Rolling Stone & U2

[LuckyNumber7]

Music critics are only valuable in their ability to write and share their own thoughts and stylistically put them into words. Their whole profession is about their personal opinion, informed as it may be. They're much like bloggers.

Their opinion doesn't change mine, isn't representative of what others think, and isn't made to change yours. There's nothing wrong with what they do. Their job is to turn opinion into words and make you think. But if anybody puts what a critic has to say on a pedestal, they're not free-thinking.

 

[CosmoKramer]

Rolling Stone & U2

No, he’s completely right. And no one is going to take the word of the biggest fake u2 fan on this site, anyway.

I wish someone would rename this thread "Ray of Fucking Sunshine" because that's what this thread is.

I don't think I have ever read a thread where I disagreed with both sides...seriously, this is a first.

I am one of the bigger "millennium U2" fans on this forum. I prefer 2000+ U2 over 90's U2 save for Achtung Baby but they are not mutually exclusive because you can like Achtung and Bomb. I also don't blindly like whatever U2 puts out these days (NLOTH was a very average album with some really bad songs and both Bomb and ATYCLB have a couple of stinkers)

With that said....

I don't agree at all that their "quality" has diminished since the 90s. There are VERY dodgy lyrics on Zooropa and Pop(terrible songs too) as well as long/awful song titles and the band did just as many "uncool" things(the current glasses Bono wears are horrid but the muscle outfits from PopMart might top it).

I also don't agree at all that these folks are not U2 fans or hate millennial U2 because they want to be cool or "like Pitchfork". The reality is U2s sound/style did change in the 2000's and for some they don't like/prefer it and that's fine

I also couldn't disagree more with Ax being a fake fan. He is clearly not a big fan of recent U2 songs but lets be honest, You're the Best Thing is a pure pop song, sickeningly so, and is the very style that a lot of U2 fans followed U2 to avoid(I happen to really enjoy it). I get why he and others don't like it but he is by all accounts a true U2 fan that has a lot more knowledge of the band than me for sure and anyone who reads his posts knows he loves them.

Lastly, I think we can all agree that Ordinary Love only charted in the Hot 100 because of the Oscar performance as the song stinks

 

[LemonMelon]

And I'm sure LM has a very good, even more deeply informed, but quite different list.

I do indeed. My top 30 albums of the year, in alphabetical order:

(Sandy) Alex G - Rocket (country-inflected indie rock)
Alex Cameron - Forced Witness (sleazy, 80s-influenced Australian pop)
Ariel Pink - Dedicated to Bobby Jameson (playful psychedelic pop)
Beach Fossils - Somersault (jangle pop)
The Clientele - Music for the Age of Miracles (chamber pop)
Fleet Foxes - Crack-Up (progressive indie folk)
Four Tet - New Energy (microhouse)
Grizzly Bear - Painted Ruins (dreamy indie rock and folk)
The Horrors - V (goth and new wave-inspired dance)
Idles - Brutalism (intense post-harcore)
Jay Som - Everybody Works (sumptuous dream pop and shoegaze)
Jesca Hoop - Memories Are Now (singer-songwriter)
Kelela - Take Me Apart (sexy alternative R&B)
Kendrick Lamar - DAMN. (stylistically diverse hip hop)
LCD Soundsystem - American Dream (new wave and dance-punk)
The Magnetic Fields - 50 Song Memoir (sprawling singer-songwriter project that's too epic to be described in one line)
Makthaverskan - Ill (gothic jangle pop)
Mount Eerie - A Crow Looked at Me (heartbreaking indie folk)
The National - Sleep Well Beast (indie rock/chamber pop)
Rapsody - Laila’s Wisdom (funky hip hop)
Ryan Adams - Prisoner (top shelf 80s Springsteen worship)
Sampha - Process (R&B balladry)
Slowdive - Slowdive (vintage dream pop)
St. Vincent - Masseduction (funky, sexy art pop)
Thurston Moore - Rock n Roll Consciousness (enveloping noise rock)
tricot - 3 (Japanese math rock)
Tyler, the Creator - Flower Boy (soulful hip hop)
The War on Drugs - A Deeper Understanding (dreamy heartland rock)
Wednesday Campanella - Superman (Japanese hip house)
Your Old Droog - Packs (old school east coast hip hop)

That's taken from about 240 albums. If anything U2 puts out this year ends up replacing one of these albums, I will be thrilled. I hope it happens.

 

[DaveC]

i would really like to hear more about how people with a desperate need to be cool are fulfilling this need in 2017 on a u2 fan message board with about 100 consistently active users.

 

[BVS]

Can we get The Real U2 Fan criteria please?

Is there a handbook or application process?

 

[Joey788]

Music critics are only valuable in their ability to write and share their own thoughts and stylistically put them into words. Their whole profession is about their personal opinion, informed as it may be. They're much like bloggers.

Their opinion doesn't change mine, isn't representative of what others think, and isn't made to change yours. There's nothing wrong with what they do. Their job is to turn opinion into words and make you think. But if anybody puts what a critic has to say on a pedestal, they're not free-thinking.

Yep, you summed it up nicely. I write about music myself for a couple of websites and do about two album reviews a month. There's always going to be some level of bias in a critic's work, as there's no correct answer as to what's a good or bad album. When I review new work by some of my favorite artists like U2, I take a critical eye but they're also likely to get a better showing from me than an artist I'm neutral towards.

But that doesn't mean everything that U2 does will get a 10 out of 10. When I reviewed the Spiderman: Turn Off The Dark soundtrack, I think I gave it a 4 out of 10. I reviewed the new Arcade Fire album and gave it 6 out of 10 (which, looking back, was far too generous). I do it because I enjoy writing about music. I never go into an album looking to hate it. I hope that my reviews either expose a reader to something new or gives them a fresh way of viewing a record. That's about it.

I've luckily never been told or pressured to change a review by an editor, though I've also never written for anywhere on the scale of Rolling Stone. I had a feeling Jann Warner dictated some level of their coverage, but it's certainly not limited to U2. As for Pitchfork, it's clear some of their writers don't like U2's recent output, and that's fine. But I only have a problem when a writer brings up stuff not related to the music (like the Apple fiasco) and focuses solely on that. You're not reviewing the band's marketing strategy, you're supposed to be reviewing the music.

As for top albums of the year so far, here's my quick take.

Priests: Nothing Feels Natural
Ninet Tayeb: Paper Parachute
Los Campesinos!: Sick Scenes
Spoon: Hot Thoughts
Algiers: The Underside of Power
Waxahatchee: Out in the Storm
Japanese Breakfast: Soft Sounds From Another Planet
Torres: Three Futures
The National: Sleep Well Beast
St. Vincent: Masseduction

Will U2 make that list? Who knows. If they hit my top 10 or 15 for the year, I'll be happy.

 

[iron yuppie]

The value of music criticism IMO is to bring things to your attention you might not have known about otherwise. Say what you will about Pitchfork, but for me there have been very few instances where something they have recommended hasn't been worth the time. There have also been several albums I have loved that they haven't, but that hasn't done anything to change my opinion of the album in question.

 

[youarenotimmune]

However, while their newer music isnt TUF etc, it's still good. Great even, at times.
I'm not sure why it's so difficult to accept U2 peaked in the 90s, yet are still good now.
Every album adds to the 'awesome U2 songs' list.

This is how I also feel about U2's music 2000 onwards. Not as many great songs as before, but enough to keep me interested. Some of the posters here who've become disillusioned with the band don't find anything post-Pop to be even close to what came before. So it's perfectly understandable and reasonable for them to think that U2 is a shadow of its former self. I remember a common criticism here about SOI was that it was simply mediocre; there weren't any great songs on it. I think it's important to understand that most of us who still enjoy U2's music genuinely find some of it to be really good. I'm sure there are some blind sheep among us, just like there are some fans hipster-hating U2 to come off as cool. But I'm pretty sure such people are an insignificant minority.

So here are the post-Pop songs I find great:

Beautiful Day
When I Look at the World
Kite
The Ground Beneath Her Feet
Levitate
City of Blinding Lights
Smile
No Line on the Horizon
Magnificent
Moment of Surrender
White As Snow
Cedars of Lebanon
Invisible
California
Cedarwood Road
Raised By Wolves
Reach Me Now
Sleep Like a Baby
The Troubles

And this is why I'm still a fan.

 

[hasin73]

This is how I also feel about U2's music 2000 onwards. Not as many great songs as before, but enough to keep me interested. Some of the posters here who've become disillusioned with the band don't find anything post-Pop to be even close to what came before. So it's perfectly understandable and reasonable for them to think that U2 is a shadow of its former self. I remember a common criticism here about SOI was that it was simply mediocre; there weren't any great songs on it. I think it's important to understand that most of us who still enjoy U2's music genuinely find some of it to be really good. I'm sure there are some blind sheep among us, just like there are some fans hipster-hating U2 to come off as cool. But I'm pretty sure such people are an insignificant minority.

