his downfall is he didn't really influence anything (musically). he just hopped from one trend to the next.
His downfall is that no one knew him before two days ago.
>>61734245
You got that wrong. He didn't really innovate but he did influence a shit ton of bands
>>61734253
this
he was an ugly brit who wore make-up
perfect for bullshit postmodern postmortem political highjack-glorification
>>61734245
He influenced me and my band
We're called swans you might've heard our music sometime
>>61734245
I don't know that you could say he didn't influence anything musically, but I can't necessarily say he did either.
All I know is he made some kick ass music, performed under some interested alter egos, and I would have LOVED to have seen him live in the 70's or 80's. David Bowie was never entirely about the music, he was a stage performer. He was a play write in a sense. He was a set maker. He designed every facet of his tours in order to go inline with the concepts of his albums. That is what made him an accomplished ARTIST and not just a musician.
Glam Rock. Art Rock. Also interesting how he took a genre where the German being emotionless thing got popular (Krautrock) and made emotional as fuck masterpieces in that genre.
ITT contrarians sick of seeing Bowie everywhere
>>61734270
please change your name or face legal action, we're called THE swans and had the name first
>>61734299
>le contrarian meme
OP is right, stop overusing that word ffs
Bowie was innovative in the sense that the pushed the boundaries of personal expression and blurred the lines between genders, but when it comes to music he was a massive trendhopper
>>61734245
>his downfall is he didn't really influence anything (musically).
The irony is that the same goes for your post, and the rest of your life
>>61734267
>he was an ugly brit who wore make-up
So did your dad. But all that got him was a disappointment who spends quality time shitposting on the internet.
I remember avoiding anything with his face on it, specifically that picture, which i've seen being spammed sice i have memory. Cringy as fuck. Glad.
>>61734452
why are Bowie fans so needlessly defensive
OP raised a fair point, stop being a dick
>>61734475
Why are Bowie contrarians so needlessly on the offensive about the fact that people liked Bowie's work?
>inb4 'le contrarian buzzword'
It is perfectly applicable here. Especially since OP's post is something that is factually incorrect.
>>61734475
>why are Bowie fans so needlessly defensive
i've been saying that for years
they're as bad as Kanye fags
>>61734509
>factually incorrect
how
>>61734509
>factually incorrect
Why? Counter-argument instead of resorting to ad hominem, it's less childish and way more productive
>>61734559
There are millions of musicians that can vouch for Bowie's influence on their work.
Given Bowie's popularity over the decades, it is ignorant to claim he didn't influence anything.
>>61734452
solid rekting m8 bowie/8
Check out:
https://youtu.be/-wCLmrap83E
>>61734582
The thing is, the musicians "influenced" by him were in reality influenced by the actual innovative musicians from which Bowie took inspiration, like Eno and countless Krautrock bands
If you look at it that way, at least music-wise, Bowie didn't influence anyone
>>61734637
how is acting like an angry 12yo on a youtube comment section "rekting" anyone?
>>61734245
>muh influence meme
He was an autodidact pop artist. His task was to impersonate the current state of pop culture and to demonstrate it, not to innovate.
>>61734735
>the musicians "influenced" by him were in reality influenced by the actual innovative musicians from which Bowie took inspiration, like Eno and countless Krautrock bands
What a stupid thing to say. Bands who influenced are always going to have their influences themselves. By your logic, nobody influenced anyone, period.
That claim doesn't remove Bowie of any credence of influencing others, especially in consideration of him kickstarting the glam rock and proto-punk movement.
>>61734735
By that logic, the only truly influential artist was the very first musician.
>>61734819
>>61734817
I don't really agree with what I said there, Bowie definitely was influential.
I'm just trying to make sense of OP's badly worded post before attacking him personally like >>61734452 did. He meant that Bowie wasn't innovative (what is kind of true) and you'd have realized that if you actually tried to read his post twice
>>61734910
>He meant that Bowie wasn't innovative (what is kind of true) and you'd have realized that if you actually tried to read his post twice
That isn't true in the slightest either. He helped pioneer the glam rock and punk movements, which was innovative for its time. Plus his stage performances and makeup style innovated the way people approached those things.
