Supper’s ready - Progressive Rock Music Forum

"Supper’s ready" (Genesis - "Foxtrot") has always been widely acknowledged as one of the defining moments in progressive rock. I should make it clear from the outset that personally I love it. Is it however the "masterpiece" it is held up to be, or is it in fact just a collection of unconnected short songs ("ditties?"), which happened to sit together well? What I'm getting at here is, was the masterstroke the merging together of the tracks, and then giving it an overall title?

What other tracks by other bands might have become classics, had they been given a similar overall title? I'm thinking of albums like "Contagion" by Arena, which has about 16 tracks, most of which merge together, and many of which have repeating themes. Had the band defined these as sub-sections of say three long tracks, would they now be hailed as 18 minute masterpieces of prog? Side one of Marillion's "Misplaced Childhood" (up to "Hearts of Lothian") is another which comes to mind. What if that had been actually called "Misplaced childhood", and deemed to be one track?

Do the links between the tracks or sections matter? Would "Misplaced childhood" need to have better bridges between the sections to be considered as one track? To me, some of them are seemless, while others such as around "Kayleigh" would need to be less obvious.

It has been said that "Close to the edge" by Yes was not written by the band in they way with which we are all now familiar. Producer Eddie Offord is said to have gathered together a number of different and disconnected pieces and ideas Yes had recorded, and formed them into the track we all know and love. (Should he have been given a co-writing credit?)

Is it a similar story with "Supper’s ready"? Have Genesis taken lots of short (dare I say throwaway?) songs, and bundled them together to form a whole? There’s certainly little in the way of recurring themes. The only one I can think of immediately is the "Can’t you see he’s fooled you all"/"There’s an angel standing in the sun" reprise.

Should "Horizon’s" have been included in "Supper’s ready"? As a relic of the LP generation, I have always considered it to be an integral part, as it would have been pointless to play side 2 of "Foxtrot" and miss out the first 2 minutes.

If we do accept that "Supper’s ready" is one complete piece, would side two of say "Abbey Road" by the Beatles have been held in (even) higher esteem if they had deemed the tracks to be sections of a "Supper’s ready" type suite with an umbrella title of say hmm, "Supper's ready"?

Some diverse but linked ramblings there, hope you can see where I'm coming from!

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
richardh Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: February 18 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 29285	Posted: July 25 2004 at 18:16
	It took a long time for 'Suppers Ready' to make sense to me but now it's probably my favourite peice of music. It's a bit like a book I suppose.The chapters on their own wouldn't tell you much so you need to read the entire book.

Easy Livin Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin Joined: February 21 2004 Location: Scotland Status: Offline Points: 15585	Posted: July 25 2004 at 16:01
	"Supper’s ready" (Genesis - "Foxtrot") has always been widely acknowledged as one of the defining moments in progressive rock. I should make it clear from the outset that personally I love it. Is it however the "masterpiece" it is held up to be, or is it in fact just a collection of unconnected short songs ("ditties?"), which happened to sit together well? What I'm getting at here is, was the masterstroke the merging together of the tracks, and then giving it an overall title? What other tracks by other bands might have become classics, had they been given a similar overall title? I'm thinking of albums like "Contagion" by Arena, which has about 16 tracks, most of which merge together, and many of which have repeating themes. Had the band defined these as sub-sections of say three long tracks, would they now be hailed as 18 minute masterpieces of prog? Side one of Marillion's "Misplaced Childhood" (up to "Hearts of Lothian") is another which comes to mind. What if that had been actually called "Misplaced childhood", and deemed to be one track? Do the links between the tracks or sections matter? Would "Misplaced childhood" need to have better bridges between the sections to be considered as one track? To me, some of them are seemless, while others such as around "Kayleigh" would need to be less obvious. It has been said that "Close to the edge" by Yes was not written by the band in they way with which we are all now familiar. Producer Eddie Offord is said to have gathered together a number of different and disconnected pieces and ideas Yes had recorded, and formed them into the track we all know and love. (Should he have been given a co-writing credit?) Is it a similar story with "Supper’s ready"? Have Genesis taken lots of short (dare I say throwaway?) songs, and bundled them together to form a whole? There’s certainly little in the way of recurring themes. The only one I can think of immediately is the "Can’t you see he’s fooled you all"/"There’s an angel standing in the sun" reprise. Should "Horizon’s" have been included in "Supper’s ready"? As a relic of the LP generation, I have always considered it to be an integral part, as it would have been pointless to play side 2 of "Foxtrot" and miss out the first 2 minutes. If we do accept that "Supper’s ready" is one complete piece, would side two of say "Abbey Road" by the Beatles have been held in (even) higher esteem if they had deemed the tracks to be sections of a "Supper’s ready" type suite with an umbrella title of say hmm, "Supper's ready"? Some diverse but linked ramblings there, hope you can see where I'm coming from!