3-LockBox
04-29-2009, 11:21 AM
I ran across a review of Decemberists: The Crane Wife over at Dutch Progressive Rock Page and picked up on a few blurbs that I found interesting. Its a rather long review that reads more like an essay, with a preface that includes a justification of why an 'indie' act is being reviewed for that website. Here's something that I think is all too true of many modern prog acts, though only recently (there are exceptions IMO).
My attraction to “Indie Rock” (and here I am referencing such artists as The Flaming Lips, Muse, The Shins, Yo La Tengo, Dredg, Sufjan Stevens, PJ Harvey, Modest Mouse, The Arcade Fire, Built Too Spill, etc.) is three-fold:
These artists all remember the importance of song as a vehicle for expressing emotion and philosophical observation. This is of course one hallmark of The Beatles’ legacy, which really has never wavered (excepting the years of punk rock’s dominance) and definitely informed the earliest albums by such bands as Yes, Genesis, and King Crimson.
These artists have not in any sense forgotten the power and allure of a compelling melody; again, another hallmark of The Beatles’ (and actually, not forgetting Mssrs. Townshend and Davies, the British Invasion’s) influence upon popular music. And
These artists all pay hard attention to arrangement and sonic palette, which the DPRP audience will correctly understand as one of the prominent tenets of the more excellent albums in the Progressive Rock annals. It is my opinion that contemporary prog tends to either abandon song and melody altogether or employs both in such a way as to be cloying, overly saccharine, tepid, redundant, or simply weak. “Old school” prog had its “Living in the Past,” “Yours Is No Disgrace,” “Epitaph,” and “Tuesday Afternoon,” all of which incorporate memorable melodies into strongly rendered songs, while also utilizing some suitably complex and inviting audio textures. Modern Indie Rock still performs that feat; I find that modern Progressive Rock does not.
Ultimately, what I love about so-called “Indie Rock” is how, in the same way that the alternative rock of the nineties borrowed heavily from punk, metal, and thrash, it (Indie) borrows very heavily from psychedelic and progressive rock. The Shins at times sound scarily like late 60s Beach Boys (I'd say more like The Zombies - 3LB); The Flaming Lips don’t hesitate to create ambience and effect in the very best vein of Pink Floyd or Tangerine Dream; Yo La Tengo exercises a flair for genre shifts rivalling The Beatles on, say, The White Album. And The Decemberists, with literary, keen lyrics, unorthodox instrumentation, strong composition, and ensemble prowess, harken back to the days of folk prog, albeit with enough of a contemporary twist to be fresh and viable.
I don't know that I disagree a whole lot with any of that...
would you?
I would like to add there are some modern acts that seem to have found what they do well and have the good sense to exploit their strengths, such the band Ritual, who came out in '99 with an old schoolish prog album which emphasized their Swedish heritage, delving in folk and traditional instrumentation and arrangments. Then they went and made two neo-prog albums that sounded like any other Swedish neo band (Flower Kings were the template here), then returned to form on '07s The Hemulac Voluntary Band, an album that should interest anyone who finds they like The Decemberists flair for period themes and folk music. Polish groups like Satellite and Riverside, who maintain a rock edge with prog trimmings ala Porcupine Tree. Maybe a few others I'm forgetting. Some bands like Beardfish seem to be able to make a great statement by pushing the boundaries of 'Prog', incorporating other genre influences, only to revert back to the buggaboos of notes-for-notes sake neo-prog. I've bought less and less prog over the last two or three years, finding I don't need more than one or two albums from the same band. By the same token, I can't say I'm a completists whereas 'indie' bands go either.
Let's face it, the guy has a point concerning his 3, well, points, but in his article he suggests that 'indie' is a fad like grunge was, and I do disagree with that. I think the 'indie' bands of this decade will endure longer than the music of the '80s and much of the '70s. I still find old 'indie' albums (from bands like Pavement) as enjoyable and relevant sounding today as they were 8 or 9 years ago, where a new wave album of 1983 sounded so dated in '88. Yeah, indie bands are lucky to last more than five years nowdays, but thats because of lack of industry support. Neo prog on the other hand is a retro thing, you buy it because it sounds like something else. Bands like IQ, Pendragon, The Flower Kings and Spock's Beard remain linked to the past, where a band like Porcupine Tree and Marillion started out retro, but evolved.
