Get Out of Your Own Way

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Headache in a Suitcase said:
I'm with the rocket scientist on this one.

This is exactly the opposite of U2 trying to be hip and cool with the kids.

This is, frankly, U2 being what made them U2. It's spitting in the eye of the IRA U2. It's broadcasting live from Sarajevo or pranking the president during ZooTV U2.

I welcome their return. Been a while.
Click to expand...

:up:
 
Irvine511 said:
now there's some classic Dad Rock :up:
Click to expand...

I just finished reading Springsteen's auotbio...great read. I can't say I relate to Bruce's music the way I do U2, but what an amazing artist that guy is, and what a life he's led.

The whole time I was thinking, wow I'd love it if Bono would write something like this. But then I thought, nah, he'd never spill it like The Boss.
 
Nah.

It's like putting on the old clothes that you used to look so natural in, and realising they don't fit you so well anymore because you're not that person anymore.

And what made them U2 was great music and incredible live performances.
 
Nick66 said:
Nah.

It's like putting on the old clothes that you used to look so natural in, and realising they don't fit you so well anymore because you're not that person anymore.

And what made them U2 was great music and incredible live performances.
Click to expand...
Yea being political had nothing to do with it.

Nope. Not one bit.
 
No one said being political had "nothing" to do with their success. Being political is part of who they are, everyone knows that. But no, being political wasn't the primary reason for their success. They were successful for the reasons I mentioned. They could have been political all they wished but if the music and passion and incredible live performances weren't there it would have meant much.

Lots of their contemporaries were political. None of them had the success U2 had.
 
Last edited:
Nick66 said:
No one said being political had "nothing" to do with their success. Being political is part of who they are, everyone knows that. But no, being political wasn't the primary reason for their success. They were successful for the reasons I mentioned. They could have been political all they wished but if the music and passion and incredible live performances weren't there it would have meant much.

Lots of their contemporaries were political. None of them had the success U2 had.
Click to expand...
I never said it was the only thing - but it was a big part of the equation, and if you take it away, they're simply not the same band.

The first iconic global U2 moment was "this song is not a rebel song..." at Red Rocks, waving the white flag. They eclipsed other acts in their time because they we're the complete package - great songs, great live performances, and that they stood for something in an the era of the hair metal bands.

You can't strip the last part and have the same career arc. No chance.
 
No doubt all that is true. I don't disagree at all.

My point was that everyone and everything changes, and I don't think U2 is that band anymore, and they haven't been for quite some time. The Bono who mocked George Bush mercilessly isn't the same Bono who cozied up to his kid. Just like 60 year old activists don't act like members of Antifa.

Some people may prefer the old Bono, and that's fine. I think Axver said once he wanted that Bono back. I like both versions. But I don't need them to be what they used to be, and this video just feels inauthentic to me. I don't think their heart is really in this kind of thing anymore. I think Bono is more pragmatic now, less the passionate ideologue, and more interested in fixing the world than railing about what's wrong with it.

Tonally, I also think Bono's feeling about the state of the world sound more like sadness, and regret, than anger and confrontation, so to me there's a disconnect between most of the songs (including this one) and the video.

I think the proof of whether this video represents a return to Bono's more confrontational activism or is just the work of other creatives commissioned by U2 to generate attention will be in how far Bono pushes the anti-Trump rhetoric and imagery during the tour....which is where a lot of their most famous political moments took place anyway, on stage. Right now it's just one video, created by other artists.
 
Last edited:
Nick66 said:
I just finished reading Springsteen's auotbio...great read. I can't say I relate to Bruce's music the way I do U2, but what an amazing artist that guy is, and what a life he's led.

The whole time I was thinking, wow I'd love it if Bono would write something like this. But then I thought, nah, he'd never spill it like The Boss.
Click to expand...

Definitely a great read, I didn't want it to end. You know a book is compelling when it's 500 pages and you devour it in days.

I wish U2 would /would've thought of their art the way Bruce does. I mean, this guy released freakin' Nebraska on a major label in between The River and Born in the USA. Why? It was done the way it was, artistically. He didn't try to FORCE it to be what it wasn't.