So here are the post-Pop songs I find great:

Beautiful Day
When I Look at the World
Kite
The Ground Beneath Her Feet
Levitate
City of Blinding Lights
Smile
No Line on the Horizon
Magnificent
Moment of Surrender
White As Snow
Cedars of Lebanon
Invisible
California
Cedarwood Road
Raised By Wolves
Reach Me Now
Sleep Like a Baby
The Troubles

And this is why I'm still a fan.

 

[jaimearodriguez]

Great list. Love you put California in there too.

 

[Axver]

That's a massive list. I could never even dream of assimilating so much music in a lifetime. Ax..... could you please point out to me some bands from your list who are similar to U2's type of music or close ? I will then give them a listen.

Honestly not sure they're that close in style to U2 ... I imagine the albums by Ride and The War on Drugs would appeal to a good number of U2 fans though. One that I didn't mention, The Church's Man Woman Life Death Infinity, would also appeal. The two bands are of a very similar vintage, both releasing debut post-punk albums at the start of the 1980s. But their paths diverged in the mid-1980s: instead of embracing American rock & roll and becoming a stadium rock band, The Church first shifted to be one of the leading exponents of the Aussie/Kiwi style of jangle pop, and then by the 1990s went heavily into neo-psychedelia.

Also, I think Neil Finn's new album Out of Silence is one of his weaker releases, but no doubt people who like post-Pop adult contemporary U2 will find something to enjoy. It's just that Neil's more adventurous: he recorded the damn thing live on a web stream!

Oh, and there's plenty of U2/Depeche Mode fan crossover, so if you like Depeche Mode, definitely listen to Ulver's album. Their career is breathtakingly diverse, everything from experimental ambient to black metal, but The Assassination of Julius Caesar is straight-up synthpop. Very catchy and creative.

I do indeed. My top 30 albums of the year, in alphabetical order:

Hah, yep, only two crossovers. Wish I could find that Beach Fossils album anything other than sleep-inducing (and "Rise" is one of the worst songs of 2017), and I'm not sure why Jay Som is getting so much praise for a fairly pedestrian if decent album. But I need to get around to the Fleet Foxes and Tricot albums.

The value of music criticism IMO is to bring things to your attention you might not have known about otherwise. Say what you will about Pitchfork, but for me there have been very few instances where something they have recommended hasn't been worth the time. There have also been several albums I have loved that they haven't, but that hasn't done anything to change my opinion of the album in question.

I haven't ever got much out of Pitchfork, but I totally agree with your definition of music criticism's value. It's not about blogging your own opinion, it's about explaining to a reader whether an album is worth their time.

 

[cobl04]

That's a massive list. I could never even dream of assimilating so much music in a lifetime. Ax..... could you please point out to me some bands from your list who are similar to U2's type of music or close ? I will then give them a listen.

Why does it have to sound similar to U2? Branch out mate. There's more to the world.

I don't agree at all that their "quality" has diminished since the 90s. There are VERY dodgy lyrics on Zooropa and Pop(terrible songs too) as well as long/awful song titles and the band did just as many "uncool" things(the current glasses Bono wears are horrid but the muscle outfits from PopMart might top it).

Would love to hear some examples.

But I only have a problem when a writer brings up stuff not related to the music (like the Apple fiasco) and focuses solely on that. You're not reviewing the band's marketing strategy, you're supposed to be reviewing the music.

People on here say this over and over, but I think it's crap. The album is inseparable from that hideous decision.

You cannot not talk about the marketing / release method, when it was such a HUGE thing. Released as Tim Cook and Bono touched fingers (how amazing the sheer lack of awareness) and then put on every single iPhone. That's so utterly stupid and dense and they deserve all the crap they copped for it

 

[Axver]

Would love to hear some examples.

Oh come on, it's not hard, and I'm one of the obvious "shit what happened after Pop?" people here.

Daddy's Gonna Pay for Your Crashed Car, Some Days are Better Than Others, If God Will Send His Angels. Definitely awful long titles. And on the dodgy lyrics front: U2 wrote Miami. Babyface, Discotheque, Playboy Mansion, the three long titles already mentioned... all of these would cop heaps of flak if they were released for the first time on a 2000s/10s album.

And as much as it's a great song that garners well-deserved praise on this forum, I remember when one of my friends read the song title North and South of the River and proclaimed it the stupidest title he's ever seen.

I must disagree with Cosmo on the glasses though. The muscle shirts were far worse. The glasses really aren't that bad. I'm glad he's not trying too hard with wraparounds any more.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

The muscle shirts were hilarious.

 

[LemonMelon]

If Babyface, Miami and Some Days Are Better Than Others were on SOI, that album would have a personality.

 

[hasin73]

Honestly not sure they're that close in style to U2 ... I imagine the albums by Ride and The War on Drugs would appeal to a good number of U2 fans though. One that I didn't mention, The Church's Man Woman Life Death Infinity, would also appeal. The two bands are of a very similar vintage, both releasing debut post-punk albums at the start of the 1980s. But their paths diverged in the mid-1980s: instead of embracing American rock & roll and becoming a stadium rock band, The Church first shifted to be one of the leading exponents of the Aussie/Kiwi style of jangle pop, and then by the 1990s went heavily into neo-psychedelia.

Also, I think Neil Finn's new album Out of Silence is one of his weaker releases, but no doubt people who like post-Pop adult contemporary U2 will find something to enjoy. It's just that Neil's more adventurous: he recorded the damn thing live on a web stream!

Oh, and there's plenty of U2/Depeche Mode fan crossover, so if you like Depeche Mode, definitely listen to Ulver's album. Their career is breathtakingly diverse, everything from experimental ambient to black metal, but The Assassination of Julius Caesar is straight-up synthpop. Very catchy and creative.

Many many thanks, dear Axver. I will definitely listen to them.

 

[shineon]

Shades

And what's wrong with wrap-arounds?!! I still wear them, and I might add I rock the hell out of those things...

 

[cobl04]

Oh come on, it's not hard, and I'm one of the obvious "shit what happened after Pop?" people here.

Daddy's Gonna Pay for Your Crashed Car, Some Days are Better Than Others, If God Will Send His Angels. Definitely awful long titles. And on the dodgy lyrics front: U2 wrote Miami. Babyface, Discotheque, Playboy Mansion, the three long titles already mentioned... all of these would cop heaps of flak if they were released for the first time on a 2000s/10s album.

And as much as it's a great song that garners well-deserved praise on this forum, I remember when one of my friends read the song title North and South of the River and proclaimed it the stupidest title he's ever seen.

I must disagree with Cosmo on the glasses though. The muscle shirts were far worse. The glasses really aren't that bad. I'm glad he's not trying too hard with wraparounds any more.

I take that point, but I also call bullshit.

This was a U2 that was balls-deep in irony at the time, too, remember. So I am certain that those Zooropa titles you mention would have been penned, along with their songs, tongue firmly in cheek.

The difference is these days the tongue's nowhere near the cheek. It's all utterly genuine.

Same with the lyrics: I adore Miami and Playboy Mansion and Discotheque and Some Days because back then U2 had the balls to make these stupid songs and just go with their gut, and we ended up with fun, somewhat throwaway numbers that still sound good. Whereas now, they spend three years working on a song and polishing it to within an inch of its life and we end up with Get on Your Boots and Best Thing.

 

[Axver]

And what's wrong with wrap-arounds?!! I still wear them, and I might add I rock the hell out of those things...

Bono would look just a bit silly in them by now.

I take that point, but I also call bullshit.

This was a U2 that was balls-deep in irony at the time, too, remember. So I am certain that those Zooropa titles you mention would have been penned, along with their songs, tongue firmly in cheek.

The difference is these days the tongue's nowhere near the cheek. It's all utterly genuine.

Same with the lyrics: I adore Miami and Playboy Mansion and Discotheque and Some Days because back then U2 had the balls to make these stupid songs and just go with their gut, and we ended up with fun, somewhat throwaway numbers that still sound good. Whereas now, they spend three years working on a song and polishing it to within an inch of its life and we end up with Get on Your Boots and Best Thing.

Yeah, I definitely hear you on the difference between something like Miami and Best Thing. Miami or SDABTO weren't intended to be lead singles released with a healthy dollop of sincerity. Best Thing is all the worse because it is.

But I don't think they're that far apart, and there is definitely continuity from the nineties to now.

 

[cobl04]

I think the quote in your sig actually sums up modern-day U2 extremely well. (I don't personally think any of those songs are mediocre, in fact the opposite, but there are similarities to be drawn I guess... but they're all the worse today because they're dressed up as sincerity, not with a nod and a wink).

 

[CosmoKramer]

Rolling Stone & U2

I think the quote in your sig actually sums up modern-day U2 extremely well. (I don't personally think any of those songs are mediocre, in fact the opposite, but there are similarities to be drawn I guess... but they're all the worse today because they're dressed up as sincerity, not with a nod and a wink).

Garbage lyrics on Zooropa and Pop are often given the pass under the guise of "having balls" or "experimentation". "a wink and a nod " don't make those lyrics or songs like Miami good.

Wake Up Dead Man: "Your father, he made the world in seven, he's in charge of heaven"

If God Will Send His Angels: "It's the blind leading the blond", or "it's the stuff, the stuff of country songs"

Miami: Miami, my mammy"

Discotheque: "You know you're chewing bubble gum, you know what that is but you still want some. You just can't get enough of that lovey Dover stuff" or "boom cha"

Staring at the Sun: "There's an insect in your ear, If you scratch it won't disappear. It's gonna itch and burn and sting Do you want to see what the scratching brings"

Some Days are Better than Others: "Some days are dry, some days are leaky, Some days come clean, other days are sneaky" or Some days are slippy, other days sloppy. Some days you can't stand the sight of a puppy .Your skin is white but you think you're a brother. Some days are better than others"

Numb: "Don't gape, Don't ape, Don't change your shape
Have another grape"

Some of the above songs I actually like but to say that these lyrics are good or better than lyrics off of an album like SOI because U2 was trying for irony? Nope

 

[cobl04]

Still call bullshit.

The WUDM line in isolation is a little clunky, but hardly offensive, doesn't take you out of the song. And is a realistic line that a faithless man of faith might ask of Jesus.

IFGWSHA - I like both of those lines, in particular the latter - it’s Bono taking a wistful little jab at the simplicity and open-heartedness of lyrics typical of country music

Miami - One of the number one reasons why I’ve so long disliked this section of the forum is that this song cops so much shit. It’s a throwaway rock song. The lyrics aren’t meant to be taken so seriously. It’s just a dumb, fun, strung-out fuzzy rock song done really well.

Discothque - fair. But, like Miami, the song is great, so who gives a shit. I wouldn’t care about half the shitty lyrics in recent years if the songs were good. Case in point: Miracle Drug. Awful lyrics, love the song.

SATS - daresay that’s a metaphor. not a great lyric, but passable.

Some Days - the silly lyrics is the whole point of the song. that’s what makes it such a fucking banger. LM will back me up here. This is when U2 used to be able to throw together a great song without refining it 8000 times.

Numb - you either like the Numb gambit or you don’t.

 

[Danny Boy]

I would add that I've always considered that Discotheque line a metaphor as well.

About someone who is caught up in club culture, one night stands, etc. Would like to be in a real relationship but keeps sating their desires with shallow liaisons.

 

[cobl04]

100%.

 

[CosmoKramer]

Still call bullshit.

The WUDM line in isolation is a little clunky, but hardly offensive, doesn't take you out of the song. And is a realistic line that a faithless man of faith might ask of Jesus.

IFGWSHA - I like both of those lines, in particular the latter - it’s Bono taking a wistful little jab at the simplicity and open-heartedness of lyrics typical of country music

Miami - One of the number one reasons why I’ve so long disliked this section of the forum is that this song cops so much shit. It’s a throwaway rock song. The lyrics aren’t meant to be taken so seriously. It’s just a dumb, fun, strung-out fuzzy rock song done really well.

Discothque - fair. But, like Miami, the song is great, so who gives a shit. I wouldn’t care about half the shitty lyrics in recent years if the songs were good. Case in point: Miracle Drug. Awful lyrics, love the song.

SATS - daresay that’s a metaphor. not a great lyric, but passable.

Some Days - the silly lyrics is the whole point of the song. that’s what makes it such a fucking banger. LM will back me up here. This is when U2 used to be able to throw together a great song without refining it 8000 times.

Numb - you either like the Numb gambit or you don’t.

Just to be clear....I like Discotheque a lot, I like Numb, I like SATS and I do enjoy Some Days. All of those songs I'm okay with the lyrics because there are other elements that I do like and would not classify any of them as bad. I also love Miracle Drug but that "baby's head" lyric does stick out a bit.

Miami and WUDM....well those I personally can't stand but to each there own.

 

[hasin73]

I would add that I've always considered that Discotheque line a metaphor as well.

About someone who is caught up in club culture, one night stands, etc. Would like to be in a real relationship but keeps sating their desires with shallow liaisons.

