U2 Album Trending: One Step Backwards to Go Two Steps Foward...

[jick]

Ever since the birth of U2, I have noticed a trend that the band has followed after Boy. They have been following the motto that to go forward, you have to take some little steps backward. So far the trend has consistently been one step backward to go two steps forward. Here goes:

Boy (BIRTH)

October (BACKWARD) - experimenting with their religious conviction but taking it too far

War (FORWARD) - good mix of religious and political beliefs and spawned some hits

Under A Blood Red Sky (MORE FORWARD) - captured what makes the band tick - performing live with a lot of passion

Unforgettable Fire (BACKWARD) - still learning to explore ambient sounds and spontaneous playing

Wide Awake In America (FORWARD) - the realization of the potential of two UF songs in a live setting including U2's best live staple "Bad" which was also highlighted in Live Aid; plus two UF rejects that showcase great songwriting and bass playing

The Joshua Tree (MORE FORWARD) - the pinnacle of their career which contained all the best elements of their previous work - `nuff said!

Rattle And Hum (BACKWARD) - they experimented on incorporating elements their musical heroes into their music which got a bad rap

Achtung Baby (FORWARD) - the second pinnacle of their career, after turning their backs on the image R&H overdid but turning to irony and heavy industrial sounds

Zooropa (MORE FORWARD) - the realization of their musical experimentation and perhaps the most ambitious and risky piece of work done by a mainstream pop band

POP (BACKWARD) - failed attempt to incorporate the hip music at that time, which was trip-hop and jungle techno, to their own music; unfinished and disjointed

ATYCLB (FORWARD) - realization that it's not always best to try to incorporate other incompatible music with you own, instead, they chose to just sound like themselves

HTDAAB (MORE FORWARD) - the previous album was a return, this one is a reasurrance that they are still sounding like themselves but this time with a more edgy sound

Their "backward" albums are always U2 on a mindset of trying out different "elements" to incorporate them in a future album or to discard them altogether. It's like a Formula One car during winter testing where they are simply testing new components - lap times aren't great and they aren't really in competetive mode.

So from all indications and following this trend, U2's follow-up to HTDAAB could be a dud but the subsequent albums would be great. That is if U2 still have 3 albums left in them.

Cheers,

J

 

[beli]

Dunno if the next album will be a "dud". Going by your formula my favourites are the backwards albums. So lets hope the next album is indeed "backwards".

 

[ImOuttaControl]

I disagree. U2 has progressing "forward" by changing their musical styles until 2000. ATYCLB and HDAAB were both a "step backwards." U2 had realized they pushed their music as far as they could so they went back to what made them great in the first place.

 

[discothequeLP]

jick, thumbs up! I agree pretty much 100% with what you posted, though I won't say just yet that the next album will be a bad egg. Though it may not be too bad, considering that I like R&H and LOVE Pop.

 

[rivergoat]

I don't know, I don't think as U2's musical progression as being so straight-jacketed. They're just not that linear... besides, if you're going to try to analyze their albums, try being a little less biased - saying The Joshua Tree was the pinnacle of their career implies that they've been going downhill ever since (Achtung Baby included).

The Joshua Tree is probably their second-most unique album (after The Unforgettable Fire) in terms of keeping a consistent musical theme for every song - it would hard for that to be a pinnacle of their career since they haven't really done anything like it since (although some tracks on Rattle and Hum are in a similar vein). In other words, they changed their sound after that time period, so obviously it wasn't the place they wanted to stay (and who doesn't want to be on top?)

Of course, it depends upon what you consider success and failure - is it album sales, critical acclaim, or just what sound you like? Or, using your analogy, could 'steps forward' be the integration by U2 of widely divergent musical styles into their own brand of punk-fuck music? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that their real 'steps forward' are the albums where they experienced the most growth as musicians and songwriters, not an album that shows their obvious mastery of the new form?

just my thoughts...

goat

 

[RademR]

not bad jick, but I cant see UF as a step backward.

 

[Yahweh_OMG]

I don't really agree with you jick.

October, ok, step back
Unforgettable fire, to me it's a step forward, new sound, famous worldwide
Zooropa, to me it's a step backward compared to Achtung Baby! We can't even compare the 2. They are both great album, but to me, despite the fact they wanted to experiment, Zooropa is the weakest U2 album.
POP, step forward in terms of music......step backward in terms of media and number of album sold.

