There's been a lot of focus on David Bowie in the last week when he turned 60 years old. I watched a whole feature evening on one of our TV channels the other day, including a conversation with three hardcore Bowie fans. They had become fans at different times, but they all pretty much agreed Bowie had lost it as early as the very early Eighties when "Let's Dance" came out. One of the things missing, one of them said, was "passion" and "urgency". Bowie no longer seemed like someone who made music because he had to, but only because that's what he did.

The conversation was followed up by a 30-minute live recording from 2002, and after watching that I could only agree with them: even the old classic songs were delivered with very little soul and urgency. To be fair, this looked like a very staged performance, made more for the TV cameras than the live audience, much like Bruce's 1992 Plugged, which is also, to these eyes, strangely liveless and sterile. So maybe that was just it. Maybe Bowie's real live concerts are killer. I can't tell since I've never been to one.

Whatever the case, I found many similarities between how many Springsteen fans perceive today's Bruce and how Bowie fans perceive today's Bowie... Only the Bowie fans were even harsher in their criticism. To many fans, Bruce hasn't been truly great since the first half of the Eighties. Sure, he's had his moments and some songs here and there that lived up to past glory, but overall he's just a shadow of himself.

Naturally, this is up to each of us individually to decide. I'm pretty sure a new fan going to a show for the first time today, is just as blown away as someone who saw his or her first show in 1978. At least, my first show in 1988 (which old-time fans certainly don't regard as one of Bruce's vintage years in terms of live performance) blew me away to the extent that here I am today, almost 20 years later, running a website about Bruce and posting on a blog about Bruce and still centering parts of my life around Bruce.

When all that is said, of course there's no denying that Bruce is not as passionate and doesn't commit himself to music to the extent he did in the Seventies. To some, that lack of passion is audible in the music and Bruce's live presence, and that's too bad. I'm just saying, show me an artist who displays the same amount of passion and urgency today that they did 20-30 years ago and I'm ready to bet they have been dead for about the same amount of time. It's simply not possible. Had Bruce continued sacrificing his whole life to music like he did in his twenties, he would no longer be here, or he would have been a long-forgotten wreck.

Passionate or not, we should be pleased we still have legends like both Bowie and Springsteen among us who can remind us what real music legends are and who, for the most part, do what they can to stay true to themselves while still pleasing a few of us fans.

Show comments   Write comment