Kansas vs. Starcastle - or, the Lie at the heart of Americophobia

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

If America is what its detractors claim it to be - i.e. a grinding money machine that imposes the law of QUANTITY over QUALITY everywhere and sells this by degrading all human complexities into broad, crass sentimentality, then why were there so few massive American prog-rock groups? Even edging away from the Floyd/Yes/ELP/Tull coterie, did any American groups approach the megalomaniac excess of Zeppelin, Queen, even 70s Who? (The biggest laser-period US rockers of the time, Aerosmith, were like the Standells in comparison to Zep!)I'll even suggest that the reason '1977' (as in 'Year Zero', not the Ash album) didn't mean shit in America is because it WASN'T NECESSARY. (US stadium rock = Kiss, the Jerry Bruckheimer Slade.)

As for Kansas, "Dust in the Wind" is a devastating Radiohead satire, with "Carry On Wayward Son" doing the same for Super Furry Animals

Sorry - I know this is my second post of the day but my first was misconceived verbiage, so feel free to delete that one ('What makes people listen to things')

― dave q, Saturday, 28 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

(Also this a SATURDAY, you pot-head)

US had no yen to deliver Arena Rock since UK supplies = top quality fine and dandy. (Rock invented in UK, after all.)

I seem dimly to remember a series of HUGE FESTIVALS c.1978, called CALIFORNIA JAM I and II etc? Eagles, Greg Allman Band, these kinds of foax?

― mark s, Saturday, 28 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

1991 - UK sneers, "Oh look, it's finally 1977 in America"

2001 - Existence of Toploader proves 2001 is the UK's version of the US's ACTUAL CHRONOLOGICAL 1977

― dave q, Saturday, 28 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hootie & the Blowfish.......

― Johnny, Saturday, 28 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I never thought about this before. Maybe because prog-minded American musicians went into jazz fusion instead? Hawkwind's "Warrior on the Edge of Time" vs. Return to Forever's "Romantic Warrior." That's where the "art music" credibilty was in those days in the States.

― Mark, Saturday, 28 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

this question is very strange. it seems to presume that prog-rock is based, more than other pop music, on "degrading all human complexities into broad, crass sentimentality." please explain how aerosmith or kiss or boston or the partridge family are less sentimental and more attuned to human complexities than yes or the van der graaf generator.

also, americans were buying the stuff, just as often as not released on american major labels.

some reasons why prog happened in the uk rather than the us: greater remaining influence of european art music tradition, greater remaining influence of anglican choirboy tradition.

― sundar subramanian, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

This topic comes up periodically on rec.music.progressive. I seem to recall on of the higher-profile prog rock books (Macan, maybe? dunno, never read it) going into an explanation of why progressive rock was predominantly British. I don't remember at all how plausible it sounded, though it was pretty strict about what was or wasn't important.

― Josh, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Rock might've been invented in the UK, but I don't think 'Revealing Science of God' was what Lonnie Donegan had in mind! (Although maybe it was...)

― dave q, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

'please explain how aerosmith or kiss or boston or the partridge family are less sentimental and more attuned to human complexities than yes or the van der graaf generator.'

Kiss sang "I want to rock and roll all nite and party every day", which isn't so far away from "no future", which was supposed to replace it. Both statements are certainly not sentimental, and if they're not complex then that's because they're intended (or if not, their impact certainly is) purely as surface statements, albeit surface statements that are supposed to connect with their audience immediately (which is what punk was apparently supposed to do), unlike, say, "Tarkus", the side- long quest of a futuristic armadildo, and if it's meant purely as a 'story' then it works (actually, doesn't) only as self-contained escapism (Fuck, I astound myself with my oxymorons), and if it hints at some greater understanding of human complexity then it defeats itself by its choice of (and decision to use) such an outlandish metaphor. And before you refer me to sci-fi or magical realism, forget it, Peter Sinfield is no Jorge Luis Borges.

― dave q, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Objection to bad sci-fi as follows - building a flimsy alternate world with no internal logic (inevitable when dealing with the limitations of the 45-minute vinyl record - this is the 70s we're talking about - which is why, in the manner of fantasy authors with a similar inability to draw any conclusions from their own work, double- and triple- albums started emerging), then using it as a model for 'human complexity' , strike me as a bit flawed.

― dave q, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

BTW I luv prog. My favorites are 'Brain Salad Surgery' and 'Animals', OK?

― dave q, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Basing ANY argt of ANY kind on success or failure of Tarkus as a concept = heroic nay Stahknovite task. Order of Lenin First Class t'ye, sorr!!

― mark s, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Anyway, since when was prog a way to make money? ELP lost massive money transporting that there ork across the land. Punk = thatcherite downsizing (flexibilisation of reserve roadie army).

