Procol Harum's contribution to progressive rock

dr wu23 wrote: SteveG wrote: Procol never had a true progressive song in my opinion. Even including In Held from the second album, which is string of unrelated but excellent songs. What Procol did was point the way forward for English progressive rock with the combination of their classical themes mixed with rock, as well as song suites. So, they were a type of important forerunner more than a prog prototype. Totally agree and I ,more or less, feel the same way about the Moody Blues one of my favorite bands in that they never really struck me as being prog rock and indeed they are here as 'crossover'...

Yup, same with The Moddy Blues and many other early groups listed as prog here.

Well it's been really interesting reading all the opinions about this topic. In summary, some people consider Procol Harum to be prog-rock, while probably more do not, but almost everyone recognizes their significant contribution to the evolution of the genre. In that regard, the label of proto-prog makes a lot of sense, at least for their 1967 to 1969 period, but what do you do then with their later work, such as the live album with the Edmonton Philharmonic Orchestra, the Grand Hotel album, or even the rather infamous The Worm and the Tree (arguably best forgotten about) and other titles that have strong prog influences? I'm not sure the Crossover Prog label really covers all of that. In the end, PH may just to be too different of a band to categorize, but I think this in part due to people's different understanding of what prog-rock is. I've yet to see a clear and agreed definition of prog-rock that would definitely exclude much of Procol Harum's music, and I wonder if some of us may be using the term a bit too narrowly. While there are no doubt some clear characteristics to what most people would consider to be prog-rock, surely any music style is ultimately fluid, evolving, and overlapping with other styles. Some bands and songs can be said to be more representative generally of prog rock, but only to a degree and only in comparison with other bands and songs, because in my view, there is no static, definite and overriding definition of what prog-rock is. For me, bands like Genesis and Yes are more prog-rock than for instance Jethro Tull, which is more prog-rock that Procol Harum, which I see as more prog-rock than the Moody Blues, but it's all a question of degree and perception. And the fact that A Whiter Shade of Pale, In Held Twas I or A Salty Dog predated the full advant of prog-rock does not make these songs less prog for me, because it's not as if there was a specific date in history when a specific definition of prog-rock was determined. That said, I would not go as far as arguing that The Beatles were prog-rock, even though they did also contribute importantly to the genre. However, when I responded to the "name your 10 top prog bands' discussion topic on this site, I did include PH, because my universe of what I consider progressive rock is sufficiently wide to encompass them (mainly for the reasons I provided at the start of this discussion). That said, I completely understand those who have a more focused definition prog, which excludes bands like PH and the Moodys. I'm not saying it's all a matter of opinion, far from that, just that the prog genre is fluid or eclectic enough to validate both views.

Thanks Moshkito for your feedback. You make a number of interesting points and I will not try to respond to all of them. When you say you don't think a top 10 poll voter would be interested in history, I would disagree as I have voted in a few polls and am interested in history, including the history of so-called popular music and cinema. Don't be too quick to come to harsh judgments . Ultimately, I don't really care whether Procol Harum is considered prog or not, but find interesting that, consideration of this topic leads us precisely to reflect about our perceptions and historical understanding of the evolution of a style and period of popular music, generating at least some thoughtful comments such as yours. In the same vein as your point about the importance of considering the historical evolution of and influences on progressive rock, as well as its interactions with other forms of popular music, it's worth pointing out the relationship between the music of early Procol and that of The Band, who mutually influenced one another in the late 60s, though The Band is hardly thought of as prog. And this mutual influence links back to the artist you mention, Bob Dylan, who I see as a key inspiration to both bands. In different ways, Dylan's lyrical imagery and musical style from Blonde on Blonde and Highway 61 Revisted resonates at the heart of early Procol and Band music. I may be wrong but I think it could be argued that Dylan and The Beatles, in the same way that they influenced so much other music, were the two main precursors of the development progressive rock, Dylan perhaps a little more on the lyrical front, and The Beatles a little more on the musical front. How we ended up where we are today (to address your points about contemporary music) is something that mystifies me a little bit, but that may be because my age (mid-50s) makes it difficult to understand today's generation. I agree it does not look optimistic but with two teenagers at home, I have to consider that maybe it's me who just doesn't get it! Ultimately, popular music is for the young, to enjoy, grow and define themselves. No new rock band or artist will ever mean as much to us after the age of about 25 as those who found a way into our hearts when we were young.

ProcolWho? wrote: As you can see from my nick....  The whole premise of the ops post , seems based on a falsehood.  "Procol Harum is not usually thought of as one of the top classic prog-rock bands, and not everyone would agree that their music is really representative of progressive rock in general."   If I was the op, I'd get an mri and check for abnormalities.      My dude, I was THERE , when it all happened.  Trust me , it was prog,  THE PROG.   Not even sure the sands of time are an excuse for blowing this call so badly .

This is one of those circular arguments that will probably never be resolved. as someone who grew up through the period, my view is that the Progressive Music Movement, of which Procol Harum were certainly a part, led subsequently to what is now described a 'Prog Rock'. Significantly, the Progressive Music Movement encompassed all styles, influences and genres, so couldn't be defined simply as 'Rock'. 

Ronstein wrote: This is one of those circular arguments that will probably never be resolved. as someone who grew up through the period, my view is that the Progressive Music Movement, of which Procol Harum were certainly a part, led subsequently to what is now described a 'Prog Rock'. Significantly, the Progressive Music Movement encompassed all styles, influences and genres, so couldn't be defined simply as 'Rock'.

Great point. I think most people would agree there's a lot of progressive elements within rock music in general, but whether we call something "progressive rock" depends on our implicit definition of "progressive rock", as an objective and agreed definition remains elusive. I think strong arguments can be made to include PH as pioneers of prog, but in the end, it does not really matter anyway as long as you enjoy the music!

One of my favourite albums.