Recommended Books about U2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

kaber

The Fly
Joined
Mar 11, 2005
Messages
71
Having withdrawal symptoms after the close of the 2nd leg of the tour !!!

Can anyone recommend any good books to read about U2?

Thought that "U2 by U2" would be good, but it isn't due to be published for another year.

Would it be worth getting the new edition of "Into the Heart" and "The Best of Propaganda" or are there better books available?

Thanks

Kaber
 
It depends on what you want to find in a U2 book.
Both the books you mentioned are very good for what they offer.
Into The Heart tells of the stories behind all the songs. The writer is a Dublin based music writer who has been friends with U2 for the whole of their carreer (IIRC). Since the members of U2 collaborated, it is a very good and accurate account (i.e. not much mindless speculation by the author about the history/meaning of a song).
The Best Of Propaganda is a big excerpt of the almost 20 years of the now-halted official U2 fanzine. As such it's quite casual-fan oriented, but with interesting viewpoints. And it has some Willie's Diaries in it from former tours (some Zooropa and Popmart IIRC).

Other good recommendations are:
- At The End Of The World: Basically an indepth account of the 'Zoo years'. But writer Bill Flanagan made it much more than that, incorporating the history and the business side of U2. All this with extremely addictive storytelling.
- U2 Show: Half photobook documenting all their tours up to and including Elevation. The other half consists of frank and indepth interviews with basically everyone who had a considerable role in organising and staging the U2 tours (from designer Willie Williams to Edge's roadie Dallas Schoo and from wardrobe honcho Fintan Fitzgerald to promotor Frank Barsalona). And it also includes interviews with some of U2's studio people and friends (Daniel Lanois, Gavin Friday, Brian Eno, etc.).
- Stealing Hearts At A Travelling Show: This album is by the U2 design team (Four5One). It documents the artwork for all the releases they played a part in (basically everything except Rattle And Hum) and includes their vision behind the covers and alternate artwork. Now on offer on their website! (http://www.four5one.ie)
- U2 & I: Another photobook, but yet again an excellent one. Anton Corbijn has been U2's main photographer for 23 years now and this is his overview. It gives an excellent view of U2 from their first shoot together in 1982 (New Orleans) to the sessions for the cover of HTDAAB (Portugal). Heavy and expensive, but totally worth it. Anton's comments are funny and revealing too!

These are just some suggestions to help you start your U2 books collection. :wink:
 
My recommendation would be.
u2 live: a concert documentary. Is not exactly a book to 'read' but to use as a reference and to find out details of all previous tours.

Theres better discussion on these topics in the Every Artist Is A Cannibal Every Poet A Thief section.
 
Exit thru Wire said:
My recommendation would be.
u2 live: a concert documentary. Is not exactly a book to 'read' but to use as a reference and to find out details of all previous tours.

Doh! How could I forget that one?!
:reject:
 
Popmartijn said:

- At The End Of The World: Basically an indepth account of the 'Zoo years'. But writer Bill Flanagan made it much more than that, incorporating the history and the business side of U2. All this with extremely addictive storytelling.

The only U2 book i have.. Its fantastic :up: Good Zoo reading.
 
U2 at the End of the World.

It's an absolute MUST HAVE - fantastic reading! For three years Flanagan is literally side by side with the band in everything they do. If you wanted to get to know the real U2, then then read this!
 
Actually, the real "must have" that many people don't is "Unforgettable Fire." It gives you full-on biographies of each band member & nearly all of their early staff, most of whom are still around. It chronicles the beginnings of the band up through to JT. I've found that reading this one gives you a great understanding of who the band is, plus it really helps to read this before "At the End of the World," as the latter book mentions tons of names but doesn't really tell you who all those people are--you can feel lost sometimes if you don't know them already. Basically, "Unforgettable Fire" is essential for the groundwork of the band's beginnings, their influences, & who's who.

"At the End of the World" is great to give you a good picture of AB/Zooropa-era U2. It gives you a great impression of the artistic side of the band. Its downside, in my opinion, is that the first half gives you the most info & insight, whereas the second half is not much more than a documentation of tour life. Most of the thoughtful, creative stuff, is lost by the end. Just my opinion. Like I said, fun book, good to get into the band's artistic side, great snapshot of the development of modern U2.

"Bono: In Conversation" is an EXCELLENT book---it really shows you how intelligent, well-read, thoughtful, & philosophical a guy Bono really is. The author can be a bit annoying at times....he has U2 pigeon-holed in their JT era & didn't get (nor like) AB & ZooTV; plus he doesn't always follow through with all the questions that you'd like (probably due to his & Bono's editing & adding on of material a year after initial interviews). All in all, though, I think this book is great.
 
Utoo said:
Actually, the real "must have" that many people don't is "Unforgettable Fire." It gives you full-on biographies of each band member & nearly all of their early staff, most of whom are still around. It chronicles the beginnings of the band up through to JT. I've found that reading this one gives you a great understanding of who the band is, plus it really helps to read this before "At the End of the World," as the latter book mentions tons of names but doesn't really tell you who all those people are--you can feel lost sometimes if you don't know them already. Basically, "Unforgettable Fire" is essential for the groundwork of the band's beginnings, their influences, & who's who.

The problem with this book, however, is that it is so full of errors, that you don't know if you're really learning something from it or that you're being fooled.
For a good review of this book, read the one by Neil McCormick: http://www.atu2.com/news/article.src?ID=4001

So while The Unforgettable Fire is an authorised biography, it is far from being a 'must have' IMO.
 
Joshua_Tree_Hugger said:
U2 at the End of the World.

It's an absolute MUST HAVE - fantastic reading! For three years Flanagan is literally side by side with the band in everything they do. If you wanted to get to know the real U2, then then read this!

:up: I've not read many books about U2, but this was definitely the most enjoyable of the few I have read.
 
Popmartijn said:


The problem with this book, however, is that it is so full of errors, that you don't know if you're really learning something from it or that you're being fooled.
For a good review of this book, read the one by Neil McCormick: http://www.atu2.com/news/article.src?ID=4001

So while The Unforgettable Fire is an authorised biography, it is far from being a 'must have' IMO.

I've seen that article, but I've never been able to decide which I believe more--the book or McCormick's memory. When he points out the mistakes in dates, schoolyears, etc., I'll give him that. But so much of the rest of his argument is less convincing. There are many things he mentions that the band apparently doesn't even remember--such as the apparent recording of a demo in a Mt. Temple classroom. Most of what he really faults Dunphy for is omission of what he thinks should have been in there: full analysis of early demos & singles, mentioning of various songs sung at early Hype performances, etc. He then has ridiculous accusations, such as 'how dare Dunphy say that Edge is original, when he doesn't even discuss the roots of originality?' How on earth do you discuss roots of originality? Isn't that the point of being original--not having clear roots?

The problem I've always found with McCormick's stuff is that so much of it is based on his memory, with which he tries to win you over by implanting meaningless details throughout his argument. But who knows if what he thinks he remembers is true? None of his memories ever seem to be confirmed by the band. For a guy who is well-known to have been very jealous of the band, as they made it & he did not, who's even written a book on that very subject, McCormick's thoughts must always be taken with a grain of salt---IMHO. The only reason we even pay any attention to him is that he's clung around the band enough that he's become a bit of his own celebrity. With the "okay" talent of McCormick & other U2 friends, like Gavin Friday, I often wonder if they're really only considered artists simply because they know the band. But that's another discussion altogether....

There are going to be errors in any biography, and one about the band is going to be even worse because there are so many people whose memories are involved. The problem's made even worse when you have to get truth out of Bono, a good Irishman with the gift of gab--and of embellishment (Did he REALLY row up to a French destroyer & knock on its wall asking for more whiskey, as reported in "At the End of the World"?? Was his artist companion really wearing a PLO shirt at that moment? Did they really drop a search boat into the water after them, and yet nothing happened because of it? C'mon...).

All in all, knowing how deeply involved the band is with any of their press or anything that affects their image, I still think that the fact that the band authorized "Unforgettable Fire" makes it a pretty decent book. Sorry for the long defense of it---I just don't think it should be so easily overlooked!
 
Utoo said:
I've seen that article, but I've never been able to decide which I believe more--the book or McCormick's memory. When he points out the mistakes in dates, schoolyears, etc., I'll give him that. But so much of the rest of his argument is less convincing. There are many things he mentions that the band apparently doesn't even remember--such as the apparent recording of a demo in a Mt. Temple classroom. Most of what he really faults Dunphy for is omission of what he thinks should have been in there: full analysis of early demos & singles, mentioning of various songs sung at early Hype performances, etc.

I can't find these accusations so quickly in his article, but I think that McCormick faults Dunphy for failing to give importance to U2's music. For a rock band, this is quite important. They got famouf because of their music. Their music has a history. To understand the band, you have to understand their musical history. And when Dunphy makes many mistakes in that analysis, then how much does it really say of U2.

He then has ridiculous accusations, such as 'how dare Dunphy say that Edge is original, when he doesn't even discuss the roots of originality?' How on earth do you discuss roots of originality? Isn't that the point of being original--not having clear roots?

Maybe, maybe not. But any person has roots. By not discussing them at all, you again leave out an important part of understanding the band. The Edge himself has said often through the years how much he had been influenced by Tom Verlaine of Television, by Rory Gallagher, etc. He may be a total original, but he did have his influences when he was young. By leaving them out, it seems as if The Edge stepped out of a vaccuum, which he didn't (and neither did Bono, Adam and Larry).

For a guy who is well-known to have been very jealous of the band, as they made it & he did not, who's even written a book on that very subject, McCormick's thoughts must always be taken with a grain of salt---IMHO.

