A new prog sub-genre : post punk

Iain, look at my post above yours, and you'll see what I believe about the whole purism issue... As to the problem of 'squeaky wheels', unfortunately PA is no different from the rest of the world, and, as you very aptly pointed out, the absence of a hard-and-fast definition of 'prog' only makes matters worse. Personally, I'd like people to start behaving more like adults, and save their energies and/or outrage for more worthy causes than the addition of, say, Black Sabbath to the PA database. The endless, inconclusive bickering about just about everything is what has driven many people (including Micky and myself) away from active collaboration. Life is hard enough without this!

Regarding the definition of prog, I once pointed out (humorously) that the song "New York City Serenade" by Bruce Springsteen has all the characteristics normally associated with prog, but no one in their right mind would seriously suggest that Bruce belongs in the archives

Like so many great things, we can't define it, so we have to rely on consensus. Still, Post-Punk has no place here.

ExittheLemming wrote: Epignosis wrote: I've never had a hard time "defining" prog (though that's not to say it's a black and white definition).  I raise an eyebrow at the sheer number of folks here who honestly think prog cannot be defined in some meaningful sense.  If it can't, wherefore this website? As for "post punk," I think two "post" categories are already quite enough (possibly superfluous), and with all the dreary clones that inhabit the post rock category (many of which- I'm sorry- are not prog at all), I honestly cannot see the point. Robert, everyone can define what a library is but they cannot define what literature is.

I'd disagree with you on both counts.

I guess I should add that I am not one of the so-called "prog purists."

Just because the boundaries of what constitutes prog are far apart and wide-reaching does not mean there isn't clear criteria.

The temptation for people is to assume that no one can say what prog is because this criteria is relatively inclusive and not restricted by genre (and not bound by the silly notion that there are "prog artists" and "non-prog artists").

Isn't this beginning to astray itself from the subject at hand?

I do know it is important and immensely helpful to have a basic definition of prog rock (or prog whatever) so to put our feet as some kind of base, but I don't think this is the most appropriate place for that.

Why not creating another thread for this discussion? I'm sure it will have a better and more satisfying outcome than discussing it here.

CCVP wrote: Isn't this beginning to astray itself from the subject at hand? I do know it is important and immensely helpful to have a basic definition of prog rock (or prog whatever) so to put our feet as some kind of base, but I don't think this is the most appropriate place for that. Why not creating another thread for this discussion? I'm sure it will have a better and more satisfying outcome than discussing it here.

Didn't mean for a side note to take the spotlight...it happens though.  My apologies.

I think I will go to the prog lounge and start a thread about what prog is exactly. 

Epignosis wrote: CCVP wrote: Isn't this beginning to astray itself from the subject at hand? I do know it is important and immensely helpful to have a basic definition of prog rock (or prog whatever) so to put our feet as some kind of base, but I don't think this is the most appropriate place for that. Why not creating another thread for this discussion? I'm sure it will have a better and more satisfying outcome than discussing it here. Didn't mean for a side note to take the spotlight...it happens though.  My apologies. I think I will go to the prog lounge and start a thread about what prog is exactly.

The problem is that such an important question is not yet defined enough by the site. You are completely right in making such questioning Robert! Specially when such subject arises.

I am sure that this opened this discussion for the better. We surely need a more solid base to work on.

lucas wrote: theBox wrote: P.S.: Post-Punk as a term refers to bands like joy division, the Cure, Echo and the bunnymen, Siouxie and the Banshees etc etc. For the love of god, please accept that they have NOTHING TO DO with prog rock.     No, they belong all to the gothic/cold-wave subgenre. Post-punk, like any other "post"-genres (post-rock, post-metal, post-hardcore) is an experimental form of music (at least this is how I understand the "post"). Post-punk bands play a somewhat experimental form of music, and my list doesn't include the bands you listed : Magazine (at least their first album), Devo, PIL, 23 Skidoo, Gang Of Four, Rip Rig & Panic, This Heat, The Pop Group.

Why are we even discussing this? Post-Punk and Prog Rock have nothing to do with each other. The few Post-Punk bands who DO have Prog connections are already here. The purpose of this site is to be a resource for Prog fans, not Rock fans in general. It's ridiculous. 

Bonnek wrote: Well I've done my bit in the previous post which I won't repeat here. Commenting on the above, it could be that PA might have to make a choice between continuing to bicker over the admission of every individual artist, or go forward with the ambition to be an all Rock inclusive Archive. A recent post by TheGazzardian (http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=64648) hints in similar directions. Especially Finnforest's suggestion to have a "straight 'rock' sub section " sounds very interesting.