| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
yarstruly 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 29 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1324
|
 Topic: What about David Bowie
Posted: September 27 2006 at 12:45 |
There are some real prog connections there (Wakeman, Fripp, Eno, others
?)...Is he prog to any degree ? Discuss....
|
|
Facebook hashtags:
#100greatestprogrockchallenge
#scottssongbysong
#scottsspotlight
|
 |
toolis
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 26 2006
Location: MacedoniaGreece
Status: Offline
Points: 1678
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 12:47 |
IMHO, the most progressive thing about him was his make up.. 
|
|
-music is like pornography...
sometimes amateurs turn us on, even more...
-sometimes you are the pigeon and sometimes you are the statue...
|
|
Ricochet
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 27 2005
Location: Nauru
Status: Offline
Points: 46301
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 12:50 |
|
...nah...
|
|
|
|
toolis
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 26 2006
Location: MacedoniaGreece
Status: Offline
Points: 1678
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 12:52 |
 Ricochet wrote:
...nah...
|
you're right, Twisted Sister's make up was proggier... 
|
|
-music is like pornography...
sometimes amateurs turn us on, even more...
-sometimes you are the pigeon and sometimes you are the statue...
|
|
yarstruly
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 29 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1324
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 12:53 |
C'mon what about Space Oddity, Ashes to Ashes, etc....
I am not a huge Bowie fan, but thought he was at least kinda artsy...
|
|
Facebook hashtags:
#100greatestprogrockchallenge
#scottssongbysong
#scottsspotlight
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 12:58 |
|
Bowie was one one the poster children for the art rock movement.. probably should be given more consideration than he is
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
yarstruly
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 29 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1324
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 13:00 |
micky wrote:
Bowie was one one the poster children for the art rock movement.. probably should be given more consideration than he is |
My point exactly.....
I'm not saying he should be on the PA listings, but is certainly worthy of discussion here and had some influence.....
|
|
Facebook hashtags:
#100greatestprogrockchallenge
#scottssongbysong
#scottsspotlight
|
|
Ricochet
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 27 2005
Location: Nauru
Status: Offline
Points: 46301
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 13:01 |
toolis wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
...nah...
|
you're right, Twisted Sister's make up was proggier... |
|
|
|
|
bhikkhu
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 06 2006
Location: A² Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 5109
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 13:22 |
|
I think people balk at Bowie because of his more straight ahead rock numbers. If you look at his entire catalogue, there is a lot of progressive aspect there. Proto or related would be my choice.
|
|
|
|
WaywardSon
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 23 2006
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 2537
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 14:18 |
micky wrote:
Bowie was one one the poster children for the art rock movement.. probably should be given more consideration than he is |
Bowie is referred to as Art Rock on a lot of sites. Maybe it is time to shuffle a few groups around and create another genre. Have Art Rock and Prog Rock
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 16:49 |
These kids don't know -- they think muppet metal is prog! 
Bowie has been discussed about a hundred times here. I always vote "yes," but still, he's excluded. I hate the "if X, then Y" argument, but if Roxy Music is here....
He's not as close to prog as Triumph, Deep Purple, Talk Talk, Radiohead, The Too-Fast Nasty Screaming Blood-Dripping Gore Mongers, or the Beatles, apparently....
Yeah -- right! 
Edited by Peter Rideout - September 27 2006 at 16:52
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 16:54 |
Peter Rideout wrote:
He's not as close to prog as Triumph, Deep Purple, Talk Talk, Radiohead, The Too-Fast Nasty Screaming Blood-Dripping Gore Mongers, or the Beatles, apparently.... |
If you'd have left out Radiohead from that list then I'd be in agreement with you...
What is it that is not progressive about Kid A or Amnesiac?
Edited by Certif1ed - September 27 2006 at 16:55
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 17:05 |
Certif1ed wrote:
If you'd left out Radiohead from that list then I'd be in agreement with you... |
I've nothing against them, Cert -- just naming some of the prior controversial inclusions here by way of saying that "prog" (or "related" "proto," whatever), is a pretty vague, subjective concept.
Again, I think it's a term that has outlived its usefulness (except to refer to a bygone era & a historic musical movement), and that this is a site that has long since outgrown the restrictions that the word "prog" should perhaps have imposed upon it.
The concept is just too subjective -- calling it "Good" Music Archives would not be much less contentious. We bring in other genres, and tack "prog" onto their existing names, but other genres are excluded. (eg, new age)
"Prog" is not much more than a value judgement now, IMO.
Anyway, I'd certainly mix some Bowie in with some of the accepted "prog" acts on a homemade compilation. He's all over the place, stylistically, and much of his stuff has been pretty darned "far out."
