Anyone notice the amount of disdain U2's contemporaries hold for them?

[Skwege]

Y'know im a big fan of U2 and alot of their contemporaries like The Smiths, Echo & The Bunnymen, New Order, The Cure, etc.
However i've always noticed alot of bitterness that alot of those bands and their fanbase hold for U2. I always wondered why? What do others think?
Ian McCulloch used to be notorious for bashing Bono and the others.
Robert Smith once accused them of being too predictable and commercial (Which is ironic since he said this in 1987 at the same time his band released Kiss Me Kiss Me Kiss Me which sold several million copies)
Not to mention go to any messageboards for these bands and a good portion of the fanbase is just vicious towards U2.
Is it just plain envy, because U2 is the biggest group on the planet? Or the annoying fad that anything popular is automatically associated with being bad?
This reminds me of how fashionable it used to be to bash Depeche Mode back in the late 80s, early 90s when they were hugely popular. Now those same folks who bashed them go about saying how great they are, etc.
Speaking of which I used to joke that fans reflect the music or attitudes of the bands they are fans of. Hence U2 fans are the most friendly and welcoming fans on the planet.
So what do others think?

 

[pax]

Well, we *are* very nice people, aren't we?

 

[bayernfc]

Well, we *are* very nice people, aren't we?

that's for sure!

 

[SkeeK]

u2 fans seem to disdain anything that outdoes U2.. look at the disdain for pop music, or lose yourself when it won the oscar. whenever there's a list of the "top whatever" it's almost a given that whatever comes above U2 will get some bashing "best? that's the worst! lol lol lol"

But then again all people in general are like that and maybe U2 fans are a bit better than the rest, but we're no angels.

 

[cujo]

It's an oversaturation thing.

And goes back to that "selling-out" stigma.

Maybe it's also the holier than thou attitude that SOME U2 fans have about the band and their taste in music. It's ridiculous that some accuse U2 of arrogancy... do you want an artist to come out after releasing an album and say "we're the worst rock band ever"... "we have no peers... we suck that much".

 

[martha]

This reminds me of how fashionable it used to be to bash Depeche Mode back in the late 80s, early 90s when they were hugely popular

They still suck.

Anyway, I'll be the one to answer your question. I think there are three reasons the artists and their fans bash U2. The first in indeed some jealousy. They were all around at the same time, but only U2 is still artistically viable. They're the only ones still not an oldies act.

The second reason is that U2's music is more accessible. That's not good or bad. It just means that their music is understandable to more people. This makes them an easy target for people who like to think that only music that's dark and obscure is good.

The third reason is that it makes you sound cool to bash a popular band.

 

[Salome]

the good old selling out issue


well, I don't give a crap whether you spend nothing on marketing or have an entire team responsible for marketing (which you do once you have a contract with a big record company whether you like it or not) as long as your music is good

 

[Skwege]

Re: Re: Anyone notice the amount of disdain U2's contemporaries hold for them?

Come on! Depeche Mode is a fun band javascript:smilie('')
They're no U2, but Martin Gore is still a very talented song writer.

They still suck.

Anyway, I'll be the one to answer your question. I think there are three reasons the artists and their fans bash U2. The first in indeed some jealousy. They were all around at the same time, but only U2 is still artistically viable. They're the only ones still not an oldies act.

The second reason is that U2's music is more accessible. That's not good or bad. It just means that their music is understandable to more people. This makes them an easy target for people who like to think that only music that's dark and obscure is good.

The third reason is that it makes you sound cool to bash a popular band.

 

[verte76]

Definitely jealousy has alot to do with it. This is a competitive-as-hell business, there's alot of jealousy and stuff. U2 is not an "oldies" act. I was a big fan of alot of those other people too. But now I don't always remember what they sounded like. It's hard as hell to have "staying power" in this business. Some have it, some just plain don't.

 

[Skwege]

Alot of bands are just way past their hey day, which U2 was able to revive rather succesfully. Former big bands like The Cure and New Order are now viewed as nostalgia acts, which is too bad as back at their peaks they put out some great tunes. It just pains me watching the new New Order DVD and seeing just how they don't cut it too well live anymore. The Cure still puts on pretty good live shows, except their new studio material just isnt as good post-1992 since Boris Williams and Porl Thompson left.
I think part of the staying power of U2 is their consistent lineup. They never had a major shakeup or band change. It gives a sense of consistency that lacks in other contemporaries.

 

[AdamsMango]

Re: Re: Anyone notice the amount of disdain U2's contemporaries hold for them?

