U2 continue to diss their “not very accessible” album
Jim Carroll
It would seem that U2 are keen to put a little distance between themselves and current album “No Line on the Horizon”.
This week, Bono described the album as “not very accessible, lyrically or musically”.
“We put out a really difficult record,” he told Rolling Stone magazine. “I would have to admit that. If I was a teenager, it would be like a European movie, it’s art house.”
This follows on from his comments last October when he described the February 2009 album as “a work that is a bit challenging for people who have grown up on a diet of pop stars.”
The fact that the album has sold poorly may have something to do with the singer’s disdain. Naturally, the singer was not so forthcoming when the band were hyping the bejaysus out of the album on release to their camp followers in the fourth estate. Now, he’s keener to talk up three unreleased albums and the band’s new songs rather than the current release.
But Bono’s comments are not the only sign of a change in attitude towards “No Line On the Horizon”.
There’s a marked difference in the set-lists for U2’s recent live gigs compared to a year ago, with the band no longer frontloading material from the current album.
For instance, their Croke Park shows from July 2009 saw the band opening the show with four songs from “No Line on the Horizon”, something which even tried the patience of long-term U2 fanciers.
Now, though, it’s a brand new instrumental (“Return of the Stingray Guitar”) and a golden oldie (“Beautiful Day”) which are the opening songs of choice on the current European tour.
The people have spoken and U2, it would appear, have listened.
I know exactly what he means. That one about the sexy boots always reminded me of the Three Colours Trilogy.
I wonder if all the critics who talked up what was a seriously dodgy album will now revise their opinions too?
Thanks Jim for lifitng the morning! with this post.
“I would have to admit that. If I was a teenager, it would be like a European movie, it’s art house.”……… lol
“not very accessible, lyrically or musically”. ……………. lol lots
“I would have to admit that. If I was a teenager, it would be like a European movie, it’s art house.”.. lol convulsions
when thinkiing of this “fine” example from the said album……..
“Get On Your Boots :
The future needs a big kiss, winds blow with a twist
Never seen a moon like this, can you see it too?
Night is falling everywhere rockets hit the fun-fair
Satan loves a bomb scare but he won’t scare you
Hey! Sexy boots
Get on your boots yeah!
Free me from a dark dream, candy floss, ice cream
All the kids are screaming but the ghosts aren’t real
Here’s what we gotta be: love & community
Laughter is eternity if joy is real ”
I think theres a future a a hallmark greeting card writer in that lyric somewhere or maybe one who does fortune cookie inserts thats about as “Arthouse” as it gets really. I also think it is more Universal then “European” as in Universally woeful.
Speaking of bands listening to the people, it appears sense may have finally prevailed with another group originally from these shores.
As you most likely knew, the band currently touring under the name of ‘Thin Lizzy’ had planned a concert for the 4th January next, to coincide with the 25th anniversary of Phil’s death. Problem is, it wasn;t in conjunction with, but rather in competition with the ‘Vibe for Phil’ that Smiley Bolger devotedly and excellently puts on every year on that date.
Now I’ve nothing against the ex members trying to make a buck, but to kind of slip in and cash in on that date which has lovingly preserved for 25 years, hail , rain wind or snow… just left a bad taste in my mouth, and many others.. as within a number of days there were over 5000 people and rising signed up to campaign to get them to change the date.
I don’t know what was going on behind the scenes, but initially from interview with scott gorham it seemed they weren’t for budging, but at last it seems that common sense has won out and they’ve moved the gig to the olympia in Feb.
Of course, the fac that they initially intended to have the gig in the point (and realising they won’t shift the tickets) may have been a bigger factor than any sense of doing the right thing, but whatever the reason is, i don’t care, the right decision has been made and hopefully this years vibe will be better than ever!
Sorry, i know the link between this and your original topic is tenuous at best…. c’est la vie i guess!
Una – chuckle. Well, this critic is sticking by his original take – http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/ontherecord/2009/02/23/u2-no-line-on-the-horizon/ – I assume my peers will be along shortly to stand up and admit they were wrong
Adam – chuckle x 2.
Uli – chuckle x 3
It is funny that despite our collective disappointment/annoyance/apathy with their recent produce, we are still interested in them. Why do we do we keep doing it to ourselves!
I do think it’s a`refreshingly honest move on their part to admit that the new material is not up to much. I think that unlike previous campaigns where they’ve tried to act humble while still throwing their egos around, perhaps they’ve finally caught on to themselves (if only a little bit). Hopefully we might get another Achtung or Zooropa out of it…
As it happens I will be at the Paris show in 2/3 weeks so will keep ye updated….