Edited by Peter Rideout - November 16 2006 at 15:16
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
AngelRat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 14 2004
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 1014
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 17:09 |
I think there's to some extent 'prog' in his music. But 'prog' or not, I just enjoy his albums (at least his 70s stuph).
|
|
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 17:17 |
Peter Rideout wrote:
Certif1ed wrote:
If you'd left out Radiohead from that list then I'd be in agreement with you... |
I've nothing against them, Cert -- just naming some of the prior controversial inclusions here by way of saying that "prog" (or "related" "proto," whatever), is a pretty vague, subjective concept.
Again, I think it's a term that has outlived its usefulness (except to refer to a bygone era & a historic musical movement), and that this is a site that has long since outgrown the restrictions that the word "prog" should perhaps have imposed upon it.
The concept is just too subjective -- calling it "Good" Music Archives would not be much less contentious. We bring in other genres, and tack "prog" onto their existing names, but other genres are excluded. (eg, new age)
"Prog" is not much more than a value judgement now, IMO.
Anyway, I'd certainly mix some Bowie in with some of the accepted "prog" acts on a homemade compilation. He's all over the place, stylistically, and some of his stuff has been pretty "far out." |
I agree that the term Prog seems to be getting watered down, but I don't think that Radiohead specifically are one of the bands that are watering down the values of prog - I think that they (albeit unintentionally) have flown the Prog flag higher than most bands from the late 1990s until today in the true spirit of Prog in the 21st century.
I'm not saying you have some kind of petty thing against the band, but, purely from seeing you list them among non-prog bands, I do think that you may not have "got" them yet!
I know from experience that, like other great prog bands, time reveals more about their music than you might think was there.
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
bhikkhu
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 06 2006
Location: A² Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 5109
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 17:35 |
Certif1ed wrote:
Peter Rideout wrote:
Certif1ed wrote:
If you'd left out Radiohead from that list then I'd be in agreement with you... |
I've nothing against them, Cert -- just naming some of the prior controversial inclusions here by way of saying that "prog" (or "related" "proto," whatever), is a pretty vague, subjective concept.
Again, I think it's a term that has outlived its usefulness (except to refer to a bygone era & a historic musical movement), and that this is a site that has long since outgrown the restrictions that the word "prog" should perhaps have imposed upon it.
The concept is just too subjective -- calling it "Good" Music Archives would not be much less contentious. We bring in other genres, and tack "prog" onto their existing names, but other genres are excluded. (eg, new age)
"Prog" is not much more than a value judgement now, IMO.
Anyway, I'd certainly mix some Bowie in with some of the accepted "prog" acts on a homemade compilation. He's all over the place, stylistically, and some of his stuff has been pretty "far out." |
I agree that the term Prog seems to be getting watered down, but I don't think that Radiohead specifically are one of the bands that are watering down the values of prog - I think that they (albeit unintentionally) have flown the Prog flag higher than most bands from the late 1990s until today in the true spirit of Prog in the 21st century.
I'm not saying you have some kind of petty thing against the band, but, purely from seeing you list them among non-prog bands, I do think that you may not have "got" them yet!
I know from experience that, like other great prog bands, time reveals more about their music than you might think was there. |
Sorry Cert. I have tried and tried, but Radiohead does not fit the bill for me. I like "The Bends," but that is obviously not prog. "Kid A" strikes me as nothing more than ambient.
|
|
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 17:37 |
^  I've only heard a very little, Cert, but from what I heard, I can see why they're here, and why you make a case for them.
Once we started including artists along the lines of "Well, X are in here, and Y don't sound too much different," the site was bound to grow and mutate almost beyond recognition. (Y leads to Z, etc.)
Categorizing something that's as tied to individual response as music is, is very problematic. "Prog" is such an artificial, restrictive notion! How many musicians (these days) embrace the term? Precious few! Now why is that? 
Speaking from a purely intellectual perspective, (perhaps not a practical, economic or emotional one) I still think a name change for the Archives is warrented, in the long run.
Progcetera
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
Australian
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 13 2006
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3278
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 20:01 |
I say Nah. As has been said before if Bowie was included many other related bands would also have to be included.
He isn’t progressive either if compared to recognized prog bands from the same era.
|
|
|
|
cuncuna
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 29 2005
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 4318
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 20:08 |
|
David Bowie belongs to his own cathegory, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't care about being or not included anywhere. Beyond that, my only question is "¿Howcome Mercury Rev is listed as prog act, and Bowie is not?, ¿what's the logic behind this?. I certainly would like to know, just for curiosity. Meanwhile, Both MErcury Rev and David Bowie belong to my collection, wich is the only thing I care about.
|
|
¡Beware of the Bee!
|
|
The Wizard
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 18 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7341
|
Posted: September 27 2006 at 20:25 |
|
David Bowie really embodies the spirit of progressive rock. He constantly experimently with different styles, making interesting and at times very abstract music. None of his albums are alike and many of them are extremly experimental, full of elements of prog rock. He was also very artsy and creative like are fellow progressive rockers. Low, Heroes, and the Station to Station are definetely full blown art rock.
|
|
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
What about David Bowie
