Pop is MacPhisto's swan song before his soul is claimed

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Utoo

Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
8,343
Location
Lovetown
He started off as a young musician, dreaming of becoming a rock star. He and his band slowly garnered success with their fiery, youthful anthems. He became earnest, the tone of his lyrics becoming as serious as the benefit "-Aid" concerts in which he performed. He worked in Africa. He was photographed only in black-and-white. His hair grew long, his clothes shabby, and he yearned to save the world---but the world fired back. Backlash. "You're only a rockstar," they said. "You can't save the world. Just play your music." The pressure mounted, and he and his band nearly broke up.

Until one day, the young singer made a brash decision. "You want a rockstar? I'll give you a fucking rockstar!" The young singer went to a phone booth, dialed a number written in ash, and when the voice answered his call, he made the transaction----he sold his soul to the Devil.

What ensued was sheer brilliance! Irony. Ecstasy. Leather. Mother-suckin' rock'n'roll. His lyrics became pointed. Darker, yet still with the longing for love and life that shone through his earlier works. His band's performances glorified the simple, gave depth to the superficial. And it was a glorious trip! Supermodels, airplanes, all-night parties with booze and clubs, waking up in an apartment in Tokyo unsure of what happened and not really caring. The persona was becoming the man---the date at which the Devil would come to claim the promised soul was fast approaching.....

Enter "Pop." This spent soul, this MacPhisto, delivered the embodiment of his full reincarnation. The album that came forth was his darkest yet. Heavy. Twisted, almost. The earliest of fans turned away, unable to recognize their old hero in it at all. In its glorification of the superficial, it was superficial. At least it was written off as such.

But was it? Through the suffocating technological, soul-less sounds, the final slivers of MacPhisto's expiring soul peek through. The transformation is so close, yet not quite complete. In its final moments, the soul laments the brash decision made years before, looking for its face from before the world was made. Meekly begging: "Mother, am I still your son?" Crying out for help: "Send your angels!" "Wake up, you fucking dead man! Save me!" This is it; this is the end. A burnt-up, spent-out soul lamenting its sins and pitifully offering up its last dregs of hope.

This is the utter beauty of "Pop."



And this is what makes ATYCLB the most perfect successor.

The soul is saved.
 
Complete stream-of-consciousness, forgive me.

As someone who disregarded Pop for years after its release but finally came to appreciate it, I'm amazed that I can continue to love it in new ways.

But unlike most fans of Pop, I think that the transition from Pop to ATYCLB is as brilliant as the move from JT/R&H to Achtung. :yes:
 
It's a great post! Except I don't really like to think of MacPhisto as singing it, and
even though I don't think the band thought of it this way either, you're right, there's a great thematic connection between Pop and ATYCLB. I haven't really thought of it this way before, but Wake Up Dead Man -> Beautiful Day is perfect.
 
You're right---I don't really think of MacPhisto as singing the songs on Pop. In a way, the "MacPhisto" that I'm thinking of is perhaps less the actual character itself, and more of a caricature of the image, station, and goals of the band & Bono in particular at the time.
 
Nice write-up, Utoo.

I do think the two albums complement each other perfectly. At least in theory. The transition between WUDM and Beautiful Day is fantastic. Not so sure about the rest of the album, though. ATYCLB was a great idea - U2 does to a real 'pop' album - but its execution left a lot to be desired. This is why I can only value it to an extent. Poor, poor tracklisting choices (both sequencing and actual song choice). It lacks a coherent theme or emotional arc.
 
Ah, great post, and a topic that has fascinated me for a long long time. This is actually a question I would love ask Bono if I met him in person... because IMO, it sounds like he made it through a very significant, personal spiritual crisis between 1997 and 2000. Going from Mofo/Gone/WUDM to BD/Walk On/Grace suggests to me perhaps even a very personal spiritual salvation he may have experienced.

But yes, I agree... amazing transition.
 
As a quick addendum... I feel that there is a very real degree of self-acceptance that had to take place... whereupon he accepted himself as Bono the rock star rather than needing to be anyone or anything else...
 
But unlike most fans of Pop, I think that the transition from Pop to ATYCLB is as brilliant as the move from JT/R&H to Achtung. :yes:

Honestly, I never even listened to POP and ATYCLB back to back until a few weeks ago, and IMO the transition from Wake Up Dead Man to Beautiful Day is shear poetry. I got chills when I heard it.
 
