U2's second chance
- Thread starter onyourkneesboy
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
An Cat Gav
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
This sums up the way I feel about SUC perfectly.
gvox
Ghost of Love
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
This is what I get out of it!
The song fits fine, unless someone wants to say that UC into CT or SUC into F-BB is somehow less fitting than Pride into Wire.
The album does not tell the same chronological story envisioned in Linear or in previous posts with various material(good job if you made a list!), but I just don't see how SUC could possibly be interpreted as sounding like it came from a completely different project.
It certainly sounds nothing like anything from Bomb, it is complete new ground for U2. The CT-Boots-SUC trilogy has so much more going on musically than anything from Bomb.
CT, GOYB and SUC were all being worked on in some form alongside the title track, Magnificent, MOS, UC, F-BB, WAS, Cedars, etc. They went through many incarnations and were intended right from the beginning.
I know its all opinion but I just can't see how the NLOTH middle 3 can be in any way represented as sticking out like a big, disruptive sore thumb.
If this is the case, then I surmise that a thread arguing that LIB, The Fly, So Cruel and One could have all come from different projects could do just as well here.
No coherent U2 album lacks diversity, JT had Trip, WOWY and Exit, War had Like a Song and Drowning Man, UF had Wire and Promenade, etc. It does not mean the overall atmosphere of the album or the flow of the album is broken.
I always get the same vibe throughout my listens of NLOTH, AB, JT, UF and War. That is certainly not true of Bomb, where all songs supposedly fit.
THANK YOU!
ozeeko
Refugee
I don't think variety is the issue. Variety is not a problem.
It's not like people are reaching for reasons not to like SUC. It's like a brick in the face to me how much it doesn't sound like a NLOTH track. It's a rare song that fails on 2 levels. 1) Not being a good song. And 2) Not sounding like a song that belongs on the album. And I feel the same way about CT, just more because of reason #2 than #1.
Okay, since this is an opinionated issue I won't go on for too too long. But I will say this, that whoever used LIB, So Cruel, One, The Fly AND TTYW AND Drowning Man AND Like A Song as examples of songs sounding out of place on albums...tragically weak examples, and if anything you have strengthened the other side's argument by comparing CT-GOYB-SUC to those songs.
It's not like people are reaching for reasons not to like SUC. It's like a brick in the face to me how much it doesn't sound like a NLOTH track. It's a rare song that fails on 2 levels. 1) Not being a good song. And 2) Not sounding like a song that belongs on the album. And I feel the same way about CT, just more because of reason #2 than #1.
Okay, since this is an opinionated issue I won't go on for too too long. But I will say this, that whoever used LIB, So Cruel, One, The Fly AND TTYW AND Drowning Man AND Like A Song as examples of songs sounding out of place on albums...tragically weak examples, and if anything you have strengthened the other side's argument by comparing CT-GOYB-SUC to those songs.
Yeah, I said something similar, ozeeko, in the post I erased. I find SUC feels blatantly out of place on NLOTH, an aesthetic perception that happens to be fully reinforced by the history of that song as compared to most of the album's other tracks. Given this history, it'd actually be something of a surprise if it did fit in. You could argue that LAPOE is a similar case on its respective album, although the noticeability is much less pronounced. If SUC had emerged from Fez, given the fuzzy sounds we heard in some of the clips, I think it actually could work in the context of the album. I think music-wise, Big Girls are Best would fit in better after GOYB (and not even much worse lyrically).
loudreamer
The Fly
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2008
- Messages
- 182
Regarding SUC and CT...
I'm one of those that likes to hear albums from beggining to end. I don't hear beach clips, ever.
Guess I'm old school, but I love to wait untill I have my copy in my hands, and the sweetness of the moment when I open the booklet and read the lyrics as I listen to the album for the first time. It's like a sacred moment, and I create a context where I can put everything on hold and just listen to the album from beggining to end and just try to devote myself to listening to the album the way the artist intended to, as a piece.
After some nights of repeating this experience and having assimilated the album as a piece, I start to come back to the album in different ways. With NLOTH, it took me a couple of days to accept the fact that I had to skip CT and SUC to still like them. Let me explain this: I think CT and SUC are good songs and I like them, but I can't stand them in the context of hearing NLOTH from beggining to end. It's in that context where they don't work, FOR ME.