If you looked at my spending habits over the last three years, it looks like 'indie' is winning over prog, but perhaps the transition from prog to indie isn't that big of a leap after all.
My attraction to “Indie Rock” (and here I am referencing such artists as The Flaming Lips, Muse, The Shins, Yo La Tengo, Dredg, Sufjan Stevens, PJ Harvey, Modest Mouse, The Arcade Fire, Built Too Spill, etc.) is three-fold:
These artists all remember the importance of song as a vehicle for expressing emotion and philosophical observation. This is of course one hallmark of The Beatles’ legacy, which really has never wavered (excepting the years of punk rock’s dominance) and definitely informed the earliest albums by such bands as Yes, Genesis, and King Crimson.
These artists have not in any sense forgotten the power and allure of a compelling melody; again, another hallmark of The Beatles’ (and actually, not forgetting Mssrs. Townshend and Davies, the British Invasion’s) influence upon popular music. And
These artists all pay hard attention to arrangement and sonic palette, which the DPRP audience will correctly understand as one of the prominent tenets of the more excellent albums in the Progressive Rock annals. It is my opinion that contemporary prog tends to either abandon song and melody altogether or employs both in such a way as to be cloying, overly saccharine, tepid, redundant, or simply weak. “Old school” prog had its “Living in the Past,” “Yours Is No Disgrace,” “Epitaph,” and “Tuesday Afternoon,” all of which incorporate memorable melodies into strongly rendered songs, while also utilizing some suitably complex and inviting audio textures. Modern Indie Rock still performs that feat; I find that modern Progressive Rock does not.
Ultimately, what I love about so-called “Indie Rock” is how, in the same way that the alternative rock of the nineties borrowed heavily from punk, metal, and thrash, it (Indie) borrows very heavily from psychedelic and progressive rock. The Shins at times sound scarily like late 60s Beach Boys (I'd say more like The Zombies - 3LB); The Flaming Lips don’t hesitate to create ambience and effect in the very best vein of Pink Floyd or Tangerine Dream; Yo La Tengo exercises a flair for genre shifts rivalling The Beatles on, say, The White Album. And The Decemberists, with literary, keen lyrics, unorthodox instrumentation, strong composition, and ensemble prowess, harken back to the days of folk prog, albeit with enough of a contemporary twist to be fresh and viable.
I don't know that I disagree a whole lot with any of that...
would you?
I would like to add there are some modern acts that seem to have found what they do well and have the good sense to exploit their strengths, such the band Ritual, who came out in '99 with an old schoolish prog album which emphasized their Swedish heritage, delving in folk and traditional instrumentation and arrangments. Then they went and made two neo-prog albums that sounded like any other Swedish neo band (Flower Kings were the template here), then returned to form on '07s The Hemulac Voluntary Band, an album that should interest anyone who finds they like The Decemberists flair for period themes and folk music. Polish groups like Satellite and Riverside, who maintain a rock edge with prog trimmings ala Porcupine Tree. Maybe a few others I'm forgetting. Some bands like Beardfish seem to be able to make a great statement by pushing the boundaries of 'Prog', incorporating other genre influences, only to revert back to the buggaboos of notes-for-notes sake neo-prog. I've bought less and less prog over the last two or three years, finding I don't need more than one or two albums from the same band. By the same token, I can't say I'm a completists whereas 'indie' bands go either.
Let's face it, the guy has a point concerning his 3, well, points, but in his article he suggests that 'indie' is a fad like grunge was, and I do disagree with that. I think the 'indie' bands of this decade will endure longer than the music of the '80s and much of the '70s. I still find old 'indie' albums (from bands like Pavement) as enjoyable and relevant sounding today as they were 8 or 9 years ago, where a new wave album of 1983 sounded so dated in '88. Yeah, indie bands are lucky to last more than five years nowdays, but thats because of lack of industry support. Neo prog on the other hand is a retro thing, you buy it because it sounds like something else. Bands like IQ, Pendragon, The Flower Kings and Spock's Beard remain linked to the past, where a band like Porcupine Tree and Marillion started out retro, but evolved.
If you looked at my spending habits over the last three years, it looks like 'indie' is winning over prog, but perhaps the transition from prog to indie isn't that big of a leap after all.