Stripping a myth - the truth about ITCOTCK

But was the chair progressive?

altaeria wrote: hmm... The album ARS LONGA VITA BREVIS by THE NICE was released in late 1968... and it includes an entire B-side of (what seems inarguably to be) textbook symphonic prog. Does anybody here, regardless of personal taste, argue that the title-track's collection of "movements" is NOT symphonic prog by definition? KING CRIMSON's debut album was released almost a year later.

It might in the sense that it has the conventional four movements of a symphony, but I do not find it very orchestral sounding.

So what was the question?

Defining prog rock. I try and do that simply. It is rock with extended harmony and sometimes structure.

More evident in fusion with jazz, but with electric or acoustic harmony orchestrating. Or not. It is rock taken beyond the context to what the mainstream is used to hearing.

ITCOTCK is heralded as the first of it's kind which it is not, merely the first to achieve classic acclaim at least in retrospect.

So there is Greg Lake's more sentimental side. He got more so on Works... But it is in keeping with the times. For me the opener and the title track are the only ones that transcend the time but that was probably not the intent merely my perception.

I used to really dislike most of Moonchild until someone on this site pointed out the improv is the deconstruction of Moonchild, the reinterpretation of the music in the instrumental section and he recommended playing the quiet bit loudly. So it became clear that the improv was a series of themes derived from Moonchild the song. Good, got it. Cheers.

The only other number that did not ring my bell was I Talk To The Wind. But as it is essentially saying that talking to the wind is a waste of time I gave it that time.

So strip the myth, put it back on, and what do we have? The out ]put from a few musos whose record still causes discussion, dissension and debate, diatribes even. But The Stones liked it, KC got that support slot, Townshend liked it and reviewed it, Genesis liked it and based their activities around it, Yes liked it...there drummer was nicked by Fripp...  I mean, really if these guys thought well of this album then why should I not take the hint?

It remains still, a challenging listen and a requirement from progressive listeners to be progressive (questioning and thinking) in their listening.

And I do like Asia covering the title track. Wetton is superb. And intriguing when he says "here's something from 1967...". Hmmmm....

You could say that loads of "successful" prog albums are just pop songs:

Somehow ITCOTCK has come to be known as the first prog album for a variety of reasons. For one thing and this may be the most important, it was extremely instrumental in helping to shape the future sound of both YES and Genesis(two bands who are arguably the most synonymous with the term prog(aside from KC themselves). So what happened is that Yes and Genesis(not to mention countless other bands) took that debut as a blueprint for their sound. The fact that it was so instrumental in shaping an entire new genre is probably why it is often considered the first prog album. However, this all by itself doesn't make it the first. Nirvana and Pearl Jam were both instrumental in developing the grunge and alternative rock genres but they weren't the first bands in either of those.You can give an example for pretty much any genre. There's people who think there was "heavy metal" before Black Sabbath also. So what was the first true prog album? We might not ever know. At the very least we will never agree on what it is.


Edited by Prog_Traveller - March 10 2014 at 21:23

Prog_Traveller wrote: I agree with the OP for the most part. Imo, the only true prog track on KC's debut (which is "in the court of the Crimson King" not in the "Course." )is 21st century schizoid man.  The rest is like the Moody Blues with longer songs. :) . The songs are all verse chorus(ie the traditional song structure) and aside from the first track and the last 3/4ths of Moonchild none of it is particularly experimental or "progressive." Imo, what progressive rock or prog rock was all about was progressive song structures. If the song structures are verse chorus then it's just pop. Sorry kids!

By that definition almost everything released back then that we now consider prog...wasn't prog at all.

Dean wrote: lazland wrote: Dean wrote: There are figuratively billions of threads about what was the first Prog album. This isn't one of them. We have had six whole pages of tosh on this, but, at the risk of extending all of this in a serious manner, which it does not deserve, this thread is actually about the first prog album. Looking at Jean's opening post, she appears to be arguing that Crimson's Crooked Cock Of The Crimson King was not pure prog, so, de facto, could not be the first prog album. Or something like that. Not that I particularly care, but nigh on four weeks in a plaster cast do funny things to a chap. Anyhow, they are all wrong. Miles Davis released the first prog album in 1946  Ah, but Steve, this thread isn't actually about the first prog album, in fact this thread is unique in that respect. For this is the first thread that declares itself to be about what is not the first prog album. So to add to this perspicuous goal I would venture that This Was wasn't either and I'd also like to suggest that Images and Words should be numbered as one that was not the first Prog Album, moreover Script For A Jester's Tear stands out as being another that was not the first Prog Album. I suspect there are many more albums we could add to this auspicious list if we look deeply into, not only how they were structured, but when they wouldn't be at all surprised to find that we could amass a list of at least 10, maybe even 11 albums that were not the first Prog album. It's certainly something to think about.

I consider this post to be extremely interesting because it appears you have not understood what Jean said. What she does is questioning if it makes sense to define a "first prog album". And that's by no means the same as what you read into her post, however you try to make fun of it.

That's my point: The question of "defining albums" was not addressed by her at all. And I know that she certainly does not question the influence of this album. What she speaks out against is the almost mystic aura of that album. Her message is "Keep your feet on the ground". Or to use a German expression: "Bleibt auf dem Teppich" ("stay on the carpet").

Dean wrote: Where I disagree is in what constitutes a fully-fledged Prog album and whether that is a prerequisite for being regarded as one of the defining albums of the genre

BaldFriede wrote: Dean wrote: Where I disagree is in what constitutes a fully-fledged Prog album and whether that is a prerequisite for being regarded as one of the defining albums of the genre And now it is my time to go .