ok kids, so anyone who knows me knows that i'm a HUGE U2 fan... probably one of the biggest fans ever amongst people my age. they were my first favorite group, and though my musical taste has expanded considerably since i first fell in love with them at 15, they will always always hold a very special place in my heart. i've seen them twice in concert. both times, i skipped town the night before a college exam and drove to another city to see them live--soooo worth it both times. :) the first time, i was on the floor, a few feet away from bono, and it was beyond my ability to describe in words. the second time, i was miles away, but it was still truly exhilirating. what can i say? they're my boys and i absolutely love them.
and yet, i'm wondering what happened with the new album. y'all wanna share some thoughts on it? i've owned "how to dismantle an atomic bomb" for months now (since the day it came out, actually) and for some reason, it's still just not doing it for me. in fact, blasphemous as it may sound, i can't even bring myself to listen to it enough to warm up to it. i guess i'm ok with the first track ("vertigo," which i think is the only radio release thus far), but generally, i find it very lack-luster.
on the whole... listening to the lyrics makes me think bono has finally drained some of his deepest poetic reservoirs, and they run dry throughout the album. hearing the music itself makes me wonder if maybe steve lillywhite, brian eno, flood, and company are feeling kinda crazy these days...? i mean, what were they doing with this one? honestly? i know edge is still a true virtuoso and his guitar skills are forever unmatched, and of course larry and adam are non-issues--they are always excellent on drums and bass, respectively. but somehow, the overall product just leaves me unsatisfied...
could it just be that they've lost their ability to produce true, moving, original music after 25 years? (on a side note, larry is still surprisingly hot these days, even after all these years). :) but seriously... bono pays some impressive lip service to this album, and i daresay it's been effective, considering his ability to speak, to spin, to sell. everyone else seems to like it. and yet, i find myself unfufilled. despite his provocative comments about it being their best album ever and their first real rock album, to me it sounds something like a regurgitation of "under a blood red sky," except...
1. there's a lot more noise and sound effects--all this confuses the auditory output and blankets the genuine musical sound of the band and their instruments
2. the earnest, youthful intensity of those early albums like "blood red sky" is sadly lacking
now, this being my impression of the album, the lesser-quality reproduction of a 20-year old sound just struck me as lamentable.
i find myself wondering why it couldn't just be something fresh and new? one reason i've always loved U2 is because i've respected their ability to reinvent themselves, to not care what anyone thinks, to diversify and experiment, to call an album "achtung baby" and still have it sell millions and millions of copies around the world. hell, i even liked "pop." and i'm one of about 5 people in the world who appreciated "zooropa." i think it has some redeeming features and i take it for what it's worth. so even in the late '90s, when everyone was knocking their game and saying they'd just lost it, i was still loving it and loving them.
of course, when "all that you can't leave behind" came out in 2000, the world rushed to re-embrace them, called it a return to their "original sound" (whatever the hell that means), blah blah blah... of course that album was beautiful, because it still sparked that inner harmony that U2 music has always been able to create inside of me. but i didn't like it because it was a return to anything (i would definitely disagree with those who call it a "joshua tree" remake). i loved it for what it was. i loved that album the same way i loved the rest of them--i loved it because it was U2 being true to themselves and whatever it was they were feeling at the time. because that always makes for beautiful music...
this album, however, strikes me as somewhat disingenous. it's not a reinvention. it's a subversive attempt to please. there's something not very U2 about it... it just doesn't sound real to me. i can't find the beauty in it. it's awkward and just won't fit with me. (if we're going to be trivial for a second, i have to mention the strange "uno, dos, tres... catorce" at the beginning of the first track. wha??). in all seriousness, though, it just doesn't do it for me and i don't know why. are they just different people than they used to be? is their creativity gone? are they tired after a quarter of a century? have they just said everything they wanted to say? are bono's energies now better spent on humanitarian work than in the studio?
or, is it actually a fabulous album and a musical masterpiece and they rest of the world is justified in adoring it and i'm just crazy? what's going on here?! i find myself unsettled. anyone have any thoughts on all this?