 

[LemonMelon]

"It's the blind leading the blonde" is a solid turn of phrase. It's a dig at the vapidity of modern society, a life built around ignorant people feeding bad information to those too shallow or stupid to investigate things for themselves.

Most of the lines above are metaphors that don't quite click, and since they can't be taken literally without the meaning getting lost, it's easy to say Bono wasn't trying or didn't care. But at least there's something behind those lyrics. And the simplistic line from WUDM was written that way because, hey, that's how people actually talk. Lou Reed was really good at writing that way, as if his characters were real people, but sometimes that meant paring things down or not bothering to rhyme at all. Bono chose very childlike rhymes because, from God's perspective, that's what we are.

Finally, "there used to be clunkers, so the gap between the 90s' writing and today's writing isn't that large" doesn't fly because the ceiling used to be a lot higher. Find me recent U2 lyrics as good as those in Zooropa, Lemon, Stay, Dirty Day, The Wanderer, Mofo, Gone, Please, etc.

 

[kiwilad]

This is when U2 used to be able to throw together a great song without refining it 8000 times.

Yep. And you're talking early 90s.
I've had Boy on repeat the last week or so. Incredible album. Some real highs, and the lows - if you call them that - aren't really low because they're so honest. There isn't that pandering to pop that Tedder has added (although the triangle/tinkly sound in I Will Follow pisses me off).

The point is, when they just churned songs out relatively quickly, without overthinking it, they were stunning. Utterly stunning. Boy is an album made by untrained teenage musicians nearly 40 years ago. And it is massive.

My issue with the post-Pop era is the huge over-correction from what they saw as Pop's downfall - limited time. Virtually every song since has that polished, calculated, committee-room feel to it. And that isn't the U2 I fell for.

And that definitely applies to the lyrics. Maybe Bono felt rushed with his lyric-writing in the 80s. Maybe he felt they were inadequate. But the pendulum has swung too far, with him now trying so hard to tell us EXACTLY what he's trying to say/teach/preach in every song. I just want him to chill, give the songs some air. Being Born is an exception, and I love it accordingly.

 

[Axver]

The only problem with that WUDM lyric is that it's a bit of a forced rhyme. It's not especially terrible in my view though.

But I can't believe any of you are defending that shit from IGWSHA, especially not such articulate and thoughtful posters as Cobbler and LM. IGWSHA has some good qualities - mainly the "Jesus never let me down ... now it's hard to get in the door" verse. But those two lines are horrendous. "Blind leading the blond" is just Bono trying to be clever and falling flat on his face, and "stuff of country songs" is a facepalming stereotype.

Some Days - the silly lyrics is the whole point of the song. that’s what makes it such a fucking banger. LM will back me up here. This is when U2 used to be able to throw together a great song without refining it 8000 times.

Numb - you either like the Numb gambit or you don’t.

I'll back you here on SDABTO. It's kinda silly, but it's one of the silly U2 songs that works. Maybe it's because Adam's bass is so irresistible. Maybe it's because you know the lyrics were banged out one night after a couple of beers. It's Party Girl silly, not Boots stupid.

I would add that I've always considered that Discotheque line a metaphor as well.

About someone who is caught up in club culture, one night stands, etc. Would like to be in a real relationship but keeps sating their desires with shallow liaisons.

This is a good analysis and I like it, but anybody who thinks Bono sat down and wrote it with this in mind is giving the guy way too much credit.

Finally, "there used to be clunkers, so the gap between the 90s' writing and today's writing isn't that large" doesn't fly because the ceiling used to be a lot higher. Find me recent U2 lyrics as good as those in Zooropa, Lemon, Stay, Dirty Day, The Wanderer, Mofo, Gone, Please, etc.

Agreed completely. I can barely even comprehend how you can go from such a sensational take on violence as Please to something as banal as Peace on Earth.

 

[Axver]

And that definitely applies to the lyrics. Maybe Bono felt rushed with his lyric-writing in the 80s. Maybe he felt they were inadequate. But the pendulum has swung too far, with him now trying so hard to tell us EXACTLY what he's trying to say/teach/preach in every song. I just want him to chill, give the songs some air. Being Born is an exception, and I love it accordingly.

I couldn't agree more.

And you can tell they've totally fallen into this mindset when they talk about Bad as incomplete. It was one thing to say they wish they had finished Pop - yeah, we got it, they felt like there was some unfinished business, and even if you love Pop exactly as it is, you can comprehend why the band see it differently. But to round on Bad as incomplete? That's when you realise they've lost sight of the indefinable qualities that make a song exceptional and timeless.