"Prog" The Third Wave, The Internet And Beyond

This long neglected (again) section gets an update with a guest editorial from Ian Oakley, [who had been the] webmaster for the The Flower Kings website [at the time] and "Progressive, jam and jazz-rock reviewer and interviewer extraordinaire, sound engineer and lyricist" at Bathtub Of Adventures [now defunct].

Someone recently posed a question to me "Is the internet responsible for 'saving' Progressive Rock in the third millennium?"

A good question and I can understand how an American audience might see it that way. But to look at "Prog" and the Internet I feel you first have to look at its origin.

Progressive Rock was born out of a set of circumstances that can never be repeated in today's politically correct, multicultural society.

Britain in the 1950s and early 1960s still had a strong class structure. The biggest class was the "middle class" and if your family was not "middle class" it was very likely aspiring to be. It was also a very "white," Northern European society, resting on its laurels, still congratulating itself for having won (or at least survived) two World Wars. True, the Empire on which, famously, the sun never set, was in the process of being dismantled, but for many Britons the Empire mind-set was still very much in place.

By the mid 1950s the first TVs, and record players for the new vinyl records, were increasingly to be found in middle class homes. However your parents, born in the 1920s and 30s, were a generation too early to have discovered the modern delights of rock and roll. So if you were a child of the aspiring middle class, your musical upbringing was usually your father playing Gilbert and Sullivan, Wagner, Holst, or other popular classics, on his modern "radiogram." Or with slightly younger parents you might have been raised on Big Band Swing (Glenn Miller, Sinatra), or even imported American Jazz. If you were lucky, you did occasionally hear the pop songs of the day (The Beatles, etc), but very rarely, and at school it was the same. (1)

Everyone was assumed to be "Church Of England" (or at least "Christian"), and from infant school (aged 5), first thing in the morning you attended school assembly. This usually involved a couple of traditional hymns and a playing on the school gramophone of (you guessed it) a popular "light classic." Also, and importantly, one out of three families attended church each Sunday, so getting yet another dose of traditional hymns.

Please be aware that I come from what we used to call a "lower" or "aspiring" middle class background. This was not the private fee-paying schooling made famous in "Prog" circles by Genesis and Charterhouse - this was a normal way of life.

At school and in church you were also encouraged to take up a musical instrument or sing in the choir (I was in three, including one national). Music lessons, at least three to four hours a week, were also compulsory.

So it's no wonder that in the late 60s / early 70s, a new musical hybrid appeared -classical (perhaps jazz-tinged) music, combined with rock and roll. We had all this classical training inside us but had to rebel somehow?

In the early 70s, Progressive Rock became the height of fashion. All the leading music papers gave it major prominence, the posh Sunday papers reviewed it, and it even had its own Saturday afternoon show on Radio One, the BBC's pop music station. The presenter, Alan "Fluff" Freeman, made the point about the link between "Prog" and classical even more emphatically ? the "jingles" inserted between tracks for dramatic effect, and the background music under his patter, were all lifted from well-known classical orchestral pieces.

Obviously, as the decades progressed, the next generation was starting to be brought up by the first rock and roll parents. If you take this as starting in the mid to late 50s, then the first rock and roll kids started appearing in the late 50s and early 60s.

English society also changed dramatically from the 1960s onwards. Immigration from the former colonies increased, bringing many different cultural influences. Church attendance fell to the point where it is now considered to be a minority interest. Compulsory "Christian" religious assemblies in schools were effectively banned in a spate of "political correctness" and multicultural awareness.

That first generation of rock and roll children arrived as influential record-buying adolescents around 1977. Ring any bells? Punk Rock had arrived. If "Prog" had been classical music's bastard son, then punk was rock and roll's. And following its birth, "Prog" underwent a fairly rapid transition from cultural significance to dinosaur irrelevance.

Thus "Prog"'s first wave ended.

