Why so much Genesis love?

I understand why some folks are turned off by GG. They basically sound like Robin Hood's barber shop quartet doing prog rock. Don't get me wrong, just like Micky, I too love those first 4 albums.

Pastmaster wrote: Gentle Giant is the one of the farthest things from soulless!  Yes, they are one of my favorite bands, but I feel that they were able to perfectly be experimental and mix all sorts of sounds yet at the same time make very beautiful soulful music.  The real question is why so much King Crimson love?

Personally, I like GG ( S/T to Interview ) far more then anything I've heard by Genesis. While admittedly I've only heard Nursery Cryme & Foxtrot other then Phil Collins era Genesis.Still, I like every Gentle Giant album I alluded to above better then both those recordings. And yes, that includes Interview.

HackettFan wrote: Oddly, I missed you dissing my band for awhile, Micky.

SWilson is more fun of target these days

Oddly, I missed you dissing my band for awhile, Micky. I don't quite understand why the question is being asked. Genesis is canonical Prog alongside Yes and King Crimson. Therefore, lots of people on a Prog site are going to like them. Even if one doesn't like them, this would still be true.

Now a question that really needs asking is why so much f*&ckin Gentle Giant love?

This may sound crazy but I have been a Progressive Rock fan for decades but never really gave early Genesis a listen due to a lack interest.The Phil Collins era , Peter Gabriel's solo material and Mike & The Mechanics left me a bit ...emm wanting. Recently gave both Nursery Crymes & Foxtrot some repeated spins and I do like them . In fact I decided to join this forum and started digging out my Prog collection again because of the two albums. However, I currently find myself more Interested in reaquinting myself with my Gentle Giant collection then exploring Genesis' discography further.

Edited by Frosted Celt - December 11 2015 at 03:04

TheLionOfPrague wrote: But And Then There Were Three is nothing like Invisible Touch . I wish they had kept on doing albums like ATTWT in hte 80's instead of what they did.

As I delve more into early Genesis I come to the realization that after PG leaves, they had to change. They simply could not write the exact same kind of music as they did with Gabriel in the band. And then when Steve left, they changed again. Once again, I think they had to. 

SquonkHunter wrote: HackettFan wrote: Dellinger wrote: Flight123 wrote: Again, I dispute the thesis that post-Hackett, Collins engineered a personal coup.  Rutherford and Banks equally complicit in lurch to simplification and pop fodder.  Collins was also one suggesting that Genesis should 'go instrumental' post Gabriel... I agree. Actually, my impression is that the one one member that has always been the most important on the direction and the music the band would create, that's Tony Banks... not Gabriel, nor Collins. That's my impression too. It doesn't absolve Collins of anything (only a new Brand X album could offer redemption), but he was not alone in Genesis' infamous shift of direction. From everything I have either read or heard over the years, I am absolutely sure that NOTHING ever happened within Genesis without either the explicit or implicit approval of Tony Banks. Phil Collins, for all his later sins against Prog, initially, and very reluctantly, did what was necessary to keep Genesis together as a viable entity after Peter Gabriel left. The failure of his first marriage initiated the change in him. Just listen to his voice on any song from ATTWT and compare it to Duke. You can hear his voice changing, becoming more forceful, more angry. But until 1981 and his hit solo album Face Value, he was still much more the follower rather than the leader. Abacab sprang from Mike Rutherford's idea that they should do something "completely different" from what they had previously done. After Collins became a star in his own right, and only then, he became more an equal partner in Genesis - and shares in the "blame" for producing their later pop drivel. So, of the three remaining members of Genesis, I would actually "blame" him slightly less than I would Banks and Rutherford.

I can go along with that too.

Many of their early lyrics are very rich in a particularly English form of Satire.. Stagnation, Harold the Barrel, Return of the giant Hogweed, Get 'em out by Friday, Can utility and the Coastliners and sections of Musical Box and Suppers ready all deal with awkward subjects in a quirky, humorous but poignant way. I think that this overly English literary approach has over the years put off as many people as it has attracted. They (along with VDGG, King Crimson and to some degree, some elements of Procul Harum) brought a 'gothic' element into the lyrics and sound as well as producing some very 'pretty' melodies (some times just very small snippets). Genesis, historically, has always had the 'Marmite' effect (you either loved them or hated them) but I don't really think they did anything in terms or adapting and changing or becoming less complex or 'prog' than any other of the other successful, big progressive bands.. they were perhaps more visible due to many 'hit' singles and mainstream radio play and Phil Collins solo career, that's all.