Punk: A Logical Extension of Prog?

tamijo wrote: This is the kind of debate that is very hard, because there is no objective defination to what is punk, proto punk, post punk ect. And there can be many different answers that could be subjectively correct. Based on where you live, what sources you had access to, and how you define your criteria. The Punk "movement" was not big is my homeland, but it was not only "punks" that did listen to the music. Few liked the Pistols, but there was a lot of people that liked The Clash, basicly because the music was better, and where I come is was quite normal that you like both Peter Gabriel, The Clash, Floyd Kate B, ect.

Edited by Svetonio - March 06 2015 at 11:56

The Truth wrote: I find it interesting to consider that the first British album to call itself "punk" (Peter Hammill's Nadir's Big Chance) was also very much a progressive rock album. I also think a lot of proto-punk, a-la The Velvet Underground/Lou Reed ventures into avant territory which while not necessarily progressive rock, there was some overlap.

I find it interesting to consider that the first British album to call itself "punk" (Peter Hammill's Nadir's Big Chance) was also very much a progressive rock album. I also think a lot of proto-punk, a-la The Velvet Underground/Lou Reed ventures into avant territory which while not necessarily progressive rock, there was some overlap.

SteveG wrote: Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: ^This is another tricky part of the puzzle, the way the music media jumped on the punk band wagon without thinking for a single second. But it's secondary for the reason for punk's origins, is it not? Yes, but I have not spoken of Punk's origins, that to me is immaterial. This topic is related to what came after since Punk per se was not a logical extension of Prog in they way that post-punk new-wave was. Even what little Punk remained became detached from its disaffected and rebellious blue-collar beginnings. You did not speak directly about punk's origins, but anyone who read 70s-80's trade publications would be aware of it's origins. In your case, by proxy, as you yourself stated that you discovered the twisted reporting of punk's growth in these music magazines.   Is this not relevant to the OP's question? Growth yes, origins no. Now I'm not sure of what you're saying. If the punk movement had an origin, which is what I've been hinting at, then punk not could not be a logical extention  of prog. Agreed?

ExittheLemming wrote: Why do you defend the natural inclination of any subsequent demographic to reject the values of the previous regime as evidenced by music journalism? Not all of us are 'suckered in' by someone who is paid to pronounce that popularity = death of credibility. If you were a regular reader of both NME and Sounds circa early 70's to late 80's (that's 20 years stubborn refusal to bow to peer group pressure, way to go boyo) is this somewhow indicative that cherry picking to conclude that music you profess to loathe is popular therefore it sucks?. How exactly do bands pander to journalists to become more popular? Are immoral acts inveigled in this scenario?

Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: ^This is another tricky part of the puzzle, the way the music media jumped on the punk band wagon without thinking for a single second. But it's secondary for the reason for punk's origins, is it not? Yes, but I have not spoken of Punk's origins, that to me is immaterial. This topic is related to what came after since Punk per se was not a logical extension of Prog in they way that post-punk new-wave was. Even what little Punk remained became detached from its disaffected and rebellious blue-collar beginnings.

You did not speak directly about punk's origins, but anyone who read 70s-80's trade publications would be aware of it's origins. In your case, by proxy, as you yourself stated that you discovered the twisted reporting of punk's growth in these music magazines.

Edited by SteveG - March 06 2015 at 10:00

SteveG wrote: ^This is another tricky part of the puzzle, the way the music media jumped on the punk band wagon without thinking for a single second. But it's secondary for the reason for punk's origins, is it not?

Edited by Dean - March 06 2015 at 09:53

The entire "punk vs. prog" rivalry is something that I in real life have never ever heard anyone under the age of 40 remark on or even show any familiarity with. The few people I discuss music with on a regular basis with in real life actually come from the crust/grind/hardcore punk milieu here in Denmark, and because of stuff like Botch or Dillinger Escape Plan most of those types are also into more technically involved and ambitious music. That's even before you consider that in Denmark and Sweden the people involved in the death metal and grindcore (a particularly extreme punk subgenre) undergrounds are at the grassroots level mostly the same individuals, so they're neither turned off by fantastic subject matter.

For an example, check out this band I'm friends with in real life, the hilariously named Piss Vortex who are very strongly inspired by technical prog metal in the Gorguts and Voivod vein only with their innovations adapted to a grind/hardcore context instead.


Edited by Toaster Mantis - March 06 2015 at 09:55

ExittheLemming wrote: Dean wrote:   Both of us can articulate our ideas without recourse to graphics that would indicate otherwise erm.... I've just agreed with you re the Post Punk comment but the toys are out the cot otherwise?

Edited by Dean - March 06 2015 at 09:29

ExittheLemming wrote: I believe the so-called hippy movement circa 1967 was at the source a genuine manifestation of a firm disavowal of the types of obsolete values bequeathed to a post WW2 generation. History teaches us that even an unimpeachable past will be rejected as false, hollow and reactionary to any subsequent generation. (This might be deemed churlish, but is healthy and testimony to a questioning, irreverent and intelligent demographic who refuse to recycle the mistakes of history - albeit this rebellion is self evidently cyclic in nature) Such a cultural groundswell is rare in our republicanised and commodified world and seems to take a planet ravaging global conflict to bring about alas.... We should of course cherish such a response as befitting a faint vestige of consumer sovereignty whenever such rears it's plebeian head. I actually agree with Dean here i.e. Post Punk could be considered a logical extension consequence of Prog i.e. most adventurous and forward thinking musicians circa 1980 would have been intrigued/inspired by the musical freedom afforded by Prog but appalled at it's eventual descent into a bloated, complacent and self indulgent apology for 'unswerving integrity' that robbed the masses of a credible voice to articulate their dissatisfaction with a cultural status quo that would have deemed Status Quo as 'prole art threat edgy' However, even by the routinely Olympian level standards of crass revisionist drivel that Dean normally churns out, the notion that the cart (punk journalists i.e. Sounds) were driving the horse (musicians circa 1976 onwards) smacks of someone crow-barring the world's most inane yet tempting pun into an argument (Punk - tuated Equilibrium geddit?)

I going to go with the old theory that youth needs to rebel, and that great support from a significant part of the mass population fuels such rebellion. So, the WW2 'baby boomer' rebellion of the  sixties seems to fall in line with this theory.

Edited by SteveG - March 06 2015 at 09:19