Hate to agree with Scaruffi but he is kinda right about this guy. most of his stuff is aesthetic over everything, but thats kinda his thing i guess, he was able to pull it off, in a really great way, personally not my cup of tea i guess but i gotta admit he is pretty based. How did he do it, bros?
Scaruffi was wrong. Sure Bowie always had a great and ever changing aesthetic, but it was always complimentary to his music. David Bowie was a brilliant musician.
>>61819769
>>61819899
it's cause he knows how to write catchy rock music and melodies!
>>61819769
I agree with Scaruffi on a lot of things but I have to disagree with his views on bowie. According to Scaruffi Eno's ''Taking Tiger Mountain'' is better than anything that Bowie has done (while I still enjoy that album a fair bit too). Not even Brian Eno would agree that Taking Tiger Mountain is better than albums like Low or Heroes. Even Ziggy Stardust and Hunky Dory have several amazing songs. Also he has god-tier singles like Ashes To Ashes and even his disco songs have a charm to them (that being mostly Bowie's voice, his greatest asset!)
My views have greatly changed after I've been re-visiting his discography, he truly was a great artist and imo is in the category something to offer to anyone (like Stereolab or Bruce Springsteen ^___^ ) . Also Blackstar was pretty good!
Scaruffi turned shitty music taste into the essence of his reviewing.
All great phenomena of music critique, from Pitchfork to Robert Chrisgau, had been, first and foremost, pleb phenomena (just like Coca Cola and Barbie before them); however, Scaruffi turned that into an art of its own. With Scaruffi the science of shit taste becomes art; art and shit fucking taste become one.
Scaruffi was a plebeian of his times, and definitely a poor music critic: to say that Scariffu is a man worth the paper he writes his hot opinions down on, is like saying that Rolling Stone is a site for music journalism (a fact that is technically true, but misleading).
Scaruffi embodies the quintessence of people with unwarranted self-importance, raises futility to actually bothering with reviewers at all, focuses on the phenomenon rather than the content, makes irrelevant the relevant, and, thus, is the epitome of everything that went wrong with music critics.
>>61820095
>According to Scaruffi Eno's ''Taking Tiger Mountain''
really? he gave Before and After Science as well as Music For Airports an 8.
he places originality and innovation above content. A 7 is by no means bad.
>>61820105
best inverted pasta 2k16
>people still think aesthetics and music can be separated
aesthetics are just as much a part of the music as the composition is. i bet you guys think lyrics are also not important
>>61819944
and he was good at taking in any genre and making it accesbile. plus keeping up with the freaky and more out-there pop music of the time and jumping on those trends before his previous phases became too copied and cliche
>>61820095
This post pretty much, spot on anon
>>61819769
yeah Bowie was pretty bad
>>61819769
he will give blackstar a 6
>>61820191
no but poor songwriting can be boring
>2016
>paying attention to any critic
Kek pepe ishygydigy bepopo bizzy
Fuck critics
Also fuck this thread
>>61819769
You'd think scaruffi would be sympathetic with a fellow pedophile
