`No Line on the Horizon’ is now open for contributions, I’ve just added the first comments I’ve found about the new album, please feel free to send the information you’ve found about the songs! (Don’t forget to read the rules first!)
I’ve added Moment of Surrender, White As Snow and Cedars of Lebanon so far.
Maybe it is so that Stephen Thomas Erlewine put his finger on what I found wanting in U2′s latter albums, quoted from his review of How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb in All Music Guide:
(…) a strange fact about the album: it was a conservative affair. After grandly taking risks for the better part of a decade, U2 curbed their sense of adventure, consciously stripping away the irony that marked every one of their albums since 1991′s Achtung Baby, and returning to the big, earnest sound and sensibility of their classic ’80s work. (…)
(…) but U2 are so concerned with recreating their past that they don’t know where to stop peeling away the layers. They’ve overcorrected for their perceived sins, scaling back their sound so far that they have shed the murky sense of mystery that gave The Unforgettable Fire and The Joshua Tree an otherworldly allure. That atmospheric cloud has been replaced with a clean, sharp production, gilded in guitars and anchored with straight-ahead, unhurried rhythms that never quite push the songs forward. This crisp production lacks the small sonic shadings that gave ATYCLB some depth, and leaves How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb showcasing U2 at their simplest, playing direct, straight-ahead rock with little subtlety and shading in the production, performance, or lyrics.(…)
I miss those small sonic shadings…
It is a rare event indeed, I don’t think it ever happened before, but it happened on the 31st of March this year. Out of the blue a mail arrived from a fellow U2 fan called Chris Taguchi, with some comments for U2MoL and the following ending:
Back in the early ’90s, I had a site called ”U2:SitB” or Salvation in the Blues which was based on the backstories, meanings of U2′s songs. … I can zip my folders and send the *.txt files to you.
How not to respond to that then a ”Yes please!”?
A few days later the archive arrived and it has taken me the better part of the year to go through the material and sort out what is within the context of U2MoL and what is not and then adding the material. The latter part started at the beginning of December and will take at least through January to complete (I simply has too many projects, as everyone else, at the moment), you may follow the RSS-feed for updates as they come in bursts. The credit line will be From Salvation in the Blues, compiled by Chris Taguchi for all the entries, in case you want to look for them later on.
A great ”Thank you!” to Chris for compiling this and sending it to me, and an equal big one to all of you who have patience with me.
I sometimes get flamed for the guidelines I use for contributions, something that is quite rare, much rarer then the flames for the very existence of U2MoL, but all the same; are they guidelines hard to understand or too harsh? The guidelines are an attempt to increase the quality of the contributions I receive (I reject about half of the contributions I get, usually because the contributor hasn’t researched the topic and/or it is a private opinion and has nothing to do with U2′s intention, as far as they are known) and will only serve their purpose if they are easily understood.
I could need a bit of help, how can I increase the quality of the guidelines?
I have been running U2MoL for nearly thirteen years, always on web servers that either belonged to the University or my ISP (i.e. using bandwidth and server space that I never had to pay for), but as the time passes I get more and more interested in renting space in a web hotel somewhere. The idea has been that I then could improve the site quite tremendously (e.g. using PHP instead of static HTML pages so there could be better ways of contacting me and contributing to the site [I'm not very found of the idea of a Wiki for U2MoL for historical reasons, but it would be a possibility!]), but it would cost me a bit and since I have no statistics for the site traffic I do not know how much it would cost me.
I don’t like adverts myself, I hate them, but I have come to terms with Googles text based AdSense, and come to the conclusion that what I hate with web adverts are the animated ads (”Click the monkey!!!!!!!”). I usually don’t like the banner-like ads Google usually use, but I checked out the system and found that I could use a number of different sizes and think I could find some that might fit the purpose. I would then use a size that doesn’t obstruct the page and use a bit of taste in the placement.
