David Bowie on the Archives?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20774
Printed Date: November 23 2024 at 06:10
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: David Bowie on the Archives?
Posted By: Dr Know
Subject: David Bowie on the Archives?
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 15:31
|
For me he is the epitome of a progressive artist! Albums like Reality and Low are very prog. He was forever changing and opened a lot of doors IMO. WHAT DO YOU SAY? |
Replies:
Posted By: Rashikal
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 15:33
|
NO
------------- 
listen to Hella |
Posted By: Dr Know
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 15:35
|
Ha ha! Ol Rashikal! I knew you would jump on this poll |
Posted By: Ounamahl
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 15:38
|
Yes he has made proggy albums. But No, even though David Bowie is one of my favourite artists, ever. But no David Bowie here, thank you. ------------- This is an electrified fairytale |
Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 16:13
|
Yeah, he's progressive, that's for sure, just not prog. These two are
completely different things. I love Bowie, but I have to say No as well.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Viajero Astral
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 17:57
|
NEVER
------------- 
|
Posted By: memowakeman
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 20:19
|
why not? ------------- Follow me on twitter @memowakeman |
Posted By: Dr Know
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 20:30
|
To quote Jimbo "He´s Progressive for sure, just not Prog" Everyone shouts Never!! No!! Explain? |
Posted By: Witchwoodhermit
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 21:59
|
David Bowie has consistantly reinvented himself, moved with times and has not been afraid to experiment. He stands on his own two feet and doesn't rest on his laurals. Yup, good enough for me. ------------- Here I'm shadowed by a dragon fig tree's fan ringed by ants and musing over man. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 25 2006 at 23:11
|
can't really decide... but definitely more prog than some that have
been kicked around like Zeppelin or the Doors, and probably some that
are here already. The purist says maybe.... the fan says hell yeah. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Zargus
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 04:54
Yes please, if there ever was an artist who realy progressed it was Bowie all his albums sound diffrent from eachothers. I say yes yes yes!  ------------- 
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 05:04
|
Unfortunately, Bowie has already been rejected by PA. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 05:21
|
^ Thats a shame, he belongs in pog related at least IMO. ------------- Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005 
|
Posted By: daz2112
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 06:31
|
I think the early albums were definately progressive,but to quote other people not prog!! ------------- In the constellation of cygnus,There lurks a mysterious force...The black hole |
Posted By: ummagumma08
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 14:07
|
I think he's more prog than for instance Supertramp, Queen, Deep Purple, Radiohead etc. But along with the aforementioned, he really wouldn't fit in on an prog site. But I really couldn't care less.
His albums from 1976 - 80 are (IMO) much more prog Station to Station (1976) (the title track is one of the best pieces of music ever!) Low (1977) (side 2 is ABSOLUTE prog, featuring lots af great expermental ambience by Eno) Heroes (1977) (same as Low + Fripp on guitar) Lodger (1979) (maybe not as experimantal as Low + Heroes, but still great and somewhat complex material + Belew on guitar) Scary Monsters (1980) (SPLENDID guitarwork by prog-giant Robert Fripp) These five albums are easily my favourite Bowie albums and as proggy as he gets! Of his earlier stuff, Space Oddity is perhaps the proggiest. &a mp;n bsp; |
daz2112 wrote:
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 14:47
Rick Wakeman played on Space Oddity, so that makes Bowie prog-related, right? 
|
Posted By: ANDREW
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 15:07
| NO!!! |
Posted By: Witchwoodhermit
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 15:19
|
YES!!! ------------- Here I'm shadowed by a dragon fig tree's fan ringed by ants and musing over man. |
Posted By: Bern
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 15:23
|
YES!!!
