Originally posted by Bonochick:
JT has been out since '87.
AB has been out since '91.
ATYCLB has been out since '00.
Give it time.
Thanks Bonochick, great point.
Also, those numbers David quoted can't be compared (as he's listed some bizarre mix of worldwide and U.S. sales data).
JT was released in 1987 and is certified as 10x Platinum in the U.S. Worldwide sales are around 15-18 million.
AT was released in 1991 and is certified as 8x Platinum in the U.S. Worldwide sales are around 12-14 million.
ATCYLB was released in 2000 is certified as 3x Platinum in the U.S., although it has now sold over 3.2 million copies to U.S. consumers. Worldwide sales are 10-12 million.
Therefore, I agree with Bonochick - give ATYCLB time. It may never quite reach JT or AB sales, especially in the U.S., but it may ultimately surpass R&H (5x Platinum in the U.S.) as U2's third best selling album in the U.S. and it may even overtake AB as U2's second best selling album worldwide.
As for popularity, 1987 was that "magical" year when U2 finally broke through. For many people, U2 was "new" band that they discovered. For others, JT was the album that really got them into U2. U2 were seen as new and fresh and different (despite the fact that they released their first album in 1980).
In 1991/92, U2's image suffered with this "irony concept." I know some JT era fans who were turned away from this. However, the powerful music, especially the one-two punch of "Mysterious Ways" and "One" kept fans interested. Also, the "cool" image U2 presented attracted new fans. Lastly, much like U2 stood out amongst the hair bands of the late 80's, U2 stood out amongst the grunge bands of the early 90's. U2 were rock, but a different type of rock - a great alternative.
After the "disappointment" of "Pop," it became clear that U2 would have to reintroduce themselves to the music buying public. Hence the heavier promotion that we see now. Also, back in '87, U2 were men in the mid-20's. It was easy for U2 to attract the music buying crowd (mostly teens) then because they could relate to U2 due to the similarity in ages. The same was true in '91. However, now, the members of U2 are in their 40's. How does one prove to a teenager that the music created by a person 3x his/her age is relevant? The answer is promotion. U2 not only had to overcome the mindset that "Pop" had failed, but they also had to attract a new generation of fans - people that most likely never heard of U2. When even the members of N'Sync are discussing U2, you know that the promotion is working.
So did all of this promotion make U2 as popular as they were in '87 or '91? I will say "no," but they are close. The freshness of '87 can never be obtained again. The uniqueness of '91 will be difficult to recapture. The U2 of today are seen as "veterans," so they will never completely attract the music buying public's attention in the same fashion as they once did.
However, there is a difference now. While there are naysayers, overall, I see a LOT more positive comments about U2, even from former naysayers (like SPIN), than I ever did in the past. During the JT era, there was a backlash about U2 being too serious or pompous or preachy. During the AB era, there was a backlash for this "irony" image and that there was too much attention to the theatrics and not enough on the music. Now, it seems U2 have found just the right mix. They are earnest without being preachy. They are confident and theatrical, without detracting from the music.
What makes U2 more special now, as compared to '87 and '91, is their longevity. They have remained the same and have been popular for 15 years. Even so-so fans admire this. Also, because of the horrible tragedies of Sep. 11th, people can relate to U2's music far better than they ever did. This is why the ATYCLB is #58 on this weeks chart, 62 weeks after its release (in contrast, JT was #76 in its Week 62).
To summarize, no I do not believe that U2 are quite as popular as they were in '87 or '91 (as evidenced by slightly lower album sales). However, I do feel that U2 have more respect now, from both fans and critics. And I think U2 would much rather have the latter than the former (especially since sales overall are still strong).
