the bowie thread

[baboon2004]

John Lydon once said she's the only pop star he likes or something equally mad. Clearly the king of contrary's endorsement virtually proves that she's rubbish.

@droid - Mass Production is amazing, but at the moment I'm still giving the nod to 'Dirt' as Iggy's finest (that I've heard)

 

[Sectionfive]

Saw Gaga named checked a lot but is it purely based on style? Surely Róisín Murphy is a better shapeshifting heir if that's the case

Here's an interesting enough look at Bowie's record collection

http://vinyloftheday.com/blogs/news/88660038-confessions-of-a-vinyl-junkie-by-david-bowie

 

[droid]

Dammit. I have 2 copies of the LKJ.

 

[droid]

Best attempt at a Bowie mix Ive ever heard:

 

[CrowleyHead]

Bowie's not contrived now, but if you go back to his original context, he's incredibly contrived, which is why so many early press people found him an easy target to bash as well as praise.

Just go back to Lou Reed and Lester Bangs scrapping over whether or not Bowie was any good.

 

[Slothrop]

I worry that we're about to get into an argument over whether Bowie was more authentically inauthentic than Lady GaGa is...

 

[Mr. Tea]

Bowie's not contrived now, but if you go back to his original context, he's incredibly contrived, which is why so many early press people found him an easy target to bash as well as praise.

OK, leaving aside the fact that Bowie isn't much of anything now, perhaps what I should have said is that Bowie was better at *being* contrived without *seeming* contrived. More naturally unnatural. Is that fair?

I worry that we're about to get into an argument over whether Bowie was more authentically inauthentic than Lady GaGa is...

Ha, now that is a dire warning indeed! Point taken.

 

[Leo]

through all his ch-ch-ch-changes, i thought the stab at drum'n bass was really the only one that came off as trying too hard, a musical/cultural style somewhat obviously bolted on instead of being internalized and expressed organically. i mean, he wasn't exactly a soul singer but managed to make the "young americans" phase sound plausible and interesting. same with the weirdo electronic "low"/"heroes" berlin phase.

 

[droid]

 

[IdleRich]

"I love pop music, but I have to say Lady Gaga leaves me absolutely cold. There's neither enough personality nor enough blankness for her music to be interesting."

I think that the thing is that she hasn't got any tunes. I like the idea of her in terms of her costumes and stuff but you do have to have something you can listen to in there somewhere if your chosen field is pop-music. I think she is diminished by constantly banging on about how her stuff is so arty as well - it makes her sound unsure and desperate.

Someone said that Radiohead are obviously the heirs to Bowie. Not sure I see that (and I reckon I have more tolerance for them than many of the people hereabouts) - sure they changed direction at least once and I agree with you that regardless of whether they pulled it off successfully it is brave and kind of morally commendable to do that when they were at the top of their game (in terms of sales). But, while changing (and often) was one thing that Bowie did I don't think that doing it once yourself is enough to become his successor in the pop music world.

 

[rubberdingyrapids]

she is def a case of concept>>music, but poker face and bad romance were excellent. telephone wasnt bad either, though not sure about the rest. ive not given her that much time.

 

[Mr. Tea]

There's also the question of charisma, stage presence, call it what you will - I've never seen Radiohead live and can't recall watching any of their live shows or videos on TV/web, but Thomh Yhorkhe isn't really renowned as a frontman (to say nothing of dancer!) in the same class as Bowie, is he?

 

[rubberdingyrapids]

RH dont really cover the same range of moods/emotions as bowie. thom yorke could never really convey joy or write an upbeat song. whether due to his own limitations, musical biases/preferences, or choosing, i dont know.

 

[baboon2004]

RH dont really cover the same range of moods/emotions as bowie. thom yorke could never really convey joy or write an upbeat song. whether due to his own limitations, musical biases/preferences, or choosing, i dont know.

