Jeff Ament comments on U2 - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong > Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-07-2002, 12:35 PM   #21
The Fly
 
rymyx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 135
Local Time: 10:45 AM
Sorry everyone but I've got to call "bullshit" on the guy from Pearl Jam.

Ist off its fine that they don't want to be U2 but when Bono says that he wishes Radiohead and Pearl Jam did want it I think he knows that they would produce better music overall.

Sounds to me like a big bad decision. If PJ did do all the publicity they would be accountable to 2 groups of fans

casual
devoted

This puts more pressure on any band to come through with great albums and innovation.

The other thing that PJ thinks is cool that isn't is still acting like a fucking grunge band. Could the 90's please come and collect their trash(PJ) they're still talking.

What an uninspired depressing vibe these guys give out. All the publicity they do is always " we don't want this, we don't do videos, we don't want to be rock stars" Fuck off already.

Its not their music that sucks it's their lack of ambition and poor fucking attitude.

Why is U2 so popular?

Because they represent an idea of ambition, innovation and human condition through their music.

What the fuck is Pearl Jam all about anyway? Someone get these guys a blanket and a bottle.
__________________

rymyx is offline  
Old 12-07-2002, 02:03 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 03:45 PM
Rymx:

Though, on the face of it, it would seem that being held accountable to casual as well as devoted fans would result in better albums and innovation, I tend to disagree with that for a couple of reasons:

1. Good art is almost always the result of inspiration, not accountability. A band that is uninspired can dial up all the sexy grooves they want, all the samples they need, and all the voice overs they can muster, but in the end, if it isn't inspired it isn't good. When it comes to art, especially music I feel, inspiration has to come from within. Accountability simply serves as a reminder - and may result in a longer recording process, something that doesn't go hand in hand with inspiration.

2. There are plenty of artists that have both casual and devoted fans - and thus accountability - but their albums are terrible. Sometimes, keeping the audience in mind is the worst thing an artist can do. Music is an organic process. Anything else is pure artifice - in other words, crap. Take most of Pop radio, for example. I'd hardly describe Britney and her ilk as innovative.

3. This leads me to artists such as Nick Drake. Have you ever heard of him? Probably not, but you might have. If you haven't heard of him, it wouldn't surprise me, as he is quite unknown. His music, in other words, doesn't have much of a casual devotion. However, his music is also, primarily, amazing. His album Pink Moon is one of the best of all time. If his music hadn't been used in a car commercial recently, many people would not even know about him. There's someone who had little accountability (according to your definition anyway), but who was highly innovative, creavtive, and made incredble music and albums.

Conclusion: at the end of the day, accountability is important - but it's really only important if it's with yourself. If you can't be held accountable to yourself, no matter who else you are held accountable to, the music will suffer. Self-accountability is the key, in my opinion.
__________________

Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 12-07-2002, 03:06 PM   #23
The Fly
 
rymyx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 135
Local Time: 10:45 AM
Excellent and interesting post Griffiths and I will check out Nick Drake. Gives me another perspective as far as art and musicians go.

I'm just tired of hearing the same story from PJ in the press over and over and over again.
rymyx is offline  
Old 12-07-2002, 06:27 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
david's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: southern california
Posts: 10,488
Local Time: 08:45 AM
And still, at the end of the day Pearl Jam, or at least a few members of Pearl Jam are still fans of U2 and respect them. Eddie attendended an Elevation show, it was actually talked about here, complete with pictures. Ament has always liked U2. I don't see any problem with his comment. After, it's a comment with U2 used as an example. He's basically saying they don't want to do what U2 did, that is all. I don't see how it's really putting down U2.
david is offline  
Old 12-07-2002, 08:08 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
HelloAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: new york city
Posts: 14,534
Local Time: 11:45 AM
Normal

Quote:
Originally posted by david
And still, at the end of the day Pearl Jam, or at least a few members of Pearl Jam are still fans of U2 and respect them. Eddie attendended an Elevation show, it was actually talked about here, complete with pictures. Ament has always liked U2. I don't see any problem with his comment. After, it's a comment with U2 used as an example. He's basically saying they don't want to do what U2 did, that is all. I don't see how it's really putting down U2.
I was at the Elevation show where Eddie was, he stood behind me the whole time and wept like a baby at times.

