FYM'ers Weigh In

[deep]

What the heck is this premium silver/gold thing anyway? I never even noticed it!

Judas preferred silver (30 pieces)

 

[BonosSaint]

I'm nothing more than a casual fan although I respect them and really like several of their albums. I discovered Interference during a brief, intense flirtation with the band, but I stayed because I liked the offtopic forums, particularly FYM. (I will admit to enjoying some of the arguments in EYKIW). I'll probably get the CD as a gift next month, so will give it a good listen then. Although I'm not a huge fan of U2, I am a huge fan of many U2 fans.

 

[yolland]

I've only had maybe a half-dozen listens to the album so far...a couple distracted listens to the MySpace stream to ensure I wanted to buy it (like several others here, I wasn't at all a HTDAAB fan), then 3 or 4 listens since buying the CD. I'm really, really enjoying it. It's very much its own album in mood and style, but for me it unmistakably has that monumental presence I've always loved about U2, and which I just didn't hear much of on the last 2 or 3 albums.

There's only one as far as I'm concerned. I don't really care for Stand Up Comedy.

That's the most awkward one for me as well (and is anyone else weirdly reminded of Thank You Falettinme Be Mice Elf Agin by it? ). It's an OK song IMO, but the lyric has a throwaway feel to me; it might work in some other lineup, but as it is, it seems kinda pointless with reference to the thematic flow of the rest of the album, so far as I can determine that. Personally, I'm not too fond of I'll Go Crazy either--it tries hard, I'll grant it that, but I was left unconvinced there's a really great song in there--but at least that one seems to tie in somewhat with Boots (which I like; it's nothing deep obviously, but fun, in a restlessly, nervily dreamy kind of way). The closing quartet of songs is gorgeous, and I love the first two as well. I'm not as wild about MoS and Unknown Caller as many others seem to be--I find the former 'nice' but bland in a way too many ATYCLB songs were IMO, and the latter fun but a bit too clever for its own good--but still, they're fine; there's nothing eminently dislikeable about them for me. Really, there's not a single song on here I actively dislike, which is great. I think several of these songs are gonna be fantastic live, wish I could see that.

I agree there's a lot of 'spiritual' material here, albeit all in a familiarly U2 sort of way...redemption through love, redemption through hope, redemption through transforming toil into praise, etc. Even though I'm not highly fond of it, I think Unknown Caller seems to hint at an intriguing notion that grace is in a sense comically, existentially absurd as much as it is powerful and transformative. And I love the fact that much like AB, which I suspect will always remain my favorite U2 album, NLOTH ends not with some feelgood blaze of hope'n'joy but with (in this case) the wryly melancholy insights of someone who's managed to survive, but nonetheless missed all his best shots at redemption: that even in hell on earth, with no relief in sight, sometimes you can still stay centered and keep moving forward if you 'choose your enemies carefully 'cos they will define you...they're not there in the beginning but when your story ends/gonna last with you longer than your friends.'

 

[Irvine511]

i'm an FYMer on a break (mostly) and a great big fan who loves NLOTH, and who tremendously enjoyed the previous two albums, for very different reasons. i loved ATYCLB becasue i found it warm and welcoming at a time in my life when i needed it, and i loved Bomb because i found it adrenalized and thrilling, though both work better as (and are intended as) collections of singles.

NLOTH is clearly the most accomplished album of the past three.

unlike others, i'm a pretty ardent supporter of "crazy tonight" (despite the title which makes me seeth with anger), and if you don't like it on the album, check out the Letterman performance. it's pretty special.

love the title track. i like "magnificent" but not as much as the rest in here. i think MOS is their most purely beautiful and perhaps most despairing track ever. UC is interesting, but i don't quite think it works. love "crazy." kind of meh on boots. i'm also a defender of SUC because i think it's incredibly well constructed and i actually think a lot of the lyrics actually work well with a song that sounds like it's bouncing around a room like a rubber ball in a racquetball court. "fez" is among my favorties on the album. i think "WAS" is good but not quite great, there's something that doesn't quite cohere and it's less than the sum of it's quite lovely parts. "breathe" is good on the album, it's a killer live. and COL is interesting and artistic and actually does have something to say, and it says it pretty well.

so i love the album, couldn't be happier, and what's even better is how well these songs are coming across live.

