Does Laurie Anderson belong in the archives? |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | ||
ziggystardust360
Forum Groupie Joined: July 22 2008 Location: Orlando Status: Offline Points: 80 |
Topic: Does Laurie Anderson belong in the archives? Posted: July 25 2008 at 19:27 |
|
Please express your opinions.
|
||
''I always had the repulsive need to be something other than human''-David Bowie
|
||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 35795 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 00:41 | |
I don't think of her as a Prog artist, but as a progressive artist and as a performance artist. I would like to see her in the archives (and it could open the doors to some other interesting additions ).
|
||
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19535 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 00:52 | |
Yes Logan, but lets face it, this is a PROG site, there are thousand of progressive artists who aren't here, we should evaluate what benefit is for the site and for Prog in her addition.
Prog Related is a place for artists that really represent something for the genre, Bowie, despite the opposition, was a pioneer and influenced the genre, The Who are fathers of the Rock Opera, but Laurie Anderson is not even a trascendental artist, and honestly her addition could open more the gates to unwanted and unrelated additions which would cause more loss of identity.
Iván
|
||
|
||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 35795 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 01:23 | |
That's kind of why I'm not going to vote. Neither poll question represents me. I would like to see her in the archives, but I would not expect her in the archives. It's more I'd like her here than she should be here. Partially because I'm not much of a purist and quite inclusive, and would like to see this site expanding further beyond progressive rock into other progressive avenues (deep down I want to open the doors to artists such as Cage, Stockhausen, Glass, Nyman and eventually Mariah Carrey! ). If we had a specific "progressive electronic related" category, I think there'd be a case. Incidentally, she has cited influences such as Massenet. |
||
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19535 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 01:39 | |
^^^^^
That's the most honest reply I ever read Logan "It's more I'd like her here than she should be here"
And believe me, it has hapened to most of us, I seen mentioned Meat Loaf hundreds of times, and I've been tempted to say "What the hell, another one won't hurt, I love his work and the Steinman piano is rooted in Rock Opera"...But at the end I notice he's just a Hard Rock musician, musically imaginative, of course progressive (His songs have more bridges than the highway to Peruvian mountains and musical changes than King Crimson), but his addition will confuse people who come here for Prog and who are the vast majority.
And honestly, she can mention Bach as her influence, but I read Torman Maxt mentions Dream Theater as their influence (I don't like DT, but at least they have talent) and read awebnsites of the most unrelated bands who mention (In this rder) Pink Floyd, King Crimsom, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tul, Camel Focus and Italian Symphonic.
One thing is the influences that artists claim and another one is the real influences, as we say in Spanish "El papel aguanta todo" (Something like the paper accepts any claim).
Iván
|
||
|
||
Ricochet
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 27 2005 Location: Nauru Status: Offline Points: 46301 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 04:04 | |
Wrote a long reply before the server crashed and lost it all, a reply that include an opposite view to Iván 3rd subpoint above.
But, anyway, I support Laurie Anderson's addition. I offered several times to propose her properly to Prog Related and then, in case she's approved, to take care of the addition. But, after so many delays, it's clear I don't have the proper time to do any of that. I support her because, even if she's completely leaning on mainstream music, there's still lot of experimentalism, theatrical, avant-texts and fusion. But since it's not enough to be progressive music, Prog Related is very good for her, she can fit in without opening other doors - I think we've feared more for that when several other great rock bands were approved for PR. The early albums, Big Science, Mister Heartbreak and the United States fabulous 4 CD tour sustain her addition in PR. Edited by Ricochet - July 26 2008 at 04:05 |
||
|
||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 35795 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 04:56 | |
Ivan:
You almost make it sound like I'm coming clean. When I said before that I'd like her here, that is exactly what I meant (had intended to specify in my first post in this topic). There's a difference between liking something here and thinking it should be here (of course it can be both). One notices it a lot in topics here, and is a bit of a peeve, "You should have included this artist" rather than "I wish you had included this artist" when it's purely a subjective appraisal. As I said in my first post in Mandrake's Laurie Anderson thread (back in October), I do not consider her a Prog artist, a progressive artist but not prog, and so could understand why she wouldn't be considered suitable for the site. That said I heard qualities that made me think that she could find a place, particularly since this site has been moving/ has moved beyond a traditional view of Prog (and not just because of including the "non-prog" (or semi prog) categories. I felt she might find a place in "revisionistprogarchives." Incidentally, I should have mentioned that Laurie Anderson cited Massenet as an influence and has adapted music by him. If this was my site, she would be here, because her music has
experimental and innovative qualities that would fit my vision for a
progressive site, but it's not, so I don't want to be presumptuous in
saying she should be here -- that others should share my vision at this
site. If the admins, after weighing up the arguments and listening to
the music decide that she is acceptible; then great. If not, I accept
it. I don't think I'd be wrong in wanting her here, but it would be
wrong of me in this case to expect the same from those who make those
decisions. And just because I like certain music, of course, does not
mean that I would think it suitable for the site. There's music I
dislike that I'd sooner suggest, because, well, I know or suspect it
fits. Of course if I like the music I'll be more passionate about the
addition, and if I think such an addition could expand the parameters
of the site in a beneficial progressive way with related additions, then
yeah.
