Not really. If anything, it says which adherents within the alleged "prog community" who feel the most compelled at constantly having their own preferences confirmed as a purportedly established objective of quality. More eclectic progressive rock adherents with a broader historical, ethymological and stylistical diversity of insight would hardly feel obliged to "contribute" to registries like this one, if they even bother to read the mag regularly in the first place.
Progressive rock music, in its heyday, achieved greatness partly through upholding virtues that shook the very foundations of generics and rules - and "progressive" thus implied on one or more levels a sense of radical creativity principles. Spock's Beard, on the other hand...
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
Where Are They Now? Yes news: http://www.bondegezou.co.uk/wh_now.htm
Blogdegezou, the accompanying blog: http://bondegezou.blogspot.com/
but Moe asked if I "know anyone who thinks that?" and (unless he means do I hang out with Symph weenies in person) it would appear that the majority who had their votes counted in this "poll" are all of the pure wonderbread Prog mind. I don't think there is a single non-Caucasian musician in the whole lot even though those of us who were there and part of the scene know for a fact that Jazz Rock was the other side of the coin with Symphonic Rock in the development of Progressive Rock music from 1969-1975
Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?
Symphonic style of prog has always been the most popular part of genre so of course it also dominates polls. Simple as that.
I don't switch hit, and I'm not one of the 3 women who post here
Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?
^
Don't worry, man. I'm not among those who keep bashing you. There are times when I disagree with your views and opinions on artists and works and stuff, but you know your music. And this is still supposedly a music forum.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
no two people are going to have the same exact taste in music bro...
yours is definitely an opinion I respect even if I don't always agree with you
for the record; I'm pretty sure there are a good number of young (under 45) Prog fans who don't dance to the 'Symph is the only real Prog' dogma. It's just sad that the majority of young Proggers generate monochromatic lists like the one at the head of this thread.
Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?
^
I don't know if they actually make for the "majority of the young proggers". There are, by definition, large groups of "young proggers" who arguably don't even know that this is what they are - and who would most probably loathe being associated with the kind of stagnant drivel that keeps popping up in such lists on demand of the overtly "genre conscious" adherents.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
well, there's not a lot of variation in these "polls" taken *by* these wonderbread Prog magazines *of* their spoon-fed readers. It's all a steady diet of Brit Symph and Prog Metal that is pushed and swallowed since the mid-late 80s. The Progressive Rock scene in the late 60s through mid 70s was so much greater that the narrow minded view that has been pushed on to the younger generation for the past 25 or so years. It is truly sad
Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?
I'm not MT's lawyer (id so, I would fire my client ), but I think that more than the poll itself, it's clearly the mag's preferred subjects of interest that pervades in its aura and which groups are being talked about in the major features. And of course(like Vicky said, it's kind of normal), it fits the UK's propency to like UK groups and generally in the symph (historical or neo) and metal thingies (this attitude is even more glaring and blatant in the mother mag Classic Rock, with the same 10 bands making the cover and major features)... I rarelly see a jazz-inclined prog band get regular features - even within the frame of the Canterbury scene ... unless there is a death like Daevid Allen's
my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicts to complete nutcases.
The fact remains, if you dismiss all these lists as irrelevant, why invest the time stressing over them, and posting endlessly repetitive criticisms of the maker of the lists? Why not just ignore the thread and let the rest of us enjoy discussing the list?
No one's "stressing over them" - it's a PART of the discussion. Discussion doesn't translate as "Let's talk about just WHY [---] are so fantastic" and then have the dissenters expelled. And the main criticism is precisely the fact that remains; if one doesn't know more than 10% of it, then one preferably shouldn't draw judgement either good or bad concerning the other 90%. Therefore: know the damn matter. The formal objective of most media is to expose information and advance perspectives for the sake of expanding insight, not to constantly - as you say - REPEAT and reproduce the very same stereotypes in order to confirm a consumer identity.
If readers aren't urging to learn anew and more, then the logical conclusion would be that there's preciously little vitality to speak of and thus no "genre" to uphold.
"Improvisation is not an excuse for musical laziness" - Fred Frith
"[...] things that we never dreamed of doing in Crimson or in any band that I've been in," - Tony Levin speaking of SGM
Bookmarks