VAPOR TRAILS

Here's a fact - during the 70's and, to a lesser extent the 80's, Rush recorded some of the finest "progressive" rock in the genre. Without them and others like them, our record collections would be poor indeed. Here's another fact - true artists "move on" and Vapor Trails is Rush's latest move. With few embellishments, VT is a superb, straight-ahead rock album but it is not, by definition, "progressive" and therefore, arguably, should not be listed in the Archives. My critique then is not directed at the album (it's fine) but at the Archives itself, as an institution. VT has provided an opportunity for the Archives to "move on". Firstly, for the Archives to remain focused on its mission, a far more selective approach must be taken to album listing. The truth is, many albums being listed cannot be, by any measure, considered "progressive". They SHOULD NOT be posted on the Archives. Secondly, the content of reviews must be STRICTLY limited to commentary on composition, production, artwork; the technical and artistic dimensions of the album. I was shocked and extremely disappointed to read many of the reviews for VT; for those of you who crossed the line, you know what I'm talking about. As for the comments by Hughes Chantraine and MusicLover.I'm appalled (refer to guideline 2.). How dare you even suggest such things!? It was offensive and demonstrates a smallness of character not to mention extraordinary arrogance for another's grief. The fact that this review went unchecked is an indication of how far the Archives have fallen. FIX IT!