Traditional Themes In Prog-Rock

I agree with you on that one, Stormcrow - I hate it when I hear a piece written for the orchestra suddenly sprout drums, electric guitars and synths. For me, that treatment somehow cheapens the work - and that includes ELPs murdering of Mussorgsky. I have only heard one rock reworking of a "classic" that does anything for me other than make me reach for the off button. And that includes the over-talented Sky.

However, when the "classics" are borrowed from and extended, rather than lazily plagiarised, the end results can be superb - e.g. Genesis, Gentle Giant and Gryphon. A successful genre cross-over can make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up, and a shiver run down my spine, and an unsuccessful one will normally elicit a "Nice try - don't stop trying!" (but the off button may still be utilised...).

Oh, I nearly forgot - the one rock reworking of a "classic" that makes me come back for more - nay, has me BEGGING for more, is by none other than the master of dumbed-down naff musicals himself, Andrew Lloyd Webber. NO - REALLY!!! His variations on a theme of Paganini's Caprice in A minor (used as theme music to The South Bank Show) are for the main part truly awesome. He enlisted some serious talent in the form of Gary Moore, Phil Collins, Herbie Flowers, Mary Hopkin - er, and his brother... one or two sections suck, but for the main, it's PROG, MAN!!!! Everything from "Classical" to "jazz" to folk to ROCK. Actually, this fits the rework category MUCH better than the "Stick it to a beat and add guitars" category.

...I'm gonna go and listen to it now!!!

Fitzcarraldo wrote: Just to be a Devil's Advocate , isn't using classical music excessively in prog music a bit lazy? Taking a lead or borrowing a style is one thing, but continuously re-hashing the Classics a la ELP could be construed as lacking in original writing talent. I love ELP's 'Pictures At An Exhibition' (listened to it yesterday, as a matter of fact) and I also love their versions of 'Jerusalem', 'Toccata' and 'Fanfare For The Common Man', plus Emerson's versions of 'America', 'The Pathetique' and 'Intermezzo' from the Karelia Suite when he was with The Nice. But should a prog band or musician continuously rehash the Classics? Is Banco's ...Di Terra more honest?

"Rehashing the classics" has been going on for the entire history of music.

In just the "classical" period (romantic, classical, baroque), everyone and his pet raccoon tried their hand at some kind of "variation on a theme by....".  Expanding on someone else's musical work is a time honored tradition and perfectly legitimate, IMO.

Also look at all the 50-60-70 year old blues songs that were updated and electrified in the 60's and 70's by rock bands like Cream.  In the blues genre it's self, taking someone else's song and expanding/rearranging it to make it your own is common and expected.

Now that being said, ripping off someone else's work, i.e. incorporating an obscure romantic era theme with no effort to credit the original composer is cheesy and just wrong.  But I don't see (or hear) anything basically wrong in "rehashing" a work that you admire, as long as you give it a certain amount of respect.

Keith Emerson is almost as responsible as my piano instructor was in nuturing my own love of "classical" music as it is today.

BTW, Fitzcarraldo, please don't take this as me trying to bag on you personally.  I read your "Devil's advocate" statement.  It's just me expressing my own feelings on the subject.

maani wrote: Peter: Not to worry...I promise to be a benevolent dictator... Besides, although Max has given me a long leash, he can always yank it if I get out of line! Peace.

Just be careful.  My dog gets tangled up in his long leash all the time!

again... going back to the main question:

i do think that using different kinds of instruments help imporve the music and the moood involved in it, also, helps going a little bit further with the knowledge of music and history, perhaps, many of the ancient instruments can be emulated with good keybords, but playing thos instruments is mesmerizing, in many cases, the music gets another level of richness and colors, like the music of Peter Gabriel for the movie (the last temptation of Christ), using Dhobros, djembes, double violins etc. or the case of jethro tull with the flutes and other wind instruments. Trying to use different kind of instruments is sometimes using a wider gamma of colors for the music, with "textures". Also using a wider use of the language is marvellous, beacuse it makes you think more and gets you involved with several aspects of the past lives.

Stormcrow wrote: Peter Rideout wrote: Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" Repressive Rock? Ugh!

MONTY PYTHON QUOTES!

W00T!!!

When I get my band together, we plan to play tons of inane quotes by monty python, like the one above...

Get back here, I'll bite your legs off!!!!!!

maani wrote: Re lyrics that attempt to be literary, I, for one, usually do not mind them.  For example, what on earth does "Can Utility and the Coastliners" refer to?  What do the lyrics mean?

Maani, I don't know about the title, but the lyrics themselves are based on an old English legend of a Middle Ages king who tried to demonstrate his earthly power by commanding the tides, only to have the incoming seas drown him. As such, they make sense.

Maani, now that you've been "handed the keys to the kingdom," as it were, and have "supreme executive power" here, (not even "derived from a mandate from the masses") try not to go absolutely mad with power!

"Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"

All:

Going back to VB's original thoughts (bet some of you forgot what they were...) about "traditional elements and motifs" in prog, and specifically "borrowing from the classics," I offer two comments.

First, the "official" definition of prog, per this site (whether one agrees with it or not) is music that combines "rock, classical, psychedelic and literary elements..."  Thus, the use of classical elements is, by definition, part of prog.  I have posited that it is not simply classical elements, but an actual "orchestral" approach to songwriting that helps make prog "prog"; i.e., rather than simply "stacking" a bass note, a guitar chord, a drum beat, a vocal and even a simple keyboard line, prog groups use a more truly "classical" approach to composition, including interweaving melodies, counterpoint, polyrhythms, etc.

Believe it or not (and I suppose it isn't that hard to understand), many classical "purists" are actually turned off to prog (or at least some of it) for this very reason: because they consider the "orchestral" approach in prog as sort of "half way," it is scoffed at as "naive" or "lazy" (and, in many cases, downright bad).  Even if all of us were to agree that ELP's interpretation of Pictures at an Exhibition is a prog masterpiece, a purist cannot appreciate it at all: to them, it is the musical equivalent of blasphemy.  I (and, I'm sure, most of us) can appreciate the difference between a "formal" interpretation of the piece and ELP's approach, and can enjoy - and even respect - both.  But don't ask a classical purist to understand that sentiment. (And this does not address the purists' understandable annoyance at the number of times that classical pieces are "quoted" in prog without credit to the original composer...)

Second, re lyrics, again we go to the "official" definition and find "literary elements."  Sometimes they are overt (direct quotes from literary works, etc.), and sometimes they are more obscure (lyrics that "attempt" to be literary).  In both cases, I think we would agree that some are more "successful" than others.

Re direct quotes, one thing that has not been noted is that their use can bring listeners to seek out the sources.  This, in turn, can (and often does) bring a person to actually read the source: whether a Shakespeare play, a Greek myth, a philosophical work, etc.  Needless to say, this can only be a good thing.

Re lyrics that attempt to be literary, I, for one, usually do not mind them.  For example, what on earth does "Can Utility and the Coastliners" refer to?  What do the lyrics mean?  For that matter, what do most of Jon Anderson's lyrics mean?Personally, I don't actually care: the lyrics are interesting, "quasi"-literary, and work well with the music.  What more do they need to be or do?

Peace.

Peter Rideout wrote: Don't like Jon Anderson's lyrics? Don't listen to Yes. But don't tell me that the words that inspire and move me (and others) are "cheesy." We all like different things. If you are home watching football, while I am watching "Pirates of the Caribean," what of it? Am I therefore less grounded in reality that you, or do I fall outside your defintion of what it means to be a man? Should we all like the same things?

Peter - I like both prog rock and football.  But who could make the case that football (or hockey or baseball or soccer or basketball or auto racing or whichever) has any more relevence to reality than does prog or jazz or reading novels?

It's all just choices on personal preference on how one escapes reality for a few minutes.

To me at least, to claim superior machismo by choosing one form of escapism over another is simply thoughtless.

Of course there are those, and I won't try to refute them, who will claim that playing organized sports teaches certain cooperative skills that can be applied in ones life in reality.  Having played organized sports I think this may be true.  But how more so than, for instance, learning to play music within a secondary school orchestra or a jazz combo or a progressive rock band?  Having done some of that as well, I would say no more at all.

Labeling people because of their choices in escapism is no more than making excuses for an absence of thought and understanding.

I've recently gotten into a rather acrimonious arguement (in another non-music oriented forum) about whether or not reading for pleasure it's self was or was not (in the words of the person I was arguing with) "queer".  Being a very avid reader of fiction myself, I was of course rather taken aback that the idea of reading for pleasure could be considered abnormal. 

But no amount of arguement, right down to pointing out that reading was what the non-reading proponent was doing on his computer screen, could sway him away from his (to me) completely wrong-headed position.  I simply have to reach the conclusion that there are people out there who have found a comfortable place where their mind can safely ossify and a new idea need never frighten them again.