Was he really that jealous? And then why does writes himself out of the biography? How unverifiable are all those errors McCormick noted?
 
Popmartijn said:

I can't find these accusations so quickly in his article, but I think that McCormick faults Dunphy for failing to give importance to U2's music. For a rock band, this is quite important. They got famouf because of their music.

They're scattered throughout. The one about not discussing the classroom demo is about 2/3 through. Others relate to things that McCormick feels are important, but were not mentioned by Dunphy----many of them small issues, and many omitted quite possibly because they were never relayed to the author.

As for giving importance to U2's music, I have to say that Dunphy does that from the start with his enthralling depiction of Live Aid & the enormous impact of its ramifications on the band. He never fails to discuss the musical, lyrical, and political importance of the music. His description of the band's religious beliefs' impact on the making of October, on the relationships in the band, is well done. Even better is the depiction of the turmoil in Edge as he is the last to give up Shalom & then comes up with the searing guitar riffs of War as a result. Dunphy, IMO, does well in giving both personal and big-picture importance to the music.

But any person has roots. By not discussing them at all, you again leave out an important part of understanding the band. The Edge himself has said often through the years how much he had been influenced by Tom Verlaine of Television, by Rory Gallagher, etc. He may be a total original, but he did have his influences when he was young. By leaving them out, it seems as if The Edge stepped out of a vaccuum, which he didn't (and neither did Bono, Adam and Larry).

Good point. I must say, however, that this is not unique to Dunphy's book.

How unverifiable are all those errors McCormick noted?

Absolutely verifiable. Sure. But a mistake in what school someone from Hot Press went to, or what year a music writer graduated from college, isn't really what I'm after. Sure, it's important to the whole picture, shows respect to the band, the people involved, etc etc. But what I care about is the what I picked up the book to learn in the first place: the stories about the band. And from what I've read in interviews and books elsewhere, I haven't yet seen any of the stories presented disavowed by anyone in the band. On the contrary, the band have often repeated the same stories over and over in other books and interviews through the years. The meat of the book does not seem to be false in any way.

Was he really that jealous? And then why does writes himself out of the biography?

Absolutely. The entire premise of his recent book, "Killing Bono," is that Bono and U2 made it, while each of Neil's attempts at stardom fell through...though he got close (which made it worse!). The whole basis for the book is that jealousy. Sure, he now jokes about it and has learned from it, as shown by the rest of the book, but it was still there. Sure, he writes himself out of the book by saying he wasn't at that initial rehearsal. But he writes himself into the U2 story by spouting off his own stories about the band as if he were there every step of the way, which he wasn't. If he had no desire to glean what he could off of U2's stardom, he wouldn't have written the article in the first place.

Look. This is all I'm saying: "Unforgettable Fire" has gotten a bad rap over the years, mainly because of this one article, which was written by someone who (IMO) certainly has his own biases, and who was not there for nearly as much of the story as he makes out to have been. From the time of the article's printing on, many fans have taken McCormick's opinion--despite many of them having not even read the book--and failed to recognize the book's good aspects. Worse yet, the opinion has gotten so prevalent that now many people think of it as entirely error-ridden, when I truly don't believe it has many more errors than any other book, especially in the crucial stories it relates.

I have read this book. I believe it does an excellent job of describing the beginnings of the band and those involved with it, as well as recognizing the band's and its music's importance in the world of music and the world in general. Despite its (mostly inconsequential) mistakes, I truly believe that it is a valuable resource, and I would not want to discourage other fans from reading it. That's all.
 
Utoo said:
Actually, the real "must have" that many people don't is "Unforgettable Fire." It gives you full-on biographies of each band member & nearly all of their early staff, most of whom are still around. It chronicles the beginnings of the band up through to JT. I've found that reading this one gives you a great understanding of who the band is, plus it really helps to read this before "At the End of the World," as the latter book mentions tons of names but doesn't really tell you who all those people are--you can feel lost sometimes if you don't know them already. Basically, "Unforgettable Fire" is essential for the groundwork of the band's beginnings, their influences, & who's who.

Yes I would agree, the main flaw in the book is not inaccuracies about U2 as such but rather it is fairly obvious that the author does not really know very much about the history of rock and roll as distinct from the history of U2. But for those wishing to read about the early years of U2, it is worth buying.

On a side note I once shared a taxi with the author......quite a character.
 
The other thing about UF is that other people besides McCormick have found fault with it. It's been too long to remember whom, exactly. But, I have seen quotes by others who were pissed off at Dunphy for some of the things he said.
 
financeguy said:

But for those wishing to read about the early years of U2

I would also mention "U2: Touch The Flame" as this paperback has alot of GREAT interviews with the band, back in the earlier days up to the Rattle n Hum era. :bow:

Although, it's very hard to find, I believe 'used' copies might be available from some bookstores or their websites. :up:
 
Back
Top Bottom