2014 Bono needs to consult 1983 Bono about the new album.

[Salome]

This thread is so bad that it makes POP look good in comparison

 

[allbecauseofu2]

they would play 2 vertigos, and a epic 25 min version of one, with 20 mins of talking and build up including how u2 invented recycling .

 

[allbecauseofu2]

And a live check in with a guy working in a toll booth . And dedicated my blue room to him.

 

[allbecauseofu2]

*your

 

[doctorwho]

Be careful, you'll be in the "dissidents black list" after having posted this.
(Or... There'll be coming hundreds of "credible" explanations for Bono's perspectives' changes in 30 years).

But people's perspectives do change.

I actually thought U2 might disband after 360. I'm happy they have not, but I can also understand the need to not rush something in 3-4 months any more.

Is 5 years too long? Yes, but a few of those years are removed due to touring, Bono's surgery and recovery, and other demands of life. If you reduce it to 3 years, it still is too long, but I'm not sure what's in U2's head. I hear OL and Invisible and don't see huge changes from what they produced during ATYCLB. Therefore, I'm not really sure where U2 are going yet. Maybe it will be worthwhile, maybe not. Maybe this is truly the swan song. Right now, I will give them the benefit of the doubt - provided the album comes out this year.

 

[Aygo]

But people's perspectives do change.

I actually thought U2 might disband after 360. I'm happy they have not, but I can also understand the need to not rush something in 3-4 months any more.

Is 5 years too long? Yes, but a few of those years are removed due to touring, Bono's surgery and recovery, and other demands of life. If you reduce it to 3 years, it still is too long, but I'm not sure what's in U2's head. I hear OL and Invisible and don't see huge changes from what they produced during ATYCLB. Therefore, I'm not really sure where U2 are going yet. Maybe it will be worthwhile, maybe not. Maybe this is truly the swan song. Right now, I will give them the benefit of the doubt - provided the album comes out this year.

Disband? Really? What did lead you to think that? Well, they just had finished their most commercially successful tour.
My unconscious wants to give U2 that benefit of the doubt, but then my conscious comes in and reminds me of the past 15 years and I think that this really might be the "swan song", even if in my heart I'll always have some little faith.

 

[doctorwho]

Disband? Really? What did lead you to think that? Well, they just had finished their most commercially successful tour.
My unconscious wants to give U2 that benefit of the doubt, but then my conscious comes in and reminds me of the past 15 years and I think that this really might be the "swan song", even if in my heart I'll always have some little faith.

It was a combination of things that made me wonder if U2 would continue - or at least continue as they had been.

• REM disbanded.
• Bono's surgery and other family issues for all 4 members.
• Their age.
• The "poor" performance of NLOTH singles.
• The lower sales of NLOTH overall (compared to past albums).
• Ending on a high note of the 360 tour (what can really top that?).
• How many more directions they could really take their music.
• Bono's discussion about the "needing" another U2 album.
• Constant discussion about relevance.

If U2 didn't disband, I thought they might do more of what they are doing now - a charity single here, a soundtrack song there. So the fact that it appears we will have yet another album and tour is wonderful news. But at some point, it will end - and this album might indeed be it. And as this is a strong possibility, I do think U2 want to give it their absolute best. Can they still generate another hit song? Can they generate another hit album? Can they generate an album that fans and critics adore? Can they capture "lightning in a bottle" one more time?

They may be over-thinking as a result, but as I wrote, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[ozeeko]

Bono has said many contradicting things over the years...he's a human being and it happens. I don't expect him to be the same dude from 1983.

There is one thing he said in the past, however, that does kinda bug me. It was on the U2 Legends episode on VH1. Was aired during the time between POP and All That You Can't Leave Behind. About the question of packing it in, Bono said something like "it's not about sales or even relevance. It's just a question of blowing your own mind. And when you stop blowing your own mind it's time to quit" - That's paraphrasing, but the gist of what he said.

The reason that bugs me is because I feel that the "relevance" issue has completely taken over. It seems like it's the #1 priority for U2. And I don't think relevance is something you consciously aim for. They were relevant in the 1980's despite being different, not doing the obvious. Really, the only 2 classic albums (pre-ATYCLB) I feel that U2 tried for relevance was Achtung Baby and POP. But Achtung Baby worked BECAUSE it was such a 180...any compromise would've ruined it. They didn't force a Joshua Tree sounding tune on there just to appease the fanbase, they pretty much said "this is the new direction, either you're with us or you're not". And really, although Achtung Baby was clearly done with the conscious fear of not being relevant...it was executed in the best way possible, probably the only way possible, because it was uncompromising.

POP, on the other hand, had a sort of schitzo quality to it, kind of like NLOTH, where it isn't sure what it wants to be. A dance album? A rock album? Post-modern? Sincere? And even though I love POP, I also recognize that U2 is once again clearly trying to remain hip, except this time the results are less successful, because of too much compromising. It wants to be everything instead of choosing one vibe and riding it out. This is why Achtung Baby and Zooropa, for me, are stellar albums...because they're cohesive and uncompromising. The said can be said about any of their 80's albums, with the exception of maybe Rattle and Hum (which was obviously a conscious attempt to show their knowledge of American music, but we all know that anyway)

The thing is...U2 don't have many tricks up their sleeve, and bands tend to not have more than 1 second act. U2 have had like 2 or 3 it seems. They will always be relevant when it comes to music history. I don't think it's something they should strive for. If they get out of their own way, toss "relevance" aside and ride out an idea for an album, they may just land themselves something the world will consider "relevant." And when it happens, the world will be too into the music to stop and say "wow, this is so relevant." Achtung Baby was a miracle album...not many artists can pull off a stunt like that. U2 should just write and record and release and promote and see what happens, and stop talking relevance because it is rarely ever something you can consciously capture.

So, yea, 1998 Bono or whenever the Legends interview was filmed...that's the guy I wish he'd go back and talk to.

 

[SpiralStaircase]

Great post. U2 have nowt to prove to anyone outside of the four of them. They shouldn't be paying the slightest attention to what people think of them. Easier said than done, though. Can't imagine it's easy to sell tens of millions of records in the late 80s/early 90s and simply laugh off shifting "only" 5 million or less each time you do an album now, or having number one singles at one time and now not make the top 50. It has to have an effect no matter how you claim it's just about the music, maaaaaan

 

[drt4]

Bono has said many contradicting things over the years...he's a human being and it happens. I don't expect him to be the same dude from 1983.

There is one thing he said in the past, however, that does kinda bug me. It was on the U2 Legends episode on VH1. Was aired during the time between POP and All That You Can't Leave Behind. About the question of packing it in, Bono said something like "it's not about sales or even relevance. It's just a question of blowing your own mind. And when you stop blowing your own mind it's time to quit" - That's paraphrasing, but the gist of what he said.

The reason that bugs me is because I feel that the "relevance" issue has completely taken over. It seems like it's the #1 priority for U2. And I don't think relevance is something you consciously aim for. They were relevant in the 1980's despite being different, not doing the obvious. Really, the only 2 classic albums (pre-ATYCLB) I feel that U2 tried for relevance was Achtung Baby and POP. But Achtung Baby worked BECAUSE it was such a 180...any compromise would've ruined it. They didn't force a Joshua Tree sounding tune on there just to appease the fanbase, they pretty much said "this is the new direction, either you're with us or you're not". And really, although Achtung Baby was clearly done with the conscious fear of not being relevant...it was executed in the best way possible, probably the only way possible, because it was uncompromising.

POP, on the other hand, had a sort of schitzo quality to it, kind of like NLOTH, where it isn't sure what it wants to be. A dance album? A rock album? Post-modern? Sincere? And even though I love POP, I also recognize that U2 is once again clearly trying to remain hip, except this time the results are less successful, because of too much compromising. It wants to be everything instead of choosing one vibe and riding it out. This is why Achtung Baby and Zooropa, for me, are stellar albums...because they're cohesive and uncompromising. The said can be said about any of their 80's albums, with the exception of maybe Rattle and Hum (which was obviously a conscious attempt to show their knowledge of American music, but we all know that anyway)

The thing is...U2 don't have many tricks up their sleeve, and bands tend to not have more than 1 second act. U2 have had like 2 or 3 it seems. They will always be relevant when it comes to music history. I don't think it's something they should strive for. If they get out of their own way, toss "relevance" aside and ride out an idea for an album, they may just land themselves something the world will consider "relevant." And when it happens, the world will be too into the music to stop and say "wow, this is so relevant." Achtung Baby was a miracle album...not many artists can pull off a stunt like that. U2 should just write and record and release and promote and see what happens, and stop talking relevance because it is rarely ever something you can consciously capture.

So, yea, 1998 Bono or whenever the Legends interview was filmed...that's the guy I wish he'd go back and talk to.

I definitely agree with this statement about relevance. It's a big shift in attitude. They clear talk now about how relevance is important, whereas in the 90s they said the opposite.

