The Doors, should they be included ???
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Suggest New Bands and Artists
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Prog Archives
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20620
Printed Date: March 03 2025 at 12:12
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The Doors, should they be included ???
Posted By: White Feather
Subject: The Doors, should they be included ???
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 00:48
|
The Doors ...Hmmm well they had a singer that was a poet, and they did feature a very accomplished organ player, and lets face it recently certain bands with weaker musicality have been added to this site, so I see it as just a matter of time when the topic will come up (like now) Should The Doors be included in Prog archives.com list of bands ?
------------- |
Replies:
Posted By: White Feather
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 00:54
BTW I voted NO  ------------- |
Posted By: chamberry
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 01:00
|
I don't know Maybe. Maybe not. The line of prog is now so blurry that I can't even tell if it is prog just by hearing it.  ------------- 
|
Posted By: White Feather
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 01:02
------------- |
chamberry wrote:Posted By: The Ryan
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 01:08
| That's funny, I was just thinking this about a week or so ago. But I am far too conservative to just silently let this site become full of non-progressive bands. So no, just keep the progginess alive, not all the other stuff. |
Posted By: eugene
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 02:05
|
Can you give me one good reason (in compliance with the logic of this site with regards to "prog-related" or "proto-prog" bands) why the hell not??? ------------- carefulwiththataxe |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 02:23
They didn't make an album that could be considered to be prog? ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to: 
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 02:25
|
Can somebody ask me why if there is a genre called Psychedelia, only British Psychedelia bands are included???? The Doors, Santana (Who I just seen a few minutes ago I believe it's contradictory to add bands as Iron Butterfly and leave away The Doors and Santana, even The Doors lyrics have great artistic value. Iván
------------- 
|
Posted By: Norbert
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 03:17
| Yes. If we have here The Beatles,ELO, Iron Butterfly it's hard to say a proper argument against the inclusion of this great band. |
Posted By: Andrea Cortese
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 03:42
I couldn't agree more, Ivàn!! |
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 03:50
I concur too. ------------- "Music is much like f**king, but some composers can't climax and others climax too often, leaving themselves and the listener jaded and spent." Charles Bukowski |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 03:54
I concur three ------------- 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 |
Posted By: eugene
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 04:07
I could reply: "Neither did ELO, Iron butterfly, Beatles, even my beloved Deep Purple, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc", and it would start endless arguments, in which no truth can ever be born. But we would not do it, would we? ------------- carefulwiththataxe |
Posted By: eugene
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 04:10
|
I quite agree with what ivan_2068 wrote above. ------------- carefulwiththataxe |
Posted By: MorgothSunshine
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 04:24
|
Yes they could psych rock or proto-prog...i vote yes....(even because in prog archives there are Beatles, Iron Butterfly, Deep Purple...etc...) ------------- For every truth even the contrary is true... 
|
Posted By: White Feather
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 09:20
I feel in a way threatened that prog is starting to lose grip of its own sense of identity these days. I`m all for progressing but I am starting to see a reduction in genre value. I do believe that The Doors lyrics are very interesting and their music is tight and I do agree that if Iron Butterfly, The Beatles and ELO are featured here then The Doors probably should be , but I dont actually believe those bands should be in prog archives but thats another argument. BTW I do acknowledge The Doors as being very significant to the music world, just not to the prog world
White Feather ------------- |
Posted By: rockandrail
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 11:17
|
The Soft Parade was not far from being prog at times. Some bars were included in Sweet Smoke's first album. ------------- Pierre R, the man who lost his signature |
Posted By: Kid-A
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 11:26
Why do people keep suggesting these sort of bands be added? Of course they shouldn't be added, they are a blues/rock band, not prog at all. Musical competency has nothing to do with whether or not it is prog. ------------- 
|
Posted By: memowakeman
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 11:49
|
well, i have the same feel as with Ivan too!!! but i dont think they should be included... i love them btw
------------- Follow me on twitter @memowakeman |
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 12:21
|
"The times they are a changing", especially on Prog Archives! Many months ago I was of the few on threads about a The Doors addition who was positive, incredible how many progheads were very cynical abd sarcastic and blamed The Doors for beiing just another blues/rock band. Now I notice way more progheads who are positive about a The Doors addition on this site. Perhaps the additions of bands like Iron Butterfly and ELO has to do with this? Anyway, to me The Doors sound (due to their different musical backgrounds) as a captivating, very progressive blend of rock, blues, psychedelia, classic and even some flamenco ADDITION PLEASE AND THEN SANTANA, JEFFERSON AIRPLANE, LED ZEPPELIN .... |
Posted By: Vi0LaToR
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 12:27
| yes, but in Prog related |
Posted By: Flip_Stone
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 13:09
|
They had progressive tendencies, weirdness, and a keyboard player, but overall, their music really wasn't in the progressive rock category. They were primarily a basic rock group, with a mixture of acid rock, blues, psychedelic, and some pop. Good group, just not people associated with prog. The more we add non-prog. groups, the less clear it is what prog. is about.
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 13:37
| They were highly influential and some of their music is proggy, but on the other hand they also did a lot of fairly simple pop songs. I don't mind them being included, but I'm not sure if they should be. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 16:57
Have you ever read our Sub-Genres page?
The highlighted´part of the Psychedelia describes 100% what The Doors did, and if you check your own definition, you're making the point they belong in the Psychedelia cathegory. Is it coherent to keep them away? Iván -------------
|
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 17:36
If you make that argument then it means you include all psychedelic bands, including Jefferson Airplane, The Grateful Dead, Love, Cream, Quksilver Messenger Service, and others. -------------  
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: March 22 2006 at 21:24
|
I believe we should check some or delete the sub-genre called Psychedelia from Prog Archives because it causes confusion. What's the difference between Britrish Psychedelia and USA Psychedelia? The Doors have deep lyrics, clear fusion with other genres, Indian and even Native Americans influence, so why not? Or do you believe that Piper atv the Gates of Dawn is more Psyche than anf Doors album) Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Prog-jester
Date Posted: March 24 2006 at 07:11
Yes,they should be here. 