Personally, I could care less what people say about U2. Everyone's entitled to an opinion, and I will never understand why people take so much flack whether they are misinterpreted or not - especially about music or film, or where the arts are concerned.

PJ want their success one way, and want to be represented one way, and that representation is different than how U2 presents themselves. So be it. Years ago, I tired of PJ's cowering from the spotlight and their seeming beliefs about how validity and savvy public relations cannot go hand in hand. Somehow, to truly be an artist, you cannot enjoy your success, or publicly promote your work. I disagree with that belief, but PJ will always have their built-in fan base whether they want to step up to the main stage or not.
HelloAngel is offline  
Old 12-07-2002, 09:48 PM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
MrPryck2U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Long Island, NY, USA, Earth
Posts: 9,434
Local Time: 11:45 AM
It's gotta be a slow news day in U2Land if we're actually giving a fuck over what Jeff Ament allegedly said about U2. U2 went their way and PJ went theirs. Can't we just leave it at that? When Kurt Cobain died, that kinda really fucked up PJ because they were somewhat ambivilent about fame like Kurt was. No coincidence that PJ cut back on a lot of shit after Cobain died. Yes, they did stop making videos before Cobain's death, but they did cut back on a lot of other promotional work after his death as well. Then there was all the shit with TM. PJ was trying to help their fans as well as all consumers by showing the government how deeply TM was fucking those said fans/consumers. Alas, nobody else fuckin' cared and we continue to get sodimized by TM to this day. When I think of PJ, I think of a consistantly solid Rock and Roll band. They usually release an album every 2 years and then tour for that album. I really like their new album Riot Act. It's definitely better than 2000's Bianural, which was OK.
MrPryck2U is offline  
Old 12-07-2002, 10:18 PM   #27
Refugee
 
zoocarolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC, USA
Posts: 1,495
Local Time: 11:45 AM
I understand that PJ wants to go a certain way and might not measure success the same way U2 does and I realize that Ament was using U2 as an example, but the first couple of times I read it, I got the feeling that he was putting the boys down for what they do as if it's a bad thing to be the biggest band in the world. It would have been different if we would have said something after or before the statement like there's nothing wrong with what they do or something along those lines.

I think I am overanalyzing a bit and it is a slow news time, this would be so much easier if it was an interview clip bc you can see the facial expressions and tone, but personally, I could give a crap less bc it doesn't matter how much U2 gets bad press or even talked about it bc most of us could agree, our liking is at a personal level.

Good discussion folks, in deep dark places I think PJ would like to be on top, and who wouldn't. I think the laissez faire approach they're taking is sort of a copout to their lack of recent success, which makes it look like this is "the plan" who knows?
zoocarolina is offline  
Old 12-08-2002, 12:03 AM   #28
ONE
love, blood, life
 
dsmith2904's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Just keep me where the light is
Posts: 12,290
Local Time: 08:45 AM
I don't think Pearl Jam not wanting to be huge and super-famous is a cop out or a sign of laziness. For a while they were so big and the world was dissecting everything they said and did (particularly with Eddie), their lives were gone through, it was horrible. That may or may not be the price of fame, I'm not sure, but somehow Pearl Jam has found away around that, they are able to make money from touring and recording without having to be all over magazines and television shows and lose their privacy. Good for them. But if that reluctance to be interviewed by Diane Sawyer or have McG direct their videos means that Pearl Jam won't top the Forbes list or Billboard, that's the choice they've made.

