The Single Non-Event that Changed Prog Rock ?

Kashmir75 wrote: [  Very well said. Punk failed to kill prog. But it did harm the media's perception of it. A stupid trend that lasts to this very day. The mainstream music mags still rave about punk like it was the second coming, pretend nothing existed before 1977, and rave about the latest trendy emo bands. Prog is still disparaged in most of the so-called 'guardians of music taste' mags.

Ok, so punk did not kill progressive rock. If prog rock killed itself then what was the single event that triggered it? Jon Anderson not returning to Yes (IMHO). Zeppelin and Floyd notwithstanding Yes were very much THE band that prog rock hinged. As they did not achieve Dramatic success in 1980 then that was the single event that ensured industry takeover and the demotion of art rock to roots rock. Cut 'em down to size etc.

Nothing wrong with roots rock by the way, but it's the (media prompted) resentment of progressive or the art form of rock that prompts a certain elitist attitude. Prog elitists versus punk elitists. Quite funny really.

I think one reason the media hates prog rock so much is that it makes their job so hard. Imagine reviewing and understanding Tales and Lamb. Much easier to champion the easy to understand and easy to review, go with a fashion get your copy in by deadline time and off to the pubs for a view from the bar. Sells more copies to those who prefer to have the tabloids do their thinking for them.

Oh, yes, ask the punks (they are still around) that if punk was so great then why was the industry so thankful  for Floyd and Zep? (Both of whom saved it's bacon in 79 and 80.)

But if Jon's Yes had gone supernova in 1980 then thigs may have been very different.

lazland wrote: Hmmm. I remember Wakeman stating that the first ABWH album shifted a million copies with barely any media mention at all.

I find that an absolutely horrifying piece of knowledge that I sure didn't want to know.

And yet...

Prog never died, but something definitely went underground in the late seventies, early eighties. In the eighties I was subscriber to a Dutch prog rock magazine, which started in the early eighties with yellow leaflets and is now a big full colour monthly magazine (after several name changes). In the eighties there was litte talk about Italian bands, Canterbury etc. and the magazine was often filled with AOR bands, because even the writers of the magazine didn't seem very much aware of the rich heritage of prog from the seventies. Neo prog was being covered, but apart from that...

It was hard to find good prog in the eighties. Now that's all changed. There is a flood of prog releases nowadays, and enormous attention to the heritage of prog from the seventies. CD and internet helped out enormously, I'm sure.

Prog never died, but prog and its audience seemed to drift apart for some time, for some part.

And amen to that! I wonder how we can still fall into the trap of the 'punk killed prog' stereotype (so we're all here to worship a corpse?), when we should know all too well how the media love to put up new idols and tear them down in the space of a few years (or even a few months).

I don't quite see how Punk had anything to do with the slump of Prog music. Somehow Prog just seemed to have ground to a halt.

Edited by npjnpj - February 05 2010 at 07:11

lazland wrote: Punk did virtually nothing to destroy prog, excepting in the eyes of the trendy & fashionable media, a silly trait that lasts to this day in most music publications, although, of course, they never bleat on about just how sad it is that The Pistols reform or UK Subs crawl around pubs & clubs still The bands we love still continued, and, indeed, continue to this day, to sell out conert halls or stadiums, sell truckloads of records, and inspired a whole new generation of great bands. Punk did NOT kill prog

The reply is to all posts above actually.
First of all, I think Prog pretty much killed itself. It didn't need punk at all.
Sure Prog still exists but it is mostly only relevant to it's fanbase. Only recent bands like PT, Opeth, Mars Volta,... manage to break out into the 'mainstream' (whatever that is these days)
And of course, any rock journalist denying the existence or quality of any rock-genre didn't do his homework.

Kashmir75 wrote: lazland wrote: Punk did virtually nothing to destroy prog, excepting in the eyes of the trendy & fashionable media, a silly trait that lasts to this day in most music publications, although, of course, they never bleat on about just how sad it is that The Pistols reform or UK Subs crawl around pubs & clubs stillThe bands we love still continued, and, indeed, continue to this day, to sell out conert halls or stadiums, sell truckloads of records, and inspired a whole new generation of great bands.Punk did NOT kill prog   Very well said. Punk failed to kill prog. But it did harm the media's perception of it. A stupid trend that lasts to this very day. The mainstream music mags still rave about punk like it was the second coming, pretend nothing existed before 1977, and rave about the latest trendy emo bands. Prog is still disparaged in most of the so-called 'guardians of music taste' mags.   I also agree with you about the hypocrisy. So its OK for people to rip off Television or the Pistols in new bands, but if anyone tries to revive the sound of Yes or Pink Floyd, it gets derided? It's fine if 50 year old Johnny Rotten pretends to be angry in front of crowds of 200,000, but if Yes do a tour, it's a bunch of sad old men? Double standard.

I remember an interview with Danny Baker (a british TV presenter and former journalist for the Melody Maker) He said, things changed big time in 1977. The results for the readers polls started coming in, and as usual is was the big rock and prog rock bands of the day, that were winning. The editor was furious at this, and decided things needed to change, so he told the team to lie about the results, and put the new punk bands at the top of the polls. Of course these days, an editor of a magazine would be prosecuted for this kind of thing, back then no one gave a monkeys. The Melody Maker team knew that many young people would listen to anything, if you told them it was the new thing, and was 'cool'

Hi,

Edited by moshkito - February 03 2010 at 18:05

Punk did virtually nothing to destroy prog, excepting in the eyes of the trendy & fashionable media, a silly trait that lasts to this day in most music publications, although, of course, they never bleat on about just how sad it is that The Pistols reform or UK Subs crawl around pubs & clubs still

The bands we love still continued, and, indeed, continue to this day, to sell out conert halls or stadiums, sell truckloads of records, and inspired a whole new generation of great bands.

Punk did NOT kill prog