|
Neo-Prog Misconceptions -
12through 13:
OK so here we..let's wrap this commentary up. By now if
you've been reading along you'll realize the concept of Neo-Progressive
rock is one that's a bit of sore spot with me. Not that I
dislike the music but rather its the term itself I find reprehensible.
So let list my last two misconceptions and summarize why I
feel the term is a mistake. Read on... ***
· Misconception 12 – Neo-Prog is less competent musically
In a world where the latest pop or rock star can hit the charts
with a raft of studio trickery it seems disingenuous to haul
out the “less competent musically” card. By and large musicians
who are interested in prog are interested in it because of
the musicianship. This is one of the reasons they get into
this genre above the usual stuff they hear on the radio. It
is obvious that every musician will be coming into the music
creation process with their skills developed to varying degrees.
Some will have formal training from their early years others
will not. A band like Spock’s Beard came on the scene with
a very high degree of musical talent and ability, certainly
on par with the bands of the seventies. There are scores of
bands such as Glass Hammer or Salem Hill who along with Spock’s
Beard are considered by some to be Neo-Prog and yet are highly
competent musically. Even a band like Jadis who many consider
the epitome of Neo-Prog display a tremendous amount of musicianship
when compared to so much of what is played by mainstream radio
these days. ***
Each of us may be able to point to a band that we feel
suffers from a lack of musicianship but it is a gross generalization
to suggest bands considered to be Neo-Prog in general suffer
from a lack of skills. Certainly, there may be some whose
skills are not as developed just as would be the case in any
musical endeavour, but to suggest that bands classed as Neo-Prog
are generally less competent musically is painfully dishonest.
Lets remember that far too many of those bands we first heard
in the seventies were far from musical maestros on their instrument
of choice, it’s just that then, as today; they were performing
far and away more competently than so much of what else was
common on the radio. So it was then, so it is today. ***
· Misconception 13 – Neo-Prog is a universally accepted
term. There is a common misconception that the term Neo-Prog
is somehow universally accepted and there could be nothing
further from the truth. If there are some who don’t accept
the term, me for example, it is by definition in no way universal.
It is by and large a term that has been cultivated by certain
critics and spread through internet use to other parts of
the world in what might be best described as in a haphazard
fashion. It is still a term that finds limited acceptance
in the UK and many parts of the world. This is evidenced by
the number of individuals outside the still select group of
prog aficionados who have little or no understanding of its
meaning. ***
This is a term that not only spreads confusion but is
itself wrapped in confusion by virtue of the inability to
clearly identify what it stands for and support an argument
that decisively defines what Neo-Prog actually is to the listener.
Neo-Prog as a term is itself an assertion with no justifiable
support. As can be clearly seen by the un-masking of the previous
12 misconceptions, each argument supposedly supporting this
definition fails in its task to do so. Neo-Prog as a sub-genre
of Symphonic Prog cannot be logically supported by argument.
I suggest therefore that it is a term of no value. ***
Now some will want to take 2 or 3 of the above misconceptions
and apply them to a piece of music or a band which they feel
qualifies as being described as Neo-Prog. Setting aside the
important point that the same band may be described as Symphonic
elsewhere, the idea of using a few of these misconceptions
to try to make the point misses the mark since each of the
above misconceptions fails to prove it’s point. In fact you
could take all 13 and apply them and you would still miss
the mark since all 13 are either self-defeating or built on
faulty premises. The process of defining something called
Neo-Prog fails. ***
It’s inevitable that some will still have a problem with
this and may argue that there is definitely something specific
they’re hearing in the band’s style that they feel warrants
the Neo-Prog label. It may be something as “it just sounds
too simple to be compared to some other prog bands” or as
one of the sites says in their definition it, “lacks the sophistication
of the truly symphonic progressive bands.” And this seems
to be the point where so many confuse preference over performance.
It is true that some bands create Symphonic Prog that is simpler
than others are. There is no arguing that point. It has always
been that way. From the very beginnings of Progressive Rock
there have been bands performing at all levels of complexity,
which to reiterate my point, in no way should qualify them
for the Neo-Prog label. This incessant obsessing over complexity
in no way brings one any closer to a more authentic Progressive
Rock style because Progressive Rock music is about more than
just complexity. All one need do is refer back to the defining
characteristics that have built the established prog tradition.