I'd disagree though and say they weren't really trying for relevance on AB and Pop. I think they were just legitimately excited by what was going in industrial and electronic music and wanted to incorporate that into their music. You could call that jumping on the bandwagon, but it came across to me as an honest enthusiasm. I don't think they were trying to play those types of music because they saw them as what was currently popular and "relevant". I think they did see themselves as bringing some of those musical trends into the mainstream, which was maybe arrogant, but they wanted to f* up the mainstream, not conform to it.

We can never totally know what their motives were, but that's my impression.

I hate that they worry about sales now.

 

[BVS]

U2 has never stated the opposite, in fact Bono talked about abusing his place in the mainstream. U2 has always strived for relevance, they may have not been so blunt as to say it, but don't fool yourself, U2 has never pulled a Pearl Jam and made deliberate moves to step back from the mainstream.

 

[Salome]

It would have been a tad weird if Bono had said they were aiming for relevance when they were already acknowledged the nr, 1 band in the universe. His claims of wanting to eff up the mainstream back then aren't that different as his claims to be searching for relevance now. It's all about trying to find some purpose in what they do.

 

[The Slow Loris]

SWAGGER. That's what's missing now, it would seem. Everything comes down to that attitude Bono had at the 1994 Grammys about wanting to "abuse their position and fk up the mainstream". They need to get back that swagger.

 

[david]

All Bono wants really is for pitchfork to rate the new album a 7 or higher.

Sent from my AT300 using U2 Interference mobile app

 

[ozeeko]

U2 has never stated the opposite, in fact Bono talked about abusing his place in the mainstream. U2 has always strived for relevance, they may have not been so blunt as to say it, but don't fool yourself, U2 has never pulled a Pearl Jam and made deliberate moves to step back from the mainstream.

Well, the key word is "abusing" his place in the mainstream. Wanting to be big on your own terms, to me, is different than over-thinking the ways in which one can remain relevant. It's a mind-set.

 

[doctorwho]

Well, the key word is "abusing" his place in the mainstream. Wanting to be big on your own terms, to me, is different than over-thinking the ways in which one can remain relevant. It's a mind-set.

To be fair, we are judging U2's upcoming album based on two obviously "safe" singles. A soundtrack song for Mandella and a charity single meant to raise millions is hardly a time for U2 to be highly experimental. By U2 sounding like U2 (especially circa 2000), they succeeded in creating the appropriate music.

However, U2 have never really blended in with the mainstream. Even Edge's daughter said that HTDAAB sounded nothing like what was out there. She meant it as a warning, but that was clearly a good thing for U2. Therefore, I don't think U2 will suddenly blend in with current music.

While NLOTH didn't really take off, I doubt U2 will create a JT2 or ATYCLB2. If they do, then I'll join you in this argument. But with songs like "Breathe", MOS and "White As Snow" on their last album, I'm willing to give U2 the benefit of the doubt on this whole "relevance" discussion. At this point, it sounds more like a well rehearsed soundbyte than anything meaningful.

 

[allbecauseofu2]

Change that to 2015 Bono needs to consult 1983 Bono.

 

[Aygo]

One thing I'm sure: if 1983 Bono knew that 2014 Bono was saying the most idiotic unashamed ass-licking clichés about Ireland's bailout and respective consequences - when he (almost) didn't open his mouth about it over the past 4 years - in the Convention of the European People's Party in the present context/situation (Merkel, Sarkozy, Berlusconni, Rajoy, Orbán, Passos Coelho... all of them, very nice guys, indeed) [not to mention the meetings/dinners/meals/teas with Christine Lagarde, W Bush, the Davos ragtags, the displacement of the tax residence to the Netherlands, etc, etc, etc]; and that he takes 5 years to write non-memorable albums full of hype, self-revival soundscapes, too much awkward lyrics... I guess he'd think that it was a joke and would laugh about it.

 

[allbecauseofu2]

this wallpaper music is finished

 

[Muldfeld]

The Bono of 2014 should go back and listen to the Bono of 1983 for a minute.

BONO INTERVIEW at US FESTIVAL 1983 U2 - YouTube

Particularly the last minute or so from the above listed video. Just a thought. If they did, they wouldn't be second guessing themselves and that then causing all of the album delays.

Well posted!

I actually don't mind the album delay because U2's output these last few years, including that awful Spider-Man musical music, pointed in the wrong direction. With a proper change, maybe we have a chance at another "Achtung Baby", instead of another "How to Dismantle An Atomic Bomb". This delay is nothing but good news -- unless the music ends up being even worse.