He started off as a young musician, dreaming of becoming a rock star. He and his band slowly garnered success with their fiery, youthful anthems. He became earnest, the tone of his lyrics becoming as serious as the benefit "-Aid" concerts in which he performed. He worked in Africa. He was photographed only in black-and-white. His hair grew long, his clothes shabby, and he yearned to save the world---but the world fired back. Backlash. "You're only a rockstar," they said. "You can't save the world. Just play your music." The pressure mounted, and he and his band nearly broke up.

Until one day, the young singer made a brash decision. "You want a rockstar? I'll give you a fucking rockstar!" The young singer went to a phone booth, dialed a number written in ash, and when the voice answered his call, he made the transaction----he sold his soul to the Devil.

What ensued was sheer brilliance! Irony. Ecstasy. Leather. Mother-suckin' rock'n'roll. His lyrics became pointed. Darker, yet still with the longing for love and life that shone through his earlier works. His band's performances glorified the simple, gave depth to the superficial. And it was a glorious trip! Supermodels, airplanes, all-night parties with booze and clubs, waking up in an apartment in Tokyo unsure of what happened and not really caring. The persona was becoming the man---the date at which the Devil would come to claim the promised soul was fast approaching.....

Enter "Pop." This spent soul, this MacPhisto, delivered the embodiment of his full reincarnation. The album that came forth was his darkest yet. Heavy. Twisted, almost. The earliest of fans turned away, unable to recognize their old hero in it at all. In its glorification of the superficial, it was superficial. At least it was written off as such.

But was it? Through the suffocating technological, soul-less sounds, the final slivers of MacPhisto's expiring soul peek through. The transformation is so close, yet not quite complete. In its final moments, the soul laments the brash decision made years before, looking for its face from before the world was made. Meekly begging: "Mother, am I still your son?" Crying out for help: "Send your angels!" "Wake up, you fucking dead man! Save me!" This is it; this is the end. A burnt-up, spent-out soul lamenting its sins and pitifully offering up its last dregs of hope.

This is the utter beauty of "Pop."



And this is what makes ATYCLB the most perfect successor.

The soul is saved.

A very interesting and well-written post but from a purely musical perspective, should we celebrate the saving of Macphisto's soul, when in hindsight we know it led to songs like Yahweh? A poster on another thread made the excellent point that U2's more recent work lacks tension be it sexual or otherwise. Electrical Storm aside, I think this is right. More is the pity, perhaps...
 
A poster on another thread made the excellent point that U2's more recent work lacks tension be it sexual or otherwise. Electrical Storm aside, I think this is right.

I think you are quoting me! :lol: I've made this point numerous times in the past, and just made a similar post in the SOA thread a few days ago. JT through Pop was absolutely the sexiest period for U2 (with he peak being JT-AB), and no coincidentally the best in many people's minds. By Pop, however, the whole thing was getting burnt out. Hell, Pop actually gives me a feeling of being burnt out and scorched. ATYCLB was a necessary reprieve, a breather, rejuvenation. What's disappointing to me is the trend---that there's been no indication of any return to tension, sex or longing---all of the things that make their greatest music great. You're right---Electrical Storm aside...a beauty hat is essentially a 2000 version of Achtung.
 
I think your post is a neat way of putting it, while I don't think MacPhisto was really speaking through it at all. But I wholeheartedly agree with all the remarks that Pop's somewhat darker, "burnt out" feel paved the way perfectly for the optimism shown on ATYCLB (Beautiful Day, Walk On, etc.).
 
I feel that there is a very real degree of self-acceptance that had to take place... whereupon he accepted himself as Bono the rock star rather than needing to be anyone or anything else...

Or, maybe they just needed some snappier pop hits to fill the coffers?

(Just kidding -- I actually love ATYCLB.)
 
A very interesting and well-written post but from a purely musical perspective, should we celebrate the saving of Macphisto's soul, when in hindsight we know it led to songs like Yahweh? A poster on another thread made the excellent point that U2's more recent work lacks tension be it sexual or otherwise. Electrical Storm aside, I think this is right. More is the pity, perhaps...

mmm. i love a reasonable amount of their 00s output (atty club some days is my third favourite album behind guess which two) but listening to the albums doesn't feel quite as amazing as listening to Achtung, nel mio opinione.
 
I'd rate ATYCLB about as high as Pop.

