My ambivalent U2 feelings…

Written by jason on November 27, 2007 in U2, reviews.

I was fourteen when post-punk populists U2 hit mega super-stardom with “The Joshua Tree”. I was far too young to enjoy the “War”-era firebrand stances, and I had only paid slight attention to “The Unforgettable Fire” and the subsequent Live Aid performance, but by 1987 everyone knew (and liked) U2. This was telegraphed home to me (in retrospect), by the fact that in my home town of Omaha, Nebraska, (not the most musically adventurous place to be in the mid-80s) they got played on the classic-rock radio station (a feat not repeated by an “alternative” band until R.E.M.’s “Green” released the next year), in malls, on TV, and in mainstream magazines like Time.

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

But I wasn’t a U2 fan at that point. I mean, I liked “Where the Streets Have No Name” as much as the next teenager just starting to explore music outside the norm, but they certainly didn’t resonate with me as an important band. That year for Christmas my mom splurged and got me an early CD player (something almost unheard-of in my age-group at the time) along with a small assortment of CDs. One of those CDs was “The Joshua Tree” (along with some Dire Straits, and The Pet Shop Boys), but I barely listened to it (I still have that CD). To my young ears, U2 had already passed into the sort of mainstream parent-respectability that made it seem “boring” to me. This was only confirmed by the bloated and overly-earnest “Rattle and Hum” released the next year. I was far more interested in Depeche Mode, R.E.M., and a variety of bands I was exposed to on Mtv’s “120 Minutes”. A re-evaluation of U2 didn’t happen till their “Achtung Baby/Zooropa” years, where a darker and “sexier” version of the band managed to win me over (somewhat).

So I’m rather ambivalent about all this media hype at the twenty-year anniversary of their big breakthrough album, complete with deluxe re-mastered box-set and loads of reminiscing from critics and journalists. Only critic Joe Gross seems to echo much of my own ambivalence in his review:

“As a 12- and 13-year-old kid feeling out the parameters of cultural rejection that punk rock afforded, I was wary of U2. Something that rockers and Christians agreed on was suspicious. Twenty years and one deluxe, three-disc reissue of their signature album later (it was released Tuesday), I remain almost as conflicted about them now as I was then … U2 is one of the very few bands to translate the cool, distant European post-punk into something both intimate and arena-ready. And nobody quite sounds like them, no matter how hard they try. U2 kept their own counsel, never replaced a band member and seem to be a God’s-honest team in what they do. On the other hand, this is arena rock — by design, there’s nothing anti-establishment about it. And Bono is one of the most exhausting rock star media presences of all time, from his on-stage pretension (especially back then) to his endless political yammering.”

While few can deny the talent and songwriting chops of U2, I do often wonder at how this band was singled out amongst the post-punk crop for fame and glory. What would have happened if U2 faded into obscurity maintaining only a cult audience, while (much stranger and darker) Irish musical peers The Virgin Prunes rocketed on to superstardom. Or if English rivals Echo and the Bunnymen became ubiquitous global pop-stars while U2 were relegated to “college rock” status and notable soundtrack appearances. I suppose it comes down to the fact that U2 didn’t threaten the “rock royalty” upper echelons due to their humble appreciation of “the roots” (something that separated them from many of their post-punk peers), they supported political causes that were popular (or at least not offensive) amongst middle-America, and won over Christians thanks to their own faith affiliations. In hindsight they were the perfect “outsider” band to gain acclaim in Reagan’s America. Years before “indie” bands started breaking big in waves.

So while the music world bows in remembrance of U2’s crowning achievement, I remain an ambivalent and peripheral fan (at best), and continue to stump for the semi-forgotten bands (and the bands that followed in their footsteps), the ones that reached out to a kid from Omaha wanting anything but what the adults (and the musical mainstream) approved of.


Leave a Comment

Would you like to Login to Your Account?


Comments on "My ambivalent U2 feelings…"

Sorry, but it seems like there aren't any comments.