― mark s, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

kiss also sang "beth, i hear you saying that our house just ain't a home." aerosmith covered "remember (walking in the sand)." boston sang "there was something about you." if anything, american hard rock bands were far more willing to perform soppy sentimental ballads than uk prog bands. surely vdgg's pawn hearts at least attempts to explore human complexities without much sentimentality more than aerosmith's toys in the attic does?

and mark is right. prog (as opposed to aor) was hardly the most commercial movement of the early 70s, being frequently daring in its sounds and sentiments. i just can't see the soft machine and henry cow being in it just for the money (more than kiss or aerosmith).

macan's rocking the classics gives a substantial argument re why prog was mostly a european, primarily uk, phenomenon.

― sundar subramanian, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Sorry, I should've made it clear in the question that I was commenting on the 'stadium rock' bands of the time, whether or not they happened to be prog (though you can't deny the prog bands displayed/created most of the stereotypical signifiers of the 'dinosaur rockers' punks supposedly reacted against - tax shelters, private planes, Greg Lake INVENTING 'bling-bling' - customized urinals!). As I said, this includes the Who, Led Zep, Queen, even solid workingman's plod like Bad Company. Prog bands that weren't selling out arenas aren't considered here.

The thing I was curious about was why all of these bands were British, despite the American reputation for obsession with ostentatious wealth and moving units. (Sorry Anthony, Patrick, Kim, Sean etc, Rush and BTO don't count. In fact, the fact that Canada was producing stadium rock may say a lot about our post-colonial mentality...)

― dave q, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Speaker/PA technology for big loud rock = able to fill a stadium with sound = primarily invented in UK, as part of psychedelic roadshow (Purple inherited PA system off Tomorrow — ?I think? — and then embarked on volume war with [fergit which proto-metal band]. Who = obsessed with tech re volume and clarity (60s breakthough in US held back by por recording quality, local tech of low standard). Zep = ditto (last tour of New Yardbirds in US = cataclysm partly cuz of rubbish sound-systems). US equivs Vanilla Fudge, Mountain? Blue Cheer? All pushed downways in canon (and out of long-lasting eternal touring careers) by absence of quality local tech. Grateful Dead, equiv. re full psychedelic roadshow magilla, able to set up eternal touring shtick from outset.

(US behind because ahead *earlier* with PA quality for cinemas et al than UK: prior advance leads to later stasis...)

Turning point: the JACKSONS!!

― mark s, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hmmm..that might explain all those 80s stadium bands that had to re- create really slick productions as well, by that time they had the technology to create a reasonable impression of Journey or J Geils albums, a bit more technically involved than getting a sound for Grand Funk Railroad or Cactus.

― dave q, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

There are a couple of factors involved, if we're talking Prog (rather than Arena Rock), and one is that the US is always kind of slow to cotton on to musical movements, so by the time the US bands were emerging, the Brit acts that inspired them were already on a downward spiral.

The second being that most of the US bands that delved into Prog took only some of the surface elements, infused it with a mix of down-home Rawk and LA harmonies (viz. Kansas), turning it rapidly into the AOR of Styx, Journey et. al.

They're still doing it with the pretty execrable Spock's Beard, who, once you strip out the instrumental flash and lengthy structures, are pretty much a sub-grade Stadium Rock outfit, yet are often hailed as modern Saviors of Prog.'

There was still some quality Prog from the US during those years, just not very succesful; Hands from Texas did a creditable Gentle Giant imitation, and Happy The Man were good for what they were, just - again - a few years late.

― CountV/John T, Tuesday, 31 July 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ten months pass...

6/10/02: As a musician with 22 years of playing to my credit, I can honestly say that rock-n-roll, ANY rock-n-roll, shouldn't have any rules concerning how it should be composed, written, recorded or performed. It shouldn't matter how complex or simple a rock-n-roll song is, what matters most is if it moves YOU, the individual, and not whether it is in step with any trends, current or otherwise. Punk or Prog-rock? I've played them both; I love them both, for different reasons. I don't try to analyze too much as to why, I just do. It's ironic how both forms are once again on the underground fringe of the vast wasteland we call the "Music Scene", at the same time.

― Glen Adam Garcia, Monday, 10 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

"Even edging away from the Floyd/Yes/ELP/Tull coterie, did any American groups approach the megalomaniac excess of Zeppelin, Queen, even 70s Who?"

P-Funk. Parliament's "Mothership Tour" had the biggest budget of any tour EVER up to that point, insane costumes, props, huge bands/cast of characters, 4-hour long shows, insanely long (and sometimes unnecessary) solos, tons of drugs, loose sex, classic hedonism mixed with sub-mythical posturing, etc.

