Question about Bono's One Speechifying

[VertigoGal]

Well into the third leg of the tour, I just thought I'd check in on Bono's preaching status. I have a concert in November and want to know what to expect.

About how long does his One speech usually go? Has he ever skipped it? Do you personally feel it's in good taste, or is it overlong/obnoxious/cringe-worthy? Opinions please...

 

[timothius]

The One Speech from what I gather goes for about 3 or so minutes. I would personally prefer it if he skipped the thing (which isn't going to happen ever sadly) but I wouldn't exactly say it is cringeworthy. A bit of dead air... yes, but cringeworthy no.

I don't find Bono the most electrifying public speaker, however he is an excellent emotive lyricist and he is much better served getting his opinion across in that way... ala LAPOE.

 

[If you shout...]

Even more cringe-worthy than during the Elevation tour. You will hear countless shouts of, "SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!" and so forth...and they will all be justified. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if there wasn't a thirteen-minute speech before "Miracle Drug," a ten-minute speech before "Miss Sarajevo," and the stupid-as-shit human rights video thing which never, EVER works properly.

Ugh.

 

[Chizip]

Even more cringe-worthy than during the Elevation tour. You will hear countless shouts of, "SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!" and so forth...and they will all be justified. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if there wasn't a thirteen-minute speech before "Miracle Drug," a ten-minute speech before "Miss Sarajevo," and the stupid-as-shit human rights video thing which never, EVER works properly.

Ugh.

haha, you should probably duck

 

[amerrydeath]

It is pretty obnoxious

 

[If you shout...]

haha, you should probably duck

I know, I know. Thanks for the warning, my friend, but I'll get by. Anyone who takes issue, quite frankly, can fuck off.

I admit openly that the speeches are NOWHERE near as long as I've indicated, but I exagerrate simply to call attention the fact that even two or three minutes of straight-up talking during a show (let alone several times during a show) is far from conducive to momentum or audience involvement. I mean, the speeches before "Miracle Drug" are NOT thirteen minutes...but they're still there and they still serve no purpose, entertainment-wise; and let's not forget that this is supposed to be entertainment.

Well, yeah...I was trying to say that other than my obviously blown-up claims about length, everything else I said is true. I've been to five shows this year, and it's been the same way at each one of 'em. It's been the same way on all the boots, too--speeches don't seem to get any shorter outside of the Chi. VertigoGal asked about "good taste," and I don't think it's in good taste within the context in which it's being presented. Just like the Sarajevo link-ups, while maybe a good idea in theory, just didn't work IN A ROCK SHOW. It's inappropriate and, in a sense, exploitative.

Although at least you can't hear the derogatory remarks on most of the boots. I can hear them, but I don't think the mics can. Bah. A pox on sermonizing!

Can you back me up pre-emptively, Chizip? You laughed...maybe that means you're pickin' up what I'm puttin' down...?

 

[Chizip]

Can you back me up pre-emptively, Chizip? You laughed...maybe that means you're pickin' up what I'm puttin' down...?

Oh I do agree with most of what you say. Sure what Bono is doing is great, but I go to a rock show to see them perform songs, not to see Bono preach. For the amount of time Bono talks, that could be two extra songs, and trust me, I'd rather hear two more songs than Bono pushing his agenda every night. I really think Bono has gone from rockstar who did a little activism on the side to a rocker/activist and is getting dangerously close to an activist who is a rockstar on the side.

But there are a lot of people here who love when Bono preaches and all that, so I probably wouldn't have been as blunt as you. But I get what you're saying.

I have to say the speeches are extra annoying when you've been waiting in the GA line all day, your ankles are swelling up, your dehydrated and uncomfortable. It's like, just get to the damn song.

 

[windylad]

So what if he talks about injustice of people dying of starvation or dying of aids. We just take for granted our health and like to forget about Africa. It's easy to do and get self contained in American materialism.

Good for Bono as a lot of people dont like to face up to injustice and if you lot have got to listen to i then good I say. Who else do you hear fighting for Africa if it wasnt for the likes of Bono?

You get 23-25 songs and a 2 and a half our show! How ungrateful!

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Even more cringe-worthy than during the Elevation tour. You will hear countless shouts of, "SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!" and so forth...and they will all be justified. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if there wasn't a thirteen-minute speech before "Miracle Drug," a ten-minute speech before "Miss Sarajevo," and the stupid-as-shit human rights video thing which never, EVER works properly.

Ugh.

whats wrong with bono's speech before miracle drug? whats wrong with him dedication the song to the doctors and nurses?, i also find his speech about edge to be pretty light hearted, see people were saying that during the first leg he "wasnt chatty enough" and now that he talks abit people are now moaning that he talks too much,

and i was actually just listening to the speech he gave before on, in boston on this leg, and the round of applause people give indicate something totally different to the one or two that tell him to "shut the fuck up",

 

[c4veritas]

Like it or not, Bono's sermonizing comes with the territory going to a u2 how in this day and age. If you're not happy about it, I know about 100,000 people who'd love to go instead of you. But you can't seriously buy tickets to a u2 concert and then expect Bono to not be Bono; it's his thing, you know?

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Like it or not, Bono's sermonizing comes with the territory going to a u2 how in this day and age. If you're not happy about it, I know about 100,000 people who'd love to go instead of you. But you can't seriously buy tickets to a u2 concert and then expect Bono to not be Bono; it's his thing, you know?

well since it has happend WELL before ZooTv, i find it odd that people have only now started to get picky with it, must of been "cool" when he did the sarajevo link up's during ZooTv, or "cool" when he gave his rants about the IRA during popmart

and also while i am on my soapbox, people complain about his "prisoner of war" thing in BTBS, but am i right in thinking he played a "soldier" during ZooTv? during bullet? and they immitated someone taking drugs during running to stand still?

 

[WildHoneyAlways]

I believe people have always though of Bono as "preachy". I dont think this criticism is new or has just begun recently. I think it may catch people by surprise how talking Bono does at any given show.

 

[Y2K]

The speech before Miracle Drug has changed, at least for some shows. Last night, he told the "Edge is from the future" story, which wasn't exactly compelling. I don't have a problem with him going political though, that's a lot of what drives the bands music. Not to mention he makes a lot of really good points about other countries not being able to survive on their own or enjoy the freedoms of life that we do.

 

[U2girl]

Bono makes a point at a U2 show?

What a surprise.

 

[If you shout...]

Like it or not, Bono's sermonizing comes with the territory going to a u2 how in this day and age. If you're not happy about it, I know about 100,000 people who'd love to go instead of you. But you can't seriously buy tickets to a u2 concert and then expect Bono to not be Bono; it's his thing, you know?

People will likely jump all the fuck over me for saying this, because we at Interference so rarely bother REALLY to think these arguments through...but I'm going ahead with it anyway.

I do agree with you that the whole endless speech drivel pretty much comes with the territory when you're attending a U2 show or, more specifically, considering Bono. That is, indeed, the way it is and I ain't gonna try to deny that. What I'm taking issue with is the fact that this is the way things are...if that makes sense. Here's where the flaming will stem from...

Hitler committed genocide. He was easily one of the five most evil people in the history of the world. He was, until his death, a recognized mass-murderer, psychopath, and general lunatic--globally, he was recognized as such. Just because that's the way he was, though, does it make it okay for him to slaughter millions of innocent people? No. If you think so, then you're a fucking idiot.

Now, Bono is no mass-murderer, he's not evil (in fact, he's CLEARLY the opposite), and I'm not trying to draw ANY parallels between these two men. What I'm trying to do is point out that your logic is inherently flawed; I mean, you can dig on Bono's sermonizing, just as can anybody else. Maybe that's just your cup of tea--I can't understand that in the least, but I can try to respect it. Simply saying that "that's how Bono is," though, doesn't make any fucking sense at all. That sort of logic, and I'm moving beyond music without leaving it behind, is terribly dangerous.

I'm not saying you're a Nazi or some stupid-ass shit like that--I'm just saying that the sort of reasoning you use does not even remotely hold up under scrutiny. I'm a Cubs fan, but I want the team NOT to suck, anymore. They do suck. They have sucked, uncannily, for quite some time. But I don't like them because "that's the way they are." I love the team because I've enjoyed a lot of their non-losing moments. I want them to be something more and STOP losing.

I hope that makes sense. I've tried my best to be objectively, and inoffensively, critical not even of anybody's opinions, but of a given logical approach. Holla.

