Vote for U2 on RS' 'Artist of the Decade' Poll - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Just the Bang and the Clatter
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-17-2009, 12:16 AM   #121
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
intedomine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 7,949
Local Time: 02:04 AM
So, I suppose, if there can exist criteria for "artist of the decade", who was the artist of the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s?

The Beatles have the 60s sewn up. But the rest is not so clear.
__________________

__________________
intedomine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 12:19 AM   #122
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,806
Local Time: 08:04 AM
60s - Beatles
70s - Led Zeppelin
80s - U2
90s - Radiohead
00s - Coldplay

Definitely a step down there in the 00s but that's to be expected.
__________________

__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 12:20 AM   #123
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,003
Local Time: 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Ok, it matters to you, all I'm saying is that you don't have to be conscious about it during the fact to make it any more valuable as art. I would say the majority of art is created and then explained and sorted after the fact. You're right, who knows how it would be received it was released before, I just know how I would have recieved it...

I think it was done to generate attention, nothing wrong with that... I wouldn't say it's unfounded, many have said the same thing including fellow musicians. They never released the numbers and like I asked before haven't they come out and said they won't do it again? Or am I dreaming this?

Like I said if they stick with this model, I'll think differently.
This is all fair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancemc View Post
I have trouble swallowing Radiohead as the "Band of the 90s" over the Band of this decade, if we have to bestow one title or the other upon them.
Yeah, it's hard to make a case for them dominating the 90's. The Bends seemed to grow in stature AFTER OK Computer came out, as it wasn't widely considered monumental at the time, and of course their work before 1995 consists essentially of one hit single.

I understand where Irvine is going with the "arriving" thing, but Shuttlecock is certainly an exception, no? They reinvented themselves in a major way, and the true impact of what they were doing isn't often attributed to them as it took a while to trickle down through the rest of the music world. There's no doubt in my mind that they're the Artist of the 90's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMelon View Post
Setting aside the opinion that a Band of the Decade should have originated more or less within that decade, as well as my own personal biases, I agree. From a commercial standpoint, it's easy to argue U2's case, especially if you magnify the tour revenue. Factoring in my personal biases, I don't believe that the release of three largely complacent albums with generally positive critical consenses places them above Coldplay. Rather, it places them beside Coldplay, and perhaps below, as Coldplay had to build their own career in the span of 10 years, while U2 was already there, previously well past it. One could argue that U2 had to rebuild their career somewhat after Pop, but it's just not the same to me. Coldplay, for all their flaws, tapped into the mainstream early on, staying true to their own wussy, laughably uncool selves throughout, and made it work. That's to be applauded.
I'm still having a hard time imagining people looking back in 20-30 years and thinking of the 2000 as being the Decade of Cockplay. I don't see them thinking of it as the Decade of Shuttlecock, either. But people who care about music WILL be talking about Radiohead and what they accomplished. Those albums aren't going away, and are going to continue to dazzle and influence people.

In the end, I really think Kanye is the only other convincing suggestion, but despite his work behind the scenes in the first half of the decade, he's really only a major figure of its second half.
__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 12:23 AM   #124
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,003
Local Time: 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMelon View Post
60s - Beatles
70s - Led Zeppelin
80s - U2
90s - Radiohead
00s - Coldplay

Definitely a step down there in the 00s but that's to be expected.
In addition to what I just said above about Shuttlecock in the 90's, I think I'd be able to make a stronger case for Prince or Madonna in the 80's. Shuttlecock really didn't break big until 1987, for all practical purposes. People weren't talking about them so much early on in the 80's, unlike the two artists I mentioned, who were already superstars in 1981-82 and 1983, respectively.
__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 12:27 AM   #125
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
intedomine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 7,949
Local Time: 02:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMelon View Post
60s - Beatles
70s - Led Zeppelin
80s - U2
90s - Radiohead
00s - Coldplay

Definitely a step down there in the 00s but that's to be expected.
I reckon many would see fit to substitute Radiohead with Nirvana for the 90s, and maybe switch Led Zep with Pink Floyd for the 70s.

The 80s are an interesting one, U2's bigness is unquestionable but, due to their musical restlessness, they hardly typified a "sound" of the decade. I'd opt to switch U2 with Michael Jackson, Prince, Madonna or even a Duran Duran or someone like that.

It all depends on the vague criteria. Have RS announced artists of the decade for the previous decades, to at least give us something to go on?
__________________
intedomine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 12:31 AM   #126
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,806
Local Time: 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
In addition to what I just said above about Shuttlecock in the 90's, I think I'd be able to make a stronger case for Prince or Madonna in the 80's. Shuttlecock really didn't break big until 1987, for all practical purposes. People weren't talking about them so much early on in the 80's, unlike the two artists I mentioned, who were already superstars in 1981-82 and 1983, respectively.
I'm strictly keeping to bands with that list. Counting in solo acts, I think Michael Jackson is undoubtedly the most commercially significant artist of the 1980s, and perhaps Mariah Carey in the 90s. The problem is that neither were terribly groundbreaking artistically.

