Monday, March 31, 2014

Why is there so much Iggy Pop in this Bowie book?

If Seabrook has established one thing about Bowie's life in the 70s, it's that Iggy Pop was a substantial part of it. He's written about Bowie's working to bring Pop's career back on track and already gave his 1976 album, The Idiot, the old song-by-song Seabrook treatment.

Now here comes Thomas Jerome again, because Iggy's put out a Lust for Life.

What's strange about Seabrook's writing about this album though is that he has a great deal less to say about it.

On one hand, based on the context that Seabrook builds for the album, his dearth of commentary could just be because there really isn't much to say about Lust for Life.

Having given it a listen as I read his track-by-track write up, I can say myself that there's not much to it. Maybe I've not listened to enough pop albums lately, but it definitely sounds like it's an eclectic mix of styles with very little direction.

On the other, I'm not convinced that, however trite, there's as little to say about something like Lust for Life as Seabrook claims. Any work of art is open for analysis of any depth. Though, if I'm reading the implication properly, I do agree with Seabrook in saying that Lust for Life as a whole isn't that artistic. Measured against The Idiot specifically and other albums in general.

My biggest problem with this part of Bowie in Berlin though is that it doesn't seem justified.

Within the context of a book about Bowie, I feel like Seabrook just doesn't give enough attention to what Bowie did on Lust for Life. Crediting him to vocals or instruments in the headings to his write ups is one thing, but it's definitely not enough to merit a whole section about the album.

The Idiot is much more clearly a collaborative effort.

At best, it seems that on Lust for Life Bowie was just plonking away (very artfully, of course) on this or that instrument. And plonking's just not deserving of the full write up that Seabrook attempts.

No comments:

Post a Comment