lyrictician said:
So Bubba, you're saying that it has too be angry? Ok, Bruce has been asked questions many times pertaining to this topic, his answer is a simple one. Something along the lines of there is already enough angry music in the music indusrty as it is. There is not enough hope and uplifting music out there. You think Bruce wasn't angry? He was just as angry as anyone else but what does anger do for you? It only drives us to do stupid things that we would otherwise never do. If you want angry music, pick up a Limp Bizkit record, but if you want something that will help ease the pain that the anger has brought and make you feel like a better person, pick up The Rising. The intent of the album was not to concentrate on the anger and the negative effects, but rather stop the hurt and try to close up some of the scars that were made, but at the same time, not to forget it. That is why The Rising is the album of the year.
Lyrictician
If The Rising is to be a truly honest look at 9/11, there is no question in my mind that there HAS to be anger there.
Certainly, creating an album that ultimately uplifts the soul after this act of war IS A GOOD THING. But to ignore or trivialize the anger it caused is not.
(Nor, I might add, is it the case that anger "only drives us to do stupid things." It was anger over Pearl Harbor that drove us to enter World War II and defeat two REALLY evil empires. There IS such a thing as righteous anger.)
And, certainly, there's already a lot angry music out there; I was going to bring up Limp Bizkit if you weren't. But there's a HUGE difference between Fred Durst between angry about "nookie" and, say, Bono being angry at acts of terrorism.
The difference is this: pouting over not getting laid is selfish and childish. Being enraged at thugs hijacking passenger jets, ramming them into office buildings, and killing 3,000 innocent lives with the hopes of killing 10 times that number is NOT.
We SHOULD be angry at people who want to kill as many of us as they can.
I say that Bono's shown anger, and he HAS - even beyond Sunday Bloody Sunday. Please and Peace on Earth come IMMEDIATELY to mind.
But where is The Rising's Sunday Bloody Sunday? Its Please? Its Peace on Earth?
Look at it this way: Bloody Sunday resulted in
13 deaths. Omagh, which led Bono to write Peace on Earth, resulted in
29 deaths.
9/11/01 is
two hundred and thirty Bloody Sunday's in one day,
one hundred Omagh bombings in one day.
WHERE IN THE HELL IS THE ANGER?
Bubba
PS - Lyrictician, I'm not saying that Coldplay's album sounds
ahead of its time. Rather, to me it sounds timeless. There are certain groups whose music fits its time only: The Byrds, The Bee Gees, Van Halen (w/ David Lee Roth). Then there are other bands whose music transcends its era: Creedence, Simon & Garfunkel, U2 - and perhaps now Coldplay.
By transcending, I mean this: once The Joshua Tree was released, it was hard to imagine that there was a time the music DIDN'T exist.
And Foxxern, I agree that the impact of 9/11 isn't that visible on A Rush of Blood (nor should it be), but interviews with the band have revealed that the attack DID impact the songwriting. Going on that, if you look for that impact, I think you'll find it.
i will have chris martin's babies
And chris marin has fabulous crazy eyes live...
to me and just because he doesn't use overt anger doesn't mean his passion and fire aren't behind the songs- it doesn't mean he wasn't angry. Perhaps he used this album as a way to comfort people (in a way nothing else has, for me at least) rather than get everyone riled up to go out to war.