However, there was still this crossover point. A small part of a generation, myself included, was on the cusp of the whole thing. Just missing "Prog"'s finest hours (I was only 15 when The Lamb came out) but too old and in some ways, too unprepared to embrace the Punk Revolution. One moment we were very young and very trendy album-buying neo hippies, the next we were outcasts.

The UK Progressive rock scene was just about dead and buried. There were some very honourable exceptions, such as The Enid, England, the great flash of brilliant light that was UK, but even that was soon extinguished. For a period of about five years in the late seventies and early eighties, "Prog" was seen as a spent force.

The exception to this, the one related scene that never really died out during that period, was the UK Space Rock / Festival scene; bands such as Hawkwind, Gong, Here And Now, Chemical Alice, and later Ozric Tentacles. I suppose the reason they survived and in some ways kept the "Prog" banner flying during that time was that they themselves generally embraced the punk ethos, and always remained part of a vibrant underground subculture. Let's face it, Hawkwind were proclaiming and living "Anarchy In The UK" years before Mr. Rotten and co.

Fortunately, punk was much more of a fashion statement than a lasting musical force, and my own sub-generation, although now forced underground, still wanted to play the music we were almost literally born to make.

Now the one good thing that Punk had brought back to the UK was that almost every other pub or club had a band playing two or three times a week. So it was relatively easy to get a place to play even if you ended up hiring it yourself. Every college and university had bands playing each weekend. The free festival circuit was still alive and there were prime-time live rock Programmes such as The Old Grey Whistle Test and Rock Goes To College that still provided more album-orientated musical fare. So there were plenty of places to play, and going to a gig was still a fashionable way of spending your evenings.

After half a decade people were rediscovering a love of Progressive rock and were unashamed of going against the current fashions ("New Romantic" at that time). In late 1982 the bands found a home at the Marquee Club in London's Wardour Street, and for the next couple of years, twice a week or so, one or other of the leading bands of the movement performed there.

From the four corners of the UK other "Prog" bands emerged. If you look at the Marquee's "Prog" "house bands" of the time the hierarchy was: -

Headliners: Marillion / Solstice / Twelfth Night / Pallas

Support bands: IQ / Quasar / Pendragon.

Also-rans: Chemical Alice / Citizen Cain / Liaison / Trilogy / La Host and if I dare be so bold, my own Déjà Vu.

The second, "Neo" wave of Progressive Rock had been born.

But looking back, the actual audience was very small. The Marquee crowd (Fish's "Marquee veterans") saw each other at so many gigs that they became friends, and each group of friends had its own preferred standing area in the club. Yep, clique-y it was! But really it was just a mixture of people aged late teens to late twenties. The very same sub-generation that had been just too young to fully experience "Prog"'s first bloom.

Only Marillion managed to have any real commercial success, on the back of a surprise hit single, "Kayleigh" (funny how that name, made up by Fish, now adorns a whole generation of "Boy Band" fans). But with the small audience there was perhaps always only room for one major band.

So what happened? Why did the second wave fizzle out, and why fifteen years later this third wave?

This is where we maybe have to hypothesise.

OK, punk helped to destroy the first wave, but it had already been on its last legs. The simple fact was that the audience was getting older and had more important things on its mind, such as career, marriage, children. All of them very important middle class necessities. And let's be honest, by the end of the seventies many of the big names in UK "Prog" had run out of ideas (ELP), or were in the process of tearing themselves apart (Pink Floyd, Yes), or had gone mainstream (Genesis, Tull), or were on ice (Crimson, Moody Blues), and the minor names, such as Camel, found themselves ploughing an increasingly lonely furrow.

The smaller second wave foundered for much the same reasons.

So why this third wave? And why has the Internet been so important? ? Or has it?

Firstly we have to face the fact, at least in the UK, that going to see a gig is not at all fashionable anymore. Original live music is almost dead in the UK - the country that invented this genre we know as "Progressive Rock" in the first place.

