[DOC] Listening to the Future: The Time of Progressive Rock; 1968-1978 by Bill Martin in Arts-Photography

Review

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Hard slogging but very thought provoking readBy John T. MoshierFirst. reader beware: this is a very difficult academically oriented book by a DePaul University Philosophy Professor published by what appears to be an academic press. It is not geared to general readers who want a high level overview of what many aficionados called the "Art Rock" era. It assumes you know all that and much more. It uses words I havent used or thought about since graduate school. sometimes several times in the same sentence.It is hard going but well worth the journey. If you love this music (and I do) you will learn much about the music. groups and individual musicians. You will also learn a lot about Marxism. sociology. the social movements and philosophical ideas that underly what is now called "progressive rock." The book is so thought provoking that I intend to read it again after reading books by the same author on "Ethical Marxism" and the progressive rock group Yes.The only reason I did not give this book five stars is that it is burdened by a professorial pomposity that is really hard to get past. At times the tongue in cheek criticisms of other scholars are hilarious. At other times the author simply calls his academic colleagues or their ideas "Stupid." This makes one wonder if people in academia with different viewpoints have manners. The seeming effort to land the cleverest "gotcha" does detract from a book that all lovers of bands like Yes. King Crimson. ELP. Jethro Tull. Renaissance and the like will be enriched by reading.21 of 27 people found the following review helpful. Did This Guy Take Writing Lessons From Heidegger?By Joseph KimseyI really wanted to like this book. I like a lot of Progressive Rock. I like a lot of philosophy. Unfortunately. Professor Martin writes with a meandering obscurity that resembles Yes lyrics at their most impenetrable. or like reading Hegel after not having slept for sixteen hours. Simply put. Martin is an appallingly bad writer. Its too bad that as writing models. Martin bypassed Schopenhauer. Hume Nietzsche. He seems to prefer Hegel. Fichte and Heidegger.I agree with several of Martins opinions. though. I love King Crimson. Jethro Tull and Gentle Giant. and all of these bands are given thoughtful analysis by Prof. Martin. Martin has little time for Rush; considering that Rush is the most overrated prog band ever. I heartily concur.Frank Zappa isnt included among the giants of progressive music (Martin takes something like eight pages to explain why Zappa isnt covered. but he never gets much beyond the "I dont like his lyrics" stage ). Zappas music is. truly. more "progressive" than most of the bands covered here. Personally. I think I detect a political bias on Martins part: one gets the feeling that had Zappa wrote Utopian lyrics that involved gnomes and fairies. or had embraced the Left as had his contemporaries. he would take up a major part of this book. Some more curious omissions are Captain Beefheart Pink Floyd.As far as Martins philosophy is concerned. he is apparently of the Hegelian-Marxist school of thought. Perhaps that is why his theory of a progressive-rock "Zeitgeist" never really gets going. The main flaw. in my opinion. is that this "logic of history" approach is biased from the get-go. For his theory to work. Martin had to leave out inconvenient accessories. That explains the absence of Zappa.0 of 1 people found the following review helpful. the book argues that punk rock appeared as a new wave music.By A CustomerTHE BOOKs IDEA OF PUNK ROCK Bill martins argument is that punk rock appeared as a new wave of music. He completely shatters the myth of it being a type of music against progressive rock by stating that it was a great part of the rock era. The line. "By the mideighties. punk was either a hard-core taste for a few people with leather jackets.and mohawks or it had merged into a larger new wave scene" is an example of biased word choise. This is not historically accurate. This resource. however. is scholarly because of the many noted historians in its bibliography. It also goes into a hardcore generation and bands that have shaped punk music. It does not recognize punk rock as an entirely new music. but views it as one large part of progressive rock history. The historical question being persued is what has punk rock provided for progressive rock? This is answered and then the book moves on to other music genres.