Monday, July 06, 2009

David Bowie, Brandon Flowers, Adam Lambert - Common Denominator?

I still get the occasional comment on a blog post from October 2008, relating to that enigmatic song "Human". A recent commenter suggested that I should look at one of The Killers' new songs: "Spaceman", with a view to writing a post about it. I started out with that aim, but as is so often the case, I took a few side-steps.



Brandon Flowers, The Killers' lead singer, co-wrote both "Human" and "Spaceman". I considered doing a post about Flowers, took a look at a few reported interviews, and at his natal chart, and side-stepped again.






I noticed Flowers' natal Moon is in Aquarius - the exact degree can't be established without a time of birth, but it will lie between 11 and 24 Aquarius. (See 12 noon chart, right). I also noted that Brandon mentions David Bowie as being one of his chief inspirations. I immediately recalled Bowie's "Space Oddity"(video below) and "Starman". Looked at Bowie's chart with data from Astrodatabank - and see that his ascendant is at 9 Aquarius.




Another upcoming singer, Adam Lambert, runner-up on this season's American Idol also frequently cites David Bowie as his inspiration. Adam is to sing a Bowie medley in his set on the Idol concert tour which started its run on Sunday in Portland, Oregon. I suspect that it's no coincidence that Adam's natal Sun is at 9 Aquarius - same degree as Bowie's ascendant! It'll be interesting to see whether Adam's first album, due for release in the Fall, will contain anything written or co-written by him relating to space or space travellers!


For a passing reader uninitiated in the zodiac signs and their meanings, Aquarius traditionally relates to all things futuristic such as space travel, new technology etc. To have one's natal Sun, Moon or ascendant in Aquarius practically gurantees an interest in these areas. The astrology in this case is even more interesting because the actual degree of Aquarius, in at least 2 cases out of the 3, is exactly the same, and two of these artists cite inspiration from the third.

For more posts on Adam Lambert scroll down to the Label Cloud in the sidebar to the right and click on his name, it appears on the first line.




The Killers "Spaceman" - on YouTube

9 comments:

Shawn Carson said...

Gotta love ziggy stardust and the spiders from mars!. Planet earth is blue and there's nothing i can do,
But fortunately, my spaceship knows which way to go.

Twilight said...

Shawn ~~~ I like a bit of Major Tom and his tin can, not over keen on much other Bowie stuff though.
I much preferred Marc Bolan from all the old Glam artists of the past in the UK.

Rossa said...

Sorry, Twilight, I'm with Shawn on this one...definitely Bowie for me. Never got into T-Rex, thought it was too girly for me at the time. Though can't say I don't like Glam Rock when I loved Freddie Mercury and Queen...soooo contradictory, I know.

Off topic, I did the Belief-O-Matic test on beliefnet and I'm a Neo Pagan. Though I too don't like to be labelled, an Aquarian trait we share, perhaps?

Secular Humanism was 12th on my list and surprisingly Scientology came out 7th. Never thought of myself as an alien lizard disguised as a human before....lol Must be all those Sci-Fi books I read as a teenager!!

anthonynorth said...

When I first saw the Killers, I thought, this isn't a rock band, it's a show. It was all just too perfect - not the anarchy of rock. Then a while later, I saw Flowers interviewed. Clean boys like that shouldn't do rock :-)
Now, Bowie is much closer to a Rock God. A massive influence, belittled only by The Beatles, And I remember seeing him live in his Ziggy days - the best and most magical performance I've ever seen.

I don't believe it!! Word verification:

merock :-)

Twilight said...

Rossa ~~~ LOL~ Don't be sorry - I don't need everyone agreeing with me. A bit of controversy keeps things interesting. :-)

Yes, I think avoiding labels is an Aquarian trait. Yet Aquarius is supposed to enjoy belonging to groups - a bit of an anomaly. I don't join groups, never have. :-)

Twilight said...

AN ~~~ I'm outvoted on the Bowie front then. Maybe I'm just a Philistine (again).

"Rock" is a very wide church isn't it? Much of what is so categorised these days doesn't sound a bit like tho old version of rock. I wouldn't say Bowie is very rock either. Led Zeppelin is rock in my book - it has to be noisy, tineless, shouty....can you tell I'm not a fan? LOL!

I rather like The Killers, or what I've heard and seen of them. It's not rock though. It's just pop.

I can't yet see how Adam Lambert will be categorised - he'd like to be a rocker, and he's capable of it, but I think his true talent lies elsewhere.

Twilight said...

Should say tuneless

anthonynorth said...

You've got it right with rock being a wide church. For instance, Led Zep - more rock gods, sorry :-) - were hard rock. Marc Bolan was traditionally a folk singer but went into glam rock after Bowie paved the way.
Traditionally, the defining point that brings all areas of rock together is the use of electric guitar (and later organ) in a small band with bass and drums backing (sax and harmonica later filtered into jazz rock) using only a basic riff through which constant improvisation could be done during gigs. In other words, rock is really any form of electric music done by a small band involving only basic rules to allow a kind of organised anarchy in music.
At least, that's how I've always seen it as being. And when I played lead in a rock group I lived that view to the full :-)

Twilight said...

Organised anarchy eh? I just wish it was easier on the ears!

Thanks for that mini 'Rock 101', I am now a little more enlightened.
;-)