0 0 1 147 844 MSR, FAHS 7 1 990 14.0 96 800x600 Normal 0 false false false EN-GB JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0mm 5.4pt 0mm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0mm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";}
Chris – a question for you.
I think a basic distinction between similarities/differences between first generation & neo-prog is a sound point to start from. However, what about the relationship between what I might call a band’s idiolect & the manifestation of style features in individual songs? What I have in mind is the problem which is apparent in first generation bands where, sometimes, the only reason we can say a track is a ‘prog’ track is because it’s by a ‘prog’ band. I have in mind things like Genesis’ ‘Your own special way’, Gentle Giant’s ‘Think of me with kindness’ (although perhaps that middle section gives it away), King Crimson’s ‘The night watch’. Pinpointing the features of these individual tracks that register them stylistically is, I think, problematic (and there are various other examples). My hunch is that things are different in the ‘80s & ‘90s, but I don’t know. Is this an aspect of the simiarity/difference perspective you take?
Allan F Moore
7xii11