^Does it matter when you declare someone dead?

Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: Polymorphia wrote: Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: But did Punk Rock really kill off Progressive Rock No So, does anyone care to set the record straight then? <h1>Did Punk really kill prog all that much?</h1> <h1>Did the Punks killed Prog Rock?</h1> <h1>So punk killed the prog did it ?</h1> <h1>Did Sesame Street kill Prog?</h1> <h1>When Punk was Dead</h1> Mmmm, are you intimating that these members, by their posts, may be a bit misled? I intimate nothing. I post these links to where this subject has been discussed to death in the past. Read them at your leisure. The consensus in these threads is generally that the answer is "No" One of them is a Poll, this is the result: <table ="tableBorder" align="center" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" style="width: 981.8181762695313px; color: rgb0, 0, 0; font-size: 11.818181991577148px; line-height: 13.09090805053711px;"><t><tr ="tableTopRow"><td width="47%" nowrap="">Poll Choice</td><td width="6%" align="center" nowrap="">Votes</td><td width="47%">Poll Statistics</td></tr><tr ="ableRow"><td><label for="P62890">Yes (big enough to kill prog)</label></td><td align="center">15</td><td ="smText" nowrap=""> [22.73%]</td></tr><tr ="oddTableRow"><td><label for="P62891">No (apart from a few weirdos I hardly noticed it)</label></td><td align="center">41</td><td ="smText" nowrap=""> [62.12%]</td></tr><tr ="ableRow"><td><label for="P62892">Other</label></td><td align="center">10</td><td ="smText" nowrap=""> [15.15%]</td></tr></t></table>

I've read these posts before posting this present one. Funny how the old poll and the present responses don't match up. If I had to guess, I would say it's because we have the term Neo Progressive which sprang up in the mid eighties that I'm sure would signify an end or at least a break in Progressive Rock music (if not, then why have it?) and the fact that King Crimson reformed with a New Wave aesthetic to go along with the band's new idea of prog, along with other factors that would imply an end to Progressive Rock or at least a serious depletion of it's ideals.

Edited by SteveG - September 02 2014 at 14:58

In my country, punk and new wave were destroyed Yugoslav progressive rock as much as they could. It was a really big hysteria. The rock journalists in the national press who were writing whole series about the prog bands, during overnight they changed their clothes, got a haircut and went to celebrate the punk crowd. Well-know Yugoslavian film director was even made a film titled The Promising Boy (1981) about the punk rocker(s) in Belgrade. In the film, there were starring both well-know Yugoslavian actors and these punk rockers who were already the stars in alternative venues and in zines at that time. Aside of documentaries films about the punk rock, "The Promising Boy" was one of the first feature films about the punk aesthetic ever made.




(English subtitles)


Of course, the great bands like SMAK and LEB I SOL were keep their fans, there wasn't any problem with that, but the punk (post-punk, new wave) destroyed any desire of upcoming, young bands to play anything else than punk, post-punk and new wave. And that was the worst thing actually.

Yugoslavian post-punk rockers were released some excellent albums in the genre, but the final consequences of that devastation from 80s are evident even today. Although prog as a genre is already rehabilitated - thanks to Prog Metal - the organizers of the gigs of foreign bands rarely organized concerts of progressive bands; it's easy to understand when you consider that as "trend setters" & hipsters as well, they belong to the generation that grew up listening to punk and new wave only. So they organize the gigs of mostly punk rock bands, garage rock bands from mostly Detroit scene, also they like to bring here a lot of americana, some new blues artists, grunge, Exit Festival in Novi Sad is "reserved" for British alt.rock acts which no one listens in Serbia but the festival get a lot audience from UK and that's all. Of course, except of gala events as the concerts of the legends as well, e.g. Peter Gabriel who played So in its entirety. 

Edited by Svetonio - September 03 2014 at 03:09

SteveG wrote: Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: Polymorphia wrote: Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: But did Punk Rock really kill off Progressive Rock No So, does anyone care to set the record straight then? Did Punk really kill prog all that much? Did the Punks killed Prog Rock? So punk killed the prog did it ? Did Sesame Street kill Prog? When Punk was Dead Mmmm, are you intimating that these members, by their posts, may be a bit misled?

Dean? Intimate? Only with his wife. 

Punk did not kill prog, it was just pushed out of the mainstream and into the underground, where it has simply grown organically forever since, far from the shining light of the petty media that did a lot to mock it in 1977-1978. The music press was brutal (NME, MM, Creem, Trouser Press, RS and many more) in particular that scumbag Lester Bangs. Even local journalist were nasty (In Montreal, Rodriguez and Mann).  

I think he's suggesting that we've had this discussion many many times before

Most of this thesis stems from pictures like this

Polymorphia wrote: Dean wrote: SteveG wrote: But did Punk Rock really kill off Progressive Rock No

So, does anyone care to set the record straight then?

freyacat wrote: I've thought about this for decades now. You can't just say that one form of music came and destroyed another form of music. The music by itself doesn't do anything. Rather, the fans changed. Robert Fripp noted that in the sixties, fans expected rock music to be the "voice of god." Progressive rock tried to live up to that by being a voice worth listening to. But it was incredibly idealistic, and I think it was hard to keep that idealism up forever. Midway through the seventies, I think everyone realized that it took more than a record to change the world, and the whole generation got a little older, stopped sitting in front of their record players all day, got jobs, and had kids. Meanwhile, a subsequent generation wanted to distinguish itself. It couldn't get more complex and idealistic, so it opted for image (disco) and attitude (punk). The pretension of the punks was that they were more "authentic" than the prog rockers. In retrospect, this was just another marketing ploy.

freyacat wrote: I think everyone realized that it took more than a record to change the world, and the whole generation got a little older, stopped sitting in front of their record players all day, got jobs, and had kids. Meanwhile, a subsequent generation wanted to distinguish itself. It couldn't get more complex and idealistic, so it opted for image (disco) and attitude (punk). The pretension of the punks was that they were more "authentic" than the prog rockers. In retrospect, this was just another marketing ploy.