On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:27:36 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
wrote:

>>> I have never thought of Rush as Prog Rock
>>
>> Me neither; it's a deeply flawed[1] list. American, of course, which
>> may account for it to some degree.
>
>Rush have been acknowledged as a prog rock band for as long as I can
>remember.

I think Rush are a bit prog-gy, but they certainly wouldn't be the top
of my list of prog bands

>> I'd never actually heard of the first three on the list
>
>You've not heard of Dream Theater, Mars Volta, or Tool? Next you'll be
>saying you've never heard of Marillion, or that Fish is their vocalist.

Well, I'd heard *of* them all, but only heard music from Dream Theater
(our bass player used to be a big fan)

>Tricky fitting BJH into every prog rock top ten, when there's bands more
>deserving such as Focus or Deep Purple not included.

OK, Deep Purple (who were the very first rock band I loved) are
definitely not remotely prog
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:36:52 +0000, Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid>
wrote:

>>>>> A short piece of one of the Ronettes tracks was played on the BBC radio
>>>>> news this morning, instantly taking me back to the caffs, coffee bars,
>>>>> and biker transport caffs of the early sixties.

>>>> Blimey, if you have memories of that then perhaps you're the oldest
>>>> member of UKRM!

>>> <gulp>

>> <sums> So you turn 78 this year? You're 2 or 3 ahead of Pete Fisher,
>> then. Might be the same age as crn

>Not sure that that's something I'd like to win LOL.

The oldest MP [1] in parliament is known as "the father of the
house"[2]

The oldest regular posting here could be known as the the Father of
UKRM [3]

[1] or is it the longest serving
[2] dunno what they'll do if that MP is a woman
[3] same problem as [2]
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:27:36 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 14/01/2022 09:48, Ace wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:00:27 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have never thought of Rush as Prog Rock
>>
>> Me neither; it's a deeply flawed[1] list. American, of course, which
>> may account for it to some degree.
>
>Rush have been acknowledged as a prog rock band for as long as I can
>remember.

By whom? As I said earlier, it's clearly subjective, and exact
definitions differ, as to what exactly does or does not conform to any
given genre. And bands vart a lot over time - one might argue that
some Rush stuff verges on the genre, but thr vast mojority doe not,
IMO.

>> I'd never actually heard of the first three on the list
>
>You've not heard of Dream Theater, Mars Volta, or Tool?

Err yes, that's what I said.
>Next you'll be
>saying you've never heard of Marillion, or that Fish is their vocalist.

Something of a non-seqitur there, I feel. And definitely not remotely
prog. They have a bit of history of association with Jethro Tull, who
were their ticket to the big time back in their early days, and who
were on paper the support band when I went to wee tham at some point
in the 80s. Marillion were pretty crap on the day, TBH, but JT were
amazing.

>> [1] No prog rock list could be complete without Barclay James Harvest
>> in it, for a start.
>
>Tricky fitting BJH into every prog rock top ten, when there's bands more
>deserving such as Focus or Deep Purple not included.

You have a very odd perception, it becomes clear. Focus, maybe, but
most certainly not Deep Purple.

--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

"ChrisND @UKRM" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in
news:j4dm43Ft737U1@mid.individual.net:

> On 14/01/2022 12:19, Stephen Packer wrote:
>> On Friday, 14 January 2022 at 07:40:45 UTC, Pete Fisher wrote:
>>> I never went there when it was a Little Chef or was it a 'Grim
>>> Consumer' (Happy Eater).
>>
>> I thought the 'Happy Eater' sign was in fact someone putting their
>> fingers down their throat.
>
> +1
>
> C

I think Ben Elton used to do a routine referring to the chain as the Jolly
Vomiter

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:08:44 -0800, Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote:

>
>The Animals -

Lead singer was a cousin of my father-in-law - same age, and almost
identical in appearance.

The mid-sixties were "awful", apparently.

Identity theft's not new. :-)
--
Salad Dodger
1690 FLHTK;GL1800D
Previously ...
CB1300SA8;GL1800A6;GL1500SEV;CBR1100XXX;
CBR1000FL;CBX1000Z;GPz750R;Z750E1;Z650C2;
KH500A8;KH250B3;TS250c;TS185c.

On 1/14/2022 5:27 AM, Mike Fleming wrote:
> On 14/01/2022 09:48, Ace wrote:
>>
>
>> I'd never actually heard of the first three on the list
>
> You've not heard of Dream Theater, Mars Volta, or Tool? Next you'll be
> saying you've never heard of Marillion, or that Fish is their vocalist.
>

Yep. Thankfully.