Posted by naseem at April 22, 2005 05:04 PMokay baby, since i'm once again up and not studying I thought I might share my thoughts. I have the new U2 album and at first felt the same way you did - that is was mediocre, especially the tracks being played on the radio. But then I listened to track 11 - Original of the Species - and fell in love with it. The way I feel about current U2 is a lot like what I feel about current Tori. They're both so much less . . . direct? than previous albums. Tori used to be so angsty and edgy and you just felt like she was speaking for every woman, and now all of her songs are about love and her kid, and that kind of stuff. And I think maybe similar stuff is happening for U2: they're older and the focus is different. But track 11 really got to me bc it was such a Real love song about finding love when you aren't expecting it (hmmm, I wonder why Rachel likes this song?).
Posted by: rachel at April 23, 2005 02:22 AMI liked Vertigo from the outset (except the "unoS, dos..." thing). I've heard several other songs and found them decent at minimum, though the current radio song has a very annoying ryhme wherein Bono turns tortoise into tortoyce. I'd rather the songwriter leave off ryhming for a moment than force something like this!
My first impression of the songs was that they really had returned to a sound closer to their original post-punk roots. My second was that I kind of liked this sound. But then the impressions stopped. The songs just weren't doing anything for me. I just felt blase about them. I questioned this a few weeks ago -- why did I have no desire to go out and buy the new album? In the end, I think it was because I just felt bored by having new "old" songs. I love Achtung Baby and Pop. If I owned Zooropa, I might be able to get into it (I've always like Numb & Lemon, but didn't like the album as a whole at the time). There are a few things I don't like about All That You Can't Leave Behind (mainly Stuck in a Moment), and I don't listen to it often, but there are some really great songs (Beautiful Day is quite nice, I love Wild Honey and Elevation).
I felt the same way about the last couple of Tori albums, but I actually like the new one quite a bit. So its not just a getting old and settling down thing. The Cure managed to put out a mostly excellent album last year. Depeche Mode's last album (98 or 99) was one of their best ever. But I've had the same reaction to REM's latest album as with U2: sounds good and all, but I just don't feel compelled/inspired to actually spend money on it. Its what I call the Def Leopard syndrome, as they were the first band I noticed this with in the mid 90's -- the new music sounds good, but just isn't compelling anymore (then again, maybe Def Leopard never should have been compelling???).
Posted by: Stephen A. Fuqua at April 25, 2005 12:33 PMhmmm... your all treading on sacred ground here, and not quite gently enough, but since i like everyone i'll try to be gentle... ;)
in reverse order:
steve, no u2 lukewarm review would be complete without a shameless plug for the cure, and that's to be expected from brother steve, but the def leopard bit was TOO much... come on now... i guess that anyone reading your post will be able to connect the dots (which, admittedly, you've tipped your own hat to) and say "okay, this guy was a def leopard fan, that's consistent with prefering the cure to u2, there's nothing that can be done"... was it two-arm or one-arm era when you gave up on the def? ;)
rachel, you were not critical, and in keeping with your good-sense and general "eyes of discernment" you seemed to be on the right track with the tracks... but you were kind of apologetic and you need to be proud of the best band ever... :) it also should be mentioned that while i believe art should have subjective rather than just objective meaning, "original of the species", while no doubt working at many levels, (scripture & U2 lyrics are always allegorical and are both known to have 70 and 2 meanings), is about the babies... they gotta make it sound like it's about guy-girl love but this whole album is about real love, god love, parent child love, the kind of love abdu'l baha talks about in paris talks as the real kind... it's full of scripture and prayer... and this song, in particular, is about the babies... listen again, read the title, it's there... and now i'll segue into
naseem...
naseem, naseem, naseem... to think i once bounced you on my knee, changed your diapers, watched you grow and develop as a good baha'i and a good u2 fan... only to turn into an apostate of the highest order... the horror... the horror... you know, i love everything they've done, and i love this album, but it might be 'cause i'm a little closer to their arc of life experience/maturation...