Forgetting the definitions used at this site for the moment, and definitions can change (sometimes we define things into existence, and then negate other things because of our rigid definitions): I think people like Laurie Anderson could fall into the shadowy realms of progressive music (not all is really rock, and not all is complex or sounds like what most would think of as Prog) that is represented at this site (or we could define her a place, not that I'm really suggesting it). I have great respect for the Ground and Sky site, and they include Big Science (the album I primarily based my liking her here on) I also refer to babyblaue prog reviews a lot when looking for album info particularly (not that we should follow their examples as they probably have their own criteria). Note: I came up with the thought that Laurie Anderson may be a worthwhile addition independently: Ground and Sky review - Laurie Anderson - Big ScienceBabyblaue Prog-Reviews: Laurie AndersonSo maybe it's not as far-fetched as some think, and maybe it's more far-fetched than others think. Having only heard in full two of her albums, I'm hardly an expert (Big Science alone was enough for me to make a connection, but that connection lies outside PA definitions; current or otherwise). I rather like this little write up from The New Yorker: Night Life: Night Life: The New Yorker
Incidentally, quite a number of progressive or progressive related artists such as Igor's Egg - " LDS - "~V~" Gravity Tree , JESUS DIESTRE and BLISSFUL BEHEMOTH cite Laurie Anderson as an influence, for what it's worth. Maybe not big names in the progressive scene, but she's had an effect. If I really researched I very much expect that I'd come up with a number of names in the archives that cite here as an inspiration. As for Laurie Anderson's possible inclusion, one could think of a
suitable prog description (if she were prog enough), I'd say
Progressive Electronic/ Expermental/ Art Rock then (using prog
parameters, otherwise I'd add others). Then
for Prog Related one would think if she has sufficient relation to
artists in those categories. Duh. In Progressive Electronic (an
important base point for me) they tend to look for bands with a
significant psych element -- is here sufficient psych elements to make
the "related" connection? I thought of her because of her
experimental, progressive approach. Rico: That's, in a nutshell, why I had thought that she'd be a worthy addition to the site. I'm glad I copied my post before the forums were unavailable since it's a fairly longish one. And now it's failing to connect. Ah, gotcha. |
||
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19535 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 07:18 | |
Good posr Logan, bu tI ask you a question..... Related to Prog Related?
Isn't hat forcing too much the boundaries?
The site has already accepted the inclusion to atists related to Prog, as an example artists from a Prog band are almost pre-accepted to Prog Related, but it's specifically said that artists from Prog Related bands won't be accepted as individual additions.
The point is clear. Prog Related is a non PROG category, so what's the sense of adding an artist rellated to a non Prog artists or band?
I think you don't get the point here, and I believe Iknow what is, because I wrote that definition.
Composition only, because this is a music based site, and performance alone means nothing, The Scissor Sisters played a cover version pf "Cofortably Numb, it's a Prog song, but they are non prog artuists, they just played a Prog song.
Michale Jackson could buy the rights (he done it before ) of Genesis Gabriel era, sing completely Nursery Cryms, byt his performance alone, doesn't make him a Prog artist, only a Pop mutant (The mutant is for obvious reasons) that PERFORMED a Prog album.
And about the sites, we shouldn't trust them, unless we are talking of an almost unanympus option, remember, Progressive Ears has added Jerry Lee Lewis and Stevie Wonder, and this doesn't make them Prog.
Laurie is accepted by two ALBUM BASED SITES (Not of the top ones like Proggnosis, Progressor, Progressive Ears or GEPR ), this doesn't mean she should be here, this sites add reviews of even non Prog ALBUMS, they don't define Prog Artist (Not completely sure about Ground & Sky)..
Iván
|
||
|
||
Ricochet
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 27 2005 Location: Nauru Status: Offline Points: 46301 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 07:31 | |
Not sure I understand this. Who said Laurie Anderson would be related to a non-Prog band - I mean, who said we would add her based on that? I think we're trying to add her as a non-Prog artist with, however, enough progressive characteristics that could "relate". Edited by Ricochet - July 26 2008 at 07:36 |
||
|
||
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19535 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 07:38 | |
Please Rico, read Logan's post:
Ok, now go by steps.
This means Related to NON PROG For God's sake. Lou Reed is not even here, so what was the point of mentioning she's related or influenced by Lou Reed, a non Prog and non Prog Related artist????
That's said, I go back to bed, it's 6:30 am and I was with insomnia since two hours ago.
