[Login] or [Signup]
Login
Username:
Password:
[Signup]
[Recover Account]

Navigation

Poll


You must be logged in to view polls
Bowie General > Images Vol. 22

You are in:  Forums / Bowie General / Images Vol. 22
Locked
homebrewPosted at 2025-05-03 14:39:55(2 days ago) (Bowie General / Images Vol. 22)


Uploaded: 152.13 GB
Downloaded: 375.34 GB
Posts: 121

Ratio: 0.41
Location: United States of America


These articles appear just as they were posted in the Usenet group alt.fan.david-bowie by group member Jamie Soule aka AladINSAnE. I have made no attempt to alter the formatting, spelling, grammar or edit in any way.

This installment brings us to the 1/3 mark of the Images articles. This one was lost for a few years but finally was unearthed with the note: (the missing part has been found thanks to Lucy).


Images: Part 22


That sounds odd, doesn't it? David Bowie had no fans. Well, as odd as it
may be it is true and many Bowie listeners do not realize that because
it is hard to fathom when looking at his popularity these days. It
wasn't easy to be a Bowie listener back then either, you were certainly
singled out, to say the least. Looking back however, there is something
quite noticeable, and that is the fact that people start listening to
Bowie for a variety of different reasons. I should say follow what Bowie
is doing because there are some that do not listen, they watch. In the
early seventies though people seemed to gravitate towards Bowie's work
for mainly one reason and it became many reasons around 1983. It seems
to be a fact that a "rift" developed between many fans around the time
Let's Dance was released. This rift grew after that and from 1984 until
1993 it not only separated some fans from other fans,  it also separated
some fans from Bowie himself. I am speaking here from personal
experience as I started listening to Bowie in the early seventies. I
want to make it clear, so this is not perceived as only my opinion, that
I have spoken extensively with others who have been interested in Bowie
from the same time period as I or earlier. I have included many of their
views as well in this piece and I believe that I should point out that
according to the comments I receive from others an overwhelming majority
of fans from this era agree with what I am going to say. By overwhelming
I mean ninety percent at the least.

I am well aware of the difficulty in perceiving a David Bowie that is
not popular. I also am aware how difficult it is to perceive a David
Bowie that is not in the mainstream. Out of the shows that I attended
during the Serious Moonlight Tour in 1983, three of them were in
Vancouver. The fact that David Bowie was almost nowhere to be found for
five long years had little bearing on ticket sales for this tour.
Vancouver has a population of around one and a half million. The first
concert was held at B.C Place Stadium,  your typical inflatable dome
sports facility, which is a horrid place to hold a concert due to its
size. The seating/standing capacity of the stadium I estimate at around
sixty thousand. I say "standing capacity" because quite often, as in
this case, there are no seats on the floor, it is standing room only.
The venue sold out in a matter of a few short hours and Bowie tickets
were a valuable commodity allowing some scalpers to enjoy an early
retirement in all probability. Bowie returned later in the tour and
played at The Pacific National Coliseum which is the same facility that
he used for the tour rehearsals in 1976. Bowie played at The Coliseum
for two consecutive nights and these concerts were filmed later released
on video. This is the Serious Moonlight Tour video that most of you are
familiar with as it was broadcast world wide and sold in video outlets.
Some seating had to be removed to accommodate the filming equipment so I
have to estimate here and I believe that there was enough space for at
least fourteen thousand people. The concert was sold out both nights and
a ticket for these two shows was next to impossible to obtain if you did
not get one the day that they went on sale. They sold out in a little
over an hour and twenty minutes.  The numbers are quite impressive when
you consider that out of a population of one and a half million you can
sell eighty eight thousand seats  and I am confident that he easily
could have played a few more shows to sell out crowds. Vancouver is
indicative of the 1983 tour as it sold out everywhere and often shows
had to be add, Such was the case in New York where Bowie was scheduled
to play one night he ended up doing three shows to meet the demand. Now,
compare. I saw the 76 Station To Station tour and the 78 Heroes tour at
The Forum in Montreal which had a seating capacity of sixteen thousand I
believe.  Bowie played one night and the place was far from sold out on
both occasions. A person could have bought a ticket the day of the show
with ease. On some of the European dates during the Station To Station
tour the venues had a capacity of three thousand. Yes, I said three, not
thirty.