What justice is there that a DJ, or a band playing other people's music (the UK is currently awash with "tribute" bands covering acts who for one reason or another don't tour any more ? everything from Abba to Zappa) can make more money and sell out more venues than the people that put the notes down in the first place? But that is the situation facing us at live venues over here.

The old live circuit, so helpful with the rise of both the first and second wave of "Prog," no longer exists. So one important avenue to getting your band and music noticed is immediately blocked.

"Live" music has been taken away from the musicians and has just become another profit-oriented commercial exercise. Recently a number of venues have seemed to have effectively banned "Prog" gigs. It appears that although most of them sell reasonably well, there is just not enough money being spent at the bar for the accountants' liking. Personally I'd prefer to pay more for the concert ticket than see yet another venue turn its back on an audience, just because that audience would rather actually listen to the music than sit in a bar getting drunk.

But to fully understand the Internet's involvement in this third wave you first have to look at the audience.

Anybody that belongs to the many Internet "Prog" news groups out there soon realises that the membership, with the odd exception, is all of a similar age. And here it makes sense that that age is between 37 and 47 plus -- exactly the same age group as that generation that experienced the first wave and was really there for the second. When you talk to the odd younger exception to this generalisation you will find that 9 times out of 10 they were raised in a household playing classical music and / or Progressive Rock.

So what happened? Again, if we look at this Internet audience, they are mostly fairly affluent middle class men. Coincidentally, the first people to get home computers have also been affluent, middle aged, middle class men. This is not a "new" Progressive rock audience we are talking about here. It's the old one returned.

Last year, as their Webmaster, I covered half a European tour and a few USA concerts with The Flower Kings, and in the last four years I have seen Spock's Beard seven times in various European countries. These two bands are considered the torchbearers of the third wave. But I can assure you that at each concert the audience is mostly the same - yes, you're ahead of me ? affluent, middle-aged, middle class men.

So why is there this interest? These people are in their late 30s plus. A career has been established, a (hopefully happy) marriage stabilised, and the children are growing up. They now have the time, and more importantly, spare money to once again explore the music of their youth. And what a delight it is to enter your favourite classic band's name in a search engine and find that not only are they still making music, but, working your way through the links, also find you have a decade or two of "interesting" bands to catch up on. Just when you thought that "Prog" had died when Fish left Marillion.

It's not only the fans that are returning to the fold. Let's look for a moment at the "new" bands. The Flower Kings - average age 41. Spock's Beard - average age 40. IQ - average age 43. In the new, less well-known English bands, such as Parallel Or 90 Degrees, the pattern is the same.

We all know that the mainstream press ignores "Prog." So, driven completely underground and against the flow of fashion, a whole host of fan driven media, printed and Internet, has stepped in and replaced the more traditional outlets. In a direct correlation to Music Media of 1977 in the printed magazine world Progression replaces Sniffing Glue. We have a situation that, at least in the media world, in a strange reversal of fortunes, "Prog" has effectively become the new "Punk."

But again all these underground media outlets are mainly run by people of "a certain age." Band home pages are also very useful, and you will usually find that the selfsame people run them. If you want an objective view of IQ, don't go to the DPRP; if you want an objective view of The Flower Kings, don't go to the Bathtub Of Adventures; and so on. The sites do vary, from those that are heavy on Flash graphics and light on content, to amateur-looking affairs piled high with content you actually want to read. Of course one major advantage of the Internet over print media is that you can often hear sound samples, which can be a better guide than a biased review.

The speed of information dissemination is amazing on the net, and of course the big change with this wave is the un-bordered global community. It has led to some anomalies though. Take the West Coast American band Spock's Beard who, despite four large European tours and increasing commercial success, have never undertaken a major tour in their own country. In fact, until 2001, had never toured at all in America. Then you have the new "Prog" "Super Group" Transatlantic, comprising [until recently] two Americans (from the differing coasts), an Englishman, and a Swede.

It must also be noted that, worldwide, the Internet is still really in its infancy and is still largely dominated by the American market. Going back to Spock's Beard and Sweden's Flower Kings, despite having a far greater European audience, I would say that 70% of both bands' Internet discussion site membership is American. Of course this may also have something to do with the language of the Internet being accepted as totally English.