So every now and then when I don't feel like hearing any of the other songs in NLOTH, I hear CT and SUC individually and I really like them, and then I can't stop hearing them in my head all day and enjoying them as great songs.
As Bram said some time ago, I think GOYB takes extra heat just for being in the middle of those 2, and it suffers from a kind of "sandwich effect" hahahaha...
Hope I make some sense.
I'm one of those that likes to hear albums from beggining to end. I don't hear beach clips, ever.
Guess I'm old school, but I love to wait untill I have my copy in my hands, and the sweetness of the moment when I open the booklet and read the lyrics as I listen to the album for the first time. It's like a sacred moment, and I create a context where I can put everything on hold and just listen to the album from beggining to end and just try to devote myself to listening to the album the way the artist intended to, as a piece.
After some nights of repeating this experience and having assimilated the album as a piece, I start to come back to the album in different ways. With NLOTH, it took me a couple of days to accept the fact that I had to skip CT and SUC to still like them. Let me explain this: I think CT and SUC are good songs and I like them, but I can't stand them in the context of hearing NLOTH from beggining to end. It's in that context where they don't work, FOR ME.
So every now and then when I don't feel like hearing any of the other songs in NLOTH, I hear CT and SUC individually and I really like them, and then I can't stop hearing them in my head all day and enjoying them as great songs.
As Bram said some time ago, I think GOYB takes extra heat just for being in the middle of those 2, and it suffers from a kind of "sandwich effect" hahahaha...
Hope I make some sense.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
You're the first person I've heard say that they like the songs BUT don't think they belong.
I like the songs, but I think they don't belong. There's two for you
Sometimes I actually think CT works well where it is though.Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I like the songs, but I think they don't belong. There's two for you
Yep, that's two!
Not sure if you two disprove my theory, or just prove that there are a lot of people with opinions in this world!I actually think your theory might be backwards. I think many people dislike these songs more than they otherwise would because of how they fit (or, more precisely, don't fit) on the album. I.e. more people have a problem with how they fit than with the songs themselves. I hardly need tell you that this has been a hot topic since before the album leaked (and even before we had 30-second clips!) when all we had were song descriptions and the track listing.
ozeeko
Refugee
I agree. Although I do find SUC to be pretty worthless on all fronts, CT I tend to enjoy to some degree in isolated moments. When it comes to complete continuous listening with NLOTH, after UC I'd rather just skip all the way to F-BB. GOYB, not a horrendous song, it's got a couple decent parts, like the chorus. I've said it before, if SUC, CT, and GOYB were on HTDAAB, or just released as singles, I'd like them a lot more. Maybe not SUC, but CT and GOYB, yea.
CT retains all the HTDAAB optimism and corniness, yet it wraps it up in a much tighter and less pompous fashion than the majority of the Bomb tracks. This song would've been a highlight for me on that album. While not completely like any song on that album musically, it is totally in keeping with the lyrical sentiments and optimstic, world concious themes.
GOYB, despite what music theory experts will argue, feels a lot like the twin brother of Vertigo, what with the glammy rock riffing, the ascending/desceding circular bass lines, and Bono's one-note speak-singing. Again, i like it much better than most of the BOMB tracks, but it's just like more of the same. To me sounds like a flashback to the previous album instead of a move forward.
SUC...forget it. Just an epic failure. Sounds like it was cut from another album, and it's not even good at all.
So...yea to back up what Bram was saying, I don't think believing a song sounds out of place on an album means that you automatically don't like it. For I do enjoy CT and GOYB.
You could make the same argument for Breathe. It's also a more straightforward big rocksong. And it's sandwiched between WAS and COL. But I don't here many people complaining about it (because most people think it's a better song?).
I pretty much like SUC but it does sound a bit forced.
I pretty much like SUC but it does sound a bit forced.
ozeeko
Refugee
actually i do feel that way about Breathe, I just didn't feel like bringing it up. But yea, would be like the 3rd strongest track on BOMB if it was there. Anthemic arena rock song with that album's trademark optimistic worldsaving vibe.
