About a week ago, I got an e-mail from a colleague of mine here at Blogcritics offering me his tickets to U2's upcoming June show in Seattle at Qwest Field. As in free, no strings attached...
Hot damn!
To say I was absolutely thrilled at this quite unexpected turn of good fortune would be something close to the understatement of the year.
U2 is a band that I love passionately, and as far as big stadium extravaganzas go, they put on a show like nobody else out there. One thing is absolutely for sure though — they have certainly come a long way from the band I saw in 1983 at Seattle's Paramount Theatre, or even the band I saw at California's US Festival the very next day (I was already on a plane to L.A. before U2 had played their second encore in Seattle).
What I remember most about those back-to-back shows I caught on the 1983 War tour was that, much like Bruce Springsteen in the early days, this was a band that was all about making an intimate connection with its audience — and that they succeeded at this (rather wildly I might add) — beyond all reasonable expectation.
In the confines of Seattle's 3000-seat Paramount Theatre, this was most demonstrated when Bono allowed the crowd to carry him on his back, long before anyone had ever heard of anything like moshing or crowd surfing.
At the US Festival, playing before 300,000 people in a God-forsaken dust bowl desert setting in the middle of what I remember as a scorching hot day, what stands out is Bono's death-defying climb to the top of a stage that was several stories high (at least) to hoist the white flag of surrender during "Electric Co."
It was one of those awesome concert moments you quite simply never forget.
But that one will forever stand out in my memory. I've never seen a rock performer, not before or since, literally risk his life to deliver whatever his message might have been — which I might add that despite the heroics involved, is one that I am still quite sure was mostly lost on the largely stoned, dehydrated masses that day in the freaking, absolutely scorching desert.
Article comments
1 - Don
Interesting article. I would think that with the level of success that Bono/U2 have had juggling those beliefs, the influence that he has with those world & business leaders, and the fans expectations must be quite difficult.
But it also reminds me a joke a once heard. "What's the difference between God & Bono?" "God knows he's not Bono" :)
Regarding the other comment, I think Achtung Baby was their watershed.
2 - Kelly
Opinions are like a*******. Everybody has one. U2 is still my favorite band, nobody can claim to still be making music together after 34 years with an intact lineup. You made several good points though.
3 - Greg Barbrick
Interesting points Mr. Boyd. Maybe we can argue them over a brew at Qwest.
4 - Glen Boyd
I'm sure we'll have a very spirited discussion indeed, as well as hoist a few and then some, next month at Qwest Mr. Barbrick. Hell, we always do, right?
Till' then....
-Glen
5 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
"and as far as big stadium extravaganzas go, they[U2]put on a show like nobody else out there."
Yea... I'd save those honors for Iron Maiden.
Kelly:"nobody can claim to still be making music together after 34 years with an intact lineup."
Yea... again, Iron Maiden. Oh and let's not forget RUSH.
As for U2, unfortunately, they have become more about the message and less about the music. You can say what you want about Bono's passion but it was also the band's commitment to focus on supporting that passion with their talents. That is what made albums like "The Joshua Tree" pretty damn good.
6 - zingzing
haven't there been some lineup changes in iron maiden? rush counts... if they count for anything. ugh.
7 - Jim
Enjoyed your article. I was a huge U2 fan, and saw them 9 times between 1983-1996. You right on about the way U2 connected to audiences. However, I noticed that connection slipping away, and almost began to resent Bono. It seemed like the focus went from the music and building that sense of community to self aggrandizement. I understand he's a rock star, and that's part of the show, but when I'm in the audience I want the band to be playing for me, for the moment. What it felt like to me was that Bono started playing for himself, and went beyond connecting to the people in front of him, all the way to making himself the point and spectacle, rather than the music. I remember being disgusted at the last show I saw, because he spent so much time playing to the cameras that it seemed like we barely saw his face---and really that was a huge part of the connections he made.
I still love the music, but can't stand watching the messenger . . .
8 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
zing, with the exception of Blaze, I believe the original lineup has been intact for 28 years. So, I guess I'm a few years off but if you actually count what U2 has released in their official discography, it counts to almost the same amount. Not 34 years. OR, in my opinion, if you actually count anything past "Achtung Baby" (and I'm being kind) as "music" and not just successful demographic marketing. But, again, that's my opinion...
9 - Phillip Winn
Glen, exploring "biblical prophecy" is an almost uniquely American pasttime, one on which I suspect Paul and Dave haven't spent muh time. There's certainly a large strain of thought within Christianity, especially historically, that Christians will help to usher in a bright future here on earth, and it could be that Bono is of that school of thought.
Or, he could simply be expressing his wish for the here and now without any regard for the future. Either way, I doubt any fear of a one world government crossed his mind at any point when writing that song.
Since then, I'm sure someone has brought it up. :-)
10 - zingzing
brian, i think u2's first recorded stuff was in 1978 (maybe 79)--some ep which i've never found--but they did form in 1976, so i guess that's where the 34 years comes in. it is a remarkably long time for a band to stick together, and they did make pretty good music for the first two decades. zooropa is interesting. pop had its fair share of stinkers, but it had a few good ones as well. everything past that, however, is pretty bad. still, i don't think they're one of the bad guys in music. they really were quite experimental during their time as the most popular rock band in the world (87-95 or so), and that has to count for something.
11 - Glen Boyd
The prophecy thing is a minor point with me within the larger scheme of things, but I also think its valid to bring up, given the fact that Bono has expressed his Christian belief on a number of occasions.
This was especially true early on, but continues to manifest on somne of U2's latter work (like the aforementioned "Yahweh"), and certainly in Bono's efforts on issues like AIDS and world hunger (which he should be lauded for).
