Genesis: Wanted Dead or Alive?
January 23rd 2011 19:16
There’s this little joke about what on this Earth could possibly survive a nuclear holocaust. Termites and Cher have been traditional answers. I would like to offer a third: Genesis. Seriously, these guys have a habit of reentering the fray just when you thought they had gone the way of the dodo.
So how does an article about a rock band have any relevance in a blog devoted to movies? Well, they released that documentary of their 2007 European concert tour. That counts, right?
Please don’t think I am insulting this band. Rather, I am a huge Genesis fan. In the last few years, I have also become a big fan of Tony Banks’ solo works and I have always listened to Phil Collins and Mike and the Mechanics.
It is hard not to have respect for a band that has endured decades, gone through several incarnations and has always maintained a group atmosphere despite pursuing solo projects of their own. Plus, they seem to be picking up a new generation of fans, thanks to parental influence and the Internet.
YouTube is a storehouse for Genesis interviews and concert segments. Genesis music videos aren’t as available anymore, due to copyright laws, but Tony’s works are still viewable.
As much as I love to troll those videos from time to time, I have virtually shied away from the ensuing comment threads, because of certain topic threads that seem to be on continuous life support. As a fan of both camps, I become disgruntled at certain bashing of Genesis and Tony Banks or any combination thereof. Therefore, I have scrapped most of my original ideas for this article (which would have consisted mostly of overgrown fan girl gushing) and present to you my rebuttals of the three biggest contentions in the YouTube community. Bear in my mind that my commentaries are based mostly on observations and not solid facts, so just take this with a grain of salt as I try to refute some ugly commentary.
1) Peter Gabriel was a better lead singer than Phil Collins, because of this reason (or vice versa). Likewise, Ray Wilson sucked, because of that reason or he totally kicked ass, because of something else and everything before him sucked and blew.
Oh, no, it’s the Great Pizza Topping Debate! In stereo, even! This argument is so tired that there aren’t any good rebuttals left and each person is left saying something to the effect of, “So there!” Still, this drama has migrated from the Genesis comment threads and found its way to Tony Banks’ corner of YouTube.
There is still a devoted legion of fans that pine for the day that Peter Gabriel will finally rejoin the group he helped to create. I hate to burst their shiny bubble, but Gabriel left in 1975. The odds certainly don’t favor him returning to the band. Also, he isn’t shy about expressing his intent that he doesn’t want to, “go backwards with Genesis.” Hell, he couldn’t even bother to reunite with Genesis for one night to accept his award for the band’s induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (citing his brand new tour as an excuse)!
If only it ended there! Some of these PG devotees go on to trash Phil Collins for condescending to take Peter’s place as the lead singer. Fact is, Phil got the job, because he was the best suited compared to others who had auditioned. An added plus was that music from the Gabriel era didn’t have to be reworked in a different key (at the time) as Phil had the same vocal range. He has since lost a bit of that range, but, hey, shit happens.
However, some fans still weren’t happy, even though their band had gained a second life. They go so far as to condemn Phil for turning Genesis into a so-called “poppy outfit.” Funny, but I thought that was a collaborative decision made between the band and Hugh Padgham. If Phil isn’t bashed the commercialism, he’s raked through the coals for his looks, his singing, etc. I guess some people would have been happier if the band had not evolved during the years 1976-1996. If Genesis had slipped into the dark depths of rock and roll oblivion, early fans could bemoan the unfairness of it, that there would be no more elaborate musical scores or compelling lyrics.
Oh, wait! They do that anyway!
And Goddess forbid if you should admit to being a fan of this era as you will be declared as too ignorant to dress yourself. Well, my first Genesis album was Invisible Touch and I can dress myself without cue cards, thank you very much!
I have observed, though, that despite the above commentary, Phil doesn’t appear to be the most loathed lead singer. At the very least, it might be a tie with Ray Wilson, the lead singer on Calling All Stations (1997), and Genesis’ last incarnation.
I think the general fan population was more forgiving when Phil took over as lead singer, because he was already a member of the band. Ray was a total outsider, and of course, sang in a completely different vocal range which made it difficult to sing the band’s older material (the material had to be played in a lower key to accommodate this). Hence, he has had the rather harsh moniker, “Raw Wilson,” bestowed upon him by Genesis fans who couldn’t abide by his deeper, somewhat gravelly voice. Well, if these holier-than-thou souls could sing Genesis’ songs, better, they should have auditioned for the job. I think Ray Wilson did could with what he had, but he had some big shoes to fill. The odds weren’t fair to him.