 

[maycocksean]

(and is anyone else weirdly reminded of Thank You Falettinme Be Mice Elf Agin by it? ).

We'll I don't know about that, but all I can hear is a Christian artist by the name of Michael W. Smith. It's very disconcerting. Seriously, do a youtube search of one of his songs--say "I Still Have the Dream". (But, Irvine, I suggest you don't do it. I don't want to ruin the song for you).

As I said in one of those appreciation threads it doesn't really bother me that much--I like Smith well enough as cheesy as he can be. But it feels odd coming from U2. I don't hate the song though. . .don't skip it or anything, but it's not my favorite.

Thanks everyone for sharing your thoughts. It's really interesting to hear what you all think.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Although I'm not a huge fan of U2, I am a huge fan of many U2 fans.

Maybe that's why we get along-opposites I'm a huge fan of you though.

Whatever "huge" is, I'm still a fan of U2's music but of the (at times schlocky) hype surrounding them, some of which is due to the music industry being the way it is and some... I'll just say other..no. As for fans there are good apples and bad apples. Good experiences and bad, I've had and seen both. Sometimes the bad has influenced my interest in U2 in a negative way, but you just have to filter it out and enjoy them in a solitary way on your own terms.

I think life changes your fandom, getting older and all that and having other priorities and values. I guess I just don't have the patience and/or inclination for much of it.

 

[A stor]

I bought NLOTH yesterday. And being one of the older folks, here at Interference. I like the new album. I can put it on my stereo and let it play, through. I don't have to jump around songs. I like the moodiness of the music and dark reflections of thought. It reminds me of Lou Reed.

 

[Irvine511]

(But, Irvine, I suggest you don't do it. I don't want to ruin the song for you).

i'm totally fine with the religion of the band, and Bono in particular, and i like much of the coded but clear biblical references and slippery wordplay when it comes to addressing big theological concerns. i've always liked that about them.

i just get queasy when, 1) conservative Christians think that Bono is Really One Of Them, and 2) every lyric by the band is intended to be a statement of praise and worship. that Baptist review that someone posted in another thread was a good example of that. it was a well-argued and thought-out review, no question, but i think it started from several incorrect base assumptions, that we need to "get on our boots" and worship God so that we can remove the "line on the horizon" between heaven and earth. that, to me, was just a bit too much. what makes Bono credible, and interesting, imho, is how much doubt and humility is there in the face of the big questions, and his lack of certainty and his continual crisis of faith.

 

[MadelynIris]

Irvine,

when you say

conservative Christians think that Bono is Really One Of Them

I think the key here is that, I'm sure most conservative, and liberal, and well whatever kind of Christians think he is one of them.

And I'm pretty sure that he is.






At least if you believe he is the messiah.

 

[Irvine511]

i totally understand that, it's just when i hear things about how, since Bono believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ, then that means that Bono also believes that the Hindus are going to Hell ... that is not Bono at all. it's the difference between pointing out a commonality between yourself and Bono, and the assumption that because you have this point in common, therefore, Bono must logically believe everything else that you believe.

that's all.

 

[Vincent Vega]

that we need to "get on our boots" and worship God so that we can remove the "line on the horizon" between heaven and earth.

Wow. To a German reporter, asking who should get on their boots, Bono replied the song was about a family that was on vacation in Baghdad when the war broke out. And instead of getting panicky and trying to get the hell out of there the husband could only focus on the beauty of his wife.
Here is the interview if anyone is interested. The first minutes are in German, but the interview itself isn't dubbed: Exklusiv: U2 im aspekte-Interview

Over time I've gotten behind more and more spiritual references, some more obvious, others less, but it never changed my love for the music.