I also think that just because someone doesn't want to be or isn't super-famous, that doesn't mean they're not working hard. I know that their are thousands (probably more, probably some on this board) of struggling musicians playing gigs every night, loading their own gear, traveling from city to city in crappy vans and killing themselves to do what they love. They're not as famous or well-paid as Britney or Justin or even Bono, but they work just as hard as those people do. Unfortunately hard work and success don't always go hand in hand.
dsmith2904 is offline  
Old 12-08-2002, 08:07 AM   #29
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 65,423
Local Time: 11:45 AM
I love PJ, think they make great records, in no way think they were taking a shot at U2 with this one, but whatever. I understand they don't want to be like U2, to be huge and all over every magazine and newspaper in the world. Not caring about that is fine. Frankly I don't think U2 even cares about that... you hear it all the time from them that it's not about the sales the record makes, it's about staying relevant. U2 just happens to be able to make great music, the music they want to make, and still sell tons of CDs. My only hope for PJ is that they stop trying so hard to NOT be a huge commercial success. I think they should just try to make the best damn record they can make. If that ends up including a few "radio friendly" songs that become huge hits, so be it. Ten, Vitalogy and Vs. had these kind of songs and were big hits... Yield had a great rocker in Do The Evolution (which amazingly had a video), but that was really about it as far as "radio friendly" songs went. Given to Fly and Wishlist were good songs, just not ones that you'd expect to get played on modern radio. Last Kiss was a hit by accident. It was originaly just a token gift that they released only to their fan club at Christmas time, but it was such a good cover that it started getting radio play, and by the summer it was even on Top40 right next to Britney and Justin. Binural was the same as Yield, a few really good songs, but none that you hear and go Bam, that's a single. Riot Act is a little better... I Am Mine's probably their most radio friendly song since Last Kiss. They've got a few other potential hits there, Love Boat Captain (about the incident in Denmark two years ago) and Thumbing My Way all have that "single" sound, and Save You, the next single off the album according to the PJ fan sites, is even rumored to have a video. The band played a 2 night stand on Letterman, and are ready to go on tour next summer with Audioslave as the rumored opener. So who knows... Ament makes these comments, not a shot but just stating the reality of the situation, but at the same time they seem to be putting forth more of an effort commercialy than they have in the past. Whatever happens with 'em... I just can't wait to see the probable tour of PJ w/ Chris Cornell and the remains of Rage. Yahtzee!
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 12-08-2002, 12:43 PM   #30
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,682
Local Time: 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrPryck2U
It's gotta be a slow news day in U2Land if we're actually giving a fuck over what Jeff Ament allegedly said about U2. U2 went their way and PJ went theirs. Can't we just leave it at that?
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline  
Old 12-08-2002, 06:21 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 09:45 AM
being a HUGE Pearl Jam fan, I tend to read every single article I can find on the web. And I can say without hesitation that at least 3 members of Pearl Jam are U2 fans. Eddie was a huge U2 fan growing up thru the 80's, he became disenchanted when they went thru their irony-period, but I think he still looks up to the band. Mike McCready is at least a fan of The Edge, he was one of the notables who attended the New York gig in 2001, and has said similar things to what Ament said in other articles. Lastly, Jeff Ament, is too indeed at least influenced at one time or another by U2, I have read this, if i run into the link again I will post it.

The thing is Pearl Jam are much more like U2 were in the 80's, and now maybe they aren't totally enamored with U2 wanting to be the best band in the world, what I have read from McCready and Ament is that they realize that they could be mega-huge, even Bono has told them this, and they fully realize this and simply say, no thanks.

Don't read too much into this. I just think they are comfortable where they are at, and say "we don't won't to be U2". And basically what they mean is (every band wants to be U2) and we don't. Trust me, that comment is more out of respect than anything.
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 12-09-2002, 02:23 AM   #32
The Fly
 
rymyx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 135
Local Time: 10:45 AM
Quote:
I think the laissez faire approach they're taking is sort of a copout to their lack of recent success, which makes it look like this is "the plan" who knows?
Big time man.

If you don't want to maximize your potential then shut the fuck up PJ.

Some say don't read into it, whatever.

"Bullshit" all the little bands always memtion U2. But PJ is just pathetic because they pissed their place in music history away.

Please argue......
__________________

rymyx is offline  
 

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 10:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×