Should Bowie be moved to Crossover Prog? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Don't think it's possible to switch genres unless an artist is deleted and readded. Ain't gonna happen. He's here. Good enough. The overwhelming vast majority of his works is glam rock so I'd vote no

https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy

Many bands/artists have been switched between categories before. I'd be fine with Bowie in Crossover or Prog Related. I'm just glad he in, period.

Edited by Logan - April 25 2020 at 09:58

Just a fanboy passin' through.

General opinion matters (if most people support the move then it would be more likely -- a move consensus would help bolster the case), but the Crossover Team and the Admin Team (of which I recently left) would have to agree to the move.

I think Bowie had various album that could fit Crossover (I'd include the Berlin trilogy), and various music off of albums that could fit, such as "Aladdin Sane" and "Cygnet Committee". That said, for me he fits Prog Related well, and there are a significant number of albums in that category by different acts that I consider to be Prog, or Prog category worthy. He is a sort of Art Rock/ Art Pop artist, and we used to have an Art Rock category -- it was split into Crossover, Eclectic Prog and Heavy Prog, not that that is important to mention.

Edited by Logan - April 25 2020 at 10:32

Just a fanboy passin' through.

The Anders wrote:

I wonder, how come the Art Rock category was split? Too big?

That was Micky's doins, and I think too big was the issue.

Help the victims of the russian invasion:
http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28523&PID=130446&title=various-ways-you-can-help-ukraine#130446

lol

no

Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.

I'm glad he's here, in PA, as I am for Queen and Led Zeppelin and Jimi Hendrix and Miles Davis and The Talking Heads as I think all of their work inspired prog artists to try slightly different things, or to come from different centers. But I do not think of Bowie's music as proggy. He was an artist, a performance artist for a long time, a man who loved to challenge accepted boundaries and who loved to push himself and reinvent himself, but I really don't think of his music as progressive or progressive rock (except maybe to him). He created songs to contain and deliver his ideas, his lyrics. When I generalize and think of most prog artists' songs, I feel as if they can/could stand on their own with or without lyrics. I do not feel this way about Bowie's music.

Drew Fisher
https://progisaliveandwell.blogspot.com/

David Bowie was progressive, but he was not "progressive"...

As for Crossover Prog, I read it refers to "progressive rock music that, though 100% progressive, may have a musical connection to popular music". I'm not sure if David Bowie really fits in here. His music was progressive in the sense that it was forward thinking, cutting edge, breaking new ground, combining style elements in new ways and so on, besides he progressed a lot as a musician by always trying out new musical ideas. But I'd say his music it's not progressive in the sense of 'prog' (perhaps with the exception of the Berlin trilogy and Blackstar). If Crossover Prog is prog artists who cross over to the mainstream, I would rather think it's the other way around with David Bowie.

So I think Prog-related makes more sense as I see it.

Edited by The Anders - April 25 2020 at 15:43

^ however may not apply to neo-prog which seems like the lyrics are as important as the music. Just generalizations of course.

https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy

Easy Money wrote:

The Anders wrote:

I wonder, how come the Art Rock category was split? Too big?

That was Micky's doins, and I think too big was the issue.

you honor me.. but while it was my brain child..perhaps first among equals and pushing hard to create the team and get us rolling.. give credit where it was due. It took the best group of collabs (Chus helping me with Xover, Dave and Raff getting hard and heavy, and Victor and Greg doing the eclectic thing) this site ever saw to go through each and every single damned one of those 900 odd groups and evaluate them and separate them.

it says a lot about what we did with ISP/RPI and the blood we had to shed to make that happen that what we did with AR was only my 2nd proudest accomplishment here.

The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip

Hi,

This is the main reason why I think that we should "redo" the whole concept of "progressive" and take it away from the album ... it all should be about the ARTIST ... and then we could easily say that this band belongs in this area, and not in the more serious one, because they are inconsistent with their "progressive" design ... and the next album is something else.

I would consider DB more "adventurous" with his music, than "progressive", but he is not one artist I would spend time discussing or vote on in any situation ... too many things go separate ways ... I think he wanted to do "progressive" but he knew that it would likely cut down his short songs, and force him to do things a bit longer than otherwise ... and EF's comments in his book about what he stated to DB is major ... he liked the music flow so he could improvise, and essentially DB's music did not provide that for him, and he ended up declining to play in DB's album. EF would have had too short a bit on DB's song, which would be the primary/priority in the whole thing, and EF I don't think worried about priority or primary in his own music ... it was all about the flow and if guitar fit well, he used it!

Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com

Post Reply	Page 12 >