While complexity is part of the process it is not THE defining
element. ***
I have on many occasions challenged readers of my on-line
editorials to demonstrate to me how exactly Neo-Prog is different
or distinct from Symphonic Prog and to date this challenge
has not been met. It hasn’t been met because I believe it
cannot be for the very reasons outlined above. All music that
might be considered Neo-Prog is in some way really a version
of Symphonic Prog and should rightly simply be called that.
It defies understanding why some would call bands such as
Spock’s Beard or Glass Hammer Neo-Prog and some would not.
Even a casual listener will hear the symphonic structure in
the music and this is obviously true of so many other bands.
The point needs to be emphasized that even the most “mainstream”
(dare I use the term?) of symphonic bands, display symphonic
tendencies. But hey, just like not everyone is equally metal
in heavy metal, so not every symphonic band will have the
same level of complexity in their arrangements. But they are
Symphonic Prog none the less. ***
There are some who profess to use the term Neo-Prog,
not in any negative sense but purely for descriptive purposes.
And while this is laudable, I fear it is almost impossible
to do consistently since so many of the descriptives attributed
to the term come from a negative standpoint. I fail to see
how you can use the negative in this case to describe something
in a positive way. The logic fails me. Because of the negative
connotation one runs the risk of not implying a negative,
but a negative being inferred. It is for all these reasons
that I believe it is time we stop using a term that is in
virtually every aspect, wrong. The prog community of listeners
and purchasers would be better served by simply referring
to these bands as they rightfully should be described, Symphonic
Prog. ***
There are others who intentionally use the term as a
pejorative as a means to ward off unsuspecting potential followers.
These individuals make no mistake about their dislike of Neo-Prog.
They feel in no uncertain terms that this style of music is
simply inferior. And they seem to take great pleasure in using
the term to reinforce stereotypes of supposed inferiority.
This is certainly not unique to Symphonic Progressive Rock.
The authors of The Rebel Sell refer in their book of how true
classical connoisseurs have found Pavarotti unlistenable for
years and their point of why this is so has direct relevance
here. It’s not that they find Pavarotti lacking in talent,
but that he is considered too “mainstream” or more to the
author’s point that he is too “down-market.” The authors,
I think correctly point out that in these critics’ system
of aesthetic judgment, he can’t be good precisely because
so many people like him. It is this sense of elitism that
drives the anti-Neo-Prog movement. ***
What these individuals compare any particular Neo-Prog
artist to, tends to be intentionally fluid and subjective.
This allows them to denigrate any band of their choosing without
any sense of consistency. If it justifies their cause a Neo-Prog
band that is a little more complex will be compared with something
even more complex and so on, all in an effort to do nothing
more than criticize musicians creating music that is perhaps
less complex that these writers want it to be. How absurd!
Once again, preference takes precedence over performance.
***
This nebulous scale is yet another good reason to do
away with the term. These individuals would never describe
bands as Neo-RIO or Neo-Zeuhl or even Neo-Canterbury. To take
it even further there is no such thing as Neo-Reggae or Neo-Country
and probably for the same reason new movies made in the Film
Noir style are not referred to as Neo-Film Noir. Their use
of the Neo-Prog term is in my opinion nothing more than lazy
writing stemming from lazy listening. ***
It will be interesting to gauge the reaction to this
argument because I dare say it will be predictable. Predictable
in that the ones who will object the most will be the ones
who either use the term as a pejorative or have a hidden agenda
to maintain the status quo for their own benefit. They will
either ignore the logic of the argument or make it personal.
***
The only question you really need to ask is this: What
stands to be lost if we were to stop using the term Neo-Prog?
I would suggest we lose nothing other than the term Neo-Prog
that as I hope I’ve demonstrated is totally flawed. The term
should in my view be replaced with Symphonic Prog, a term
that is at once descriptive and knowable to everyone. And
what then do we gain? We gain a more accurate description
of the music being created by all these bands. And just in
case it needs to be said again, all Neo-Prog is first and
foremost Symphonic in nature anyway, so why not. To my mind,
that says it all. ***
Drop me an email anytime at
jlucky@pacificcoast.net
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
|