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS, ST1100 (in memoriam)

On 14/01/2022 17:17, Champ wrote:
> Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:

>>>>>> A short piece of one of the Ronettes tracks was played on the BBC radio
>>>>>> news this morning, instantly taking me back to the caffs, coffee bars,
>>>>>> and biker transport caffs of the early sixties.

>>>>> Blimey, if you have memories of that then perhaps you're the oldest
>>>>> member of UKRM!

>>>> <gulp>

>>> <sums> So you turn 78 this year? You're 2 or 3 ahead of Pete Fisher,
>>> then. Might be the same age as crn

>> Not sure that that's something I'd like to win LOL.

> The oldest MP [1] in parliament is known as "the father of the
> house"[2]

> The oldest regular posting here could be known as the the Father of
> UKRM [3]

> [1] or is it the longest serving
> [2] dunno what they'll do if that MP is a woman
> [3] same problem as [2]

Let's not go there ;-(

--
Spike

On 14/01/2022 17:11, Champ wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:30:55 -0800, Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> And no Led Zep?
>
>>> Not in my book, no.
>
>>> Of course that's the trouble with trying to define music genres,
>>> especially 40+ years after the event, but I think that one of the
>>> defining factors of prog was its use of 'new' instruments and styles,
>>> and much as I love Led Zep, their classic bass/guitar/drum lineup was
>>> very much at the heart of the non-prog rock sound.
>
>> I'll never forget sitting in the 2nd row at that Led Zep concert in
>> Berlin (tripping on acid, btw,) and watching Jimmy Page walk over to
>> that box on a stand with an antenna sticking out of it. He waved his arm
>> at it and it made these weird, spacey sounds. Sounded great, of course.
>
> It's called a theremin
>
> Great for making sci-fi noises.
>
> You can build one from a kit for about $30

I bought one for SWMBO for her birthday a while ago, to go with the lap
steel guitar, ocarina, stylophone, and didgeridoo.

On 14/01/2022 17:14, Champ wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:27:36 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> Tricky fitting BJH into every prog rock top ten, when there's bands more
>> deserving such as Focus or Deep Purple not included.
>
> OK, Deep Purple (who were the very first rock band I loved) are
> definitely not remotely prog

http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1969

On 14/01/2022 18:41, Ace wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:27:36 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14/01/2022 09:48, Ace wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:00:27 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have never thought of Rush as Prog Rock
>>>
>>> Me neither; it's a deeply flawed[1] list. American, of course, which
>>> may account for it to some degree.
>>
>> Rush have been acknowledged as a prog rock band for as long as I can
>> remember.
>
> By whom? As I said earlier, it's clearly subjective, and exact
> definitions differ, as to what exactly does or does not conform to any
> given genre. And bands vart a lot over time - one might argue that
> some Rush stuff verges on the genre, but thr vast mojority doe not,
> IMO.
>
>>> I'd never actually heard of the first three on the list
>>
>> You've not heard of Dream Theater, Mars Volta, or Tool?
>
> Err yes, that's what I said.
>> Next you'll be
>> saying you've never heard of Marillion, or that Fish is their vocalist.
>
> Something of a non-seqitur there, I feel. And definitely not remotely
> prog. They have a bit of history of association with Jethro Tull, who
> were their ticket to the big time back in their early days, and who
> were on paper the support band when I went to wee tham at some point
> in the 80s. Marillion were pretty crap on the day, TBH, but JT were
> amazing.

It does appear that your perception of what is prog varies enormously
from mine.

On 14/01/2022 17:17, Champ wrote:
>
> The oldest MP [1] in parliament is known as "the father of the
> house"[2]
>
> The oldest regular posting here could be known as the the Father of
> UKRM [3]
>
>
> [1] or is it the longest serving

Longest continual service. Currently Sir Peter Bottomley, who those with
long memories may recall was the transport minister who mooted
compulsory leg protectors for motorcycles.

> [2] dunno what they'll do if that MP is a woman
> [3] same problem as [2]

Theresa May nicknamed Harriet Harman the Mother of the House as the
female equivalent.

https://metro.co.uk/2017/06/13/harriet-harman-has-become-first-ever-mother-of-the-house-6706051/

On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 10:29:46 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 14/01/2022 17:14, Champ wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:27:36 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Tricky fitting BJH into every prog rock top ten, when there's bands more
>>> deserving such as Focus or Deep Purple not included.
>>
>> OK, Deep Purple (who were the very first rock band I loved) are
>> definitely not remotely prog
>
>http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1969

Well yes, this correctly describes them as "The archetypal hard rock
band" It also tags them as "proto-prog", but really that could apply
to almost all mid-60s rock, especially anyone using the almost
ubiquitous Hammond organ.

