U2= Greedy, Money Mongoring Sell-Outs
Brad
No doubt I'll take some grief from the folks here who would bend-over and
kiss the people at Ticketmaster and Island Record's ass just to get a good
seat for the new "Screw You 2 Tour," but fuck U2's attitude towards their
music and their pathetic attitudes towards their "so-called" fans.
While I still love their music, it is hard for me to accept $50+ for a
ticket, and the absolute crap you have to go through just to get one.
Fuck "PopMart", or whatever their pretenious "theme" is nowadays for their
self-absorbed tour scam, the ridiculous props, and everything else that
takes away from their music.
Why can't they just play their damn music and let it stand on it's own?
Or do they have to satisfy the idiot-mass culture of today by
supplementing their music with effects, self-imagery, and props to win
over people?
What a bunch of assholes, really.
I don't fucking worship musicians to the point that I'm paying
$20 a year to belong to some fan-club, or wearing wrist-bands and wasting
my time listening to the radio just to attend a show. Give me a break!
U2 should just take their Advil, wash it down with some liquid antacid,
and get over their pretenious self-indulgent attitude.
I went to a show on their last tour in Cleveland, and it was so half-assed
I couldn't stand it. What a waste of time and money! They couldn't even
play an entire concert because they are so busy trying to make fucking
money that they don't even care about their music, and their fans anymore.
Anyone who disagrees with this is just plain ignorant. I like the music on
POP over-all, but the poor sales they've experienced so far on their
recent tour just goes to show what money-mongering fools they are!
Just look at the sales in Columbus, or in Southern California, and you'll
see what I am talking about.
Bono needs to get it back in his pants, and quit floundering himself all
over MTV, and get back to what music is all about in the first place.
What a pathetic turn for the worse this band has taken. They certainly
won't get any of my money this year for their ridiculous "super-tour."
I'll make a tape of their CD and enjoy it for "$3.95" like a normal
person.
Quit over-analyzing songs like "Discotechque," or however it is spelled,
god, some people need to get a life.
Give me a break.
Will McDonald
In <brubin-2502...@news.fuse.net> bru...@fuse.net (Brad)
writes:
[long rant snipped]
>Anyone who disagrees with this is just plain ignorant.
Must be nice to be omniscient and infallible.
Will
--
The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history...this
century's history...We all lived in this century. I didn't live
in this century. -- Dan Quayle, then Indiana senator and
Republican vice-presidential candidate during a news conference in
which he was asked his opinion of the Holocaust
Linda
Brad wrote:
>
> No doubt I'll take some grief from the folks here who would bend-over and
> kiss the people at Ticketmaster and Island Record's ass just to get a good
> seat for the new "Screw You 2 Tour," but fuck U2's attitude towards their
> music and their pathetic attitudes towards their "so-called" fans.
>
> While I still love their music, it is hard for me to accept $50+ for a
> ticket, and the absolute crap you have to go through just to get one.
>
> Fuck "PopMart", or whatever their pretenious "theme" is nowadays for their
> self-absorbed tour scam, the ridiculous props, and everything else that
> takes away from their music.
>
> Why can't they just play their damn music and let it stand on it's own?
>
> Or do they have to satisfy the idiot-mass culture of today by
> supplementing their music with effects, self-imagery, and props to win
> over people?
>
> What a bunch of assholes, really.
YOUR CRAP ATTITUDE REMINDS ME WHY I MARRIED AN IRISH PERSON AND LEFT
CINCINNATI TO LIVE WITH THE IRISH!! OPEN YOUR MIND......LIGHTEN UP
BEFORE YOU GET ULCERS!
Eric DeFonso
In article <brubin-2502...@news.fuse.net>,
Brad <bru...@fuse.net> wrote:
>
>While I still love their music, it is hard for me to accept $50+ for a
>ticket, and the absolute crap you have to go through just to get one.
Let's see, I stood in line for about 20 minutes, maybe 25, and got
reasonably good floor seats. Maybe it was different for other people, but
that doesn't sound too bad to me.
>
>U2 should just take their Advil, wash it down with some liquid antacid,
>and get over their pretenious self-indulgent attitude.
I take it you've had to experiment with this formula on previous
occasions yourself.
>I went to a show on their last tour in Cleveland, and it was so half-assed
>I couldn't stand it. What a waste of time and money! They couldn't even
>play an entire concert because they are so busy trying to make fucking
>money that they don't even care about their music, and their fans anymore.
So, you still love music that you think they don't even care about? What
do you like about the music in the first place?
As far as ZooTV goes, the show I saw in Phoenix was excellent.
>Anyone who disagrees with this is just plain ignorant. I like the music on
Glad to see you're keeping an open mind about this.
>Bono needs to get it back in his pants, and quit floundering himself all
>over MTV, and get back to what music is all about in the first place.
What do YOU think the music is about anyway?
>
>What a pathetic turn for the worse this band has taken. They certainly
>won't get any of my money this year for their ridiculous "super-tour."
>I'll make a tape of their CD and enjoy it for "$3.95" like a normal
>person.