-------------  
RIP in bossa nova heaven. |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 15:26
| MAYBE!!! |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 15:54
that's a shame... but understandable as long as 'the powers that be' are consistant... if you know what I mean hahahah. Precedent seems to be established that 'progressive' rock is not prog, thus not to be included here. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Dr Know
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 17:06
|
So gentlemen, we have all agreed he´s in! Good |
Posted By: Bern
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 17:34
Exactly  -------------
RIP in bossa nova heaven. |
Posted By: ANDREW
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 19:40
|
Do you really guys think that David Bowie played progressive rock or something similar??? Not for me. Maybe, in "Space Oddity" there are some little prog elements, but he played glam rock!!! |
Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 19:42
|
[QUOTE=Jimbo]Yeah, he's progressive, that's for sure, just not prog. These two are
completely different things. I love Bowie, but I have to say No as well.
[/QUOTE Well said!!! ------------- "You want me to play what, Robert?" 
|
Posted By: ANDREW
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 19:50
|
Sorry Jimbo, but i didn't understand what you said: "he's progressive, that's for sure, just not prog": what does it means??? |
Posted By: Guillermo
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 22:38
|
Yes. He also played in albums recorded by BlacK Sabbath and Cat Stevens. Maybe they could be included in PA too! My vote for Bowie was "No". Like Roxy Music, his image/music was more Glam Rock,not Prog. ------------- Avatar: Photo of Solar Eclipse, Mexico City, July 1991. A great experience to see. Maybe once in a lifetime. |
Posted By: Witchwoodhermit
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 23:23
|
Just finished listening to LOW for the first time. Bowie needs to be in prog archives. ------------- Here I'm shadowed by a dragon fig tree's fan ringed by ants and musing over man. |
Posted By: Zac M
Date Posted: March 26 2006 at 23:43
|
Maybe it's just me, but he seems to fit the category of Prog-related perfectly...
------------- "Art is not imitation, nor is it something manufactured according to the wishes of instinct or good taste. It is a process of expression." -Merleau-Ponty |
Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: March 27 2006 at 12:36
What I mean by this, is that you can be progressive without actually being progressive rock. Punk was very progressive when it first appeared, because it introduced some new musical elements. It was something that no one had heard before. It's the same with Bowie. Progressive rock then again, is a genre, which has certain rules etc. Therefore it's possible to be a part of the progressive rock scene without actually doing anything "progressive" or new. For example The Flower Kings, Spock's Beard etc. I'm not good at explaining things, I hope you understand what I'm saying.  -------------
|
Posted By: Dr Know
Date Posted: March 27 2006 at 14:40
|
I think what Jimbo means is this... An Example.. Van Halen´s Eruption was very progressive for the time, introducing two hand tapping but Van Halen aren´t a Progressive band. Am I correct? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 27 2006 at 15:52
good example... another one.... The Who... find me a group more... progressive. Tommy for instance...sure rock operas weren't invented by the Who. Perfected maybe hahahhah.. in any case... progressive with a capital P but I don't think anyone would call them a prog group... art-rock perhaps though... hmmm.... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Dr Know
Date Posted: March 27 2006 at 18:42
|
Being Progressive doesn´t mean it´s Prog and not being Progressive doesn´t mean it isn´t Prog. It all doesn´t really add up at the end of the day |
Posted By: Kid-A
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 10:40
|
Yes, Progressive is completely unrelated to prog. David Bowie was not prog. Absolutely no way. Why do people keep wanting people who blatantley aren't prog to be in the progarchives? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Dr Know
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 13:15
| But most of Bowie´s work is Prog. I think he is the strongest candidate for the Archives. Also Deep Purple Mark 1 was a Prog band. |
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 13:55
|
Freaky looking dude who sang about prog.nah, that ain`t prog .It`s a
space oddity.I do know this band 'maybe' .Are they progressive. No
.Maybe= No.People try to dig up these old dinosaurs when there is so
many new bands committed to prog rock who don`t get there just due.
Maybe?!
|
Posted By: Dr. Occulator
Date Posted: March 28 2006 at 22:24
|
Bowie is Art-Rock, not prog. Guess I gotta learn to have some patience and write more than one liners.
------------- My Doc Told Me I Have Doggie Head. |