I wrote a rant 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Un Lapin

The Fly
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
49
Location
Toronto
How To Stage a Rock and Roll Funeral
James Bastable

"It's a big occasion and you just got to be careful that you don't upset people. But, to be absolutely honest, I would really have liked this maybe 10 years down the line…It's a great institution, the Rock 'N' Roll Hall Of Fame, and I'm just not sure that I'm quite ready to accept institutionalization." – Larry Mullen Jr.

Tragically, Mr. Mullen Jr.’s words betray a complete absence of self-consciousness on behalf of a machine that has been regressing since All That You Can’t Leave Behind. The Facile Four have been on auto-pilot since the critically disastrous but commendably adventurous Popmart debacle and, in reality, the timing of U2’s internment in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame could not have been better.

U2 is ready to take its place in the pantheon irrelevance alongside such non-acts as Aerosmith and Santana, a place characterized by predictable Grammy nods, Top 40 hits, movie soundtracks, bloated setlists and acoustic-versions, all of this enabled by the tacit approval of a fundamentally gutless fanbase.

U2 is ready for retirement and it seems that at least on a sub-conscious, that is to say, a private level, U2 knows it and has been preparing for it. Ethical backflips not withstanding, how exactly does Bono reconcile his campaign to forgive the Third World debt with iPod endorsements and $100 cheap-seats? And yes, it is Bono, that self-righteous rock ‘n’ roll martyr who must be held responsible for the public embarrassment that U2 has become for it is his ubiquitous mug that graces the covers of magazines, newspapers and news broadcasts. The wrinkles are showing, the inspiration is fading and I suspect that the other three know it.

As for the oatmeal-flavoured non-music that this dinosaur continues to churn out, the blame lies squarely on said “other three”: Mullen Jr., Adam Clayton, and The Edge (“The Edge?” Is there no end to the unintentional self-parody?) The post-punk bombast of the “early days” and the detached irony of ZooTV have given way to the cynical pandering of “Elevation” and “Vertigo.” As more discriminating listeners (i.e. anyone standing more than a fist-pump away from U2’s cabal of personality-cultists) have noted, these two songs are the same shitty, suburban grind. I am actually skeptical about whether or not Mr. Mullen Jr. has stepped foot inside a recording studio in the past ten years at all.

In the past, U2’s music, while not always good, has at least had an idea behind it. Yes, U2 has always been an insufferably self-important band, but the self-importance of Red Rocks, The Joshua Tree and ZooTV was, if not justified by, at least propped up on, an optimistic innocence. Bono mingled spirituality with sensuality and politics with post-atomic love stories. If Achtung Baby! and the Baroque post-modernism of the subsequent ZooTV tour represent the culmination of U2’s vision, then Pop is the sound of U2 going supernova. Everything since has been the paper on the walls of U2’s nursing home.

As a once passionate U2 fan, I must now declare without reservation that U2 is over. The question now is: will the members of U2 be able to recognize their own irrelevance and step down, as they always said they would? After all, what is more pathetic than an irrelevant rock and roll dinosaur? How about an irrelevant rock and roll dinosaur that once vowed it would never become one?
 
You did this to tick people off I gather. Why in the world would you post this on a u2 fan board? The piece is well written as far as word choice and grammar goes, but you give no real proof for the character denigration within it. Still, I suppose you have a right to rant....
 
How predictable. Another 90's worshipper.

U2 has - according to critics - released one of their best albums, and is about to play arenas and stadiums in the tour that is about to sell out worldwide. For the first time ever, they've had two no.1's in UK from the same album and Bono is currently having one of his best ever vocal phases. ATYCLB proved they're as relevant as ever.

Yup, a bunch of irrelevant dinosaurs.
 
Last edited:
I agree, well-written.

As a side note, is it possible that U2 just doesn't make music you like anymore and so therefore they must be over?

Their album sales and staggering tour sellouts and an impassioned following that is bigger than any other band out there would surely counter your essay's argument.
 
HelloAngel said:
I agree, well-written.

As a side note, is it possible that U2 just doesn't make music you like anymore and so therefore they must be over?

Their album sales and staggering tour sellouts and an impassioned following that is bigger than any other band out there would surely counter your essay's argument.

i would simply direct you to the nearest Aerosmith or Kiss concert.

album and ticket sales do not good music indicate.
 
popsadie said:
You did this to tick people off I gather. Why in the world would you post this on a u2 fan board? The piece is well written as far as word choice and grammar goes, but you give no real proof for the character denigration within it. Still, I suppose you have a right to rant....

because i am a U2 fan and this forum is for discussing U2.

you would rather i posted this on a Coldplay board?

i'm not giving them a pass. they've lost it.
 