Well hurray for you. Whose CD are you going to borrow? Are you going to
tell the person you borrow it from that you think they are "just plain
ignorant" to have bought the CD in the first place?
>
>Quit over-analyzing songs like "Discotechque," or however it is spelled,
What's wrong with talking about the music? I thought that's what you
just got done telling us it was "all about".
>god, some people need to get a life.
I was just about to say the same thing.
>
>Give me a break.
OK, here's your break. Enjoy!
--
Eric D UC Davis
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Building the towers belongs to the sky..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JJamesBell
Thanks Brad for an original and enlightening piece of literary genius. His
vocabulary skills leave me amazed.
Thanks also for not participating in U2's new tour. I'm sure someone,
somewhere is greatful for an extra ticket that is available.
Oh and by the way, it's illegal to copy an album. If you're so high minded
you would buy the album. You really just sound cheap and bitter,
JIrvine830
<some people need to get a life>?
Um, someone sounds just a little bit bitter and if you had a life of your
own, why do you give a shit? Period.
Hell, if you're that upset with U2 for "selling out", Pearl Jam is always
there for you.
Myself, I'll be at POPMart. God, I'm so ignorant!
jlau...@students.wisc.edu
Just for the record, what is music about? It's not just that I don't
like your argument, but what is your point? It seems like you wanna play
Jesus or something based on nothing more than your opinions of what music
is and should be.
Tom Mahieu
I don't understand people who can't differentiate their opinion from
fact. I have no problem with this guy feeling this way, but the second
he says, "Anyone who disagrees with this is just plain ignorant." I find
his post very ignorant.
tom
On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Brad wrote:
"Anyone who disagrees with this is just plain ignorant."
>
> No doubt I'll take some grief from the folks here who would bend-over and
> kiss the people at Ticketmaster and Island Record's ass just to get a good
> seat for the new "Screw You 2 Tour," but fuck U2's attitude towards their
> music and their pathetic attitudes towards their "so-called" fans.
>
> While I still love their music, it is hard for me to accept $50+ for a
> ticket, and the absolute crap you have to go through just to get one.
>
> Fuck "PopMart", or whatever their pretenious "theme" is nowadays for their
> self-absorbed tour scam, the ridiculous props, and everything else that
> takes away from their music.
>
> Why can't they just play their damn music and let it stand on it's own?
>
> Or do they have to satisfy the idiot-mass culture of today by
> supplementing their music with effects, self-imagery, and props to win
> over people?
>
> What a bunch of assholes, really.
>
> I don't fucking worship musicians to the point that I'm paying
> $20 a year to belong to some fan-club, or wearing wrist-bands and wasting
> my time listening to the radio just to attend a show. Give me a break!
>
> U2 should just take their Advil, wash it down with some liquid antacid,
> and get over their pretenious self-indulgent attitude.
>
> I went to a show on their last tour in Cleveland, and it was so half-assed
> I couldn't stand it. What a waste of time and money! They couldn't even
> play an entire concert because they are so busy trying to make fucking
> money that they don't even care about their music, and their fans anymore.
>
>
> Anyone who disagrees with this is just plain ignorant. I like the music on
> POP over-all, but the poor sales they've experienced so far on their
> recent tour just goes to show what money-mongering fools they are!
>
> Just look at the sales in Columbus, or in Southern California, and you'll
> see what I am talking about.
>
> Bono needs to get it back in his pants, and quit floundering himself all
> over MTV, and get back to what music is all about in the first place.
>
> What a pathetic turn for the worse this band has taken. They certainly
> won't get any of my money this year for their ridiculous "super-tour."
> I'll make a tape of their CD and enjoy it for "$3.95" like a normal
> person.
>
> Quit over-analyzing songs like "Discotechque," or however it is spelled,
> god, some people need to get a life.
>
> Give me a break.
>
>
"I'm not the only one staring at the sun."
Jen Van Dijk
No, BONO wants to play Jesus. BRAD was just complaining about U2's
pretentiousness and high ticket prices.
Jen
Jen Van Dijk
Linda wrote:
>
> Brad wrote:
> >
> > No doubt I'll take some grief from the folks here who would bend-over and
> > kiss the people at Ticketmaster and Island Record's ass just to get a good
> > seat for the new "Screw You 2 Tour," but fuck U2's attitude towards their
> > music and their pathetic attitudes towards their "so-called" fans.
> >
> > While I still love their music, it is hard for me to accept $50+ for a
> > ticket, and the absolute crap you have to go through just to get one.
> >
> > Fuck "PopMart", or whatever their pretenious "theme" is nowadays for their
> > self-absorbed tour scam, the ridiculous props, and everything else that
> > takes away from their music.
> >
> > Why can't they just play their damn music and let it stand on it's own?
> >
> > Or do they have to satisfy the idiot-mass culture of today by
> > supplementing their music with effects, self-imagery, and props to win
> > over people?
> >
> > What a bunch of assholes, really.
>
> CINCINNATI TO LIVE WITH THE IRISH!! OPEN YOUR MIND......LIGHTEN UP
> BEFORE YOU GET ULCERS!
Stop yelling. You'll scare all the little kids. Geez. Maybe the guy
just wants to hear the music, not all of the band's pompous attitudes
and other miscellaneous junk.
Jen
Jen Van Dijk
Yay!!! *clap clap* *wild applause* *whistle whistle*! I totally
agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
Jen
Jen Van Dijk
> Um, someone sounds just a little bit bitter and if you had a life of
What's so wrong with being bitter?
Brandon Barrett
Wow, I was starting to feel very alone in here... Of course Jen, you know
that according to Eric D, James B, et al., we've got our heads way up our
asses, we're closed-minded, stuck in the past, judgemental fools who are
trying to ruin it for everybody else... sigh, it's tough being so evil...
Brandon Barrett
barr...@ucs.orst.edu
(SPAM is bad - see my email address at the end of this reply)
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997 19:06:19 +0000, Linda <oha...@indigo.ie> wrote:
>YOUR CRAP ATTITUDE REMINDS ME WHY I MARRIED AN IRISH PERSON AND LEFT
>CINCINNATI TO LIVE WITH THE IRISH!! OPEN YOUR MIND......LIGHTEN UP
>BEFORE YOU GET ULCERS!
Hmm.. Well your attitude doesn't do much for me either.
And now for something completely different...
I agree somewhat with the original poster. My wife really wants me to
get tickets for the SLC show but I am not going to shell out the fifty
plus (which is now more than that from scalpers) just to see U2. I
will be content with listening to audio tapes and maybe picking up a
few video bootlegs. Hopefully they will do another laserdisc from
this tour too.
=======send replies to: g...@srv.net================
I do not take unsolicited offers by email. If you
send me unsolicited offers via email you will be
added to my mailing list and receive the same in
return.
Cheryl Duffy
As they say, ignorance is bliss!! I'll be there too!
Cheryl
JJamesBell
I love groups that sell out!!! They're my favorite. I love being too dumb
to recognize when someone is trying to steal my money. I'm so simple I
just like the music.
choves
While Im a longtime fan of u2 and have waited anxiously for their new
album and tour, it does disturb me a bit that tickets are so expensive.
I know alot of the price is due to ticketmaster's "service charge" of
eight dollars, but you would think U2, having the pull they do, could get
them to lower it. I have NEVER paid a service charge this high, even from
other ticketmaster shows. Its fucking criminal. Some here would argue
that seeing u2 live is well worth it, and even I paid $200, from a
scalper to see them at the LA sports arena in 92, but even their base
price per ticket is a bit overwhelming. These big flashy spectacles do
somewhat take from the music, in that your forced not to rely so much on
your own imagery and intereratation of the song, but rather have it
forced on you by all the props. My advice, cut down on the cost of all
the extra's, get on stage, play the music, have more room for
spontinaiety(sp?), and lower the ticket prices. You can still play
stadiums without turning it into a circus, after all, we all went to the
stadium shows during the JT tour, and you got to every fan there, even us
in the back....
Jeff Cristofono
------------364641094A260
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Stop posting your gripes here. If you really need a place to vent,
start your own damn newsgroup!! I'm so tired of people bitching and
longing for the past--those who can't accept change. If you want to
relive the old U2, then please do so by all means. Stop reading the
newsgroups, stop reading articles about the band, turn off the radio
when their songs come on, and leave town when Popmart hits your city.
As the saying goes, change is always tough to accept. For some, it
seems almost impossible.
fuck.......
JC
------------364641094A260
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<HTML><BODY>
<DT>Stop posting your gripes here. If you really need a place to
vent, start your own damn newsgroup!! I'm so tired of people bitching
and longing for the past--those who can't accept change. If you want
to relive the old U2, then please do so by all means. Stop reading
the newsgroups, stop reading articles about the band, turn off the radio
when their songs come on, and leave town when Popmart hits your city. </DT>
<DT>As the saying goes, change is always tough to accept. For some,
it seems almost impossible.</DT>
<DT> </DT>
<DT>fuck.......</DT>
<DT> </DT>
<DT>JC</DT>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------------364641094A260--
Brandon Barrett
On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Jeff Cristofono wrote:
> Stop posting your gripes here. If you really need a place to vent,
> start your own damn newsgroup!! I'm so tired of people bitching and
> longing for the past--those who can't accept change. If you want to
> relive the old U2, then please do so by all means. Stop reading the
> newsgroups, stop reading articles about the band, turn off the radio
> when their songs come on, and leave town when Popmart hits your city.
> As the saying goes, change is always tough to accept. For some, it
> seems almost impossible.
Ummmm... What's the point of this newsgroup? Is it to worship U2? Is it
to praise U2? Is it to drool all over the new album?
Yeah, the newsgroup is for all of these things. But it's also for
discussion. It's a place to exchange opinions, a place for critical
debate. If debate didn't occur on this group, it would be so
insufferably boring that many of us wouldn't bother showing up. If you
want to do nothing but talk about how great U2 is, maybe you should start
*your* own newsgroup, alt.music.superfans.u2 or something, a moderated
group where dissing U2 isn't allowed. Maybe some people would enjoy
that, but I for one would be bored to tears.
>
> fuck.......
>
> JC
>
Brandon Barrett
barr...@ucs.orst.edu
Kathryn L. McCabe
Very well put! I agree.
Eric DeFonso
In article <3314EB...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net> wrote:
>Yay!!! *clap clap* *wild applause* *whistle whistle*! I totally
>agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
>first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
>They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
Their image or the real band? If you mean the individuals, what do you
base that opinion on?
Eric DeFonso
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.970226...@ucs.orst.edu>,
Brandon Barrett <barr...@ucs.orst.edu> wrote:
>
>On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Jen Van Dijk wrote:
>
>> Yay!!! *clap clap* *wild applause* *whistle whistle*! I totally
>> agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
>> first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
>> They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
>>
>>
>>
>Wow, I was starting to feel very alone in here... Of course Jen, you know
>that according to Eric D, James B, et al., we've got our heads way up our
>asses, we're closed-minded, stuck in the past, judgemental fools who are
>trying to ruin it for everybody else... sigh, it's tough being so evil...
I don't think you're evil, Brandon - I don't even think your a fool!
I just think that you are missing the irony. U2 has always struck me as a
band that was fundamentally very sharp-witted and spot-on, when it comes
to recognizing global realities, in whatever shape or form. I don't have
any reason, based on the interviews I've read, the shows I've seen, or the
*music* that I listen to of the band U2, that they are any different
deep-down than they were 5, 10, or 15 years ago. To me, I see that
they still have very strong morall beliefs, and they still have plenty
of messages in the music. I just think that some people, including you,
are bashing the band needlessly because the message is being presented
much differently than it used to.
They have grown musically, and it is my fervent belief that as
fans we should allow musicians to do that. I suppose then that our
disagreement boils down to what constitutes musical growth, and what makes
the music listenable. Fair enough. But what I really take issue with is
when people who have opinions like yours tell me that they have "sold
out", that they have no message anymore, and that they are simply greedy.
That's where I think you are very wrong. And when the poster who began
this thread tells me that I am ignorant for expressing my beliefs and
wanting to hear and buy their new album, or see their show, do you think
that helps make this newsgroup any more enjoyable, or the discussions any
more civilized?
-=[ DzineR ]=-
Brad wrote:
>
> No doubt I'll take some grief from the folks here who would bend-over and
> kiss the people at Ticketmaster and Island Record's ass just to get a good
> seat for the new "Screw You 2 Tour," but fuck U2's attitude towards their
> music and their pathetic attitudes towards their "so-called" fans.
>
> While I still love their music, it is hard for me to accept $50+ for a
> ticket, and the absolute crap you have to go through just to get one.
>
> Fuck "PopMart", or whatever their pretenious "theme" is nowadays for their
> self-absorbed tour scam, the ridiculous props, and everything else that
> takes away from their music.
>
> Why can't they just play their damn music and let it stand on it's own?
>
> Or do they have to satisfy the idiot-mass culture of today by
> supplementing their music with effects, self-imagery, and props to win
> over people?
>
> What a bunch of assholes, really.
I for one, plan on enjoying the show thouroughly! With or without the
props,
it's worth the $50 to me. But then again, I'm not a CHEAPSKATE!
So DON'T GO-----
We don't want people with your lousy attitute around anyway.
And finally------
No, I wouldn't bend-over and kiss ANYone at T.M. or I.R.,
my seats are fine and I'm happy just to be able to go.
Why don't you lighten up a little and enjoy life.
:^) food for thought.
John Benyamine
Brandon Barrett <barr...@ucs.orst.edu> wrote in article
<Pine.OSF.3.91.970227...@ucs.orst.edu>...
> Ummmm... What's the point of this newsgroup? Is it to worship U2? Is it
> to praise U2? Is it to drool all over the new album?
> Yeah, the newsgroup is for all of these things. But it's also for
> discussion. It's a place to exchange opinions, a place for critical
> debate. If debate didn't occur on this group, it would be so
> insufferably boring that many of us wouldn't bother showing up. If you
> want to do nothing but talk about how great U2 is, maybe you should start
> *your* own newsgroup, alt.music.superfans.u2 or something, a moderated
> group where dissing U2 isn't allowed. Maybe some people would enjoy
> that, but I for one would be bored to tears.
Very good point and I agree with you completely, however I don't think that
people who bitch and moan should do so without a foundation to their
statement, backing it up. The reason...they look foolish, ignorant, and a
bit stupid. See, it's cool if you don't agree with what U2 is doing, but
if you don't understand what they're doing, your shadowed opinion means
very little to every single intelligent person on the newsgroup. Hence,
your post makes you look like a 12 year old and we end up not listening to
you...
> > fuck.......
intelligence rules on the Internet...do some homework, buddy...it's
college.
...WZTV
John Benyamine
Eric DeFonso <szde...@bullwinkle.ucdavis.edu> wrote in article
<5f4deg$4v4$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>...
> >Yay!!! *clap clap* *wild applause* *whistle whistle*! I totally
> >agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
> >first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
> >They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
>
> base that opinion on?
I would LOVE to see Ms. Van Dijk respond to that. Unfortunetly, ignorance
will probably prevail, with a blushing Ms. Van Dijk in the corner...
...WZTV...some people shouldn't speak until spoken to
Brandon Barrett
The problem being that U2-bashers are not the only ones prone to making
sweeping statements without foundation. What's the difference between
"U2 is the shittiest band on earth!" and "U2 is the greatest band on
earth!" They are both ridiculous statements if you ask me. Yeah,
people who bitch for the sake of bitching sound ignorant, but people who
lavish praise just for the sake of lavishing praise sound, to me, just
as ignorant.
>
> > > fuck.......
> intelligence rules on the Internet...do some homework, buddy...it's
> college.
If you had looked carefully at the post, you would have seen that the
final expletive was not written by me, but by the poster I responded to.
Speaking of doing your homework...
>
> ...WZTV
>
>
Brandon Barrett
barr...@ucs.orst.edu
Brandon Barrett
On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, John Benyamine wrote:
> Eric DeFonso <szde...@bullwinkle.ucdavis.edu> wrote in article
> <5f4deg$4v4$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>...
> > In article <3314EB...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net>
> wrote:
> > >Yay!!! *clap clap* *wild applause* *whistle whistle*! I totally
> > >agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
> > >first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
> > >They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
> >
> > Their image or the real band? If you mean the individuals, what do you
> > base that opinion on?
Last I checked, *facts* needed a concrete basis. Opinions do not. It
seems like everytime somebody complains about U2, however, such wise-guy
demands some kind of "proof."
"What's the factual proof that U2 has sold out?"
"What legit. basis do you have for saying that U2 is pretentious?"
Okay, well "prove" to me that U2 is an honest and artistic band, then, if
you're so convinced of it. On what do you base *that* opinion? On
other opinions, no doubt, opinions concerning the quality and substance
of U2's music, appearance, etc. You look at U2 and see one thing, I look
at them and see another. Neither view is necessarily the "right" one,
and therefore I feel no need to provide legal proof that U2 has turned
to crap, just as I demand from you no proof that U2 is God's gift to music.
>
> I would LOVE to see Ms. Van Dijk respond to that. Unfortunetly, ignorance
> will probably prevail, with a blushing Ms. Van Dijk in the corner...
>
> ...WZTV...some people shouldn't speak until spoken to
>
>
Brandon Barrett
barr...@ucs.orst.edu
the golden rule
Cheryl Duffy
>In <5f2r30$4...@news.service.uci.edu> choves <steb...@fia.net> writes:
>>
>>While Im a longtime fan of u2 and have waited anxiously for their new
>>album and tour, it does disturb me a bit that tickets are so
>expensive.
>>I know alot of the price is due to ticketmaster's "service charge" of
>>eight dollars, but you would think U2, having the pull they do, could
>get
>>them to lower it. I have NEVER paid a service charge this high, even
>from
>>other ticketmaster shows. Its fucking criminal. Some here would argue
>>that seeing u2 live is well worth it, and even I paid $200, from a
>>scalper to see them at the LA sports arena in 92, but even their base
>>price per ticket is a bit overwhelming. (the rest of the post snipped)
>Very well put! I agree.
Does anyone else see anything wrong with the longer post above? This person,
on the one hand, is complaining about the high price that U2 is charging for
concert tickets. Yet this person had no problem with paying $200 (4 times the
current price) to a scalper. Let's see, would I rather pay the money directly
to the artists who are earning it by performing for me or do I want to pay 4
times that amount to someone who is taking advantage of the artists' fans?
Doesn't seem like a tough choice to me.
Cheryl
Erik Mortensen
Brad <bru...@fuse.net> wrote:
> I went to a show on their last tour in Cleveland, and it was so half-assed
> I couldn't stand it. What a waste of time and money! They couldn't even
> play an entire concert because they are so busy trying to make fucking
> money that they don't even care about their music, and their fans anymore.
I'm glad I wont run into you at any of their shows. Then I don't have to
take the time to kick your ass, you stupid jerk!
> Anyone who disagrees with this is just plain ignorant.
Well, what a ignorant young man we have here! Jesus, this comment is
really too stupid - even for you!
> Give me a break.
Not a chance stupid!
Erik
"Technology favors horrible people." - Douglas Coupland (1993)
Visit my tribute to Douglas Coupland at
http://www.imv.aau.dk/~bogus/douglas/dcframes.html
Eric DeFonso
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.970227...@ucs.orst.edu>,
Brandon Barrett <barr...@ucs.orst.edu> wrote:
>> Eric DeFonso <szde...@bullwinkle.ucdavis.edu> wrote in article
>> <5f4deg$4v4$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>...