I refuse to proclaim Nirvana the most significant band of the 1990s when they were only active for half the decade. Also, their influence was largely harmful. Post-grunge
__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 12:38 AM   #127
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,003
Local Time: 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMelon View Post
I'm strictly keeping to bands with that list. Counting in solo acts, I think Michael Jackson is undoubtedly the most commercially significant artist of the 1980s, and perhaps Mariah Carey in the 90s.
Well this isn't just strictly about commercially significant, is it? Michael Jackson had two huge albums (one of which admittedly dominated the airwaves for a couple years), five years apart. Was he a major figure of the 80's? No doubt about it. But consider everything that Prince put out, from 1999 and Little Red Corvette, to Purple Rain (the album AND movie), his Sign O' the Times album and concert film, to the Batman soundtrack. The guy put out NINE albums, all of which were big sellers, all of which had hit singles. His constantly-changing image, much like that of Madonna, kept him very much a constant pop culture topic of conversation as well. I'd also argue that the music itself perhaps symbolizes the SOUND of the decade more than anyone else's.
__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 12:51 AM   #128
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
intedomine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 7,949
Local Time: 02:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
I'd also argue that the music itself perhaps symbolizes the SOUND of the decade more than anyone else's.
I'm agreeing with you on too much here.

It's the criteria of SOUND which makes it especially difficult to identify an Artist of the Decade for the noughties. What is THE distincitve sound between 00-09? Tough one.
__________________
intedomine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 01:04 AM   #129
Blue Crack Addict
 
GirlsAloudFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 25,287
Local Time: 10:04 AM
Would it be possible to take Kanye out of the 2000s discussion simply because he's a colossal asshole? I'm giving my vote to Radiohead because of the huge impact and mindfuck of both Kid A as an artistic statement and the In Rainbows "pay what you want" thing. The impact of Kid A and In Rainbows (both its marketing scheme and the brilliant content of the album itself) will be felt longer than Kanye's work, in my opinion.

60s is obviously The Beatles and, yeah, I would give the 70s to Zeppelin. Although you could make a case that the punk movement was the biggest thing that happened to music in the 70s so maybe one of those pioneering punk acts could be seen as the biggest artist of that decade? 80s would have to be either Michael Jackson, Madonna, or Prince. With U2 and R.E.M. being the runners up holding the "alternative" music flag for the 80s. The 90s is tricky. Just like this current decade. I'll say Pavement was the artist of the 90s. Or maybe Nirvana. Or maybe...somebody else. I don't know. I think Garth Brooks sold the most albums in the 90s worldwide. Ha!
__________________
GirlsAloudFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 01:21 AM   #130
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 10:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMelon View Post
60s - Beatles
70s - Led Zeppelin
80s - U2
90s - Radiohead
00s - Coldplay

Definitely a step down there in the 00s but that's to be expected.
Entirely subjective but the worst offender on that list is Radiohead.
Clearly two great albums is not enough. Otherwise, it's Nirvana and it's not even close in terms of what they did to popular music (their success might have got Radiohead signed in late '91 in the first place) both critically and commercially. And their influence reached across genres,most definitely and has lasted for years.

As an aside, 90% of all post-grunge bands were PJ, Soundgarden and AIC etc. clones, not Nirvana. It permeated through hard rock and metal, not the more punkish stuff. Probably Nirvana was responsible for some of the pop-punk of the late 90's but passively, IMO.

But if the base is having to overcome only two great albums and an influence that would have (essentially) spanned only half the decade at best (more likely the 3 years following OK Comp) then I could make cases for a half dozen other groups in that slot, including Pearl Jam, for an easy example. Radiohead is not the choice for the 90's. They are the easy choice for this decade over Coldplay, for the same reasons I'd take Zeppelin over The Eagles (keeping with bands only).

The Eagles have the second biggest selling album of all time.
What is it? Their greatest hits from the 70's. Hugely influential (though I happen to agree with The Dude here) and huge commercial success, but this is where any objectivity takes it up the ass. I don't like em as much, so Zeppelin works better. Radiohead over Coldplay for the same reason.

I'm not sold on U2 in the 80's either. Although it's hard to think of a band off-hand that would have the same resume. Not sticking to bands, it's easily, easily, not U2. Madonna, Prince, MJ, Springsteen etc.

Too many varying criteria here and too much subjectivity. Yeah, I know, that's mostly what talking about music is.
So we are all never going to agree but let me just throw out one objective fact for the sensible among us to agree on.