It is funny that despite our collective disappointment/annoyance/apathy with their recent produce, we are still interested in them. Why do we do we keep doing it to ourselves!
James D – good point. As I said in the original post back in Feb ’09, “this album will fill stadiums, newspapers, radio stations, web sites, quarterly target spreadsheets, bank balances, pension funds and investment opportunities in the tech sector.” They’re a big band and thus, just like events like Oxegen, that seems to warrant coverage in the media. For as much as I’ll write here about new music and acts, the biggest reaction is always when the piece is about acts like U2 or Arcade Fire.
Is ‘not very accessible’ rockstar pompous jargon for ‘not very good’? I think the first three tracks of ‘No Line…’ are impressive but it takes a nose-dive after that, much like every U2 album since Achtung Baby. A few good tracks, a few half-decent tracks and the rest instantly forgettable. As a big fan it’s depressing for me to have to say this but I was at the gig last Summer in Croker, my fourth U2 concert outing (my first was in Boston’s Foxboro stadium during the Zoo TV tour), and I’ve hit a wall on attending what have become their greatest hits tours interrupted every 15 minutes with an infomercial on Bono’s latest worthy cause. I didn’t spend close to two hundred Euro on two tickets so as I could find out how wearing a paper mask is going to free Aung San Suu Kyi.
U2……art house – wow
No harm in admitting that in retrospect, you’re work wasn’t that great. It really was a terrible album. What were they thinking.
I don’t think critics need to revise their original review of the album because Bono has changed his mind on it. But some of the original album reviews were hilarious, trying to talk up the dog of a record. This from Blender: ‘No Line on the Horizon is U2’s third killer in a row—by now, it’s bizarre to remember that just 10 years ago, everybody thought they were headed toward the dinosaur band tar pits.’
What exactly does he mean by ”difficult”? Are they admitting it was difficult for them to come up with any discernible tunes, melodies or memorable songs? Then he is correct.
I would have a lot more respect for the band and for Bono if they just admitted they released a turkey rather than wrapping up their growing disdain for the album with stuff like ”really difficult record“ or bullshit like ”If I was a teenager, it would be like a European movie, it’s art house.” It’s just a shit album. Bono.
Una makes an excellent point. I think Rolling Stone said it was their greatest album ever and Uncut and Q gave it glowing reviews. Obviously these publications were afraid to give honest reviews as any real negativity shown towards the band – the biggest rock band in the world with a massive and loyal fanbase – would affect sales and might invite a backlash from militant U2 fans.
It’s real dinosaurs slowly trudging off towards extinction stuff, U2 seem to spend more time apologising and finger pointing, then actually being in any way interesting anymore…More of it here in Paul McG’s article here..
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2010-08/13/gq-music-paul-mcguinness-on-music-piracy/file-sharing-on-spotify-and-piracy
It’s not really what you want from your Rock Stars… you do getting the feeling Camp U2 know that the rules have changed in ‘the music biz’ but have no idea what they’re going to do to try keep up.. at least your REMs and Radioheads (off the top of my head) have found some way to at least sustain their fan base, and continue producing good (well good-ish in REMs case) records… where as U2s manic desire to remain at the top of the charts, the media, the business, well everything, seems to me to be the making of their un-doing (and none too soon!)
Fiachra – you do getting the feeling Camp U2 know that the rules have changed in ‘the music biz’ but have no idea what they’re going to do to try keep up
Very good observation. It reminds you that U2 as an act are one who’ve done the dog with the old industry ways and have succeeded hugely because of that (look at how Paul McGuinness did a deal to get the band a chunk of Island Records in lieu of outstanding royalties, which they then cashed in when Universal bought out Island). But those days are OVER. Other bands of U2′s ilk have accepted their heritage band status and hit the greatest hits circuit but U2 still bring out new albums. While this is admirable in itself, it’s of fuck all use when the albums aren’t (a) any good or (b) not as good as the tunes the band’s fans want to hear (ie The Hits). As we saw with McGuinness – http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/ontherecord/2010/08/23/some-managers-do-ave-em/ – the solution which the old industry favoured (ie turning the clock back) is just not possible.
Quint – reviewers far closer to home were also raving about the album but then again, as Una pointed out back in Feb ’09, “I just get so bored at the predictability of reviews, especially in Ireland, when it comes to big records like this.