 

[Muldfeld]

One thing I'm sure: if 1983 Bono knew that 2014 Bono was saying the most idiotic unashamed ass-licking clichés about Ireland's bailout and respective consequences - when he (almost) didn't open his mouth about it over the past 4 years - in the Convention of the European People's Party in the present context/situation (Merkel, Sarkozy, Berlusconni, Rajoy, Orbán, Passos Coelho... all of them, very nice guys, indeed) [not to mention the meetings/dinners/meals/teas with Christine Lagarde, W Bush, the Davos ragtags, the displacement of the tax residence to the Netherlands, etc, etc, etc]; and that he takes 5 years to write non-memorable albums full of hype, self-revival soundscapes, too much awkward lyrics... I guess he'd think that it was a joke and would laugh about it.

Nicely said. It's true. Bono is on the side of the Wall Street and European Union bankers that have raped Ireland by making the debt irresponsible banking created now the public's to pay off. Sickening!

 

[allbecauseofu2]

What direction can they really go in? that's gonna have the effect (???) of AB. They said their new music was gonna sound like their influences. Well, we expect that. lol. DON'T sound like them. Listen, this bands going go country/Nashville at some point. Its the last refuge of a rock band that has no idea what to do or where to go. I mean if they NEVER seriously considered it even once I would be shocked. The next step up would be a pure hard rock sound with no effects and based in he blues rock classic rock style or the bands of 60s.

 

[Aygo]

Nicely said. It's true. Bono is on the side of the Wall Street and European Union bankers that have raped Ireland by making the debt irresponsible banking created now the public's to pay off. Sickening!

I don't remember, over these past 4 years, listening or reading a word from Bono's mouth about the irish bailout, about what really led to it, about its consequences (including mass emigration again) - well, he couldn't, because he was still "burnt" for many irish didn't forgive the fact that the multinational U2 displaced its taxes to Holland, so he was better staying silent.
And now, the proudly and unashamedly talks about it, in a Convention of part of the assholes who are responsible for all the chaos in Europe (and consequently in Ireland), almost "sending kisses" whether to the EPP leaders, whether to Enda Kenny... And what he has to say is empty clumsy clichés like "the irish people bailed the irish people out"(!), something that could've perfectly been said by Jean-Claude Juncker, Durão Barroso, Angela Merkel, Passos Coelho or Mario Draghi.
If it was possible, I'd bet that 1983's Bono would have an heart attack if he knew this (and much more).

 

[U2girl]

Actually Pop, like most U2 records, was very well reviewed by the critics. And it sold quite well in comparison to Bomb worldwide.

I'm going to even respond to bringing up the Grammy's as proof of quality.

Pop as a "critical failure", like R&H bombing, is a nice little piece of revisionist U2 history. If you mean to say that Pop was not as well received by fans, and didn't do as well commercially as most of the records that came before it...well that I agree with.

I also agree that U2 has been trying to make "radio hits". As they've been doing since before Boy.

Sent via owl

Both ATYCLB and Bomb outsold Pop.

And not so much the critics...the fans hated Pop (Zooropa somehow gets under the glory cloak of Zoo TV years though it also lacked a good single and sold about the same as Pop).
Rattle and Hum, the movie buried them and critics brought out the knives. Both times failing in contrast to NLOTH where it seems fans and the general audience didn't care.

 

[U2girl]

U2 has never stated the opposite, in fact Bono talked about abusing his place in the mainstream. U2 has always strived for relevance, they may have not been so blunt as to say it, but don't fool yourself, U2 has never pulled a Pearl Jam and made deliberate moves to step back from the mainstream.

Pearl Jam that crawled back to Ticketmaster to play more venues ? Pearl Jam that got in bed with Target to sell Backspacer ? Pearl Jam that wrote one of the more obvious radio aimed ballads with Sirens last year ?

 

[mikal]

Pearl Jam that crawled back to Ticketmaster to play more venues ? Pearl Jam that got in bed with Target to sell Backspacer ? Pearl Jam that wrote one of the more obvious radio aimed ballads with Sirens last year ?

What's your point?

Sent from my Note 3 using my S-pen.

 

[BVS]

Pearl Jam that crawled back to Ticketmaster to play more venues ? Pearl Jam that got in bed with Target to sell Backspacer ? Pearl Jam that wrote one of the more obvious radio aimed ballads with Sirens last year ?

No, the PJ that stopped doing videos for awhile and the PJ who shelved certain songs because they felt they were too palatable.