U2 Final Examination Question

[ZooMacPhisto800]

1. During the PopMart Tour (1997), Bono was known to say, in reference to PopMart, that they (U2) thought it better to "eat the monster, before the monster ate them". During the Vertigo Tour (2005), Bono was known to say, with respect to the War on Terror, that we "must not become a monster, in order to defeat a monster". Are these 2 seemingly contradictory stances conciliable? Explain (1 page max):

 

[lazarus]

On a literal level, "eating" the monster isn't necessarily the same as "becoming" a monster--note the definitive "the" as opposed to "a" as well, which draws the difference between assimilation and transformation.

Absorbing the idea of disposable pop in order to fuse it with their own thematic approach and aesthetic allows them to comment/critique on said culture; by not eating the monster and attempting to be sincere they run the risk of being ignored and considered passé. While Pop and Popmart may have been considered failures in some circles, they failed on terms that they dictated, perhaps veering too far away from the norm to be be taken seriously, which probably did less damage than potentially being failures at what they're expected to do best. For comparison's sake, imagine if the "back to basics" approach of ATYCLB had failed? Would that not have been more demoralizing than the failure of the public to understand/appreciate Pop and Popmart?

In the case of the lyric in Peace on Earth referenced on the Vertigo Tour, you're talking about using violence to defeat violence, which flies in the face of a belief in the passive resistance example of Gandhi and Martin Luther King. To do so would put in practice a hypocrisy not present in the artistic pursuits of the first quote.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

When you have no compass (or conversely, no map), there are no limits to our understanding. No reason to get back to the place we started out from. Hence Bono's contradictory-contradictions, simultaneously north & south of the river. There's no need to compare lemons here, some connections are not worth making.

For example, it's a bitter pill that I swallow here trying to map out what we've lost along the way, the spark that lit the flame. Where the streets have no name.

Let's not try to make idiots of each other and remember that the goddess Grace carries a perfect tune known as karma and makes beauty out of ugly things. Let's all start landslides in our egos and move forward. As Barack Nader would say, "It's time for change. Onward."

 

[ZooMacPhisto800]

The correct answer was:

The idea to "eat a monster, before the monster ate them" refers to a preemptive strike. The idea that one must not "become a monster, in order to defeat a monster" refers to the quality of that strike. It must be a "good" one (as opposed to a bad one).

 

[Ellay]

Two different monsters. QED

 

[gman]

one must not "become a monster, in order to defeat a monster" ...in thine eyes, is saying, dont become the bully in order to beat the bully.