Sadly, this Genesis incarnation was never put to an adequate test as they only released the one album. I think if fans had given this album a real chance and not listened to it with the pre-expectation that Ray would be a Phil Collins/Peter Gabriel clone, that Tony and Mike would have had the confidence to keep the band going a while longer. It’s a shame that we’ll never know what could have been.
2) Steve Hackett left the band, because of Tony Banks (or Tony pushed him out) and they still hate each other.
This migrating argument is just as stale as the above. Okay, I wasn’t there to actually witness this event in 1977 (I was born that year.), so I can’t offer factual proof of any feud that existed between the two. However, I am sick of the viewpoint that the burden of blame rests squarely on Tony’s shoulders. Yes, he is known for being temperamental and stubborn, but it takes two (or more) people to feud. Also, Steve left the band of his own accord as he felt his creativity was being stifled within the confines of a group that operated democratically. I call it as being six of one and a half dozen of the other as the saying goes. I mean, we are dealing with two like-minded, creative, driven and stubborn individuals here who were both in their twenties when this all went down.
I will note that in a picture of the two taken at Steve’s 50th birthday party, neither seems to exhibit lingering animosity. And, no, I don’t think they’re acting for the camera. Remember, Tony has said on many an occasion that he can’t act! Apparently, they’ve buried the hatchet, at least, to some extent.
Lastly, the two stood side-by-side at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony. There were no glares. There was no bloodshed and neither was poised to wring the other’s neck. People, let this “feud” die!
3) Everything Tony Banks did outside of Genesis (or in later Genesis) was “poppy trash”!
Uh-oh, this is the second negative commentary in a row for Tony! Le sigh! However, this third and final argument is the one that most gets my goat. Therefore, the following rebuttal is lengthy, as I have culled it from my original article premise. And, yes, there is slight fan girl gushing to stomach.
I have never seen the old saying, “Never judge a book by its cover,” apply more to a person than it does to Genesis’ keyboard player, Tony Banks. Speaking as a soul who has made the aforementioned mistake in the past, I can tell you that if you only scan the surface of this individual before nonchalantly moving on, you will garner less than the tip of the proverbial iceberg. And that, my friends, would be a dire mistake, for not only will you come away with a mistaken impression of this person and his solo works, but the band that he helped to conceive.
Naturally, we are drawn to extroverted souls who make it their business to be socially interactive. They make the most noise and are forever in your face. People were drawn to Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins for their public personas and, therefore, credited these individuals with being the brains behind Genesis. (I won’t mention Ray Wilson, because I have too little knowledge of his public persona to make a fair determination of his stage presence.) The other band members (Rutherford, Banks and Hackett) were deemed to be there for mere back-up decoration and nothing more.
Tony Banks spent so many years quietly composed behind his keyboards that many people were and are under the belief that he was easily expendable. He just played the lyrics and notes that were given to him. He didn’t possess an ounce of acting, so videos were a hindrance and he never appeared to be much of a team player. In fact, he wasn’t terribly social at all. So, why did the band keep him around all this time?
Phil Collins said back in 1990 that Tony Banks was (and is) the most important member of Genesis with Michael Rutherford as close second. Gee, that doesn’t seem to fit the profile of someone who is dispensable. In fact, Tony was has always been pretty much involved in everything from writing the music to playing keyboards and acoustic guitar to concert set design, etc. Well, the band was his day job and it isn’t written into his personality to be a quiet backdrop for 40 years. In fact, if that was his attitude, he would have been given the boot years ago. There is no room in Genesis for shiftless loafers.
In the threads of YouTube commentaries centering around Genesis and Tony’s solo works, there seem to be four distinct camps. One camp adores everything he has ever done. He could write baby talk on a piece of toilet paper and the fans will flock. (Raises hand!) The second camp, loves his work with Genesis, but hates the products of his solo career, dismissing the latter as “poppy trash.” The third camp only likes his work from early Genesis as all of his later material (band and solo) lacks the elaborateness that they grew to love. The fourth camp, I will call the pickers, because they will pick and choose from Genesis’ history as well as Tony’s 25-year compilation of solo work. Throwback and Afterglow win praise, but Shortcut to Somewhere is too commercial to be worthy, for example.