>>61734783
When has rekting ever been used to describe anything else?
>>61734932
>He helped pioneer the glam rock and punk movement
You're right about glam rock– that's why I said "kind of true"– but the proto-punk movement already was in full swing before he even recorded his first album
>Plus his stage performances and makeup style
Not musically relevant
>>61734819
Was the man who invented music influenced by musicians?
Hmmm... Ok then.
>>61735002
We got a Hopsin fan over here
>Scott Weiland
>Natalie Cole
>Lemmy
>David Bowie
No. Seriously. Fuck these last two months. Fuck 'em.
>>61735020
it's only sad because you have awful taste
>>61734735
>The thing is, the musicians "influenced" by them were in reality influenced by the actual innovative musicians from which Krautrock took inspiration, like Stockhausen and countless 20th century classical artists
>If you look at it that way, at least music-wise, Krautrock didn't influence anyone
>>61734253
This. Get your words right, OP.
>>61735020
>who
>daughter
>who
>oh I know he made that shrek song
>>61735000
Bowie was innovative, just not as much as some people make him out be
>>61735093
this
Almost every musician in the 80s, 90s and beyond were influenced by Bowie.
>>61734245
his downfall was an 18 month battle with cancer, dummy
>>61735431
kek
>>61734540
Just read any Bowie article on P4K released this week where musicians like Bradford Cox cite Bowie as being responsible for their entire interest in music.
>>61734272
you just described Kanye West...
>>61734245
The interviews with his video director for blackstar makes it clear that Bowie doesn't really have a clear meaning behind most things he does and just picks cool imagery...they described how he said "lets put a tail of that women, it's kind of sexual". The truth is that most of bowies lyrics and art is the same way...it's just a superficial bundle of random stuff that doesn't go much further than a particular image, for better or worse. Most of the depth is a beat up
>tfw we will never hear a live version of Bowie performing Blackstar
>>61735020
Next:
>Paul McCartney
>Billy Joel
>Mick Jagger
>Roger Waters
>Phil Collins
>>61734817
>kickstarting the glam rock and proto-punk movement
Marc Bolan
>>61736882
>>61736882
David Bowie and Marc Bolan are both equally credited for that.
>>61736949
Not true
Bolan started it in the 60s
Bowie only adopted it in 71
>>61734245
...He influenced Joy Division. Massively.
You know, one of the most influential rock bands of all time.
>>61734418
>OP is right, stop overusing that word ffs
He isn't though
Trend hopping is one thing, but even though he hopped trends, he was still influential.
>>61735034
>Natalie Cole
>Bad
nigga come on
>>61734245
Pls kill yourself, he WAS the trend.
>>61734295
>Can
>Faust
>Neu!
>Emotionless
literally what
>Glam Rock
Bolan
>Art Rock
are you genuinely trying to put forth the argument that Bowie propelled Rock music into an artistic form of expression?
>>61737008
joy division, one of the most influential bands of all time? youre a deluded nut case
>>61736969
Learn your history, bro.
T. Rex was psychadelic folk in the 60s, just like Bowie was. Their self-titled kind of pushed them in the glam direction, but Electric Warrior was really the one that kickstarted the glam movement and propelled T. Rex into protopunk territory in 1971. Meanwhile, you could argue that The Man Who Sold The World, released in 1970, was more punk than any of T. Rex's early work before Electric Warrior.
>>61737008
You're right, he was influential, but only in the sense that he influenced those who he did because those artists heard Bowie before they did Neu, or Eno or whoever it be, and they mightn't have been able to connect to it in such an abstract form, it not being swerved towards a pop audience. His wider exposure and watering down more abstract and bold new musical inventions were influential, but that is not necessarily a good thing and it certainly doesn't make Bowie a good or respectable artist
>>61737132
They're responsible for a wide variety of British pop trends in the early 80s that quickly spread to America.
You're the delusional one here. Also you type like a fucking retard. Get out.
Because:
https://youtu.be/-wCLmrap83E
>>61737168
yeah sure buddy. youre a deluded nut case. learn music m8
>>61737140
>mental arithmetics
>>61737133
what is your point? punk does not mean instantaneous. The man who sold the world is not glam rock, its just generic hard rock from 1970. And what relevance does TMWSTW being 'more punk' than Pre EW have?