They still suck.

Anyway, I'll be the one to answer your question. I think there are three reasons the artists and their fans bash U2. The first in indeed some jealousy. They were all around at the same time, but only U2 is still artistically viable. They're the only ones still not an oldies act.

The second reason is that U2's music is more accessible. That's not good or bad. It just means that their music is understandable to more people. This makes them an easy target for people who like to think that only music that's dark and obscure is good.

The third reason is that it makes you sound cool to bash a popular band.

ahh! i agree with you 100%!!

 

[HeartlandGirl]

There are lots of reasons that people bash U2, as martha and others have stated. But I wanted to point out that for every artist that hates U2, there is another artist who really admires them and respects the music they make. Because of that, I'd say that most U2-bashers have their own personal hang-ups and that's why they lash out. God knows we've had enough threads here trying to figure out what Henry Rollins's deal is. In some cases, I think we'll just never know.

And I like Depeche Mode.

 

[cujo]

If you want to hear Henry Rollin's beef... I think it has to do with religion, and how U2 incorporates "doctrine" in its message. Oft times Bono boards the pulpit, and can be a little preachy. A lot of people who advocate the Rollin's argument tend to think that U2 is just not punk enough... too middle of the road, too cautious. But, they (the Rollins') pretty much defeat their own arguments most of the time. U2 is a political band, and their "accessible" message (like Martha said) allows for multiple interpretations. Music can be an outlet for more than just the literal... unless you went to Subtle is For Chumps University: Henry Rollins First in his class. Wearing your heart on your sleave is not a cautious endeavour, and associating yourself with any political movement takes more than being a passive cynic.



Whenever I talk about this issue to non-U2 fans, they immediately paint me as biased and uninformed. It usually comes out though that they pay very little attention to music, and only argue because it's fashionable to throw rocks at a big popular target. Don't waste your breath on those that already have a formed opinion on the band... don't let your insecurities over-power you. You're either a fan, or you're not.

 

[Skwege]

Which is interesting as Rollins has been supportive of different political and similar causes in the past, ironically this summer he is touring to raise money for the Memphis Three Defense Fund, which I actually applaud him for.
However for each productive thing Rollins has to say, he always sticks his foot in his mouth on another issue. Henry Rollins is his own worst enemy.

 

[kingofsorrow]

1: some are jealous
2: some are stupid
3: some just get tired of seeing U2 and their latest "pet cause". i get tired of sitting around waiting for new material while U2 goes out and saves the world.
lately U2 has been repeating the same behaviour that got them the now famous Rattle & Hum era bashing. i admire the bands conviction to "saving humanity", but what about the fans? we need saving too.
ATYCLB didn't do it for me, i need the U2 that made albums that were different from the one's before it, not Joshua Tree PT.2.

 

[kingofsorrow]

on another note, Henry " no neck" Rollins is just angry because the only people who his music matters to are self absorbed losers who suddenly realised the world does not revolve around them. just go to his site and read the guestbook.

that's what U2 fans have above all the other fans. the ability to see that the world is bigger than their backyard.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Interesting.

If you go to any other artist's message board, more then likely, that artist's fan will bash other artists, like U2 or Pearl Jam. If you notice, the artists that are still relevent today don't say anything disdainful about U2. Henry Rollins has at least been saying the same shit over time, so he's not just jumping on the anti-U2 bandwagon.

U2 has been taking on social/political causes since pretty much their inception. The only thing that's different is that they have more money, clout and visiblity. They're not taking these long breaks because of these causes. Maybe, just maybe, they actually HAVE LIVES. Maybe finding new ways to satisfy U2 fans isn't on this year's agenda. So we wait a few years for some new stuff. Usually it's worth the wait and not the same old shit. Sometimes it takes 4 years to "dream it up all over again." In the meantime, listen to some old shit or discover new music from different artists. I love Pearl Jam and their albums always seem to coincide with U2's breaks.

Most artists that bash U2, wish they had U2's bank account and worldwide popularity.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

I agree with a lot of these reasons.

I don't care if some people personally don't care for U2's music, or for anyone in the band, and say so. But then just let it go. There's no point in constantly letting the world know how much you despise U2 *cough, cough...HENRY ROLLINS...cough, cough*. We get the point. Let's move on with our lives.

I mean, if they want to waste their time doing that, whatever...I just don't see the point.

By the way, I don't mind Depeche Mode. .

Angela

 

[Skwege]

Thats what I always find funny about people spending so much effort bashing something, like Henry Rollins.
If there is certain music, movie, book, I dont like, well thats that. Im not gonna go out of my way to mention how much it disgusts and how much I think it sucks. I would rather take that energy and put it towards something more useful like things I do like.

Eric
And yes Depeche Mode is cool.

 

[kingofsorrow]

And yes Depeche Mode is cool.

 

[martha]

And yes Depeche Mode is cool.

Kids.

 

[Skwege]

C'mon Martha, we all know you're just a closeted Depeche Mode fan
Im just ribbin ya.

Cheers,
Eric

 

[martha]

C'mon Martha, we all know you're just a closeted Depeche Mode fan
Im just ribbin ya.

Cheers,
Eric

Well,


NO!

 

[womanfish]

I actually find it hard to believe that you can like U2 and not like Depeche Mode. Especially Songs of Faith and Devotion, Ultra, etc...

They started mixing rock in with their dance, right when U2 was mixing dance in with their rock.

Anyway, I think fans of New Order, DM, Cure, Echo, etc... get angry because U2 was able to transform and move on and all the band members get along AND be as popular in the 90's as in the 80's and now into the 2000's. Depeche Mode was the only one of those bands listed that could really claim any 90's popularity.

sour grapes I say - Although I am fans of all of those groups.


oh, p.s. - The new David Gahan solo album just came out and it is really good. 'Paper Monsters'

 

[Skwege]

I have heard mixed opinions on Dave Gahans new album, though Counterfeit 2 by Martin Gore is wonderful.

 

[Skwege]

Though I would slightly disagree on The Cure, as they were very succesful in the very early 90s through 93 when Boris Williams and Porl Thompson left the band.
However none were able to maintain the popularity that U2 had, which rose in the early 90s with ZooTV.
Though Depeche Mode did respectfully well, and still does.

I actually find it hard to believe that you can like U2 and not like Depeche Mode. Especially Songs of Faith and Devotion, Ultra, etc...

They started mixing rock in with their dance, right when U2 was mixing dance in with their rock.

Anyway, I think fans of New Order, DM, Cure, Echo, etc... get angry because U2 was able to transform and move on and all the band members get along AND be as popular in the 90's as in the 80's and now into the 2000's. Depeche Mode was the only one of those bands listed that could really claim any 90's popularity.

sour grapes I say - Although I am fans of all of those groups.


oh, p.s. - The new David Gahan solo album just came out and it is really good. 'Paper Monsters'

 

[martha]

I actually find it hard to believe that you can like U2 and not like Depeche Mode.

I liked Echo and the Bunnymen when I saw them about, what, 19 years ago?

It's okay that we like different bands!

 

[u2popmofo]

Anyway, I think fans of New Order, DM, Cure, Echo, etc... get angry because U2 was able to transform and move on and all the band members get along AND be as popular in the 90's as in the 80's and now into the 2000's. Depeche Mode was the only one of those bands listed that could really claim any 90's popularity.

Uh, The Cure had massive amounts of popularity and extremely high record sales in the '90's. As much if not more than Depeche Mode. Honestly, some of the biggest radio hits that The Cure have had were in the '90's.


Anyways, I've honestly never read anything where Robert Smith has said ANYTHING bad about U2 anywhere. I'd like to see some see this supposed interview/quote for myself.

 

[Skwege]

Well Wish sold quite well, over a few million units in the US alone.
Though I would hardly call Wild Mood Swings, or Bloodflowers, extremely succesful albums. They sold respectfully, but nowhere near as well as Kiss Me Kiss Me Kiss Me, Disintegration, and Wish.
His comment was back in 1987-88. I wish I could remember the interview precisely. I got archives of old interviews from that era from assorted folks that I should go through sometime. I'll try to find out the source precisely. Nonetheless it was nothing overtly negative, just said U2 was predictable and overtly commercial. Which this was during the Rattle & Hum era, and I would actually be keen to agree with him on the predictability aspect. Though criticizing them for being too commercial is just silly, since The Cure were selling out the same venues U2 were at the sametime.
Though I am curious as to whether he has ever met Bono. Be kinda funny seeing those two together. The two most innovative and talented songwriters of their generation.

 

[Skwege]

on another note, Henry " no neck" Rollins is just angry because the only people who his music matters to are self absorbed losers who suddenly realised the world does not revolve around them. just go to his site and read the guestbook.

I heard a rumor that Rollins auditioned for the role of The Hulk before they decided to do CGI. However Rollins had too much difficulty reading the dialogue.
Sure its childish, But I couldn't resist.

Eric
"Me Hulk Smash!"