I'd agree that this is the main reason why they can't be compared to Bowie. Radiohead can't distill their art into genius pop songs. I might be biased here, but being miserabilist in order to imply profundity seems to me to be the (relatively) easy option.

Historically speaking, Madonna is probably Bowie's clearest successor in certain respects, despite the gulf in musical talent between the two. She had the same genius for choosing collaborators (though I daresay many of them aren't that fond of her now), and for creating a remarkably sustained run of high quality pop music, as well as a high level of stagecraft and a sequence of reinventions that gave her global fame for a greater period than most manage. Goes without saying that her musical range was considerably narrower than Bowie's though, even if greater than many give her credit for.

 

[rubberdingyrapids]

im sticking with prince.
or some hybrid version of madonna and prince. madince. or pri-madonna. ho ho.

 

[droid]

 

[Woebot]

hm.

i wonder if there isn't the suggestion that he had been the subject of infidelity on blackstar. there's "tis pity" and "sue".

 

[baboon2004]

http://www.theguardian.com/music/20...-down-coldplay-its-not-a-very-good-song-is-it the number of good stories is getting ridiculous

 

[Corpsey]

I'd agree that this is the main reason why they can't be compared to Bowie. Radiohead can't distill their art into genius pop songs. I might be biased here, but being miserabilist in order to imply profundity seems to me to be the (relatively) easy option.

To be fair to the person who made that comparison (me), they did acknowledge this difference. Anyway, I didn't mean to suggest that they're Bowie's SUCCESSOR, just that the possibility for their artiness and proclivity for exploring new directions even when commercially inadvisable was arguably opened up by Bowie. (As opposed to, say, Oasis - who no doubt revere Bowie but whose turgid conservatism represents something like the opposite of his artistic legacy.) But perhaps I'm giving Bowie credit for a trend that has existed in British pop/indie music since The Beatles - art-school rock, essentially.

Though I wouldn't disagree with Mr Tea's assessment of Thom Yorke's stage-craft, it is quite amusing to see this asserted alongside an admittance of never having seen him perform!

Can we at least agree that 'Black Star' sounds a little Radiohead-y? Otherwise I'll cry, like Radiohead always do.

 

[rubberdingyrapids]

http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2016/jan/19/kanye-west-david-bowie-covers-album

anything suggesting kanye (who IS brilliant, though not sure if hes really an heir to bowie tbh) is the new bowie is basically click bait but i would be genuinely interested to see what kanye does with bowies songs.

The fact is, though, that West is the closest we have to Bowie in the modern mainstream. There is nobody else who can sell as many records as West does (30m-odd album sales and counting) while remaining so resolutely experimental and capable of stirring things up culturally and politically.

The point is, you might find West’s work offensive or lacking merit. But you cannot deny that he has made records that sound like no one else’s, taking enormous creative and commercial risks each time, lyrically examining the nature of what he does as well as questioning the collective mood of the times, inhabiting myriad disturbing alter egos, and becoming loathed and vilified like no other musician. He has expressed himself in other media as well as music, and entered partnerships with artists from the most mainstream to the far leftfield.

That’s what makes him like Bowie, and why it makes more sense to have him pay artistic tribute to Bowie rather than any of the MOR pop stars who are rumoured to be lined up for a tribute at the Brits. Yet here we are, once again, with social media flooded with venom about what an “idiot” he is (always the digs focus on his intelligence), with his face photoshopped on to penises, and memes showing how he and Justin Bieber are responsible for the rot of modern culture.

In comparison to this collective roar of disgust, the disgruntlement at the likes of Chris Martin and Noel Gallagher being considered worthy to step into Bowie’s shoes is but a murmur. It’s almost as if people who claim to love Bowie in all his variety and transgressiveness don’t actually like it that much when other stars step outside their allotted roles.

the little bits ive heard of blackstar sound a bit like post-ok computer radiohead. they played lazarus before RH's spectre on sunday and it was interesting how well they segued into each other.