3:20 Good call on the relationship between Gm and F. The melodic figuration on the F is sequential to the melodic figuration on the Gm. Basic cognitive chronology should cause normal listeners to hear the F event as elaborating the Gm event, not the other way around. Academic analysts should resist listening with their eyes and trying to confirm with their ears.
9:35 To me, this is the funny part. The Db implies pre-emptive nostalgia for prescribed loss of innocence when combined with "let the children lose it". It's a deadpan sarcasm of poignancy.
I was so focused on the notes and chords in this analysis that I wasn't thinking about the lyrics at all, but you're right, this is some definite word painting. "Deadpan sarcasm of poignancy" is a perfect summary of Bowie's entire vibe.
@@EthanHein Bowie's lyrics seem largely to be about nothing in particular, but they're always a refreshing break from the cookie-cutter "deepness" of most of his contemporaries. His lyrics are an invitation to think about what he's saying more than maybe he has. It's nonchalantly deconstructive of basic semiotic systems. What we hear is more important than what he's telling us, and he never apologizes for it, thank goodness.
12:35 I think this happens in other Bowie examples you might treat, and I think it explains a large part of Bowie's specific market appeal. A lot of 20th Centrury pop aesthetic boils down to simply forming a pattern and then breaking it. But Bowie does it better; interrupting ongoing entrainment with content of a previous pattern reframes the familiar as a kind of surprise. To some extent, this works even if one has heard the song before, because brute pattern recognition is prime to long-term memory. The way that Robert Greene explains what he calls "the uncanny" may somewhat explain why at least some listeners find this track, and similarly structured Bowie tracks, to be aurally seductive.
There's a lot of music that has a seductive surface, and a lot of music that has buried structure that is only understandable after many close listens. Bowie is that rare artist who manages to do both. You can hear these songs on the radio or in a bar and absent-mindedly groove along with them, or you can meticulously take them apart and enjoy all the rich layers of meaning. I really admire that about him.
@@EthanHein Yes. Bowie respects the superficial and doesn't try to use sophistication as a substitute for it. That's how he is able to get away with the sophistication when he does.
Excellent!
3:20 Good call on the relationship between Gm and F. The melodic figuration on the F is sequential to the melodic figuration on the Gm. Basic cognitive chronology should cause normal listeners to hear the F event as elaborating the Gm event, not the other way around. Academic analysts should resist listening with their eyes and trying to confirm with their ears.
9:35 To me, this is the funny part. The Db implies pre-emptive nostalgia for prescribed loss of innocence when combined with "let the children lose it". It's a deadpan sarcasm of poignancy.
I was so focused on the notes and chords in this analysis that I wasn't thinking about the lyrics at all, but you're right, this is some definite word painting. "Deadpan sarcasm of poignancy" is a perfect summary of Bowie's entire vibe.
@@EthanHein Bowie's lyrics seem largely to be about nothing in particular,
but they're always a refreshing break from the cookie-cutter "deepness" of most of his contemporaries.
His lyrics are an invitation to think about what he's saying more than maybe he has.
It's nonchalantly deconstructive of basic semiotic systems.
What we hear is more important than what he's telling us,
and he never apologizes for it, thank goodness.
12:35 I think this happens in other Bowie examples you might treat, and I think it explains a large part of Bowie's specific market appeal. A lot of 20th Centrury pop aesthetic boils down to simply forming a pattern and then breaking it. But Bowie does it better; interrupting ongoing entrainment with content of a previous pattern reframes the familiar as a kind of surprise. To some extent, this works even if one has heard the song before, because brute pattern recognition is prime to long-term memory. The way that Robert Greene explains what he calls "the uncanny" may somewhat explain why at least some listeners find this track, and similarly structured Bowie tracks, to be aurally seductive.
There's a lot of music that has a seductive surface, and a lot of music that has buried structure that is only understandable after many close listens. Bowie is that rare artist who manages to do both. You can hear these songs on the radio or in a bar and absent-mindedly groove along with them, or you can meticulously take them apart and enjoy all the rich layers of meaning. I really admire that about him.
@@EthanHein Yes. Bowie respects the superficial and doesn't try to use sophistication as a substitute for it.
That's how he is able to get away with the sophistication when he does.
Thanks man!
Great presentation of the data.