(04-24-2005) World Leader Pretend -- Dallas Observer* - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > 'Zine (archived) > U2 News
Click Here to Login
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-10-2005, 06:26 PM   #81
Rock n' Roll Doggie
sue4u2's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: hatching some plot, scheming some scheme
Posts: 6,628
Local Time: 07:49 PM
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
Just out of curiosity, why is it so bad to like pretty much everything U2 does? I mean, if someone is one of those people who likes some things and not others, that's fine, that's their prerogative. But why do those who like pretty much everything U2 does get criticized for being that way?


Yeah - exactly. I really think that those who don't get it just can't relate to the fact that there are those that do.

I'm not asking for your approval... just not your insults.
Not that insults will make any difference, just that some of the pontification (the distractors) express...to prove their point... is the same as they accuse Bono of doing.

Which way is it, Bono is the fake or are you the fake?
You really love U2 but have some aversion/phobia to amit it?

sue4u2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2005, 02:30 PM   #82
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3
Local Time: 05:49 PM
first, i should point out a couple of misconceptions: i never had tickets to the current tour, nor did i ever attempt to get tickets. i'm not jealous, nor filled with hate. and aside from calling you all "suckers," my rant was not directed at you, but at the band for failing to live up to what i believe they indirectly promised all of us. when i first heard "zooropa," i wasn't crazy about it. same goes for "pop". but i continued to respect the band for challenging themselves, and for giving all of us "die-hard" fans the finger. that's what i loved about them: they cared little about adoration and more about testing authority and the status quo. what is U2 now? frankly, embarrassing. they made a conscious decision to make easier music, to rely on pop melodies and ballads rather than create progressive music. they have substituted what everything from boy to pop did to push our intellectual and social limits with "vertigo" and photo ops. is it wrong for you to love everything U2 does? no, of course not. but have you asked yourself why you love everything U2 does? are you not following them blindly? do you respect yourself for doing so? at the heart of U2's music and their lyrics is rebellion and dissention (at least, those albums before atyclb and htdaab). sadly, that's no longer the case.

ex-fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2005, 02:33 PM   #83
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3
Local Time: 05:49 PM
ex-fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2005, 09:56 PM   #84
Blue Crack Addict
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,715
Local Time: 07:49 PM
I love challenging music. I listen to a lot of bands/songs that deal with important issues, that do really different, creative things with the music, all that good stuff. There's some great challenging music out there. No argument about that.

But what I don't understand is when this train of thought came along where it suddenly became bad for music to be simple and fun. Can someone explain the downside of that to me, 'cause I'm not really getting it. There's some times when I just want to rock out to a song and party, too. Pop music can be good-pop isn't just relegated to the bubblegum people, after all, and melodies can be good, too.

And I'd say U2 still test the status quo-when I've seen them perform "Bullet The Blue Sky" on recent DVDs and stuff, they don't really seem to be hiding much with that one, it's pretty obvious what they're trying to say there. Besides that, testing the status quo doesn't always mean doing something really big and obvious to prove you're against the status quo. A simple, quiet action can prove you're not agreeing with the status quo, too. And photo ops? They've been doing those for years. Practically every mainstream band does photo ops. That's nothing new, or even really anything bad, in my opinion.

I love everything U2 does simply because their music relates to me in some way, shape, or form, and simply because they make really good songs. Those are the main reasons I personally listen to music. The popularity of the artist isn't important to me, even how innovative they may or may not be isn't of major importance to me. All that truly matters to me when I'm deciding whether or not I like an artist/song is: Can I relate to what they're saying? Is the song one that can fit any mood I'm in? Is it a fun song for me to sing along to at the top of my lungs? If the artist/song meets one or more of those requirements, then it's good in my book. Hence why U2 is there, and why I love everything I've heard by them (the sole exception being "Some Days Are Better Than Others". Just never could get into that song, personally).

Again, you are completely entitled to feel however you wish regarding the band and regarding music in general and all that sort of thing. But I disagree, and I've just never really understood why it's considered bad to like practically everything a band does.


Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com