David Bowie vs Neil Young

[Beno]

Ok, so it looks like The Beatles and Bob Dylan are numbers 1 and 2 in BCB's affections with Bowie in third place. One other artist though rivalled Bowie in terms of multiple entries in the BCB 100 poll. On the face of it Neil Young is like a lesser Dylan in that it is his homespun style against Bowie's glamour. There's something of the cult outsider about Neil Young though that makes me think that some people who vote for Bowie against Dylan may be tempted to change their vote on this one. Others though, like myself, who voted for Dylan based on the body of his work will think that Neil Young hasn't got quite enough against Bowie's stylistic variety.

Apologies for the copycat thread but I've been wondering for a while which way BCB will go on this one.

[doctorlouie]

It's close. Both have written great songs and have had clunky segments in their careers. Both managed a pretty damn perfect run of LP's in the 70s. Both have chopped and changed backing bands. Both have gone their own way for good or ill.

And then Neil puts on the guitar...

[Carlisle Wheeling]

Close here, maybe. David Bowie doesn't make my Top 50.

[Bungo the Mungo]

Bowie just edges this for me.

I'm very tired and will definitely come back to this one later. An interesting match that hopefully won't attract as much deluded fanboy nonsense as some of these other vs. polls have lately.

[brassneck..]

I have a lot of time for the Thin White Duke, and, indeed i will sometimes claim Hunky Dory and Ziggy are 2 of my all time favourite albums.

However, Neil's 70s run of albums has a far greater emotional impact on me, and he made at least one great album (Ragged Glory) and two very good albums (Harvest Moon, Sleeps With Angels) since 1980.

It's Neil by a country mile for me.

[Corporate whore]

Young for me, but then I have never been a huge Bowie fan.

[Goat Boy]

This is basically Sophies Choice for me. I love both dearly and each are Godheads imo. I'm gonna have to retire for a while and think about this one. My gut reaction would be Bowie but then I think 'what about On The Beach, Tonights The Night, Everybody Knows'...etc

[ChrisB]

Both great yet very diverse acts. Far more variety and imagination with Bowie ....... you never know what you're going to get. Neil is either electric or acoustic, save for the misjudged albums in the early 80's. However, I think Young and Bowie are a little like the tortoise and the hare. Bowie sets off like a house on fire, but by the mid 80's he's run out of steam. Neil plods along with varying degrees of succes. However, when both have new releases imminent, Neil is always top of the list to buy first. Will Bowie ever get a second wind of creativity? I honestly don't know, but Neil will always be Neil. He's more genuine and honest in his music where David is a diletante. However, I own 19 Neil albums and 13 Bowie, and that's more than by any other artist, and the world would be a poorer place without either. So, the chicken out answer, on career balance, a draw.

[Matt Wilson]

They were both THE most consistent album artists of the '70s. What edges it for Young is that he was great both before and after Bowie. David Bowie doesn't matter after the early '80s, Neil (periodically) has.

[Insouciant Western People]

Gentlemen please, this is so one-sided it's ridiculous. David Bowie is the coolest rock star ever to have lived, whilst Neil Young sings like a girl.

[Matt Wilson]

Gentlemen please, this is so one-sided it's ridiculous. David Bowie is the coolest rock star ever to have lived, whilst Neil Young sings like a girl.

Yep, as opposed to actually looking/dressing like one.

[Insouciant Western People]

Neil will always be Neil. He's more genuine and honest in his music where David is a diletante.

Whoa there. Why should sticking to essentially two types of music over a 40 year career be intrinsically more honest than trying your hand at a lot of different styles ? Was Louis Armstrong a more genuine and honest musician than Miles Davis ?

[The Modernist]

Neil will always be Neil. He's more genuine and honest in his music where David is a diletante.

Whoa there. Why should sticking to essentially two types of music over a 40 year career be intrinsically more honest than trying your hand at a lot of different styles ? Was Louis Armstrong a more genuine and honest musician than Miles Davis ?

Yes exactly. no doubt Slightbreeze thinks Picasso inauthentic because he went on to Cubism rather than just stick in his blue period.
It always amuses me how Bowie is distrusted for being imaginative and innovative. Neil Young has basically written variants of two songs for his entire career.

[Insouciant Western People]

It always amuses me how Bowie is distrusted for being imaginative and innovative.

Brian Eno once said something along the lines that it's only in Britain that 'dilettantism' (for want of a better word) is frowned upon. I like Bowie's readiness to experiment, and his unflagging interest in new musics.

[Matt Wilson]

Gentlemen please, this is so one-sided it's ridiculous. David Bowie is the coolest rock star ever to have lived, whilst Neil Young sings like a girl.

Yep, as opposed to actually looking/dressing like one.

That's a bad, BAD thing I suppose, in your eyes.

I guess you made that assumption because I prefer the non-dress wearing Dylan to the dress-wearing Bowie?

Is your world always so black and white?

[Davey the Fat Boy]

Bowie just edges this for me.

I'm very tired and will definitely come back to this one later. An interesting match that hopefully won't attract as much deluded fanboy nonsense as some of these other vs. polls have lately.

"deluded fanboy nonsense" = Coan disagrees.

FWIW - I voted Bowie by a small margin.

[Davey the Fat Boy]

That's a bad, BAD thing I suppose, in your eyes.

I guess you made that assumption because I prefer the non-dress wearing Dylan to the dress-wearing Bowie?

Is your world always so black and white?

Can you fucking focuss for a while ? What's it got to do with anything that Bowie wore dresses ? I clearly remember
Dyl wearing make up. So fucking what. Does it really discount anuthing they did musically ?

I don't know Matt, you seem a living proof of any prejudice people have against americans.


Ride 'em in !

Well it should be noted that "sings like a girl" was a stupid critique to begin with. Why would you expect the conversation to get smarter from there?

[Insouciant Western People]

Well it should be noted that "sings like a girl" was a stupid critique to begin with.

I did mean it lightheartedly, but never mind. For me though, there's something inherently ridiculous about the dichotomy between Neil's grizzled man o' the woods image and his fey falsetto voice. Ferchrissakes, he makes the Bee Gees sound like Leonard Cohen.

[Matt Wilson]

That's a bad, BAD thing I suppose, in your eyes.

I guess you made that assumption because I prefer the non-dress wearing Dylan to the dress-wearing Bowie?

Is your world always so black and white?

Can you fucking focuss for a while ? What's it got to do with anything that Bowie wore dresses ? I clearly remember
Dyl wearing make up. So fucking what. Does it really discount anuthing they did musically ?

I don't know Matt, you seem a living proof of any prejudice people have against americans.


Ride 'em in !

Jimmy Jizz, you are one stupid asshole. It's not my problem you assume everything because you know nothing. Never did I say there was anything wrong with anyone wearing dresses. You assumed that was my point just like you assume everything else negative you feel about Americans. When someone says so and so sings like a girl (the implication being that it's a bad thing) and I counter with "as opposed to wearing a dress" or whatever I said--I'm making a point: One shouldn't necessarily be worse than the other. You didn't get this because you're a thick cunt. Even when I pointed out to you in my last post that... I dunno, maybe you're on the wrong track here with your assumptions you still persist with your mindless stereotyping: Wilson is an American who likes Dylan over Bowie so therefore he must be homophobic or whatever else passes for logic in Dutch-land.

You honestly have no clue what I'm talking about, do you?

Just fuck off and I'll do the same and we can (to quote your boy, Dylan) "forget that we ever have met."

[Matt Wilson]

Jimmy Jizz, you are one stupid asshole. It's not my problem you assume everything because you know nothing. Never did I say there was anything wrong with anyone wearing dresses. You assumed that was my point just like you assume everything else negative you feel about Americans. When someone says so and so sings like a girl (the implication being that it's a bad thing) and I counter with "as opposed to wearing a dress" or whatever I said--I'm making a point: One shouldn't necessarily be worse than the other. You didn't get this because you're a thick cunt. Even when I pointed out to you in my last post that... I dunno, maybe you're on the wrong track here with your assumptions you still persist with your mindless stereotyping: Wilson is an American who likes Bowie over Dylan so therefore he must be homophobic or whatever else passes for logic in Dutch-land.

You honestly have no clue what I'm talking about, do you?

Just fuck off and I'll do the same and we can (to quote your boy, Dylan) "forget that we ever have met."

I liove it when you get all subtle. Anyway it can't be expected.

I wonder if you have a clue about exactly what you're writing ?

It doesn't matter. I have a lot of time for the simple minded for theirs is the......

I changed my typo, Jizz boy.
Way to ignore my point about your cluelessness by trying to point to an error as being representative of stereotypical thinking.

You had no typos so what's your excuse then?