U2girl said:
How predictable. Another 90's worshipper.


nope. i just like good bands who make innovative music. live, U2 is a force to be reckoned with, but with the exception of Beautiful Day, they haven't written a good "U2 song" since Pop.
 
Stuck in a moment, Kite, In a little while, Miracle Drug, City of blinding lights, Sometimes you can't make it on your own, Original of the species, One step closer. For good measure, Stateless, Ground beneath her feet, Mercy.

Very good U2 songs.

Oh and you're proven your 90's bias well enough in your post, no need to deny it.
 
Last edited:
To each his own I suppose. Make sure you avoid going to the concerts then so us fans can get a hold of one. Thanks.
 
Too bad U2 wasn't paid for the iPod commercials and the cheapest seats were $49.50 and not $100. I really don't care what you think about the band but I don't see any wiggle room for criticism for what Bono does in his 'offtime'.
 
Again..its your opinion. I personally love the intense..non cynical feeling behind "City of Blinding Lights"..and am glad that they didn't stay in the zoo-tv frame of mind. Like I said before, your piece was well written, I just think that it has too many unmerited character slams. You don't like the music anymore and that is fine..but I don't think that gives you a right to slam their character. Again, why did you post this on a fanboard?
 
yeah,you're right.they're too old.dinosaurs.you should probably switch to the new trend:
pop-punk-arty-wrist-slashing-wicked-wannabe-assholes like sum,blink (please insert numbers) or emo wankers.
whatever your choice could be,i'm sure you will enjoy this powerful and emotional music genre.

Cheerio
 
Tragically, Mr. Mullen Jr.’s words betray a complete absence of self-consciousness on behalf of a machine that has been regressing since All That You Can’t Leave Behind.

Oh, yeah, we all know about Larry's "complete absence of self-consciousness."

It must have been that total lack of concern for the quality of their product that led him to sit across the table from one of the greatest frontmen in the world and one of the greatest guitarists in the world a year and a half ago, and tell them that "very good wasn't good enough."

Are you kidding me?

This little editorial would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.

PopDaisy

:rolleyes: :yawn:
 
Un Lapin said:


because i am a U2 fan and this forum is for discussing U2.

you would rather i posted this on a Coldplay board?

i'm not giving them a pass. they've lost it.
yes but just because you dont like the last 2 albums dosent mean U2 "are over" and going back to your "point you in the direction of aerosmith or kiss concert" well my friend that is an awful thing to even try and compare these two bands to U2, at the end of the day its just YOUR opnion that they are over, but i can promise you its not the worlds opinion,
 
U2girl said:


Oh and you're proven your 90's bias well enough in your post, no need to deny it.

if anything, my bias is towards the 80's.

but yes i am biased. i prefer innovation in my music and testicles on my rock stars.
 
Un Lapin said:


i would simply direct you to the nearest Aerosmith or Kiss concert.

album and ticket sales do not good music indicate.

Um, those two bands have been jokes for years. I will direct you to their lack of print and praise.
 
starsgoblue said:
Too bad U2 wasn't paid for the iPod commercials and the cheapest seats were $49.50 and not $100. I really don't care what you think about the band but I don't see any wiggle room for criticism for what Bono does in his 'offtime'.

49.50 for the all coveted floor tickets.

$95 and $175 (CDN) for seats.
 
Un Lapin said:


nope. i tried to get tickets.

I don't see how your trying to get tickets means there are no $49 seats?

There are $49 seats.

You should get your facts straight before you bash U2 on a U2 board.
 
It's a nicely put together rant, however, this is simply a regurgitation of all the self-important reviewers from such magazines as Blender and Rolling Stone, who thought it was tres-chic to bash U2 after Pop came out and the tour was struggling. There really is no originality to it. This is no different than a college written essay that pulls together 5 or 6 articles all dealing with the same issue (the "regression" of U2) and puts it together in a nice, easy to read package.
The problem is, and comeone hit it on the head, you don't provide much backup or any of your own thoughts. I have already seen the same sentences written in other places.
 
Totaly not true Un Lapin.
U2 made only one mistake in their history.
That was: releasing a "we HAVE to do" album instead of the usual "we WANT to do" album...
I'm talking about ATYCLB.

Last time I checked HTDAAB was, is and probably will be for a while U2's 4th masterpiece (after War, JT and AB).
So I don't know what you're talking about.
 
bathiu said:
Totaly not true Un Lapin.
U2 made only one mistake in their history.
That was: releasing a "we HAVE to do" album instead of the usual "we WANT to do" album...
I'm talking about ATYCLB.

Last time I checked HTDAAB was, is and probably will be for a while U2's 4th masterpiece (after War, JT and AB).
So I don't know what you're talking about.

to use the rebuttal du jour:

yeah? well that's just, like...your opinion, man.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom