Sex Pistols...but seriously.
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Suggest New Bands and Artists
Forum Description: Suggest, create polls, and classify new bands you would like included on Prog Archives
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=33600
Printed Date: March 04 2025 at 02:11
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Sex Pistols...but seriously.
Posted By: clarke2001
Subject: Sex Pistols...but seriously.
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 09:30
|
I'm proposing addition of the Sex Pistols on the ProgArchives website. Before someone kills me or jumps into conclusion that these punks recorderd a symphonic conceptual masterpiece never published, let me explain: They could be included in any category: prog-related, neo-prog, metal, non-prog, various artists, I don't care. But only one album by them, "Never mind the b*ll*cks". They should be treated as any other band here: band entry, track listing, picture, availability to rate and review, inclusion in top 100(00000).... Exceptions are: 1) their reviews shouldn't appear on the front page 2) band's entry should be "petrified" by administrators; e.g. no-one should be able to add new albums. Why they should be here? By letting the Pistols on PA, every forum member will be able to bash them, rate them with one star, to canalise and focus one's negative energy on one hated point. They should be here for pure therapeutic reasons. Maybe then people will stop saying "I think prog-metal/electronic/post/neo/prog-related/proto/whatever is crap and I hate it, the band ABCXYZ shouldn't be here." After that, maybe we will became able to discuss and share knowledge about our most beloved musical genre, progressive rock. I apologise in advance if administrators think that this is not appropriate thread for this section; please, feel free to remove it into "help us improve the site" section if necessary. However, I'm deadly serious. postscriptum: it doesn't have to be Pistols necessary. Any widely prog-hated album should do; any of Justin Timberlake's or Celine Dion's albums. Same rules apply. Well, you get my picture. Peace. |
Replies:
Posted By: Angelo
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 09:34
  ------------- http://www.iskcrocks.com" rel="nofollow - ISKC Rock Radio I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected] |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 09:38
|
I don't care how serious you are,this is ridiculous.
I will not move it,I am simply closing it. -------------  |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 12:39
|
I closed this thread because I thought the proposal was ludicrous,and I perceive it as an abuse of the Suggest section.
If you all want the bands you Suggest to be taken seriously I would suggest to you all to not post "joke" topics here. If the topic creator was trying to stimulate debate over controversial additions or whatever,a thread in the appropriate section would have been a better idea. ------------- |
Posted By: tuxon
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 12:48
I was quite amused reading this. 
for implementation the idea is too absurd to be taken seriously, but it makes sense to me.
BTW it would provide me with an opportunity to propose P.I.L. for inclusion in prog-related  ------------- I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT |
clarke2001 wrote:Posted By: Philéas
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 13:12
| Interesting idea. I'm not sure if it would work though. But I think it's worth a try. |
Posted By: enteredwinter
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 13:19
|
I just want to point out that the real offense of this proposal (IMO of course) is that the central idea is that essentially all prog fans hate the Sex Pistols. Where would one get that idea? I think Bollocks is a great album, and I bet a lot of members agree. Even if you don't agree, do many people around here actually harbor strong animosity towards the band? Sure, the dawning of the age of punk was the death knell for classic prog, but I doubt that means there is a strong resentment towards punk here. Maybe I'm wrong ... I'm curious to hear other views on the subject. |
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 13:24
|
After the topic was closed, I've sent a PM to Progtologist; although there was no reply, I see the topic is now reopened. Thanks, Ghost Rider for understanding, and also thanks to Progtologist for doing his job promptly (although I disagree with the decision). You can describe my post/thread as ironic, ridiculous, distasteful, even blaspheming - and I agree to some extent, but my intentions are to rise a constructive debate. I don't think that my proposition will ever see the light of the day, however I still think that inclusion of any non-prog entry will emphasize prog entries and their qualities and characteristics in a good way. As I said, I tried to develop the constructive and fruitful discussion here, and my mistake is that I used a trigger that is waaay too "close to the edge". To Progtologist: my post was not a "joke" post in any way. Actually, after seeing too many threads with intolerance and almost hating atmosphere on certain prog subgenres, the whole thing left quite bitter taste in my mouth. Not a joke at all. I explained my intentions very clearly in a PM to administrator and I won't be repeating myself further on, but I will repeat one thing: My intention was not to trivialize informations, work or members of PA in any way. If anyone feel offended because of subject of my thread, I apologise. To Ghost Rider: you don't have to worry, there shouldn't be signs of any intolerant or aggressive behaviour. Let's keep it civil. The same goes for any thread, right? |
Posted By: Passionist
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 13:26
| I agree with above post. Sex Pistols was not that bad. we have this Popstars winner called Jane here who would be even better for the cause, though I guess more people have heard Sex Pistols. |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 13:47
|
I didn't understand a single thing out of the therapeutical thing.
