Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: May 14 2013 at 23:58
The Dark Elf wrote:
Svetonio wrote:
My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.
Hmmm....let's see here: nine minutes long, symphonic, avant-garde and Brechtian influences without a trace of blues-based rock forms, extended musical themes, fantasy-like ambience and lyrics, ample, rich sounds and productions, part of a concept album, experimental, and varying time-signatures.
Please, explain to me how this is "pop" music.
His proggy phase is like a cabaret.
I don't like a cabaret music, so I prefer his greatest hits - they are much better than that, aren't they?
Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13097
Posted: May 14 2013 at 19:41
Snow Dog wrote:
Dayvenkirq wrote:
The Dark Elf wrote:
Svetonio wrote:
My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.
Hmmm....let's see here: nine minutes long, symphonic, avant-garde and Brechtian influences without a trace of blues-based rock forms, extended musical themes, fantasy-like ambience and lyrics, ample, rich sounds and productions, part of a concept album, experimental, and varying time-signatures. Please, explain to me how this is "pop" music.
This is just an exception.
To be accurate it isn't one song.
Neither is Thick as a Brick.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1754
Posted: May 14 2013 at 18:27
dr wu23 wrote:
Speaking as an American who grew up in the 50's, 60's ,and college in 70's , Bowie was pretty popular and had more than 2 hits imo.
He was played regularly on fm radio and his pop songs on am.
Interesting. I don't doubt you. I have an American friend who is about 10 or 15 years older than me, and his favorite bands are groups like Genesis, Yes, the Strawbs. He said they were on the radio all the time when he was a kid; whereas I never heard Gabriel-era Genesis on the radio, or the Strawbs. Growing up shuffling back and forth between Baltimore and Florida, the only Bowie songs I heard on the radio were Fame, Changes, Young Americans and Space Oddity.
I think American radio must've become quite conservative and more American-centric as time went by?... I wonder how and why that happened...
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Posted: May 14 2013 at 18:27
Dayvenkirq wrote:
The Dark Elf wrote:
Svetonio wrote:
My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.
Hmmm....let's see here: nine minutes long, symphonic, avant-garde and Brechtian influences without a trace of blues-based rock forms, extended musical themes, fantasy-like ambience and lyrics, ample, rich sounds and productions, part of a concept album, experimental, and varying time-signatures. Please, explain to me how this is "pop" music.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: May 14 2013 at 18:16
^^ While I was writing and posting my post, Mr Elf posted the same track.
Dayvenkirq wrote:
This is just an exception.
And Cygnet Committee, Wide Eyed Boy From Free Cloud, Memory Of Free Festival, Width Of A Circle, Quicksand, Bewley Brothers, Time and Station to Station are also exceptions. As is this:
Joined: May 25 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 10970
Posted: May 14 2013 at 18:00
The Dark Elf wrote:
Svetonio wrote:
My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.
Hmmm....let's see here: nine minutes long, symphonic, avant-garde and Brechtian influences without a trace of blues-based rock forms, extended musical themes, fantasy-like ambience and lyrics, ample, rich sounds and productions, part of a concept album, experimental, and varying time-signatures. Please, explain to me how this is "pop" music.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: May 14 2013 at 17:56
Bowie is a rock singer-song writer and musician and he has had pop hits, but that is not is "primary genre" so to speak. Since he has dabbled in practically every style of rock music going it is impossible to say he fits into a one particular genre - Art Rock comes closest as that is an eclectic genre that covers a broad spectrum, but that would exclude his plastic soul and acid-house influenced albums - Art(istic) Pop is woefully inaccurate.
Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13097
Posted: May 14 2013 at 17:53
Svetonio wrote:
My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.
Hmmm....let's see here: nine minutes long, symphonic, avant-garde and Brechtian influences without a trace of blues-based rock forms, extended musical themes, fantasy-like ambience and lyrics, ample, rich sounds and productions, part of a concept album, experimental, and varying time-signatures.
Please, explain to me how this is "pop" music.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1754
Posted: May 14 2013 at 13:59
I suppose in England many may consider Bowie to be 'pop.' In the US though, particularly in the 70s, he had maybe 2 'hits', and generally his music was not considered to be accessible or radio-friendly pop music.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: May 14 2013 at 13:39
Svetonio wrote:
Dean wrote:
The two sections are not in one, they are seperate. The Who is in Proto Prog and Bowie is in Prog Related.
Frankly, I don't see what you are moaning about.
Yes I know it's separated on the PA' list of the bands but not separated forums for Proto Prog bands and Prog Related bands make it quite simple to be confused.
My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.
Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20631
Posted: May 14 2013 at 11:06
I agree with Svetonio that The Who could be called proto prog.....but not that Townshend was any kind of electronic innovator. Many early bands of that time were using electronic sounds and keyboards...doesn't make them innovators per se.
But I also don't think Bowied is true prog.....prog related certainly, but not progressive rock imho.
Many here have mentioned artists/bands just as proggy that have not been included here.
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin
Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1754
Posted: May 14 2013 at 09:33
Cool, I didn't realize till just now, reading Dean's post, that Bowie is on PA. I thought all this talk was about getting him on PA... I'm a happy camper :-)
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: May 14 2013 at 08:35
Dean wrote:
The two sections are not in one, they are seperate. The Who is in Proto Prog and Bowie is in Prog Related.
Frankly, I don't see what you are moaning about.
Yes I know it's separated on the PA' list of the bands but not separated forums for Proto Prog bands and Prog Related bands make it quite simple to be confused.
My point is very simple and please let me repeat that - Mr Bowie is artistic pop, not Progressive Rock at all.
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: May 14 2013 at 07:25
Guldbamsen wrote:
It would be nice, if you somehow could relegate to us your definition of prog Svetonio, because I don't think I understand where you are coming from.
You would like to see both The Who as well as the Grateful Dead included in proper prog categories, yet you deem Bowie unfit for PA altogether. You see, that makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever...
No denying that these bands were experimental at times, especially The Dead, but being experimental - heck even being progressive doesn't necessarily mean you should be on PA. Wutang Clan were progressive - do we really need to include them as well?
No artist / band can escape very far from their artistic nature. Mr Bowie has always been fashionable pop artist. So, at the time when prog rock was fresh and bold, he was linked with that; this link would be a good reason why Mr Bowie is in PA' Proto Prog / Prog Related section. A little problem is that that those two different sections are in one. Imo, Mr Bowie deserved to be in Prog Related, not in Proto Prog because he wasn't an inventor.
The Who were the inventors. All four of them, although in my previous posts I mentioned Mr Townshend only. The Who are among those group of acts that made it possible for progressive rock. The Who deserved 100% to be in Proto Prog section; also, they are Prog Related because of Her Majesty Quadrophenia. The similiar thing is with The Dead. As a part of Psychedelia movement what was one of the most important Art movement in the last century - what made it possible for progressive rock - the Dead deserved to be in Proto Prog section and in PR because of Blues For Allah, Terrapin Station and maybe Mars Hotel (my fav album by them).
It doesn't metter that Mr. Bowie is a pop singer-songwriter, not rock. This genre addopted so many acts who weren't played rock music, for example Miles Davis and Tangerine Dream; they were great inventors in Jazz and Electronic music, they were contemporaries, so prog rock audience accepted them and that is that.
Definition of Progressive Rock? I think that the name of the genre is that definition per se.
It would be nice, if you somehow could relegate to us your definition of prog Svetonio, because I don't think I understand where you are coming from.
You would like to see both The Who as well as the Grateful Dead included in proper prog categories, yet you deem Bowie unfit for PA altogether. You see, that makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever...
No denying that these bands were experimental at times, especially The Dead, but being experimental - heck even being progressive doesn't necessarily mean you should be on PA. Wutang Clan were progressive - do we really need to include them as well?
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Is David Bowie prog?
Topic Options
Svetonio wrote:
While I was writing and posting my post, Mr Elf posted the same track.
The two sections are not in one, they are seperate. The Who is in Proto Prog and Bowie is in Prog Related. 