I don’t go out on an all-out comment war with the naysayers of his work. After all, I have a life outside the Internet. I will admit that, one might have to listen to his songs more than once to get a true feel for them. Concise, isn’t in Tony’s vocabulary and he is very proud to admit it. However, I do bristle when people accuse him of selling out and becoming “poppy.” My first reaction is, “Well, duh, one of his earliest influences was the Beatles. It’s not unreasonable that a little pop will find its way in there somewhere. Never mind that he has implied the musical scores he creates take center stage and he pulled any accompanying lyrics from his ass.
My second thought is that the Internet critics might be missing a point in simply dismissing these songs. Tony Banks’ trademark is long and sometimes rambling epics with long orchestral solos (Domino, Island in the Darkness and Home By The Sea come to mind). In this context, the shorter songs could be construed as something of a stretch for Tony in that he was forced to cram a lot of thought and musical composition into a small amount of space. That’s not easy for him to do. Also, he implied in Chapter and Verse that he had grown tired of writing such ambitious pieces all the time.
One source of contention for his critics, though, has nothing to do with Tony’s musical ability, but his personality. Tony Banks, besides being an introvert, is stubborn, driven, and temperamental and will not be coerced into doing what he doesn’t like to do. Like I said before, if the others had thought he was so problematic, he would have been ousted from the band, probably even before Trespass.
Finally, the man has never sold out. To him, selling out means that an artist is coerced to put out a product that he/she doesn’t believe in for the sole purpose of making a buck. He has always followed his instincts and, while he has had second thoughts about some albums or songs he’s done, he has never signed on to anything he didn’t believe in. I respect that in a person.
In closing, there are certainly more mini arguments out there, concerning videos and such, but I only wanted to touch upon the most prevalent (and tired). As a fan who has grown to appreciate aspects of all three eras of Genesis and the solo albums of Mr. Anthony Banks, and as a person who believes there is more to something than what can merely be seen on the surface, I must quote Jack Nicholson in Mars Attacks. “Can’t we all just get along?”
In other words, I just want my tunes, damn it! Save the drama for someone who cares!
So how does an article about a rock band have any relevance in a blog devoted to movies? Well, they released that documentary of their 2007 European concert tour. That counts, right?
Please don’t think I am insulting this band. Rather, I am a huge Genesis fan. In the last few years, I have also become a big fan of Tony Banks’ solo works and I have always listened to Phil Collins and Mike and the Mechanics.
It is hard not to have respect for a band that has endured decades, gone through several incarnations and has always maintained a group atmosphere despite pursuing solo projects of their own. Plus, they seem to be picking up a new generation of fans, thanks to parental influence and the Internet.
YouTube is a storehouse for Genesis interviews and concert segments. Genesis music videos aren’t as available anymore, due to copyright laws, but Tony’s works are still viewable.
As much as I love to troll those videos from time to time, I have virtually shied away from the ensuing comment threads, because of certain topic threads that seem to be on continuous life support. As a fan of both camps, I become disgruntled at certain bashing of Genesis and Tony Banks or any combination thereof. Therefore, I have scrapped most of my original ideas for this article (which would have consisted mostly of overgrown fan girl gushing) and present to you my rebuttals of the three biggest contentions in the YouTube community. Bear in my mind that my commentaries are based mostly on observations and not solid facts, so just take this with a grain of salt as I try to refute some ugly commentary.
1) Peter Gabriel was a better lead singer than Phil Collins, because of this reason (or vice versa). Likewise, Ray Wilson sucked, because of that reason or he totally kicked ass, because of something else and everything before him sucked and blew.
Oh, no, it’s the Great Pizza Topping Debate! In stereo, even! This argument is so tired that there aren’t any good rebuttals left and each person is left saying something to the effect of, “So there!” Still, this drama has migrated from the Genesis comment threads and found its way to Tony Banks’ corner of YouTube.
There is still a devoted legion of fans that pine for the day that Peter Gabriel will finally rejoin the group he helped to create. I hate to burst their shiny bubble, but Gabriel left in 1975. The odds certainly don’t favor him returning to the band. Also, he isn’t shy about expressing his intent that he doesn’t want to, “go backwards with Genesis.” Hell, he couldn’t even bother to reunite with Genesis for one night to accept his award for the band’s induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (citing his brand new tour as an excuse)!