>> > In article <3314EB...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net>
>> wrote:
>> > >Yay!!! *clap clap* *wild applause* *whistle whistle*! I totally
>> > >agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
>> > >first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
>> > >They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
>> >
>> > Their image or the real band? If you mean the individuals, what do you
>> > base that opinion on?
>
>Last I checked, *facts* needed a concrete basis. Opinions do not. It
>seems like everytime somebody complains about U2, however, such wise-guy
>demands some kind of "proof."
I'm asking for "proof" (actually, I'm just asking for an explanation) as
to why some people are so down on the band now. You're right, opinions
can be based on anything anyone wants. I just would like to know if people
are *reasonable* in their criticisms. So far, I don't have any reason to
think that the U2 critics aren't simply making this stuff up. BUT, if you
give me some real reasons, maybe I would change my mind.
>"What's the factual proof that U2 has sold out?"
>"What legit. basis do you have for saying that U2 is pretentious?"
>Okay, well "prove" to me that U2 is an honest and artistic band, then, if
>you're so convinced of it. On what do you base *that* opinion?
I have said on another occasion that I base my opinions on the articles I
have read in the past several years, from ones that came out just after AB
was released, to a very recent one in SPIN magazine. I also base it on
having seen the band's shows, and listening to the music, and watching the
videos that I have.
So, I ask again, what do you base your opinions on? Is it fair for
me to ask? I'm tired of the hedging.
On
>other opinions, no doubt, opinions concerning the quality and substance
>of U2's music, appearance, etc. You look at U2 and see one thing, I look
>at them and see another. Neither view is necessarily the "right" one,
>and therefore I feel no need to provide legal proof that U2 has turned
>to crap, just as I demand from you no proof that U2 is God's gift to music.
Brandon, I was hoping we could have a reasonable discussion here. I am not
asking for legal proof, OK? I'm asking for a reason for an opinion. I know
that you have no obligation to me or anyone else - I just thought you or
rocket or whoever would be willing to explain to me why the vitriol. If
there isn't a reason, fine, I can accept that. I would just like to know
why some people have such a different perception of the band, that's all.
John Benyamine
> seems like everytime somebody complains about U2, however, such wise-guy
> demands some kind of "proof."
But of course. When I see someone pointing something out that is false, I
like to correct them. However, it seems that ignorance will prevail again.
Opinions I love, as a matter of fact. It's just that when an opinion is
based on falsities, that opinion is actually wrong. Why, you ask? Because
the original idea that led to the opinion was false, so in turn the opinion
is false. If at times I seem harsh when pointing things out, it's merely
because it's been pointed out so many times that the mis-informed is very
frustrating in their ignorance.
...WZTV...you have to look behind the mask
Brandon Barrett
Are you not understanding? OPINIONS CANNOT BE WRONG. There is no such
thing as a "wrong" opinion. You can get FACTS wrong, but the statement "U2
bites ass" is an opinion and is neither right nor wrong! Same goes for
"U2 rocks hard!" What kind of supernatural, godly powers do you have,
that you can declare opinions to be incorrect? Maybe you disagree with
them, but NEWS FLASH, that doesn't make them wrong.
Brandon Barrett
barr...@ucs.orst.edu
Jen Van Dijk
> it's worth the $50 to me. But then again, I'm not a CHEAPSKATE!
Being a cheapskate and not wanting to pay 50 hard-earned dollars to see
Bono prance around onstage like a chicken with his head cut off are not
necessarily the same thing. I could understand if maybe they were a
band who actually cared about their fans and just played music without
trying to be cool and put on an act, but as it stands I really don't
care anymore, and I'm sure Brad doesn't either.
Jen
Jen Van Dijk
John Benyamine wrote:
>
> Eric DeFonso <szde...@bullwinkle.ucdavis.edu> wrote in article
> <5f4deg$4v4$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>...
> > In article <3314EB...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net>
> wrote:
> > >Yay!!! *clap clap* *wild applause* *whistle whistle*! I totally
> > >agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
> > >first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
> > >They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
> >
> > Their image or the real band? If you mean the individuals, what do you
> > base that opinion on?
>
> will probably prevail, with a blushing Ms. Van Dijk in the corner...
>
> ...WZTV...some people shouldn't speak until spoken to
First of all, SCREW YOU! And to the guy who wrote before you, I'd just
like to say that I think it is ridiculous that U2 thinks they NEED an
image. I would always much rather experience the individuals and their
personalities and real lives than a stupid act of trying to be something
they aren't. And I think if they NEED to have an act, an image, then
yes, the individuals ARE pretentious.
Jen (Ms. Van Dijk)
Eric DeFonso
In article <33177D...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net> wrote:
>> Eric DeFonso <szde...@bullwinkle.ucdavis.edu> wrote in article
>> <5f4deg$4v4$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>...
>> > In article <3314EB...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net>
>> > >agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
>> > >first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
>> > >They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
>> >
>> > Their image or the real band? If you mean the individuals, what do you
>> > base that opinion on?
>>
>I'd just like to say that I think it is ridiculous that U2 thinks they
>NEED an image.
