For those who have not read U2 BY U2, here's a little excerpt...

[Zoots]

I sat down this afternoon and read thru' much of this book, especially all of the POP and ATYCLB chapters... just to see what was going on in their minds during this turbulent time. Here's an interesting excerpt:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDGE: Bono came up with this line about reapplying for the best job in the world. It was a good line... at the time. I mean, it's never really that simple. But I think we'd blown it to some extent with the 'Pop' album but this record was very strong and direct and it was going to be the basis for a great tour. We had the goods.

BONO: There's great humility and arrogance in that line. The humility is admitting that you've lost it. And the arrogance is imagining you can have it. But it got everyone talking and that's part of my job. Are they? Could they? How dare they? That's all good.

And part of reapplying for the job was a reappraisal of what was cool and uncool for rock 'n' roll bands to do. For the last fifteen years, we had maybe done a half-dozen interviews a year. We were still following a kind of Seventies punk rock model. The idea was that you should keep a mysterious distance, don't go round selling yourself.

Well, we decided to sell ourselves on All That You Can't Leave Behind and we've continued to this day. And the reason is the world had changed for rock 'n' roll. We weren't just fighting for the band's life, we were fighting for the format. And you're up against people who work very very hard. Hip hop was all over the place. So if you don't do those TV programmes, other people are going to do them. I was thinking about our first couple of albums, when we would do anything we could do, every interview, every radio station, any TV show. In fact, it's how any rock 'n' roll band starts off, whether it's The Beatles, The Sex Pistols or U2, before the mysterious distance turns into a pompous distance, where you think you don't have to do this kind of promo, that it's somehow beneath you. It's amazing how lazy rock 'n' roll had become. Hip hop artists have videos selling their songs and in the same video they're telling you about the next song that's coming or the next artist signed to their label. They've got clothing lines and fashion labels. They're just so industrious. It's the way music was in the Sixties, when The Rolling Stones would be on a TV show in between Engelbert Humperdinck and a magic act. You have to find the energy of your era and ride it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And there you have it. Bono admits to selling out. I had no idea and I'm pretty sure at least a handful of you didn't either. Well... so bottom line is, there is no point of accusing U2 of selling out when they themselves admit to it.

 

[Utoo]

I don't get it. In the same section that you typed out, he talks about how doing what they're doing now is exactly what beloved bands of yore did at the height of rock. It's what U2 themselves did when they started out---as indicated in what you typed. The interesting part, the part that hits the nail on the head, is this:

before the mysterious distance turns into a pompous distance

The whole idea of "selling out" is a bullshit concept created by skinny, white anti-establishment punks in thrift-store clothes who need some angle to rebel against who and what are currently popular.

One gets so tied up in being cool that you're just a dick and miss the point entirely. It's kind of like rebelling by dying your hair pink and getting a nose ring---you're so caught up in being different that you're the same as everyone else who rebels, missing the point of rebelling by a longshot. The whole point of keeping the mysterious distance is to make the image of the band cooler---which, in a sense, is in the same vein as "selling out." But cool bands have their heads so far up their own asses they think they're the shit.


What I'm surprised that people don't understand is that U2 were "selling out" even in the 90s---even if the band themselves don't recognize it. How many times were they interviewed or shown on MTV during ZooTV? Dozens. How many tv specials did they do around the world? Quite a handful. The thing was, in the case of the 90s, they weren't selling "themselves," per se----they were selling the characters that they were playing. They thought they were giving a middle finger to media and the establishment of celebrity, that they were playing with irony and sarcasm and all these cool ideals...and they were. And yet in the process, they were selling their tour and their album at the same time. They were "selling out," but just in a cooler way.

The only thing that's changed is that they're now a little more up front about it, much in the same way that you'll see the producer in a rap video or Gwen Stefani peddles her insignia in all of her videos. It's not as cool because it's not as mysterious, it's not as "fuck you." But it's not something that they haven't done since 1980.

 

[LyricalDrug]

Interesting... this is now the second time I've seen Bono use the phrase "mysterious distance," the first being in the lyrics to "A Man and a Woman."

 

[Zoots]

Re: Re: For those who have not read U2 BY U2, here's a little excerpt...

The thing was, in the case of the 90s, they weren't selling "themselves," per se----they were selling the characters that they were playing. They thought they were giving a middle finger to media and the establishment of celebrity...and yet they were selling their tour and their album at the same time. They were "selling out," but just in a cooler way.

