Your favorite GENESIS studio albums (pick three)

  • That there's some intrinsic purity to the older material that only fans who have reached a certain level of enlightenment such as yourself can appreciate. You have grown wise enough and sophisticated in your tastes to recognize that even if you enjoy a song like Paperlate (to choose a representative example), it's a 'blind spot', and the song is somehow objectively garbage despite your enjoyment of it. This argument is drivel of the lowest order. There is no inherent value to one song over another, only different attributes that you might enjoy more than another person. I personally prefer Firth of Fifth to Paperlate but is that because it's a 'better' song and I know what a good song sounds like because I'm a smart person with refined tastes? No, because that would be bullshit. I just prefer it because I like a long dramatic song for one, and I love the melody in the opening piano bit and the atmosphere in the guitar solo. Could I understand someone preferring Paperlate? Of course. To each their own.

    I'm not entirely sure this is what Lazlor was saying, though I'm sure he/she will confirm or otherwise. But regardless, I really like how you express this as it certainly does nicely rebut a certain kind of old prog-head attitude I see and hear often. As you said, it's one thing to say "Wind & Wuthering was the last proper album they did" when that means "I don't like anything they did after Hackett left" which, although it's not a view I share, I think is fair enough. But when it comes with this much more dogmatic assertion that everything post-Hackett or post-Duke is definitively rubbish because it isn't Cinema Show or Vine and it earned them hit singles and huge audiences, that's what I have a problem with.


    It's on the same part of the spectrum as another gripe I've heard before, that when they packed out stadiums and mega-arenas on the IT tour it mainly wasn't "proper" Genesis fans, and only "true" fans would appreciate the old songs in the set. Now that really is arrogant codswallop.

    Abandon all reason

  • Interesting post, several points I might agree with, some other I clearly don't but it's not my place to reply. This one I found interesting though, I can only speak for myself but I don't give a you know what whether the band cringe at my personal taste, assessment and appreciation of their music. It applies to Genesis and well as to any other artist and I don't think anybody should care or it should be a factor in the appreciation or dislike of their music. Yes band members seem generally to think that Relayer is one of their best albums, they are entitled to this opinion of course, I and a myriad of other fans disagree profoundly and we are equally entitled to an opinion. An artist releases an album, promotes it, often stating that it is their best to date, it doesn't mean I have to agree. As many artists would tell you, once it's out there, it doesn't belong to them anymore, the audience will make it or break it and time will put in context. I will agree with you that it is always difficult to surmise somebody's true intentions and I for one, don't think that Genesis sat down to write a song thinking, let's cash in! Some of the stuff they were writing simply sounded like a good idea for those times, that's all, just like a mullet seemed an acceptable thing back then. That's why we have old pics or old albums, we look or listen back and think; Yeahhh....Not so great, perhaps. I don't think it is correct to over-idealize their 70s period either, much as I love it, the muse thing is a bit too much for me, again, they were in tune with those times but it can generally be accepted that during the 70s an artist enjoyed a bit more freedom and independence. They wrote, recorded and released SEBTP without even seeing an executive around but they consulted with Ahmet Ertegun of Atlantic records over what tracks to include on Abacab and I don't think it was for ''artistic' reasons, whatever might be understood under that term, They sold out? Not necessarily, it would have been ludicrous to release something like the Lamb in 81 but commercial concerns were probably on their mind, particularly with their singer suddenly becoming a household name and why not? To go back to the poll thread main theme though, it shouldn't come as any surprise though if Genesis fans tend to favor their older albums, the general audience might be fond of songs like Invisible Touch and never heard The Cinema Show for instance but in a Genesis fans forum things are different.

    I think we're on slightly different wavelengths here. When I said the band would cringe at what was written, I wasn't referring to album or era preferences. I was really referring to this idea that they sold out. And especially that they were in tune with their muses (or whatever it was) in the 70s.


    The point about Whodunnit is well taken, I bet an executive wouldn't have been in the middle of a debate the running order of Nursery Cryme. Still, I think they respected the opinion of the person who made that recommendation, although his name totally escapes me. The founder of Atlantic or something? And commercial concerns from The Man didn't stop Gabriel when it came to So. My point being that I don't think they sold out. There was no muse. There was just the band members, working hard and doing their best.

  • But when it comes with this much more dogmatic assertion that everything post-Hackett or post-Duke is definitively rubbish because it isn't Cinema Show or Vine and it earned them hit singles and huge audiences, that's what I have a problem with.

    Exactly.

    It's on the same part of the spectrum as another gripe I've heard before, that when they packed out stadiums and mega-arenas on the IT tour it mainly wasn't "proper" Genesis fans, and only "true" fans would appreciate the old songs in the set. Now that really is arrogant codswallop.