Bowie may have been a recognized personality in his home country but in
North America it was quite a different story. Bowie was not very well
accepted in America and Canada and that was due a lot to the fact that
there were so many misconceptions about him.  The root of it was the
publicity that was generated by MainMan and spread by the media
concerning his "sexuality." The dresses and make up did not help and
many American and Canadian stations refused to play any music written by
a "transvestite," as some put it. You must understand that homosexuality
was NOT tolerated in the early seventies as it is now. It was extremely
dangerous to "come out of the closet"  back then and you had an
excellent chance of getting a severe beating if you were even perceived
as a "faggot." Bowie received death threats on his first few American
tours and Defries hired a body guard to protect him. This stemmed from
one instance where a handgun was actually pulled out by someone a little
too close for comfort. The labels were not confined to Bowie either. I
want to ask who would take any notice of you today because you are a
Bowie listener? I imagine that no one would say much except to
compliment you on your better than average taste in music. This was not
like it used to be however as there were some pitfalls back then for
making your taste in music well known. Although it never did happen to
me, I know of several incidents where some Bowie fans ended up getting a
beating because of what they listened to. These were not isolated cases
either and Montreal is an extremely tolerant city. I did get called
names on several occasions as it was thought that Bowie was faggot
music. Bowie had become a symbol for the gay community, against his
will, and that further fuelled the belief that only queers listened to
his music. Being a Bowie fan often meant getting labelled as a queer,
fag, homo or just plain weird. It was something you endured at times.

Bowie did not have a large fan base in North America in the seventies
and that is easily proven by looking at the amount of people who bought
his work. There are some of you who will question these statements and
figures and some may say I am a liar.  Please feel free to say what you
want in disagreement, however that will not change the fact that this
information is correct. I know from experience that few people are
actually aware of how small a fan base Bowie had. The people who
listened to Bowie were a select few that I like to consider as people
who were more intellectual in their approach to music and refused to
entertain the thought of listening to what appealed to the mass record
buying public. We were selective about what we exposed our minds to and
therefore avoided that which most people bought for the simple reason it
lacked any depth.  Our numbers were small, and I mean small enough that
we could not accurately be called an audience. If there is any
terminology that would be the best to describe us it would be a "cult
following." You don't believe me?  First consider this, and I advise you
to be ready for a shock. If you think that Bowie was a big seller then
here is a bit of David Bowie Trivia for you. In the seventies sometimes
FIFTY PERCENT(50%) of Bowie albums were returned to the record
distributors as UNSOLD STOCK. I had the same question that some of you
are asking now, "Surely Bowie must have been better known?" Well, I
discovered the answer and it is quite appropriate. Bowie was well known
but the truth is being "known" does not always equate into record sales.
Bowie was known as being "strange" and all of the other characteristics
that were generated for promotion in the media. A tremendous number of
the public knew of him but did not buy his work.
How many people lived in America in the seventies? I am guessing, but
probably two hundred and fifty million and about twenty million in
Canada. Ask new Bowie fans how many people out of the  two hundred and
seventy million bought Heroes, Low, Lodger, Aladinsane, Diamond Dogs or
The Man Who sold The World as of 1983. Well? Let me tell you. A whole
153,000 people out of 270 million bought Lodger and as far as Diamond
Dogs goes not even one million bought it, as It sold 745,000 copies.
Heroes 280,000, Low 266,000. Only 207,000 thought The Man Who Sold The
World Was worth anything  and 532,000 people saw value in Aladinsane.
Bowie did not sell.  Very few people "got it", including the so called
"experts," you know, the critics.

