EXP
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by hamman:" The only thing that well-being and amount of struggle has anything to do with it is how YOU hear the music based on YOUR life. It affects everybody differently."--

    That's a bunch of crap. That's why urban music has become so popular is because the cities are growing and those people form those backgrounds can relate to those songs. Ask a black person from the streets if he can relate to most of the U2 songs. They usually only know of Bono or of U2 but not the any songs. Why? Because they can't relate to what he's saying and how their saying it. If you can't understand that look at the today's music charts. That's just dumb saying relevant isn't about how well off a person is. Look at the facts, at what's being played, instead of this theoretical bullsh$$ you've concocted.

    I never said I didn't like their new album, I did. To me, them being relevant doesn't matter. I like their music anyways, thats why I said, "I don't know why Bono cares so much about being relevant".-- If it affected everybody so differently, no one artist would be extremely popular. And your trying to tell me how I listen to music. It's obvious if you know anything about U2 that when they made all those great albums you listed, U2 wasn't set for life, they still could go broke, with the exception of Achtung Baby. So yeah, relevancy obvisoulsly does have something to do with popularity or selling albums. And when Bono says a coffee shop he used to go to regularly, got blown up,I'd say he felt those struggles. You can have your personal opinion, but when U2 made the Joshua Tree, their highest selliong album, they weren't set for life, and that's a fact.



    First of all, I think saying that all urban people can't relate to any U2 song is kinda unfair. Just because they live in an inner city doesn't mean that they have no relation to any other music genre besides rap ("urban music"). Besides, I think in the situation you describe, those people would have grown up in a culture in which that specific type of music was so prevalent, it would be very rare for someone to take to a completely different form of music (i.e. one that sounds and is structured so differently). In other words, you grow up only listening to really one type of music...it's very hard to find something you like in another type. Also, it seems to me that relevancy is completely about how people individually react to a song. Sunday Bloody Sunday, a song about a very specific event, received universal appeal (i.e. not just to people in Ireland who were directly affected by the IRA, etc.) because people could relate (on an individual basis) to the theme of struggle, loss, want of peace in their lives, and so on. Where someone comes from...whether or not they are rich...has nothing to do with it. Based on your argument, I'd guess that many urban people, especially those from an inner city, would enjoy or at least respect the message of the song itself. You say to look at the charts...at what's being played. Well, pretty much anyone on that list is more well off than any one of us, and yet they are "relevant." Music is such an individual, subjective thing, I don't see how wealth has ANYTHING to do with it.

    By the time The Joshua Tree came around, U2 weren't the richest musicians in the world, but they were much more well off than the average Joe. The argument isn't about whether relevancy is about popularity (I mean, that's basically a synonym...I don't think it's possible to argue otherwise), but whether or not an artist's monetary situation has anything to do with it, or am I missing something? If that's the case, how did All That You Can't Leave Behind do so well and catapult U2 back to being the "best band in the world"? They were set for life, yet millions of people were still able to connect with it on such a personal level, it was considered their third masterpiece...
  2. I'm not trying to tell you how do you anything. What I'm telling you is that saying he's not relevant because he's rich is an inane statement if you've ever appreciated anything they've ever done, because they've been rich for an incredibly long time.

    Money does not equal relevancy. End of story.
  3. relevancy and success are two different things, if you guys are telling me that they are as relevant today as in the 80's I'm pretty sure your wrong. And when Bono in one of the latest interviews linked from this site, says he doubts they will still be relevant, then take it from the man himself.

    "We're experimenting to discover different sides to us," Bono says. "And I think we're at one of those moments. We're fighting for relevance. Being successful is a lot easier than being relevant.

    "We may be about to do our best-ever album or we may be about to be irrelevant."

    He pauses to consider that rather weighty statement.

    The Age, October 21, 2010
    By: Andrew Murfett

    I think everybody has given good points but I don't agree with them. Good topic for though.
  4. Originally posted by hamman:relevancy and success are two different things, if you guys are telling me that they are as relevant today as in the 80's I'm pretty sure your wrong. And when Bono in one of the latest interviews linked from this site, says he doubts they will still be relevant, then take it from the man himself.

    "We're experimenting to discover different sides to us," Bono says. "And I think we're at one of those moments. We're fighting for relevance. Being successful is a lot easier than being relevant.

    "We may be about to do our best-ever album or we may be about to be irrelevant."

    He pauses to consider that rather weighty statement.

    The Age, October 21, 2010
    By: Andrew Murfett

    I think everybody has given good points but I don't agree with them. Good topic for though.



    I think what Bono meant in that interview was that most people that buy music and power the charts and radio don't care much for aging rock stars in their 50s. Youth relates to youth. Justin Bieber is so relevant because there are millions of pre-teen girls whose parents are willing to buy them his albums, etc. The challenge for U2, and Bono in particular according to those quotes, is to make music that is relatable across all generations of music fans. They've shown in the past that they can make an album that is commercially AND critically successful, and also appeals to harder-core U2 fans. I mean, back in 2000 the argument was the same: not many thought U2 could be relevant again because they were getting older and hip-hop seemed ready to take the reins as the premiere music genre. ATYCLB proved those doubters wrong. And I think that a similar sentiment exists now, albeit under a little more pressure considering they're that much older. Should be interesting to see if they can still put out a critically acclaimed (which NLOTH really was) AND commercially viable product next (which HTDAAB really was). Combine those two factors and you have an Achtung Baby or Joshua Tree. I still believe!
  5. Originally posted by hamman:I think you both don't understand the meaning of relenvancy. He doesn't live paycheck to paycheck, or worry about having air conditioning when it's 100 degrees outside or having a winter coat when it's cold. Its nice that you guys seem to be well off but don't ignore those who aren't. I will speak my opinion mate if I want and if you can't handle it, you should try another site.



