Genesis were bad to its fans.

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

This is an issue i'd like to address. Fans get irate about the change in direction Genesis took in the 80s,  Collins Banks and Rutherford counter argue that bands change.This retort may appear a reasonable statement by itself, but they managed it in an unreasonable way;

Firstly they dismissed their past; I have heard stories about when Genesis were on tour fans were caling out for then to play Musical box, Collins answered "back we don't play that crap anymore." Thus dismissing music that moved many people, and alienating an audience that were supporting  the band when they weren't as popular. They could have brass in their music while still sounding like Genesis and not have that foreign song Paperlate.
I see this behaviour as arrogant.
Yes bands do change their sound but many have achieved that while respecting their fanbase and embracing their past, for instance Iron Maiden evolved their sound has changed many times over the years with many experimentation but have never dismissed their past, they play the songs their fans like old and new. They are now talking about playing only their more recent material but their recent material has still strong connection to their past, they are a band that have put out good and bad albums, have changed singers but still have maintained their artistic aesthetic, and any change such as the controversial Bayley on vocals is understandable. Again Rush has been similar in many respects to its fans as Iron Maiden

Secondly Phil Collins is absolutely entitled to write whatever he likes on his solo albums, the same goes for Mike and the Mechanics and Tony Banks. But when Collins included his songs on Genesis albums, he should have made sure they had some sort of reference to the Genesis sound, you hear many stories of band members doing solo but adding music to the band that fits in well with their music, while sticking the music that doesn't fit in to their solo material because they respect their fans. If they have ever made that mistake or done an album that doesn't fit in their bands catalogue they often repent. 
Genesis allowed songs alien to their sound constantly on different albums. They again came across arrogant to their fans.

Thirdly their sound embracing trends and conformity. Genesis's music was largely anti-convention like most other prog. I understand that bands do flirt with wider success I don't think thats wrong, but thing is many of them have maintained their uniqueness, Rush and Split Enz achieved this, (although Enz last 2 albums were more foreign the band was falling apart and they don't consider their last 2 albums any good [see example 2]).  If Genesis wanted to have singles they could still do it while still being Genesis.

Some more things I'd like to point out you may argue that Yes did the same with 90125, but the fact is they were going to be a band called Cinema at that time, but the executives thought otherwise, I don't blame Trevor Rabin for the choices he made, he was against them being called Yes, it was another band, and you know how it got messy for them.
Another may argue Miles Davis did the same thing to his fans with Fusion, again I believe that this is different, Davis was constantly changing his sound right from the start; he experimented with orchestra, post bop. And also although he worked in a band context Davis wasn't a band he changed his line up all the time, he was under no obligation to continue a specific sound, he could have done country music if he wanted to. Also Davis unlike Genesis still stayed true to his roots, he still played Jazz, Genesis wrote In too Deep and other such tracks which are again foreign to their roots. In too Deep should have been on a Solo album. 
What am I saying here? I believe that a band can grow and experiment but remain true to their sound, while a solo artist has no such obligation they can be diverse as they want; that is the nature of solo work its about the artist exploring sounds outside of the requirements of the band.

So IMO opinion that is why Genesis gets a roasted, Banks Collins and Rutherford are asking for it, they were bad to us.

Edited by Cheesecakemouse - April 23 2009 at 21:55

Post Reply	Page 12 3 5 >