U2: Vertigo -- Originally a Gun Control Tune

Status
Not open for further replies.

AZRickD

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
1,684
I read this in Time Magazine last night (Nov. 22 issue, page 80).

Bono and "The Edge" just can't help themselves. Good thing they had a producer which dropped all of the political nonsense from the lyrics of the album.

http://www.atu2.com/news/article.src?ID=3615&Key=&Year=&Cat=10
When the music started to smolder, Bono grabbed a microphone. "He was awful," says Lillywhite. "The song was all about gun control -- an extension of his political beliefs. Bono doesn't try that kind of thing much anymore, but when he does, you can feel the ambivalence from the band, and so can he. They want the rock star." "Native Son" was rewritten, stripped of politics and retitled "Vertigo." Gradually, it emerged as the most rousing -- and ironically, seemingly effortless -- opener of U2's career.
More political reflection:
"I really didn't like the idea of him appearing in a photograph with George Bush," says the Edge. "Larry didn't like seeing him with [Vladimir] Putin. But Bono felt that in the end, even though he agreed on some level, the benefits [of such photo ops] far outweigh the negatives. We're always discussing it, but then we discuss everything."
 
Sounds like they're wising up. I like their music, but I'd certainly refuse to send money their way if they write blatantly anti-gun songs. Their early stuff was anti-violence (Sunday Bloody Sunday) which we can probably all agree is a worthwhile theme.

I think THR members mostly understand that violence is not stopped by inaction and platitudes, but by will and superior firepower.
 
You know it's perfectly OK and normal for an artist or a band to have one or two good albums in an otherwise forgetable career and to have absolutely nothing of any value to say on political issues. I just listen to the old U2 that I like and pay no attention to the preaching, scolding, and selfpromotion.
 
U2 has come up before... *shrug* I can't see how they ever sold their first album and can't see how they can get any attention now. To each their own, eh? Personally I prefer listening the Chipmunks, when given a choice. Their range is broader and they're a lot more creative.
 
U2's early work was good. They came into their own with The Unforgettable Fire and choked on their own success by the time Rattle and Hum was released. They haven't had a good idea since then.
 
I lost all interest in U2 during the overexposure of The Joshua Tree. Byt he time that mess was over, I was out on them. I'll still listen to Sunday Bloody Sunday if it's played on the radio, but most everything else gets changed ASAP. But hey! To each his own!
 
"Rattle & Hum"??!!?

Now, there ya go bringing up bad memories. Although I liked two or three of the tunes (Pride) on the DC, that was a painful time for me, music-wise suffering through far too many weeks at work listening to Top 40 radio with no veto power over the radio dial. That was the late 1980s...I think it drove me to talk radio.

Rick
 
Last week a DirecTV channel called Treo (trio?) showed a recent concert of thiers (I mean the last few months or so-it had some of thier new stuff).

I wasn't too interested, but the show was pretty good, and they performed well. Good lighting, effects, singing by Bono and playing by everyone, and a good selection of new and old stuff. A good show indeed, and I was surpised it was on 'regular' TV.

Then they ruined it: on the large video screen above the stage, the showed a a 30 sec byte of Charles Heston speaking about guns on some kind of street interview before one song began. I remember him saying something to the effect of "a gun in the hand of a bad guy is a bad thing, a gun in the hand of a good guy is a good thing-only bad people have a reason to be afraid of a good guy with a gun".

I don't disagree with that sentiment, and I don't think it was an unreasonable comment. But it was presented in a bad way, and the message seemed fairly clear: guns=bad, no one should have them, Charles Heston=bad. Etc.

You know, I've liked U2 for a long time. As a believing Christian, I admired thier faith and the issues they've had with it along the way, and even many of the things they/Bono have done even if I disagreed with them.

But this, an almost Michael Moore episode from them, made me angry.

Alice Cooper said it well (italics are mine):

"To me, that's treason. I call it treason against rock 'n' roll because rock is the antithesis of politics. Rock should never be in bed with politics.

"When I was a kid and my parents started talking about politics, I'd run to my room and put on the Rolling Stones as loud as I could. So when I see all these rock stars up there talking politics, it makes me sick.

