Quote:
Originally Posted by PFD
While on the subject of the beautiful Kate, I have a question that's been on my mind for years.
I love Kate's music. She's brilliant. But I never understood her connection to the prog rock crowd. Like myself, many prog rockers love Kate. But she certainly isn't prog. Yeah, I know she's got a tenuous Dave Gilmour and Alan Parsons connection...but what is it, do you think, that endears her to the prog crowd?
|
you know how much i hate this prog vs non-prog, but here's my opinion.
The connection between a "progger" and someone is not really enough to make it prog. However, the connection is more than tenuous. Gilmour and Bush have worked very closely together. She's also worked with Eberhard Weber and Peter Gabriel.
I never understood why some artists get a free "prog pass". Gabriel's "So" contains many non-prog efforts, yet is considered prog. Kate sings on Gabriel's "Don't Give Up" on "So". And that is really a gospel/prog thing. So by the prevailing "association" she should be prog.
Gilmour's first two solo records are brilliant, but I don't think they're Prog.
See how pointless this all is? You can spin it however you want.
Anyway, her records from Never For Ever to Sensual World are VERY much in the prevailing prog vein and are rightly on the Moon. They are absolutely brilliant efforts. So is Aerial (on the Moon). I'm not sure why Kick Inside is not. Could be not selected by Jim (it's not as prog as the others more just her and the piano a lot) )or maybe he doesn't own it. I have offered to upload it for addition, but I'm not making any decisons on moon inclusion (it's not my job, and I would not want the job if asked lol). I also have Lionheart. i did a show on Kate, and vaguely remember a discussion about her early music on the Moon. Hopefully Jim can refresh my memory.
Not railing on you at all PFD....it's a good question