1. to add non-prog bands so to bash them?
 2. to add only one album of a band?
3. to not allow access to a band?
4. to not allow a band a fair review result (meaning tops, artist image appreciation etc.)
5. to call a band that's not prog a band for all possible prog genres?
6. to be deadly serious, but to act confusingly?
7. to propose, promote and consider possible a band that isn't prog by A THOUSAND MILES?!
besides points 1 to 7, upon the last things I'll agree in this life of mine is for Sex Pistols/Celine Dion/J. Timberlake to be added... ------------- 
|
Posted By: tuxon
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 13:56
|
1. to add non-prog bands so to bash them?
2. to add only one album of a band? 3. to not allow access to a band? 4. to not allow a band a fair review result (meaning tops, artist image appreciation etc.) 5. to call a band that's not prog a band for all possible prog genres? 6. to be deadly serious, but to act confusingly? 7. to propose, promote and consider possible a band that isn't prog by A THOUSAND MILES?! besides points 1 to 7, upon the last things I'll agree in this life of mine is for Sex Pistols/Celine Dion/J. Timberlake to be added... .................. IŽll give you the first 6 points, but the 7th is open for discussion. IŽll trade it for Peter gabriel though 
But a non/prog band in a discussion can help us realise what it means to be progressive, and work as a bonding thing between us proggers. Though I would have taken Mariah Carey for that purpose, and not the by many proggers loved punk band. Of course Mariah Carey is already used for obsolete silly things. ------------- I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT |
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 14:58
Punk rock was more a fashion movement than moving music forward, it was the antithesis of Prog, and definitely has no place here! 
as for being not bad, the spitting Sex Pistols were only not bad compared to James Blunt or Beyonce
 -------------  Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 15:07
tux, seems I'm in heavy to weird polemics with you lately, sure it isn't...intentional?
 no problem towards having an eye towards what's progressive by what's progressive (and, by punk, what actually killed the prog star ), but we're talking artist's inclusion, appartenences etc. in other words, no problem realising what prog means by observing Sex Pistols and co., but surely outside prog archives.-------------
|
Posted By: markosherrera
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 15:13
| sex pistols is anti prog ,they are famous but ,i listen one cd of their hits,and i only listen 20 sec of each song because that music is horrible is like go to the dentist for an extraction. without anestecia |
Posted By: Syzygy
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 15:25
Not again  .
Personally I think Never Mind The Bollocks is infinitely better than Abacab, Love Beach and the Big Generator combined, and I'd sooner be stranded on a desert island with that as my only music than I would with the entire recorded output of Dream Theater. Of course it's not prog - even at the time the musical content was actually quite retro, with only John Lydon's vocals and lyrics having any trace of originality (and he was the one who liked Can, Peter Hammill and Captain Beefheart).
I can think of far better candidates for the token one star album to be sl*gged off (Chris De Burgh, James f***ing Blunt and Michael Bolton all spring to mind), but what's the point? There has been enough substandard dross released by prog's big names without us importing the dregs from other genres.
And the assumption that prog fans will automatically hate the Sex Pistols is extremely patronising and narrow minded.
Aside from that, it's a fine idea. ------------- 'Like so many of you I've got my doubts about how much to contribute to the already rich among us...' Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom |
Posted By: tuxon
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 15:25
I enjoy watching the ricochet of my friendly fire
I want to observe the sex pistons inside progarchives. And i don't know what polemics mean. anyway. back on subject. I do not favour the Sex pistols or any non-prog-related band in the archives as entry, but within discussion these bandns can be used to numerous benefits of us proggers. A common enemy, a mutual disinterest, a short break from real music discussion, let's all gang up on the weakest entry and bash it's ugly head in and so form friendships unimagined before. But let the weakest entry be a non-prog artist so we do not hurt someone we actually care about. and of course we all have tea with a cookie afterwards. ------------- I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT |
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 15:28
|
oh,okay, go ahead and go endlessly with discussion, but I believe that the bold words of this topic's first post is "I'm proposing addition of the Sex Pistols for the ProgArchives website".
polemics are heavy talk between two or several or fiery discussions.
-------------
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:04
| No, we'll still get people who want to sl*g off Dream Theater/Rush/Yes/Genesis/whoever. |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 17:07
Don't forget Tool!!!!!! ------------- |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 18:58
|
I think I see the point in this.... Maybe the perosn who suggested this was LITERALLY suggesting this, but then maybe it's an astute way of having us discuss how come we get so excited in extra-musical arguments that don't lead nowhere or how we let ourselves become so passionated that we either bash an artist without actually giving him any chance or worship and revere him without sitting down and checking for flaws.... Whatever purpose, this thread is, to my liking, not as useless as many do. Of course this subject could have been better discussed in a prog lounge, but then again, what better way to entice people to answer immediately than to see "sex pistols addition" as the topic's name? I think it was a great inverse-sicology maneuver.... Bad thing is, the results weren't that good.
