Parallels between David Bowie and Neil Young

Darth Pazuzu

Banned
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Posts
3,521
Reaction score
1,461
"The Sixties are definitely not with us anymore…the change into the music of the Seventies is starting to come with people like David Bowie and Lou Reed…they don’t expect to live more than thirty years and they don’t care. And they don’t care. They’re in the Seventies. What I’m tryin’ to say is these people like Lou Reed and Davie Booie or Bowie, however you pronounce it, those folks—I think they got somethin’ there, heh heh. Take a walk on the wild side!"

--Neil Young, 1973.

David Bowie and Neil Young are two of my favorite musical artists. And there are many similarities between the two of them – more than most people might realize on the surface. Understandably, those fans who look upon their favorite rock or pop stars as some sort of representative avatar of some desired ideal – or just whatever they think is cool – may scoff at the comparison. And in many ways, they are opposites, at least in a superficial sense: American/British, grungy/glamorous, organic/synthetic, sincere/ironic, etc., etc.

But for me, both Young and Bowie represent a certain kind of artistic archetype: “He Who Will Not Be Pinned Down” (for lack of any better descriptive!). Both musicians started out in the mid-1960′s, and they both achieved their greatest early success (artistic and commercial) in 1972 (Harvest and The Rise And Fall Of Ziggy Stardust And The Spiders From Mars). They’ve both gone through a great deal of stylistic metamorphoses (and haircuts) over five decades, confounding those people who would prefer that they stayed in one place. (As such, Young and Bowie can perhaps be considered “sons” of Bob Dylan. And I suppose Van Morrison also deserves mention in this regard, although frankly I'm not as big a fan.) And while this has certainly proved an artistically rewarding path for both individuals, it’s also proved frustrating for many of their fellow musicians and collaborators. There have been many players who have hoped to have long-term professional relationships with both, but ended up left in the lurch when the artists’ mercurial streak rears its head and they go off in a completely different direction.

What I think both Bowie and Young share is the desire not to get sidetracked by the trappings of popular success, and a willingness to destroy their popular image in order to create something new. (The obvious examples of course are Bowie’s retiring of Ziggy Stardust after the Hammersmith Odeon performance in ’73, and Young’s “destroying” his laid-back, sensitive singer-songwriter persona from Harvest with the scorched-earth rage of the live Time Fades Away the same year.)

While Young perhaps possesses a certain “redneck” quality (particularly with regard to his country-music influence) which definitely sets him apart from people like Bowie and Bryan Ferry, neither performer can exactly be described as conventionally “butch” in terms of their singing styles, both voices possessing a strange, otherworldly, androgynous quality. (And speaking of Ferry, have you heard Roxy Music’s live cover version of Like A Hurricane?) And both Young’s and Bowie’s lyrical sensibilities cannot always be described as straightforward or literal, both men capable of an almost offhand surrealism and the occasional flair for the fantastic. (The sci-fi imagery of After The Gold Rush‘s title track is not a million miles removed from the end-times scenario conjured up on the Ziggy album.)

And while Bowie certainly has a deserved representation as one of the most theatrical of rock performers, Young himself has certainly given audiences his share of theatrical conceits over the years – for instance the Rust Never Sleeps tour from 1979, with its roadies (or “road-eyes”) dressed like the Jawas from Star Wars and its oversized props. (Young attempted to do a sequel to the Rust extravaganza in 1986 with Crazy Horse, the Rusted-Out Garage tour, and from what I’ve read described in books, it was kind of the Glass Spider to Rust‘s Diamond Dogs!). And even in a lot of Young’s acoustic performances early in his career, he made a deliberate point of fumbling about with his instruments (tuning the guitar, adjusting his harmonica rack) and chatting and joking with the audience, maintaining the audience’s interest with some contrived bit of “business” that wasn’t exactly “real”!

Also, try listening to After The Gold Rush and Hunky Dory back to back. You can definitely hear the influence of the former on the latter, particularly that of Till The Morning Comes on Kooks (that jaunty French horn in particular!). Add to that the fact that Bowie himself covered one of Young's songs, I've Been Waiting For You (from Young's self-titled 1968 solo debut) on 2002's Heathen.

