This issue of Phaedrus features and article that I wrote in 2006 for a booklet that was edited as part of the 2007 edition of the Gouveia Art Rock Festival. Back then, the term “Progressive Rock” was still banned by critics and rock related media. Currently, progressive rock is enjoying a steady resurgence; however, I believe that much of what I stated in the article remains valid.

You may be wondering, if the term is misleading, why is it commonly used in Phaedrus? The reason is that this magazine appeals to a wider audience than followers of the current art music scene. Most people would not be aware of what this magazine is all about if the term “progressive rock” was omitted. With this in mind, I invite you to read this insight on how we label our dear genre and its different subcategories.

Progressive Rock – A Misleading Tag

Carlos G. Plaza Vegas

December 30th, 2006

The title of this article[i] seems to suggest that this is yet another attempt to define what or what not ‘progressive rock’ is. My purpose, however, is not to propose an alternative definition but rather to alert the community of the pitfalls inherent in the use of the words ‘progressive’ and ‘rock’ to define our genre. Indeed, ‘Progressive Rock’ is a term that many musicians and bands stray away from. It also generates negative connotations in both critics and the music industry alike. But what is even worse, the term itself leads fans and musicians to wrong expectations and assumptions, and it is here where the use of this misleading tag has its most negative consequences.

Throughout the years, our music has been subject to a wide range of definitions, classifications and sub-classifications. Books like Edward Macan’s Rocking the Classics[ii], Jerry Lucky’s 20th Century Rock and Roll – Progressive Rock[iii] or Progressive Rock Reconsidered by Kevin Holm-Hudson[iv] are attempts to define the genre following different criteria. Sites like www.progarchives.com or www.progressor.net, likewise, provide definitions of the genre itself and a wide variety of sub-styles, such as:

Art Rock
Canterbury Scene
Experimental/Post-Rock
Indo-Prog/Raga Rock
Italian Symphonic Prog
Jazz Rock/Fusion
Krautrock
Neo Progressive
Prog Folk
Prog Related
…

Although these classifications are useful to guide fans through such an enormous musical offer, I’ve always felt that the focus must be on the music and not on its different tags. If this is my position, why then do I propose the subject of classification as a topic for discussion? It is because I believe the term ‘Progressive Rock’ is one of the main elements preventing the expansion of the genre.

Those who believe that “progressive rock” cannot enjoy a healthy fan base because “it’s too complex” for the average listener, must ask themselves why jazz and classical music do have a healthy minority, big enough to allow musicians to make a living of music and to generate hundreds of festivals and concerts throughout the world. Let me take the analogy with jazz and classical music a step further by asking some questions, in order to show why it makes little sense to use ‘progressive’ as a noun, instead of as an adjective:

1. Do you think that a jazz fan would discard listening to contemporary musicians playing classical jazz?
2. Would the term “progressive” be appropriate to describe avant-garde groups that are experimenting with the fusion of jazz and electro-acoustic music?
3. Do you think a jazz fan would say: “the only jazz worth listening to is avant-garde. If I go to a jazz club and see a group playing classical jazz, I leave immediately”
4. What about classical music? Do you think there are no classical composers who could be considered as progressive as the most radical RIO group? Well, they definitely do exist so, why bother going to a concert to listen to Bach or Ravel?

The Term “progressive”

For jazz or classical music fans, progressive or avant-guard is nothing more than an attribute. Not the main, definitely not differential, and by no means a mandatory way to lead the listener towards the type of music he listens to. In the classical world, fans of Mozart or Clementi feel as classically oriented as fans of Messiaen or Hindemith. Yet, this is not the case with progressive music… Despite their obvious differences, Arena and Univers Zero, for example, must have something in common: both appear in similar webzines and magazines, share fans, they play in similar venues and festivals, even though one is unquestionably prog while the other one is not. Either we leave one of them out, or something is definitely not working with the way the term ‘progressive’ is currently applied.

Many musicians demand that bands labelled ‘progressive’ must be innovative. Let me quote Steve Wilson as a case in point:

In his excellent book “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”, Robert Pirsig explains that the way we perceive reality is heavily dependent on the way we use our “analytical knife” to splice it into categories.[vi]
The way Wilson uses his knife leads him to conclude that contemporary progressive rock bands “[follow] the blueprint from 1972 so closely; it’s completely pointless and redundant. They’re never going to better the originals, anyway – why bother?”[vii]

Now, if instead of using our analytical knife to divide music into prog or non-prog, we use it to divide the music into Art Music and Commercial Music, let us look at how music could be currently classified:

(1) Academic in the sense that formal training is required to compose and, generally, to perform this kind of music
(2) More on this term later in the article
(3) Under this alternative classification, Neo-Prog should be used to label contemporary progressive bands like, for example, Miriodor. Bands we currently classify as “neo-prog” should rather be classified as “neo-classic.” In the remainder of this article, I will use this term to refer to neo-prog.