I think part of the problem with U2 is that they have been in a massive album/tour holding pattern for the last 20 years (with less & less successful results on each campaign). They have become too reliant on recording a music product that translates to the stadium, and vice versa. While I don’t think Achtung Baby was made with Zoo TV in mind, it was the last time I think they were able to keep both balls in the air successfully.
If they knocked touring on the head (for a while at least) and simply got on with recording the best album they could, I believe that the results could be quite surprising…
I didn’t read those comments as Bobo being disdainful of the album or even admitting it wasn’t great. I think it sounds arrogant, i.e. “people didn’t get, it went over their heads.”
Didn’t they scrap sessions with Rick Rubin and went for a the usual stadium rock vibe? Would love to have heard the Rubin sessions.
JC – that will be on “No Tunes On The Horizon – the 10th Anniversary Deluxe Download”
“No Tunes On The Horizon” is opening in the IFI tonight.
Quick question: How many people here who like ‘difficult’ or ‘inaccessible’ music bought No Line on the Horizon?
i’ve found most of u2′s albums to be not very accessible, lyrically or musically.
NLOTH is a mediocre album with about 5 tunes worth listening to. Get on your boots musically and lyrically is one of the worse songs they’ve ever released and the feeling off the album was that they had come full circle and were now creatively running on empty. Their is only so many fx pedals the Edge can play around with and Bono’s songsmith was never going to challenge the Cohens, Morrisseys of this world this opus saw it reach a particular nadir. They always talked about how artists often deliver their best work in their 50′s/60s etc and they saw themselves as a band who could continue to produce quality albums. Somehow I don’t ever see U2 taking a risk and delivering a “Kid A” or “Funeral” album that would capture a zeitgeist. Nope it’ll be back to formulaic rock a la “ATYCLB” with vacuous lyrics that will aim to fill airwaves in good old Uncle Sam. In their defence they do put on a great live show…albeit the exception being when Bono opens his gob and pontificates and preaches on his latest charity venture or human rights issue….zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
NLOTH is one of my favourite albums. And folks that is what it is …an ALBUM.
The music business churns out singls these days and if you are into bubble gum crap then that would appeal to you.
Yes this is a european style album with experimentation in the songs, but for me..I don’t want another Actung Baby or Zooropa or Joshua Tree!
Breathe last year was a great opener and U2 fans want it back..NOW! Unknown Caller is great live as well as I know i”ll go crazy. ! Moment of Surrender is a fantastic track and closer to the show, not a single, but a solid track on this album. U2 fans who go to the shows will tell you. NLOTH is a fine piece of work and not a flash in the pan. The songs that I hear on the radio will not be listened to in 10 years from now. But i’m sure as hell that NLOTH will still be getting plays on whatever musical platform we are listening to in years to come. D. Dempsey Cambrdige Ontario Canada
Ro@19..”Quick question: How many people here who like ‘difficult’ or ‘inaccessible’ music bought No Line on the Horizon?”
I was in Tower the other day and bought the new Autechre album, some Aphex Twin, These New Puritans and a Swans and Throbbing Cristles best-of and….No Tune on the Horizon. I’m having a lot of trouble with the U2 album. Unlistenable. Pure genius.
MDR,
That is almost the definition of a rhetorical question. Have U2 made any comment on the arrests of the amnesty people at their Moscow gig or is Bono afraid of upsetting his new best friend forever?
I for one love NLOTH. I’m a pretty loyal U2 fan, and have to admit, I was a little disappointed after the first listen, but I “wanted” to like it, and sort of deliberately listened to it over and over again for a day to hear “new” sounds, and shapes not heard on the first listen. It grew on me, and I soon was into a groove of listening only to this CD, to a point where my wife thinks I’m a little crazy, as I tend to do with any music I really like. Right now, my obsession is Radiohead. Anyway, critics are useless. If you want the best opinion of a musical collection, there’s none better than your own.
U2 lost their way around the time they stopped having a progressive edge to their sound.. I know they were never innovators, but for a stadium rock act the likes of Achtung Baby, Zooropa and Pop are about as ‘edgy’ as it gets. They had a forward-looking view up til that point incorporating new sounds into their music with each release.. When you start cannibalising your own previous work for musical ideas you know it’s time to call it quits. Unfortunately they’re still around a decade on from that point and it gets progressively more embarrassing as it goes along. ‘All That You Can’t Leave Behind’ at least had catchy songs but on the current one they just sound lost at sea. You can’t blame them for running out of inspiration, no rock band should really last 3 decades, but it’s unfortunate that they don’t know when to stop.
