The Future of Prog

{I'd just like to add some comments - by way of discussion, not derision }

Despite some progressive elements, I still say that DT are much more metal than prog, and metal sells, especially with younger listeners.

{Too true.}

  Where is the same level of hype/promotion for a clearly progressive newer band like IQ? The 70s are gone -- you can't recreate an era or an overall sense of rock developing/expanding before your eyes. To a certain extent, it has all been done before, {Sorry, me old mucker, but I don't buy that - I could just as easily argue that Bach did everything first and everything else is just gravy... Back in the 1970s, Rock was still finding its feet, and categories were easier to tell apart, because there were fewer and more easily defined destinctions. Now many of the differences are more subtle - but this has happened for every successive generation of music - e.g. compare Vivaldi to his peers and play "spot the difference", ignoring the fact that Vivaldi was top of his game for his time. Now look at the time period over which Vivaldi's music developed - best part of half a century. It's less time than that since prog was born, so not surprising to me that much of what follows the "greats" sound similar. Music constantly develops - but what makes now so strikingly different from Vivaldi's time is that in those days there were fewer composers, who were far more highly skilled and formally trained. Nowadays it's all diluted - and becoming ever more so as "Young people" are encouraged to "express themselves" and eschew formal training to "do it naturally". The problem here is that like any skilled profession, unless you spend the time in the apprenticeship, the workmanship will become of a lower quality. It will take the skilled composers to make the music that lasts - but they are being "progressively" (sic) squeezed out of the system by "kids from the street making music for the kids of the street".  plus, I think that youth/rock culture was more unified and open to variety in prog's heyday. Now youth/rock culture seems much more factionalized. {I think things have come around full circle - many "younger" people I've spoken to have wide interests in music - what you are saying is very true of the devisive era of the mid 1970s - 1990s, but I think people are finally realising that there is good in most music.}

The good ol' days are gone. {No!!! The good ol' days are right here, right now! } There is still good new music being made, but audiences are (I think) different now. Attention spans are generally shorter, lyrics and music that require an effort and thought to get into are less likely to succeed, I think. {That certainly seems to be a trend I have noticed. People now seem to like the "short, sharp shock", which is diametrically opposed to the days when prog was in its infancy, when such tactics were only reserved for shocking moments. I put this down to the same culture that goes for instant gratification and intense sports. The other thing that sells over and above everything else is the packaging - the presentation. Put a bunch of ugly guys on the TV who can play really well, and write great songs, and they will do less well than some pretty boys who have their stuff written and played for them by session musicians (the ugly guys...). Worse than that is that a lot of people can't seem to hear the music for the production - the old "magic dust". Producers now more than ever seem intent on disproving the old saying "You can't polish a turd". There is some great music out there with shockingly bad production on the recordings that gets overlooked because of the advances in production techniques that means that rubbish can be polished up until the average Joe (or Julie) can't tell the difference. Bah!!! }

Classical and opera have similar problems, as their core audiences age, but are decreasingly replaced with new adherants. {Tricky one to argue against, but it's taken a very long time for interest in, say, Bach to start waning - could just be a "blip". I'd like to think so }.

Give most teens that I've taught some classic Genesis or Yes lyrics to read, and an overwhelming reaction will be "That's gay!" 

Sad, but true, methinks....

{I'm not exactly a teen anymore, but I find the lyrics of both bands a little problematic in places... (...stops before the air becomes too thick with flying missiles...)}.

I believe that real prog will remain on the fringe, and (as in the 80s) that prog bands that want to be economically viable will have to become more commercial to survive. DT do well because agressive high-speed metal does well. Did Marillion become more commercial-sounding by accident?

{No - but I believe that decision was probably management driven - hence Fish's decision to get out early. I'll bet everyone in the band was surprised when "He Knows You Know" and "Garden Party" were hit singles - I certainly was! The subject matter of the lyrics goes against all prevailing trends, and the song constructions are in different sporting arenas to, say, Duran Duran, Spandau Ballet or The Cure. If you are able to get hold of any of the Radio broadcasts of the concerts Marillion did before "Misplaced Childhood" was released, you will notice that "Kayleigh" is a much better fit in the overall concept - and much less striking as a stand-out track. That song had a lot of "tweaking" before its final release - which is a pity, as it is a good song in its own right, but was much better in its original form. I don't think Genesis became more commercial sounding by accident either }