>>61737140
You're partially right; he definitely did take influences from those artists and combine them with pop sensibilities. However, that doesn't make his compositions any more or less nuanced, interesting, or influential. He never cribbed wholesale from anyone, either.
Also, in case you didn't know, he collaborated directly with Eno, so I wouldn't say that he "watered it down". Made it more palatable, maybe, but Eno came through so strongly on Low and Heroes that none of his complexities and intricacies were lost.
>it certainly doesn't make Bowie a good or respectable artist
Yeah, you're right. He's a good and respectable artist because his music was fucking great.
>>61737200
If you care to refute any of my arguments or post anything other than "lol ur dum m8", I'll be here.
>>61737233
You, or the guy I'm responding to, said that Bolan started protopunk in the 60s. Have you listened to T. Rex's work in the 60s? It's not protopunk whatsoever.
(also TMWSTW is definitely somewhat glam)
>Glam rock emerged from the English psychedelic and art rock scenes of the late 1960s and can be seen as both an extension of, and reaction against, those trends.[4] Its origins are associated with Marc Bolan, who had renamed his folk duo T. Rex and taken up electric instruments by the end of the 1960s. Often cited as the moment of inception is his appearance on the UK TV programme Top of the Pops in March 1971 wearing glitter and satins, to perform what would be his second UK Top 10 hit (and first UK Number 1 hit), "Hot Love".[8] In 1973, a few months after the release of the album Tanx, Bolan captured the front cover of Melody Maker magazine with the declaration "Glam rock is dead!"[9]
>From late 1971, already a minor star, David Bowie developed his Ziggy Stardust persona, incorporating elements of professional make up, mime and performance into his act.[10] Bowie, in a 1972 interview in which he noted that other artists described as glam rock were doing different work, said "I think glam rock is a lovely way to categorize me and it's even nicer to be one of the leaders of it".[11]
>>61737265
Glam, yes.
Proto-punk? No.
A lot of the sound and style that would later emerge in the glam movement was already present in TMWSTW.
>>61737140
>I have been rekt'd but I still try to save face: the post
There's a KPop thread waiting for you
>>61737216
Well I feel like I really have to spell it out for you, you don't seem to be able to connect these points by yourself
Bowie was a notorious teef and a massive trendoid hipster and if you can't see that then OK
But he's just his generation's version of Madonna
A highly motivated careerist trend hopper
>>61737262
AH, well that wasn't, what a ridiculous argument.
It's glam on a similar level that like, i don't know, Subterranean Homesick Blues is hip hop, or Helter Skelter is punk, or Heroes is shoegaze
>>61734245
but he definitely pushed the genres he trended to, so he did
> protopunk only emerging in the 70's
Fucking Peruvians were releasing punk rock in '64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb46GBRhby8
I find it really hard to believe that some obscure South American shithole was ahead of the rest of the world, not to mention I found this through VICE which automatically means its wrong/behind the times.
>>61734245
>he created the trends
>he influenced nearly everyone who became anyone from the 70's onwards
But we all know this is a bait thread.
>>61737540
Which trends did he create?
>>61737576
All the ones that this thread claims he "followed". Basically everytime he changed, he did something no one else was doing.
>>6173768
Name one trend he created
Drake the Trend Hopping Snake is literally the modern day equivalent of Bowie
>somehow is relevant if a musician is the creator or just a follower of a trend, even when he is the most influential artist of said trend
>the fact that he died is not relevant to understand a concept album about his death
Contrarian Tax when?
>>61737334
I wasn't already in that conversation to have been rekt, but if you consider an argument won by saying 'you're wrong bowie WAS influential', then, i dont know, youre stupid
it seemed like alot of people weren't understanding the relationship between trend hoping and it denouncing the credit one receives for the influence they caused.
>>61737245
we differ in how successful we think bowies albums are, theres not much to argue about. only
>Also, in case you didn't know, he collaborated directly with Eno, so I wouldn't say that he "watered it down". Made it more palatable, maybe, but Eno came through so strongly on Low and Heroes that none of his complexities and intricacies were lost.
except this
if you think the work that eno did on here (that is some of his most exposed stuff, that bowie gets credit for) is his best or most interesting work, you're crazy
>>61737720
If you don't know how much Bowie influenced music theough bands such as Joy Division, R.E.M., Sonic Youth, The Pixies and many other that list him as one of their main influences, then my friend I think you're the stupid one
>>61737767
Any good ones though?
>>61737720
I never said that it's his best or most interesting work. I said that it's not watered down. Learn to read.
>>61737796
>Sonic Youth
>The Pixies
>Bad
Literally kill yourself
>>61737796
Would you be so kind as to commit suicide please?
>>61737817
Kill myself because I don't like your ultra-conservative plebcore trash
How about no
I've listened to some of his music and it's really really shit.
Why was this muppet popular?
>>61737832
>ultra-conservative plebcore trash
You've never listened to either of them you fag
>>61737838
Okay, anyone who calls anyone a muppet is probably a retard
>>61737838
Because not everyone is as stupid as you.
>>61734245
Bowie was an overrated hack who was more known for his wild appearance than his talent at composing or performing. Anyone who isn't completely oblivious to music history knows that he was a trendhopper who basically ripped off other shit that was going on around him and watered it down for a mainstream audience. His few good albums were collabs with more talented musicians like Eno. Berling Trilogy is like 60% Eno's doing
>>61737849
Sounds like you've been called a muppet in your lifetime and it's had a negative effect on you, muppet.
>>61737859
>Berling Trilogy is like 60% Eno's doing
I dislike this meme, please delete it and never post it again kthx
>>61737841
>implying I would listen to something as boring and prescribed as sonic yoot
Pixies were alright, if you like that whole Nirvana thing
I suppose you also think Nirvana were geniuses for blindly copying Pixies
>Been listening to space oddity and starman nearly every day recently
>People think I'm one of the hipsters who only cared about him post mortem
Fug.
>>61737859
Everything he touched he did better than the original artists. Glam was a parody before Bowie stepped in. Pretty much everything from 70-83, despite taking influence from other sources, managed to outperform any of those sources.
>>61737859
Station to Station was all him, though, and that was very close to being as good as Berlin for similar reasons.
>>61737905
I disagree with glam being a parody. T. Rex owned.
>>61737905
Another Green World is still better than Low.
>>61737934
lmao
>>61737931
Gary Glitter was King of Glam.
http://strawpoll.me/6524963
http://strawpoll.me/6524963
http://strawpoll.me/6524963
>>61737983
GG was after Bowie, he was almost too late to the party
>>61734245
beck's kinda the same but you can bet your white ass i'm gonna be crying like a little bitch when he dies
>>61737895
Nirvana weren't geniuses, but they're decent.
>>61737934
>>61737978
I really love both but I can see the argument for Another Green World being better.
>>61737983
Man why couldn't he have died instead?
>>61738031
Paul Raven was making music before bowie picked up a guitar.
>>61738048
Because he fed on the juices of virgins.
>>61738078
Yeah but he wasn't standing around wearing satin and eyeshadow
>>61738097
Glitter still influenced many groups.
>>61738097
He was still King Of Glam and making music before Bowie.
>>61738125
As far as glam goes
Bolan was first
Then Bowie
Then Gary Glitter
By the time Gary arrived there were already like 10 other bands doing it
He was really big tho, pretty sure he was the main reason Bolan tried to kill it off in 73
>>61734245
ITT: Kids without context, reference points or experience.
RIP ALAN RICKMAN
>>61734452
lol
>>61737245
>complexities
>Eno
Eno says himself he isn't a musician in the sense that say Robert Fripp is. He was more like a sound designer.His stuff wasn't complex in a musical sense. The concepts he worked with and the execution are brilliant but complex isn't the right word to describe it.
His complete lack of music theory can make for some interesting melodies often though. From how he describes his trial and error method to composing melodies, I'd say it's a pain in the ass to do though.
>>61734998
>1910 = Music Started
>>61734452
Heh
Did Bowie get any formal singing training in his early years? It definitely seems that once he got to the late 70s he developed some more advanced vocal techniques and his later 90s work is even more so technically impressive than his earlier works.
