U2: Protecting this House since 1976 -> AKA, more new album talk

[gvox]

If U2 doesn't release an album soon, I'm going to sue them for driving me to finally walk myself right on into a permanent banning from this...cesspool.

lol

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

For those of us graying at the temples like myself: we tend to soften with age. We don't have the same piss and vinegar we did in the our mid 20s and early 30s. I guess that would also affect ones artistic expression. The fact that the lads are still even trying makes me feel blessed. There are exceptions but even James Hetfield has been crucified by loyal fans for softening up Metallica. If B and the lads read some of this thread often (doubt it) then it's no wonder we get Greatest hits tours so to speak. The know they can't keep the hardcores happy.

I agree with this to one extent, and disagree to another...

I fully understand that bono will be writing less about teenage angst and the loss of his mother and more about parenthood, marriage and old guy stuffs.

Where I disagree is with the political aspects of bono's lyrics... the band of Sunday Bloody Sunday, New Year's Day, Bullet The Blue Sky, etc. haven't written a powerful political song since Please in 1997... in the middle of an incredibly changing and controversial political and socioeconomic climate.

In that sense, I believe, as most do, that Bono's political work has softened the edge of his political lyrics.

 

[gvox]

the band of Sunday Bloody Sunday, New Year's Day, Bullet The Blue Sky, etc. haven't written a powerful political song since Please in 1997...

They could really use one of these right now..and I couldn't agree more, there's plenty to write about.

 

[Super Yo]

They could really use one of these right now..and I couldn't agree more, there's plenty to write about.

Love and Peace or Else?

 

[Registered Dude]

For those of us graying at the temples like myself: we tend to soften with age. We don't have the same piss and vinegar we did in the our mid 20s and early 30s. I guess that would also affect ones artistic expression. The fact that the lads are still even trying makes me feel blessed. There are exceptions but even James Hetfield has been crucified by loyal fans for softening up Metallica. If B and the lads read some of this thread often (doubt it) then it's no wonder we get Greatest hits tours so to speak. The know they can't keep the hardcores happy.

some people will never give up on the idea that U2 can has to release an album where every song sounds like Exit in order to be great again

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Love and Peace or Else?

Love and peace or else turned into a pretty cool live song... but has zero balls.

 

[lemonfly]

Love and Peace or Else?

Nah, toothless (and quite boring) rhetoric. Ditto Crumbs. Those two numbers could have made very pointed statements (and, yes, Native Son as well), but got lyrically castrated. Whether or not Bono was aware of it, there's no doubt he compromised his voice by hobnobbing with too many power players.

 

[jeevey]

Whether or not Bono was aware of it, there's no doubt he compromised his voice by hobnobbing with too many power players.

Let's just repeat that one so that Bono is sure to see it when he catches up on this thread today.

 

[mikal]

Love and peace or else turned into a pretty cool live song... but has zero balls.

Love and Balls or else?

 

[YBORCITY]

I agree with this to one extent, and disagree to another...

I fully understand that bono will be writing less about teenage angst and the loss of his mother and more about parenthood, marriage and old guy stuffs.

Where I disagree is with the political aspects of bono's lyrics... the band of Sunday Bloody Sunday, New Year's Day, Bullet The Blue Sky, etc. haven't written a powerful political song since Please in 1997... in the middle of an incredibly changing and controversial political and socioeconomic climate.

In that sense, I believe, as most do, that Bono's political work has softened the edge of his political lyrics.

Spot On

 

[ClaytonsKitten]

Spot On

 

[Globo14]

Love and peace or else turned into a pretty cool live song... but has zero balls.

This. It's a neat enough song, but it's always struck me as extremely underwhelming. I always expect it to go somewhere big, and it never does.

 

[pacemaker]

Have to consider the fact or the possibility?

You're right. I was in rant mode and misspoke. Bono is still capable of being profound, and it is possible that he has lost the ability to write the type of lyrics we would like him to write. I think he spent the first decade of the 2000s in an extremely self-conscious state and I'm hoping this time around he and the rest of the band have regained their self-confidence in that black hole they seem to be lost in.

 

[lazarus]

I must take serious umbrage here Hawkmoon, Heartland, Desire, AoL, GP2, AIWIY are astronomically better songs than 90% of what U2 cooked up in the entire 00s. R&H also happens to be the third best-selling U2 album of all time. Right now, U2 would kill to have that level of song craftmanship and commercial success.

Totally agree. Take away the live songs and this is a very strong album. Probably their fifth best.

I'll join this chorus. Not crazy about most of the live tracks either, but this is about as good a follow-up to JT as a fan could want. Expanding upon the Americana and getting deeper into rock and roll's roots, while still retaining the band's sound.

 

[DPardue]

"Rattle and Hum" as an album is perhaps underappreciated because it is tied to a film that was seen by critics as being underwhelming and self-indulgent. I believe it to be the most underrated album in the U2 catalog. I think it is an album that is appreciated much more retrospectively than it was at the time. "God Part II", "Angel of Harlem", "All I Want is You", "Love Rescue Me", et al would be solid tunes on any album. I even wonder if the band itself doesn't give the album it's due credit.

 

[ClaytonsKitten]

Personally, I like self-indulgent.

R&H and then the Zoo that followed were an amazing period in the band's history. And as I've said in previous threads, I'd love to see them "dream it all up again".

 

[djerdap]

They're 52 years old. They're not gonna dream it all up again.

 

[LadySpinHead]

I'm really tired of the age argument. I know plenty of people who have "dreamt it all up again" in their lives in their 50s. 50 ain't the end of the line, folks. Creativity still exists at that "advanced" (shudder) age. Are there differences now than 20-30 years ago? Of course. But don't write them off just yet.