 

[yolland]

^ Yeah, I wasn't sharp enough to catch distinctly Iraq references if they're in there, but it did seem immediately obvious to me that the song is about the advent of something like that. Which is why Crazy, coming just before it, ultimately works for me even though I'm not very keen on it musically--to me Crazy is the moment where you respond to the onslaught by joining hands and charging in-your-face upward and outward against it together, Boots is the moment where you decide that now's not a time for fighting back, but for huddling together to dream it all up again in preparation for the next round. But I can see where for some that also lends itself to an onward-Christian-soldiers, evangelizing interpretation, even though I don't personally think that's at all the 'crusade' Bono had in mind.

We'll I don't know about that, but all I can hear is a Christian artist by the name of Michael W. Smith. It's very disconcerting. Seriously, do a youtube search of one of his songs--say "I Still Have the Dream".

Right, I can hear that too, in terms of the overall genre type the song seems to belong to. The Sly Stone reference was more of a gestalt thing pertaining to the flow of the song, the to me rather '70s-ish way in which the "Stand up!s" soar over the thick, heavy, funky main riff. Something like the way several critics heard Dylan's slap-happily frenzied declaiming on 'Subterranean Homesick Blues' in Boots, and I can totally see that too.

I like the moodiness of the music and dark reflections of thought. It reminds me of Lou Reed.

Not sure if this is true for you or not, but Reed is another one of my favorite artists, I think ultimately for a similar reason--the monumental presence, the almost overwhelming force of personality that seems to fill the room when you put on one of his records.

i just get queasy when, 1) conservative Christians think that Bono is Really One Of Them, and 2) every lyric by the band is intended to be a statement of praise and worship...what makes Bono credible, and interesting, imho, is how much doubt and humility is there in the face of the big questions, and his lack of certainty and his continual crisis of faith.

I basically share the same grievance, but at the same time I can understand the impulse towards that kind of interpretation. It becomes a way of turning the act of listening and taking it in into a spiritual exercise. Maybe in something like the way certain ultracerebral lit-crit writers--Kristeva or Irigaray, say--go at any and every text they analyze so rigorously that at times you find yourself thinking, Oh for God's sake, can't you just enjoy the freaking narrative for once, all the richness and tension and human contradiction that's already right there on the surface, and stop soaring off into the ether with your relentless babble about dis-semination and intertextuality and signifiers just for once. But ultimately it's not that they're immune to that level of beauty, it's just that they're seizing the act of reading as an opportunity for meditation on the ideas they've really devoted their lives to, their Muse in a sense.

 

[Vincent Vega]

I still wasn't sharp enough to get that reference, only since I saw the interview I knew that he was trying to say that.
But I'm a person who never really dives into the lyrics of songs, and hence often couldn't tell another person what this song was about. And I don't care.

Crazy to me is not a favorite. It sounds a little like an old German "schlager", which is really simple music. But it's an okay song.
So far I've listened to the album from the first to the last, and often right from the beginning again, maybe twenty times, maybe more, and I've never felt the need to skip a song. That's a nice thing, but it's also something I've experienced with every U2 album. It certainly has a nice flow.

 

[Irvine511]

--Kristeva or Irigaray, say--

you just made the little undergraduate's heart that still beats in my chest go pitter-patter.

oh, Kristeva ...

 

[A_Wanderer]

i totally understand that, it's just when i hear things about how, since Bono believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ, then that means that Bono also believes that the Hindus are going to Hell ... that is not Bono at all. it's the difference between pointing out a commonality between yourself and Bono, and the assumption that because you have this point in common, therefore, Bono must logically believe everything else that you believe.

that's all.

Jesus Christ
I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

I wouldn't listen to a band that embraced a narrow interpretation of that.