It just depends whicj album people prefer..... it is very personal.

 

[lazarus]

POP (BACKWARD) - failed attempt to incorporate the hip music at that time, which was trip-hop and jungle techno, to their own music; unfinished and disjointedJ

J, you used these terms in ignorance for years on Wire, and I'm going to put a stop to it here too. If you don't understand electronic music, don't talk about it. Maybe some of the people on Interference are as naive as you are, but the people who DO know something about the genre will rise up and put you in your place. It was clear to me long ago that you had a bias against this genre of music, yet you criticize without being informed on what you're dealing with.

Your phrase "trip hop and jungle techno" is a laughable clue to your foolishness, as "jungle techno" is a term no one familiar with the music would ever use. Plus, trip hop and jungle are two completely different styles of electronic music. There are maybe only two songs on POP that have beats even resembling trip hop (IGWSHA and Playboy Mansion) and nothing even CLOSE to jungle (or drum and bass) is found on the album.

As for "failed attempt", that is a completely subjective opinion that you can't back up with anything. I'd argue that getting a real DJ/electronic artist like Howie B. to participate would remove any doubts to its authenticity as a hybrid. But regardless, it's still a rock and roll record with modern flourishes, and LESS processed than what was heard on Zooropa. If you want to take potshots at POP, find another way to do it. Because it pisses me off to see you throw words around that you didn't understand 5 years ago, and don't understand now. Of course, what would you expect from someone who thinks Bon Jovi is good?


laz


** and by the way, you forgot Passengers in your pathetic attempt at some kind of "pattern" in U2's albums. It was a full length recording that was originally slated to be their next release after Zooropa, so to discard it just to prove your wild, unsubstantiated theory is just weak, especially coming from someone with a (alleged) law degree.

 

[jick]

Ok, let me explain further.

Statements like "the JT is the pinnacle of U2's career" may be argued by some but that is not the point of this post. The point is - you ask yourself: was JT a step forward from WAIA? If yes then there is a consensus at least to that point I was trying to make.

Also, when I say "step backwards" it does no mean a digression or losing their edge. What I mean is that it is sort of a "mini-sacrifice" by U2 for further musical glory. All their backwards albums are sort of exploratory and preparatory albums to ready them for the music that lies ahead in the next album. Without these exploratory events, U2 would have never stepped forward.

For example, UF was not as commercially viable as War but U2 did UF to see how it could incorporate new sounds into their music. The realization and perfection of these new sounds came with the JT.

With POP, U2 explored a new set of musical genres to attempt to incorporate into their music. One the compatibility was proven to be shaky at best, U2 realized that it was best to go back to their roots and they started the forward steps with ATYCLB and perfected it now with HTDAAB.

This thread is not to belittle those "backwards" albums. As a matter of fact, without these "backward" albums the U2 learning curve would have been a lot less and their musical repertoire so boring.

So it may have been harsh words to say that the next album will be a "dud". I guess the better term is that the next album will be exploratory and risky, considering U2 have already achieved another pinnacle with HTDAAB. There is nowhere to go but down unless they find ways to reinvent the wheel and stay relevant which they always have done. So the next album will be another back-to-the-drawing-board and rebuilding-process kinda album which may not be as commercially successful and accepted as HTDAAB - but which will lead U2 to new musical horizons to puruse for the two following albums which will take U2 to yet another stratosphere.

Cheers,

J

 

[namkcuR]

I disagree with everything jick said. U2 progressed with their music and absolutely hated the idea of repeating themselves until 2000, when this current retro movement started. Not to say that there aren't some new things on HTDAAB.

 

[bathiu]

/side note/ jick you're so boring with threads and views like that, you have no idea how boring

Although you are completly wrong with this "album trending" (because you had to use a live album and EP to make it work... what about Best Of CDs? I sugest using only studio albums)... there actualy is a patern in U2 albums:

"Albums (1,3,5,7,9,11) are better/not worse (equal) than albums (2,4,6,8,10)"... take a look

1. Boy
2. October - worse
3. War - better
4. Unforgettable Fire
5. Joshua Tree - better
6. R&H
7. Achtung Baby - better
8. Zooropa
9. Pop - better
10. ATYCLB
11. HTDAAB - better

...now you're asking if UF is worse/equal to War... well since there are instrumentals on UF and the album actualy has only 3 or 4 realy strong songs (no matter how great they are) I would say this theory works in this place.
...and abviously JT is better than UF.

 

[U2_Guy]

This Jick character looks like someone with loads of spare time on his hands that comes to Interference with just one thought: to incite controversy by creating silly theories nobody can prove about the most silliest subjects.

And some ppl are actually beginning to agree with this character... Oh my...

 

[U2girl]

I think U2 had three major steps forward: War - that started breaking their anonimity, Joshua Tree - that made them stars and Achtung Baby - that gave them the second decade.

Also, two transition albums: Unforgettable fire and ATYCLB.

I don't know whether the next album will be a dud or not. The 80's saw the best album made towards the end of the decade, the 90's best album was done at the start of the decade. Maybe this decade is the one where they make the best album at the middle of the decade?

I'm hoping they get a new producer next time, they worked with Lillywhite and Eno/Lanois on the last two albums.
They're not going for Jimmy Iovine on the next one are they?

 

[isabelle_guns]

To be honest, I do not think that there is going to be a next album adn I am not saying this as a negative thing but a realistic thing as I am sure the band would like to venture onto other things, I can see Bono getting more involved in politics than he already is, didn't larry mullen want to act? This is a prediction and predictions can be wrong.

 

[all_i_want]

well, by jick's logic, i do hope they backtrack on the next album. since both POP and UF are considered backward movement

 

[Pero]

Boy-solid
October-much worse
War-better
UF-more complete,but song to song is worse
JT-better, much better
R&H-much worse
AB-c'mon, best album
Zooropa-worse than ab but better than uf and war
Pop-shut up, pop is step forward in every view, every song is 5 min long, and they say it's not complete. If it would have been complete, it would be better than ab
ATYCLB-worse
HTDAAB-third best(my opinion)

BTW. You can't just make straight line of u2 albums, because they are different from each other very much, except Boy and October

 

[Lancemc]

I think people should stop tagging all of Jick's posts as "trying to insite controversy" because that's what any good post does. It gets people comparing ideas and actually considering other people's point of view, instead of just the "Gee, hmm, how bout this...let's all list our top five favorite non-single songs, that were played live, but only acoustic" type thread. And this is acctually a very valid and interesting post.

Now, moving on to the actual topic here, I think Jick is really on to something here. And some of you still don't "get" what he's saying by a step backward. In no means is he implying that those "backwards" albums are better or worse than any other albums (that's a desicion we each have to make on our own), but that those album are when
U2 sacrificed acessability in order to open new doors for themselves. If this trend continues as it is, then the next album should be a bit off from the ATYCLB/HTDAAB style we have been accustomed with the past four years. Maybe tracks like Fast Cars and Mercy are a hint at what they are beginning to dabble in, sonically. Maybe the reason they were left off the album is because U2 weren't quite ready yet to release that next "pushing the envelope" type work.

What I hope for the next album is another Eno/Lanois collaboration that perfects the style they arwe using now, and then allowing for these more "unorthodox" (..for U2, i know Fast Cars didn't revolutionize the music world, ok?) songs structures and world music influences fill the album.

 

[jick]

I think people should stop tagging all of Jick's posts as "trying to insite controversy" because that's what any good post does. It gets people comparing ideas and actually considering other people's point of view, instead of just the "Gee, hmm, how bout this...let's all list our top five favorite non-single songs, that were played live, but only acoustic" type thread. And this is acctually a very valid and interesting post.

Now, moving on to the actual topic here, I think Jick is really on to something here. And some of you still don't "get" what he's saying by a step backward. In no means is he implying that those "backwards" albums are better or worse than any other albums (that's a desicion we each have to make on our own), but that those album are when
U2 sacrificed acessability in order to open new doors for themselves.

You sure can find a way to read my intentions and chose better words to convey it that make the original thread less offensive to some overly sensitive U2 fans. I think I need you to be my spokesperson and agent! Thanks for the insight.