i got into u2 in '85 with unforgettable fire, they're 8 or 9 years older than me, and their last couple albums have resonated with me as much or more than their earlier ones... "kite", on atyclb, i would listen to on repeat for hours... my dad told me when i was at the height of my angst-ridden teenage/skater/rebel years that i'd never know what it meant to really love someone until i had kids... he was talking about selflessness...
baha'i love is about selflessness... and the songs about kids and losing parents and family (like "sometimes you can't make it on your own" & "original of the species" on the new album) are so strong... but if it's not something you can relate to you probably just won't connect with it at that level...
i suspect that the love songs, the god songs, and the political songs could all still grip you, given the chance, but you probably aren't "in love" with bono anymore, like you probably were at some level when you first got into the band, and so your personal space is probably the thing that's turning you off this album, i suspect... probably not as angst-ridden yourself... less questions, more answers maybe... might not listen to it as much or as loud as you would've in the past... plus, you're still a youth, in some sense, and the earlier u2 albums were all brilliantly youthful... and you came right out and said:
" 2. the earnest, youthful intensity of those early albums like "blood red sky" is sadly lacking"
there's an easy explanation for that, these guys are grown-up... society is fascinated by youth because youth owns the future... not just in the obvious you will grow up and the old people will die sense, but more in the possibilities are limitless sense, the exhilleration(sp?) of the unknown sense... and when you're young you're paradoxically fixated in the moment and the intensity of your own present experience while also completely oblivious to your own mortality...
i say this is a paradox because you'd think if you thought you were going to live forever you'd be more concerned with the future than with the present... but bands like u2 don't come from level heads making prudent decisions... they'd have all been accountants if that were the case... but now they're grown up, married, kids, so they sing about those things, as rachel mentioned...
so yeah, for me, when atyclb came out, i was new to fatherhood, new to my thirties, and when i heard the line in kite "i'm a man, i'm not a child" and the rest about letting go, it affected me very powerfully... same with "sometimes you can't make it on your own"... ... ... it's about mortality and continuity... coming to terms with the love left after the angst... and bono's dad & their relationship is the "atom bomb" named in the album title... and the way to dismantle it is love, according to the man...
anyhow... the "uno, dos, tres, catorce " thing is a punk-thing that's been done differently by different bands, counting-wrong to piss people off 'cause you can or 'cause you think it's funny... seems to be working... and as far as the no fresh & new no good poetry stuff goes, i think the way they talk about love, god, committment, family on this album is all those things... and i dig the tunes... so some lyrics to cite as proof, & to help rachel in her journey of u2 discovery(scottish love, by the way, you tease the ones you love the most the most... you know i'm culturally scottish, right?):::
chorus from original of the species:
and you feel like no-one before
you steal right under my door
i kneel 'cos i want you some more
i want you some more, i want you some more...
in cheeky-irish-poet way bono allows the uninitiated to believe this is about whatever they want, uses language to make it sound like a boy-girl thing, preserve the universal appeal, the artists veil, but it's actually an incredibly cool way to sing a new song about an old theme that rock bands don't hit on (only c&w artists are allowed to sing about this)...
how kids grow up too fast, about how kids become independent, how intense their feelings are, and how all a parent can do is pray they turn out right... that's my man...
so, yeah... my dad was right about parenting... marriage too... i encourage you all to not waste time rebuking me for my lengthy post, spelling mistakes, lack of meaningful punctuation, or general nonsense, and instead go make some babies so you'll dig this album more... ;)
love,
me
PS - nas, this doesn't bode well for the title of your blog, does it? the original author went and got herself a man, and U2 have abandoned you! is it a reference to "trying to throw your arms around the world" song from u2 or to feminism in flux?
your g,
be
I couldn't quite put my finger on why I wasn't on fire for the new album until Brian reminded me of how much my 30 and 40 year old friends dig atyclb. Aha! Of course it doesn't resonate with me, it's not written for my age group. Per se.