But no matter what i said, whoever bashes DT without equilibrium will have to meet my flaming sword! 
 ------------- 
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 19:09
|
Give me a flippin break. This thread was not well thought out and though I understand the reasoning, it makes no sense to either include this band nor to simply throw them up as a point of debate. There are more important issues here. Who cares why we discuss or get carried away by certain bands, this isn't Social Dynamics Archives.
|
Posted By: Mascodagama
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 19:30
Sir, you rock. I salute your general correctness.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 19:39
hahahhahahhahahahhahahhahahahhaha shear frickin brillance... I'm on board with this one. We have influences of prog.... on prog... what better album than this one. reviews of this album, written in a compare and contrast style with the musical world of the late 70's in mind. I've got my eye on you brother..... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Witchwoodhermit
Date Posted: January 24 2007 at 23:58
|
For the record.
I love the Sex Pistols. Never Mind the Bollocks is a great, no holds barred, in your fat face rock album. Everything that prog... isn't.
Punk rock changed the face of underground and mainstream rock- forever. The Pistols led this charge. (without getting into an Velvet Underground/ Stooges debate). On this basis they can be considered PROGRESSIVE.
But that is not the ESTABLISHED definition of "progressive" I know that. Progressive, by its genre, is some ethereal thing that nobody can clearly define.
Well, where does that leave me in my statement? Hmm.
I feel progressive rock, with a capital P, is 1969 to 77 (arguable timeline). Progressive, with a small p, is a generalization towards a movements "progress" in any genre.
For the sake of this site and it's intentions, I will have to say NO, to the Sex Pistols.
------------- Here I'm shadowed by a dragon fig tree's fan ringed by ants and musing over man. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 00:04
|
Just as a sidenote, isn't it ironic that The Sex Pistols, along with others, precisely helped bring prog down from the top? -------------
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 00:15
|
The Sex Pistols were just a marketing gimmick like the Jacson Five, the Spice Girls, Britney Spears and the Monkees, all the minimalism and haed rock energy was already established by Hawkwind, Krautrock, the Ramones etc. The Sex Pistols were just a commercial version of that.
They represented nothing ion music that wasn't already established in the music scene. I don't see the Sex Pistols as a legitimate band but rather a threatrical performance, ttheir antics, costumes and behaviour was what made them famous not their music, take away the mindless agression and heavy gain on their guitars and your just left with superficial pop. All the Sex Pistols wanted to do was shock and offend, they ran down just about every rock band before them such as Led Zep and the Beatles, critics took it upon themselves to interpret this as just prog bands.
I do know for a fact that Johnny Rotton/Lydon likes the following bands; Can, Neu!, Magma, Van der graff generator, Hawkwind, Pink Floyd (yep the I hate Pink Floyd t-shirt was just a fad), Miles Davis-they collaborated together on some unreleased material and some Genesis (this is true). I know that their guiatarist liked Roxy Music, and that Syd Vicious introduced Johnny Rotton/Lydon to Can.
So what we have here is an insincere marketing gimmick with theatrical displays to shock and offend people for no other purpose than to make a name for themselves and offend.
So although I know one person started this thread as a joke, some here also think that the Pistols were innovaters, If you believe that then I'm sure they complement your Madonna and Spice Girl albums, since like them they are marketing gimmicks that represent only extremely superficial meaning.
So in short their album Nevermind the Bollocks, should have been called We're Full of Bollocks. ------------- |
Posted By: Witchwoodhermit
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 00:19
|
I have no doubt that the punk movement "put the boot in" regarding the demise of prog. I think it was inevitable, regardless. The old guards of progressive rock were getting old and slowing down.
I greatly dislike the new-wave, post punk era of the eighties, but could you imagine it with only the dried-up remnants of many of the late sixties/ early 70's proggers calling the shots? We would be crying in pain for the lost days of our hero's past.( eg : Love Beach, Abacab, Final Cut, etc etc).
At least the punks and wavers gave us something to truly HATE. ------------- Here I'm shadowed by a dragon fig tree's fan ringed by ants and musing over man. |
Posted By: Witchwoodhermit
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 00:39
|
[QUOTE=Cheesecakemouse]The Sex Pistols were just a marketing gimmick like the Jacson Five, the Spice Girls, Britney Spears and the Monkees, all the minimalism and haed rock energy was already established by Hawkwind, Krautrock, the Ramones etc. The Sex Pistols were just a commercial version of that.
