Why don't most people love our beloved music?

Polo wrote:

The spirit of Moshkito lives on. . . .

Peter wrote: Henry Plainview wrote:       Hey, I haven't seen you post in a while. I'm glad you could spare the time to come back and make what is possibly the most elitist post in this thread so far in case we'd forgotten about your moral superiority while you were gone.  <div style="border-width: 0px; margin: 1px; line-height: 1.2; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">    Thank you, Mr Pot.   Henry, et al (< note elitist use of dead language), I know I risk sounding elitist, but I still believe what I wrote to be broadly true. I am generalizing, of course (see my use of "most"), and the issue of personal taste is complex, but most people (again, in my experience) don't care much about ANY form of music. Most people have middle of the road (thus the expression) tastes in most things. Prog is not middle of the road music -- it does not appeal to, or target, the average.   Many others here have made insightful responses to the OP's question, which shed further light on the issue. Again, the issue IS more complicated than my admittedly off-the-cuff, uni-dimensional post might imply, but I still think that I've expressed a basic truth. If it is "elitist" to generalize about masses of people at all, then I am guilty, I suppose.   BTW, thank you for suggesting that I am morally superior, but there is really little about morality in my post, or the issue. I was speaking of taste, and of many people's seeming propensity to not think much -- least of all about music. I don't think that's in the realm of "morality."   But here's my basic point, in a nutshell: prog is not average music, so it does not appeal to the (average) majority. Ditto jazz, classical, folk, death metal, microbrewed stout -- ANY "niche" thing that comes down to taste. I'll leave SUVs and shrimp out of it, next time (though again, my point there was about "average" behavior.   peace and love!

Nice posts Peter and welcome back. If your post is elitist then long live elitism.



HP's a decent chap but quite contrary and thus ranks second bottom in popularity on the site, just above me.

If you've read Stephen Hawking's book "Black Holes and Baby Universes" you'll see that he lists his desert island discs. All classical stuff. His appearance on Pink Floyd's Keep Talking was completely unbeknownst to him and if I remember correctly the track of Hawking's voice was lifted from a British telecomunications company television advert. So the fact that Hawking is a big Floyd fan is a complete myth.Or any rock music for that matter.


Edited by Vibrationbaby - June 22 2011 at 15:07

Warthur wrote: And Floyd's most commercially successful albums - Dark Side of the Moon to The Wall - all kept one eye on more commercial forms of classic rock too (to the extent where there are those here who'd argue that they aren't very progressive).

Other than the Brick single, I don't hear COMMERCIAL music on the Wall and none of it certainly on Dark Side.  Quite accessible, yes, but that's non-negotiable.  The more inaccessible side of prog is not going to win over the mainstream but from time to time in the 70s, its more accessible side was commercially successful. The Yes album went platinum. Aqualung has apparently sold 15 million units by now.  If we look only at charting success, then, shock and horror, Free Hand touched 48 on the US Billboards.  We know the story....those who got commercial success wanted more of it and crossed over and those who preferred to remain trve got swept away by the 80s.  Of course, as I already said, it is difficult to balance appeal and sophistication and when I am feeling less charitable, I like to suggest that some of those who tilt totally towards sophistication do so because they don't have the talent to write something appealing that isn't also crap. It is harsh but I think there are those to whom this applies. 

rogerthat wrote: ^^^ All that doesn't answer why many people who love jazz or classical music disregard prog. Why do many people who like great rock music, by any means 'real' music and not decadent mass entertainment, like Dylan, Kinks, Beatles dislike prog?  Surely, they all REALLY listen to music too?  The answer lies to a large extent in not only how the media and critics project prog (usually in a bad light) but also how a lot of prog listeners themselves describe it and project it. You are not going to find a lot of people who are interested in actively listening to 'weird', 'intellectual', 'complex' music because most people who love music listen to it for pleasure and for the emotions.    Why did some 20th century classical compositions have to be performed in its early days for small private audiences instead of huge halls as in the Romantic era?  The answer to both questions is much the same.  Musicians can try all they want to make a lot of people like avant garde and it's never going to happen, it's a battle that they will never win.  I am not saying there is anything wrong with wanting to make challenging music or challenging conventional notions of melody but people who either like music for the sake of such complexity or innovation or who derive more pleasure from dissonance and an aesthetic ugliness rather than conventional melody have thus far been the minority.  There are no signs yet that this would change. If, on the other hand, you try to introduce what prog there is that is emotionally resonant to people, you MIGHT succeed if the concerned people are somewhat open minded about music.  If you try to scare them off with something like Magma, don't be surprised that they hate prog.