Great post! I've never listened to the albums back to back but I'm surely gonna try it now. The difference between Pop U2 and ATYCLB U2 is really unbelievable. With Pop they were pushing there limits and with ATYCLB they went back to basics and tried to make the perfect pop (irony) record, although that was also something new for U2.
 
Nice write-up, Utoo.

I do think the two albums complement each other perfectly. At least in theory. The transition between WUDM and Beautiful Day is fantastic. Not so sure about the rest of the album, though. ATYCLB was a great idea - U2 does to a real 'pop' album - but its execution left a lot to be desired. This is why I can only value it to an extent. Poor, poor tracklisting choices (both sequencing and actual song choice). It lacks a coherent theme or emotional arc.

But I would argue this is true for "Pop" as well.

The album starts off with three techno-rock songs, two of which have rather fluff lyrics. Suddenly, we are tossed into two very traditional U2 songs, one with a Beatles-esque Harrison like guitars. And more sadly, gone is that techno sound that intrigued us at the album's start. In a way, part of "Pop" is already on ATYCLB as more and more songs on the album sound like "traditional" U2.

"Pop" goes back and forth, between brilliance and the mundane, discussing angels, cities and Playboy Mansions, while simultaneously asking for peace and challenging God. We have screams inexplicably ruining great moments. We have unusual guitars ruining great themes.

For example, I love the concept of "Wake Up", but I find the song itself horrid and never listen to it. Similarly, I think the Jools Holland version of "Velvet Dress" is infinitely better than the version on "Pop". Holland created a sexy, seductive song - even if it is a bit Vegas. The "Pop" version has all the romance of concrete.

If "Pop" is MacPhisto - and I would argue that it is not as I've always felt that character's last hoorah was "Hold Me...KILL Me" (emphasis on "kill" intentional -then it's clear he was experiencing some senility at this point.

What makes ATYCLB a better album is, ironically, the fact that it does not try to be an album. ATYCLB's greatest weakness may also be a strength: the fact that it is a great collection of songs, but they may not blend as well together (this is even more true on HTDAAB). Still, there is a power behind the hope and yearning on ATYCLB that is absent on "Pop".

But then, this may be what makes "Pop" powerful - the questioning, the challenging. If we push the idea that "Pop" is MacPhisto nearing "death", then it makes sense that he is disoriented, bitter and questioning, even challenging. ATYCLB is the hope and redemption he was seeking.

In other words, while I do see the point stressed in this thread - even if it wasn't as intentional or obvious as pointed out here - I also feel that "Pop" deserves some of the criticism it receives.
 
Interesting take on Pop. I could definitely see Macphisto/The Fly reappearing in something like Velvet dress or Do you feel loved, but there's a different, more morally burned out character on Pop.

I also think the goofyness on ATYCLB video (stealing apples, running around, throwing money...) is kind of a 2000-ish lightened up The Fly.
 
I think you are quoting me! :lol: I've made this point numerous times in the past, and just made a similar post in the SOA thread a few days ago. JT through Pop was absolutely the sexiest period for U2 (with he peak being JT-AB), and no coincidentally the best in many people's minds. By Pop, however, the whole thing was getting burnt out. Hell, Pop actually gives me a feeling of being burnt out and scorched. ATYCLB was a necessary reprieve, a breather, rejuvenation. What's disappointing to me is the trend---that there's been no indication of any return to tension, sex or longing---all of the things that make their greatest music great. You're right---Electrical Storm aside...a beauty hat is essentially a 2000 version of Achtung.

:up: Yes, I think your thesis is very persuasive.
 
But I would argue this is true for "Pop" as well.

The album starts off with three techno-rock songs, two of which have rather fluff lyrics. Suddenly, we are tossed into two very traditional U2 songs, one with a Beatles-esque Harrison like guitars. And more sadly, gone is that techno sound that intrigued us at the album's start. In a way, part of "Pop" is already on ATYCLB as more and more songs on the album sound like "traditional" U2.

"Pop" goes back and forth, between brilliance and the mundane, discussing angels, cities and Playboy Mansions, while simultaneously asking for peace and challenging God. We have screams inexplicably ruining great moments. We have unusual guitars ruining great themes.

For example, I love the concept of "Wake Up", but I find the song itself horrid and never listen to it. Similarly, I think the Jools Holland version of "Velvet Dress" is infinitely better than the version on "Pop". Holland created a sexy, seductive song - even if it is a bit Vegas. The "Pop" version has all the romance of concrete.

