[atlantaprog] Re: prog

<<Like whom? (I think I know who you might mention, but hang on.)

I think part of the problem is that once a new material element comes along, 
people feel obliged to think of it after a few years as "yesterday's new 
thing", and thereby no longer good for anything (or else a mark of 
conservatism). 
But that doesn't mean we should stop using it, especially when older elements, 
considered more basic, remain. (Notice, to pull out the obvious example, how 
Genesis doesn't play in odd meters any more. Why? It's supposedly a "cliche" by 
now. But that doesn't stop them from playing in good ol' 4/4 all the time. 
Why is 7/8 "retro" and 4/4 not?)

Newer bands employ some new elements, but they throw out the older new 
elements (!), possibly in the interest of aesthetics. That's OK, but avoiding 
elements simply because they've been used before is a non-starter when you 
think abou
t it. I mean, where does that stop?>>

I think that a key goal for any up and coming artist to aspire to is to find 
that middle ground between ignoring history entirely and doing near literal 
reproductions of history.  That's a really hard thing to balance.  In one of my 
more acerbic moments I once commented that I thought that The Musical Box was 
actually one of the most honest prog band around today because they just come 
right out and play Genesis music rather than ripping it off.  

Truly original stuff is increasingly hard to come by because I think rock and 
roll has reached that postmodern phase where everything has been pretty well 
done and all you can really do is try to listen to as wide a range of prior 
stuff as possible and try to assimilate in into something new and unique.  I 
mean, think about the Yes lineup that made Close To The Edge.  You had Anderson 
who was prety well grounded in vocal oriented sixties pop music, but also had a 
thing for Stravinsky.  Then there was Squire with his 
Entwistle+McCartney+English church music sensibility.  Rick Wakeman was a 
clasically trained music 
school dropout.  Bill Bruford was a jazzer.  Steve Howe was into seemingly 
every 
guitar style under the sun.  The push and pull of those five guys from 
different backgrounds with different interests is what made Yes great.  Where 
many 
new prog bands run into trouble is that they tend to pull their influences 
straight from bands like Yes without delving into the source material that 
helped 
make that Yes sound in the first place and also without adding anything 
particularly new of their own.  This often results in the sonic equivalent of a 
theme park ride: some excitement, some fun, and you might do it again, but no 
real 
danger or suspense.  The outcome is never particularly in doubt. 

One fantastically underrated band that I think did a wonderful job of 
"reinventing" old school progressive rock practically by accident without ever 
actually being influenced by it is Miranda Sex Garden.  They're kind of like a 
post 
punk version of Renaissance:  lush, medieval style female vocals mixed with a 
crashing wall of guitar, bass and drums with some keyboard and violin thrown 
in as well.  I also think Bjork is pretty much the modern day Jon 
Anderson.         

CH

Other related posts: