Rolling Stone & U2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-26-2017, 05:51 PM   #1
Refugee
 
Hollow Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,054
Local Time: 03:48 AM
Rolling Stone & U2

Quote:
Rolling Stone declared U2’s eminently forgettable Songs of Innocence the best album of 2014. Hagan reveals that Wenner demanded the ranking personally. (“My dictate. By fiat, buddy. That’s that.”)
It's official: RS lies. Imagine working for a boss that declared that SOI had to be album of the year...

https://slate.com/arts/2017/10/the-j...-reviewed.html
__________________

__________________
Hollow Island is offline  
Old 10-26-2017, 06:50 PM   #2
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,521
Local Time: 01:48 AM
This is why you ALWAYS take music critics with the smallest grain of salt.

The majority have an agenda. They either; want to desperately be friends with the artist, want to humiliate the artist, failed as an artist themselves and are bitter, desperate for street cred, or have delusions of sleeping with the artist.

I’ve always found people who rely so heavily on critics to be sad. The majority are a joke.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-26-2017, 07:29 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
trevgreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 3,248
Local Time: 01:48 AM
In other news, the sky is blue...
__________________
trevgreg is offline  
Old 10-26-2017, 08:27 PM   #4
Refugee
 
Hollow Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,054
Local Time: 03:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
This is why you ALWAYS take music critics with the smallest grain of salt.

The majority have an agenda. They either; want to desperately be friends with the artist, want to humiliate the artist, failed as an artist themselves and are bitter, desperate for street cred, or have delusions of sleeping with the artist.

I’ve always found people who rely so heavily on critics to be sad. The majority are a joke.
I'm pretty cynical but this is too much even for me. I disagree with the critical consensus more often than not but most critics are honest in their opinions. Which isn't to say they aren't entrapped by trends and groupthink...they are people, after all.

Also, all artists are failures. They never achieve what they want to.
__________________
Hollow Island is offline  
Old 10-26-2017, 09:08 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
iron yuppie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,393
Local Time: 01:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
They either; want to desperately be friends with the artist, want to humiliate the artist, failed as an artist themselves and are bitter, desperate for street cred, or have delusions of sleeping with the artist.
For someone who hates generalizations, this is one hell of a generalization.
__________________
iron yuppie is offline  
Old 10-26-2017, 09:29 PM   #6
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 150,758
Local Time: 06:48 PM
I think BVS once got a bad review.
__________________
"Mediocrity is never so dangerous as when it is dressed up as sincerity." - Søren Kierkegaard

Ian McCulloch the U2 fan:
"Who buys U2 records anyway? It's just music for plumbers and bricklayers. Bono, what a slob. You'd think with all that climbing about he does, he'd look real fit and that. But he's real fat, y'know. Reminds me of a soddin' mountain goat."
"And as for Bono, he needs a colostomy bag for his mouth."

U2gigs: The most comprehensive U2 setlist database!
Gig pictures | Blog
Axver is online now  
Old 10-26-2017, 10:11 PM   #7
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,521
Local Time: 01:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollow Island View Post
I'm pretty cynical but this is too much even for me. I disagree with the critical consensus more often than not but most critics are honest in their opinions. Which isn't to say they aren't entrapped by trends and groupthink...they are people, after all.



Also, all artists are failures. They never achieve what they want to.


Cynical? Maybe... but I find your notion that most are honest to be a bit naive.

One of my best friends wrote for one of the biggest publications of the 90’s and early 2000’s, she would tell me about how many reviews were written based on one listen, partial listen, some artists removed certain tracks, how some came with letters describing what to focus on, how the reps would wine and dine them, how many weren’t even big music fans just wannabe writers, etc.

To pretend you’re getting some well informed opinion of a record from someone who knows music is naive at best.

Let’s take SOI as an example, how are you being honest about the music when a majority of the critiques focused on the release method?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-27-2017, 12:30 AM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rachel D.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Under a Pile of Words
Posts: 5,760
Local Time: 01:48 AM
RS has always sucked up to U2, while other publications/writers criticize them no matter what. That’s just how it goes.
__________________
Rachel D. is offline  
Old 10-27-2017, 12:46 AM   #9
Refugee
 
nbelcik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,446
Local Time: 11:48 PM
That review was Rolling Stone sucking off U2
__________________
nbelcik is online now  
Old 10-27-2017, 07:36 AM   #10
The Fly
 
jaimearodriguez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 183
Local Time: 02:48 AM
Just confirms what we suspected all along. Things like these are why many people can’t stand U2.
__________________
jaimearodriguez is offline  
Old 10-27-2017, 07:51 AM   #11
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,521
Local Time: 01:48 AM
Rolling Stone & U2

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaimearodriguez View Post
Just confirms what we suspected all along. Things like these are why many people can’t stand U2.


:facepalm: and what have we suspected exactly?

You think this is only a U2 thing?

Jaime
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-27-2017, 08:21 AM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Registered Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: NWT
Posts: 4,578
Local Time: 03:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaimearodriguez View Post
Just confirms what we suspected all along. Things like these are why many people can’t stand U2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
:facepalm: and what have we expected exactly?

You think this is only a U2 thing?

Jaime
jaime's right.. this kind of thing is a big reason why people dislike u2, these days.

Also there's nothing in his post that suggests he thinks U2 are the only ones to get this treatment. Your use of is patronizing. Wish people wouldn't post this kind of thing
__________________
Registered Dude is online now  
Old 10-27-2017, 08:30 AM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Nick66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: "I drank what?"-Socrates
Posts: 5,883
Local Time: 07:48 AM
Wait...did RS really name SOI album of the year?
__________________
Nick66 is offline  
Old 10-27-2017, 08:40 AM   #14
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,521
Local Time: 01:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Registered Dude View Post
jaime's right.. this kind of thing is a big reason why people dislike u2, these days.



Also there's nothing in his post that suggests he thinks U2 are the only ones to get this treatment. Your use of is patronizing. Wish people wouldn't post this kind of thing


What have we suspected all along?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-27-2017, 09:59 AM   #15
Acrobat
 
Montrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 431
Local Time: 02:48 AM
The amount of reviewers obviously sucking up to the band (or making a point that older artist can still rank in their lists regardless of 'relevance') is probably outweighed by the reviewers like Pitchfork who take it as a badge of honor to constantly knock particular artists regardless of the quality of their output. So many critics are ranking 'meta' stuff about music output, that it's generally hard to find one where the reviewer actually seemed to take the time to sit, listen, and absorb the music. I wouldn't say SOI was album of the year, but I liked it enough to think it should be mentioned, and definitely not as the article described: 'eminently forgettable'. Right there is the implication that an album's worth is more how 'interesting', relevant, and impactful an album is regardless of the musical contest. Or in some cases, it's a huge positive if an artist or album isn't too popular.
It's one of the reasons U2 fight so hard to get past those impediments. And the fact that they're obviously fighting to remain in the conversation is, for some critics, an element to use in a review.
__________________

__________________
Montrose is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com