Or am I just greedy? I have no idea how big the traffic is and if I would make any amount of money that it is worth the effort (I learned from a friend of mine that you need about 100,000 hits to get $50, so I won’t retire from my day job just quite yet). Besides, I rely on the work of others for the site and even if the money would be used to finance the site (and encourage me to work on it), I find it an interesting moral dilemma.
As I’ve rented space at a webhotel (Dreamhost to be specific) I can now get better statistics for the site, but it will take some time before all the traffic to my old site has moved here.
What do you think? Please leave a comment and tell me what you think.
(This post was first published on the U2MoL Golb at 19th of July, 2007.)
Ok, I admit it, and I agree will all … zero of you that has mailed me about it. The red, HTDAAB inspired, theme wasn’t very good. That the header image looked awful in some (read: one—you know which) browsers didn’t help.
It’s now back to basic, and back to the Joshua Tree inspired theme I had before. It is not exactly the same but very similar to the old theme (the site has changed a little behind the scenes, but not much). I hope I will be more satisfied with this one then the previous one, and I hope you enjoy it as well.
(This post was first published on the U2MoL Golb at 3rd of February, 2007.)
I saw the video of Window in the Sky at YouTube in the middle of December, and the video got me thinking. I was able to, not for the first time, and certainly not for the last time, express a feeling I have had for quite some years by now; I do not recognize U2 anymore. Window in the Sky gave a sample of a style of music that has almost nothing left of what I think characterized the U2 I have been so fascinated by for so many years — I bought the first album, Rattle and Hum, in 1989.
I am sitting and listening to So Cruel and it has quite some in common with Window in the Sky, e.g. Bono’s long oooh-sounds, but Window in the Sky, and How To Dismantle an Atomic Bomb before that, has a much smoother finnish, it seems to lack a certain spark, an internal anger, an involvement and a commitment. There is involvement in both HTDAAB and Window in the Sky, but the longing for actually be performing the song, the music, has diminished. I seriously doubt that I will buy the next album by U2 as I am seriously disappointed by HTDAAB (it is the record that I have played the least number of times — maybe not even 15 times!) and after have been listening to Window in the Sky am I just more convinced of which path I will walk. The path away from U2. I have bought every studio album U2 has made so far without hesitation and now I know that I will listen to the next album before I will consider whether to buy it or not. Considering what kind of website I have built, this is quite a step…
U2 is extremely good musicians, but I think that Bono has realised that he can make the world a better place much easier and with a much higher chance of succeeding by talking to the leaders of the world, instead of singing about it in front of thousands of fans (many of whom won’t get it anyway). Has he discovered that music cannot change the world? That music can make people aware of an injustice but to really make a difference you have to talk to the politicians?
Personally, I think that Pop belonged to the ”old” U2, where the music where to only thing that really mattered, that it was the vessel and the channel for any message they wanted to be communicated, that the music where the tool with which Earth would be moved — remember what Bono said during Popmart about their dread at the thought that the corporate monster might eat them? Popmart was about eating the monster before it could eat them, but I think that the monster devoured them (before or after Popmart, I do not know) and Bono has really not yet understood it. All That You Can’t Leave Behind marked a change in Bono’s approach to their music. Up until then, Bono had always been singing in a dialog with the listener; he had been aware of a listener and he has had a message for him or her, and where directing it toward the listener. But from All That You Can’t Leave Behind a change came, he is more singing to himself, he is looking down on the floor and hoping that someone will listen and hopefully hear that there is a message. The message is as strong as ever but the lyrics is not any longer the main tool for changing the world, it is the lobbing with politicians that really pays off. The new style of music is much more humble in one sense, it seems like they are asking are you listening to us?, maybe this humbleness was what they couldn’t leave behind?
