Bono's 'Supposed' Africa Lecturing

[Jeannieco]

The people whinning about Bono's preaching obviously don't get it.
U2 have always been about liberal politics and activism. By liberal I mean, liberal in LOVE and social justice, so to expect Bono, the voice of U2, to just shut up and sing during the shows is like asking the wind to stop blowing. Like others have said here, most U2 fans are like minded souls who admire the message of social justice and how U2 inspire us to TAKE action. The reason Bono made the speeches during the Vertigo tour was to get the ONE Campaign strong enough and large enough to make a political statement in numbers to get aid to those in need in the most poverty stricken place on the planet. And guess what? IT WORKED. Bono's pride has long since been put to rest in this respect. I don't think he cares about pissing off jaded music fans with his 5 minute speech about how joining a campaign can actually change the world, because like he was quoted saying "This shit actually works"...and U2 have thusly saved millions of lives...
we did it. We ( The One Campaign members) are saving millions of lives now thanks to the aid the west has now provided for aids drugs and thanks to U2 for propelling this to happen.
Let's see...saving millions of lives versus pissing off so called music fans....no contest...

I think this tour is about saying thank you to us for joining ONE the incredible progress that has been made, thus the toned downed "preaching". "Window in the Skies" was the first queue to me that Bono was in a thankful gratitude mode at the end of the Vertigo tour.

I personally love it when Bono gets up there and preaches...
I mean come on..... remember "F**K the revolution"?
Pure passion. Music and passion and a message that changes the world! Nothing like it IMO.

"Oh can't you see, what LOVE has done?"

 

[popacrobat]

The people whinning about Bono's preaching obviously don't get it.
U2 have always been about liberal politics and activism. By liberal I mean, liberal in LOVE and social justice

yes, only liberals are about love. conservatives hate love!

 

[LPU2]

yes, only liberals are about love. conservatives hate love!

Conservatives don't hate love. It's just that their love is limited to flags, firearms, and Fox.

What I find interesting is that it appears people really love it when their celebrities sing or write about injustice, but the minute they actually do something about it, we turn on them.

"Shut up and sing," an idiot once wrote. As if SHE and other professional talkers are more qualified than celebrities to comment on the world.

 

[powerhour24]

Lots of songs you'll have to write off if you think there are bad messages in songs about being shit-faced.

I mean, do you feel the same way about "Trying to Throw Your Arms Around the World"?

I get my hackles raised when someone throws around the word "talentless" about someone whose music they don't care for. You don't like her music, fine - but talentless? You've clearly never heard her perform one of her songs as a solo acoustic number with a piano.

But anyway, back to Bono's mid-concert dissertations on Africa....

Not talentless, she has a knack for getting people's attention while performing and her producers come up with very catchy hooks. My point about the message is that its music appealing to young impressionable people, and its buried in this infectious pop chorus, I'm not exactly writing it off but I don't think its exactly making for a great upcoming generation of teenager or songwriters.

But, we can agree to disagree. Whereas I won't agree to disagree with Bono haters.

 

[Jeannieco]

yes, only liberals are about love. conservatives hate love!

I did make the distinction...
"by liberal I mean, liberal in LOVE and social justice,"....
used as an adjective.

 

[gvox]

well that's definitely not true. in Hartford the speech before One was around 3 minutes from the start of when he asked us to take out our Cell phones. there were a few longer from the New York shows too.

and no, i didn't time them when I was there, just looking at the bootlegs.

3 minutes, oh noez.


The bottom line is very few, if any, were 5 minutes. The majority were about a minute (or less).

 

[popacrobat]

3 minutes, oh noez.


The bottom line is very few, if any, were 5 minutes. The majority were about a minute (or less).

like I said, I don't really care if its 3-4 minutes or whatever. But to say the longest was just over a minute and most were under a minute is just false.

 

[bigjohn2441]

i dont like anyone telling me what i should think/do. bono is no exception.

 

[Marien]

i dont like anyone telling me what i should think/do. bono is no exception.

He's telling you what he thinks and asks for your help, if you don't agree don't do it, it's that easy, but some people here are telling Bono to shut up and sing, isn't it against free speech? or is it that he loses his rights when he gets on a stage?

 

[corianderstem]

... but some people here are telling Bono to shut up and sing, isn't it against free speech?

Not unless "some people" are the government and are throwing him in jail for speaking his mind, or censoring him.

That would make it a "freedom of speech" issue.

 

[OrARoundabout]

...praise to high-heaven bad influence no-talents like Lady Gaga.

No

You, Sir, are wrong

 

[Niceman]

For the most part I think its great that they are interested in political issues. It has inspired some of their best songs and done a lot of good to inform the public.

BUT I do think there was a time at the beginning of this decade when Bono seemed to be more involved with causes than with music. The band complained that Bono was away so much during the writting of ATYCLB, and I suspect that was a big part of why that ended up being (IMHO) the weakest album in the catalog. He forgot about his day job....

And while I understand that they are playing Walk On for a good cause, I think its a pity that they are playing such a weak song - for whatever cause. I believe the song was only in the set because of the message...... and well, I saw it as the vegetables in the set that I (and maybe others) didn't actually want to eat, but we understood it was the good thing to eat (listen to.) It's a pity that they hadn't written a better song for her...

So, there is a line they have to be careful of, and I think they have gone too far a few times. (The 4-5 minute speeches nightly during Vertigo being another example.)

 

[mikal]

yeah, as laughable as those masks were, they were much better than Bono's homily every night during the Vertigo Tour.

 

[65980]

The way some of you turned on Tim Wallach's posts here is stunning. Two of you called his opinions "sad", when he was just responding to the first poster's questions (and also made clear -- twice -- that he didn't necessarily share the opinions of the people he was discussing).

I hope some of you realize how fascistic your posts are when you call other people's intelligent posts "sad", "exaggerating", or "wrong". This is rather ironic coming from people desperately defending Bono for upholding democratic values.

For the record, I agree that Bono took the speech-thing too far on *some* of the Vertigo shows. Certainly, it's way over-long (for me) on the Chicago DVD.

There are many clear, intelligent, and rational (not to mention time-honored) reasons why MANY people -- say, maybe 98% of the population -- don't want to hear political messages or invitations to join causes while at a music concert. The fact that Bono himself has spoken about his own dilemmas on this issue, and that it came out that Edge criticized Bono for talking too much at the gigs, should tell some of you that your "defend Bono at all costs and insult people who think independently" attitude here is a bit ridiculous.

 

[gvox]

Man, I'm gonna have to pay better attention at the next show, because clearly 2% of the audience have amazing vocal abilities if they can project cheers for Bono's speeches that drown out the 98% that are booing! I think that number is off, in other words. It might be closer to a majority in the online community that obsesses over these things and critics who would have found something else to criticize anyways, and I think that when Bono and Edge address these things in interviews it is because they are (imo overly ie they shouldn't give a fuck) sensitive to media/online criticism. Because I'll tell you one thing: there certainly weren't 19,600 people per night on the Vertigo tour and 63,700 people per night on 360 booing and telling Bono to stop preaching.

As for the length..tell you what popacrobat, you go back and listen to each and every bootleg and make a table of all the times per show. Until then I'll just modify my assertion to say that MOST of the shows clocked in at a minute or a bit more. A small percentage went longer.

Is the Chicago DVD speech too long? Maybe, in relation to other Vertigo shows. But I've noticed a bit of a habit of his. When they are filming a DVD, it seems he's either so high on adrenaline, nervous about saying exactly what he wants to say, whatever the reason might be...but it seems that he goes on longer on those nights. Take for example the band introduction at the recent Rose Bowl taping. Imo that was considerably longer than the speeches he gave at either of the two shows I was at, and it seemed that he was kindof rambling/meandering a bit. Watch older DVDs and I get that sense also, that he speaks for longer.

That plus the fact that I don't base very much of my opinion of what they do live on the official DVDs (if at all), is why I say that this is a non-issue to me.

 

[65980]

Man, I'm gonna have to pay better attention at the next show, because clearly 2% of the audience have amazing vocal abilities if they can project cheers for Bono's speeches that drown out the 98% that are booing! I think that number is off, in other words.

I was referring to 98% of music fans in general, not U2 fans who go to gigs (themselves, a small percentage of U2's overall audience).

 

[Tim Wallach]

The way some of you turned on Tim Wallach's posts here is stunning. Two of you called his opinions "sad", when he was just responding to the first poster's questions (and also made clear -- twice -- that he didn't necessarily share the opinions of the people he was discussing).

I hope some of you realize how fascistic your posts are when you call other people's intelligent posts "sad", "exaggerating", or "wrong". This is rather ironic coming from people desperately defending Bono for upholding democratic values.

For the record, I agree that Bono took the speech-thing too far on *some* of the Vertigo shows. Certainly, it's way over-long (for me) on the Chicago DVD.

There are many clear, intelligent, and rational (not to mention time-honored) reasons why MANY people -- say, maybe 98% of the population -- don't want to hear political messages or invitations to join causes while at a music concert. The fact that Bono himself has spoken about his own dilemmas on this issue, and that it came out that Edge criticized Bono for talking too much at the gigs, should tell some of you that your "defend Bono at all costs and insult people who think independently" attitude here is a bit ridiculous.

Thank you!
I appreciate that. (Especially the fact that you actually read the post properly).

And I totally agree with your last part as well.

 

[gvox]

How are 98% of music fans in general relevant to what goes on at U2 show. The only people whose opinion matters at a U2 show are U2 fans - those who go primarily, those who don't only very closely behind. What fans of music in general think really does not matter.

