoths - Yes, Genesis, Floyd, Crimson*, - were having trouble selling albums or doing huge tours after Punk stuck the boot in. Indeed, some prog-bands had their biggest (commercial) successes way after Punk had detonated. * as in the 80's version of course
|
|||
Jane 3024 posts |
Jan 02, 2009, 18:27
|
||
|
zphage wrote: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2d7eeeba-d14f-11dd-8cc3-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1 ...the emergence of a bold new trend in music-making, which would, for a brief period, dominate the world’s album charts...Prog rock was a deadly serious affair. There was no room for irony... Here were the essential tenets of prog rock: virtuoso musical skills, applied to any song with limitless indulgence; poetic flights of fancy that turned language into an enemy of meaning; brazen yet leaden showmanship (see Spinal Tap); and extremely long hair. Gah! Honestly, what a pile of sheer COCK. There really is some prize wank wanked over by musos about 'prog' rock. What, pray, is the problem with being able to play your instrument? And what's wrong with making music that is varied, original, indulgent, has weird time signatures, long symphonic sections, instrumentals lasting 20 minutes or more of big, sweeping tunes and complex instrumentation? And what's FFS is wrong with long hair? If you (the reviewer, not you zphage!) don't like it, then that's one thing, but it doesn't make it crap or meaningless, it just means it's not to your taste. For the most part I love 'prog'. It's probably my favorite rock genre. I'm sure the programme tonight will mention ELP, Genesis, Tull, Yes, Camel, and so on but I bet it won't mention my own progtastic heroes: Focus. So many bands owe so much to prog and it never went away. Not in my world anyway.
|
|||
Deepinder Cheema 1972 posts |
Edited Jan 03, 2009, 01:23
Jan 03, 2009, 00:04
|
||
|
Jane wrote: zphage wrote: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2d7eeeba-d14f-11dd-8cc3-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1 ...the emergence of a bold new trend in music-making, which would, for a brief period, dominate the world’s album charts...Prog rock was a deadly serious affair. There was no room for irony... Here were the essential tenets of prog rock: virtuoso musical skills, applied to any song with limitless indulgence; poetic flights of fancy that turned language into an enemy of meaning; brazen yet leaden showmanship (see Spinal Tap); and extremely long hair. Gah! Honestly, what a pile of sheer COCK. There really is some prize wank wanked over by musos about 'prog' rock. What, pray, is the problem with being able to play your instrument? And what's wrong with making music that is varied, original, indulgent, has weird time signatures, long symphonic sections, instrumentals lasting 20 minutes or more of big, sweeping tunes and complex instrumentation? And what's FFS is wrong with long hair? If you (the reviewer, not you zphage!) don't like it, then that's one thing, but it doesn't make it crap or meaningless, it just means it's not to your taste. For the most part I love 'prog'. It's probably my favorite rock genre. I'm sure the programme tonight will mention ELP, Genesis, Tull, Yes, Camel, and so on but I bet it won't mention my own progtastic heroes: Focus. So many bands owe so much to prog and it never went away. Not in my world anyway. I mentioned Focus! Jan for Jane : http://flickr.com/photos/24959568@N04/2404897286/in/set-72157604509209301/ I just seen it - all the usual prejudices - judicial editing for the trailer - amazing personal witness testimony regarding Schizoid man at Hyde Park - and *Mothers in Erdington, but a lot of the premise I don't subscribe to, oh and the biggest 'class' or music fraud Bob Harris, all that promise, yet he probably secretly grooves to 'The only way is up' by Yazz. They could have mentioned Animals by Pink Floyd, but it may have not suited their Symphonic metaphor - as its nihilistic and 'progressive' at the same time - which journalist decided that Thick as a Brick grew in time to be a prog classic as the programme indicated? I don't. * The Mothers Club Erdington High St opp St Barnabus Church closed in Jan 1970. If you peer up the side entrance the grafitti is still there: 'Out Demons Out' http://flickr.com/photos/24959568@N04/2371449349/
|
|||
|
dave clarkson 2988 posts |
Jan 03, 2009, 00:08
|
||
|
"..and what's wrong with making music that is varied, original, indulgent, has weird time signatures, long symphonic sections, instrumentals lasting 20 minutes or more of big, sweeping tunes and complex instrumentation?" ...nothing, as long as you're not a cock about it and don't take yourself too seriously, e.g.....errr can't think of any....oh, Robert Wyatt. Now as for these dudes... http://www.upthedownstair.net/pics/lovebeach.jpg 8)
|
|||
paradox 1576 posts |
Jan 03, 2009, 00:12
|
||
I thought Robert Wyatt came across really well in the interviews!
|
|||
|
dave clarkson 2988 posts |
Jan 03, 2009, 00:32
|
||
|
Yeah I noticed that the darker prog stuff wasn't touched on...no VDGG, Magma (could have been mentioned even though not british), Floyd. No mention of jazz influences like Sun Ra, Miles, Ornette or in ELP case, the CTI label. Very much kept to a white european classical influence even though most of the groups were adapting black american music as much too. The over romantic idea that there's something 'quintessentially' english sounding about most of the music is also a lazy myth which has built up and still does in this area of music. The Kent scene and the folk influenced stuff then yes but unless you're Nick Griffin, you're not going to tell me that ELP, Soft Machine, Yes or Genesis is some sort of english roots music. ...and Carl Palmer needs shooting! 8)
|
| Pages: 8 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| Unsung Forum Index | |