What bugs me more though, is the often delicate balancing act between Bono's rock-star posturing, his occasional messiah complex, and the sort of populism that I actually believe he is still sincere about -- but which he continues to distance himself away from in a variety of ways (from ticket prices average fans can scarcely afford to his sometimes naive association with the "one-world" crowd, whose agenda actually looks kinda scary when you give it a closer look).
Hey, I still love these guys, and I think they get it right more a lot more often than they don't. But if you wanna' save the world, sometimes its best when you start in your own background, and in this case, with your own original fanbase.
-Glen
12 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
zing... I,personally, wouldn't call what U2 did after "Achtung" "experimental". Actually, I feel that "Achtung" was a successful attempt at blending just the right amount of experimentation without losing their sound. But, that's where my appreciation ends. Everything after that album is terrible. Funny enough, I used to call Coldplay "U3" but with the current U2 material, I actually don't hear any difference between the two. It's like Enya Rock.
13 - zingzing
zooropa was pretty experimental, on a relative scale (being a scale for a huge ass rock band). definitely more purely experimental than achtung baby. i think it gets over on most of the songs, although it would have been better as the ep it was originally going to be.
my point about them being experimental while on top of the rock popularity pile has more to do with the huge chance they took with achtung baby. although that could be explained by the relative, and mostly deserved, failure of rattle and hum. but even then, rattle and hum was very ambitious (and really strange). what is that album? crappy live tunes, bits of interviews, hendrix samples, covers, completely warped songs (god part 2), superstar collaborations... it's either a hodgepodge or the most misguided attempt at completeness i've ever seen. i like it in theory, but listening to it is a chore.
but then they completely rewired their sound with achtung baby. as mike love said to brian wilson, "don't fuck with the formula" when you're #1, but that's just what they did. they had balls, at the very least. zooropa (recorded during breaks on the achtung baby tour) is of a piece with ab, but goes further out there. if the songwriting suffers, the sounds they were going for were freed up. it has to be one of the stranger #1 albums of the time.
by pop, their muse (or luck) was abandoning them. from there on out, it's just product. disappointing. meh. they got old.
14 - Tom Johnson
I'm off-topic here, but just to address Brian about Maiden, in addition to Bruce Dickinson leaving, there was also Adrian Smith leaving and being replaced by Janick Gers. Both came back about 10 years ago (and Janick also stayed) so they're intact now, but they haven't been intact the whole time.
As for Bono's Christian message, my guess is he toned it down because he realized it was offensive to non-Christians, and he's smart enough to realize there's a huge world filled with people who deeply believe something other than what Christians believe, and that doesn't make them wrong. The message is what he focused on, not the specific religion or god, and really that makes sense because the religious aspect in their early material really wasn't all that prominent anyway.
15 - El Bicho
free tix? hope he buys some in LA/OC and can't use them.
When you ask "Make sense?", I have to say no, there's a whole lot here that confuses me.
why bother saying you won't talk about the mullet only to talk about it in the next sentence?
I was at that Anaheim show and there were no rafters. It's an open stadium as anyone who has seen the Angels play can tell you.
Not sure how they weren't a band of the people during Pop. Sounds like you might have missed the lyrics as the songs cover similar ground.
"somewhere along the line Bono seems to have confused his spiritual beliefs with his larger political ambitions."
How so? They seem to be working together. I don't see how you've made this point. Sounds more like you are upset that he'd rather spend time with Bill Gates than have a beer with you, yet who is doing more to better the world?
16 - El Bicho
"his occasional messiah complex"
So he's not practicing his beliefs but actually thinks he's a savior? what proof do you have of that?
"ticket prices average fans can scarcely afford"
then how are they still filling arenas and stadiums?
zing's right, both AB and Zoo were experimental sounding for U2. After Pop, everything was safe and familiar, occasional good songs but essentially Joshua-lite.
I like R&H but it's a soundtrack album about the band touring America, physically on tour as well as musically through its past as they play with different styles and ideas. If it hadn't followed Joshua, I don't think expectations of it would have been so high. Something more for fans to seek out like Dylan's Basement Tapes
17 - Glen Boyd
Bicho...
I'll try to address all your arguments at some future point, as a lot of it falls under the "you say tomato, I say tomatoe" category anyway.
But one thing I want to go straight to now is those "rafters" at Anaheim...
I was down on the field during that show and I have a vivid, very distinct memory of looking up at the "rafters"...okay maybe you call them "stands," I don't know...But during "Where The Streets" everyone was jumping up and down on them, and the whole structure was moving up and down. I honestly was a little worried for those folks safety, as that whole structure looked like it might fall off its hinges due to the force of all those people going nuts.
True story.
-Glen
18 - Dr Dreadful
If Rattle and Hum proves nothing else, it demonstrates (viz. "Van Diemen's Land") that The Edge is a far better singer than Bono...
19 - Glen Boyd
#17...
Whatever they were, rafters, stands, or whatever...it was structure that hung out over the back of the stadium like a leaf, and I swear it really looked like it was going to come down.
-Glen
20 - Dan
Shit man you would never catch me doing that during a concert hell i would be like " I AM A ROCK ARTIST NOT A ROCK CLIMBER"
21 - Erica
Does anyone know why we humans tend to forget that other humans don't necessarily think the same way we do? I can't tell you how many times I've been shocked to rediscover that; it could be in the 100,000s.
Bono's motivation, his behavior, what he says and how he says it, etc., belong to him. He alone knows what he is or isn't doing; everyone else is projecting.
I can't imagine why anyone would want to be famous, and it wouldn't surprise me if most famous people would choose differently if they knew then what they know now.
Bono and the rest of U2, are people no doubt doing the best they can, when you get down to it. Just like the rest of us, except they're doing under a microscope.
Interesting article; thanks Glen.