Nebraska is his masterpiece IMHO
 
Nick66 said:
No one said being political had "nothing" to do with their success. Being political is part of who they are, everyone knows that. But no, being political wasn't the primary reason for their success. They were successful for the reasons I mentioned. They could have been political all they wished but if the music and passion and incredible live performances weren't there it would have meant much.

Lots of their contemporaries were political. None of them had the success U2 had.
Click to expand...

I never loved U2 for their politics. I mean, I knew all about it, and it was very THERE, but had nothing to do with their magic , power and genius to me.
 
Also, whoever said the children holding hands around the globe was cliche or whatever...

Second watch made me realize that that scene comes just before the dead Syrian boy on the beach.

It's a perfect world for our children, embracing hand in hand.
 
Gzusfrk said:
Definitely a great read, I didn't want it to end. You know a book is compelling when it's 500 pages and you devour it in days.

I wish U2 would /would've thought of their art the way Bruce does. I mean, this guy released freakin' Nebraska on a major label in between The River and Born in the USA. Why? It was done the way it was, artistically. He didn't try to FORCE it to be what it wasn't.

Nebraska is his masterpiece IMHO
Click to expand...

I disagree with this a little. I think U2 has been very bold and creative in their musical choices. This is a band that reinvented themselves several times, took a huge risk with Achtung Baby, and released Pop. And put out records like Zooropa and Passengers in the midst of all of it.

Granted, things have changed, and I can't say their new music is nearly as compelling to me. I do think they're trying to remain "in the arena" in a way Bruce hasn't with his records. That's to their credit...they don't want to be a niche act, but it's also caused them to make some compromises I think Springsteen probably wouldn't. Bruce makes the kind of music he wants and doesn't worry about the rest of it...U2 does. And Bruce also seems to be at a place in his career where he's comfortable taking stock and looking back, something that's always been an anathema to U2. As you said, they do look at their art in different ways, but that's fine. I will say that I think Bruce is much more confident in the music he makes than U2 is. Ironic since as an individual he's full of self-doubt.

In any event, while they'll never be as loved as Bruce (few are) I think their legacy is very secure. And I like that U2 and Bruce respect each other as artists and people, and Bruce gave a nice and generous shout out to all the member of U2 in his book.
 
Last edited:
Nick66 said:
I disagree with this a little. I think U2 has been very bold and creative in their musical choices. This is a band that reinvented themselves several times, took a huge risk with Achtung Baby, and released Pop. And put out records like Zooropa and Passengers in the midst of all of it.

Granted, things have changed, and I can't say their new music is nearly as compelling to me. I do think they're trying to remain "in the arena" in a way Bruce hasn't with his records. That's to their credit...they don't want to be a niche act, but it's also caused them to make some compromises I think Springsteen probably wouldn't. Bruce makes the kind of music he wants and doesn't worry about the rest of it...U2 does. And Bruce also seems to be at a place in his career where he's comfortable taking stock and looking back, something that's always been an anathema to U2. As you said, they do look at their art in different ways, but that's fine. I will say that I think Bruce is much more confident in the music he makes than U2 is. Ironic since as an individual he's full of self-doubt.

In any event, while they'll never be as loved as Bruce (few are) I think their legacy is very secure. And I like that U2 and Bruce respect each other as artists and people, and Bruce gave a nice and generous shout out to all the member of U2 in his book.
Click to expand...

I should have said post Pop, that's my opinion anyway.
 
Bruce, U2, anyone who has had a peak and subsequently went over the hill... they're probably never going to crack a top 40 hit again. Even if they do, the album probably won't be renowned.

That doesn't mean the music isn't good. If U2 went out writing albums like NLOTH and SOI/SOE and just cut the crap out of them like Boots, I'd never complain. Might not be the same as before, but I still love what they make.

Saddens me to hear folks like Bruce Springsteen are hesitant to make music because of its reception. He's a legend.
 
LuckyNumber7 said:
Also, whoever said the children holding hands around the globe was cliche or whatever...

Second watch made me realize that that scene comes just before the dead Syrian boy on the beach.

It's a perfect world for our children, embracing hand in hand.
Click to expand...
:wave: That was me. I stand by my opinion.
 