This alternative classification allows, for example, the attribute ‘Symphonic’ to be applied to both Classical or Progressive oriented musicians. Arena would be an example of a Classic-Symphonic band. Kotebel would be an example of a Progressive-Symphonic band.

Wilson’s statement is only correct when applied to avant-guard artists in all forms of art, not just our genre. This is the root of the problem. We cannot discard art just because it is not progressive. ‘Progressive’ is about the future and only a few artists take upon themselves the challenge of expanding their language and exploring new grounds. But there are hosts of artists whose creative urge can be satisfied with the means already at their disposal. They do not feel the need to go further. But be careful: innovation cannot be an end in itself! The artists that innovate AND transcend, are those who break new grounds as a means to fulfil their creative urge; they are compelled by their inspirational drive to create new languages.

Rachmaninov wrote his music when few composers dared to put a key signature (tonality) in their score. He was not progressive; quite the contrary, he was quite regressive. Nevertheless, he is regarded as one of the most important classical composers of the 20th century. In fact, much more than a fair number of his contemporary “progressive” peers.

Looking at our genre from this angle, allows excellent neo-classic artists like Matthew Parmenter to co-exist and be appreciated along with the bands/artists who are breaking new aesthetics grounds. These artists will transcend depending on the intensity of their music and their ability to deeply affect the listener. Bad copy/paste neo-classic bands full of clichés will be forgotten in the same way that RIO bands whose only aim is to sound original. Both cases will not sustain the passing of time.

I invite you to consider the impact of this Copernican shift, not only amidst fans and musicians, but mostly with regards to the interaction of our genre with the outside world. If a current neo-classic band wipes out any reference to the term progressive in its literature, they would be able to avoid the attack of both anti-proggers outside our circle and anti neo-proggers within our fan base. They could approach the outside world saying that what they offer is not progressive but … what? Well, this takes me to consider what Arena and Univers Zero have in common.

The progressive bands in the 70s incorporated a fair number of elements that, used in conjunction, created a whole new genre. Thomas Olsson[viii] accurately describes these main elements, identifying, among others:

• The use of a wide variety of instruments
• Notated music
• Modal harmonic principles are widespread
• Classical forms are common
• Complex compositions and arrangements

Nowadays, most of these attributes are also present in other music styles. However, there is one that is rather unique to our genre and shared only by classical music: structured development of thematic material.

This is, in my view, the back-bone of our genre. It is very difficult to find a “progressive rock” band where there is no organic growth of thematic material. You can find it (at least an attempt) in any long neo-classic song, as well as in most complex RIO compositions. Any band/composer who takes thematic cells (melodic, rhythmic, harmonic) as building blocks and develops these ideas in a structured form to reach a climax, will sooner or later find its way into our genre. Some will do it using a simple traditional language, others will achieve it through complex compositions; sometimes so complex that the building blocks are not apparent anymore. But in essence, they are writing the same kind of music.
I hope by now it appears clear why the term ‘progressive’ is not helping out in clarifying what our genre is all about. It confuses us internally and misleads the outside world. You might be asking yourself: “progressive is clear enough, but what is wrong with the term ‘rock’?”

The Term “rock”

Even at the climax of its popularity by the mid 70’s, Progressive Rock was under constant attack from music critics. Most argued that this genre betrayed the basic principles of Rock, which originated as an expression of counter-culture, aimed at the masses, with simple musical structures (mainly ABA) and lyrics about day-to-day themes that people could easily relate to. From this point of view, our genre should have been called something like “Progressive Anti-Rock”: complex musical structures frequently based on lyrics full of abstractions or based on mythological and ancient literature. Quite the opposite of the basic postulates of Rock.

Many groups presently working under our music genre are increasingly incorporating elements from other styles, giving an eclectic nature to the music produced. It is true that most bands have the typical rock quartet or quintet configuration, but so do many Jazz bands and they are not labelled rock because of their use of electric guitars, electric basses and drums.

Because of the complexity of our music, defining our genre as a rock manifestation is misleading.

Perhaps intuitively, some have moved away from the term ‘rock’, and changed the genre’s main label to “Progressive Music”. Others discarded the word ‘progressive’ and have come up with the term “Art Rock”. If we eliminate ‘progressive’ and ‘rock’, we end up with “Art Music”. It might be a start, the problem is that any musical manifestation conceived as an artistic expression not subject to commercial considerations, can rightfully be called “Art Music”. Jazz, classical, or folkloric music fits under this category.

