I'm just happy a thread I authored lived to see 4 pages!
This is a big deal for me, guys!
I think it's safe to say that THIS might be the only thing we can all agree on.
Not necessarily, no.
Yes my fellow Blue Crackers, I sincerely wouldn't be crushed if U2 never released a new album again.
Not necessarily, no.
Yes my fellow Blue Crackers, I sincerely wouldn't be crushed if U2 never released a new album again.
Agreed. I was actually hoping they would retire because I have an awful feeling about this album.
To be honest, I don't look forward to U2 releasing an album. I have such a nice life right now, calm, and enough money. All of that will change when they bring out the album. Oh, the stress
You should add it to your signature!I'm just happy a thread I authored lived to see 4 pages!
This is a big deal for me, guys!
You should add it to your signature!
Just make sure you quote yourself because that is the best part.
Not necessarily, no.
Yes my fellow Blue Crackers, I sincerely wouldn't be crushed if U2 never released a new album again.
I am so curious about this. What is it like to love a band well enough to hang out on their fan board, yet wish that they would stop working?
This bothers me more than the Hive business.Best idea in the whole thread!
Put the whole thing in there, Gvox. Spoiler tag it for length.
Just make sure you quote yourself because that is the best part.
This bothers me more than the Hive business.
I am so curious about this. What is it like to love a band well enough to hang out on their fan board, yet wish that they would stop working?
This reminds me a little bit of Bono's comments about rock and roll being a death cult, how rock culture believes that age means inevitable decline in a way that it doesn't for something like architecture or painting. What do you think- is it true? Radio hits aside, is it impossible for the creative juggernaut to keep going? Is it better to "die young", so to speak? Are U2 destined to recycle and become the Rolling Stones?
Just a shot in the dark here... Have you actually listened to any of the last Stones album, or are you simply assuming it was just bland, generic and rehashed?
I am so curious about this. What is it like to love a band well enough to hang out on their fan board, yet wish that they would stop working?
The irony never stops...since 2000, no less.
By becoming the Rolling Stones I meant, recycling themselves, failing to grow as musicians and capitalizing on past brilliance rather than pushing on to new creativity. Maybe some folks on this forum would disagree but I don't think U2 is there.
And you're right that other genres don't make fun of their elders- but they also don't expect continual innovation out of them so much as continuing virtuosity. Rock does, or rather it expects continual innovation in the genre and assumes that artists can only keep that up for so long, and that the shelf life of a rock musician as "cool" is very short in relation to their actual life span. We really idolize the early brilliance/flame out early heroes like Kurt and Janice and Jimi. I'll go back and listen through some old interviews to find the quotes I'm thinking of. I know the series but not the particular segment, so it may take a day or two.
There's a lot to admire about the Stones, like their stamina, their work ethic and the integrity of their sound. But on the "Doing what we're great at really well" versus "Sticking our asses out doing something profoundly uncomfortable and challenging to us" continuum, I do think they fall closer to the first.
It would be a sad day if Bono said things like this:
Mick Jagger claims fans don't like new Rolling Stones material | News | NME.COM
What if they simply like what they're doing? Why does something have to be uncomfortable and profound?
Shit... Tom Petty and Neil Young haven't changed their sound in 40 years... there's nothing wrong with just doing good old fashioned rock and roll. Not everything has to be innovative and mind blowing. Just being entertaining is pretty valuable as well.