Posted on 10/31/2014 11:49:08 PM PDT by This Just In
MUSIC | U2 pans for wisdom in Songs of Innocence
“There is only one thing … worse than being talked about,” says a character in Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray, “and that is not being talked about.”
The Irish rockers U2 and their partners at Apple tested that idea by placing free copies of U2’s latest album, Songs of Innocence (Island), in the accounts of iTunes subscribers on Sept. 9—a date, coincidentally, that also marked the 124th birthday of Colonel Harland Sanders and the 48th anniversary of Elvis Presley’s debut on The Ed Sullivan Show.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldmag.com ...
During his interview in Esquire, Gene Simmons of the iconic rock group, KISS, stated:
"It's very sad for new bands. My heart goes out to them. They just don't have a chance. If you play guitar, it's almost impossible. You're better off not even learning how to play guitar or write songs, and just singing in the shower and auditioning for The X Factor. And I'm not slamming The X Factor, or pop singers. But where's the next Bob Dylan? Where's the next Beatles? Where are the songwriters? Where are the creators? Many of them now have to work behind the scenes, to prop up pop acts and write their stuff for them.
Here's a frightening thought: from 1958 to 1983, name 100 musical anythings that are iconic, that seem to last beyond their time.
NS: The Beatles, The Stones...
GS: Elvis, the Beatles, Michael Jackson, the Stones, Jimi Hendrix, the numerous classic Motown artists, Madonna, U2, Prince, Pink Floyd... The list goes on. Individuals, all unanimously considered classic, timeless, revolutionary. Now from '84 until today, name some. Just give me a few — artists that, even after their passing, are or will be inescapable. Artists on the same level as the ones I just mentioned. Even if you don't like them, they will be impossible to avoid, or deny, even after they've stopped making music and maybe passed on. In fact, they become bigger when they stop. Name artists that even compare with the ones I just named.
NS: Nirvana?
GS: Nirvana. That's about it. They are the notable exception. Keep thinking. It's harder, isn't it, to name artists with as much confidence? The pickings are so slim, and it's not an arbitrary difference. There was a 10- to 15-year period in the '60s and '70s that gave birth to almost every artist we now call "iconic," or "classic." If you know anything about what makes longevity, about what makes something an everlasting icon, it's hard to find after that. The craft is gone, and that is what technology, in part, has brought us. What is the next Dark Side of the Moon? Now that the record industry barely exists, they wouldn't have a chance to make something like that. There is a reason that, along with the usual top-40 juggernauts, some of the biggest touring bands are half old people, like me."
U2 will always be one of those icons. Their songs often asks the deeper questions, their lyrics conveying a desire to reveal more than the stereotypical "sex, drugs, and rock and roll" anthem.
I don't agree with all that Gene Simmon's expressed in that interview, but it is true that bands like the Stones, Van Halen, the Beatles, as well as U2 are fewer and farther in comparison to what we are seeing today.
I'm still listening through Songs of Innocence, but at the very least, U2 continues to step out of the comfort zone, take risks, and truly create music rather than just make music.
Uwho?
A fan, I take it. :^)
I believe you’re referring to The Who.
Bono is a raging lefty elitist who thinks YOU should pay confiscatory taxes, but nobody better touch a dime of his money.
I find that reduces any enjoyment I might have had in a band.
See: ditzy chicks, Moby, Fiona Apple, and Sheryl Crow the typhoid spreader.
They aren’t all that original. I remember when they were basically ripping off Joy Division for all their riffs. I also remember when the U2 “3” EP came out and “Out Of Control” was the big hit single, with everything after that sounding quite similar.
Fair enough, but who do you listen to? Who do you like? I’ll bet some of the artists you love are just as liberal as those you’ve mentioned.
This is by far the best U2 song they ever did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgBtoiNxPyE
Bad.
I don’t care for U2 these days though. Whatever it was that they had, they lost.
And to answer the question what is the next Dark Side of the Moon?
There isn’t going to be another Dark Side of the Moon.
We are in a dark ages, and it is clearly reflected in our music and our “art”.
Have you actually listened to their library? If that’s the case ,you may as well say that the Stones music sounds “similar”. All bands/artists possess a signature sound.
He behaves like a snooty South-sider even though he was raised in (even then low class) Finglas, which today is a hellhole. One of my aunts lived in that suburb for a few years and the house was plagued with mice. Sounds like Mr. Hewson really does want to forget where he came from, never mind perpetuate the cause of the problems Finglas has had for decades.
I was inundated with “their library” thanks to RTÉ radio and TV. You’ll forgive me for preferring Thin Lizzy, I hope.
The “Shut up and sing” campaign, started right here on FR, worked.
The ditzy chicks tanked, and “artistes” who didn’t want a backlash kept their traps shut.
I tend to walk away from groups who put their politics out there.
Once known, they cease receiving any of my time.
And bono will get none of my time, dime, or praise.
That he does.
I’m not convinced that we’ve reached the zenith of our creative musical exploration. Although, music is in a odd flux right now. The market’s been over-saturated with sanitized music.
It will be interesting to see where artists take us musically.
lol.
No forgiveness is necessary. One mans U2 is another mans Thin Lizzy.
The creative funk we are in is also clearly visible in movies, television, art, writing.... everything really.
Your money, your time, your dime.
I tend to do the same. Our family owned the chicks CD until Natalie decide to show the world how much of a blithering idiot she is. I tossed the music. My sentiments are the same for Gerth Brooks, Willie Nelson, Faith and Tim Hill. :^), etc.
I cut U2 some slack because I’ve heard a number of interviews in which he praised President Bush for his various humanitarian efforts. Something other artists didn’t have the integrity to do. Also, he has expressed a love and support for America while artists-especially American artists-express nothing but hatred.
After Nirvana came the Joe Satriani stealers.
U2, from the inception, was a band that had a flaming peacock with a bullhorn, a saltbox to stand on, and empty ideas.
Entertainers are paid to entertain. I do NOT pay them to blather on about their particular politics.
I find it funny,that everybody who rushed to put that latest release of music on YouTube, had their posting MUTED, ‘according to YT copyright policies’.
One of the main reasons for this extreme lack of originality, creativity, and ingenuity is the way in which our youth have been educated in the public schools.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.