I think part of the problem lies with the change of word usage over
time - there's no doubt that back then a lot of bands including DP
were viewed as 'progressive', but I'd argue that the modern-day usage
of the term to define a whole genre has (a long time ago) shifted a
long way from that.

(I was about to jokingly suggest that if you label DP as prog then
you'd also have to include bands like the Doors, but I see that the
website you linked actually does so, which just goes to show how
different are the definitions we're using.)

--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

On 14/01/2022 09:48, Ace wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:00:27 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 13/01/2022 18:06, wessie wrote:
>
>>> "ChrisND @UKRM" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in
>>> news:j4b16kFdlldU1@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On 13/01/2022 13:53, wessie wrote:
>>>
>>>>> [1] this album
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Threshold_of_a_Dream that my
>>>>> sister bought dates the period to 1969. Sounds about right. My
>>>>> introduction to prog rock...
>>>>>
>>>> Hmmm, I never quite thought the Moddy Blues fitted the 'prog rock'
>>>> idiom - always seemed far too 'commercially aware'!
>
> I'm not sure why you think that prog rock shouldn't be commercial.

That wasn't me.

<snip>

>>
>> I have never thought of Rush as Prog Rock
>
> Me neither; it's a deeply flawed[1] list. American, of course, which
> may account for it to some degree.
>
> I'd never actually heard of the first three on the list, and the rest

You are not alone.
Probably the authors choice.

> simply shows a lack of understanding on the part of the polled RS
> readership of what prog rock is, or isn't.
>
A bit like their understanding of punk?

>
> [1] No prog rock list could be complete without Barclay James Harvest
> in it, for a start.

Never really listened to them.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 14/01/2022 16:30, Turby wrote:
> On 1/14/2022 3:13 AM, Ace wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 10:59:05 +0000, "ChrisND @UKRM"
>> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/01/2022 09:48, Ace wrote:
>>
>>>> [1] No prog rock list could be complete without Barclay James Harvest
>>>> in it, for a start.
>>>>
>>> And no Led Zep?
>>
>> Not in my book, no.
>>
>> Of course that's the trouble with trying to define music genres,
>> especially 40+ years after the event, but I think that one of the
>> defining factors of prog was its use of 'new' instruments and styles,
>> and much as I love Led Zep, their classic bass/guitar/drum lineup was
>> very much at the heart of the non-prog rock sound.
>>
> I'll never forget sitting in the 2nd row at that Led Zep concert in
> Berlin (tripping on acid, btw,) and watching Jimmy Page walk over to

You seemed to have dropped a fair bit of that.

> that box on a stand with an antenna sticking out of it. He waved his arm
> at it and it made these weird, spacey sounds. Sounded great, of course.
>

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 14/01/2022 17:11, Champ wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:30:55 -0800, Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> And no Led Zep?
>
>>> Not in my book, no.
>
>>> Of course that's the trouble with trying to define music genres,
>>> especially 40+ years after the event, but I think that one of the
>>> defining factors of prog was its use of 'new' instruments and styles,
>>> and much as I love Led Zep, their classic bass/guitar/drum lineup was
>>> very much at the heart of the non-prog rock sound.
>
>> I'll never forget sitting in the 2nd row at that Led Zep concert in
>> Berlin (tripping on acid, btw,) and watching Jimmy Page walk over to
>> that box on a stand with an antenna sticking out of it. He waved his arm
>> at it and it made these weird, spacey sounds. Sounded great, of course.
>
> It's called a theremin
>
> Great for making sci-fi noises.

Still appears at Hawkwind gigs. Unsurprisingly.

>
> You can build one from a kit for about $30

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 14/01/2022 17:14, Champ wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:27:36 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>>> I have never thought of Rush as Prog Rock
>>>
>>> Me neither; it's a deeply flawed[1] list. American, of course, which
>>> may account for it to some degree.
>>
>> Rush have been acknowledged as a prog rock band for as long as I can
>> remember.
>
> I think Rush are a bit prog-gy, but they certainly wouldn't be the top
> of my list of prog bands
>
>>> I'd never actually heard of the first three on the list
>>
>> You've not heard of Dream Theater, Mars Volta, or Tool? Next you'll be
>> saying you've never heard of Marillion, or that Fish is their vocalist.
>
> Well, I'd heard *of* them all, but only heard music from Dream Theater
> (our bass player used to be a big fan)
>
>> Tricky fitting BJH into every prog rock top ten, when there's bands more
>> deserving such as Focus or Deep Purple not included.
>
> OK, Deep Purple (who were the very first rock band I loved) are
> definitely not remotely prog

Are you sure we are not related? :-)[1]

I do remember them being classed as "Progressive Rock" in the local
vinyl shops.

But never thougt of them as the shorter prog rock. I suppose some of the
earlier stuff might fit in with the prog rock genre, and Made In Japan
did feature some "long" songs which is apparently an element of
progressive rock.

[1] It was shortly after buying my ABBA album that my French penfriend
introduced me to Deep Purple, and so spawned a life time of a preference
for rock.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 14/01/2022 18:41, Ace wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:27:36 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14/01/2022 09:48, Ace wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:00:27 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have never thought of Rush as Prog Rock
>>>
>>> Me neither; it's a deeply flawed[1] list. American, of course, which
>>> may account for it to some degree.
>>
>> Rush have been acknowledged as a prog rock band for as long as I can
>> remember.
>
> By whom? As I said earlier, it's clearly subjective, and exact
> definitions differ, as to what exactly does or does not conform to any
> given genre. And bands vart a lot over time - one might argue that
> some Rush stuff verges on the genre, but thr vast mojority doe not,
> IMO.
>
>>> I'd never actually heard of the first three on the list
>>
>> You've not heard of Dream Theater, Mars Volta, or Tool?
>
> Err yes, that's what I said.
>> Next you'll be
>> saying you've never heard of Marillion, or that Fish is their vocalist.
>
> Something of a non-seqitur there, I feel. And definitely not remotely
> prog. They have a bit of history of association with Jethro Tull, who
> were their ticket to the big time back in their early days, and who
> were on paper the support band when I went to wee tham at some point
> in the 80s. Marillion were pretty crap on the day, TBH, but JT were
> amazing.

I was dragged to a Marrilion gig at the turn of the century. They were
shite.

Seen Fish twice since on his own, and he is excellent.
>

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 14/01/2022 12:21, Stephen Packer wrote:
> On Friday, 14 January 2022 at 09:00:29 UTC, YTC#1 wrote:
>
>> I have never thought of Rush as Prog Rock
>
> Did you ever listen to 2112? Not sure how that could be anything *but* prog.

Yes, fully enjoyed it. Still do.
But never remotely labeled that as prog.

If that was prog, then so are Hawkwind.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 14/01/2022 17:17, Champ wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:36:52 +0000, Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>>>>> A short piece of one of the Ronettes tracks was played on the BBC radio
>>>>>> news this morning, instantly taking me back to the caffs, coffee bars,
>>>>>> and biker transport caffs of the early sixties.
>
>>>>> Blimey, if you have memories of that then perhaps you're the oldest
>>>>> member of UKRM!
>
>>>> <gulp>
>
>>> <sums> So you turn 78 this year? You're 2 or 3 ahead of Pete Fisher,
>>> then. Might be the same age as crn
>
>> Not sure that that's something I'd like to win LOL.
>
> The oldest MP [1] in parliament is known as "the father of the
> house"[2]
>
> The oldest regular posting here could be known as the the Father of
> UKRM [3]
>
>
> [1] or is it the longest serving
> [2] dunno what they'll do if that MP is a woman
> [3] same problem as [2]

You never heard of the term "mother"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Harman#After_the_2015_general_election

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 10:27:24 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 14/01/2022 17:11, Champ wrote:

>> It's called a theremin

>I bought one for SWMBO for her birthday a while ago, to go with the lap
>steel guitar, ocarina, stylophone, and didgeridoo.

I still have a hankering to own one
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 10:29:46 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 14/01/2022 17:14, Champ wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:27:36 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Tricky fitting BJH into every prog rock top ten, when there's bands more
>>> deserving such as Focus or Deep Purple not included.
>> OK, Deep Purple (who were the very first rock band I loved) are
>> definitely not remotely prog

>http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1969

You can probably find a webpage supporting any assertion you can
imagine somewhere on the internet. Doesn't make the assertion true
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 10:44:18 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 14/01/2022 17:17, Champ wrote:
>>
>> The oldest MP [1] in parliament is known as "the father of the
>> house"[2]
>>
>> [1] or is it the longest serving

>Longest continual service.

Ah. Thank you. I'm indebted

>Currently Sir Peter Bottomley, who those with
>long memories may recall was the transport minister who mooted
>compulsory leg protectors for motorcycles.

I certainly do remember!

