I've been trying for two hours to ignore this, but can't.......
U2girl said:
And I suspect that's actually where your problem begins and ends. Because U2 wanted to explore electronica further as a way to create and enhance the sounds in their head, they brought in an expert in the field. It's as simple as that.
These guys, Eno/Howie/Flood etc, aren't so much the simple knob twiddling producers as the guys who help U2 with 'whatever' else is going on behind the guitar/drums/bass/singer and how even those basic elements are shifted and beefed and placed to become what U2 want them to become. In that sense they are all the exact same thing. Eno is around so much simply because he is in very close tune to what the band want in regards to the basic elements that back their sound up. Simple synthesiser work mostly, but that doesn't always make him the main player. For example I would call Unforgettable Fire & The Joshua Tree the 'Eno' albums as his input is front and centre in shaping the overall sound and feel of the album, but while he is credited on Achtung Baby and certainly is very active on Achtung Baby, the defining sound of that album is most definitely Flood's work first and foremost. Bring it forward to Pop and the work of a strictly electronic artist pretty much makes Eno redundant, as essentialy thats all he is as well. There's nothing Eno can do that Howie B can't, and the difference between the electronic work of both of them is similar to the difference between bringing in a guy who plays great acoustic guitar and a guy who plays great heavy rock. They wanted a heavy, cluttered, beefed sound for Pop. That's simply not what Eno does. It's not a shift for popularity, it's simply what is needed where and when. U2 hiring Howie B for Pop fits perfectly with everything they've done before in regards to their producers/assistance needs.
Originally posted by U2girl Doesn't that sound like trend pandering to you? The sounds on that album, the band image - Bono in particular? [/B]
Not at all. Musically, no chance. I just think that it's the stylistic change that you personally didn't like, while in reality there is zero difference between that one and any of the ones before it. You didn't like U2 doing that with their music? Fine. I wouldn't in a million years expect a fan of With Or Without You to automaticaly be a fan of Mofo.
Also, U2, and particularly Bono, have made their 'band image' tie in with what they're musically trying to achieve forever. Follow the transition of their personal style along with their music and you can easily see that.
They're a punk band? Bono dresses and behaves like a punk rocker, pulling those standard punk rock poses for everyone in photos.
In the mid 80's? They're a big band of big ideas with a high degree of romanticism and Bono is all big hair and frilly shirts and suede jackets.
They're an earnest, honest, serious, truthful band in the late 80's? They start to dress somewhere between 'straight off the boat from Ireland' and 'straight off the farm from Ohio' and not a smile to be seen.
They're the ultimate devils advocate rock'n'roll show in the early 90's? Slick back the died black hair, slip into the all leather outfit, put on a big fat pair of shades and never take them off again. Have a little cigar hanging out of your mouth in virtually every photo, and take absolutely nothing seriously.
They're the ultra-experimental artists working with the Eno's and Pavarotti's etc on a conceptual album? Let the hair grow out a little grey, grow the goatee, slip on the tweed jacket and cap and look all grown up and like the wise old man.
They're the multimedia influenced band of the future? Turn those black shades red, shave the head, and dress like you fell straight out of one of the pop-art scenes booming out of the massive screen behind you, muscle shirts, sparkly cowboy hats, bright orange jump suits and all.
You're just an honest rock band trying to write a great song that the everyman can sing along to? Jeans and t-shirts all around. Conservative hair cuts. I could be the guy on stage, or I could be the guy standing next to you in the crowd.
And of course the way they dress is only the surface, but those image changes have always become a part of everything they do. From the way Bono conducts himself in interviews (during Zoo TV era virtually every Bono interview pretty much featured him in character as The Fly, all flirty and smirky), to every piece of artwork and every little tiny stylistic detail. Everything about their image.
Originally posted by U2girl U2 was never cool except in 91-93. [/B]
Well you fell for it hook, line and sinker then didn't you.
You did an exceptional job of describing the U2 image throughout the years... pop art for Pop, that's exactly it.
