The particular reasons people (pretend to) hate U2:
-- Their music tries hard to be uplifting.
-- Their music is spiritual.
-- They're not cool and aren't apologetic about it.
-- Bono is a do-gooder.
-- They've been over-exposed (this is partly their fault).
And then, there's the biggest sin of them all, the most unforgiveable fault:
-- They've been the world's biggest group since cro-magnon man.
Things that are (a) really popular and (b) really uncool are prime targets for music / cultural snobs to dis. U2 exemplify both.
I think the history of U2 moving in and out of pop-culture approval goes something like this:
1980 to 1982: cool, young, up-and-coming group loved by college students
1983 to 1985: cool, young and arriving group loved by college students
1987: massive group loved by everyone
1988 to 1990: overexposed stadium rockers, loved by uncool rock fans
1991 to 1994: cool, spiritual Godfathers of the "alternative rock goes mainstream" movement
1997 to 1999: old dudes, a bit washed-up
2000 to 2006: mainstream rockers, back to being accessible and big, welcomed
2009: old dudes, a bit washed up and overexposed.
It is a bit baffling, though, why some fans of groups like Pearl Jam, The Clash, The Stone Roses, The Who, or Oasis don't like U2, since the style is pretty much the same.
Oh, then there's the fact that a lot of old farts (like my Dad) don't like U2 because they have absolutely no "blues" bones in their bodies.
Hello interference! Damn, I just realized its been a month plus since my last post! I don't have a particularly good excuse! Alot of good stuff here, 65980, great timetable, thanks for being the one who took the time to write it out for us, as that is very helpful! I think its accurate and a good way to look at U2's popularity.
I do often think that alot of the U2 hatred is due to their success. Like alot of people said in this very good thread, when they ask their friends to explain their U2 hatred, they often can not name a song or album or era that they particularly dislike. Its success, and what you mentioned above about perceptions of Bono as a do gooder millionaire asshole. Most of these haters simply lack context. They have no idea that Bono grew up amidst the poverty and war that he works to end, no idea that he cared about Africa long before it was the cool thing to do, that he puts a shitload of his own time and money into advancing the causes he believes in, and most importantly, that he is no more political now than he has ever been.
The same lack of context can be seen with haters regarding the musical side of U2. When I ask why the hate, when I really press people, a common response is "I am sure they were really great in the 80s, but now... they're just old.....etc" we have all heard it! No mention of the 3 very strong, sales and quality wise, albums they have released and supported with massively successful tours just this decade. Objective critics, not just die hard fans, still in 2009 rate U2 the best live band playing today. Just look at the boxscores for confirmation by millions and millions of paying concert goers in 2009/10. Watch highly prominent shows like SNL and Letterman- people are amazed at how these 4 old Irish guys take a 15 minute time slot and shoot much more tangible- through- TV energy into it than 7 or 8 20 yr olds in last week's band. But amazingly, and I have no idea why, haters seem completely oblivious to this!!!!!!!!!!!!
I actually recently had an argument with a co worker friend of mine. Its a story that illustrates exactly what we are talking about. We were sitting in the 5 Guys Burgers and Fries at Gillette Stadium. We got to talking about concerts at the venue, and this 29 yr old girl said that it would be really awesome if Coldplay played here. I made no comments as to my opinion on Coldplay(which is actually neutral leaning favorable, save the few times I just want to punch them for even letting themselves be compared to U2!). I simply said "couldn't fill it." Objective fact, they have been trying to fill a US stadium for many years and a few albums now; have not. Taylor Swift just did. That was all I said. We talk about some more bands, no arguing yet, then she says that the band she really hates is U2. I admit to taking it a little personal since she knew I was a huge fan, but still, all I did was offer her a little deal:"In 30 yrs, Jess, stay friends with me on Facebook, and if in 30 yrs, Coldplay has sold 170 million albums, won 22 grammys, had many massively successful world tours, and while they are at it, somehow write a new book on playing stadiums twice(Zoo TV for elaborate, 360 for selling # of seats and going in the round) and still be going strong after all that, then I will mail you the deed to whatever house I own." She got upset, started asking why the F(she is not a very classy girl) Bono always wears those stupid sunglasses, and says she just hates everything about them. I told her headaches and camera flashes for one, and the other reason, The Fly persona, I did not have time or energy or any desire to explain to someone like her.
The ironic thing is, she pulled out the whole 80s great, now they suck card. Well, if her 2 bands are Bruce and Coldplay(I beyond love Bruce, BTW, just saying) isn't Bruce old, too?! Couldn't a non educated person who has no idea of the brilliance of an album like 2007's Magic say Bruce should have hung it up in 1979?? With her 1st love, Bruce, it is just too similar a situation to U2 to overlook and not question. With her 2nd love, Coldplay, how could she possibly talk shit about U2 being old and irrelevant when Coldplay themselves play Magnificent as they hit the stage, and when U2 is setting attendance records at stadiums the world over, at the same time Coldplay can not get into one??!!!!!!!!
