| | Jordan, you wrote:
"Reading your article, I sense that you don't enjoy the style of pop music from the 60s on. Maybe you should pick up the "Symphonic Music of Yes" - a symphony orchestra playing Yes music (not a great album but at least the style won't get in the way). But, if you're looking for anything in pop music to approach what you get in romantic symphonies or operas, you're wasting your time."
I don't know if this suggestion really helps, because, besides the fact that most of these symphonic rock albums (starting with ORCHESTRAL TUBULAR BELLS) lose a lot in the translation of electric and electronic instruments to orchestral instruments (there are just some things that violins and horns can't do), the experiment was to see if James could connect with rock music on its own terms. I do think that it is a good idea in itself to see if rock music can translate at all with orchestral treatments, and it may be a good litmus test for greatness to subject different kinds of music to alternative treatments of arrangement and instrumentation (like a jazz rendition of a Bach piece or a Gaelic treatment of a jazz song). Sometimes I've heard melodies that I like in a different setting and loved the results, other times I can't believe it's the same things. And recording techniques affect this also, I rarely like cover songs because the original production was so integral to the overall piece. (Which makes you wonder how much of the greatness is in the melody itself as opposed to the style, the manner in which it's presented.
But to get back on point, about the suggestion of the symphonic Yes. Bill Martin, in his book MUSIC OF YES: Structure and Vision in Progressive Rock, the author addresses this issue regarding Rick Wakeman's first solo album THE SIX WIVES OF HENRY VIII:
"SIX WIVES is a pivotal moment in what we might call the 'campaign' of progressive rock, its march toward a more general musical credibility. This was the sort of album we got our music teachers in high school, and other 'adults' who had some experience with 'serious music,' to listen to-and we were happy when they pronounced Wakeman's effort good, and even 'valid.' The funny thing was that we gave these adults too much credit. They were able to relate to some of these musical structures because they were coming from the keyboard; other instruments common in rock music, especially electric guitars, bass guitars, and drums, they couldn't relate to so well. Therefore, constrained by some rather silly ideas of what it takes to make good music (orchestral instruments, pianos, and operatically trained voices, apparently,) they were impressed by SIX WIVES, and yet not impressed by other rock music that was far more adventurous.
There is something very "Roarkian" about this, in the sense of trying to do something with the new technology that was not possible with acoustic instruments, and the "we" in the above paragraph show a "Keating" tendency in the appeal to traditional classical styles. It is not unlike the ordeal Hank Reardon faces in the introduction of Reardon Steel.
(Incidentally, THIS is why I did not recommend CLOSE TO THE EDGE or RELAYER by Yes to James; GOING FOR THE ONE is much more "conservative" in its instrumentation and tonality.)
Jordan also asked: " It's interesting to me that a lot of Objectivists like Yes. I haven't put my finger on the connection."
In case you haven't seen it, there was a Symposium in THE JOURNAL OF AYN RAND STUDIES on Rush, Rand, and progressive rock featuring an article on Yes and Rand by Peter Saint Andre: (Chris must have fallen asleep on the link alert!)
http://www.saint-andre.com/thoughts/rr.html
(Edited by Joe Maurone
on 5/08, 9:50am)
|
|