Cheers,

J

 

[ultraviolet7]

I disagree. U2 has progressing "forward" by changing their musical styles until 2000. ATYCLB and HDAAB were both a "step backwards." U2 had realized they pushed their music as far as they could so they went back to what made them great in the first place.

I agree with most of this, however I don't know if they went back to what made them great in the first place because they realised they had pushed the limits of their music too far or there were other reasons. I tend to think there might have been other motivations.

 

[Lancemc]

You sure can find a way to read my intentions and chose better words to convey it that make the original thread less offensive to some overly sensitive U2 fans. I think I need you to be my spokesperson and agent! Thanks for the insight.

Cheers,

J

Hmm, is that a job offer? I've never been anyone's agent before...

 

[rjhbonovox]

Unforgettable Fire (BACKWARD) - still learning to explore ambient sounds and spontaneous playing

POP (BACKWARD) - failed attempt to incorporate the hip music at that time, which was trip-hop and jungle techno, to their own music; unfinished and disjointed

J

If the Unforgettable Fire was a step backwards afer War then I am a complete asshole with shit in my ears. How in the hell can Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Pride, Promenade etc be a step backwards. Also, I am not even gonna say anything about Pop except that it pisses all over the following two albums!!!

 

[Lancemc]

Wow, you people still have no idea what Jick was talking about. So, how about we all just forget about it and go back to whatever it was we were doing before all this.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

You can't say that the UF is "backwards." It was their first atmospheric album that introduced a U2 sound that only Eno and Lanios (their first u2 album as well) could of gave us. Adam has often said that the first three were practices. As well, it is often noted that the song Bad is where the band gained respect for their trade. They all finally take it to another level that was never reached before.

 

[U2_Guy]

Wow, you people still have no idea what Jick was talking about. So, how about we all just forget about it and go back to whatever it was we were doing before all this.

Apparently, you see Jick as the second coming and you are his apostle. The rest (us shitheads) will see the truth in the next 1000 years i'm sure.

 

[Lancemc]

Apparently, you see Jick as the second coming and you are his apostle. The rest (us shitheads) will see the truth in the next 1000 years i'm sure.

Nooooooooo, my point was that he and myself has already repeatedely explained what he meant by the "forwards/backwards" tag. I'll admit, I was a bit confused at first, and don't completely agree with him, but at least I understand his intentions in what he said. I'm not going to explain it again, because it had already been explained here numerous times. So the next time you "shitheads" want to make me feel guilty of something, try to put it in perspective first.

 

[rivergoat]

First off, tossing insults around doesn't do any good. You cannot convince anyone of your side of an argument if you make them defensive.

Secondly, I was using jick's own logic (which Lancemc rephrased and repeated) to show he got his assessment of each release well, backwards. The steps forward would be the more exploratory albums, the steps backwards would be returning to previous explored avenues.

The ONLY way jick's post makes sense is if he's talking about sales - each album he listed as a step forward had more commercially successful singles than the previously listed 'backward' one. (I am not counting the live albums, just as I would not count the "Best of" releases).

If jick wants to discuss music theory, then he should read his own words first and determine what it is he REALLY wants to say. Adding flowery language to confuse the issue does not make for a good argument. Using words and phrases that you do not understand the meaning of only lessens other people's assessment of your intelligence and makes them more likely to question your motives.

That being said, I completely agree with this statement:

Originally posted by all_i_want
well, by jick's logic, i do hope they backtrack on the next album. since both POP and UF are considered backward movement

Amen!


goat

 

[Joshua87]

This thread has no credibility at all because whether or not they took steps forward or backwards is just personal opinion. Most of the people here think that october is a step below war, but i think the other way around (war is very patchy, 4 great songs and 6 shitty ones). Also, there is no way they took steps back from Rattle and Hum to make Achtung Baby. Are you fuckin kidding me?? Everyone listen to them back to back and see if R&H influenced AB. U2 didn't take steps back then, they came to a complete stop. You are all welcome to disagree with me as you like.

 

[Jamila]

I enjoy jick's posts.

I may not always agree with them, but they either make me think or laugh.

Good to see you're still here, jick. And thanks to Lancemc for sticking up for his right to be part of our forums!

 

[yimou]

Interesting Jick... I think i will pass on entering the discussion about which album is what