All That You Can’t Leave Behind where a change in their music, very much like Achtung Baby, but this time I think it went for the worse. I still listen to U2′s music, all pre-Pop, but it becomes all the more infrequent. Why should Bono be reaching out to his fans at a concert and ask them to make a difference when he can speak to the world leaders at Davos and try to make them change the world — it is by our leaders where the real power lies. It doesn’t matter what you want to accomplish, sooner or later you have to go to the politicians and ask them to make some decision, and Bono has found out that the leaders now listens to him. I think that we will see Bono’s political message and U2′s music will start to drift apart, maybe we will see the same thing as happened with Midnight Oil where Garrett decided to leave the group to become a full time politician? The difference between U2 and Midnight Oil is that the latter worked on a local scale while U2 work on a global scale. I don’t think that Bono will join any political party, his cause is far too global for working for a single political party in one country. The music still fuels U2 and will continue to do so, but the anger that drove October and War, the social commentary of Achtung Baby and the pleading for understanding in Pop won’t come back in my opinion. It would be a much more laid back commentary in the future albums, where Bono comments and sings about his causes but does not use his music to influence the audience and make the audience to write to their politicians. The change is good for the AIDS-stricken in Africa, but not for us.
There are thousands of bands in the world, some of them ought to be good, and I can live without U2, Africa cannot.
(This post was first published on the U2MoL Golb at 5th of January, 2007.)
So, it was time again. For the fourth time ever, it was time for a redesign of the site; or the colour scheme at least. I was never really pleased with the green and white design I had previously, which replaced the black-and-gold Joshua Tree-inspired theme before that, and the first Achtung Babyesque white-on-black theme with blue and red as secondary colours. Before that I do not remember what I had, or if I had any at all? I think I went for the AB-black theme as the first one when I decided that I should add colour to the site in … 1996? How time flies…
This new redesign is inspired by How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb, although I consider that to be their worst album. The Joshua Tree-inspired colour scheme felt a bit oldish, even if I liked it, but I wanted something more modern. I really like the sleeve of All That You Can’t Leave Behind, and maybe will the next redesign be inspired by that album?
A first with this redesign is that I have begun (again) to use a image as a header, the word ”U2MoL” is placed to the left in the margin (I really look forward towards CSS3′s ability to turn blocks, which will be an approved standard and implemented by the main browser around the time of the heat death of the universe!). I used images for headers on my first version of my website in 1994/1995 but threw them out a few years later when I did a major redesign of the site and threw our the Running U2 Archive (see the history for details). I wouldn’t call this ”back to basics”, for two reasons. It is not basic to use images as headings (the <h1> and friends are more them capable of holding that kind of information) and it would be that kind of dry blog-humour I promised above that I would spare you. (Pathetic, isn’t it, how it creeps in?) Oooh, well.
I hope you like the new look, if I don’t I will replace it with a new one…
(This post was first published on the U2MoL Golb at 21st of April, 2006)
Every item collects dust over time, websites as well as physical objects, and considering that U2MoL has been alive for more then a decade (11.5 years at the time of this writing!) a fair number of the entries leaves something to wish for when it comes to the quality. Since I strive for keeping a high quality site, an ambition usually thwarted by the quality of many of the contributions I receive (before you feel offended or saddened by that, consider the following; I reject about 40-70% of all material that is sent to me based on level of research and I have never published any of the many flames I’ve received, sometimes related to a rejection and sometimes straight out of the blue). I try to do a bit of cleaning every now and then, but I have almost never, i.e. only once before, done a real overhaul. It was now well overdue and it is with some pride I now announce that the spring-cleaning has been commenced and finished! A number of entries has been removed and quite a few has been combined into others. The main reason for doing either is either false information and/or duplicated information. I didn’t keep track of how many I deleted but around fifty contributions is an good estimate!
In case you had an entry here before and it is now nowhere to be seen, it has fallen for the axe. I’ve used two criteria for removal: First, in many cases new information has been revealed and made the entry irrelevant and the second reason is that someone else wrote a better description (better in the sense terser, covered more topics and/or was better written in regard to spelling and grammar). I have tried to be fair and base judgement on fact and there is no point in flaming me and demand that I put your interpretation back, if you think that you have a better grasp of the meaning of the song, write a new contribution according to the rules and make sure you include good references and proofs that backs up your interpretation. As usual, I’m not interested in finding what you think of the song, but what Bono was inspired by when he wrote the song.
