Sex=/=Prog: Yes? No? Good? Bad? Why?

Nietzsche would reject any kind of popular movement having once written that popular opinion is always wrong.  Always.  He would also reject any and all overtures of popularity in Prog as he rejected the popularity of German unification.  At one point in time, Nietzsche lauded the music of Wagner for its sophistication and elevating qualities, but then came to despise Wagner himself - for accommodating popular opinion.  And let's face it - this is a commercial form of music, just one that sells in relatively low numbers.  I doubt that any one of our beloved artists would bewail any significant gain in popularity.  Remember that many of the classic artists went populist.  I do not think he would really care that much about an individual's opinion but he would challenge whether that person was being truly individual or not.  And this is the too-often missed aspect of his philosophy.  Mastery is not master over others, it is mastery of oneself. 

WWNT? What would Nietzsche think? That's a hard question as philosophers write one thing and many other people over many years try to decipher what they actually meant.

But the 19th century philosopher that hyperbolic-ally stated that "God is dead" was also adverse to the asceticism of Christianity, and had he lived long enough to experience rock 'n roll would probably have found rock 'n roll a dumb ed down version of a purer black American art from and would probably have applauded The Stones for their overt sexuality and would have been put off by Prog's nonsexual lyrical stance; a type of unwritten rule that centers on all topics except the celebration of the sexual.

Is Progressive Rock music actually nonsexual compared to other forms of rock music. if so, why do you think this unwritten rule exists? And does it matter to you if prog is nonsexual or not?




Edited by SteveG - October 14 2014 at 11:37