Breathe, Unknown Caller, Magnificent, Stand Up Comedy, and Moment of Surrender are some of the best songs I’ve heard in years.
The only problem I see with NLOTH is the misjudged choice of single order. Get On Your Boots is a great song to dance around to, and in the context of the album it’s perfectly placed, but U2 should have chosen a song which sounded more like the signature U2 sound, chime and echo – such as Breathe or Magnificent – to introduce the album as lead single.
What I love about the criticism is that U2 are damned if they do, damned if they don’t. No classic U2 anthemic chime? “U2 sound nothing like they used to and have lost their unique touch”. Tons of chime? “U2 sill sound the same, there’s nothing new here and it’s getting old”. Now they release an album which is split between modern sounds and classic U2 sounds, and critics STILL aren’t happy?
If NLOTH had been a debut album from a new artist everyone would have been singing its praises. U2′s problem is not what they are writing, it’s that there are so many different expectations of them that they can’t possibly live up to the illogical expectations demanded of them. Strip away what you THINK U2 should sound like, pretend that you have no idea who is singing the songs, and I’ll bet you’ll suddenly start listening to how great the actual music is than how well it fits in with some imaginary “path” you think U2 should be walking…
@27 – Howaya Mr McGuinness…
U2 should ask Jez Coad to produce future albums.
Jez and Simple Minds are unstoppable!
“Artshouse”? Shurely he meansh Arsehouse?
never heard this album, just the singles like most folk. i still think that there was a coy evil genius bono at work putting together ‘magnificent’ – as a single that became the tabloid standard issue gig review. Sort of in the same way vertigo and elevation hinted at that skyscraper they wanted to build.
@Paul: I’m with you on a lot of your points. Too many opinions here of what U2 “should” be doing. Bottom line is they can do what they want, and that’s what makes them rock stars. Regarding the single order, I think they got it right with the first song (title song). To me, it sounds like a “new” hard rock song. Very linear.. hard driving, and strong.
If NLOTH had been a debut album from a new artist everyone would have been singing its praises
Paul – nope, they wouldn’t. Regardless of whose name was on it, “No Tune on the Horizon” would be regarded as a pompous, unfinished, unfocused, lash-it-out-there-lads dog of an album. The band have finally clicked that the public and, more importantly, the fans ain’t biting, hence the focus on new material, three unreleased albums and all that spin. Next time around, I hope the critics who praised the emperor’s new clothes this time out actually LISTEN to the album before filing their reviews.
Fair play to Jim for never buying into the hype. That’s why we pay you so much. Rolling Stones magazine did not give the album five stars. Magazines don’t give reviews unless the reviews are carried out by committee. Instead, a clueless reviewer did instead. Step forward David Fricke, whoever he is when he is at home. The magazine should never have allowed a perfect review when even the most ardent U2 fan could spot a plethero of duds on it from 40 paces.
U2 have hit a brick wall and after 30 years of creativity, it is both inevitable and no shame. There is one great song on NLOTH, Magnificent, but once again the chimey guitar sound and arrpegios are nothing that we haven’t heard hundred times before.
While The Edge keeps reinventing himself sonically, he has not progressed musically. If you espouse three chords and the truth, sooner or later you are going to run out of inspiration.
Ronan – i’m not paid enough! While I hear you on the reviews, I will defend David Fricke as he is a brilliant writer especially when it comes to new music and gnarly garage rock. He is also the only music hack I know who could pass for a member of The Ramones. All writers have a blind spot – long-suffering OTR readers know mine is Bruce Springsteen – so maybe his is U2? He is the RS journalist who did the interview with Bono quoted above, though, so I wonder did he go ‘dude, I gave that turkey five stars!’
It took me a year to buy NLOTH because Zooropa and Discoteque were just bad. While I like it, I am nostalgic for the good old Joshua Tree Days. I think they need to take some time off, hold up in the U2 tower (while he is there, he should pay his damn taxes) and create some truely good music, not just crank out the same ole shite all the time. If they maintain this cycle of tour and record, they will end up like the Rolling Stones, dinosaurs in leather pants (mick, jesus enough already) churning out tunes from yesteryear, with no original music. While I admire all of Bono’s charitable efforts, he is really becoming pretenious. I have been a U2 fan the better part of my life, while I like all their classic stuff such as Pride (in the name of Love) , I really like songs like the “The Sweetest Thing” and “BAD”. They need to recapture the magic.