This brings me to a common thread of all the U2 hate I have heard spewed. It is 99% of the time not a particular, honest dislike of the music but rather a dislike that is unexplainable and bordering on maniacal. It is like I said above, something having to do with Bono personally or U2's music that is just not in any way shape or form true. Perfect example is my friend: Bono and the sunglasses(so what?) and the old and washed up card. Both are absolutely batshit crazy criticisms of U2 that do not fit in any way! Same with criticizing the Africa work. Since when is using one's fame, image, energy and money to help others evidence of a God complex or ego mania? 1% of the arguments I have heard have been someone truly not liking any album, any era, etc, and for honest, respectable reasons. Not saying people who know music and honestly appreciate other bands alot more than U2 and dislike them are not out there, but they are in the minority of U2's detractors. There is the odd "true classic rock" fan who truly does not get them musically, and there is the odd member of a band called Negativeland who has reason to dislike them personally, but most of the haters are nuts.
This is getting long, but a few more observations. I agree with the people around my age(22) who say that alot of the peers who dislike U2 honestly do not know that much about them. I run into this alot, I don't start arguments, but if music comes up, I try to naturally work U2 into the conversation and feel out the person. It is the 35 and older crowd who will all start bringing up Gloria, Wide Awake in America and Zooropa much to my excitement, and the 25 and under crowd that will either go deer in headlights or say U2 are really old. Sometimes I get lucky and run into someone my age with more than Vertigo and BD knowledge, and rare times I even hit the jackpot like I did when this gorgeous girl I met told me when U2 came up that she had used "Please" and Love is Blindness" in a school project and loved them!
When I was a senior in High School, Bomb was coming out and among my age group, U2 could do no wrong! They were the undisputed rock gods, and one of my teachers who is a HUGE FAN and Bono look alike, remarked that it felt like 1987 again with U2 being popular at the school! I got to college in Vermont, and talked to alot of people about my upcoming first U2 show in Boston on Vertigo. Almost every single person thought it was awesome that I was going to see them, and my door was being knocked down the morning I got back, kids wanting to know how they were, what they played, etc. I had a friend who was going to MSG in a couple weeks, some classmates on their way to Montreal to see U2, etc. Then, when I arrived back for sophomore yr in fall 2006, it was like someone flipped a switch. All of a sudden, Pearl jam represented all that was right with the world, U2 were old and for our parents, Bono was a rich tax evader(not true) and the Vertigo tour should just be put out of its misery. The attitude has seemingly remained the same since.
I have no explanation for the above. I only buy the overexposure argument to a certain extent. U2 needs to go away and dream it all up again??!! Get the hell out of the media for a while????!!! Didn't they just do that? Very long wait between Bomb and Horizon, Horizon was not as out there as many thought it to be, but listen to it after Bomb and its clear how big a departure it is! Then, when the highly anticipated Horizon dropped, it made a relatively soft landing. Sure, we had some Letterman, promo tour only for fans hard core enough to call into radio multiple times, then nothing until June. Thats not to mention no promotion at all for the Boots single(remember I-Tunes Vertigo?). NLOTH fell softly or not at all on the radio, hardly heard a track at the time. Not to mention how shocked I would be if I heard anything Horizon on traditional format radio at all now, less than a year after release. U2 has just not been everywhere like they were in the mid-late 80s, early 90s and early mid 2000s, that is a fact. Most people I talk to have no idea that U2 is currently touring with this big space ship, and some of these people are admitted fans who I know have respectable levels of U2 knowledge! I think they have been pretty underexposed since about the 3rd leg of Vertigo in 2005.
My best guesses, and they are only guesses as I do not have any real explanation for the uptick in U2 hatred, it baffles me. 1- the tax issue, people think U2 truly are hypocritical tax evaders and this is reinforced by 2- the recession, general mistrust of rich people in the wake of such a big financial meltdown which is reinforced by 3-pampered, upper middle class indie rock kids now see U2 as the filthy rich band that has too much money to make good music anymore. Of course 1 and 3 are bullshit, and 2 is legitimate but needs to be seen as a human nature/greed argument as opposed to something to fear about all rich people. We need the rich, they just need to have their actions regulated and not be given the assumption of rational thought in place of regulation. As for greed, people confuse hunger with greed, U2 has hunger, but not greed. Greed is AIG or Johnnie subprime mortgage lender, hunger is putting out in album like NLOTH and not being satisfied with 30 years of success.
My overall philosophy on these arguments is I never start them and I never let it hurt my relationship with the person, be they a friend, co worker, etc. I look at things like sports, music, etc as very worthy things that are good to be passionate about, but in the end, at least when it comes to arguments, it is entertainment only. Of course, U2 means alot more to me than entertainment, their music and stories and lives have helped me through so much, but when it comes to arguments with others, that's how I view it. No one lost their mother or father or child or their job or went hungry or contracted a terminal illness because the Red Sox lost or because their friend hates U2. There are things that matter, then there are these things, mostly to be taken in jest.
Sorry to ramble, just have not posted in a while and just realized again how addictive it is!!
