|
Post by *LARK* on Jan 10, 2020 12:09:56 GMT
Music, not background. VU were essentially a rock and roll band. Bowie thought that was beneath him and wanted - like fucking Freddie Mercury - to bring opera to the masses
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 12:22:12 GMT
Music, not background. VU were essentially a rock and roll band. Bowie thought that was beneath him and wanted - like fucking Freddie Mercury - to bring opera to the masses. But that background feeds into the music, there's nothing particularly "rock n' roll" about Lady Godiva's Operation! I do know what you mean though, but I think you're simplifying things a little bit to fit your narrative. There are any number of rock tracks from the early 70s that Bowie recorded of course, but he was also an eclecticist who wanted to mix it with other things. Reed was a bit more singular in his vision, perhaps because, being a New Yorker, he was closer to the source.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Jan 10, 2020 12:46:35 GMT
There are Bowie album tracks I don't care for, but he has a lower 'miss' quota than anyone else I can think of (regarding his classic run anyway). I think it's very high. I don't get spotty I have to say (I find Wonder much more spotty btw) but there are certainly songs I'm less keen on (Song for Bob Dylan is my least fave in the golden run, I actively dislike it). At least from Hunky Dory on he's very strong and high on inspiration for the rest of the decade. Young Americans is continually underrated imo. I like histrionic Bowie. It's like being a Doors fan and not digging Jimbo at his most outre. I love Wild Is The Wind's drama for example and like it when he really pushes his vocals too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 12:47:40 GMT
Back to the original question posed in the opening post, 7 people have agreed with the motion and 8 people have disagreed. But the thing is I doubt there's a consensus among the 8 that have disagreed over a single artist that has a better catalogue, so I think Bowie's the closest figure we'll get to the question.
|
|
|
Post by *LARK* on Jan 10, 2020 12:53:21 GMT
I'd agree with that.
|
|
loveless
god
Bringing ballet to the masses. Sticking to the funk.
Posts: 2,843
|
Post by loveless on Jan 10, 2020 13:03:22 GMT
I like histrionic Bowie. It's like being a Doors fan and not digging Jimbo at his most outre. I love Wild Is The Wind's drama for example and like it when he really pushes his vocals too. I mean, again with all of my "golden period" caveat, absolutely. WITW is the shit, for sure! Love his voice, and love when he gives it some. The coda of 'Rock and Roll Suicide', or the last minute of 'Five Years", it's like...yeah, that's what we paid our money for! (HIS "Horse Latitudes"?)
|
|
|
Post by DarknessFish on Jan 10, 2020 13:35:41 GMT
. Anyone mentioned Scott Walker yet? Not slight variations of sound disguised by a change of dress; there was a man who was brave enough to change style, not care whether his audience joined him, and increase the quality of his work. Bowie never did anything halfway as radical as his work from Tilt onwards. And Bowie would no doubt agree that he was more important. He wasn't more important, he just fits your own idealised model of what a musician should be (radical, difficult, experimental, non-commercial)better than Bowie. That's fine, but that's your own subjective criteria. Well, I apologise for using subjecive criteria, I guess that was just me. <cat meme or something indicating wide eyed stary behaviour>He fit Bowie's concept of an idealised model of what a musician should be, was more my point.
|
|
nolamike
star
Old Fart At Play
Posts: 874
|
Post by nolamike on Jan 10, 2020 14:00:04 GMT
Back to the original question posed in the opening post, 7 people have agreed with the motion and 8 people have disagreed. But the thing is I doubt there's a consensus among the 8 that have disagreed over a single artist that has a better catalogue, so I think Bowie's the closest figure we'll get to the question. Going back to the original post - about Bowie's "catalogue of songs" being the best in the post-Beatles world... are we talking purely about songwriting, or is the question more about recorded works?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 16:36:29 GMT
He wasn't more important, he just fits your own idealised model of what a musician should be (radical, difficult, experimental, non-commercial)better than Bowie. That's fine, but that's your own subjective criteria. Well, I apologise for using subjecive criteria, I guess that was just me. <cat meme or something indicating wide eyed stary behaviour>He fit Bowie's concept of an idealised model of what a musician should be, was more my point. I'm sure he did, but that doesn't make him more important.
|
|
toomanyhatz
god
I've met him/her. He/she's great!!
Posts: 3,248
|
Post by toomanyhatz on Jan 10, 2020 18:27:17 GMT
Back to the original question posed in the opening post, 7 people have agreed with the motion and 8 people have disagreed. But the thing is I doubt there's a consensus among the 8 that have disagreed over a single artist that has a better catalogue, so I think Bowie's the closest figure we'll get to the question. Going back to the original post - about Bowie's "catalogue of songs" being the best in the post-Beatles world... are we talking purely about songwriting, or is the question more about recorded works? I think that's the main question we need to be asking. G keeps citing cultural importance but is he any less wearing Bowie-goggles than I am Beatle-goggles? I took the question to be about songcraft. Which is a pretty subjective subject. Is Bowie the collective benchmark of songcraft post-Beatles? Inconclusive, at best. On Preludin? Maybe, but with plenty of dissent. As much as I love Bowie, I'm ultimately a dissenter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 18:32:59 GMT
Going back to the original post - about Bowie's "catalogue of songs" being the best in the post-Beatles world... are we talking purely about songwriting, or is the question more about recorded works? I think that's the main question we need to be asking. G keeps citing cultural importance but is he any less wearing Bowie-goggles than I am Beatle-goggles? I took the question to be about songcraft. Which is a pretty subjective subject. Is Bowie the collective benchmark of songcraft post-Beatles? Inconclusive, at best. On Preludin? Maybe, but with plenty of dissent. As much as I love Bowie, I'm ultimately a dissenter. Dissenting from what though? You don't think he's written great songs?
|
|
nolamike
star
Old Fart At Play
Posts: 874
|
Post by nolamike on Jan 10, 2020 18:46:47 GMT
I think that's the main question we need to be asking. G keeps citing cultural importance but is he any less wearing Bowie-goggles than I am Beatle-goggles? I took the question to be about songcraft. Which is a pretty subjective subject. Is Bowie the collective benchmark of songcraft post-Beatles? Inconclusive, at best. On Preludin? Maybe, but with plenty of dissent. As much as I love Bowie, I'm ultimately a dissenter. Dissenting from what though? You don't think he's written great songs? I think he's certainly written some great songs, but I think he's far from the greatest songwriter of the post-Beatles era. If that's the criteria we're judging him by, without considering his performances/albums/visuals, he's surpassed by many others.
|
|
toomanyhatz
god
I've met him/her. He/she's great!!
Posts: 3,248
|
Post by toomanyhatz on Jan 10, 2020 18:50:48 GMT
I think Bowie and Willie Nelson and Townes Van Zandt and Kevin Ayers and Leonard Cohen and Andy Partridge have all written tons of great songs, yes.
|
|
|
Post by *LARK* on Jan 10, 2020 19:00:58 GMT
Bob Geldof!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 19:03:17 GMT
I think Bowie and Willie Nelson and Townes Van Zandt and Kevin Ayers and Leonard Cohen and Andy Partridge have all written tons of great songs, yes I'm getting to the stage of repeating myself here, but they all seem very minor ( well not Cohen but I think he's a slightly different case). I mean there's not much written by them that's known to the wider public, where's their equivalent of Starman, Life on Mars or Heroes? It feels as if people are just naming their favourite cult artists.
|
|