If only it ended there! Some of these PG devotees go on to trash Phil Collins for condescending to take Peter’s place as the lead singer. Fact is, Phil got the job, because he was the best suited compared to others who had auditioned. An added plus was that music from the Gabriel era didn’t have to be reworked in a different key (at the time) as Phil had the same vocal range. He has since lost a bit of that range, but, hey, shit happens.
However, some fans still weren’t happy, even though their band had gained a second life. They go so far as to condemn Phil for turning Genesis into a so-called “poppy outfit.” Funny, but I thought that was a collaborative decision made between the band and Hugh Padgham. If Phil isn’t bashed the commercialism, he’s raked through the coals for his looks, his singing, etc. I guess some people would have been happier if the band had not evolved during the years 1976-1996. If Genesis had slipped into the dark depths of rock and roll oblivion, early fans could bemoan the unfairness of it, that there would be no more elaborate musical scores or compelling lyrics.
Oh, wait! They do that anyway!
And Goddess forbid if you should admit to being a fan of this era as you will be declared as too ignorant to dress yourself. Well, my first Genesis album was Invisible Touch and I can dress myself without cue cards, thank you very much!
I have observed, though, that despite the above commentary, Phil doesn’t appear to be the most loathed lead singer. At the very least, it might be a tie with Ray Wilson, the lead singer on Calling All Stations (1997), and Genesis’ last incarnation.
I think the general fan population was more forgiving when Phil took over as lead singer, because he was already a member of the band. Ray was a total outsider, and of course, sang in a completely different vocal range which made it difficult to sing the band’s older material (the material had to be played in a lower key to accommodate this). Hence, he has had the rather harsh moniker, “Raw Wilson,” bestowed upon him by Genesis fans who couldn’t abide by his deeper, somewhat gravelly voice. Well, if these holier-than-thou souls could sing Genesis’ songs, better, they should have auditioned for the job. I think Ray Wilson did could with what he had, but he had some big shoes to fill. The odds weren’t fair to him.
Sadly, this Genesis incarnation was never put to an adequate test as they only released the one album. I think if fans had given this album a real chance and not listened to it with the pre-expectation that Ray would be a Phil Collins/Peter Gabriel clone, that Tony and Mike would have had the confidence to keep the band going a while longer. It’s a shame that we’ll never know what could have been.
2) Steve Hackett left the band, because of Tony Banks (or Tony pushed him out) and they still hate each other.
This migrating argument is just as stale as the above. Okay, I wasn’t there to actually witness this event in 1977 (I was born that year.), so I can’t offer factual proof of any feud that existed between the two. However, I am sick of the viewpoint that the burden of blame rests squarely on Tony’s shoulders. Yes, he is known for being temperamental and stubborn, but it takes two (or more) people to feud. Also, Steve left the band of his own accord as he felt his creativity was being stifled within the confines of a group that operated democratically. I call it as being six of one and a half dozen of the other as the saying goes. I mean, we are dealing with two like-minded, creative, driven and stubborn individuals here who were both in their twenties when this all went down.
I will note that in a picture of the two taken at Steve’s 50th birthday party, neither seems to exhibit lingering animosity. And, no, I don’t think they’re acting for the camera. Remember, Tony has said on many an occasion that he can’t act! Apparently, they’ve buried the hatchet, at least, to some extent.
Lastly, the two stood side-by-side at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony. There were no glares. There was no bloodshed and neither was poised to wring the other’s neck. People, let this “feud” die!
3) Everything Tony Banks did outside of Genesis (or in later Genesis) was “poppy trash”!
Uh-oh, this is the second negative commentary in a row for Tony! Le sigh! However, this third and final argument is the one that most gets my goat. Therefore, the following rebuttal is lengthy, as I have culled it from my original article premise. And, yes, there is slight fan girl gushing to stomach.
I have never seen the old saying, “Never judge a book by its cover,” apply more to a person than it does to Genesis’ keyboard player, Tony Banks. Speaking as a soul who has made the aforementioned mistake in the past, I can tell you that if you only scan the surface of this individual before nonchalantly moving on, you will garner less than the tip of the proverbial iceberg. And that, my friends, would be a dire mistake, for not only will you come away with a mistaken impression of this person and his solo works, but the band that he helped to conceive.