They represented nothing ion music that wasn't already established in the music scene. I don't see the Sex Pistols as a legitimate band but rather a threatrical performance, ttheir antics, costumes and behaviour was what made them famous not their music, take away the mindless agression and heavy gain on their guitars and your just left with superficial pop. All the Sex Pistols wanted to do was shock and offend, they ran down just about every rock band before them such as Led Zep and the Beatles, critics took it upon themselves to interpret this as just prog bands.
I do know for a fact that Johnny Rotton/Lydon likes the following bands; Can, Neu!, Magma, Van der graff generator, Hawkwind, Pink Floyd (yep the I hate Pink Floyd t-shirt was just a fad), Miles Davis-they collaborated together on some unreleased material and some Genesis (this is true). I know that their guiatarist liked Roxy Music, and that Syd Vicious introduced Johnny Rotton/Lydon to Can.
So what we have here is an insincere marketing gimmick with theatrical displays to shock and offend people for no other purpose than to make a name for themselves and offend.
So although I know one person started this thread as a joke, some here also think that the Pistols were innovaters, If you believe that then I'm sure they complement your Madonna and Spice Girl albums, since like them they are marketing gimmicks that represent only extremely superficial meaning.
So in short their album Nevermind the Bollocks, should have been called We're Full of Bollocks.
Cheesecakemouse
You are totally correct in your observation. The Pistols were nothing but a gimmick, thanks to Malcolme Maclaren. Unfortunately, to everybodies surprise, it worked.
In the late Seventies, the modern youth were under different pressers and in a completely different mind-set to the earlier "hippies" and thinkers. They were tired of having to think about the music they listened to. They were tired of having to think that everything will be "just fine". In a nut shell, they just wanted to rock. Get pissed and dance about. The Sex Pistols filled this gap, with an unbelievable presence, well beyond any of the players expectations. THIS is what the youth wanted!
Johny Rotton says on stage once. " Do you ever feel like you've cheated?" Some people took this as him taking the piss out of the audience. In reality, it was Johny feeling cheated. By Malcolm, the industry, media and the band. I can say more, but that is another story.
In the end, The Sex Pistols began as a joke, and ended as a movement for a generation. ------------- Here I'm shadowed by a dragon fig tree's fan ringed by ants and musing over man. |
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 04:08
|
The reason I've chosen Sex Pistols to be bashed is not because of my "narrow-mindedness" - although I dislike them and I wouldn't rate them with more than two stars not even on some punk rock web site, I have to say they somehow captured the spirit of rock'n'roll, but that's the best I can say about them. Although I like some of the punk rock names, notably Clash, Dury, Jam and PublicImageL. I picked them because: a) the use of the words "sex, pistols" sounds like a blasphemy on this web site if they are mentioned in any context more serious than a rudimentary joke, b) they are the core, the beginning of a movement often cited as opposition to progressive rock, c) although some forum members like them, it's not very obvious here. It's much easier to gain impression that they are ridiculed almost all over the site - whether they deserve it or not, d) opposition to prog? There is no diametrically opposite genre to progressive rock, because prog is able to implement and re-construct anything. Progressive rock needs to be re-evaluated again and again, simply because it's evolving all the time. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Discussing the correct way to destroy an organ  , March 06.  |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 15:37
Only to answer your a, b and c points: a) It IS possible to use those words: for example: "when this guy plays, he's actually having sex with his guitar...he makes it moan incoherently"... or: "I need a pistol, I have to shoot whoever wrote this crap". You see? b) Read witchwoodhermit chapters 2,3 and Cheesecakemouse chapter 1. Useful insight these authors provide. c)I know for a fact more than 50 PA members are incredibly-commited Justin Timberlake's fans. d)Not a bad point. -------------
|
Posted By: floydisgod
Date Posted: January 25 2007 at 23:46
At least do it with class!  ------------- 
|
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: January 27 2007 at 21:58
|
Hey! I like the Sex Pistols! -------------  
|
Posted By: dedokras
Date Posted: January 28 2007 at 06:10
| And so do I! |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: January 28 2007 at 23:39
|
And I like eating corned beef, but like the Sex Pistols it doesn't have a place on this website. ------------- |
Posted By: Uther
Date Posted: February 02 2007 at 13:27
HAHAHAHAHA what the hell is this?Some people try to cover their fanatism fr over good reasons ------------- What! can the devil speak true? Macbeth, 1. 3 |
Posted By: MadcapLaughs84
Date Posted: February 02 2007 at 13:44
|
You gotta be kiddin' me ------------- 
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: February 02 2007 at 13:45
|
If you listen closely, with headphones, you'll notice prog elements in Rotten's vocals.... if you have some Sid Vicious with you, you can hear where Squire got his inspiration from.... -------------
|
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: February 02 2007 at 14:04
Ditto here. |