But as for "who shouldn't be here" question...what the hell Anathema doing here?And Lacrimosa?And these power or doom-metal bands?
|
Posted By: Kid-A
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 15:27
|
Ivan the only flaw in your argument is that this is progarchives, not psychedelia-archives. The category listed here is psychedelic/space-rock. So the only psychedelia that belongs here is the spacier stuff, and stuff slanted towards prog. The Doors are neither. -------------
|
Posted By: eugene
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 16:16
|
It's not only Prog Archives since quite a time already. Have not you noticed yet?? ------------- carefulwiththataxe |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 19:31
|
No Kid-A, read the description placed in the main page of Prog Archives:
As you see, both sub-genres are independent, joined only becauuse some bands that started as Psychedelic ended as Space Prog related. But read the description, Prog Archives clearly separates Psychedelic from Space Prog. And bands as The Doors or Santana are absolutely psychedelic. Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: Kid-A
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 19:42
|
Well it actually says Psychedelic Progressive :P, and although they are clearly psychedelic, they are not anything to do with prog, so don't belong in that section, and hence shouldn't be in the prog archives. -------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 19:43
hmm... interesting... psychedelic progressive? ..... isn't that repetitive... my two cents... that's a bogus sub-genre... either include all the psychedelic groups.. or just the ones that were a part of the progressive (post-psychedelic) movement. Most definitions of prog rock mention that it grew OUT of psychedelia. In my book they are seperate, for this site at least, other than those groups which bridged psychedelia and prog like Hawkwind, Amon Duul, and Floyd. My two cents as always.. as far as the Doors... no way... a couple of psychedelic albums with little to no artistic leanings shouldn't qualify as prog. Sure they used Indian influences.... WHAT group in the late 60's didn't. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Kid-A
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 19:46
|
Although now the Beatles are on here the site is on a slippery slope. Why do people want to brand everything thats good as 'prog'? -------------
|
Posted By: Zepology101
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 19:51
|
Maybe Peog related, they are pretty prog. but I do think they aren't prog all the way, but have stuff that are the prog elements
------------- 
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 01:33
No Kid A, I'm really not so interested in adding The Doors, as a matter of facts, a few months ago I wouldn't even have mentioned this posibility. But I try to be coherent, if we're going to add one Psychedelic band, lets add all, The Doors is just one example, why not Sweetwater? They used Orchestral instruments and mixed Classical influence with their Psychedelic sound. This is an issue to be woorked by the Psyche/Space Rock team, and honestly I wouldn't like to be i their shoes. Iván -------------
|
Posted By: salmacis
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 15:27
| Prior to the 'proto prog' genre, I'd never have considered it, but now that genre has been set up (and it's shaping up nicely) it's hard to see how people could argue against The Doors being in the 'proto prog' category. They were one of the first rock acts to use the keyboard creatively and used abstract themes for their songs that certainly paved the way for the prog genre. I think The Doors, Love and Jefferson Airplane (of those not yet included- acts like Vanilla Fudge, Iron Butterfly already are of course...) are amongst the acts that really paved the way for the genre. |
Posted By: Spacemac
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 16:09
|
Yes |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 17:38
nice post! Psychedelia did pave the way for prog... though some smarta$$ would be quick to note that Elvis, Chuck Berry, and Buddy Holly did as well thus should be included hahahha. Not to mention Dave Brubeck who took odd time signatures and turned popular music on it's ear in 1957. Probably the fair thing to do is include them and the great psychedelic groups of the late 60's that haven't been included yet OR eliminate the whole categorie and focus on prog and prog alone. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: necromancing777
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 21:49
|
Though I love the Doors, they are TOO blues based, and should not be considered prog. IMO, Led Zeppelin are more prog than the Doors, and Led Zeppelin are not listed here either. Sure "The End" is a cool long song, but so is "Stairway to Heaven". I don't feel either of these can be considered prog songs. ------------- 
"Your progressive hypocrites hand out their trash, But it was mine in the first place, so I'll burn it to ash." |
Posted By: Dr. Occulator
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 22:20
|
The Doors were a great creative band but they were simply not progressive rock.
------------- My Doc Told Me I Have Doggie Head. |
Posted By: master_k
Date Posted: March 29 2006 at 06:13
As were Leafhound and Captain Beyond. They are at least considered as prog-related. ------------- Situation that rules your world (despite all you've said) 
I would strike against it but the rule displaces... |
Posted By: DrWizard
Date Posted: May 01 2006 at 15:51
| I say no. Morrisons lyrics beats any prog artists though and their definitely one of the greatest bands of all time. |
Posted By: bamba
Date Posted: May 01 2006 at 20:14
|
well Soft Parade have some prog moments but tahts not enough, I agree with Ivan but about Santana noooo ------------- Learning Flute [Amigo de Manticore y Memowakeman] (primo)[IMG]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2187/2437702285_fbb450500d_o.jpg |
Posted By: MattNYR
Date Posted: May 01 2006 at 20:41
|
The Doors are definitely not prog. Of course Jim Morrison is great, but their music has to speak for itself and in this case it just doesn't. The Doors belong in blues rock and classic rock, not prog. ------------- [IMG]http://www.highergroundmusic.com/i/artists/umforiste.gif"> |
Posted By: Zoso
Date Posted: May 01 2006 at 21:18
|
I'm a pretty big fan, though I must say no.
-------------  |