From: ledgerj@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (Jim Ledger)
Subject: Re: Genesis: What everybody misses
Organization: Ada Joint Program Office
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:01:11 GMT

In article <1992Jul26.183056.22694@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Ryan.J.Victor@dartmouth.edu (Ryan J. Victor) writes:
>However, instead they became the intensely exciting band that they are
>to this day. What most don't realize is that since the beginning,
>nothing has changed except personnel and their writing methods.

You have hit the nail squarely on the head here. The more progressive
aspects of Genesis are missing because the majority of the progressive
members have left the band. Furthermore, the intensity and
emotional content that pervades Genesis' old material is lacking
from their new material *precisely because* their writing methods
have changed. Previously, they worked in a more personal way, 
writing songs individually (for the most part) then fleshing them out
in a band context. From "Abacab" on, most of their songs have
been the result of jam sessions, with Phil using nonsense guide
vocals to start the creative process. I have to believe the band invests
far less emotionally in each song than they used to.

Genesis are no longer a band in the conventional sense. They are simply
three guys who gather for a few weeks every few years to jam out an album.
The material they produce now is fundamentally different from what they
produced back when they *were* a band. It is only natural to categorize
music from the two periods differently.

>Genesis has always written for its current audience...
>...But as times changed, so their music evolved. This is why they are the
>sole progressive rock band to survive the punk era, escaping the label of
>being antiquated by becoming leaner to suit the times. 

For many people, this is the definition of "selling out" - letting the
marketplace dictate creative direction. Whether you feel Genesis sold out
depends upon whether you believe your original premise - that Genesis
have *always* written for the marketplace. I happen to disagree with your
premise. On the other hand, I can't fault them for taking the direction
they have. I simply regret it.

>In other words, Genesis music is the same as it ever was: contemporary
>with generous helping of their own special touch-- an invisible one,
>perhaps... 
>.. If you don't like
>anything past Gabriel's stuff, I suggest you re-listen to it and think
>about the possibility that your musical tastes haven't evolved.

This is rather heavy-handed. You can't have it both ways -- you can't claim
that the music is fundamentally the same, and then claim that the reason
some folks dislike newer Genesis is because their tastes have remained
fundamentally the same.

"Progressive" music is not something you "evolve beyond." The fact that
folks don't like the new stuff as much (or at all) is not because they have
"failed to mature" with the band. It's simply that new Genesis may no longer
be progressive for them.

>By the
>way, there's nothing wrong in not liking the music; but just don't call
>it garbage. 

I agree that calling it "garbage" is not very diplomatic, but it's really
just an indelicate way of saying it's not to your taste.

Jim
Newsgroups: alt.music.progressive