 

[yolland]

But I'm a person who never really dives into the lyrics of songs, and hence often couldn't tell another person what this song was about. And I don't care.

I'm not a Deep Thinker when it comes to lyrics either, nor am I particularly capable of it even if I wanted to try--I was never more than an average student at interpreting poetry, I'm basically rather literal-minded when it comes down to it and the kinds of inspired associative leaps such minds make are often tough for me to follow. (I'm married to a publishing poet though, so I'm forced to get some Here,-Read-This critical practice at regular intervals anyway. ) And when it's not your native language or culture in question, it only makes it that much harder. I remember during a final exam for my Tamil class in grad school, the professor 'surprised' us by having us listen to, transcribe and interpret a few Kollywood songs (Kollywood=Chennai's 'Bollywood'), ranging from an eloquent, densely literary lyric from the film version of a Hindu epic to a cheesy but wordplay-filled love song. Gah, now that was tough! So many levels of meaning that are readily apparent to a native speaker living inside the culture fly right over your head, and the colloquialisms--well you know how that is, you're sitting there scratching your head, completely bewildered by how the heck this combination of words could possibly make sense together, when if you only knew that the whole unit has some specific slang meaning all by itself, you could've just breezed right through and not wasted all that time. Not long ago at a conference, I was intoduced to a professor who'd just translated Ulysses into Mandarin and I thought, Good God! how can you possibly do that? It's hard enough for a native English speaker unfamiliar with Ireland to grasp much of it, and harder still for a non-native speaker...how on earth do you go about recreating that world for a Chinese audience? (And it was actually listening to Breathe that made me recall that earlier today; some obvious nods to Ulysses in there.) But I guess if you can force Hegel to make sense in English than anything must be possible, right.

There's something to be said for being content to just grasp the broad outlines of a lyric and leave it at that, though...you're never gonna know exactly what the songwriter had in mind at the time anyway (unless s/he explains it in detail), so why not just enjoy a little mystery and ambiguity and the places they can take you to. Understanding precisely how each and every part fits together isn't likely to make you love the whole anyway if it failed to grab you from the beginning, even though it might enrich the listening for you if it did; that's one of the wonderful things about art.

you just made the little undergraduate's heart that still beats in my chest go pitter-patter.

oh, Kristeva ...

Now if only it always worked that way on students at the time, right?

I loved reading her too, but she did make me feel like tearing my hair out at times.

 

[maycocksean]

i'm totally fine with the religion of the band, and Bono in particular, and i like much of the coded but clear biblical references and slippery wordplay when it comes to addressing big theological concerns. i've always liked that about them.

It's not the religiosity of SUC that reminds me of Michael W. Smith though. It's the vocalization and the style of the song. When he sings "voyage of discovery" Bono sounds EXACTLY like Smith. It's weird. I hear funny things though, I guess. I heard Tom Petty in some of the songs from Bomb.

i just get queasy when, 1) conservative Christians think that Bono is Really One Of Them, and 2) every lyric by the band is intended to be a statement of praise and worship.

I do too. It makes me embarrassed for whoever is drawing the comparison.

 

[diamond]

Hey Maycocksean,


How do you pronounce your screen name anyway?

Is it:

May kock-shun?

Curious is all..

<>

 

[Dreadsox]

I love the album. I put it possibly among their most openly religious albums.

I think Boots and Fez are weak. White as Snow is my favorite and Breathe. Magnificent will go down as a big hit.

Good Stuff....I like the new sound.

 

[maycocksean]

Hey Maycocksean,


How do you pronounce your screen name anyway?

Is it:

May kock-shun?

Curious is all..

<>

Ummm. . .yeah, about that.

See when I was signing up for Interference I didn't know that my login name would be my screen name as well. It's just my last name followed by my first name. My name is Sean. You can just call me that.