"If you're listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you're a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons. We sleep all day, we play music at night and very rarely do we sit around reading the Washington Journal."

Chris
 
Like the Dixie Chicks speaking out against Bush awhile back, I really don't care. I expect musicians to entertain me, and nothing more.
 
Know what really pisses me off? The fact that this is a foreign band, the members of which currently live in a foreign nation, trying to influence American gun control policies. This brings out my temper, like the Japanese petition urging changes in domestic American gun control. GRRRrrrrr... :cuss:
 
U2's liner notes are irrelevant and not worthy of being even toilet paper.

Not absorbent enough anyway.
 
Bret Micheals once said something to the effect of:
"Why was Michael Stipe appointed as the "voice" for Gen X?"

Same thing with these clowns. Don't come here if it's so bad.
 
U2 peaked early. I think the height of their talent was War and everything since has been an uneven downhill ride. I say uneven because there have been high points since then (The Unforgetable Fire, Achtung, Baby and yes, even The Joshua Tree- its not their fault that it was played into the ground via Top 40 radio) along with particular lows (Pop, Rattle and Hum, and Zooropa). I really don't give a hoot about their politics, and tend to agree with Ms. Ingrahm. Shut up and sing.

And since when do the Irish get to lecture anyone about having a peaceful, stable society? :scrutiny:

Mike
 
Bret Micheals once said something to the effect of:
"Why was Michael Stipe appointed as the "voice" for Gen X?"

stipe is far worse than bono. he makes bono look like a bush supporter.

the guy is a nut.

as a person in the x gen., i find it rather appalling such people appoint themselves as "spokesmen" for my generation. i believe in letting people live their own life and all but i dont believe in forcing my views onto others. if you like guns, great, if you dont thats ok, but dont force your anti gun views on me or think everyone shouldnt be allowed to have a firearm of any kind. if you like being a vegan great, if you insist on eating nothing but meat, great. i dont care.

this is something most of these people dont understand. its ok to think a certain way and live your own life a certain way but it is NOT ok for you to tell others how to live, it is NOT ok for you to force your beliefs onto others. as far as i'm concerned they are disrepectful as they feel their idea or opinion trumps yours.

i watched trading spouses this week and one of the women on there, a control freak vegan seemed to have this compulsion to "convert" everyone into a vegan. she seemed really convinced that being a vegan IS the only way to live and everything else is unhealthy. its ok if you're a vegan its not ok to try and convert everyone else into it. wanna present your idea to people? ok, that seems fair but if they say no then DROP IT.

its why i dont bother talking to people who are anti gun, its why i dont bother talking to people who think you have to be relgious. i am not in the mood to debate with you or tell you that your opinion or your view of the world isnt THE opinion or view to have and its ok to have a different view. i dont force my atheist beliefs on anyone, its a personal matter and i keep it that way, so is my dietary habits and way of life. i dont feel this need to try and convert people into gun lovers or pro gun, i dont feel this desire or urge or compulsion to convert people into being atheist or into becoming an omnivore. i'm too busy living my life to do such things.

bono and company need to take a long walk on a very short pier. as should charlie daniels, yeah he's a pro gun kind of guy and all but he's an entertainer, shut up and entertain me.

i dont want politics mixed into the music i listen to. when i want your opinion i'll give it.
 
What a quandrary. I like U2's music, but their political views are anathema. Ted Nugent's politics are more palatable, but his music has always made me want to ram knitting needles through my eardrums.
 
I liked U2 until I heard about Bono's anti-gun stance. I don't own or listen to any of their stuff anymore, other than The Wanderer, which I have on a Johnny Cash cd.

I'll just go off and listen to Skynyrd.
 
Wow, a rock band from Europe that doesn't like guns. I'm shocked!

Look, I like U2's music for what it is and I could care less for their politics. I went to one of their concerts once and they were still referring to Clinton as "The President" even though he was no longer the president at the time. They ran their little Heston clip, too. Do they think that we bought their tickets to hear about their "enlightened" political views? It's easy to be all the way out in left field when you have a multimilliondollar discretionary spending budget.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top