Oh, yes. KUEF--I can only speak for myself, but I've always had a problem with the sermon thing. Especially when it's written into the show. I find the "Sunday Bloody Sunday" performance highlighted on Rattle and Hum to be quite powerful simply because it was NOT "scripted." And, like I said earlier, the Zoo TV Sarajevo links kicked good taste in the nuts, as far as I'm concerned. Just imagine, I guess, if "Please" were to be played in its entirey on this tour--I think it'd be a lot more powerful to let an already powerful song do the talking, rather than saddle it with a bunch of burdensome, repetitive, ham-fisted rhetoric which you've already heard a million times from this guy (on the radio, in magazines, on television news, entertainment, and music programs, and even at other shows, if you've attended them) before.

It's like looking at The Bible. If you look at the whole bloated thing, it makes a lot less sense and seems far, far less appealing than if somebody just gives you the basic tenants of Christian faith, which make a lot of sense when they're not delivered with so much internally contradictory hoo-ha all over the place.

Fuck. Now I've attacked The Bible. I anticipate death. Just remember, again, that I'm not attacking Christian values, but rather a given mode of discourse and what I see as its shortcomings (comparable, again, what I see as the shortcomings of the soapboxing at the shows).

 

[WildHoneyAlways]

 

[corianderstem]

Congratulations on invoking Godwin's Law!

From Wikipedia:

Godwin's law (also Godwin's rule of Nazi analogies) is an adage in Internet culture that was originated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states that:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.

There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. Many people understand Godwin's law to mean this, although (as is clear from the statement of the law above) this is not the original formulation.

That's all I have to say. I'll leave the flaming and eye-rolling to everyone else.

 

[U2girl]

Bono vs Hitler.

Classy.

 

[Chizip]

before people crucify this guy, the only point he was trying to make is yes, Bono has always been preachy, that doesn't mean he has to like it now because it's always been that way.

of course people will only focus on the words nazi and hitler and disregard the rest of the post and attack, so he probably just should have stuck with the cubs analogy.

edit: haha, while i was writing my post i see this has already happened, before people get upse they should read this line

"Now, Bono is no mass-murderer, he's not evil (in fact, he's CLEARLY the opposite), and I'm not trying to draw ANY parallels between these two men. What I'm trying to do is point out that your logic is inherently flawed"

 

[unosdostres14]

oMG!@!!!!!!1@1 I H8 b0nO!!!!!!!!11one

 

[Tennis05]

I disagree with all of you. i tihnk bono is a great public speaker. it adds to the whole rock show for me, it takes up to a new level and i think it would be pretty selfish of bono to urge people to "get up off their knees" and do all this for the one campaign while he had the attention of thousands of fans night after night and didnt do anything with it. communication and rock are synonymous.

 

[If you shout...]

Congratulations on invoking Godwin's Law!

From Wikipedia:

Godwin's law (also Godwin's rule of Nazi analogies) is an adage in Internet culture that was originated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states that:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.

There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. Many people understand Godwin's law to mean this, although (as is clear from the statement of the law above) this is not the original formulation.

That's all I have to say. I'll leave the flaming and eye-rolling to everyone else.

Ha ha ha! Well-played, I will admit. VERY well-played. Though one should note that it's Godwin's "Theory," in actuality, in that it can't be proved; still, I'd agree with a GREAT deal of it...aside from the "law" that I've somehow "lost" something which can't be won to begin with.

If Hitler bothers you (and, yeah...it probably will), then just toss in Jeffrey Dahmer or any other "evil" person. Again--the point isn't that Bono's speeches are evil or wrong or anything morally "bad," but that the type of argument I saw was just as flawed, logistically, as such a claim about Bono. Dahmer was a murderer and a TERRIBLE man...that's the way he was. But it doesn't mean that "the way he was" was good. It just means that he was a fucking crazy bastard.

This was really meant only to be a demonstration of "laws" of logic first theorized thousands of years ago. Still, bring the eye-rolling. That's not logical, either, so I'm cool with that, too...whatev.

Still...good call on that basic invocation of my invocation, corianderstem! It really seems true, in my experience, that internet or not, Nazis are ALWAYS invoked in debates and such. That's so strange...

"Don't let it happen again!" I guess, right? Or somethin' like that...

 

[If you shout...]

Bono vs Hitler.

Classy.

Not reading an entire post: classier, still!

It's an abstract logical analogy, remember--NOT a comparison. Not even close.

 

[corianderstem]

Still...good call on that basic invocation of my invocation, corianderstem! It really seems true, in my experience, that internet or not, Nazis are ALWAYS invoked in debates and such. That's so strange...

Ah, good call on the "theory" vs. "law."

But thank you for taking it in the spirit in which it was intended. And best of luck to you with the flames that might follow.

 

[catlhere]

All I have to say about any of this is that most likely all these "rants" will not stop, and even more likely, will increse in numbers as Bono's political/moral causes multiply. So really all these discussions do is give people a place to vent their annoyances and other people a chance to defend their band. Nothing is ever going to change. Bono isn't going to stop saying what he wants to say, unless people start walking out of concerts, which will not happen any time soon. Neither side is right. Even though I dislike the magnitude of speeches going on during the Vertigo Tour, I realize that it's a pointless issue to nag over when I could have easily put my ticket money to an organization that helps more important things than my getting fatter and listening to music in an air conditioned arena.

But being a human, I'm naturally selfish and concerned with my own wants and needs, so... OMGWTFBBQ!1!!!11!one! YU-TOO SUX! Bano talks 2 mutch!1!!! more lyk YU-SNOOOOOZE! m i rite?

 

[U2girl]

Not reading an entire post: classier, still!

It's an abstract logical analogy, remember--NOT a comparison. Not even close.

Making a pathetic analogy: classy. Again. (do not assume we didn't read your post)

 

[Anu]

Liking U2 and not liking the preacherman is like loving Star Wars but loathing Luke, Yoda, and Anakin--or something to that effect.
I like, sometimes love, sometimes feel the sermons. I like the dose of humor and humility mixed in with the hugeness of it all.
But dedications to Condy Rice and Paul O'Neill? Ugggh. The troops thing was a little eerie, but full-blown fellating of hugely powerful demagogues? Yuck.
I read somewhere on a blog recently that no one is nicer to the Bush Administration anymore besids Bono, except for members of the Bush administration.

Anu

 

[corianderstem]

Liking U2 and not liking the preacherman is like loving Star Wars but loathing Luke, Yoda, and Anakin

Is it okay for me to love Star Wars and loathe Jar Jar Binks?

 

[Varitek]

For me the show transcends music not just because U2 as a band and Bono as a lead man make such an intimate connection with the audience, but also because of what Bono says during his speeches. I absolutely love Bono's politics, I only disagree with him on an accademic level about some things, but on an emotional/gut level I'm completely in line with him and that's the level his speeches are on. It is so necessary for the world to hear what he has to say, and especially for the Americans and Western Europeans who can afford to drop $100 on a concert, or in the case of most of us, $500+ and travel expenses on many concerts. Bono is in a unique position here where he has people who will listen to what he has to say even if they don't agree with him righ off the bat and many other stars of his caliber don't use that position at all but Bono does. I both respect this and embrace it as part of the concert, and I hear his message and get worked up into an even crazier state than U2 live has already gotten me into.

The audience may be taken out a bit but the question is, does the show lose more energy from some members of the audience being disengaged during the speaches than it would lose from Bono not hyping himself up and getting himself emotional by giving those speeches?

And let's not forget that many of U2's songs are political from their beginnings with Irish issues to now when they are taking on the world. So the speeches come from the songs which come from the ideas which produce the speeches....it's all tied together, and it's part of the construction of this show (e.g. the human rights video, the texting UNITE, the africa flags) for a reason. If you are a true fan of the band's music, all of it, and the message of many of their songs has this particular political bent, doesn't it enhance the meaning of the songs to hear the speeches? So you're complaining cause you're a lucky f@#% who's heard them 10+ times live and you've got the speeches memorized. So what? Would you deprive a first time, or second time, or third time concertgoer of that experience that so enhances the meaning and emotion of the songs? Would you deprive Bono of letting it all out (not to mention that speeches probably give his voice and body time to rest from all that they output during the musical performances)? Would you deprive their music of its message? I embrace the message seperately from Bono and the music, I always have had that as part of me, but it means that the experience of U2 for me is that much more meaningful because Bono is vocalizing what I wish I had the power to and many of my feelings are in their songs. I don't know, if you don't embrace the message, do you not embrace Crumbs? or SBS? or One? or Streets? or Pride? or Miracle Drug? etc etc.

 

[Axver]

I must say, as someone who actually enjoys Bono's speeches, I think Bono would do much better to say just a couple of lines in concert and leave his longer talking for spoken functions and interviews. Why? Because when you compare a quick two-sentence mention during a song's intro to a two-minute speech before One, I honestly think that Bono makes his point far more effectively in the brevity of the two sentences.