 

[Dreadsox]

i totally understand that, it's just when i hear things about how, since Bono believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ, then that means that Bono also believes that the Hindus are going to Hell ... that is not Bono at all. it's the difference between pointing out a commonality between yourself and Bono, and the assumption that because you have this point in common, therefore, Bono must logically believe everything else that you believe.

that's all.

Same can be said about some of the liberals as well.....isn't it a neat experience when an applicable statement about all people is discovered.

 

[AliEnvy]

Like many, I wasn't crazy about I'll Go Crazy but I must say it plays really well live. Being able to tell that from a youtube clip on Letterman gives me great hope for this one on the tour. A few great sing-along lines.

The more I listen the more I find to appreciate. I especially like listening to the whole thing in sequence - it feels like a thread of a common story woven through each of the songs. Bono has been saying in interviews that these are characters' stories he's telling but it seems much more intimate and autobiographical than that to me. It sounds very much like a spiritual journey and feels like it has the cohesiveness of AB.

Enjoying the sound, nothing unique really, but to me the obvious and varied influences play into the cohesive picture this album gives me. I do love how they can take an influence and make it their own.

 

[Vincent Vega]

I'm not a Deep Thinker when it comes to lyrics either, nor am I particularly capable of it even if I wanted to try--I was never more than an average student at interpreting poetry, I'm basically rather literal-minded when it comes down to it and the kinds of inspired associative leaps such minds make are often tough for me to follow. (I'm married to a publishing poet though, so I'm forced to get some Here,-Read-This critical practice at regular intervals anyway. ) And when it's not your native language or culture in question, it only makes it that much harder. I remember during a final exam for my Tamil class in grad school, the professor 'surprised' us by having us listen to, transcribe and interpret a few Kollywood songs (Kollywood=Chennai's 'Bollywood'), ranging from an eloquent, densely literary lyric from the film version of a Hindu epic to a cheesy but wordplay-filled love song. Gah, now that was tough! So many levels of meaning that are readily apparent to a native speaker living inside the culture fly right over your head, and the colloquialisms--well you know how that is, you're sitting there scratching your head, completely bewildered by how the heck this combination of words could possibly make sense together, when if you only knew that the whole unit has some specific slang meaning all by itself, you could've just breezed right through and not wasted all that time. Not long ago at a conference, I was intoduced to a professor who'd just translated Ulysses into Mandarin and I thought, Good God! how can you possibly do that? It's hard enough for a native English speaker unfamiliar with Ireland to grasp much of it, and harder still for a non-native speaker...how on earth do you go about recreating that world for a Chinese audience? (And it was actually listening to Breathe that made me recall that earlier today; some obvious nods to Ulysses in there.) But I guess if you can force Hegel to make sense in English than anything must be possible, right.

There's something to be said for being content to just grasp the broad outlines of a lyric and leave it at that, though...you're never gonna know exactly what the songwriter had in mind at the time anyway (unless s/he explains it in detail), so why not just enjoy a little mystery and ambiguity and the places they can take you to. Understanding precisely how each and every part fits together isn't likely to make you love the whole anyway if it failed to grab you from the beginning, even though it might enrich the listening for you if it did; that's one of the wonderful things about art.

Now if only it always worked that way on students at the time, right?

I loved reading her too, but she did make me feel like tearing my hair out at times.

I would put myself in the same category. Analysing poetry and interpreting all the stuff isn't my strong point, either. Hence, I also never really developed a great interest in philosophy.
Thus, I never read Hegel (and as such I can't tell you if he makes sense in German ), but from experience I can tell I would never attempt to translate such a text into any other language. You have to study that language very deeply, otherwise your translation will lead to gross misinterpretations of the text as you simply won't be able to get across what the author himself was getting at.
Same for music. Especially when it comes to the use of idioms and such someone who is not familiar with those will not understand what this bunch of words is meant to say. To see the whole text in its entirety isn't easy as well. And if you just consider how differently some of the texts get interpreted by people who share the same mother tongue, you may grasp just how different an interepretation could be by a non-native speaker.

