SOE
Active topics
U2 - American Soul
 Album:
Songs Of Experience (2017)
  2. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]
    Who are you directing this towards?

    If me, I'm not expecting them to make literal sense, in fact I think Bono is being too obvious and on the nose with his lyric writing. How many songs on the new album have the word "liberty" in them already? It's just too obvious. Bono's best lyrics (and the best lyrics in general I'd say) are when they're their most interpretive. I didn't know Bad was about a heroine addiction killing someone until somebody told me, I thought it was a love song and nothing more when I first heard it.

    It's no secret what any of these new songs is about, and that's sort of why it's a shame. They're starting to be come what they hated themselves for in the Rattle and Hum era, America-loving, greatest-hits set playing, overblown, etc. I hate that this album became a political one when it probably wasn't even close to that before Trump got elected and they "took a step back". The promise of Songs of Experience was that it would be as personal as Innocence was, but with a different take, a different outlook. Instead they reverted back to their old selves.


    There was no secret to the narrative of Songs of Innocence. Its lyrics dealt with Bono’s youth, grief (California & Iris), discovery of rock and roll (Joey Ramone, Lucifer’s Hands, TIWYCRMN), teenage angst/rage, joining a band (volcano), street gangs, friendships, neighbours, Dublin (Cedarwood Road, Raised by Wolves), his parents (Crystal Ballroom) first loves (Song for Someone) first journeys (Invisible), etc. All obvious from the lyrics (not to mention Bono’s accompanying essay with the release).

    The next progression, Songs of Experience is U2 and Bono looking back at how they developed through more extensive and frequent travel to America; expanding their horizons, travelling the World, developing relationships, becoming more politically aware. From what the band have said in interviews of late, Songs of Experience, lyrically at least, will reflect back on a period where the Joshua Tree was their central piece of work, where Bono’s lyrics became less abstract and more focussed, perhaps closer to what you describe as ‘on the nose’; In God’s Country with its obvious reference to the Statue of Liberty, Bullet The Blue Sky, Mothers of the Disappeared. Where once you had Bad dealing with heroine addiction, now you had Running To Stand Still with an explicit (or in your words, obvious) reference to the Seven Towers of Ballymun where the dogs on the street knew what Bono was getting at when he said there ‘was only one way out’.

    It was no secret what any of the aforementioned songs were about and yet it didn’t make them any less powerful lyrically. I believe it is entirely consistent with the ‘experience’ theme that Bono would now be writing with a more pointed and perhaps obvious approach to his lyrics. In fact, over the years, a criticism levelled at Bono’s lyrics is that they have been too universal as if to accuse him of avoiding taking a direct stand on a topic or issue.

    Re: American Loving: U2 make no secret of their love for America, at least the idea of it. U2 determinedly strove to ‘break America’ and almost made it their mission. Back in ’87, Bono made it clear that he didn’t U2 to be an elitist thing, he wanted U2 to be heard by the masses. Bono has also gone on record to say that he has never had that British band mentality of seeking to ‘spank the yank’ as he colourfully described it. U2 were about exploring and embracing other cultures and America in particular, at least in the mid to late 80’s.

    Re: Hating the Political theme: Just as The Joshua Tree’s lyrics mixed the personal and the political, all Songs of Experience songs we have heard so far appear to deal with both themes too. What well rounded (and experienced!) writer/artist wouldn’t have interest in expressing their concerns for both. Can the two be readily separated? Politics affects everyone, personally. There is room on one album for both, even in the same song. Why the hell not? Can you really compartmentalise your life so easily? Rock/Pop/(whatever you want to call it) composition, musically and lyrically should not have so many rules imposed on it. Why shouldn’t a track deal with the personal and the political? Why not re-use the same lyric or piece of music in another song? Fuck it, it’s art. Plus good art provokes debate, so maybe Bono and the boys are doing something right, after all.
  4. Originally posted by TheRefugee:[..]


    There was no secret to the narrative of Songs of Innocence. Its lyrics dealt with Bono’s youth, grief (California & Iris), discovery of rock and roll (Joey Ramone, Lucifer’s Hands, TIWYCRMN), teenage angst/rage, joining a band (volcano), street gangs, friendships, neighbours, Dublin (Cedarwood Road, Raised by Wolves), his parents (Crystal Ballroom) first loves (Song for Someone) first journeys (Invisible), etc. All obvious from the lyrics (not to mention Bono’s accompanying essay with the release).

    The next progression, Songs of Experience is U2 and Bono looking back at how they developed through more extensive and frequent travel to America; expanding their horizons, travelling the World, developing relationships, becoming more politically aware. From what the band have said in interviews of late, Songs of Experience, lyrically at least, will reflect back on a period where the Joshua Tree was their central piece of work, where Bono’s lyrics became less abstract and more focussed, perhaps closer to what you describe as ‘on the nose’; In God’s Country with its obvious reference to the Statue of Liberty, Bullet The Blue Sky, Mothers of the Disappeared. Where once you had Bad dealing with heroine addiction, now you had Running To Stand Still with an explicit (or in your words, obvious) reference to the Seven Towers of Ballymun where the dogs on the street knew what Bono was getting at when he said there ‘was only one way out’.

    It was no secret what any of the aforementioned songs were about and yet it didn’t make them any less powerful lyrically. I believe it is entirely consistent with the ‘experience’ theme that Bono would now be writing with a more pointed and perhaps obvious approach to his lyrics. In fact, over the years, a criticism levelled at Bono’s lyrics is that they have been too universal as if to accuse him of avoiding taking a direct stand on a topic or issue.

    Re: American Loving: U2 make no secret of their love for America, at least the idea of it. U2 determinedly strove to ‘break America’ and almost made it their mission. Back in ’87, Bono made it clear that he didn’t U2 to be an elitist thing, he wanted U2 to be heard by the masses. Bono has also gone on record to say that he has never had that British band mentality of seeking to ‘spank the yank’ as he colourfully described it. U2 were about exploring and embracing other cultures and America in particular, at least in the mid to late 80’s.

    Re: Hating the Political theme: Just as The Joshua Tree’s lyrics mixed the personal and the political, all Songs of Experience songs we have heard so far appear to deal with both themes too. What well rounded (and experienced!) writer/artist wouldn’t have interest in expressing their concerns for both. Can the two be readily separated? Politics affects everyone, personally. There is room on one album for both, even in the same song. Why the hell not? Can you really compartmentalise your life so easily? Rock/Pop/(whatever you want to call it) composition, musically and lyrically should not have so many rules imposed on it. Why shouldn’t a track deal with the personal and the political? Why not re-use the same lyric or piece of music in another song? Fuck it, it’s art. Plus good art provokes debate, so maybe Bono and the boys are doing something right, after all.
    I appreciate the lengthy response, but I just can't agree. Even if Bono's lyrics have been "as focused" in the past (which I still disagree with - I'd bet no one knew what the "seven towers" were unless you lived in Dublin or were told by someone/read it somewhere, and I'd still argue that even that song is a lot more interpretive than these new ones - it certainly doesn't have to be about heroine specifically (even though it is)), they were still just more nuanced and for lack of a better word, "better". Can you really compare the lyrics off of The Joshua Tree to "you are rock and roll, I came here looking for american soul"?
  5. Originally posted by kris_smith87:[..]
    See I think what they are doing is smart. They are making fairly simple songs that are melodic and can get stuck in your head. They are melodic but they have heart. They sound personal but they also sound political.

    For better or worse, that is what most music is now. It isn't too complex (I suspect because people will so quickly turn to the newest new song) because a song needs to hook you rather quickly.

    I'm like what I'm hearing so far and looking forward to more exploration of the personal meets political.

    Cause if this is songs of EXPERIENCE and is the adult Bono he is the personal meeting the political.

    I agree with everything in this post
  8. Originally posted by TheRefugee:[..]


    There was no secret to the narrative of Songs of Innocence. Its lyrics dealt with Bono’s youth, grief (California & Iris), discovery of rock and roll (Joey Ramone, Lucifer’s Hands, TIWYCRMN), teenage angst/rage, joining a band (volcano), street gangs, friendships, neighbours, Dublin (Cedarwood Road, Raised by Wolves), his parents (Crystal Ballroom) first loves (Song for Someone) first journeys (Invisible), etc. All obvious from the lyrics (not to mention Bono’s accompanying essay with the release).

    The next progression, Songs of Experience is U2 and Bono looking back at how they developed through more extensive and frequent travel to America; expanding their horizons, travelling the World, developing relationships, becoming more politically aware. From what the band have said in interviews of late, Songs of Experience, lyrically at least, will reflect back on a period where the Joshua Tree was their central piece of work, where Bono’s lyrics became less abstract and more focussed, perhaps closer to what you describe as ‘on the nose’; In God’s Country with its obvious reference to the Statue of Liberty, Bullet The Blue Sky, Mothers of the Disappeared. Where once you had Bad dealing with heroine addiction, now you had Running To Stand Still with an explicit (or in your words, obvious) reference to the Seven Towers of Ballymun where the dogs on the street knew what Bono was getting at when he said there ‘was only one way out’.

    It was no secret what any of the aforementioned songs were about and yet it didn’t make them any less powerful lyrically. I believe it is entirely consistent with the ‘experience’ theme that Bono would now be writing with a more pointed and perhaps obvious approach to his lyrics. In fact, over the years, a criticism levelled at Bono’s lyrics is that they have been too universal as if to accuse him of avoiding taking a direct stand on a topic or issue.

    Re: American Loving: U2 make no secret of their love for America, at least the idea of it. U2 determinedly strove to ‘break America’ and almost made it their mission. Back in ’87, Bono made it clear that he didn’t U2 to be an elitist thing, he wanted U2 to be heard by the masses. Bono has also gone on record to say that he has never had that British band mentality of seeking to ‘spank the yank’ as he colourfully described it. U2 were about exploring and embracing other cultures and America in particular, at least in the mid to late 80’s.