What if they WANT an image? What if they recognize that they can use an
image to express an idea, regardless of whether or not the image is
somehow exemplary of themselves?
> I would always much rather experience the individuals and their
>personalities and real lives than a stupid act of trying to be something
>they aren't.
How do you know who they are, and who they aren't? What do you base your
perceptions of the persons of the band on? The one single momentary
experience of your cousin?
Besides, I thought you said in an earlier post that you thought U2
was pretentious and silly. Well, now you say they are trying act like
something they aren't. Which is it? Are they deep down pretentious, or are
they just acting like it? And if they are just acting like it, why do you
think that is?
>And I think if they NEED to have an act, an image, then
>yes, the individuals ARE pretentious.
The band will have an image thrust upon them whether they want it or need
it or not. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. "Need" or "want" is
immaterial. What matters is "which".
Eric DeFonso
In article <33177E...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net> wrote:
>
>Being a cheapskate and not wanting to pay 50 hard-earned dollars to see
>Bono prance around onstage like a chicken with his head cut off are not
>necessarily the same thing.
Wow. When has he ever done that?
>I could understand if maybe they were a
>band who actually cared about their fans and just played music without
What does it mean to "just play music"? You are the second poster I have
seen who wishes that the band did this. I guess I don't understand what
that entails.
What is an example of a band that "just plays music" without
actually trying to enjoy it? It seems to me that U2 has never ever "just
played music".
Brandon Barrett
It can be both. Pretenious people revel in acting like things they aren't.
By the way, I bought concert tickets. Yes, curiousity won out over
principle, and soon it'll be time for me to see with my own two eyes the
spectacle that is PopMart. I figure that after the experience is over,
either I'll have found some great enlightening truth about U2 and
"convert" back into a devout U2 fan... or I'll be totally disgusted by
the display and want my money back. (I think one of those
possibilities is much more likely than the other, I'll let you guess
which...) Until then, I'll try to keep a more open mind about the whole
thing.
Brandon Barrett
barr...@ucs.orst.edu
Eric DeFonso
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.970301141...@ucs.orst.edu>,[...]
>> Besides, I thought you said in an earlier post that you thought U2
>> was pretentious and silly. Well, now you say they are trying act like
>> something they aren't. Which is it? Are they deep down pretentious, or are
>> they just acting like it? And if they are just acting like it, why do you
>> think that is?
>
>
>It can be both. Pretenious people revel in acting like things they aren't.
Hmmm... that means, for a pretentious person to act like something they
aren't, they must be acting humble and modest, and perhaps self-effacing.
I thought that generally the big criticism against U2 was that they were
acting pretentiously. I was simply asking Jen (and anyone else, I suppose)
whether she thinks they are pretentious, or not really pretentious. I
would submit that it CANNOT be both.
>
>By the way, I bought concert tickets. Yes, curiousity won out over
>principle, and soon it'll be time for me to see with my own two eyes the
>spectacle that is PopMart. I figure that after the experience is over,
>either I'll have found some great enlightening truth about U2 and
>"convert" back into a devout U2 fan... or I'll be totally disgusted by
>the display and want my money back. (I think one of those
>possibilities is much more likely than the other, I'll let you guess
>which...) Until then, I'll try to keep a more open mind about the whole
>thing.
Well, I must say I am surprised. I do hope you enjoy the show for your own
sake, although, based on your main gripes against them that you've
written, that might be hard. Then again, if you spent the money, surely it
wasn't because deep down you're a masochist! 8^)
Seriously, I applaud your openmindedness in light of your earlier
comments. I'm not sure I could have done the same thing (especially
admitting it in a newsgroup).
Cheryl Duffy
In article <33177E...@oro.net> Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net> writes:
>> it's worth the $50 to me. But then again, I'm not a CHEAPSKATE!
>Being a cheapskate and not wanting to pay 50 hard-earned dollars to see
>Bono prance around onstage like a chicken with his head cut off are not
>necessarily the same thing. I could understand if maybe they were a
>band who actually cared about their fans and just played music without
>trying to be cool and put on an act, but as it stands I really don't
>care anymore, and I'm sure Brad doesn't either.
>Jen
If you don't care anymore then why are you still here? I'm not trying to be
rude, just curious. You've made your anti-U2 feelings plain. If you're not
into them anymore, that's your choice but why are you still hanging around
this newsgroup? It's not likely that we can convince you that they still care
about their fans. And frankly, I'd be interested to know of a rock
musician who doesn't try "to be cool and put on an act".
Sorry that you're going to miss the fun of Pop Mart - it's going to be quite
the time!
Cheryl
will seo
i bet more of the $52.50 goes towards the big ass tv than to the
band...really lame...who the hell wants to go to a concert just to see
the band on tv? sorry, but $52.50 is just plain ridiculous. Yes, I
agree that U2 are in it more so for the money these days, but I don't
blame them...if they're able to fill up stadiums charging this price,
good for them...