I sometimes read up on what is meant by a song, and for me meaningful, or powerful, lyrics add to the greatness of a song, but they don't define it. Something like Sunday Bloody Sunday or Pride could be a rap song and would keep its meaning. But since I don't like rap I couldn't care for the song, nevermind its lyrics. I wouldn't be a bigger now less of a U2 fan if I understood each and every of their song from the first to the last word. Music is about melody for me.

I tried to find some Hegel texts online, but all I could find were written in old German letters. Thus, besides the grammar and words being different it's also extremely hard to read the text as the letters are so much different. But should I stumble upon a text of his written in today's letters I will take my time to read a page or two.

I've also repeatedly read the criticism of the other two albums being more a collection of singles than having a theme. I guess me not really paying attention to the meaning of the songs makes that point irrelevant for me personally. I've never thought of an album being good or bad because of a common thread going through all of the songs, but rather because of the track order and such.

 

[yolland]

^^ Here's the opening chapter (in German) from his most widely read work. (And here's the same passage translated into English for comparison.) Just skimming a page should be enough to give you a sense of his style...



OK I'll shut up now...back to the thread topic!

 

[Vincent Vega]

Cool, thank you. I will bookmark the Aquesta page. Have to say the English translation is more understandable than the German.

But yeah, back to topic. I'm glad Bono is no Hegel.

 

[Irvine511]

Same can be said about some of the liberals as well.....isn't it a neat experience when an applicable statement about all people is discovered.

you mean the liberals who try to imply that because Bono supported intervention in Bosnia that he therefore was a big supporter of the Iraq invasion?

those liberals?

 

[the iron horse]

I still remember the first time I listened to October.

It's always been about the lyrics.


Great songwriters don't write lyrics to enhance the music.
They are trying to say something to the listener.


"To those who have ears,
Let them hear."

 

[Vincent Vega]

Oh I'm sorry, I might be too stupid for that.

 

[Dreadsox]

you mean the liberals who try to imply that because Bono supported intervention in Bosnia that he therefore was a big supporter of the Iraq invasion?

those liberals?

No - I was not implying anything. Good to see you!

There have been in the past people on both sides of the aisle who would like to feel that Bono is in line with their way of thinking. That was my point PERIOD

Are you trying to say that ONLY conservatives are guilty of such things? Is it wrong to point out that it happens on both sides of the aisle?

Again, so very nice to see you

I do believe that this is one of the most openly religious albums other than maybe October that the band has produced. I think that I see it because of my religious background, and I love the fact that I can identify with the religious themes within the album.

My brother in law does not see the album that way. He does not see the religious themes nor does he agree with me that Magnificent is almost Psalm like in its lyrics. He sees a self absorbed Bono.......:O)

I guess my point - people see what they want - but not just what they like for those of us who hold this band to our hearts - like any hero - we want to identify with them...so we see what we want - no matter what our ideology.

 

[coemgen]

I'm liking it more with each listen. At first, I was concerned. It sounded too shiny to me. But now I'm liking nearly every track. I don't think it's "Achtung, Baby," but it's pretty good. It is without a doubt their most spiritual album, which is exciting to me. I can't wait to hear "Songs of Ascent," which sounds to be even more so. I love the imagery of Christ in "White as Snow," and the all out worship of "Magnificent." Then there's "Unknown Caller," which is like sci-fi gospel. I also like "Boots" - yes, I said it. Listen to Hendrix and it makes more sense (to me at least, and no, I don't mean for the guitars. The drums and backing vocals are similar.) The one song that's still really growing on me is "Crazy Tonight." It's not horrible, but it's not my favorite by any stretch. A little too pop for me. "Cedars" and "Breathe" are amazing. I love the focus that "Breathe" has on Grace. Well done. "Stand Up Comedy" is growing on me, too.