As an invitation for people to come up with an alternative term, it would certainly be worthwhile to consider a term that is recently gaining popularity to define current art in all its manifestations: Neo-Baroque. I believe our genre fits very well in its definition. One of the most distinct attributes of our genre is its tendency to integrate styles, instruments, exotic modes and rhythms. And integration is precisely one of the main characteristics of Neo-Barroque, as most authoritative authors explain:

Alejo Carpentier, a notable exponent of 20th century literature, defines the term as “an aesthetics and ideology of inclusion.”[x]

In a way particularly relevant to our subject, the similarities between baroque and neo-baroque types of art were described in a recent exposition in Spain as:

Other attributes of Neo-Baroque that equally describe aspects of our genre very well are:

• the aesthetic of repetition and variation
• a tendency towards expansion, creating ambiguity in the frontier between pieces
• a desire to evoke states of transcendence

Art is Communication

Music, as the most ineffable form of art, has been a vehicle used by men to communicate sublime and transcendental messages that cannot be expressed by rational means. Inspiration emerges from the need to say something. Art, in any of its forms, is the vehicle. If there is no inspiration, nothing sublime to transmit, the result might be intellectually challenging or interesting, but sterile. Of course, inspiration is not enough; you need a correct media to transmit it. Without proper technical skills, it is not possible to project the idea effectively and accurately. A Master Work of Art, therefore, can only be achieved when these two elements are combined.

When I say that Art is the vehicle, I am implicitly stating that it is a tool to serve inspiration. Accordingly, art is subordinated to inspiration, to the message being conveyed. When an artist attempts to innovate for the sake of originality, because he/she wants to be considered “progressive”, he is transforming the vehicle into the end in itself. This is precisely the greatest danger with the improper use of the word progressive. It gives the idea that innovation is the end to be pursued and what should always remain a vehicle becomes, rather, the criteria to judge the value of a work of art. In the meantime, of course, inspiration and message are lost in this terminological jungle, to the benefit of people incapable of either understanding or conveying the true language of music.

I will finish this article with an analogy extracted from a letter I sent to the Spanish Progressive Rock Forum “La Caja de Musica” in March 2002:

Credits

[i] The ideas in this article were used as basis for the discussion forum on Gouveia Art Rock Festival – April 9th, 2006

[ii] Edward Macan. Rocking the Classics – English Progressive Rock and the Counterculture. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.)

[iii] Jerry Lucky. 20th Century Rock and Roll – Progressive Rock. (Burlington: Collector’s Guide Publishing Inc., [no year stated in publication. Probably 1999 – 2000].)

[iv] Kevin Holm-Hudson. Progressive Rock Reconsidered. (London: Routledge, 2002)

[v] Interview with Steve Wilson. Explicitly Intense magazine (December 2005) quoted in The Ministry of Information blog, http://www.ministry-of-information.co.uk/blog/archives/001321.htm. The quote also appears in the Porcupine Tree forum (http://www.porcupinetreeforum.co.uk/).

[vi] Robert Pirsig. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. (New York: Bantam Books, 1974), p. 72.

[vii] Interview Steve Wilson.

[viii] Thomas Olsson. Rock progressivo hoje. Is there anybody out there? (Gouveia: Cadernos Progressivos Nº 1, 2006)

[ix] Francesco Guradiani. Old and New,Modern and Postmodern:Baroque and Neobaroque. Full article can be viewed at: http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/mcluhan-studies/v1_iss4/1_4art2.htm. For a very extensive analysis of Neo-Barroque, centered around audiovisual arts and cinema, follow this link to the article “The Baroque and the Neo-Baroque” by Angela Ndalianis: http://web.mit.edu/transition/subs/neo_intro.html

[x] Taken from the article Comparative Literature in an Age of “Globalization” , by Lois Parkinson ZAMORA. http://clcwebjournal.lib.purdue.edu/clcweb02-3/zamora02.html Link not active at time of publication in Phaedrus issue # 3 January 2016.

[xi] Baroque and Neo-Baroque – The Hell of the Beautiful (art exposition in Spain October 2005 – January 2006). Taken from an article published in the website of ‘Non Starving Artists’ http://www.nonstarvingartists.com/News/ImagedNewsItem.2005-10-16.4920.html Link not active at time of publication in Phaedrus issue # 3 January 2016.

[xii] http://www.dlsi.ua.es/~inesta/LCDM/Archivo/lcdm0348.txt (La Caja de Música # 348)

Featured image is a wallpaper from the outstanding webpage “ProgArchives”. This site is in my opinion the best reference for “Neobaroque Art Music” aka “Progressive Rock” 😉 This is the link to the wallpaper: http://www.progarchives.com/wallpapers/PACollage2.jpg

If you are not acquainted with ProgArchives, you should pay them a visit: http://www.progarchives.com/