Are RUSH actually Prog?

Cristi wrote: Progishness wrote: Hard rock with progressive tendencies, is my assessment of Rush. you've just simply described what we call "heavy prog", the subgenre Rush are classified here on PA.

Well I'm mostly steeped in the symphonic / eclectic / space-psyche aspects of prog... which is reflected in my Twitter handle (in my profile).

Cristi wrote: Progishness wrote: Hard rock with progressive tendencies, is my assessment of Rush. you've just simply described what we call "heavy prog", the subgenre Rush are classified here on PA.

Cristi wrote: all three were into it. Check the writing credits. As far as I know, Collins alone wrote just a couple of songs (Man on the Corner, Misunderstanding), it was usually an all three writing effort, a few just Banks and a few of them just Rutherford.

Since this is a Rush post.  I will pipe in by saying that I have so much respect for Rush even through they often sound too clinical because overall over the years they have stuck to being Rush.  Same applies to many others of the old bands Pink Floyd plays Pink Floyd.  Led Zeppelin plays Led Zeppelin.  Camel plays Camel even though the Record Company tried and failed to make them commercial.  Tull plays Tull.  I guess that's why it pains me so much with Genesis to give them the same love.  Because they stopped being what Genesis started up as being.  It's kind of sad and makes me wonder a few hundred years from now what people will then consider as their great albums with them when they view this period as another classical period.  The original Genesis or the later pop efforts, which ones will make that classical listening list?  For me its simple Genesis were original until 1974... after that commercialism changed them over time.

Catcher10 wrote: Spaciousmind wrote: Right, Collins however continued in the same vein in most of his solo efforts.  it's why I can't lessen his responsibility or his quest for wanting to be a Superstar in Pop. You have to understand all of them were influenced by American soul/R&B artists of the 50-60's. His solo album Going Back is an awesome tribute to many of the Motown greats, he covers those songs in excellent form. If you have zero interest in that music then I can see how one would take offense to what he did in his solo career, and not remain a "prog" artist for his entire career.  Many of these older progressive bands from the 70's did not grow up listening to "prog" music , they mainly listened to pop music and American soul, that was their influence.

Edited by jude111 - May 19 2021 at 11:42

verslibre wrote: Maybe these posts should be moved into a Is PHIL COLLINS actually Pop? thread.

SteveG wrote: Catcher10 wrote: Spaciousmind wrote: Cristi wrote: all three were into it. Check the writing credits. As far as I know, Collins alone wrote just a couple of songs (Man on the Corner, Misunderstanding), it was usually an all three writing effort, a few just Banks and a few of them just Rutherford.  Right, Collins however continued in the same vein in most of his solo efforts.  it's why I can't lessen his responsibility or his quest for wanting to be a Superstar in Pop. You have to understand all of them were influenced by American soul/R&B artists of the 50-60's. His solo album Going Back is an awesome tribute to many of the Motown greats, he covers those songs in excellent form. If you have zero interest in that music then I can see how one would take offense to what he did in his solo career, and not remain a "prog" artist for his entire career.  Many of these older progressive bands from the 70's did not grow up listening to "prog" music , they mainly listened to pop music and American soul, that was their influence. I was just trying to keep this thread going and I succeeded. I love Phil's first two albums and his cover of You Can't Hurry Love is great. Ok, continue the discussion.

Catcher10 wrote: ] At least Phillip does a better job singing that song.......