Echelon wrote:everyone is totally allowed to use whatever they like as an influence to further their art and put a unique stamp on it. I'm an artist myself and I am pretty open about the ideas I poach from other, more established artists and synthesize into my own thing.
But yes, I fully get your argument about BOC and not releasing music and others filling the void. We should not hate this, because BOC means just as much to the art creators as they do fans.
If music has the right to children, it's fair to assume that BOC was the "child" at one point too.
They also absorbed from other artists, who in turn laid their brick on the wall ( representing the sum total of all musical expression / experience ) before them, and they cherry-picked techniques and timbres from everyone who influenced them.
All musicians do it. No man is an island.
Without a Little Richard, we may not have had an Elvis Presley
Without the Beatles , we may not have had a David Bowie
Without a Kate Bush, We may not have had a Goldfrapp
etc........etc........
But, when it comes to BOC, people put them on a pedestal, and consider them untouchable. Some of their tracks are complete genius ( Roygbiv ), but some are terrible ( opening the mouth ), and other artists that would be considered derivative, have made some better tracks than BOC have. Clocolan would be a good example.
Personally speaking, Cult48 is inspired by the best of BOC, but is also the sum total of every other audio / visual experience that was absorbed, filtered, and translated along the way as well
BOC has the right to musical offspring too.