    Re: Hating the Political theme: Just as The Joshua Tree’s lyrics mixed the personal and the political, all Songs of Experience songs we have heard so far appear to deal with both themes too. What well rounded (and experienced!) writer/artist wouldn’t have interest in expressing their concerns for both. Can the two be readily separated? Politics affects everyone, personally. There is room on one album for both, even in the same song. Why the hell not? Can you really compartmentalise your life so easily? Rock/Pop/(whatever you want to call it) composition, musically and lyrically should not have so many rules imposed on it. Why shouldn’t a track deal with the personal and the political? Why not re-use the same lyric or piece of music in another song? Fuck it, it’s art. Plus good art provokes debate, so maybe Bono and the boys are doing something right, after all.
    Sorry, but that was not the point me or Alex are trying to make.
    Of course we want the songs to deal with personal and political themes. Nothing wrong with being explicit, or only being evocative with subtle metaphors. Bono can do both quite well.
    But the lyrics of SOE are just... mundane. Too prosaic, repeating the talking points that Bono used in a TED talk. They can work well as a punchline in a speech, but not so well in a song that's supposed to be your artistic expression.
    You can have silly lyrics for a silly song as long as you're not pretending it's something beyond that. I love WIld Honey for what it is, and Bono never tried to sound transcendental in that song. One of my favorite songs of all time is Wrong Impression by Natalie Imbruglia. It's only a pop song, she never tried it to be anything else.
    But this is supposed to be a song about America in 2017, and we had delays of the album allegedly because of this quest for relevance in the times, so I don't accept that he only came up with his now cliché phrase "America is an idea":
    It's not a place
    This country is to me a thought

    How many times does he have to say that? When you compare it to the poignant, angry, precise lyrics of Bullet or In God's Country, it's no contest. I think we can ask for better images and metaphors from Bono, couldn't we? He can do better.
  9. No, but I could with 90's U2...

    Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]It reminds me of how Brian Eno wanted them to go with Moment of Surrender as the first single because he thought it would've been a really artistically ambitious move. Instead they chose Boots. That's a pretty good metaphor for the kinds of decisions U2 continue to make these days.
    But that's the kind of decisions U2 has make since ever, not these days. They always have been and have wanted to be and bragged to want to be a radio friendly band. And they have been bashed for it since the 80's.
    This isn't new.
  10. Originally posted by cesar_garza01:[..]
    Sorry, but that was not the point me or Alex are trying to make.
    Of course we want the songs to deal with personal and political themes. Nothing wrong with being explicit, or only being evocative with subtle metaphors. Bono can do both quite well.
    But the lyrics of SOE are just... mundane. Too prosaic, repeating the talking points that Bono used in a TED talk. They can work well as a punchline in a speech, but not so well in a song that's supposed to be your artistic expression.
    You can have silly lyrics for a silly song as long as you're not pretending it's something beyond that. I love WIld Honey for what it is, and Bono never tried to sound transcendental in that song. One of my favorite songs of all time is Wrong Impression by Natalie Imbruglia. It's only a pop song, she never tried it to be anything else.
    But this is supposed to be a song about America in 2017, and we had delays of the album allegedly because of this quest for relevance in the times, so I don't accept that he only came up with his now cliché phrase "America is an idea":
    [..]

    How many times does he have to say that? When you compare it to the poignant, angry, precise lyrics of Bullet or In God's Country, it's no contest. I think we can ask for better images and metaphors from Bono, couldn't we? He can do better.
    B-I-N-G-O
  11. Originally posted by Bloodraven:[..]
    No, but I could with 90's U2...

    [..]
    But that's the kind of decisions U2 has make since ever, not these days. They always have been and have wanted to be and bragged to want to be a radio friendly band. And they have been bashed for it since the 80's.
    This isn't new.
    For every "baby" in Achtung Baby,there were verses like
    You bury your treasure
    Where it can't be found
    But your love is like a secret
    That's been passed around

    So I don't think the lyrics in AB are as ordinary as in the latter songs.
  12. Originally posted by blueeyedboy:[..]
    See I think what they are doing is smart. They are making fairly simple songs that are melodic and can get stuck in your head. They are melodic but they have heart. They sound personal but they also sound political.

    For better or worse, that is what most music is now. It isn't too complex (I suspect because people will so quickly turn to the newest new song) because a song needs to hook you rather quickly.

    I'm like what I'm hearing so far and looking forward to more exploration of the personal meets political.

    Cause if this is songs of EXPERIENCE and is the adult Bono he is the personal meeting the political.

    Could it be the experienced side of Bono has learned (as most of us try do as we age, is to try to lighten up our lives and simplify, while still (as much as we'd like to) not forgetting the issues in the world around us? They are still a focus, but other things become more important. Family. Friends. Who knows. Just sayin', wile I wasn't gonna say anything. I felt this was worthy of a comment, because it's so right!


    Love that! The defiant joy idea is sort of prevalent here. You can change the world by making a difference in the lives of the people you love.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.