The only thing that's changed is that they're now a little more up front about it, much in the same way that you'll see the producer in a rap video or Gwen Stefani peddles her insignia in all of her videos. It's not as cool because it's not as mysterious, it's not as "fuck you." But it's not something that they haven't done since 1980.

Yeah I agree.

 

[Chill Mike D]

Well I think the thing that's off-putting about promoting your clothing line or next song or whatever in a video - which itself is nothing but a 3 minute commercial - is that you're implying that someone should be interested in that. The mistake that celebrity musicians make is that that they think their fans should be interested in them and what they do beyond the music they put out.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

That's not evidence of 'selling out' at all, just evidence in a shift of plan for selling themselves, which is fine.

'Selling out' - a B.S term I hate as well - would be if Edge was running through something, and Larry stepped in and trashed it because he didn't think a song like that would sell enough t-shirts. Not that individual songs sell t-shirts, but you know what I mean. There's steering your career and creativity to a more accessible, commercial direction, then there's making sacrifices creatively to achieve a commercial goal, and then there's turning yourself wholly over to being a commercial machine producing a product that happens to be music, as opposed to being a creative unit that happens to also be a commercial machine. Does that make sense? None of those things are right or wrong. It's fine, it's just disappointing. It's just a let down when you are shuffling through a U2 playlist and Elevation comes on after Gone, or Miracle Drug comes on after the Unforgettable Fire or something.

We're never going to see a quote from any band member that proves it one way or another, and we're never going to really know. For some/a lot of us though it feels like the soul has been ripped out of their music, that regardless of what you think of the songs themselves on any technical level (Vertigo is as close to a perfect pop-rock single as any ever made by anyone), they sound a lot more clinical than creative, and you naturally merge that with all their talk of ambitious hugeness and just assume that the band is the brand and the music has become just part of the overall product, ie rather than the music steering the band, the brand steers the band and the band steers the music in line with it. Rightly or wrongly, they are making it easy to jump to that conclusion. I actually think I hope that is the case, because if Sometimes You Can't Make it On Your Own is where their creativity is at and is as good as they can do....

 

[phillyfan26]

My favorite part was when he called Pop something like "the world's most expensive demo tape." How right he is.

Popmart = The way Pop should be.

 

[Chizip]

'Selling out' - a B.S term I hate as well - would be if Edge was running through something, and Larry stepped in and trashed it because he didn't think a song like that would sell enough t-shirts.

But doesn't there have to be some of that going on if your goal is to reapply for the "biggest band in the world?" like if you have a good song but scrap it because it's not accessible/radio hit enough?

 

[Screwtape2]

It's amazing how lazy rock 'n' roll had become. Hip hop artists have videos selling their songs and in the same video they're telling you about the next song that's coming or the next artist signed to their label. They've got clothing lines and fashion labels. They're just so industrious. It's the way music was in the Sixties, when The Rolling Stones would be on a TV show in between Engelbert Humperdinck and a magic act. You have to find the energy of your era and ride it.

WTF is Bono talking about. How can you compare The Rolling Stones on a variety show to hip hop artists havng clothing lines and fashion labels? The energy of this era isn't in the non-musical elements of hip hop. Has the band sold out or simply off their rocker?

 

[ntalwar]

It says "sell ourselves", not "sell out".

 

[JCOSTER]

I don't think they have ever sold out on anything. I do think however people change and their music has changed with them. Selling out is doing a car commercial, or promoting diet pepsi etc. They haven't booked 3 years in Vegas yet. They didn't sell out they changed and matured based on growing up.

 

[rihannsu]

The whole selling out thing is built around the myth that artist create simply for the sake of creating and don't care whether or not anyone sees or hears their work and that it is somehow demeaning for the artist to pay any attention to money or promotion. Record labels and even managers love for artists to believe this because it makes it very easy to rip them off. Also the fact that many of these artists were dupped into signing contracts that gave away their creative control and thus "sold them out" to the power of the company. But from the very beginning U2 greatly minimized the amount of compromise they had to deal with. Their very first contract stipulated that the albums would be accepted site unseen. The company could decide not to promote it but they could not edit or force the band to change it. Their second contract removed even the veto power of the label and ensured that the masters returned to them at the end of the contract as well as the publishing rights. From UF on U2 owned and had complete control over everything they did. From the beginning they delivered not just the album but all the artwork as well. When other artists asked how they got this control they replied that they took a lower royalty rate in the beginning. Now they have one of the highest royalty rates in the industry. They took care of business and that's how they didn't get screwed.

It is difficult to compare U2 to other musicians because they do not approach music from the same viewpoint that most do. Their goal which has been clearly stated from the very beginning was to touch and affect people emotionally through their music. This is why they have no problems with genre hopping because they don't necessarily have an attachment to specific genres. If they can touch your heart that is what is important. They have changed their sound as much because what was getting through to people changed as because of any interest in particular sounds. They have never wanted to be a cult band or to appeal to only a select few. I think that is also why they don't put as much into the whole fan club thing as they probably could because although they appreciate those that have stuck with them fan clubs are largly exclusive types of organizations and U2 has always been about inclusiveness. They are one of the few older bands that I ever hear talking about what the latest trends are in music. They keep up with what is new because they are interested in what is exciting and communicating to the most people. And this is where I think people loose the thread. They look at this and think that the reason is that they want to make money but it is really that they want people to hear what they are saying. If all they cared about was money then they suck because they could be ten times as rich as they are. They have made plenty of decisions that make no sense if they are supposedly so money hungry and have passed up many opportunities to make shitloads more money. I just cannot buy the picture of U2 as this money hungry machine. I will concede that McGuiness is probably a lot more interested in money but then again as manager he should be and without his toughness maybe they would have been taken advantage of, but the band members themselves are certainly not putting money first in decision making.

Bono's point about hip hop is that those artists are not afraid to admit that they want money and fame and are willing to go after it. They are not interested in being starving artists. Whereas a lot of the white rock scene tries to romantacize this idea of not wanting money or fame.

To me the only way someone could be accused of selling out is if they go against their own ideas or do something they don't believe in because it will make them more money. Things like endorsing products that you don't really believe in just to make more money. That is why I don't think the Ipod ads were a sellout for U2, because they obviously believe in the product and they wanted to do the ad because they believe in it not because they were offered a huge sum of money. This was a collaboration with Apple. Plus the ads were a great way for their song to reach a large number of the younger generation and that was a goal they set for themselves on the last couple of albums. Of course they get criticized for wanting to expand their audience as well because the older fans seem to want the band to pay attention only to them. But again U2 has never wanted to be exclusive so it makes perfect sense that they want to reach new audiences all the time. This again is nothing new but something that fans seem to want to ignore.

Dana

 

[Smallville]

I'm missing your "evidence"! Either you have no clue what you are talking about, or you like to stir up shit. I've read enough of your posts to think you just like to stir up shit!

 

[BVS]

WTF? Give up...

You're becoming a paraody, seriously. You are better than that...

 

[LemonMelon]

U2 has not sold out.

There is a difference between "selling yourself" and "selling out". One is making yourself known, the other is prostituting yourself for fame, which U2 has certainly not done.

Take the iPod commercial for example. U2 accepted NO MONEY for the ad, yet everyone started screaming "sell out" and running around in circles. This just shows how intolerant and shallow-minded fans are to the bands they love. U2 didn't sell out with that; they simply made themselves known to the world. There's nothing wrong with that. Springsteen said it best:

"They could have taken the money. Anyone could have taken the money. But to NOT take the money...that's smart."

I'm sorry that you people dislike U2's new sound, but seriously, grow up. To think that a band would naturally choose to be poor over a life of riches and fame (and still keep their integrity, like U2 is trying to do) is extremely naive. Blame yourself for not liking the new music, or blame the band for not penning top-notch tunes, but don't peg your current distaste for the band's music on some imaginary instance of "sell-outery". That's just sad.

I can't wait to one day hear Radiohead's "Airbag" on a Lexus commercial. The whole internet will implode, and hilarity will ensue.

 

[DreamOutLoud13]

I'm a Pop fan. I'm not an ATYCLB/HTDAAB fan. I like several songs on both albums, but not nearly as much as I liked much of their 90s music (and even a good handful of the 80s music)

In general, I prefer harder, darker music than much of what's been on the last two albums. I want some heartbreak in my music, I want a little bit of emoness, I want guitar driven songs with heavy riffs and great basslines, I want some sexiness as well as some darkness. That's what I like about 90s U2, and is what I look for from any band. ATYCLB and HTDAAB don't really deliver that.

But no, I don't think they've sold out, at all.

Yes, they've been selling themselves, but that's different. Let me step into a metaphor here. Picture U2's music scene as a wall. In the 90s they started beating pretty hard on that wall, pushing it to its limits. The "failure" of Pop broke a hole in that wall. It was just too much, and they pushed it to far. The last two albums have been the equivalant of U2 going out to Home Depot and picking up a tub of wall compound and using it to patch that hole. They were fixing the mistake they made.

Now granted, I am a Pop fan, and I think its fine the way it us, and I don't necessarily agree that they pushed it to far, or that it needed fixing, but when you try to look at it from their point of view, you can see where it makes sense.
The singles didn't get the radio play they'd hoped for, the shows didn't sell out, and to U2, that was a failure. Not because they're greedy, but because they felt they hadn't done their best, and that the music wasn't reaching people like it should've, and indeed, that they weren't just beating on the wall of the music scene anymore, they'd completely broken through it.
And so they fixed the hole by being careful, by making sure that their next album was more radio friendly, and more perceptible. They made sure it would appeal to the masses, they put themselves out there into the media and explained themselves, they scaled the tour down and made it intimate. They were indeed selling themselves, and working their way back into the hearts of the people.

And they've done that now. So what's next? The hole is completely fixed, you can barely see it now. I'm hoping though that maybe they're ready to start beating out a new one.

 

[U2girl]

Great point about hip hop, rap and pop taking the rug from underneath rock in the 90's and 00's by being agressively promoting itself. It's a big part of why the urban genres are dominating the scene in the US, and as a consequence, worldwide. As someone once posted on another forum, either compete with them or roll over and die.

I wish more rock bands, especially of this caliber, would be as alert to the music scene, and that includes embracing the digital technology with the Ipods, which plenty of musicians caught on later. As with Zoo TV, they were breaking new ground (in fact they're talking about cutting of labels in distribution of their music back in Flanagan's book) but of course it all got reduced to "oh noes they're using their song in a commercial".

I disagree though that they had this underground "few interviews" methods prior to 2000. All U2 albums since JT had lots of promotion. It's just more noticeable now.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

For the love of God, this conversation will go nowhere as long as you are all stuck on the following:
How they market their music.
How they promote themselves.
The image they choose for themselves.
Who, where and when they choose to sell their music. Be it for the 'ok' Apple or the 'not ok' Ford.
How much they charge for it.
How much they charge you for however many versions of it.
How much they charge for tickets in whatever size venue.
etc
etc
etc

'Selling out' is not an action, it's the attitude driving the action. In which case, until we're in the studio, we won't really know. You may feel that this ever increasing drive to the middle of generic pop-rock is killing their mojo, but that doesn't mean they've 'sold out'. They might well have been just as inspired and honest within the creation of Yahweh as they were Streets (I think I just threw up a little). But, if they're sitting there in the studio mapping out their music as per the expected U2 formula ("OK, by track three we should have one of those big anthem songs where we drop everything to real quiet, then Edge comes in with a couple of soaring echo heavy notes, then Bono comes screaming in with Oh!So!Much!Passion! That's what sells the albums, tickets and t-shirts boys!") then they're taking everyone in this forum for a ride. For the record, I don't think they're doing that, but I think the risk right now is greater then at any point perhaps other than just after the Joshua Tree. The dead easy cash loaded path for them right now is HTDAAB 2. If they are very aware of that, and do make it more clinical than creative, we'll all notice. So: U2 have not sold out, but they're at the crossroads.

 

[Zoots]

I'm missing your "evidence"! Either you have no clue what you are talking about, or you like to stir up shit. I've read enough of your posts to think you just like to stir up shit!

WTF? Give up...

You're becoming a paraody, seriously. You are better than that...

I didn't create this thread to start shit. I thought the excerpt really was interesting. And my last line about them admitting to selling out was a joke. (Hint: the smiley)

/leaves thread.

 

[Peterrrrr]

Well, we decided to sell ourselves on All That You Can't Leave Behind and we've continued to this day. And the reason is the world had changed for rock 'n' roll. We weren't just fighting for the band's life, we were fighting for the format. And you're up against people who work very very hard. Hip hop was all over the place. So if you don't do those TV programmes, other people are going to do them. I was thinking about our first couple of albums, when we would do anything we could do, every interview, every radio station, any TV show. In fact, it's how any rock 'n' roll band starts off, whether it's The Beatles, The Sex Pistols or U2, before the mysterious distance turns into a pompous distance, where you think you don't have to do this kind of promo, that it's somehow beneath you. It's amazing how lazy rock 'n' roll had become. Hip hop artists have videos selling their songs and in the same video they're telling you about the next song that's coming or the next artist signed to their label. They've got clothing lines and fashion labels. They're just so industrious. It's the way music was in the Sixties, when The Rolling Stones would be on a TV show in between Engelbert Humperdinck and a magic act. You have to find the energy of your era and ride it.

If they will contunie to think like this, then we will never get a new Zooropa. Without develop your self you will become booring.

I think its wrong to think like this, for an example Bruce Springsteen, he still try new things wich inst mainstream, but still he is on the toplist of sales, why? Because he still try new things.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Re: Re: For those who have not read U2 BY U2, here's a little excerpt...

The whole idea of "selling out" is a bullshit concept created by skinny, white anti-establishment punks in thrift-store clothes who need some angle to rebel against who and what are currently popular.

i think i love you

 

[U2girl]

("OK, by track three we should have one of those big anthem songs where we drop everything to real quiet, then Edge comes in with a couple of soaring echo heavy notes, then Bono comes screaming in with Oh!So!Much!Passion! That's what sells the albums, tickets and t-shirts boys!")

Yep, sounds about right - this is the capital crime of 00's U2 TM.

Too bad I still haven't found.... doesn't get accused of ripping off Pride/New Year's Day/Gloria. Chimey guitars? Check. Huge chorus? Check. LOUD vocals? Check. Put the song early in the album? Check.

 

[jinn77]

I got U2 by U2 for £5.00 recently at a book store called Works.

 

[forbonou2]

Actually Zoo...I just bought the book this sat., 5/12 and the Bono: book I am making my way thru that one first! But I did read a little bit about Jordan's birth! THat was funny! I think I am in for alot more! Sure is a Big book...takes 2 hands and a big pillow to read it for me!

 

[forbonou2]

Well Dana i agree...and I AM one of the older fans! I like watching them reach out to greater audiances! It's just awesome to me that a band that started out in another generation..is reaching out to another! At least They are willing to try...!

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Too bad I still haven't found.... doesn't get accused of ripping off Pride/New Year's Day/Gloria. Chimey guitars? Check. Huge chorus? Check. LOUD vocals? Check. Put the song early in the album? Check.

Haha... did you read the next line where I said "I don't think they're doing that"? I said if they WERE doing that, simply turning past success into a standard formula for all future success, THEN they're taking you/me/us for a ride. It would be very easy for U2 to realise song after song, album after album, to that 'classic' formula, with a 'new' shine over the top, and comfortably sell shitloads, sweep Grammys, play to sold out stadiums. But I don't think any of us want that.

 

[Chizip]

I'm glad I haven't read this book, I think it would just make me sad. Case in point, the way Bono admires the mainstream rap culture. It's a culture of selling out. It's about who can get the most bling, drive the fastest car, have the biggest house and hottest ho's.

Sure the top of the charts may be topped with their albums, but the majority of them suck, and have absolutely zero staying power. Yeah the kids may love a rapper while he is hot, but as soon as a newer cooler rapper comes out that first one becomes obsolete.

Is this really the type of scene he wants to compete with? If U2 wrote an amazing album, but only debuted at 5th in the charts behind the current flavors of the week, is that really such a bad thing? What is more important, trying to top a chart of bad music, or trying to write a good album?

Especially at this point in their career, when they've already accomplished everything there is to accomplish, I hope they give up on trying to be the biggest band in the world and just trying to be the best.

 

[U2Man]

yeah. but radiohead is in the way. and thats tough competition.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Especially at this point in their career, when they've already accomplished everything there is to accomplish, I hope they give up on trying to be the biggest band in the world and just trying to be the best.

Me too, but I'll buy your next round of U2 tickets if the next album is not essentially a follow up of more of the same. I sincerely doubt anything new - apart from on the very surface - is coming. Slight surface level shift in sonics and sound for sure, but I bet it will be another inch deep pop record.

 

[silvrlvr]

U2 has not sold out.

There is a difference between "selling yourself" and "selling out". One is making yourself known, the other is prostituting yourself for fame, which U2 has certainly not done.

Like a Supreme Court opinion, I agree in part and dissent in part.

I agree "selling yourself" is a necessary part of the music world today (or really any field) in order to get your voice heard and your art to have some resonance. (And for everybody who says you can do that by posting MP3 files on a Web site, fine, but that's also selling yourself, just in a less obvious way.)

Re prostituting yourself for fame, no, the band hasn't done it in a truly commercial way, like the Rolling Stones appearing in that horrible mortgage commercial. BUT Bono is up front when he says he's got currency and he's going to spend it on attention for Africa or the AIDs crisis. Come on, this is the guy who goes on Brian Williams and yells at a man on a tractor, "Rock Star -- limousine?" which was absolutely cringe worthy.

On the other hand, he wouldn't get the attention if he wasn't a rock star, not unless he was a very, very notable researcher or crusader -- and how many of them are as well-known as Bono? Answer: zero. It's prostitution with a purpose and it is Bono, not the band.