    And more exactly!


    It's a toxic, condescending attitude I find very off putting.

  • When I said the band would cringe at what was written, I wasn't referring to album or era preferences. I was really referring to this idea that they sold out.


    The point about Whodunnit is well taken, I bet an executive wouldn't have been in the middle of a debate the running order of Nursery Cryme. Still, I think they respected the opinion of the person who made that recommendation, although his name totally escapes me. The founder of Atlantic or something? And commercial concerns from The Man didn't stop Gabriel when it came to So. My point being that I don't think they sold out. There was no muse. There was just the band members, working hard and doing their best

    Oh, I'm sure they would resent anybody thinking they sold out, any artist would after all, even when they do. Nobody would freely admit it and they certainly had to find another narrative. Fans though, are free to believe what they want and that was my whole point, it gets however slippery when said fans, in order to substantiate their claim, start invoking the purity of the muses, slippery and a double-edged sword. Phil started to jam with Brand X around 75 and they released their record in 76, when Genesis, according to some fans were still to be considered ''pure'' and ''respectable''. He l said several times that was, musically speaking, the happiest he had ever been, he would have quit the band in a heartbeat, but Genesis were his bread and butter and he freely admitted that much. Does that mean he sold out by staying with the band? Some might think that but to Genesis fans of that era the thought would have been tantamount to a sacrilege. There were after all prog gods. I don't like Abacab not because they sold out, I just think the material is poor and thin. I'm happy they went that way but as an album it doesn't have any particular commercial relevance, good luck hearing any of those songs on the radio today, while you can still hear IT, into deep, that's all, no son of mine and so on. As for the Genesis songbook and fans, the album seems to have left no particular trace, the band have dropped it altogether and while some fans might like those songs, stuff like another record or like it or not will hardly ever be what the band is remembered by. Still, an important album, one that needed to be made but not a good one as far as I'm concerned and I really don't resent them for capitalizing on Phil's newly found success. It was the right thing to do. I guess, what I'm trying to say and we might be on the same side on this is, let's just like or dislike what without without thinking something is better or worse, pure or soiled.

    Edited once, last by Fabrizio ().

  • I've raised this point before, but I'll do it again as it is relevant to this conversation.


    There is nothing wrong with creating art to make money. It is what most (admittedly not all) artists do. Some of the greatest works in music and art were made for money, very often tailoring the art to meet the expectations of the people paying for it. A composer such as Mozart created music for his patrons/employers at the time. Michaelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel ceiling because he was commissioned to do so. Their works were not diminished because they were done for money.


    I would argue that Genesis was always creating music to make money and build an audience. How successful they were changed over time. I don't believe they ever stopped caring about creating music that they liked and felt was of good quality.

  • The short answer: seeing Duke ranking above Nursery Cryme and Foxtrot in this poll is proof that there are many more Patrick Batemans than music lovers around us (how's that for a planet-wide blind spot?).


    But then we always knew that, didn't we? ;)




    (Key to this inflammatory statement: PB was only incidentally a serial killer...)

  • I'm not entirely sure this is what Lazlor was saying, though I'm sure he/she will confirm or otherwise. But regardless, I really like how you express this as it certainly does nicely rebut a certain kind of old prog-head attitude I see and hear often. As you said, it's one thing to say "Wind & Wuthering was the last proper album they did" when that means "I don't like anything they did after Hackett left" which, although it's not a view I share, I think is fair enough. But when it comes with this much more dogmatic assertion that everything post-Hackett or post-Duke is definitively rubbish because it isn't Cinema Show or Vine and it earned them hit singles and huge audiences, that's what I have a problem with.


    It's on the same part of the spectrum as another gripe I've heard before, that when they packed out stadiums and mega-arenas on the IT tour it mainly wasn't "proper" Genesis fans, and only "true" fans would appreciate the old songs in the set. Now that really is arrogant codswallop.

    There are no 'old prog-heads' as opposed to new ones.


    Only progheads (for lack of a better word) on the one hand, and blind love from indiscriminating fans on the other hand.


    Which is OK, again - happiness lies in lack of perspective ;)


    ('he')

    Are you sure? The manner and frequency with which you mention their latter-career earnings suggests you do have some kind of problem with it.


    What are the 'blind spots' you refer to?


    It's a problem only from a musical/artistic point of view.



    Regarding the 'muse' thing: you guys might reread what I wrote, 'cos it infers nothing pretentious at all ;)

  • Everything being equal to everything else?


    'The band would cringe' - which band exactly? ;)


    Forget any purported 'intellectual calisthenics': the truth of the matter is we had THE 'prog' band, a band that pretty much defined an era thanks to its honest approach to making both ambitious and accessible musicone that opened 'lontananze d'azzurro' (Franco Battiato reference) to countless disenfranchised children of the Seventies, at a time when what you might call art mattered, a time before absolutely everything became ruled by accountants and fashion designers.


