Do The Decemberists have people fooled?

Are The Decemberists prog folk?  Not always.  But so what?  Neither is Jethro Tull.

The first three releases are not exactly prog folk as many might consider the term, but they're all still great and have some pleasing exceptions, like "Odalisque" from the debut- this is progressive folk if there ever was a such thing.

But then you have The Crane Wife, which is partly a concept album (and contains the masterpiece "The Island") and The Hazards of Love, which is a progressive folk masterpiece in the richest sense.

Do The Decemberists have us fooled?

My answer: Who cares?  If they do, I'm damn happy to be that fool!

Edited by Epignosis - June 13 2009 at 08:15

What is really odd is that other prog websites do not seem to hold to the same idea of 'purity' many people have here... ProgEars has a good deal of pure jazz entries in their database (not to mention reviews for the likes of Bob Dylan and Napalm death), ProgGnosis includes artists such as Daryl Hall because of their occasional collaborations with prog musicians (Fripp in this particular case), and Sea of Tranquillity is chock-full of reviews of hair metal albums. Yet, I don't care, and continue to visit the sites whenever I want, without posting in their forums (if they have one) and decrying their addition policy. 

Sure. But there are also those who try to look beyond their current favorite genres ... and IMO that is the spirit of progressiveness. Maybe some people simply forgot the ideals they used to hold high when they initially became fans of progressive music.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: What I can't understand is why prog fans - of all people - seem so prone to inflexibility.

Try not to understand this.  It can only lead to madness. 
Not all of us are that way.
By the way I haven't tried them yet.  I'm not in the mood for new discoveries at the moment.
But sooner or later I will be...

Prog or not prog?  Yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is, no it isn't yes it is, etc.


Edited by Slartibartfast - June 13 2009 at 08:08

They certainly had me fooled......

hmmm... sort of expected a thread like this as some people will take note how prog fans have embraced this groups and will want to see what they are missing.


the simple truth of the matter is... some will see it as prog... some won't. 

If one's idea of prog involves stupid, pseudo-intellectual lyrics wrapped up in emotionless, complexity for complexities-sake music.. then they will probably fail to see how some see the Decemberists as prog. Raff is right though... I heard people talking about that during the show we saw...  not in our terms of course.. but it was clear.. just how different their music was from the typical sh*t out there.

if those who see them as being a modern heir to progressive folk music are fooled... then ...  ahhaha...  there are a hell of a lot of people that are fooled.   That leads me to think that people like the OP are the ones .. not being fooled...  but not musically-intelligent of listeners to discern prog from non-prog.


Edited by micky - June 13 2009 at 07:21

even though I love them whether they are prog or not, i still think they are prog. as of late, anyway. ever since "the tain" at least.

"Do The Decemberists have people fooled?"

No. Did they have any part in being included here? I don't think so. Several collabs listened to their music and came to the conclusion that they could be included here. I don't really think the band cares whether they're listed here - my guess is that they would not call their music "Prog Folk", and neither would I - but their later albums are surely progressive. I guess that long time fans of Jethro Tull's key albums from the 70s should get used to the idea that not every folk related band has to sound like a JT clone, with a slightly weird flute player (standing on one foot while playing -> extra points).

moreitsythanyou wrote: Oh and the Ice Queen, your so called "poor Janis Joplin impersonator" is not in the band and is  FING AWESOME