If Bowie never recorded and never released Berlin trilogy, would

Bowie was influential and famous before the Berlin trilogy.

>>74657813
Yeah but those albums solidified his legend status to a great extent

Only to the serious fans, and many critics dismissed them at the time.

>>74658051
I'm not even a big Bowie guy, but I came in here just to say fuck music critics. Now more than ever, they're the fucking cultural MS-13, but instead of giving you a Columbian necktie they subtweet you at some fuckwad who works for like, the fucking Quietus.

>>74657734
influential and famous, yeah - the Berlin trilogy wasn't canonized right away and the only real hit single that came out of it was heroes. maybe he wouldn't be as well-regarded critically but he'd already made his mark before that

Why wouldn't he be? Hunky Dory and Ziggy Stardust were both huge.

>>74657734
Berlin trilogy wasn't commercially successful at all.
He basically fell of the map after Golden Years up until Let's Dance in America
In Britain, Ashes to Ashes was a hit, but not much else, I think Fashion did ok.
Heroes wasn't even that big when it came out.
So yes, he would still be so influential and famous
The real question is, would he still be liked on /mu/? Or would he just be considered a dadrock pop fag?

>>74658261
he'd be contrarion-core like most dadrock and 70s pop

>>74657734
>would he be influential and famous?
yes
>would he be very influential and famous?
yes
>would he still be SO influential and famous
obviously not you fucking retard

>>74657734
he still had the glam albums so