One of the main problems with Bowie's work was that it was complex and
had depth, both musically and lyrically. It was music that had to be
"listened" to and therefore required you to sit still and become
absorbed with the sound. This was not light music made for fun or catchy
happy cute little jingles to sing along with. I can only speak for
myself but I do not think many people tapped their feet to We Are The
Dead or whistled along to Saviour Machine. I never once heard Width Of A
Circle or Right played at any dances I went to. Oh, and I didn't hear
Stay played on AM radio to sing along to. Another problem was that the
work he released did not fit in with the time period that it was
released in. Low and Heroes were released in the disco era and maybe
some have a difficult time understanding the significance of this.
NOBODY was interested in Bowie's music because it was totally the
opposite of what was popular. Bowie had a lot of integrity towards his
work by failing to cave into what the public wanted and recording what
he felt was relevant to him at the time. He wrote for himself and stood
by his work for the sake of what it meant to him and not for how it
would fare on the charts. Bowie deserves a lot of respect for doing
this, and so do the other artists who also demonstrated the same
integrity towards their work. I thought my point would be best
illustrated if we looked back at the charts to discover exactly what
people were listening to the week some Bowie albums were released. I
hope you find this as interesting as I did.

Low was released on January 14, 1977.  I obtained the following
information from a New York area radio station which have charts that
list the top selling albums and singles by the week. According to the
information this is what the most popular singles were for the week Low
was released:

 1. Car Wash - Rose Royce
 2. You Don't Have to Be a Star (To Be In My Show)   Marilyn McCoo &
Billy Davis, Jr.
 3. You Make Me Feel Like Dancing - Leo Sayer
 4. Tonight's the Night - Rod Stewart
 5. I Wish - Stevie Wonder
 6. After the Lovin' - Engelbert Humperdinck
 7. Hot Line - The Sylvers
 8. Dazz - Brick
 9. Enjoy Yourself - The Jacksons
10. Whispering/Cherchez la Femme/Se Si Bon -  Dr. Buzzard's Original
Savannah Band

These are the top singles for the week in which Heroes was released,
October 14, 1977:

 1. Star Wars Theme/Cantina Band - Meco
 2. You Light Up My Life - Debby Boone
 3. Nobody Does It Better - Carly Simon
 4. Boogie Nights - Heatwave
 5. Keep It Comin' Love - KC & the Sunshine Band
 6. I Feel Love - Donna Summer
 7. That's Rock and Roll - Shaun Cassidy
 8. It's Ecstasy When You Lay Down Next to Me -  Barry White
 9. Strawberry Letter #23 - The Brothers Johnson
10. On and On - Steven Bishop

By looking at these charts it makes it relatively clear what people were
interested in listening to. Since I lived, I mean survived, through this
nightmare I can tell you first hand that the "music," and the clothing
which accompanied it, was not the type of "scene" that most of you would
want to participate in, and probably wouldn't unless you were tortured.
These albums did not fit in with the time period, and it is interesting
to note that neither did any of his work from 1974 until 1980. Now, you
can well imagine how Bowie fans were viewed back then for listening to
Low and Heroes.  They were all  dressed in polyester suits with  open
shirts to reveal well placed gold chains and  they danced to mindless
drivel about sex while sniffing amyl nitrate.  Amyl nitrate goes by the
street name "poppers" and it was quite popular in the disco scene. When
sniffed it elevates the heart rate and raises the blood pressure enough
so you get a "rush." The stuff was a legal  "cheap" high that led to a
headache afterwards.

Bowie fans were at the opposite end of the spectrum when Heroes was
released. We were listening to Bowie for one reason only and that was
because it was music that stimulated the mind. Bowie made music which
was unique, it had depth and it was intricate in every way. The average
record buyer was unable to understand Bowie's work, because like all of
the progressive music of that time period  it was aimed at a more
intellectual audience. We all knew that Heroes and Low were two of the
most amazing albums ever written and we were well aware that they were
twenty years ahead of their time. It is true that the early Bowie fans
who remained listeners for decades were motivated by the calibre of
Bowie's work.  Outward appearances, or anything else physical, was not
considered important, what came out of the stereo speakers was.
Anyone who was a Bowie listener from 76 to 80 was there for the quality
of his work. There were NO TOP 40 HITS, NO GIMMICKS, NO COSTUMES, NO
FADS and FEW FANS. Bowie shared his audience with those who followed
other artists for the same reasons, and again that was music. It is no
accident that on the shelves of Bowie listeners you were apt to find a
mixture of similar recordings of other unpopular or semi known artists
at the time who were also producing their work for the sake of the
artistic value rather than the income generating value. Do not misquote
me on this however. If these artists,  and many did, scored a hit then
that was fine. If something sold all the better,  but the point is that
they did not write with the goal in mind of producing hit after hit.
The albums of Bowie's that are referred to today as classics were all
dismal failures when they came out with the exception of Young Americans
and the reviews were nothing short of unkind in most instances. The
question that begs to be answered is why? I have a feasible answer to
that question. It is because  Bowie composed music. Not only did Bowie
compose music, but what he wrote was outside of the traditional
framework of what most were used to hearing, as his music was not
superficial, instead it had substance. Equally as important was the fact
that Bowie utilized the talents of others as competent as himself, and
this put his work in a class reserved for those who truly had enough
talent to rewrite the definition of music. If you look at the reviews
the critics lavished on Bowie's work through this period it becomes
obvious that they were looking for something that did not exist and
missing what did exist.  To call these individuals "music" critics is an
oxymoron, as the "music" escaped them. They were not looking for music,
they were looking for songs, and ones that were commercially viable.

There is always a number of "fair weather fans" and I admit that Bowie
had some as well. I completely understand that there were those who
liked the "gimmicks" of the early seventies and by this I mean the whole
uni-sexual theme ,hairstyles, clothes, make up and glitter. It was like
every other new wave that separated the generations by shock value.
Shock losses its ability effect people after awhile because after being
exposed to it for a period of time it ceases to grab attention anymore
for the simple reason people get used to it. The whole thing becomes
routine. Punk, Rock N' Roll, Disco, Hip Hop, Grunge, Gangstra Rap and
every other "movement" became routine. Those who were into Bowie so they
could play "dress up" only stayed around while the clothes and the make
up were still an effective weapon against "The Establishment," or until
the whole "look" had become acceptable by the "common" people. The
gimmicks bands used in the early seventies ceased to be effective by
1975.  When Station To Station,  Low and Heroes came out the Bowie look
that once shocked people was gone, and these fans went with it.

Things have not changed at all over the years when it comes to those who
purchase records.
The average record buyer is looking for  "songs," and not music when
selecting something to listen to.. Those who are looking for "music"
make up a small minority of the record buying public. Their motivation
for buying an album comes from a set of much different criteria than the
average person who buys songs. As I said before, the record buying
public wants "pop." Popular music is all alike, all 3:00 to 4:30
seconds, and almost all of these songs share certain specific qualities
with one another. First of all the "music" itself is extremely
simplistic in nature, utilizing three or four chords in a 4/4 time
signature and played in a tempo that rarely changes except at the chorus
lines. The rhythm is best described in normal cases as being, "boppy"
and you can dance to the beat.  The structure to each song is absolutely
the same with verses followed bt a four or six line chorus followed by
more verses, so everything alternates.  In almost all cases lyrics are
mandatory for songs and these lyrics are usually catchy enough that it
invites the listener to sing along. Like the competence of the musicians
on most songs the lyrics do not have to be of high quality.  The
intellectual quality of what is said by the lyrics is of no importance.
The worth of these songs are is not based on any real measure of
quality, so to speak.  We are "sold" the fact that these "songs" are
good by record companies who are trying to get your money. They tell us
what is popular and what we should listen to. They tell us what music
is, and they tell us by attacking us with a blaze of hype generated from
advertising, repetitive radio play, music videos, Grammy Awards and any
other form of marketing money can buy. The performers of these "songs"
in most cases have little talent as proper musicians and many times do
not write their own material. What they do  have is usually a voice,
however the voice is secondary. The biggest asset for one of these
"singers' is good looks, and forget about the music industry as a career
if you are a real musician who does not looks that rival a model. The
reason is that to make a singer popular they must be "packaged" to sell.
The success of a person in the music business is not based on talent,
but on the fact of how successful the record company wants to make you,
and that depends if your package sells. If people buy the hype then the
company will put more money behind you to create even more hype. If your
package does not sell then you are replaced with a new package. There is
no longevity for a singer. The people who pay are not paying for quality
music, they are buying hype and the "flavour of the month." Tastes
change rapidly and once they get tired of looking at you then you are
replaced. All of this works well and sells for the reasons that the
reviewers indicate, because these "songs" and the packaged entertainers
who sing them are not out of touch with the man on the street and
certainly not too distant for pop audiences.


I value the fact that I discovered his work and had the opportunity to
see it performed in those days. Unfortunately those days are gone, and I
believe that the desire and motivation for him to be ever go back to
working in this fashion are long gone. What Bowie produces now is of the
highest quality but it is really no different than the other noise over
the airways in terms of having anything "new" to it. I thought I would
never live to see the day when I would say that the depth in Bowies work
is sadly lacking and much of what he puts out today is at best shallow.
I am saying this as a general statement as he still has his moments,
namely Earthling being the most recent in my assessment. A sure sign
that will prove my point is the fact that you can tell the quality of an
artist's work by their fan base and Bowie is no different. Bowie since
1983 has broadened his fan base by writing music that has been geared to
sell albums rather than for strictly artistic value. There is a rather
large percentage of these new fans who listen to Bowie for different
reasons than the listeners who have been around for over twenty years.
These differences have become a division line between the two fan bases
and in my opinion negatively affected Bowie's work. This explanation may
be lengthy.

It is debatable, which would be for no reason really, that 1974 through
until 1983 saw Bowie's best work from the standpoint of music. Since
Heroes and Low were his most personal works those who lived through this
period or the fans who have gone back to discover it have been rewarded
by getting to know the essence of the "real" David Bowie, the artist.
These albums speak from the soul of Bowie, he is stripped down and free
from the marketing "gimmicks" which often became obstacles for listeners
wanting to get an uninhibited understanding of him. The next two albums,
excluding stage, were also written for artistic merits and sold poorly.
They were brilliant albums and I will cover them later.  His attempt to
create a solidly commercial album to break into the American marketplace
was a masterpiece that did exactly what it was designed to do. It was a
work that demonstrated the true talent of Bowie and his ability to
create music that truly reaches the listener that he wishes to reach.
Bowie set out to make a commercial album and who else could do it better
as it sold FIVE MILLION copies. The older fans were a bit concerned
seeing this sort of product coming from Bowie but rested assured that
this was another "character" and another "phase" that would soon be gone
and replaced by more adventurous work. We were wrong. Dead wrong. Little
did we know  at the time that we had a reason to be deeply concerned.
The next two albums were enough to send most of his older listeners
scrambling to purchase work by The Talking Heads, Laurie Anderson, Klaus
Nomi, Bauhaus, Adrian Belew or any other leading edge artists we could
get our hands on. Bowie was no longer followed with much interest. Bowie
had picked up a new fan base starting from 1983 that was comprised more
of the average record buyer.

Yes, I speak my mind. I do so without fear as well, even though I have
taken plenty of heat for it in the past. The reason I have no fear is
for the simple fact that I know that I speak for a large number of
others who do not speak out. Inside they "know" but they see no need to
voice it and come under attack. I do not blame them at all. It is not
important really because as long as they "know" that is all that
matters. Those that "know"  will understand that sentence. Won't you?