― Shaky Mo Collier, Monday, 10 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

six years pass...

not enough conversation about KANSAS! (still one of the greatest threads evah tho...)

― I am Robertson Speedo (Drugs A. Money), Saturday, 21 March 2009 15:10 (seventeen years ago)

I'm a seventies kid and I have to admit now that I have great memories of people blasting Kansas at the park or drive-in or whatever.

― u s steel, Sunday, 22 March 2009 02:09 (seventeen years ago)

I was def. a weird kid...around 6th or 7th grade(prolley 1994?) Kansas was like my favourite band ever...though I've met a few people my age up here in Michigan who still swear by them...so I wasn't THAT weird...

― I am Robertson Speedo (Drugs A. Money), Sunday, 22 March 2009 05:15 (seventeen years ago)

still dave q & mark s riffing off each other, whilst Sundar plays Devil's advocate = multiple layers of delicious CLASSICness!

― I am Robertson Speedo (Drugs A. Money), Sunday, 22 March 2009 05:16 (seventeen years ago)

I was probably the most sincere person on the thread!

― Sundar, Sunday, 22 March 2009 08:01 (seventeen years ago)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0d/Kansas_-_Point_of_Know_Return.jpg

― u s steel, Sunday, 22 March 2009 10:29 (seventeen years ago)

Sorry.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0d/Kansas_-_Point_of_Know_Return.jpg

― u s steel, Sunday, 22 March 2009 10:29 (seventeen years ago)

I would think that in US prog is academic, less theatrical. Groups like Kansas have Christianity influences.

You proggers ought to come up with playlists for the rest of us.

― u s steel, Sunday, 22 March 2009 10:38 (seventeen years ago)

two years pass...

hey-o!

― pax raggetta (Drugs A. Money), Friday, 27 May 2011 20:09 (fifteen years ago)

extremely relevant to this thread:

http://www.emusic.com/features/spotlight/2010_201007-essay-prog.html

― xhuxk, Friday, 27 May 2011 20:15 (fifteen years ago)

you've posted this before methinx

― pax raggetta (Drugs A. Money), Friday, 27 May 2011 20:17 (fifteen years ago)

here we go

Where is the love for KANSAS?

― pax raggetta (Drugs A. Money), Friday, 27 May 2011 20:19 (fifteen years ago)

Never fails to amaze me when these threads get revived @ the perfect time - I was thinking about Kansas just this morning, and came to the exact conclusion as mark did about jazz-fusion being the USA substitute for prog-rock. And that Kansas indeed had a bit of a Mahavishnu feel to them during their jammier instrumental bits, thanks to that violin.

― a "goaty"-style beard (Myonga Vön Bontee), Friday, 27 May 2011 22:33 (fifteen years ago)

loved that piece xhuxk

― Blink 187um (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Friday, 27 May 2011 22:47 (fifteen years ago)

listening to starcastle on youtube now

― Blink 187um (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Friday, 27 May 2011 22:47 (fifteen years ago)

Prog was distinctly romantic, I think. And romanticism in general definitely has an association with England and Northern Europe, more so than, say, France and Italy.

French and Italian prog (Magma, Area, etc.) was more futuristic, but a lot of English prog had a romantic identification with the past that seems tied in with English identity.

It goes back to psychedelic music. Kaleidoscope (U.K.) was more "romantic" than any American group.

― timellison, Friday, 27 May 2011 23:33 (fifteen years ago)

So, I don't necessarily think it's a "phobia" that someone might be inclined to wonder if Yes were more authentic than Starcastle.

Of course, Yes/Starcastle were actually futuristic too, and I think Starcastle did that quite well. I like them a lot.

― timellison, Friday, 27 May 2011 23:44 (fifteen years ago)

W/r/t Romanticism & prog tim, I think you're otm even though you fail to recognize that we Americans have succeeded over and over in cultivating our own homegrown strains of Romanticism. I think Kansas a) has deep affinities w/ such poets as William Cullen Bryant & Oliver Wendell Holmes (least of which are all of them being rendered 'irrelevant' by modernism), and b) I think Kansas' relationship w/ the English prog bands is nearly identical to the relationship something like "Thanatopsis" had w/ the body of English Romantic poetry...

― pax raggetta (Drugs A. Money), Saturday, 28 May 2011 00:19 (fifteen years ago)

four years pass...

I remember hearing/reading that Jefferson airplane were the first band to have the PA setup that allowed them to play really really fucking loud but extremely clear.

― brimstead, Sunday, 29 November 2015 00:42 (ten years ago)

(Re: mark s's old post re: quality of tech of us vs uk bands

― brimstead, Sunday, 29 November 2015 00:43 (ten years ago)

What happened to dave q?

― Hey Bob (Scik Mouthy), Sunday, 29 November 2015 08:01 (ten years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.