Progressive in Spirit

Many of us who are fans of Rush are familiar with the term, "progressive rock". Since the subject of this blog is Rush and our support for their induction into the Rock Hall of Fame, I thought it would be interesting to discuss the concept of progressive rock.

Consider the meaning of the word, "progressive". According to Merriam-Webster's website, www.merriam-webster.com, the definition of the word is

1 a: of, relating to, or characterized by progress b: making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities c: of, relating to, or constituting an educational theory marked by emphasis on the individual child, informality of classroom procedure, and encouragement of self-expression

Of particular interest is the part of the definition that says "characterized by progress" as well as "making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities". To me, this is at the crux of progressive rock. It's stretches the limits of the imagination, both in form and content. It seeks to advance the art, not simply capitalize on it commercially.

I don't know if most music critics would characterize albums like Snakes and Arrows as being progressive rock. I guess my music connoisseurship isn't quite at such a level. Few would argue that it's top caliber, but it seems to be much different from the seventies brand of progressive rock that included concept albums and atmospheric sound effects interlaced within the music. Of course, those are just two of the standout features that I remember.

I would say, however, that Rush remains progressive in spirit at the very least. Progressive in a personal sense, that is. When you look at the discography of Rush since 1974, the music has shown amazing diversity. Play Rush and then play Snakes and Arrows. You might still recognize Geddy Lee's voice, but it ain't the same music anymore. Pick any of the albums in-between and you will be hard-pressed to make any solid comparisons.

I think this is another amazing aspect of their music and yet another reason to induct them into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. With no disrespect to Rock Hall inductees like Blondie, who achieved the "amazing" success of three platinum albums (out of eight released) from 1976 to 2003, Rush has certainly outperformed most of them. According to Wikipedia,

As a group, Rush possesses 24 gold records and 14 platinum (3 multi-platinum) records, placing them fourth behind the Beatles, Rolling Stones and Kiss for the most gold and platinum albums by a band in music history.

This was from the period between 1974 until today. Again, look at the music. Despite all of the changes in their music, they continue to make their mark in the music industry and haven't lost any fans yet. I would certainly call that progress.

Should the Football Hall of Fame Induct Baseall Players?

In an article on NPR.org, Miles, Beyond Jazz: Rock Hall Honors Davis, Steve Inskeep and Ashley Kahn write,

The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame welcomes its new members Monday night - and that list will include Miles Davis. For most of his career, the great jazz trumpeteer played music that had very little to do with rock 'n' roll.

There are few people who know anything about music who would question that ability and influence of Miles Davis. Of course, the real question is does he belong in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

If the intention of the founders of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame was to honor musicians who contributed to contemporary music, why didn't they call it the Musician's Hall of Fame? It is not as if there aren't worthy musicians in rock music who haven't been inducted yet. Despite Miles Davis's ability as one of the best jazz musicians ever, I don't think I have ever read anyone in rock music list him as one of their first influences. Therefore, even the flimsy argument that he somehow has benefited rock music seems false.

What is the point of having a hall of fame that broadly honors members of sibling areas of activities (such as rock honoring jazz) while snubbing the members of its area of concern (such as the way many bands in rock have been overlooked)? Would controversy not arise if Jackie Robinson, a professional baseball player was inducted into the Professional Football Hall of Fame simply because he was one of the first major black athletes in American sports? Certainly, his success and ability was an inspiration to many young athletes, but I doubt that anyone would feel his rightful place is in a football hall of fame.

Shouldn't the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame being focusing their efforts towards honoring members of the rock community? Obviously, rock is a very broad genre and there will always be debate about what constitutes rock. I think that broadest definition is important. Rock has evolved dramatically since its original form and the Hall of Fame would not seem relevant to a generation who no longer cares about the 50s. By the same token, however, the Hall of Fame does not seem relevant if it is going to overlook major rock artists, such as Rush, who have a history of successful albums, a recognized level of influence and respect, and an immense fan base that cries out for the artist's induction. Perhaps these are signs that a new rock hall of fame is needed.

Who's in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame

This is a list of inductees since Rush was eligible in 1998.

1998	Fleetwood Mac, The Mamas & the Papas, Lloyd Price, Santana, Gene Vincent
1999	Billy Joel, Curtis Mayfield, Paul McCartney, Del Shannon, Dusty Springfield, Bruce Springsteen, The Staple Singers
2000	Eric Clapton, Earth, Wind, & Fire, The Lovin Spoonful, The Moonglows, Bonnie Raitt, James Taylor
2001	Aerosmith, Solomon Burke, The Flamingos, Michael Jackson, Queen, Paul Simon, Steely Dan, Ritchie Valens
2002	Isaac Hayes, Brenda Lee, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, Gene Pitney, Ramones, Talking Heads
2003	AC/DC, The Clash, Elvis Costello & the Attractions, The Police, The Righteous Brothers
2004	Jackson Browne, The Dells, George Harrison, Prince, Bob Seger, ZZ Top
2005	Buddy Guy, The O'Jays, The Pretenders, Percy Sledge, U2
2006	Black Sabbath, Blondie, Miles Davis, Lynryd Skynyrd, Sex Pistols
2007	Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five, R.E.M., The Ronettes, Patti Smith, Van Halen
2008	The Dave Clark Five, Leonard Cohen, Madonna, John Mellencamp, The Ventures
2009	Jeff Beck, Little Anthony & the Imperials, Metallica, Run-D.M.C., Bobby Womack

Wikipedia Doesn't Like Supporters of Rush Page

I tried to create a Supporters of Rush wikipedia page recently. Much to my disappointment, I discovered in short time that my page was selected for "speedy deletion". Apparently, pages dedicated to groups must explain the significance of their existence before they will be allowed to live on Wikipedia.

