Progressive Punk?

Well, punk could be used as the "style". Take the ethos of punk, the sound, the feel, and combine it with the complexity, intelligence, and intentions of prog, and there you go. Plus, without prog punk, what would we use to define the style the Mars Volta play?

But who really cares, music is music. If its good, it's bad, and if it's bad, it's good. Or so thinks Ozzy Osbourne of our opinions of music, the old sellout.

Well indeed, there is Prog-Punk. Like 5 years ago I listened to a NOFX album. For the ones who dont know, NOFX is a classic punk band from the 90's. Well, i cant remember the name of the album, but, it was really prog-punk. i mean, it had punk chords and style but the complexity of prog rock, it was good, i wish i could remember the name of the album.

Prog died because counterculture died. Punk wasn't just thrust on the masses, it came as a reaction to dying counterculture. Punk is not nearly as bad as disco/techno. Punk is a sort of iconoclastic reaction to society. Prog was an intelligent reaction. Disco was much more anti-prog than punk. Punk had a social conscience, however ill-expressed and dimwitted it may be. Disco was thudding, conformist rhythm, constant, unchanging. It had no conscience, no purpose other than dancing. On a side note, punk was not like it is today, really. It had a point, it was a reaction against what they saw as the enemy. They saw prog as that enemy, and they were, of course, fairly blind, but hey, any reaction is better than complete resignation and loss of conscience. Punk today is pop, with no purpose. Especially Blink 182s brand of it, and their ilk. Johnny Rotten of the Sex Pistols may be considered a genius, as close as you get in punk. His influences included Peter Hammill, Can, and Capt. Beefheart. That's where the "Nadir's Big Chance" thing came in, he was influenced by it, and began punk.

Prog is a sort of hidden, unknown influencer of all good music. Most "extremely good/legendary/universal" songs have a prog influence, like "Sgt. Peppers" (the whole thing), "Kashmir", "Stairway to Heaven", "Paranoid Android", a lot of stuff by the Who, etc.

Oh, and prog punk bands. There is such a thing: The Cardiacs, The Mars Volta, numerous bands which I've never heard but have heard of such as Primus, and Green Day to a certain very small infintesimal way only visible in their descision to write two 9-minute multimovement songs in a concept album. They could be pop punk prog, which emphasis on the first two words.

Try to resist posting things saying "GREEN DAY ISNT PROG THEY DONT SHOW ANY HINT OF IT". I'm not saying that they are, or do. I said, the only influence they may have is the two 9 minute songs and the concept. That's it.

lostrom wrote: gdub411 wrote: lostrom wrote: Progs enemy number one was not punk! It was the most evil of all...I dare not say it, but I must......: DISCO Prog's biggest enemy was prog itself. The musicians of that era lost interest and decided to make some money. No, no, no...my dear friend...that was NOT the case...I was a teen during that period, and I know from many sources, that this is not the case. Please, what you believe in is a myth! The truth is, if we're gonna be serious...the truth is that they where forced to change their music by the "winds of time". They were forced! Some musicians paniced, for example Gene Clark (ex The Byrds). He once said in an interviev that: "Suddenly, in just one year or so, everything changed. Big stars hardly got their tickets sold anymore. The record-companies demanded hit-singles and beat-drums. It was hard for me even to get a gig. All was about this punk! Everything else was just not in fashion anylonger". So, the dinasours did fell, but thay fell while being attacked. Some quit, but most of them just tried to survive. Van der graaf Generator had to wait for more then 25 years to come out again. Next? Gentle Giant? Perhaps...

Yeah, there is some truth to what you say but there were still prog bands cropping up in the late 70's. It was that our most popular ones all seemed to move into the pop direction which I am sure was spurred on by the record company execs....Pink Floyd is the one case where your theory doesn't fit.

I don't know why some some punk artists turned against prog. Mick Jones of The Clash was a hippie at school & listened to Yes ect. It's in a Clash biography!

lostrom wrote: Progs enemy number one was not punk! It was the most evil of all...I dare not say it, but I must......: DISCO

Prog's biggest enemy was prog itself. The musicians of that era lost interest and decided to make some money.

James Lee wrote: It's a good thing we have punk to blame, or maybe we'd be forced to recognize that the original prog scene was already starting to run out of steam...

Another hooray for Punk.
I was thinking the excact same thing myself
 

James Lee wrote: I'd recommend Television's "Marquee Moon" and Sonic Youth's "Daydream Nation". Punk was liberating for people who wanted to make music, and some managed to turn that inspiration into a 'progressive' approach...despite often lacking prog's esteem for virtuosity. So the genres may not so opposite as some would have you believe.

Yes, they are. I blame Punk for destroying the "classic prog scene".

Hierophant wrote: Prog punk? I prefer prog-rap.

tuxon wrote: I think Punk is the ultimate form of progressive rock. no structure, completely loose, ever changing time-signatures.

  

THE CARDIACS