Sorry I did not respond earlier. I think we generally agree.

Edited by Peter - June 22 2011 at 10:29

Peter wrote: As I said, I think that for the vast majority of people, music is for dancing, or serves as an unobtrusive vacuum-filling background for talk, work, etc. As such, they don't think about it much, and complexity (as in prog) will only work against what they "use" music for. Dedicated music listeners, like dedicated readers, etc, are a minority.

True, and I think you will also find that just because someone has middle-of-the-road tastes in music, doesn't mean they have mainstream tastes in absolutely everything under the sun - most people will have at least something they're enthused by, it's not to be held against them if that thing happens to be music.

As I said, I think that for the vast majority of people, music is for dancing, or serves as an unobtrusive vacuum-filling background for talk, work, etc. As such, they don't think about it much, and complexity (as in prog) will only work against what they "use" music for. Dedicated music listeners, like dedicated readers, etc, are a minority.

Henry Plainview wrote:       Hey, I haven't seen you post in a while. I'm glad you could spare the time to come back and make what is possibly the most elitist post in this thread so far in case we'd forgotten about your moral superiority while you were gone.

Peter wrote: In my experience, most people don't love any music, period (least of all complex music). If they don't opt for TV, they will play a dance-oriented satellite radio channel, and mostly ignore it. For most, music is just background noise -- a steady beat to talk over. I honestly believe most people lack the attention spans needed to really listen to music. They hear it, but they don't listen to it much.They are often totally oblivious to the lyrics, for example -- a 50 year old, educated woman I know recently told me that she "loves" Nickleback. "Ever pay attention to their lyrics?" I asked. "They are often very misogynist, very demeaning toward women."  "No," she replied. So, what does she love about them? An angry voice over aggressive music, I guess. A perceived image. Not the reality of lines like "I love you on your knees. I love my hands around your neck. You look so much better with something in your mouth. She's making six figures... she didn't get this far by just shaking hands." (That's right, girls -- prostitution is your road to riches.)   Most people don't read books, or go to see art films, plays, or finely-crafted costume dramas, either. They prefer shows like Jackass, and movies with lots of blood, boobs, and explosions. "Most" people like McDonald's cheeseburgers. Most people prefer Coor's Lite to a tasty, chemical-free, all-natural micro-brewed beer. Most people will not read a news story about the imminent death of the world's oceans, but they'll keep eating shrimp. Most people drive too much, in vehicles that are too big, and burn too much gas. Most people exercise far too little. Many will take up smoking tomorrow, despite having brains. Most people will not change their ways, for the greater good of their planet, and their future. Most people are sheep (tellingly, many will even opt for religions that label them "the flock" and their leaders or saviour figures "shepherds." and thinking too much or acting independently just makes them uncomfortable.   Thus, they get the entertainment, leaders, societies and planet they deserve.   I think it has always been that way, and likely always will.    Oh, to hell with it -- let's take the SUV to Walmart, then McDonald's!

Hey, I haven't seen you post in a while. I'm glad you could spare the time to come back and make what is possibly the most elitist post in this thread so far in case we'd forgotten about your moral superiority while you were gone. 

Navegador wrote: Have you guys ever watched The Truman Show? Amazing movie. Christof, the show director, said that "if he [Truman] was absolutely determined to discover the truth, there's no way we could prevent him". That's the same that happens here. People who listen to "regular" music are happy - like Truman was happy with his fake reality - and it's their right to be. If they ever felt they needed more complex and perhaps even profound music, they would end up discovering prog.

This comparison is absolutely ludicrous.  
 

rogerthat wrote: That's right but especially because prog essentially emerged out of rock, there's some amount of overlap between rock and prog so how prog is projected as to listeners is quite important.  Jazzheads and classical listeners might at least want to have nothing to do with rock in principle but that even knowledgable fans of rock don't necessarily like even a handful of prog rock bands says a lot about how it has been perceived over the years.

I'm not really sure what your second sentence is supposed to mean. 

Navegador wrote: Have you guys ever watched The Truman Show? Amazing movie. Christof, the show director, said that "if he [Truman] was absolutely determined to discover the truth, there's no way we could prevent him". That's the same that happens here. People who listen to "regular" music are happy - like Truman was happy with his fake reality - and it's their right to be. If they ever felt they needed more complex and perhaps even profound music, they would end up discovering prog.

Pretty much. It's not like prog is completely obscure, after all. Radiohead and Muse have both had massive commercial success lately, and a lot of coverage of them mentions potential prog influences on their work. People like what they like and there's nothing wrong with that.