I think NLOTH is a really good album – streets above HTDAAB, and they had guts releasing such a non radio friendly album. IMO what helped kill it was the dreadful choice of first single. What I don’t like is U2 now bashing this album they originally so praised – they should stand by their album and thier convictions, and bring back some tracks to the tour. Admittedly U2 can’t win- release a “poppy” and popular song and they are ” selling out”; release a more complex album that does not sell well in the mainstream and they are dinosaurs. They have such a high standard to live up to how can they meet it. U2 is an amazing band and they inspire me.
@Jim
“We put out a really difficult record,” he told Rolling Stone magazine. “I would have to admit that. If I was a teenager, it would be like a European movie, it’s art house.”
Haha, are you sure he’s distancing himself from the album here? Sounds more like he’s elevated them album from simply being “challenging” to being in the pantheon of great cinema. He’ll be comparing to it to the genetic code next.
I listened to No Line On The Horizon a couple of times and the only real impression I got was that it was dull. Not good, not particularly bad, but definitely not challenging or innovative. Luckily, I didn’t have to review so I got out relatively unscathed.
I am a fan of David Fricke but not for his reviews – you could almost predict them before he’s written them.
Perhaps U2 need to get back to their roots, and write an album about growing up in “sectarian Ireland”.
See Bono’s NAACP speech for details of his extraordinary early life, spent in war-torn Glasnevin:
http://weekendfisher.blogspot.com/2007/03/bonos-acceptance-speech-at-naacp.html
Eh,,,,Just an opinion,But maybe U2 are years past their best and prime because their all approaching 50 years old now???Maybe theres no great mystery about it after all??
It doesn’t really matter what Bono thinks, or says he thinks, about the album. Around the time of Born in the USA, Bruce said he thought Darkness on the Edge of Town was overrated. Which of those records is the better? Which was the more successful? What I think Bono is saying is, he wishes NLOTH was a bigger hit. I’ve no idea why Jim Carroll seems to think his review of the record was the correct one and that anyone who disagreed has somehow been found out, or was a sycophant. I thought the first four tracks, along with Breathe, rank with the best music U2 has made, and I continue to think that.
All rock stars are obsessed with success, and don’t like the idea of slippage, and Bono may well be trying to put a brave face on low sales. But sales are not the same as quality; if it was up to the public, U2 would still be stuck in the Joshua Tree. What Bruce was saying was, “I’ve just had a huge hit (USA) and a load of rock snobs are saying, we prefer Darkness, but it wasn’t a huge hit, so they’re wrong.” But we weren’t.
And if Jim Carroll insists on reprinting a review, it really should have a bit more going for it than, Magnificent is good and everything else is no good. Really? Breathe is no good? Moment of Surrender, NLOTH are no good? If you think so, you should have spent more time saying why; as it stood then, and stands now, you just come across like an indie guttersnipe.
I would call the No Line On The Horizon album, All That You Can’t Leave Behind Vol 3, basically I think the last 3 albums are just more of the same and I tend to lose respect for any artist when they play it safe which I believe U2 are doing either deliberately or because they have lost something.
What a piece of moronic trite this article is. Nevermind if you love, hate, dont know, or dont care for U2 for a moment.
The author of this article quotes Bono as saying:
“This week, Bono described the album as “not very accessible, lyrically or musically”.
“We put out a really difficult record,” he told Rolling Stone magazine. “I would have to admit that. If I was a teenager, it would be like a European movie, it’s art house.”
Any idiot who speaks the English language can clearly see that this is not a “diss” or “disdain for the album” as the article’s author attempts to assert. There is no sense of even word that you can point to that suggests Bono even has even the slightest negative feeling about the album itself. As one previous posted noticed, his comments speak more about its reception and if you wanted to take a negative shot at him or the band its would make sense in terms of claiming Bono’s arrogance or disconnect from the masses, or delusion. Instead the author of this article just put out more evidence of his ineptness.
It you are gonna take shots at people, come prepared with real ammo, dont set off a bomb in your own face. You could have said that came from anyone, replaced Bono and U2 with any other artist and your assessments would still come off as insipid and foolish.
A commenter on this board outdid your slam on U2, but for some stupid reason you get paid for lazy writing and pathetic analysis. If you disagree, please point out exactly how “difficult” and “not very accessible” = dislike
I bet you anything that the majority of people here, as well as the author praise albums for the very same quoted phrases above. This is not to say that difficult automatically equals good, it is merely pointing out the flaw in the entire article.