Yeah, I was wondering if Breathe would come into this conversation and I'm glad you brought it up, nielsgov. As someone who was not terribly interested in this song after hearing the beach clip (and who's still lamenting the loss of Bono's vocals in the outro), I happen to think this song fits perfectly between the two slowest, chillest songs on the album. A lot of this has to do with the intro (start quiet and build--the opposite of the obnoxious ABOY intro) and the pulsing, direction-changing outro (I realize that this guitar figure shows up earlier as well, but it's fairly divorced, sound-wise, from the rest of the song). I think it works flawlessly despite the fact that it could seem very out of place, just as Exit and Acrobat could if you stop and think about it without playing them through. I realize that my argument here is pretty nebulous (i.e. "It just works!"), and I'd actually love to hear the thoughts of someone who disagrees. Edit: just saw your post ozeeko
ozeeko
Refugee
Yeah, I was wondering if Breathe would come into this conversation and I'm glad you brought it up, nielsgov. As someone who was not terribly interested in this song after hearing the beach clip (and who's still lamenting the loss of Bono's vocals in the outro), I happen to think this song fits perfectly between the two slowest, chillest songs on the album. A lot of this has to do with the intro (start quiet and build--the opposite of the obnoxious ABOY intro) and the pulsing, direction-changing outro (I realize that this guitar figure shows up earlier as well, but it's fairly divorced, sound-wise, from the rest of the song). I think it works flawlessly despite the fact that it could seem very out of place, just as Exit and Acrobat could if you stop and think about it without playing them through. I realize that my argument here is pretty nebulous (i.e. "It just works!"), and I'd actually love to hear the thoughts of someone who disagrees. Edit: just saw your post ozeeko
Yea, not sure it works like a charm, although it does work "better" than the 3 song middle. My only problem with it is that WAS and COL seem so closely related. Both songs are so hopeless. So taking these three songs together, you get a strange emotional ride that feels a little off. The protagonist is lost and scared in WAS, then becomes a strong confident leader in Breathe, then is back to being lost again in COL, this time seemingly deader than before. It's a strange emotional ride. Does it work? I don't think so, but it's not as distracting as the middle portion. I think just with different lyrics the song could've fit.
Good points.
I think I'd characterize the lyrics of Breathe differently though (although the delivery sounds the way you describe it). He starts off being inhospitable and then thinks better of it ("These days are better than that"), and in the chorus discusses the ability to remake yourself out of your shitty past and present. Finding this 'grace', this ability to move forward even after what's happened (in WAS, for example, or in the entire preceding journey of the album if one can even piece such a thing together), seems to be the culmination.
I agree that the lyrical progression from here to COL requires more of a stretch. Perhaps we can sum up the exuberant experience found in Breathe as something that's fleeting:
This shitty world sometimes produces a rose
The scent of it lingers and then it just goes.
In the end, I think this kind of close reading is just idle speculation (because I think U2 writes the songs first and then sequences them--for the most part), if occasionally fun.
Even as someone who likes it when U2 slows down and chills things out, I like having the upbeat track in this spot, but I realize it comes down to purely subjective response.
I think I'd characterize the lyrics of Breathe differently though (although the delivery sounds the way you describe it). He starts off being inhospitable and then thinks better of it ("These days are better than that"), and in the chorus discusses the ability to remake yourself out of your shitty past and present. Finding this 'grace', this ability to move forward even after what's happened (in WAS, for example, or in the entire preceding journey of the album if one can even piece such a thing together), seems to be the culmination.
I agree that the lyrical progression from here to COL requires more of a stretch. Perhaps we can sum up the exuberant experience found in Breathe as something that's fleeting:
This shitty world sometimes produces a rose
The scent of it lingers and then it just goes.
In the end, I think this kind of close reading is just idle speculation (because I think U2 writes the songs first and then sequences them--for the most part), if occasionally fun.
Even as someone who likes it when U2 slows down and chills things out, I like having the upbeat track in this spot, but I realize it comes down to purely subjective response.
It's almost always the tenth track on a U2 album that sounds a bit different than the rest of the album: OOTS, Exit, New York...
I think Breathe just works great between them because it doesn't make the last part of the album too slow. I'm not the person to analyze lyrics to the detail but it probably doesn't work lyrically. Musically it's just some fun between the more serious songs WAS and COL. I have the same feeling about the "middle three". Just some playful songs that the album needs to make it a bit lighter.
I think Breathe just works great between them because it doesn't make the last part of the album too slow. I'm not the person to analyze lyrics to the detail but it probably doesn't work lyrically. Musically it's just some fun between the more serious songs WAS and COL. I have the same feeling about the "middle three". Just some playful songs that the album needs to make it a bit lighter.
ozeeko
Refugee
I think OOTS works in that position, because like all the songs that preceded it, it's something different, and the album is collection of individual songs.