The Beatles own them all.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 02:29 AM   #131
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 26,959
Local Time: 08:04 AM
60s: The Beatles
70s: Led Zeppelin
80s: U2
90s: Pearl Jam
00s: Radiohead
__________________
the tourist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 02:51 AM   #132
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
LyricalDrug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Posts: 3,212
Local Time: 09:04 AM
Random... on that list, these are the artists that I've seen in concert, during this decade:

1) Arcade Fire
2) Black Eyed Peas
3) Coldplay
4) Green Day
5) Bob Dylan
6) Jack White
7) Kings of Leon
8) MIA
9) U2
10) Wilco

U2 was the best

Vote early and vote often... vote U2, baby
__________________
LyricalDrug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 03:31 AM   #133
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,003
Local Time: 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
Entirely subjective but the worst offender on that list is Radiohead.
Clearly two great albums is not enough. Otherwise, it's Nirvana and it's not even close in terms of what they did to popular music (their success might have got Radiohead signed in late '91 in the first place) both critically and commercially. And their influence reached across genres,most definitely and has lasted for years.

As an aside, 90% of all post-grunge bands were PJ, Soundgarden and AIC etc. clones, not Nirvana. It permeated through hard rock and metal, not the more punkish stuff. Probably Nirvana was responsible for some of the pop-punk of the late 90's but passively, IMO.

But if the base is having to overcome only two great albums and an influence that would have (essentially) spanned only half the decade at best (more likely the 3 years following OK Comp) then I could make cases for a half dozen other groups in that slot, including Pearl Jam, for an easy example. Radiohead is not the choice for the 90's. They are the easy choice for this decade over Coldplay, for the same reasons I'd take Zeppelin over The Eagles (keeping with bands only).

The Eagles have the second biggest selling album of all time.
What is it? Their greatest hits from the 70's. Hugely influential (though I happen to agree with The Dude here) and huge commercial success, but this is where any objectivity takes it up the ass. I don't like em as much, so Zeppelin works better. Radiohead over Coldplay for the same reason.

I'm not sold on U2 in the 80's either. Although it's hard to think of a band off-hand that would have the same resume. Not sticking to bands, it's easily, easily, not U2. Madonna, Prince, MJ, Springsteen etc.

Too many varying criteria here and too much subjectivity. Yeah, I know, that's mostly what talking about music is.
So we are all never going to agree but let me just throw out one objective fact for the sensible among us to agree on.

The Beatles own them all.

This entire post is just WIN.

One thing I will add is that Pink Floyd should be in the 70's discussion. While not as popular as Led Zeppelin, they're pretty close, and were just as influential, just in a different direction. Hard to discount the impact of Dark Side of the Moon, Wish You Were Here, and The Wall, not to mention Meddle and Animals. They completely revolutionized the conceptual music film (something Zeppelin failed miserably with their release of The Song Remains The Same), and obviously set new standards for live stage shows.
__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 04:05 AM   #134
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Saracene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia, some time after tea
Posts: 6,325
Local Time: 04:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the tourist View Post
60s: The Beatles
70s: Led Zeppelin
80s: U2
90s: Pearl Jam
00s: Radiohead
I think that Radiohead are an odd one out here, because all the other bands (and most others mentioned in the discussion) have been hugely popular in their respective decades and produced songs that everyone and their dog knows. Radiohead can't really claim either, though they certainly had great sales for the kind of music they made this decade.

I guess it just highlights the fact that no band this decade has managed to combine massive popularity and massive critical adoration.
__________________
Saracene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 04:18 AM   #135
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,003
Local Time: 08:04 AM
You're dead-on about that last part. I feel like previous decades all had a decent roster of big name bands that were widely agreed-upon as being great. The artists mentioned for the 00's are for the most part too divisive or niche-oriented--Cockplay, The Killers, Green Day all have their critics or appeal to a smaller demographic.

I would probably say The White Stripes would lay claim to Best of the Decade over any of those (and they have a much higher critical standing), though they don't quite have the same level of popularity (similar to Wilco). But I think it's fair to say they definitely are emblematic of the decade in terms of sound, at least in the rise of American indie to the mainstream, and have certainly been a visible presence as far as pop culture is concerned.
__________________

__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rolling Stone Magazine's 5 star rated albums Maoilbheannacht Just the Bang and the Clatter 73 03-26-2009 09:59 PM
VOTE FOR U2 for "Internet Artist of the Year" Award Lise Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive 15 01-07-2002 01:26 PM
VOTE VOTE VOTE in this simple, but important poll U2Fanatic4ever Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive 59 12-20-2001 01:14 AM
Vote for U2 in Vh1 end of year poll! u2sangel Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive 13 12-07-2001 03:49 AM
Rolling Stone Now has end of the year poll up - go vote!! womanfish Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive 28 11-16-2001 11:38 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:04 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