Although there's no way I can tackle Brian's rambling harangue in its totality I would like to agree with his point about the artist's veil. Though I'll point out the subjectivity of what's beneath: the poetry of the lyrics actually enables the face of the song's meaning to change based on the listener's tastes, experiences, and prejudices. The passage Brian quoted can simultaneously be about eros, agape, piety, and paternity depending on what you prefer to see.
Posted by: george at April 27, 2005 08:18 AMoui, oui, mon cherie... but if you read the opening three lines of the song there are some pretty strong context clues about the chorus & the rest of the song... but yeah, that's part of the appeal, it's still beautiful and moving if you approach it as a boy/girl love song... not to marginalize the transgender u2 fans out there... ;)
Posted by: brian guequierre at April 27, 2005 11:46 AMbrian. welcome to my little corner of the blogosphere. i see you're a prolific commenter. as george said, it's difficult to respond to your novela in it's entirety, but i'll see what i can do...
one, you never changed my diapers, thank you. we met when i was 7. bouncing me on your knee is questionable at best. two, i won't take issue with your spelling, grammer, and punctuation infractions, but i did add paragraph breaks for ease of reading (and incidentally, i quite like the ellipses and lack of capitalization). third, i'm not an apostate, i still love them dearly, and i'm still going to see them in concert in 2 weeks. however, i did offer some legitimate reasons for my lack of elation with this album, so don't essentialize my reasoning...
first, i suppose it's possible that i don't identify with this album because of my age or stage in life. this is unlikely however, since i've loved all their albums thus far (to varying degrees, of course), and they've been 20 years older than me for all of them. so i don't think that's it. also, if the poetry is as complex, multi-faceted, and variously interpretable as you say it is (and as i've often found it to be), then i should have no problem finding resonance on some level. and yet, i just don't feel this one in the same way i've felt all the past albums. this leads me to believe it's this album that's the aberration, not me.
second, i'm not one of those who's still wishing for the U2 of the mid-80's. i know that they have to grow up and change, as we all do, and i've appreciated the diversity of sound, feeling, and message that this maturation has brought throughout the years (notice my tribute to their adaptibility and creativity in my original post). i didn't expect them to be angsty teenagers forever (a la "war"), and as i said, i've loved the unique character of each of their albums. i did, however, say that this album, to me, bears a musical resemblance to "under a blood red sky" without exhibiting the passion and youthful intensity that gave rise to that sound in the first place. i just found that strange.
third, i acknowledge that bono still has some good lines (and i should say for the record that i've never been in love with him), but some parts of this album disappoint me.
"listen to me now
i need to let you know
sometimes you can't make it on your own"
seriously? this reminds me of the dime-a-dozen bands these days, the suburban teenage boys with guitars and daddy issues, that are trying desperately to say something meaningful and poetic. in contrast to those clowns, bono's poetry has often been bone-chilling. but that's not the case here. at times, the lyrics on this album just seem quotidian and uninspiring.
fourth, i should speak to the rest of you for a moment. i understand where you're coming from, rach. i feel the same way about tori, too. and i think "less direct" is a good way to describe the current incarnation of both U2 and tori. that's not a bad thing necessarily, but like i said, i'm not feeling it. stephen, excellent assessment of "all that you can't leave behind." i totally agree about the tracks you mentioned. and george, good points, very insightful, as always.
finally, brian, the title of my blog is, of course, only half-serious, but it's still kind of a shout-out to trail-blazing feminists and a reference to one of the most beautiful and least-appreciated U2 songs. and i don't see any conflict really... gloria can get married even though women don't *need* men (the same way fish don't *need* bicycles), and bono, in his beautiful woman-worship, can say things like this and make me smile. of course, i'm a bahai and i believe in the institution of marriage, and i'm also still a feminist (in the unadulterated sense of the term). but i still think it's a good title. :)
Posted by: nas at April 27, 2005 04:49 PMand you're going to see them with ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i can't believe it. i'm the luckiest girl in the world.
Posted by: delara at April 28, 2005 12:36 AMYou both are. I wonder if I'll ever see them. :( *sniff*
Posted by: george at April 28, 2005 10:02 AMdelara! i just checked your blog out too, how've you been? iffin you gimme your email i'd love to catch up... naseem, i knew full well that i'd never changed your diapers... 'cause guys don't change diapers... ;) and i love the song your blog name references, and like the name, very nice, very nice... and i enjoyed all your other postings! great writer, great thinker, cool girl... as far as "legitimate reasons for my lack of elation with this album, so don't essentialize my reasoning..." goes, i kind of think artistic likes & dislikes are so subjective that there are no objectively "legitimate reasons", and i guess that's essentially why i essentialized you... 'cause one opinion's as legit as the next, right? with that in mind, i'm of the opinion that you really mounted a kind of cold-blooded attack on some verses from a song that again, contextually, you probably could never relate to... so, again, i think it's you & not the song/lyrics... you're a persian girl, from a wonderful family, with all that entails... bono wrote this song for his irish father while he was dying... the relationship between a father and son from this era and this culture is probably the closest thing to a polar opposite you could ever find from your experience... and since the scots and the irish subscribe to similar fight your own battles/out of the house & independent at 18/tough love theories of parenting, i kind of feel like i know where it's coming from... a father/son relationship like this is a legacy of love and hate and anger and respect that is all about shared experience, mutual respect, but never talked about... there's a code that you never show weakness, neediness, don't talk about emotions... just be tough & independent and exchange the odd meaningful glance or tight-lipped handshake... so bono's trying to reach out himself, and encourage his father to do the same, past the ego's and the pride and the code or whatever, while there's still some time... trying to make it okay to show a little weakness or neediness or emotion between father and son without losing face or respect... wrestling with mortality/continuity/irony in all the ways we become the enemy as learn through experience where our parents were coming from, and after spending our youth defining ourselves through our independence/rebellion, finding that our voice, our face, all reflections of our parents... as one of 5 sisters you've never even seen a father and son relationship intimately enough to have even a 3rd-party perspective on what it's like, so rather than accuse the man/song/band of: "seriously? this reminds me of the dime-a-dozen bands these days, the suburban teenage boys with guitars and daddy issues, that are trying desperately to say something meaningful and poetic." i'd think you might be better served by looking at it as a window into a world you've never seen, and showing a little respect for the subject matter/context... and, fyi, bono's on record as saying his father/their relationship is the "atom bomb" referenced in the album title, and the answer to the question is "with love"... ... ... my own dad's been in the ICU for the last 3 weeks, meningits, sepsis, stroke, coma... looked like he wasn't going to make it for a while, but now it looks like he will survive, but the extent of his brain damage & paralysis are still unknowns... the man is a personal hero to me, the kindest, most honest, selfless, and well-liked man i've ever known, but the only time i've been able to talk to him about my deepest feelings was when he was unconscious or asleep... we were supposed to have gone hunting that weekend (when he got sick) and had pushed it back a week, and now i don't know if we'll ever be able to do that again... and all our male-bonding stuff, all our interaction, is activity based... hunting, hiking, building stuff, golf, pool... that's what we do... i talk to my mom, not my dad, but i do stuff with my dad, not my mom... and now his life and our relationship, if he survives, are both going to be redefined in ways that are hard to imagine... he's an engineer and a handyman, always building, working, incredibly capable, incredibly independent, and now he's helpless... they've got to keep his hands restrained 'cause every time they're loose he's trying to pull out the respirator or feeding tube... it's going to be very hard for him to let other people help/do for him... so, yeah, this song, those particular lyrics, seem incredibly meaningful and beautiful to me, and not the least bit "quotidian and uninspiring"... but that might be 'cause i suspect u2's been soundtracking my life for the last 20 years since the unforgettable fire show at the bronco bowl in dallas when we first met... if they're not soundtracking yours anymore you shouldn't take it personally... ;)
yours truly,
me
lol... feel free to edit out the parts of this post that are exact fyi duplicates of my first one... i've got to start blogging at work, like everyone else, and not in the middle of the night! :)
fyi-i repeat myself from time to time
fyi-i repeat myself from time to time