Bowie prog?

Atavachron wrote: yes, and also there's the other ugly little secret of judging music.. and that is personal taste.  It isn't suppose to matter but, in fact, it does-- i.e. I would probably not support the addition of, say, Lou Reed, but mostly because I don't care for his music..  but is he progressive... and well, there you have it

much like Steely Dan...  artists like Reed progresive as they are .. have absolutely no connection with prog.  As Dean likes to say... it is a fine line we walk.  To balance judging upon the music.. versus what public perception is.

The littlest things do make a difference...  like origin..  to use your example, Reed was american and as I posted in the SD thread, during those years prog was european.  Bowie did spring out of that same movement...  he has a much stronger case by association.  What some people will never get through their head is prog was a movement... to expand rock beyond it's boundries... not a genre based on epic track lengths and sh*t like that...   I have found so damn funny, yet sad at the same time, that many of fans of prog,  are amoung the most close minded of music fans.  Whereas like the music and musicians of prog  themselves... had willingness to incorporate other styles and ways of thinking and were quite open minded.  Oh well.  

Atavachron wrote: that's a strong point on Bowie's side you raise.. region and background are highly significant

very significant..

ask yourself this David... do you think Steely Dan would be here if they were English..     I'd bet my paycheck on that... they would have, well before  either of us had joined. 


Edited by micky - October 02 2007 at 19:43

Atavachron wrote: well I don't know, but if true, that's points for Bowie

it does... but we'll deal with that down the road.

darqdean wrote: For many Bowie typifies what has been descibed in the Progressive vs. Prog thread as a progressive artist who is not Prog. Almost everything he does is simultaneously eclectic and progressive - his albums generally arrive from the leftfield and land slap bang in the middle of the mainstream. And that's where the problem lies.   He produced some Prog songs, but maybe not whole Prog albums, he did Concept albums (albeit within fairly a standard rock format) and even ventured into the realm of Art Rock and Art School Rock. He has created fusions of every school of music you can care to imagine: minimalism, krautrock, jazz, soul, hip-hop, electronic, hard-rock, folk... and of course prog... (He is also pretty unique in suceeding in influencing some of the people he was influenced by - the only other artist to do that I can think of is Trent Reznor...) yet he remains a mainstream performer in the eyes of the world, even when producing non-mainstream albums.

very very very well said...

Zargus wrote: Bowie is yust as prog as Peter Gabriel, and even much more IMO, the only reason PG is here and not Bowie is becaus he was in Genesis if it was the other way around Bowie whuld be here and not PG. You cant get more progressiv then Bowie he changed his sound and style more from album to album then most bands and artist do thiere whole carer.