Why isn't Phil Collins in Prog-Related

When Phil finally came clean and told us he was from Croatia and he was extremely fond of granite, we knew he could never be part of such a special place here on PA. Prog-related? No such thing!

There was this attitude amongst the 3 of them Banks, Rutherford, and Collins and it said "C'mon boys, we always wanted to be songwriters...let's give it a shot" So in interviews all 3 of them had expressed having a love for songwriting before and during Genesis, but it wasn't possible because the band was heading in the new Progressive direction of Trespass. There was a scene created for bands like that in London and that was the direction Genesis were going in and so they put off the songwriting desire. From Genesis to revelation is actually corny singer/songwriter pop. Much of it is driven by the sound of the Bee Gees and that is telling.

I've been a fan of ProgArchives for years, but I just registered one minute ago. I had to chime in on this thread, because I've wondered the same thing many times. I'm a huge Phil fan and I own all of his solo albums. I think he poured his heart into every Genesis album -- particularly his last one ("We Can't Dance") and the tour that followed. Just watch his performances on that DVD!

But in Genesis he could devote himself to drums and vocals. On his solo albums, he's spread thinner -- he has to cover all the bases himself. His albums are as far away from prog as a rocker can get. Therefore IMHO he does NOT belong on this site. HOWEVER, when I noticed that Kate Bush and John Wetton have pages here, I had to wonder why Phil is missing. I'd only seen Kate's name once before (a Peter Gabriel duet), and I recognized John's name from Asia, Crimson, UK, etc etc. I must admit I've never heard a note of their solo music; I've only perused their albums and reviews on this site. For all I know, they might be a prog goldmine, but I don't get that impression. So I'm still left wondering why Phil isn't here.

Obviously the PA administrators have to draw the line somewhere. Whenever man tries to put labels (like "Prog") on something that can't be labeled (like music), blurriness and inconsistency are unavoidable. But such labels are useful tools for discussion and have helped me discover many great bands here. Now I'm starting to go off the philosophical deep end, so I'll shut up :)

Another reason NOT to add Phil is because then they'd also have to add Mike & the Mechanics, and M&M are even less prog than Phil!

criticdrummer94 wrote: Horizons wrote: criticdrummer94 wrote: Yes his solo work wasn't exactly Prog but if other members of Prog bands whose solo career wasn't exactly Prog then why can't Phil? Just an observation Which members are you referring to?  Also, even if they aren't prog, why would you want to include another artist that isn't prog-related? You said it yourself, his work isn't progressive. Well there is David Gilmour and Nick Mason of Pink Floyd. There also is Page and Plant and even Led Zeppelin wasn't really progressive

Gilmour and Mason both released somewhat progressive solo works as well as Page and Plant.

Some of Led Zeppelin was progressive but obviously not most of it.

Phil Collins released nothing progressive in any sense.

As I said before.......all of PA for Prog Related

I don't give a crap about prog-related and neither should any member here. 

Yes his solo work wasn't exactly Prog but if other members of Prog bands whose solo career wasn't exactly Prog then why can't Phil? Just an observation