Bowie departed from many of the characteristics in his music that
initially made us listeners. I, for one, was not overjoyed at the fact
that these characteristics were absent as this did not improve the
music, instead it made it shallow enough for the average record buyer.
His move toward commercialism was achieved by writing what the average
record buyer wanted, and that was "songs." The writing of this material
required it to be completely accessible and this was achieved by
removing some of the qualities that made us listen in the first place.
Unfortunately they were the MAJOR qualities. There was little depth left
and the innovation was absent, replaced by the standard framework that
most songs are written from. The quality was there but the music no
longer took you places that were uncharted and you no longer had to
think. The lyrics were downgraded to widely acceptable topics in most
cases.

I was vocal about this due to the fact that I felt robbed in a way. I
was not happy about the fact he lowered his standards. Bowie always set
the highest standards for himself and I grew to expect them after
awhile. I admired the fact that every part of him went into his work and
it was disappointing to find that gone. Now, I was the recipient of a
few, well actually a lot of, comments from some of his new fans
regarding some of the things I said. I stated that his work at times was
a little better than mediocre and that the depth and intellectual
quality of his writing seemed to be missing. One of the most common
comments aimed at me was the fact that in their opinion  I am not a
Bowie fan. Yes, I am not a Bowie fan. The reason I am not a Bowie fan is
that I demonstrated the fact that his music was nowhere near the high
standards it used to be. I CRITICIZED David Bowie, and harshly as well.
Fasten your seat belts as this gets really terrifying when you hear the
reasoning of some of these new fans. I fought back with the argument
that I spoke out because being a Bowie listener I ACTUALLY CARE about
what he produces and if his work starts slipping I get CONCERNED. Their
response was if I don't like it then don't listen to it. How brilliant I
thought that reply was. So, I just give up listening to Bowie after
twenty eight years? I consoled myself with these questions and I want to
share them because the right answer would be great if I happened. If
Bowie ever decided to focus on music again and put out four albums in a
row that were like side two of Heroes and Low with a little Baal put in
for good measure, how many of these "new" fans who like the songs Bowie
writes would still be listening after the four albums? If Bowie kept
producing based on his innovative urges then how many of these fans
would have started to listen to him in the first place? Do you like
those questions?

Fasten your seat belts as this gets really terrifying when you hear the
reasoning of some of these new fans. One of the common tactics was to
remind me that Bowie can do whatever he likes as he doesn't "owe" me
anything? Okay? Let's look at Station To Station. How many "bad" songs
on It? Scary Monsters? Aladinsane? Ziggy? Hunky Dory? How many songs on
each album are not worth listening to. How about the two albums made in
84 and 87, how many good songs do they have? Two on each album? Is that
the usual quality that I should expect from Bowie? Is that what I should
accept. The answer was YES. YES it is okay for Bowie to put out as many
albums as he likes with only two good tracks each on them. What shocks
me is the simple fact that the people who feel this way have NO
STANDARDS. None, they will accept anything Bowie throws at them. On the
contrary the Bowie listeners from the seventies have extremely high
standards and that is the reason they listened to Bowie in the first
place, and the reason they left when he lowered them. One of the main
reasons alt.fan.david-bowie is attacked is for the simple reason that
the members are long time fans who have high standards with regards to
what they feed into their ears. They have also felt robbed by the loss
of Bowie as a quality artist and they speak out. These "fans" also
attack them. Look at what is really behind their reasoning. They attack
people for having high standards and refusing to lower them and in the
same breath state that they do not care what Bowie puts out because they
have no expectations of quality. These people do not care about the
music. The ones who do however show a great deal of integrity and self
respect for being discerning when it comes to music and what they
subject their minds to.

WARNING: I AM ABOUT TO POST SOME COMMENTS THAT I TOOK FROM BOWIEZOIDNET.
THESE COMMENTS ARE REAL. IF YOU HAVE A WEAK STOMACH DO NOT READ THIS. IF
YOU ARE BOTHERED BY PEOPLE WHO ARE BOWIE FANS FOR THE WRONG REASONS DO
NOT READ THIS OR YOU ARE QUITE LIKELY TO COMMIT SUICIDE.

I will reserve comment on these quotes for a few minutes. You may want
to read them twice since they are rather unbelievable.