Iván Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 26 2008 at 07:44 |
||
|
||
Ricochet
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 27 2005 Location: Nauru Status: Offline Points: 46301 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 07:44 | |
OK, but after the all, the argument above can't be used for her addition, I'm sure even Logan would agree. Logan said "some consider", but while it shouldn't mean Lou Reed is NON PROG because he's NOT ON PA, it also shouldn't really mean the point here that Lou Reed = PR, Lou Reed = Laurie Anderson => Laurie Anderson = PR Back to my statement, I'm sure that if we judge Laurie Anderson in the right way to judge an artist for PR, she wouldn't put much problems in being accepted as PR. I know Micky and Raff once even considered her best albums (the early stuff) good for Crossover. But PR is the better place indeed. Edited by Ricochet - July 26 2008 at 07:44 |
||
|
||
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator Prog Folk Joined: April 29 2004 Location: Heart of Europe Status: Offline Points: 20240 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 08:24 | |
I only know of her early career, and her minimalism was maybe (just maybe) taken from Can or Kluster
Let's fave superman is miniůalist, but it's not prog (or even progressive) and does everything to not resemble it
OverallI'd rather she's not in PAI , wouldn't fight her inclusion all the way
|
||
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
||
ziggystardust360
Forum Groupie Joined: July 22 2008 Location: Orlando Status: Offline Points: 80 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 09:54 | |
I'll fight for her inclusion. She definitly is prog related IMO
|
||
''I always had the repulsive need to be something other than human''-David Bowie
|
||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 35795 |
Posted: July 26 2008 at 15:21 | |
I won't go into much detail now because I'm just preparing for my daughter's birthday party -- 5 years old today. Lou Reed is considered prog related by some due to his contributions to Art Rock. I take a different approach to PR than the site definitions -- personally I would change them especially those percent mentions "Without being 100% Prog" since I don't like such quantification, especially when what is prog is debatable. If a band is only 99% Prog then is it not suitable for a prog category? I see Prog-Related in part as semi-prog rather than non-prog, or music shares shares similar compositional approaches to artists in prog categories. Or it just doesn't fit the sites current progressive categories.
The Related to Prog Related relates to comments I sometimes make such as "Sure so and so is prog Related, the question is how closely Related?" Related to Prog Related is meant in a rather humorous train of thought way. I've actually mentioned this idea a number of times, only partially seriously. Please see this topic of mine as it should provide added context: Proto [insert Prog genre] and Related bands (click) I've humorously suggested a Related to Related to Prog Related category before. And yes, agree with Sean Trane. Actually, i don't know how closely her minimalism relates to Can or Kluster -- I've likened her to people like Philip Glass, and various electronic minimalist composers. Edited by Logan - July 26 2008 at 15:30 |
||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 35795 |
Posted: October 21 2008 at 19:45 | |
Very late, but conversation died before, and I didn't have the mind (as I was very busy) to properly explain before, but my comment about "...Some
consider Lou Reed, Anderson's partner, as prog-related, and I know he's influenced her music..." was meant to bring a little levity to the post. Related in the sense of a "familial" (partner) relation who is related to Prog, but not meant to be taken as a serious part of an argument. It's the music that matters, not who one is a partnered with. At the same time, I do believe that to be fair, and I try to do so, one should try to refer to both strengths and weaknesses of a postion (offer an argument and counter-argument -- pros and cons -- when it comes to evaluation). We're not trying "win" place for people here, we're exploring the possibility, then it's up to the admin to decide.
I think musically she has quite a bit in common with artists in Progressive Electronic and Krautrock (in part her minimalist approach), and has Art Rock/ Crossover credentials. But as I said in this thread Laurie Anderson I don't think she's Prog, progressive, avant-garde, quirky, and experimental, but not Prog; however, I do think her approach to music makes her considerable for PR as a related artist (an interesting case, anyway, I think). |
||
Raff
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: July 29 2005 Location: None Status: Offline Points: 24429 |
Posted: October 22 2008 at 02:26 | |
I am not an expert on Laurie Anderson by any means, but I'd like to point out one important fact. If, according to the new guidelines for controversial additions, their presence on other prog sites is one of the defining factors to be taken into account, she is included in the databases of three of the foremost prog sites: ProgressiveEars, GEPR and ProgGnosis. I would take it to mean that there are other knowledgeable people around who consider her output to be at least prog-related.
|
||
russellk
Prog Reviewer Joined: February 28 2005 Location: New Zealand Status: Offline Points: 782 |
Posted: October 22 2008 at 03:15 | |
To make it here an act needs to be either progressive or Prog, or, best of all, both. Laurie Anderson is, I think, the former but not the latter. That makes her acceptance here somewhat problematic. I'd be happy to see her here, based on just about everything she's done.
Again, it comes down to what the guardians of the site want. Prog, progressive or both? If both, then she should be here. |
||
Yorkie X
Forum Senior Member Joined: July 04 2007 Status: Offline Points: 1049 |
Posted: October 22 2008 at 03:59 | |
Prog Related .. bring her in
|
||
npjnpj
Forum Senior Member Joined: December 05 2007 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 2720 |
Posted: October 22 2008 at 05:40 | |
A point raised above is almost worth starting a new thread for:
Should an artist being an influence on other artists be a factor in classifying whether he/she/they is (are) considered progressive or not.
Surely an artist can be progressive without growing a horde of imitators?
|
||
Kotro
Prog Reviewer Joined: August 16 2004 Location: Portugal Status: Offline Points: 2815 |
Posted: October 22 2008 at 06:35 | |
Ok, here are my two cents: HELL NO.
|
||
Bigger on the inside.
|
||
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |