Reggie Thee Dog
Blue Crack Addict
These two statements conflict each other, IMO. The former being irrelevant to everything but U2's future creative decisions. The latter is certainly accurate.
The band can believe what they want but they are not the arbiter of truth when it comes to the quality of their own music. That U2 consider POP a failure is utterly meaningless to the idea that it failed artistically or creatively. Commercially? That can be fairly measured - objectively. The band's own perception of it is whatever it is. But they don't hold any special authority over how any single one of us appreciates or doesn't appreciate a song.
Thus U2 calling POP a failure is only meaningful as a comment on its chart performance and other such nonsense that shouldn't matter to fans like us. We can love it or hate it or we can consider it a success or a failure and we don't need to defer to the band's opinion in order to do so.
The first statement I added for dramatic effect...
Music is subjective, however the real point of my post is not whether or not you like it (you do, I can appreciate that) but what the artist thinks of his own work and a more 'official' response to the subject line.
And it does matter what the artist thinks, it's their piece of work. Just because you find Pop essential doesn't mean the artist's negative feelings on said subject are irrelevant. But agreed, the way you feel about the album as a whole is your own.
I don't think Pop is a good U2 album, you think it's great. There are many different reasons why you feel the way you do, and why I find it just OK. I'm just stating my opinion mixed in with U2's feelings towards the project as a whole. We disagree on Pop...that's what makes this forum so much fun.