1)  "Here he is in Utrecht, 1997. Just look at all those people gathered

round all itching to tear his pants off and give him the fuck of his
life.

2) "This is David performing Ziggy Stardust (I am fairly certain) on the

Sound and Vision tour.  I bet there's a few of you out there who would
like to snuggle up to him tonight aren't there now?

3) "When you chat, is it to much to hope you could speak to me, as I've
idolized you since way back. you mean so much to me in my life david,
and
i know if i'd ever met you we would have got= on so well. Bet i
could've made you laugh, worship you so much David.
David, could you give me any job in your organization?  All i offer is
loyalty." If you don't talk to me on june the 4th i'll, i`ll,i`ll,
still worship you as I've always done since those far off 70`s days. "

I spent three months over at BOWIEZOIDNET and these posts came directly
off of the message boards. To be perfectly honest I can guarantee that
there are hundreds, if not a thousand messages which reflect the same
sentiments. If you float around the Net and pop into a few Bowie related
E-Groups it is not difficult to find similar posts.

BOWIEZOIDNET is by far the leader when it comes to discerning fans such
as these.  I know it boggles the imagination but I can safely say that
Bowie's official web site is the most useless place to get information,
collectibles or talk to other fans. Can you see these people discussing
the social commentary on Scary Monsters or Stacy Heydon's guitar work on
the 76 tour. Ooops, I made a mistake. Unless they have a Ryko release of
Station To Station they will never hear Heydon, he is on the two bonus
tracks, Word On A wing and Stay. The only other avenue to hear Heydon
would be on ssshhhhh, quiet now, would be on those evil royalty robbing
BOOTLEGS. These are frowned upon over in BOWIEZOIDLAND and rarely
mentioned as they hurt David financially. I won't get into any
legalities here  but let me say this. I am an admirer of Bowie's work
and as far as live performances are concerned, I will get everything i
can get my hands on and I think I speak for many.

The gloves are off when it comes to this topic and I am deadly serious
about my remarks. I wish to show you something and it is worth listening
to. The truth is that each and every one of you who are Bowie fans for
the RIGHT REASONS, his work, should be deeply concerned about these
worshippers because they are hurting you. The people who blindly worship
David Bowie as if he is some kind of an idol are NOT Bowie fans, they
are in fact the opposite.  Did you know that it is these people who are
the reason Bowie does not put out the quality of music he used to. It is
true. These people are to blame for it and in my opinion should be
treated with the contempt they deserve. They are not Bowie fans at all,
what they are in reality are a bunch of ignorant morons. If you are one
of these worshippers and wish to say something I would appreciate it if
you would direct your comments at me.  I would like to  have the
opportunity to do all real Bowie fans a favour and reply to your
objections. My reply should be sufficient to run you off of the Net.

It comes down to supply and demand. Bowie produces his work and someone
buys it and these transactions are how he earns a living. It is a
business and like any other business you have to sell products that
people want.  Do you see where I am going with this?


I am only one of many thousands that will never have a complete Bowie
collection which includes all of his official releases. Why? The reason
is Bowie, or no Bowie. I will not spend my money on anything that does
not meet the definition of what I feel constitutes good music. What do
you think an artist would do if nobody bought their work because it was
not of the quality it once was? I will NEVER own Bowie/Puff Diddy, and
neither will any other self respecting Bowie listener. The point is that
if no one bought Bowie/Puff Diddy then it is quite conceivable that
David Bowie would not work with him. The Bowie worshippers however have
NO STANDARDS and will BUY ANYTHING that has the name David Bowie on it.
This in turn allows Bowie to release anything with a firm guarantee that
it will sell. The idol worshippers can find absolutely no fault with
anything Bowie does. I do not believe that it is a coincidence that
during the seventies the quality of his work was consistent.  I do not
believe that he would have tried to compromise his music as I am sure
that he would not jeopardize the small base of fans he had at the time.
His fan base was particular with what they listened to and would have
stopped buying his albums. This point can be proven due to the fact that
many of his older fans walked away between 1984 and 1993. Let's Dance
worked wonders and the follow ups, rated as his two worst, also sold and
this may have been the route that delivered a dangerous message to
Bowie. The message was that his new fans bought Tonight and Never Let Me
Down with very little complaint.  This is true, as I said I have seen
these albums defended by those who insist that having only two really
worthwhile tracks on an album is acceptable.  I say to the "fan" who
said that Bowie doesn't owe me anything that you are wrong. Just because
you have no expectations do not lump me in with others who share your
low standards. You see, for over twenty  eight years David Bowie TAUGHT
ME TO EXPECT A HIGHER QUALITY OF MUSIC FROM HIM SO HE OWES ME THAT.
PERIOD!!