If "Pop" is MacPhisto - and I would argue that it is not as I've always felt that character's last hoorah was "Hold Me...KILL Me" (emphasis on "kill" intentional -then it's clear he was experiencing some senility at this point.

If we push the idea that "Pop" is MacPhisto nearing "death", then it makes sense that he is disoriented, bitter and questioning, even challenging. ATYCLB is the hope and redemption he was seeking.

In other words, while I do see the point stressed in this thread - even if it wasn't as intentional or obvious as pointed out here - I also feel that "Pop" deserves some of the criticism it receives.

An interesting post but I don't agree with it all. Firstly Pop only prefigures ATYCLB if you read history backwards and as an undergraduate historian, I am instantly suspicious of that approach. IGWSHA may have traditional-sounding guitar work but it also has a trip-hop feel. Maybe you have more of a case with SATS. Furthermore, I don't agree with your take on Velvet Dress. The Pop version shimmers with haunting ambiguity; the Holland version expunges it, horribly, just like the remixed versions of other Pop songs on the Best Of collection.

I agree with your characterisation of Pop and ATYCLB, however. That makes absolute sense to me.
 
An interesting take. I would argue however that Pop if anything is the prequel not the sequel. Pop has the feeling of a life descending into frustration and hopelessness. I feel that if you look at the album as a loose narrative there are similarities to Pink Floyd's The Wall. If God Would Send His Angels and Wake Up Dead Man are quite close to the running line of 'is there anybody out there?' For The Fly/MacPhisto "the wall" is the shades, the leather, the platform shoes, etc. They are born when the character is left to become the very thing that torments them. Pop could be seen as an insight into what tormented them be it the materialism (Miami, Playboy Mansion) or the cruelty of the world (Angels, Please).


As for the transition between Pop and ATYCLB, I always found it to be jarring. Pop is the band's darkest album while ATYCLB is the most light-hearted minus a few songs. Wake Up Dead Man is one of the band's darkest songs while Beautiful Day is joyful. It is a bizarre combo.
 
agree with monsieur fly on Velvet Dress. everyone loves the Jools version and whilst it's interesting, i think studio version is infinitely better, and much 'sexier'.
 
agree with monsieur fly on Velvet Dress. everyone loves the Jools version and whilst it's interesting, i think studio version is infinitely better, and much 'sexier'.

Totally agree with this too. And the album version absolutely belongs on POP. The JH version seems just a sorta neat little experiment.
 
going back to the original point, i sincerely doubt that PoP has anything to do with MacPhisto. MP was a ZooTV character, Pop was four years after that tour, and in between Bono grew this weird facial hair and did the Passengers project. the idea that it's MacPhisto's swan song is nice, but it's just that, a fan's subjective idea.
 
The devil comes in many forms.

The naive egocentric.
Bono-Fly_shades_Profile.jpg


The washout narcissist.
Macphisto_.jpg


The fraud.

bonolive.jpg




The devil cannot be saved. He is still among us, yearning to reappear.
u2-rolling-stone-spain-09.jpg



Great thread by the way.
 
For example, I love the concept of "Wake Up", but I find the song itself horrid and never listen to it.

That's funny. I bought Pop for the first time over 8 years ago, and I think I make listened to Wake Up Dead Man maybe a total of 5 times. I never really gave it a listen afterwards... always skipped it on the album, my live bootlegs, the Elevation DVD, all of that.

But last fall, I started listening to Pop pretty heavily there for awhile (I think I even had a thread on here about it). And in the process, I listened to that song for the first time in years, and I was shocked at how strongly I took a liking to it. Something hit me that didn't stick with me after the first few listens I guess. Maybe it was the pessimistic lyrics, or Edge's simple yet effective guitar play during the chorus, whatever. It's actually one of my favorite songs off the album now, which I never really saw coming to be honest with you.
 
ATYCLB was a great idea - U2 does to a real 'pop' album - but its execution left a lot to be desired. This is why I can only value it to an extent. Poor, poor tracklisting choices (both sequencing and actual song choice). It lacks a coherent theme or emotional arc.

Resumes perfectly what I think about ATYCLB and it justifies why I rank ATYCLB lower than HTDAAB and, of course, NLOTH.
 
:up: Great thread, one of the best I've seen in this section of the forum in a long time. I really, really hope I remember to come in here after work tonight because I have quite a bit to say about this topic. I just hope I can get it all sorted out in my head, so it makes a modicum of sense.:lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom