Progressive Rock - Not Very Progressive?
Press Releases are always to be read with a degree of skepticism, but one I saw the other day set me off on a train of thought that I'm still trying to put the brakes on. It called a new band, who shall remain nameless, "prog rock innovators," likened them to prog rock giants like Pink Floyd and Yes, and described them with a barrage of prog rock key words: "abstract," "figurative," "intelligent," "conceptual." The album only had a handful of tracks but each were several minutes (and "stages") long, and the album even had a silly pretentious name. PRs are always full of dubious claims, but it seemed particularly odd to me that this band was being held up as "innovators" when they stuck to every prog rock cliche in the book.
So what does prog rock actually mean now? Is it intrinsically "innovative," even when it's formulaic? I don't think it can be. In the 70s, progressive rock was so-called because it involved high-minded ideas about what rock music could sound like with a little experimentation, and much of it was incredibly pioneering when compared to the rock scene of the time. But surely modern progressive rock must still be progressing, and its comparative rock scene must be today's -- 2009s -- not the early 70s? What we should now be talking about as modern progressive rock should be bands like Battles and Animal Collective, surely, neither of whom sound anything like Pink Floyd. Isn't that kinda the point of being "progressive"?
It seems to me that music which is in thrall to the early 70s is retro, and retro is the opposite of progressive.
But if the meaning of "prog rock" is stuck in a time capsule, that's no different from what's happened to "alternative rock" or "indie rock," genres which now don't seem to require the artists to be alternative or independent at all.
While you ruminate on those ramblings, why not improve your day by watching this clip of Pink Floyd performing "Time," from Dark Side of the Moon, in London in 1994.
Oh and, hi, btw. I'm Ally. This is my first post for Chordstrike. Nice to meet you!
--Ally Brown
magic bullet on August 13, 2011 at 01:06 PM
I believe that a substanial portion ot today's progressive rock music is happening on a more local level, "under the radar" as it were, and not as visible in the expected ways.
Music on March 31, 2009 at 05:13 AM
nowadays it's very difficult to know what genre a music is.
Don Tillman on March 28, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Hi Ally,
"Progressive rock" is just the name that was given to the genre, and dissecting the words, or parts of words, will tend to be misleading. Prog is musical sophistication and artistic creativity applied to the rock genre, which itself is traditionally simple, loud, youthful, boisterous, and vulgar.
(Did he say "vulgar"? Well yeah, remember that the phrase "rock'n roll" was slang for sex.)
So there's not necessarily any "progress" in progressive rock. Bands like Gentle Giant and Gryphon were incorporating 17th century style counterpoint into their music. Numerous bands arranged for harpsichord and lute. 'Hard to call that dictionary-defintion "progressive".
In the early 70's the peak of Progressive Rock was riding a "Perfect Storm", a remarkable confluence of electronic instrument technology, recording technology, record label business practices, free-form FM radio programming, the culture of the time, some remarkably talented musicians, and an intelligent audience eager for and appreciative of sophistication, all in a symbiotic relationship boosting each other. You're just not gonna beat that combination.
It is true that today's progressive rock bands are not nearly as creative as during the peak. But that's the case in pretty much all genres of serious music; I mean, where are today's leaders in jazz and folk music?
And yes, today's prog bands do have a tendency to fall into cliches. And that's unfortunate. Certainly the original leaders (Genesis, Yes, ELP, etc) came into prominence because they sounded absolutely nothing like anybody else at the time, so when current bands dip into prog cliches it is evidence that they are missing the point. (Heh-heh, not that there wasn't any copying back in the day; I'm thinking of Starcastle, Marillion, Triumvirat, Fireballet, Citizen Cain, Klaatu, etc.)
On the other hand, there are some modern bands doing very interesting new work; Radiohead, The Decemberists, The Mars Volta, GYBE, etc.
I believe that a substanial portion ot today's progressive rock music is happening on a more local level, "under the radar" as it were, and not as visible in the expected ways.
Do check out the New England Art Rock Society ( http://www.newears.org ) for details about the progressive rock scene in New England.
And check out BayProg ( http://www.bayprog.org ) for progressive rock goings on in the San Francisco Bay Area.
(Full disclosure: the latter is my work, and I'm kind'a proud of it.)
-- Don Tillman
http://www.till.com