    Then that band turned into something else entirely, which I will refrain from defining for fear of sounding like 'a smart person with refined tastes' ;)


    OK, I'm not one for reining in (much) my (refined) views: one of those bands made art, the other made money - simple as that.

  • Ouch, I rank Duke above those two and practically live for music. I don't think that ranking is really proof of anything substantial, just a different taste and only barely at that as I love the other two albums quite a lot 🙂


    I could see maybe having this comparison perhaps between NSync or some corporate pop-outfit vs Genesis where the worlds more like universes apart, but Genesis vs. Genesis I never quite got. The fact that someone likes even one Genesis album I think proves they would enjoy music as art.

  • You guys go for this explanation because it suits ya, but the truth of the matter is: the music is rubbish regardless of the sales figures.

    🤦‍♂️

    Which is OK, again - happiness lies in lack of perspective ;)


    Regarding the 'muse' thing: you guys might reread what I wrote, 'cos it infers nothing pretentious at all ;)

    <X

    🤦🤦‍♂️

  • 🤦‍♂️

    Pretty much the only sensible possible response to someone vomiting all over the thread.


    Someone needs to gently lead him to a comfy chair with a view of the grounds, tuck a blanket around him, give him a nice warm milky drink and leave him to babble away to himself.


    Oh sorry, almost forgot -


    😉

    Abandon all reason

  • Ouch, I rank Duke above those two and practically live for music. I don't think that ranking is really proof of anything substantial, just a different taste and only barely at that as I love the other two albums quite a lot 🙂

    No, you're wrong. Didn't you hear him? What you said is merely -

    blind love from indiscriminating fans ;)

    I mean, show some gratitude to him for helpfully explaining your own views to you!

    Abandon all reason

  • There are no 'old prog-heads' as opposed to new ones.


    Only progheads (for lack of a better word) on the one hand, and blind love from indiscriminating fans on the other hand.

    Talk about indiscriminating......The idea that the band stopped making real music in 77 is as absurd as the notion that they wasted a decade before starting making real music in 81, something incidentally some fans who got on board with WCD and Phil' Tarzan believe also. There are several songs I find bad, bordering on tasteless on IT and WCD but, provided you are being sincere and you are not just trying to ruffle some feathers around here, I find your position quite naive.

    Edited 4 times, last by Fabrizio ().

  • I absolutely love that when you quoted me, it italicized the face palm emoji, somehow reminding me of Pornography by the Cure!


    OT: Lazlor I find your take on Genesis singularly depressing and one dimensional. I became a fan in 1991 and absolutely love Feeding The Fire and Calling All Stations. In your head this is blind love from an indiscriminating fan? You tool. It doesn't bother me in the slightest since I can easily recognize this form of pious condescension for what it is, but I hate that there are potential fans out there that would be put off or influenced by you or your stale like.

  • Guys, guys, just think about this: in 1982, an allegedly washed out Jethro Tull released Broadsword and the Beast ;)

    Great album!


    :love:8o

    First we learned to walk on water.

    Then we tried something harder.

    - Red Seven -

  • I absolutely love that when you quoted me, it italicized the face palm emoji, somehow reminding me of Pornography by the Cure!


    OT: Lazlor I find your take on Genesis singularly depressing and one dimensional. I became a fan in 1991 and absolutely love Feeding The Fire and Calling All Stations. In your head this is blind love from an indiscriminating fan

    Hell yeah. And why not? I don't mind a bit of cheese myself, from time to time.


    But again, it's never a bad idea to get a little perspectiveand those songs are definitely not what Genesis is all about or will be remembered for (if at all)


    Kudos for thinking there are potential fans out there, thoughminus a few points for thinking they mightn't listen with their ears.


    Look, love for any given band can be a great thing, but you can't let it blind you to the reality, in this case, of a great original rock band devolving into purveyors of nondescript pap.


    Also, if you can't take a strongly divergent opinion without resorting to name-calling, you probably need to take a step back and go for a walk or something ;)


    Hugs & kisses from the toobox

  • if you can't take a strongly divergent opinion without resorting to name-calling, you probably need to take a step back and go for a walk or something

    Says the person who ascribes opinions differing from his own to "blind indiscriminating fandom" - which is intentionally derogatory regardless of how many winking emojis you slap on it.


    Not to mention your smug arrogance in believing you can define what the band will be remembered for, and making pompously objective pronouncements about the value of different eras of their work.

    Abandon all reason

  • That isn't name-calling: way too general for that.


    Sorry that I offended your sensibilities, but one has to step out of the woolly consensus once in a while

    especially on a thread such as this.