Naturally, we are drawn to extroverted souls who make it their business to be socially interactive. They make the most noise and are forever in your face. People were drawn to Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins for their public personas and, therefore, credited these individuals with being the brains behind Genesis. (I won’t mention Ray Wilson, because I have too little knowledge of his public persona to make a fair determination of his stage presence.) The other band members (Rutherford, Banks and Hackett) were deemed to be there for mere back-up decoration and nothing more.
Tony Banks spent so many years quietly composed behind his keyboards that many people were and are under the belief that he was easily expendable. He just played the lyrics and notes that were given to him. He didn’t possess an ounce of acting, so videos were a hindrance and he never appeared to be much of a team player. In fact, he wasn’t terribly social at all. So, why did the band keep him around all this time?
Phil Collins said back in 1990 that Tony Banks was (and is) the most important member of Genesis with Michael Rutherford as close second. Gee, that doesn’t seem to fit the profile of someone who is dispensable. In fact, Tony was has always been pretty much involved in everything from writing the music to playing keyboards and acoustic guitar to concert set design, etc. Well, the band was his day job and it isn’t written into his personality to be a quiet backdrop for 40 years. In fact, if that was his attitude, he would have been given the boot years ago. There is no room in Genesis for shiftless loafers.
In the threads of YouTube commentaries centering around Genesis and Tony’s solo works, there seem to be four distinct camps. One camp adores everything he has ever done. He could write baby talk on a piece of toilet paper and the fans will flock. (Raises hand!) The second camp, loves his work with Genesis, but hates the products of his solo career, dismissing the latter as “poppy trash.” The third camp only likes his work from early Genesis as all of his later material (band and solo) lacks the elaborateness that they grew to love. The fourth camp, I will call the pickers, because they will pick and choose from Genesis’ history as well as Tony’s 25-year compilation of solo work. Throwback and Afterglow win praise, but Shortcut to Somewhere is too commercial to be worthy, for example.
I don’t go out on an all-out comment war with the naysayers of his work. After all, I have a life outside the Internet. I will admit that, one might have to listen to his songs more than once to get a true feel for them. Concise, isn’t in Tony’s vocabulary and he is very proud to admit it. However, I do bristle when people accuse him of selling out and becoming “poppy.” My first reaction is, “Well, duh, one of his earliest influences was the Beatles. It’s not unreasonable that a little pop will find its way in there somewhere. Never mind that he has implied the musical scores he creates take center stage and he pulled any accompanying lyrics from his ass.
My second thought is that the Internet critics might be missing a point in simply dismissing these songs. Tony Banks’ trademark is long and sometimes rambling epics with long orchestral solos (Domino, Island in the Darkness and Home By The Sea come to mind). In this context, the shorter songs could be construed as something of a stretch for Tony in that he was forced to cram a lot of thought and musical composition into a small amount of space. That’s not easy for him to do. Also, he implied in Chapter and Verse that he had grown tired of writing such ambitious pieces all the time.
One source of contention for his critics, though, has nothing to do with Tony’s musical ability, but his personality. Tony Banks, besides being an introvert, is stubborn, driven, and temperamental and will not be coerced into doing what he doesn’t like to do. Like I said before, if the others had thought he was so problematic, he would have been ousted from the band, probably even before Trespass.
Finally, the man has never sold out. To him, selling out means that an artist is coerced to put out a product that he/she doesn’t believe in for the sole purpose of making a buck. He has always followed his instincts and, while he has had second thoughts about some albums or songs he’s done, he has never signed on to anything he didn’t believe in. I respect that in a person.
In closing, there are certainly more mini arguments out there, concerning videos and such, but I only wanted to touch upon the most prevalent (and tired). As a fan who has grown to appreciate aspects of all three eras of Genesis and the solo albums of Mr. Anthony Banks, and as a person who believes there is more to something than what can merely be seen on the surface, I must quote Jack Nicholson in Mars Attacks. “Can’t we all just get along?”
In other words, I just want my tunes, damn it! Save the drama for someone who cares!
| 145 |
| Vote |
Add Comments
Read More
Comments (2)