It is interesting that it is Sweden's bands that seem to lead and dominate the third wave as much the UK did the first two. From talking to Swedish bands, I gather that there is a direct correlation between the circumstances in the England of the 60s and 70s described earlier that led to the first wave of "Prog," and the Sweden of the 70s and 80's. Children are still brought up on classical and folk music in the home and at school, in a white-dominated middle class society. And which other country is still a staunch "Prog" market? Why, Italy of course, where children still get an exposure to church and classical music (particularly opera).

The one bad thing that has arisen from the Internet is the obsession of certain fans for "Prog Purity," which has led to the birth of a self-appointed "Prog Police." No one has ever been able to exactly define what makes "Progressive Music." The closest I have found was said by Porcupine Tree's Steve Wilson: "For me, the true definition of Progressive music has always been a music that drew on every other kind of music and somehow found a way to create something new out of the fusion." I can't understand these people that want to belittle another band because that particular band does not meet their own personal criteria for what "Prog" should be. These people can get very abusive on the newsgroups, and instead of joining in with people's enjoyment of the wonderful diversity of the genre, just seem to want to spoil it. In fact sometimes it seems that, if it doesn't first die of old age, the whole genre does genuinely seem to be at grave danger of being destroyed from within by the elitist attitude of the very fans that laud it so much.

However, I'm sure the Internet is good for "Prog." But are a lot of people over-emphasising its CURRENT importance in this third wave ("ripple")?

If we take it that the net is still dominated 70% by American traffic, why is it that "Prog"'s current greatest commercial success is still in Europe and Japan - especially mainland Europe (a region that, demographically, has some of the lowest internet penetration, and of course doesn't speak English as their mother tongue)?

Remember that bands such as Spock's Beard and The Flower Kings can attract audiences of 500-plus in German and Dutch towns less than 60 miles apart, when they are lucky to pull a third of that number on a smaller American tour with a far greater distance between venues.

If you look at the rough demographics of current "Prog" sales you will find a split of this type of order: - imagine the whole of the "Prog" sales in America and Britain. They are roughly the same (but look at the difference in population and landmass). Add those sales together and they almost equal the sales in The Netherlands. Add those three together and you have the sales in Germany.

So if, as some believe, the Internet is so responsible for the 3rd wave, why hasn't America become "Prog" heartland (in terms of audience size rather than numbers of bands)?

At the height of their success, Marillion had two number one albums and a number of top 10 singles in most European countries. But what impact did they have in the States? How big was "Prog" in America during the second wave? In fact, was there actually ever a second wave in America?

So why has it taken off again in mainland Europe - WITHOUT the Internet?

I would suggest something like this:

1. Mainland Europe is much less fashion conscious than the UK and the USA.

2. The live circuit (destroyed in the UK) is still intact and vibrant.

3. European music papers still write about "Prog" without embarrassment.

4. As already explained (with reasons) the original "Prog" audience (both waves) are returning to going to concerts and rediscovering their old musical tastes.

5. "Prog" albums are much easier to find in Europe. Go to a record store in Holland or Germany (currently "Prog"'s "Big Two" centres) and there are likely to be whole sections devoted to "Prog" - and there always have been.

6. Someone like myself, going into the shop to replace his Genesis vinyl collection with the latest CD re-master, is quite likely to experiment with some new stuff at the same time (remember, this generation has a high disposable income). This is how I (re)started, and how I discovered Spock's Beard before I even had a net connection.

7. Word Of Mouth. I got a lot of people into Spock's Beard by this method. Again, well before any of us had Internet access.

8. Perhaps most importantly, "Prog" never really died in mainland Europe. Bands like Pendragon, IQ and even Marillion have ridden out the last 15 years making a living by playing almost exclusively in mainland Europe. Are you aware that Pendragon were almost household names in Poland? They even had their concerts broadcast live on Polish national TV. This is, and always will be, "Prog"'s heartland.