I'll bet a 76 tour program that I speak for EVERY Bowie listener from
the seventies. We were Bowie fans for the RIGHT REASONS, his MUSIC.
After 1983 we lost the REAL David Bowie, his work was indistinguishable
from the other "pop" on the radio and he sank to a level of mediocrity.
If you do not understand this then you do not "understand" and you
"missed" it all. We will not accept any reply from those who wish to
contradict this fact, it is not an opinion. The reason why is that you
are in no position to correct anything. I will not have someone lecture
me on Bowie in the seventies because I was alive then and I find it
difficult to accept the fact that a person  would have a deeper
understanding about this period when they weren't born yet. That has not
stopped some of you though. If you like Bowie because he is cute,  has
nice hair or writes pop songs then you are listening to Bowie for the
WRONG REASONS. If you buy collaborations with Puff Diddy, slander Heroes
and Low on your E-Groups and ALLOW Bowie to sell work below  the quality
he is capable of then you are the root of a problem. If you support
BOWIEZOIDNET, BOWIEZOIDBANC and ULTRASTAR you are financing other
sources of revenue for Bowie that allows him to focus less on his music.
If you set your standards as low as I have seen, no real complaints
about Puffy on BOWIEZOIDNET, I really wish you would become fans of
Satan and you can all go to.............

David Bowie shocked RCA. The Thin White Duke shocked the media. It all
had to do with promoting Heroes.

AladinSANe

To be continued...................


""I don't begrudge any artist for finding an audience"
- David Bowie abt. 1987
Report This Post Go to the top of the page
 

<< Prev  1   Next >>

Locked
You are not permitted to post in this forum.

Latest Forum Posts
Latest Topic TitleRepliesViewsAuthorLast Post
where are the box sets?8290ayresby ayres
2025-05-05 17:06:51
Montreux 2002 HDTV video2125Ballhausby Moony
2025-05-04 19:50:29
Images Vol. 220109homebrewby homebrew
2025-05-03 14:39:55
Images Vol. 212350homebrewby Moony
2025-04-30 20:53:01
40th Anniversary Picture Disc Collection - Mixcloud Playlist123973libertine90by professormouse
2025-04-30 09:17:54
Ready Set Go source?10725Besomdaveby professormouse
2025-04-30 09:15:15
Health Issues281038Steveboyby StarmanPhilly
2025-04-30 02:22:27
part 2 radio 2 celebrates0199Diedrichby Diedrich
2025-04-29 19:41:54
Exploring Bowie (1969-1986)71246Rael076by professormouse
2025-04-22 04:16:24
The Collector vinyl3516Rael076by Rael076
2025-04-21 02:02:36
Images Vol. 200521homebrewby homebrew
2025-04-19 14:47:52
Hello!71433daydreamby neilwilkes
2025-04-18 13:40:24
Halloween Jack Is A Real Cool Cat CD/DVD14723gousterby themole
2025-04-17 05:52:28


Online Users

Newest Members
Modified by JanErik |- Page Generated In 0.051106 secs.
-|- RSS Feed -|- Feed Info
Theme Base By: Nikkbu | Modified by: paperdragon | Graphics by: MossGarden
Email: bowiestation(AT)bowiestation.com