namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
But, in their plight to fight ageism in rock, if that is what they are trying to do, they are in fact perpetuating the idea that most people have of what aging rock bands are about - back to roots, trying to emulate what made them 'big' in the first place, still not having as many chart hits as in years past, putting out records so they can tour, etc. If they really wanted to fight ageism in rock, shouldn't their goal be to retain the respect of people - age 15, age age 25, age 45 and older alike - for their abilities as musicians and not for their ability to make chart hits? Because as someone who was in high school as recently as two years ago, I GUARANTEE you that those kids DO NOT have the same kind of respect for U2 that the 15 year-olds of 1987 or of 1991 or of 1993 had for U2. If they really wanted to fight ageism in rock, shouldn't the goal be to continue pushing the envelope with their music and to keep trying to blow peoples' minds with their music as if there's no reason why being 45 should make them any less capable of it? Wouldn't that be a better fight against ageism in rock than making two records that basically say, 'we're 45 and we don't think we CAN make records that will blow your mind anymore so we're trying to be the pop band we're not instead'?