Interestingly enough, the above quote from Young regarding the passing of the ’60s and the increased relevance of Bowie and Lou Reed in the ’70s comes from 1973, the year in which Neil cut his dark masterpiece Tonight’s The Night (although it wouldn’t actually be released for another two years). In fact, the track Lookout Joe (actually recorded during rehearsals for the Time Fades Away tour), with its imagery of drag queens, junkies and street wheelers, seems almost a salute to the underworld territory of Reed (or writers like Hubert Selby Jr. before him), as well as anticipating the frazzled, dystopian paranoia and sense of mutation in Bowie’s Diamond Dogs (the title track in particular). Neil Young certainly had a more informed sense of zeitgeist than most others in his peer group. Someone like David Crosby certainly had very little use for glam rock, and certainly none for the later punk rock movement. Tonight’s The Night is in fact a requiem for a dream (with apologies to Selby!) – in this case the utopian ’60s dream (“I’m not going back to Woodstock for a while!”), as well as a kind of Irish wake (in the words of Billy Talbot), a raucous elegy for fallen friends Danny Whitten and Bruce Berry (“standing on the sound of some open-hearted people going down”).
 

Darth Pazuzu

Banned
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Posts
3,521
Reaction score
1,461
Okaaaaaaayyy...now I'm annoyed. Why, oh why, is my thread completely stillborn right out of the gate? That's really no good for my ego, y'know... :uh:

Too many words, perhaps? :D
 

metalife

Senior Member
Joined
May 14, 2014
Posts
210
Reaction score
0
Location
Melbourne Australia
I've been a bit fan of both artist for a long time now, though I don't think I've ever used both names in the same sentence. Interesting that you would make this comparison. Gives me something to think about today. :)
 

Lynch

Here for the cookies and the tunes
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Posts
32,251
Reaction score
11,188
Location
The Land of Sky Blue Waters
Okaaaaaaayyy...now I'm annoyed. Why, oh why, is my thread completely stillborn right out of the gate?

2h5s8le.jpg

most likely a case of TL;DR



Please don't take that gif as anything more than just something I found funny and better than the typical "didn't read it" image out on the interwebs. For me, I didn't reply because I'm not really a fan of either artist.
 

kath

astronomy domino's™
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Posts
3,483
Reaction score
8
Location
bama via new orleans
well, i thought it was a killer post. it's true.

they are, essentially, both geniuses, trail blazers, new-lookers, changers of the scene and risk-takers, with a zillion imitators in their wake, both with phenomenal album runs, particularly in the 70s.

neil's much better live, of course. but bowie not only looks better in makeup and spandex; he plays better with others. bowie is more.. more.. malleable.

these things must be weighed. everything is a question of balance.

i think if i had to choose, neil would be closer to my heart. he's the one to first make me pick up a gweetar, after all.

good thing i don't hafta choose...
 

Darth Pazuzu

Banned
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Posts
3,521
Reaction score
1,461
Now that's more like it! Feedback, baby - how sweet it is... :D

Another thing that should be pointed out about both Young and Bowie is that, unlike many other artists in their peer group (late '60s/early '80s), they managed to have an enduring influence on the younger breed of punk, post-punk, and alternative acts - arguably all the way up to the present day.

This is perhaps a bit less surprising in the case of Bowie, since he always presented himself as the antithesis of the organic, naturalist hippie sensibility. But what's quite fascinating is that there's quite an overlap, in terms of artists and bands directly influenced by both Young and Bowie. For example, fans and disciples of both would include members of Nirvana, the Pixies, and Dinosaur Jr. Also, when John Lydon (a.k.a. Rotten) made an appearance on Britain's Tommy Vance radio show in 1977 to play his favorite records, among the songs he played were Bowie's Rebel Rebel and Young's Revolution Blues. (Not so surprising that he was a fan of the latter!) (BTW, other artists played by Lydon on that particular show included Captain Beefheart, Nico, Lou Reed, Peter Hammill, Peter Tosh, Can and John Cale. Lydon's tastes were certainly nothing if not eclectic.)

2h5s8le.jpg

most likely a case of TL;DR

Guess I had that coming. :gig:
 

Find member

Forum statistics

Threads
31,037
Posts
1,089,834
Members
6,494
Latest member
larryb

Members online

Top