>made competent but average and ultra trendy music
>Basically someone like the Weeknd or grimes of the past, also competent but uninventive pop artists with a faux "artistic" image
>Still unironically, to this day, revered in "art" scenes for some strange reason
Explain.
>Explain.
Simple: you're just a contrarian faggot.
/thread
>made competent but average and ultra trendy music
He actually made music that was above average, and would be trendy, but was usually about two years before it was really "trendy".
I bet you don't understand why Andy Warhol was good.
You literally just name-dropped andy Warhol in the same sentence as unironically calling Bowie forward thinking. You're new to music, opinion discarded.
>Unpopular opinion
>Must just be a contrarian
This is nu-Sup Forums, really made me think.
>really made me think.
There's a first time for everything desu.
You're still a cancerous faggot that embodies the downfall of what this site stood for compared to other social media
>You're new to music
You're very clearly new to art, whether audio or visual.
Pretensions recognized. Are you validated?
I'm not saying being new automatically makes you less qualified, its just when you speak in incredibly formulaic namedropping newfag style it's hard to take you seriously. Its like you're aligning your taste and logic/reasoning to what seems "current", alot of people new to anything do that and you will grow out of it in time but right now you aren't worth taking seriously
>Pretentious
Literally never implied my opinion is objective.
>when you speak in incredibly formulaic banedropping newfag style
Lovely buzzword parade.
You realize Andy Warhol is also a Bowie track, so even if I had no real awareness of art history, if I were a Bowie fan (which would be likely, considering the nature of this thread), it would be very probable I'd have an idea of who that was?
>Its like you're aligning your taste and logic/reasoning to what seems "current"
It's so hip of me to cite artists who were relevant in seventy years ago, right? Though, coincidentally, both Bowie and Warhol are honestly relevant that time gap, which is staggering considering the rapid progression of medium.
>Literally never implied my opinion is objective.
That's not why you're putting on airs, m8. Nothing made me think you believe you're speaking in a matter of fact. It's just the endless implied denigration of things you have little understanding of that made me feel you were attempting an illusion of intellectual elitism.
If I could give a blue ribbon of "most Sup Forums person ever", I'd give it to you.
I don't understand why you fags get hung up on Bowie's image. He wanted to merge theater and music from the start, that's why he was so fond of playing characters and changing his look every year. If you look past that, he was still a talented multi-instrumentalist who was well versed in rock, R&B, and jazz, and successfully jumped from genre to genre with great success. His soul albums were played on traditionally black stations. His Berlin trilogy is a fascinating exploration of krautrock and electronic. And on and on.
But not a 2nd, it seems...
Why would you reference Andy Warhol if you only knew him of a song?
>It's so hip of me to cite artists who were relevant in seventy years ago, right?
Not in that sense. Theyre still very relevant in name-dropping, though. Like you will often see white people especially name-drop people like Andy Warhol because they once saw or read somewhere how "influential" he was do they just repeat it again to look knowledgable. That sort of thing. Same with bowie.
>intellectual
Cringe. If just pointing out your poseur shit seems like even an *attempt* at looking smart to you, you're literally on the spectrum.
Also pretty ironic you would pull the 9gag "illusional intellectualism" or whatever then unironically defend the ultimste pseudo intellectual bowie. Nice.
As base as it is, I really do find the aspect of the Berlin trilogy relating to Bowie's substance use to be the most interesting undercurrent.
I really think that's integral to Bowie integrating those influences into his music. Separated from his decadence, all he had to focus on was his music, and so he naturally sapped the environment he consciously emigrated to, out of what is ultimately an unrelated stimuli.
Heroes is such a neat album to listen to.
Your assumptions are erroneous and vague, which is why you are confused.
So in other words, literally competent but average?
>Genre hopping
>Impressive or meaningful
Wow, he switched instruments and rythyms every once in a while. How
I N N O V A T I V E. You know, putting your accoustic down and starting to play a drum in a different rythym is technically "genre hopping" too.
lel yr a fucboi
The real triumph is that he's a bit above competent.
It's not that he genre hops, but that he consistently genre hops and still puts out great material, that makes him good.
Ashes to Ashes is the most prescient song of pop music I've ever heard.
>putting your accoustic down and starting to play a drum in a different rythym
>doesn't even know what 'genre' means
>So in other words, literally competent but average?
No? Like I said, he played multiple instruments. And he arranged many of the strings on albums like Hunky Dory and Ziggy Stardust himself. He showed great talent his whole life.
>Wow, he switched instruments and rythyms every once in a while.
Yes, and he did it all while demonstrating a strong understanding of the genres he was working with. It's too easy for artists to imitate genres and end up sounding like watered down versions of the sound they seek, but Bowie was learned in the styles he attempted and found excellent artists to work with.
>You know, putting your accoustic down and starting to play a drum in a different rythym is technically "genre hopping" too.
You're right, but Bowie did it was great skill and recorded numerous albums which were consistently good across genres.
...
FPBP
God you're such a faggot
He had a knack for finding the right talent. He was a capable music maker. He could "play" instruments, but I would never class him at being highly skilled at playing them. I don't think he would've made a mark quite as big if not for the Spiders from Mars and especially Mick Ronson who btw wrote a lot of those early tunes.