Exit works perfectly as the link between OTH and MOTD. It sort of creeps its way into existence after the fading chorus reprise of the previous song, and MOTD carries on the darkness. Plus, it's true to the album's interpretation of American roots music.
New York works for me because, like BOMB, the album it's featured on is a collection of songs, but they are also held together by themes of reflection, loss and grief, and New York carries on those themes. Not to mention it retains that lush, warm ATYCLB production.
Aight, a change of subject is probably in order at this point...
ozeeko
Refugee
Another thing, putting in lightweight songs to alleviate the tension isn't something new. They've done it their entire career. One example being TTYW, a song that works because of its bluesy American sound. A song like Sweetest Thing would've stuck out and seemed out of place, considering it's a little too sweet and poppy for that album.
Mysterious Ways and Ultraviolet are lighter sounding, but still executed well with that dangerous AB production.
POP has got Miami and Playboy Mansion. (Miami being one of the weaker tracks in U2's canon, but it fits there and is in keeping with the album's vibe)
Aight I'm done.
Mysterious Ways and Ultraviolet are lighter sounding, but still executed well with that dangerous AB production.
POP has got Miami and Playboy Mansion. (Miami being one of the weaker tracks in U2's canon, but it fits there and is in keeping with the album's vibe)
Aight I'm done.
Salome
you are what you is
POP also has If god ...
just about their worst song and ... after Mofo
now I know people will make a case for this song
but truly
jarring is The Fly - Mysterious Ways
and I still don't see how In God's Country and Trip go with the rest of JT
and I could prolly think of 1 or 2 more
just about their worst song and ... after Mofo
now I know people will make a case for this song
but truly
jarring is The Fly - Mysterious Ways
and I still don't see how In God's Country and Trip go with the rest of JT
and I could prolly think of 1 or 2 more
ozeeko
Refugee
Not talking about good songs vs. bad songs, talking about what songs sound like they fit/belong/are a part of the albums they are featured on.
If God is not the greatest song (i think its kinda good) but production wise it sounds like its a part of POP. The hip hop bongos in the beginning, the swooping sounds, Bono's lower register vocals.
I don't see how The Fly into MW is jarring. I'm actually clueless as to what u mean by that. MW keeps the energy up, is exotic sounding and sexy like the rest of the album, deals with a sexual/spiritual relationship like other songs, and while being playful still has the subtle hint of danger left over from The Fly.
In God's Country...the title alone should be enough to convince you of its worthiness. The Joshua Tree is an album that deals with America. The song's called In God's Country. Need I say more?
TTYW is a bluesy song. The Joshua Tree is an album that deals with U2 exploring American roots music. It works.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
What's the harm? It would be an an awfully short discussion.
You don't see how In God's Country fits into an album that seeks to be an aural representation of the American southwest?
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
What's the harm? It would be an an awfully short discussion.
You don't see how In God's Country fits into an album that seeks to be an aural representation of the American southwest?
I see that, just as I see how a song whose lyrics are filled with geometrical references fit onto No Line on The Horizon.
I did not say these songs were out of place on albums, maybe reading the post would have helped.
I said that anyone who could argue that CT-GOYB-SUC are out of place could plausibly argue the songs I mentioned are out of place. I do not think any of them are, and I did not compare the merits of any of these songs to the middle 3 of NLOTH.
Thematically, musically, these songs are not out of place on NLOTH. Sorry. They sound different, but I could not think of any 2 different sounding songs than UC and MOS, both from the original fez sessions and both universally loved.
You strengthened Niceman's and my argument when a few posts under this one, you expressed for the 100th time your strong dislike for SUC in general.
Most of the criticism of these songs are from people who do not like them, and that clouds their view of everything else related to how they fit with the other songs, track order, etc. With all due respect, I just don't see it any other way.
Anyone want to tell us how woefully bad the UC into CT and SUC into F-BB transitions are? It would be interesting to hear an argument that actually makes a case that these tracks are woefully out of place.
This I agree with you 100% on!
I do not mean to suggest from my posts that I am against you or your arguments, I think we're all closer together here than we think. This has been a great thread.
JT I think is the most brilliant artistic capture of America ever. IGC speaks so well to the beacon of hope and opportunity we are to the rest of the world while putting this in the context of the vast natural beauty of the American Southwest. TTYW is just as you say, and it incorporates the desert theme: "I was thirsty and you wet my lips" "rain cloud in the desert sky." "Angel or devil" may speak to the dichotomy U2 saw between the image of America and her people and the greed and malfeasance of the 1980s.
Every song on JT, but for me, especially IGC and Trip just transport you to a place and capture a landscape and a feeling like nothing else.
JT is the quintessential U2 masterpiece, and is easily my favorite album to blast on long drives during the first nice days of Spring.
ozeeko
Refugee
You and Niceman's argument is comprised of somehow having some kind of mindreading talent, as you both claim to know what goes on in some member's heads. As I've explained repeatedly my reasons for thinking some songs sound out of place, even confessing that i happen to enjoy a couple of them...this gets ignored by you and Niceman apparently because u continue to just chalk it up to, "you just don't like the songs and it's clouding your vision". Forget the other examples i've given of songs I DISLIKE yet think sound fine on a said album. I'm talking about flow and cohesion, while you guys are getting too fixed on just plain liking or disliking a song based solely on the song itself. Two different conversations. Which one would u like to have? I thought the convo about albums was more interesting.
But getting to your question about UC into CT - my gripe, at that moment the album forgets the plot, ceases to be a moody masterpiece, and instead becomes a silly pop romp for 3 songs with the same drivel Bono's been feeding us since 2004. Sounds nothing like 2009 Bono, sounds like Bono from 2004. The BOMB Bono has decided to drop by and visit for 3 songs.
And SUC into F-BB - my gripe, actually it's not a gripe, I'm just pleased to have made it that far to F-BB since SUC was an utter borefest, with the same drivel Bono's been feeding us since 2004. F-BB gets us back on track, the moody masterpiece that is NLOTH the album ensues.
Honestly, remove those 3 tracks, have F-BB pick up where UC left off, the album becomes a pretty sweet ride.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
It is very unfair for you to misrepresent what I have said. I have suggested that MAYBE most of the people who go on and on about how the song doesn't belong are simply the same people who don't like the songs and that they are over-complicating the issue. Yes, I am a very powerful telepath, but I would hope you understand that it is against my code to use my powers on a U2 message board...... If we aren't safe here, where else would we be?????
Seriously, I have made a suggestion that most people who say the song doesn't belong simply don't like it. No claims as to what you may keep safe in the darkness of your mind, but the constant posts saying A: "I don't like the song" and B: "I don't think it belongs" always together over and over lead me to a sneaky suspicion........ And, you'll notice, I have made NO comments about what you personally feel or don't feel.
ozeeko
Refugee
I'm not going to explain over and over again (too late for that i guess). I'll just sum up by saying that CT and GOYB are not the worst U2 songs I've ever heard. Hell, I kinda like them. But to me they sound like a different era of U2, the BOMB era. Same for SUC (which as you should know by now is not my fave song). These songs sound like they were torn from a different project, different album, put on NLOTH to ( i guess, and as some of you have suggested) lighten the mood. But it was a bad judgement call because it takes me out of the album. It's like having a full length album with an independent EP smack dab in the middle.
And NICEMAN, sorry for roping u in with the other dude. Nothing personal. I would've just addressed him if he didn't mention u as his sidekick.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I'm not going to explain over and over again (too late for that i guess). I'll just sum up by saying that CT and GOYB are not the worst U2 songs I've ever heard. Hell, I kinda like them. But to me they sound like a different era of U2, the BOMB era. Same for SUC (which as you should know by now is not my fave song). These songs sound like they were torn from a different project, different album, put on NLOTH to ( i guess, and as some of you have suggested) lighten the mood. But it was a bad judgement call because it takes me out of the album. It's like having a full length album with an independent EP smack dab in the middle.
And NICEMAN, sorry for roping u in with the other dude. Nothing personal. I would've just addressed him if he didn't mention u as his sidekick.
Yeah, I did hear you a bunch of posts ago. I'd bet Batman probably did too. The fact is, even if that's how you feel it's not how I suspect most posters on here feel. I suspect that those who don't like the song and those who think it don't belong are mostly co-existent. I suspect that if you do love Stand Up Comedy and IGCIIDGCT as much as I do, but still think they don't belong - you are in the great minority.
Of course, if you don't like them very much, you do prove my point. But I don't claim to know your feelings.
Similar threads