I asked for a better explanation about what type of content they were looking for. After all, what exactly do they mean by "significance"? Isn't it true that we are significant by our sheer existence? There are currently 87 members in our organization. That's larger than most meetings that I have attended.

Furthermore, this question of significance is rather subjective. To Rush fans who believe that Rush has been getting screwed by the RnR folks, our existence is highly significant. It demonstrates a grassroots effort to show that the fans count. After all, we are buying the albums that record companies produce. Shouldn't our choices by heard?

But the Wikipedia page may be dead for now, it is an issue that shall be revisited. It is not a priority and was more of an interesting afterthought. If anyone knows how we can make this page work, please create it or let me know what to do.

Keep up your support.

MSNBC talks about Rush not getting inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame

I recently ran across an article on MSNBC.com regarding Rush not being inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It is definitely worth checking out. Click here to find out why Rush isn't in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

It basically sucks that bands like Run-DMC are managing to get recognized before one of the most successful bands in rock and sadder still that this band is a rap band. Despite the countless number of critics, it doesn't appear as though the Hall of Fame is going to budge any time soon.

Hopefully, fan efforts, such as this one, will end up making up some kind of dent in their resolve.

Is Facebook Another Temple of Syrinx? - Part Four

Well, it seems that my account has been restored on Facebook. After over three weeks of suspension, I received an email requesting information about my activities on Facebook. I had already explained what I did on Facebook when I was first suspended. I very briefly stated that I didn't do anything wrong and that this is a matter that should have been discussed much earlier. Much to my surprise, my account was restored. The interesting part is that my account was suspended because of an auto-refresh tool and had nothing to do with the fan club activity. Shame on you, Facebook, for giving me cause to speculate, but thanks for bringing me back!

Is Facebook Another Temple of Syrinx? - Part Three

The controversy still looms over my Facebook account getting suspended for undisclosed reasons. Many people are asking the question - what would cause Facebook to suspend my account? It is the same question that I have been asking for the past few days with no official response yet from Facebook.

A new theory for this reason was proposed to me today regarding my usage of the Starman logo of the classic 2112 album. I had initially speculated that perhaps I had created a copyright infringement issue. However, there are numerous Facebook groups who are using this logo and these groups, including the "Supporters of Rush Becoming Inductees into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame" group, are still in existence. Why would my account alone and not any of the groups be removed then?

The theory proposed to me, however, was quite interesting. What if it was not a copyright infringement issue at all? What if the issue is the nude, but non-explicit, form of the Starman? Is it possible that my account was suspended over a "butt shot"? This would be perhaps the most shocking revelation of them all. The insinuation being that this image is somehow indecent or even pornographic, and that itself would be a violation of the terms of service.

Of course, for such a theory to be true, then the same prior logic must apply. Others are using the logo. Why are they not suspended? Why are these images still being used? Why are the groups using these images not removed?

It is shame that people must engage in speculation over such controversies. Facebook should explain themselves regardless of what happens afterwards. Hopefully, there is someone at Facebook who is investigating whatever allegations were made regarding my account and that my account is rightfully restored. We don't want to be talking about Facebook. We want to talk about Rush and their right to be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

I guess we must all wait and see. Until then, I'll keep everyone posted.

Is Facebook Another Temple of Syrinx? - Part Two

While I have not discovered WHY my Facebook account has been suspended, I have discovered WHAT consequences it has.

Every where that I have posted a link to the Facebook group is now gone from Facebook because I am gone from Facebook. Indeed, this is a powerful tool for stifling the support movement. I have also noted that there is no longer an admin for this group so I am curious as to the fate of the group on Facebook.

I will continue to blog about these events as they unfold. The group on Facebook continues to grow despite what seems to be an effort to stop it.

Is Facebook Another Temple of Syrinx? - Part One

Recently and without warning, my Facebook account was suspended. I was the admin for the Facebook group, "Supporters of Rush Becoming Inductees into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame." When I attempted to login, I received an error message stating that I had violated the Terms of Use.

I don't do much on Facebook except discuss recent events in my life and, lately, discussing this grassroots movement of showing support for inducting Rush into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. The closest I have come to "controversial" is posting links to our group on other related pages and groups. I don't feel that posting an internal link to a group constitutes spamming or misrepresentation. If this is against the Terms of Use, then why does Facebook enable us to do so? In any event, if I had inadvertently violated the Terms of Use, I believe that I should have been notified first and given a chance to either stop what I was doing or explain myself.

This somewhat heavy-handed action on the part of Facebook is disappointing. Hopefully, it is merely a misunderstanding that can be resolved without me being forced to create a new account. Even moreso, I hope that this is not an attempt at squelching our effort to show support for the greatest rock band of all time.