I would suggest that if you really want to see an Internet-led musical phenomenon, you should take a look at the "Jam Band" scene, a musical genre that is almost entirely confined to America. Bands like Phish, Dave Matthews Band, moe, Disco Biscuits, Béla Fleck and The Flecktones, etc. are almost totally unknown in Europe. A lot of that has to do with cultural differences, but how much of it is down to the American domination of the Internet?

However, I would agree that there is a well-defined audience out there. The "Prog" generation has the highest disposable income of any generation ever...

Find ways to tap into this and you may have cracked it - for now?.

Sure, "Prog" can survive on smaller audience numbers - but can it thrive and grow? And will bands be content with just "surviving." Are the musicians in it for the money - to earn a living from making music - or are pure musical satisfaction and integrity enough? And can you maintain one without the other?

The real main question is: does "Prog" have a future, without a new and younger audience coming through to replace the original fans?

A while ago I had a discussion on a list with Jim Farrell, who was/is involved with trying to market Spock's Beard. The Beard were, at least then, beginning to take the approach that to "break" they need to appeal more to a singles market. My argument was that this will not work, as you will be appealing to the wrong audience. If you think that by having a hit single, the audience that bought it will suddenly embrace the delights of "Prog" you are wrong. Marillion proved that with "Kayleigh." You cannot trick someone into being a "Prog" fan. He retorted, "What are you trying to say? That you have to be born a "Prog" fan?" Not born, but perhaps bred.

Bred in a set of circumstances that can never be repeated.

Yes, children will still grow up with classical music. But not only, or even primarily, classical music. Look at what is on offer to the children of the first wave. Pop, rock, punk, disco, grunge, jam, rave, dance, rap, hip hop, world music, not to mention "Prog" itself, are all part of the rich diversity available to today's music fan. All of them ingredients added to the musical melting pot. And each market has got smaller over the past 30 years as music has fragmented and the spectrum has diversified. Is "Prog" really so sacrosanct, or is it just one small part of this rich tapestry?

And then the old, familiar question - is "Prog" really Progressive? Does it have to "Progress" to survive and thrive? Is truly Progressive Rock music to be found today in the Jam scene or on the dance floors of the Rave culture? After all, they have been following Mr Wilson's description by taking musical styles and mixing them together to make something new. I even heard a sample of "Fountain Of Salmacis" used on a "chill out" dance album the other day.

Is "Prog"'s real future to be found in bands such as The Disco Biscuits? A "jam" band whose musical influences include Hendrix, Pink Floyd, The Doors, Gong, Hawkwind, The Grateful Dead and Phish (a band who incidentally created one of the classic "Prog" albums of the third wave with Junta), their resulting psychedelic fusion married to the hypnotic electric beats of the modern dance scene.

Outside "Prog"'s ageing but still faithful fraternity, will it be looked on by new generations as being of only archaeological interest? With the exception of Europe, has the Internet's usefulness to "Prog" already peaked?

Perhaps what we are witnessing now is not a miraculous rebirth of Progressive Rock, but its final death throes.

© Ian Oakley

And yes, ye ol' editor does see some measure of irony in that this article/editorial can only be read online (as far as I know) and that it features links to the Internet... It originally appeared at Bathtub Of Adventures (see the 3 part essay beginning with "How I sold my soul for 'Baroque'n'Roll'" in the Reviews and Articles section)

Links: Genesis, Radio 1, The Enid, Hawkwind, Gong, Ozric Tentacles, Marillion, Twelfth Night, Pallas, IQ, Quasar, Pendragon, Citizen Cain, Spock's Beard, Parallel Or 90 Degrees, Transatlantic, Phish, Dave Matthews Band, moe, Disco Biscuits, Bela Fleck and The Flecktones

Copyright © by ProgressiveWorld.net All Right Reserved.

Published on: 2003-01-12 (3182 reads)