>> [2] dunno what they'll do if that MP is a woman
>> [3] same problem as [2]
>
>Theresa May nicknamed Harriet Harman the Mother of the House as the
>female equivalent.
>
>https://metro.co.uk/2017/06/13/harriet-harman-has-become-first-ever-mother-of-the-house-6706051/

Interesting.

I wonder it the term "Mother of the House" (and the single duty that
falls to the longest serving MP, which is running the election of the
speaker) will be formally used for Harriet Harman if/when Peter
Bottomley retires/falls of his perch (he is in his late 70s now).

--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On Saturday, 15 January 2022 at 14:09:53 UTC, Champ wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 10:29:46 +0000, Mike Fleming <mi...@tauzero.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >On 14/01/2022 17:14, Champ wrote:
> >> OK, Deep Purple (who were the very first rock band I loved) are
> >> definitely not remotely prog
>
> >http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1969
> You can probably find a webpage supporting any assertion you can
> imagine somewhere on the internet. Doesn't make the assertion true

It's possible to argue either side though, isn't it when it's not an easily defined term?

Personally I wouldn't have called Deep Purple 'prog' but some of the songs were certainly
leaning that way, for example Space Truckin'. Elsewhere I've said I thought Rush were
clearly prog, citing 2112; Bruce didn't agree with this.

Looking at Wikipedia (which of course is only a view of a group of people and not
authoritative) there's this definition which I quite liked:
"...the style was an outgrowth of psychedelic bands who abandoned standard pop
traditions in favour of instrumentation and compositional techniques more frequently
associated with jazz, folk, or classical music. Additional elements contributed to its
"progressive" label: lyrics were more poetic, technology was harnessed for new
sounds, music approached the condition of "art", and the studio, rather than the
stage, became the focus of musical activity, which often involved creating music
for listening rather than dancing."

Maybe 'music for listening rather than dancing' is the key point?

Either way it's impossible to label a band as 'exclusively' prog or not. Songs, yes
but the whole output of a band, especially one like Deep Purple or Rush with a
catalogue stretching over decades?

On Saturday, 15 January 2022 at 14:20:06 UTC, Champ wrote:
> I wonder it the term "Mother of the House" (and the single duty that
> falls to the longest serving MP, which is running the election of the
> speaker) will be formally used for Harriet Harman if/when Peter
> Bottomley retires/falls of his perch (he is in his late 70s now).

Given Harman has said she's retiring at the end of this parliament,
we'll only find out if Bottomley falls of his perch in the next couple
of years.

What I find quite staggering is that Harman's only 6 years younger
than Bottomley. Exactly six years younger. How did she get to be
middle aged so soon?

On 15/01/2022 14:35, Stephen Packer wrote:
> On Saturday, 15 January 2022 at 14:09:53 UTC, Champ wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 10:29:46 +0000, Mike Fleming <mi...@tauzero.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/01/2022 17:14, Champ wrote:
>>>> OK, Deep Purple (who were the very first rock band I loved) are
>>>> definitely not remotely prog
>>
>>> http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1969
>> You can probably find a webpage supporting any assertion you can
>> imagine somewhere on the internet. Doesn't make the assertion true
>
> It's possible to argue either side though, isn't it when it's not an easily defined term?
>
> Personally I wouldn't have called Deep Purple 'prog' but some of the songs were certainly
> leaning that way, for example Space Truckin'. Elsewhere I've said I thought Rush were
> clearly prog, citing 2112; Bruce didn't agree with this.
>
> Looking at Wikipedia (which of course is only a view of a group of people and not
> authoritative) there's this definition which I quite liked:
> "...the style was an outgrowth of psychedelic bands who abandoned standard pop
> traditions in favour of instrumentation and compositional techniques more frequently
> associated with jazz, folk, or classical music. Additional elements contributed to its
> "progressive" label: lyrics were more poetic, technology was harnessed for new
> sounds, music approached the condition of "art", and the studio, rather than the
> stage, became the focus of musical activity, which often involved creating music
> for listening rather than dancing."
>
> Maybe 'music for listening rather than dancing' is the key point?
>
> Either way it's impossible to label a band as 'exclusively' prog or not. Songs, yes
> but the whole output of a band, especially one like Deep Purple or Rush with a
> catalogue stretching over decades?
>

Hmmm, I think I quite like/identify with that wiki definition.
Especially since it supports my assertion, up near the top of this part
of this sub, sub, thread, that prog rock was not
predominantly/necessarily commercially oriented. :-)
Chris

--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550t
http://www.Deuchars.org.uk