    Originally posted by hamman:relevancy and success are two different things, if you guys are telling me that they are as relevant today as in the 80's I'm pretty sure your wrong. And when Bono in one of the latest interviews linked from this site, says he doubts they will still be relevant, then take it from the man himself.



    I'm just confused as how, in the first post, you relate relevancy to living like the average public, and in the second quote, you say how they were more relevant in the 80's...when they were even more popular and successful as they are today.

    You say that success does not equal relevancy, yet every time you talk about "when they were relevant" it's in the 80's, when they were even bigger than they are today. Does it have to do with the songs they were writing? They aren't relevant anymore because they haven't written a "world issue" song since...2004? Just because they aren't as popular as songs like "Sunday Bloody Sunday" doesn't mean they aren't still the same passionate band that we've always known. I don't understand how I can't sit here and say that they're still relevant because they're still relevant to ME. I'm not trying to tell YOU how to listen to music- that's the point. Nobody should be telling anyone how they can hear it- but nobody should also be telling people that there's one specific way for it to be heard.

    Their music still evokes something in me, a fueling passion that moves me, because that's just who they are in my life. I'm sorry if they don't for you anymore, but just because the general public doesn't deem them as "relevant" anymore because they aren't keeping up with the latest popular styles doesn't mean that I'm going to follow suit and turn in my cards.
  6. Oh really

    Your 1st post
    -I'm not trying to tell YOU how to listen to music- that's the point. Nobody should be telling anyone how they can hear it- but nobody should also be telling people that there's one specific way for it to be heard-

    2nd post
    -But it has nothing to do with walks of life. The only thing that well-being and amount of struggle has anything to do with it is how YOU hear the music based on YOUR life. It affects everybody differently



    Look at what Bono said and don't try to interpret what he said unless you know the man. Would you want someone to interpret what you said if they don't know you? I don't see what issue here is if Bono said it himself. It's like you just want to argue instead of looking at the facts. He said it, get over it. If you can't handle it, don't get in on the discussions. It would be different if it were us saying, but he said it. The head singer for U2, Bono, said it. Get upset about it, cry about it, get angry, but he said it.
  7. Originally posted by hamman:Oh really

    Your 1st post
    -I'm not trying to tell YOU how to listen to music- that's the point. Nobody should be telling anyone how they can hear it- but nobody should also be telling people that there's one specific way for it to be heard-

    2nd post
    -But it has nothing to do with walks of life. The only thing that well-being and amount of struggle has anything to do with it is how YOU hear the music based on YOUR life. It affects everybody differently



    Look at what Bono said and don't try to interpret what he said unless you know the man. Would you want someone to interpret what you said if they don't know you? I don't see what issue here is if Bono said it himself. It's like you just want to argue instead of looking at the facts. He said it, get over it. If you can't handle it, don't get in on the discussions. It would be different if it were us saying, but he said it. The head singer for U2, Bono, said it. Get upset about it, cry about it, get angry, but he said it.



    lmao the two quotes you've posted are saying exactly the same thing, that everyone should, and does, hear music differently...

    I'm not trying to interpret what he says at all. He thinks they aren't relevant anymore. Or he doesn't know if they will be, whatever- it doesn't matter. Because like I said, no matter who thinks it, they'll always be relevant to me, in my life. End of story. Even if 100% of U2 comes out and says "we don't think we're relevant anymore", then that's fine- but their music will still be relevant in my life. That's what I'm trying to say. And don't tell me not to get in on a discussion because "Bono says it, so we must obey". If he came out and said, "Hey everybody, ya know what- our music is really shitty. Even "The Joshua Tree". That album sucked"....are we all supposed to just submit out opinions to the toilet and say, "well, Bono said it sucked. It's true."

    It's all about opinions, my friend, and quite frankly, if you're the one who can't see more than one side of an argument, then I highly suggest you be the one to take a backseat.
  8. You keep saying "end of story." Do you think your Charles Bronson? This isn't Death Wish. End of story for who exactly? Do you have a theoretical 44 that you think your using and that's why you say "end of story?

    -It's all about opinions, my friend, and quite frankly, if you're the one who can't see more than one side of an argument, then I highly suggest you be the one to take a backseat...................................End of story.

    Money has nothing to do with relevancy.................End of Story

    Bono said they may become irrelavent

    But not to me........................End of Story

    Those 2 post say the same thing even though they don't........................End of Story
  9. And don't tell me not to get in on a discussion because "Bono says it, so we must obey". If he came out and said, "Hey everybody, ya know what- our music is really shitty. Even "The Joshua Tree". That album sucked"....are we all supposed to just submit out opinions to the toilet and say, "well, Bono said it sucked. It's true."

    I never told ya/-......................................................................................................................End of story.

    But I.................................End of Story.
  10. HANDBAGS!
  11. This is all just a bit off topic
  12. Will Mr hammam kindly calm down and can we all stick to topic please
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.