It was their best album since Achtung Baby *and* they made more money than any other band on Earth last year. Er, what’s the problem again? (Oh and what a surprise Jim C didn’t like it, eh? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz).
Part of the problem surely is that many, many, many big name artists have limited muscial ability. Radiohead, Arcard Fire even Lisa Hannigan’s band are unusual for the breadth of the musical talent on display. Leonard Cohen’s troup of troubadours are brilliantly talented and have taken a clutch of “suicidally depressing” songs and reimagined them.
I listen to a lot of Jazz and the real greats while treading water occasionally rarely release bad records. They are just too gifted muscially and hang around and jam with so many virtuosos that something interesting is always going on. Listen to the album Herbie Hancock and Duke Ellington recorded together for the clash of the old and the new.
U2 do not lack a back catalogue and are a pretty good live act that are adept at the pyrotechnical end of things but they are about as credible as KISS these days. They need to be more (not less) permissive with their collaborators and maybe even look beyond the confines of light rock like Blur, Beck and others have had the guts to do.
Bryan Ferry’s last two records (Bob Dylan covers and American Songbook standards) were outstanding records and a thousand miles away from Roxy Music. David Bowie and Bob Dylan constantly added new people to their touring party (as the Beatles did in the late 60s) to keep things interesting.
My, U2 fans are very protective of their idols – the street teams are out in furious force. I know, though, that it must be very hard to stomach seeing your idols turn on a record which you, the fan, know in your heart is a prize turkey, but which you’ve had to defend for the last 18 months. The lot of a U2 fan is not a happy one. I notice too that none if the street team members – or cult followers – have addressed the fact of the setlist changes.
I have been reading with interest all of the comments in reference to U2 and Bono, as I have followed them most of my life. Here in the States there is really not alot of legitimate music commentary on the subject of U2, just blind admiration. The real problem I have with U2 is the same that I have with a lot of long standing acts, that after a while their music sounds the same. The worst example of this sameness is Aerosmith, Love in an elevator sounds like Ragdoll. Where the Streets have No Name sounds like I Still have not found what I am looking for. This problem gets worse after a while. That is why I hestitated with NLOTH, while I like the album I just do not like it the same as I like Auchtang Baby or Joshua Tree. I am not an Indie Rock snob, I just know what I like, speaking of which:
To Declan Hughes @41 I have to ask are you the same person who wrote City of Lost Girls, featuring Dective Ed Loy? If so, this summer I read the entire series in reverse and really loved the series. I sincerely hope that you continue to write the character Ed Loy as he reminds me of a dear friend of mine who lives in Dublin, a place I miss.
I wouldn’t consider myself a huge U2 fan, but I genuinely believe NLOTH is a great record. I don’t know if that makes me a “cult follower,” but regarding the setlist, maybe it’s a concession that this tour is no longer to promote the album, since it’s not big news anymore, but rather it’s just U2 on tour, because there’s money to be made and the likes of Beautiful Day will always sell out arenas and stadiums. It was always U2′s intention to make a “difficult” album after they were derided by some for playing it safe on their previous two, but unfortunately not all songs work in such vast live venues as the ones they now play.
Critics are worthless. Which is why no one ever built a monument to any. Unless they can do what they expect others to do, artistically/musically they serve only one purpose. To be forgotten.
I’m sorry Jim, who are you again?
OK Jimmy, I’ll bite—about the setlist changes, that is. I think they’re bogus. I think the band is chickening out on this record—another panicked 180 in this, their Decade of Blah. Those songs were much better live than on disc, and if I recall correctly, the band kept playing Pop songs for the rest of that particular tour despite its parent album’s early death-by-sneering.
Now, I don’t like the No Line album much either—while it’s better than the last two, that’s not necessarily high praise—but for me the decade’s tours have been…interesting, I guess…to see which obscure back-catalogue bones U2 will throw at die-hard geeks like me. Those are fun—but I despair of ever seeing the polka-funk version of “Acrobat,” or the tear-jerking torch take on “Out of Control.”
Oh, but have I actually seen a 360 show? No. Don’t care. Not interested in dealing with the 90,000 other people. Lots of other bands out there to geek out over and bitch about, if I wanted to—but a long time ago I discovered that my own personal security and confidence didn’t hinge on the convulsions of an arena-rock band’s setlists. My own band’s setlists, on the other hand, are definitely worth fighting over (especially against other guys in the band), but we’re not famous, so no one will care.
Hang on—I was supposed to be talking about this tour’s set, wasn’t I? Ho ho. As if anything I say matters anyway—I am, after all, only an American.