 

[djerdap]

Fair enough. Which band had a dramatic reinvention in their 50s? I'm genuinely curious because I can't think of any. And I consider creativity and the will to dream it all up again to be two slightly different things.

 

[Galeongirl]

Did I really just read 12 pages of nothing?

 

[powerhour24]

I go away for weeks, come back thinking surely something must be known by now, but nope. Guess I'll check back in later on in the month.

 

[ElectricalVoice]

Did I really just read 12 pages of nothing?

 

[2861U2]

Did I really just read 12 pages of nothing?

You didn't find the pages of Under Armour discussion fascinating?

 

[ClaytonsKitten]

I'm really tired of the age argument. I know plenty of people who have "dreamt it all up again" in their lives in their 50s. 50 ain't the end of the line, folks. Creativity still exists at that "advanced" (shudder) age. Are there differences now than 20-30 years ago? Of course. But don't write them off just yet.

Thank you for saying it more eloquently than I could have. I actually had to get up and walk away before I let my mouth override my brain. They are in their 50s, yes, but they are still out there and doing it! And besides, I seem to recall plenty of fangirling over how good they all looked last tour!!

Did I really just read 12 pages of nothing?

Yeah, time to hole up in PLEBA again.

 

[Mount Temple]

Fair enough. Which band had a dramatic reinvention in their 50s? I'm genuinely curious because I can't think of any. And I consider creativity and the will to dream it all up again to be two slightly different things.

This challenge is so subjective that it is impossible to accept it. Do you remember Johnny Cash in his late 50's hooking up with Rick Rubin to shake up his sound over the American Recordings Series? That was a bold move.

 

[LadySpinHead]

This challenge is so subjective that it is impossible to accept it.

This.
I'd also like to add, that very few (if any) bands and artists have pulled off a complete reinvention at any time in their career, much less doing so twice, and still maintained the same level of commercial success and worldwide stature as U2. Madonna comes to mind, although the last decade had been waning for her, too. I'm sure there are others that I'm just not familiar with.

Just because it is rare, doesn't mean it can't be done. Especially by this band in particular.

 

[ClaytonsKitten]

Just because it is rare, doesn't mean it can't be done. Especially by this band in particular.

Perfect!

If anything, I think THIS band is more capable of it than any other.

 

[gvox]

Love and Peace or Else?

Um. No.

 

[jeevey]

Exactly what I was going to say, Temple. This ageist arguement kind of pisses me off. It's true that rock is a new art form and it's certainly one that's oriented towards youth. But really, creativity does not die at 48. We confuse peak creativity with peak testosterone production but they aren't actually identical.

There are many, many examples of creative artists going strong and even having peak work in their 50s and beyond. U2 is largely treading new ground, simply because rock has not been around long enough for many rock stars to get old. Only a few people have done what they are doing now- aged as a band and kept working on new material. Those who have, notably the Stones, were always more tradition oriented than U2, which def. must influence how they age. This band doesn't really have a map, and while they may have run out of juice there's no reason to assume they must have, just because they turned 53 this year. Johnny Cash was 62 when he began the American Recordings series and while those records are quite different to his early work they're certainly some of his best.

 

[djerdap]

Thank you for saying it more eloquently than I could have. I actually had to get up and walk away before I let my mouth override my brain. They are in their 50s, yes, but they are still out there and doing it! And besides, I seem to recall plenty of fangirling over how good they all looked last tour!!

I couldn't care less how they look. Being out there and doing it is a bit different than what for many the phrase "dream it all up again" symbolizes. I'm fairly skeptical that the band is capable of this at this stage, especially since their output in the last 13 years did little to impress me. As long as they're being obsessed about their songs being played on the radio and creating a perfect pop song and all the other bullshit they've spitted out in the last decade, there is a slim chance of something as bold as Achtung Baby or Zooropa (not that sound, but the surprisingly new and fresh direction) coming out. Some feel optimistic about Danger Mouse going onboard, but it seems to me the attitude of the band and the perverse overanalyzing hasn't changed a bit, since he's been working with them for three years on the album.

This challenge is so subjective that it is impossible to accept it. Do you remember Johnny Cash in his late 50's hooking up with Rick Rubin to shake up his sound over the American Recordings Series? That was a bold move.

Hardly something that could be applicable to U2, unless doing stripped-down covers of contemporary bands is what would satisfy some people here. A Banjo Temple Bar mix of Mumford and Sons maybe? As admirable as the Cash/Rubin project was, I'd hardly compare that to what U2 did with The Unforgettable Fire or Achtung Baby, or what Bowie did with Young Americans and Low, or Radiohead with Kid A, or Talk Talk with Spirit of Eden etc.

This.
I'd also like to add, that very few (if any) bands and artists have pulled off a complete reinvention at any time in their career, much less doing so twice, and still maintained the same level of commercial success and worldwide stature as U2. Madonna comes to mind, although the last decade had been waning for her, too. I'm sure there are others that I'm just not familiar with.

Just because it is rare, doesn't mean it can't be done. Especially by this band in particular.

So you can't think of anybody. That's cool. Neither do I. There are artists making good music in their 50s, but all of the cases I know of is that those artists are perfectly comfortable in their own skin right now and with their established sound (Nick Cave, Neil Young, David Bowie etc.). Better not to expect any radical changes or breaking new ground, because one might be faced with a NLOTH-like disappointment, which was unfortunately hyped as this new Achtung Baby-like reinvention. It wasn't.