 

[65980]

Gvox, you apparently think of U2 fans as some sort of politically elevated people who want to be preached at during concerts. I grant you, there are people who probably do want that -- maybe 1.35% of the audience. Then there is another segment of the U2 audience -- perhaps 45.87% -- who enjoy the social/political commentary in U2 songs, but do not equate with a need for 5-minute speeches.

What you might be forgetting is that U2 are a mainstream band and have been since 1987 (or sooner). The same people who bought Bon Jovi and Def Leppard and George Michael in 1987 also bought The Joshua Tree. Some of them even went to U2 gigs. (For example, I worked with a British guy who saw them at Wembley in 1987, and his favorite band is Air Supply). Not all of these people expect to be preached at when they go to a gig. Some of them just want to hear some intelligent, passionate music.

 

[popacrobat]

Man, I'm gonna have to pay better attention at the next show, because clearly 2% of the audience have amazing vocal abilities if they can project cheers for Bono's speeches that drown out the 98% that are booing! I think that number is off, in other words. It might be closer to a majority in the online community that obsesses over these things and critics who would have found something else to criticize anyways, and I think that when Bono and Edge address these things in interviews it is because they are (imo overly ie they shouldn't give a fuck) sensitive to media/online criticism. Because I'll tell you one thing: there certainly weren't 19,600 people per night on the Vertigo tour and 63,700 people per night on 360 booing and telling Bono to stop preaching.

As for the length..tell you what popacrobat, you go back and listen to each and every bootleg and make a table of all the times per show. Until then I'll just modify my assertion to say that MOST of the shows clocked in at a minute or a bit more. A small percentage went longer.

Is the Chicago DVD speech too long? Maybe, in relation to other Vertigo shows. But I've noticed a bit of a habit of his. When they are filming a DVD, it seems he's either so high on adrenaline, nervous about saying exactly what he wants to say, whatever the reason might be...but it seems that he goes on longer on those nights. Take for example the band introduction at the recent Rose Bowl taping. Imo that was considerably longer than the speeches he gave at either of the two shows I was at, and it seemed that he was kindof rambling/meandering a bit. Watch older DVDs and I get that sense also, that he speaks for longer.

That plus the fact that I don't base very much of my opinion of what they do live on the official DVDs (if at all), is why I say that this is a non-issue to me.

Okay, I'll go check out all the bootlegs of the shows I went to later today. I went to 24 on Vertigo tour so I'll let you know the results, probably not till tonight.

 

[Jeannieco]

It all boils down to this. Public figures cannot please 100 percent of the people 100 percent of the time so who 100 percent cares?

Just enjoy the music/show for what it's worth. You know what you are getting when you buy the ticket....so just go to bathroom during the parts you don't enjoy.

Simple.

 

[gvox]

Gvox, you apparently think of U2 fans as some sort of politically elevated people who want to be preached at during concerts. I grant you, there are people who probably do want that -- maybe 1.35% of the audience. Then there is another segment of the U2 audience -- perhaps 45.87% -- who enjoy the social/political commentary in U2 songs, but do not equate with a need for 5-minute speeches.

Riiiiight. What a backpedal. I made no such assumption, but you're pretty clearly asserting that 98.65% of the audience does NOT want to listen to a short speech (you call it "being preached at", which shows your outright bias against it anyways) and that assertion is patently ridiculous. You're basically just grabbing numbers out of thin air, and have no real hard evidence to back it up. 1.35%? Think again.

And basically, like I said, it was more like 98% of the people at the concert who CHEERED during/for the speeches. No matter what type of fan they were - general U2 fan, hardcore U2 fan, also bought Bon Jovi U2 fan, general and U2 music fan...just came tonite because I want to get in this girls pants U2 fan - WHATEVER!

 

[kafrun]

Bono's always been political. This is nothing new folks.

Bono's always been political. This is nothing new folks.

Bono's always been political. This is nothing new folks.

.

 

[Jeannieco]

^^ and gvox exactly!!!

 

[Rachel D.]

I have mixed feelings. I think it's great that U2 use their shows to raise awareness about issues like Burma and AIDS in Africa instead of basing their shows on sex and debauchery like a lot of other acts do. My friend who went with me to the Norman show had never heard of Aung San Suu Kyi and I don't think she knew who Desmond Tutu was, so she learned something (granted, she thought the ASSK masks were creepy, but nonetheless...).

However, I believe that Bono should, for the most part, keep his Africa work and U2 shows separate. I'm not saying that he shouldn't mention the ONE campaign at all, just that he shouldn't stop the show and talk about it for as long as he was doing on the Vertigo tour because it kills the flow. That part on the Chicago DVD, for instance, is not going to make most people go, "Yeah! Woo! Preach it, brother!" It'll more likely make them press the "skip" button. I'm not saying that it's bad that he talks about Africa at shows; it's just not the right place for long talks like that.

 

[mikal]

i'm going to start a "2 Campaign".....to make poverty history........twice!