Letters
Bloody Well Write
Send your letters to us at: Prog, Future Publishing, 121-141 Westbourne Terrace, London, W2 6JR, or email prog@futurenet.com. Letters may be edited for length. We regret that we cannot reply to phone calls. For more comment and prog news and views, find us on facebook.com under Prog.
WHAT ABOUT THE SYNTH REVIVAL?
Regarding Prog 146: I wonder, is the term ‘prog revival’a contradiction in terms? It raises the interesting question as to whether most prog is really revivalism, rather than taking things forward.
The article on the 80s prog revival, indeed, only seemed to look at acts who revived a traditional 70s live band format, plus a lead singer with Peter Gabriel-like facepaint and head gear. This went against the grain of the 80s synth era, though. I think you missed an opportunity to maybe feature the many other artists of the era who could validly be considered to be in the prog vein. I am thinking of artists like Howard Jones, Nik Kershaw, Tears For Fears, Talk Talk, China Crisis (or even Kate Bush). However, those acts did adopt mainstream pop-style codes, which appears to be unforgivable in the eyes of prog purists.
Having said that, quite a lot of 80s Genesis had a slightly techno/pop feel to it (but they were considered to have‘sold out’by many). Also, Peter Gabriel appears to somehow have prog credibility but he was largely a pop artist when he was solo.
In my opinion it is not valid to only view music through the lens of 1970s style band line-ups and technologies. Authentic prog surely can’t be based purely around image or specific types of instrumentation. If we only have that, we’ll end up with artists who are mere caricatures.