This is from Born To Run... Bruce in his own words about Wrecking Ball.

I knew this was the music I should make now. It was my job. I felt the country was at a critical juncture. If this much damage can be done to average citizens with basically no accountability, then the game is off and the thin veil of democracy is revealed for what it is, a shallow disguise for a growing plutocracy that is here now and permanent.

Wrecking Ball was received with a lot less fanfare than I thought it would be. I was sure I had it. I still think I do and did. Maybe my voice had been too compromised by my own success, but I don’t think so. I’ve worked hard and long to write about these subjects and I know them well. I knew Wrecking Ball was one of my best, most contemporary and accessible albums since Born in the USA. I’m no conspiracy theorist, so basically I realized that the presentation of these ideas in this form had a powerful but limited interest to a reasonably large but still select group of people, especially in the United States. For the next several years we toured, crisscrossing the globe, to a wild reception, where Europe, as usual, was a whole other story. There there was a deep and abiding interest in American affairs and anyone singing about them. Their interview questions were political and filled with the stakes I knew I was writing about when I wrote the record. I came to terms with the fact that in the States, the power of rock music as a vehicle for these ideas had diminished. A new kind of super-pop, hip-hop and a variety of other exciting genres had become the hotline of the day, more suited to the current zeitgeist. Don’t get me wrong. I can’t complain. Wrecking Ball went to number one and had a fine success of its own in the United States. Appreciative and understanding audiences met us everywhere. But I thought this was one of my most powerful records and I went out looking for it all.
Click to expand...

And he hasn't written much since, certainly nothing that could be released as a collection.
 
PopFly said:
He's right, Wrecking Ball was an awesome album
Click to expand...

And I'm glad we got some of the stray tracks on High Hopes, and the expanded River collection.

I would like to hear the full band Nebraska just out of curiosity
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
And he hasn't written much since, certainly nothing that could be released as a collection.
Click to expand...

I think it's more accurate to say he hasn't released much since. Who knows how much he's written (though perhaps he's commented on having writer's block or something and I just haven't read it) and whether it would make a great record.

I can't say whether Wrecking Ball's American reception is the reason he hasn't put anything new out. He's a lot older and has been doing other things. And he may have had an extended bout of depression, who knows. Sting didn't put out anything new for like a decade or more because he had writer's block. Or maybe he's just worried, like U2, that the music would be ignored. I'd hope that wouldn't be the reason. Bruce's music has for the most part never been particularly happy, and even when hopeful it's a melancholic kind of hope. And I actually tend to think that when times are tough, most people want music (and film) that will let them escape, not confront the world their living in.

That said, I do think his his comments on why Wrecking Ball wasn't received as well as he'd hoped ring very true.
 
Last edited:
Nick66 said:
I think it's more accurate to say he hasn't released much since. Who knows how much he's written (though perhaps he's commented on having writer's block or something and I just haven't read it) and whether it would make a great record.
Click to expand...

Good point. Let's ask him.

According to Bruce:

“I wrote most of that before [2012’s] “Wrecking Ball,” and I stopped making that record to make “Wrecking Ball,” and then I went back to it. So it’s been a while since I’ve written, but that’s not unusual. That’s occurred plenty of other times in my working life.”

What this admission means is that Bruce has not written significant volumes of new material for over five years, and that is a surprise.
Click to expand...

And just yesterday there was this...

Will there ever be another E Street Band tour?

“I sure hope so,”*tweeted*guitarist* Nils Lofgren to a fan query about the future of the band.

“Looking unlikely though,” replied bassist Garry Tallent to the Lofgren tweet.
Click to expand...

You're right that it might not necessarily be the reaction to Wrecking Ball, but it times out that way. He's also said that he has no interest in writing about what's going on today, which is very not Bruce like.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Achtung_Bebe
IO: It's been a while...
Replies
2
Views
636
mikal
mikal
M
Ticketmaster app
Replies
3
Views
492
rosephile
R
Janet H
  • Sticky
Forum Update - We're back! Ask your questions here.
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
Popmartijn
Popmartijn
W
U2.com subscriber presale confusion
Replies
21
Views
1K
wolfwill23
W
O
Better late than never “they” say…
Replies
1
Views
285
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom