A Trenchant Observation
David Bowie is incredibly, and inexplicably, overrated. I find most of his music turgid, boring, pretentious, fumbling, and less than half as exciting as an intimate massage from Janet Reno.
Notable exceptions: Low, Station To Station, many very excellent singles including "Heroes," "China Girl," "Young American," and "A Space Oddity." But song for song, pound for pound, and column inch for column inch, David Bowie is the best-loved nonstarter since Dwight Eisenhower.
[postscript] What brings this on? Today I have been listening to "Young Americans" and "The Man Who Sold The World." Hardly a half dozen great songs between them, and a load of incoherent dreck.
Obviously, others might make the same case about Elvis Costello, the Beatles, Elvis Presley, Aerosmith, and a host of other ostensibly immortal talents. Yes-- EC had Goodbye Cruel World, the Beatles had most of Magical Mystery Tour, Aerosmith seem hellbent on self-parody, and Elvis had Hawaii and little red pills. But to those who may quibble with my assessment of the Thin White Duke, pointing to other more egregious examples of reputation outstripping actual worth, I say this: taste is subjective, quality is eternal, and you're wrong.
on
| § 1
§ One Comment
[ You're too late, comments are closed ]
I cannot argue with the fact
I cannot argue with the fact that most Bowie albums were filler. However, Rock was still producing LPs that were not completely distinct from 45s. Certainly the days had passed when bands created throw-aways, but singles still represented a strong market, and bands could still records two albums in one year (how many ABBA albums were there?). Only a few bands created complete albums that ignore singles, but their production was more limited.
To counter my point I would note that at the same time Bowie produced Low and Heroes, two great albums, and the disappointing Lodger, Costello produced My aim is true, This year´s model, and Armed forces.