--
ws...@mail.sas.upenn.edu - Molecular Biology, UPENN Class of 1997
http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~wseo
Eric DeFonso
In article <5fcbo0$7...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
will seo <ws...@mail1.sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
>i bet more of the $52.50 goes towards the big ass tv than to the
>band...really lame...who the hell wants to go to a concert just to see
>the band on tv? sorry, but $52.50 is just plain ridiculous. Yes, I
What makes you think that they won't use the TV for displaying images
other than themselves? I thought they used the TVs during ZooTV very well
- it's not like the band didn't even show up.
Remember, they DID play excerpts from Martin Luther King's "promised land"
speech on the TV array during the ZooTV tour. Gosh, how offensive and
pretentious that was.
Cheryl Duffy
In article <5fa5ms$n2p$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu> szde...@boris.ucdavis.edu (Eric DeFonso) writes:
>In article <33177E...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net> wrote:
>>
>>Being a cheapskate and not wanting to pay 50 hard-earned dollars to see
>>Bono prance around onstage like a chicken with his head cut off are not
>>necessarily the same thing.
>Wow. When has he ever done that?
He's never done that.
>>I could understand if maybe they were a
>>band who actually cared about their fans and just played music without
>What does it mean to "just play music"? You are the second poster I have
>seen who wishes that the band did this. I guess I don't understand what
>that entails.
> What is an example of a band that "just plays music" without
>actually trying to enjoy it? It seems to me that U2 has never ever "just
>played music".
>--
>Eric D UC Davis
Eric, the people who want them to "just play music" are those who want to
dictate how the band presents their music to us. They resent having to pay
for a stage production - they want the band to walk out with their
instruments, microphones, amplifiers and just play the songs. You know, kind
of like how artists do it on MTV Unplugged. They don't want the band to
expand creatively, to try and present its music in a way that will stimulate
both them and us. They want a cheap tour. They want the band to do it
"their" way, rather than the way the band wants to do it. Kind of like the
boss who restricts your creativity because she or he is paying your salary and
has a myopic idea of how things should be done.
Guess they'll just stay home and miss out on all of the fun.
Cheryl
Jen Van Dijk
Eric DeFonso wrote:
>
> In article <33177D...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net> wrote:
> >> Eric DeFonso <szde...@bullwinkle.ucdavis.edu> wrote in article
> >> <5f4deg$4v4$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>...
> >> > In article <3314EB...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net>
>
> >> > >agree with everything you said here. Funny how no matter what, the
> >> > >first word that pops into my head when I hear U2 is "pretentious."
> >> > >They seem to be a living, breathing, definition to the word.
> >> >
> >> > Their image or the real band? If you mean the individuals, what do you
> >> > base that opinion on?
> >>
> >I'd just like to say that I think it is ridiculous that U2 thinks they
> >NEED an image.
>
> What if they WANT an image? What if they recognize that they can use an
> image to express an idea, regardless of whether or not the image is
> somehow exemplary of themselves?
>
Well, I think if they WANT an image, that means they don't think they
can express ideas themselves, like they NEED an image to do it, and
therefore I think they are actually short-changing themselves.
> > I would always much rather experience the individuals and their
> >personalities and real lives than a stupid act of trying to be something
> >they aren't.
>
> How do you know who they are, and who they aren't? What do you base your
> perceptions of the persons of the band on?
I base them upon interviews, videos of them, their new songs, their new
video, the whole POPmart concert thing, the fact that they are charging
50 dollars for their concert, I base it on a lot of things.
> The one single momentary
> experience of your cousin?
In THIS SPECIFIC THREAD, I did not say anything about my cousin's
experience. If you could please quote the exact location IN THIS THREAD
where I mentioned my cousin, I would be very grateful.
> Besides, I thought you said in an earlier post that you thought U2
> was pretentious and silly. Well, now you say they are trying act like
> something they aren't. Which is it? Are they deep down pretentious, or are
> they just acting like it? And if they are just acting like it, why do you
> think that is?
They can be both. They can be deep down pretentious, and also feel they
need an image. I never said the image itself was pretentious, now did
I? I said U2 was pretentious, meaning it's band members.
>
> >And I think if they NEED to have an act, an image, then
> >yes, the individuals ARE pretentious.
>
> The band will have an image thrust upon them whether they want it or need
> it or not. >
That isn't necessarily true. That's your opinion. But we don't know,
because they HAVE made their own image. Besides, first you are trying
to say that they have an image because they want it, now you are saying
that it is all made up by other people? Make up your mind. I can't
argue with you if you change your mind every three seconds.
>Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. "Need" or "want" is
> immaterial. What matters is "which".
In this case, if they WANT an image, they obviously think they NEED one,
or they wouldn't want one, and if they NEED an image, that also means
they would want one, wouldn't it? So therefore it is both.
Jen
Fabrizio Zizza
First of all, I want to tell you that I disagree with you completely
and this DOES NOT make an ignorant of me, as you try to say. Secondly,
although I did not grow up with English in my mouth, I am able to spell
Discotheque and some other words in this language, and this makes me
much less ignorant than you, who should at least be able to put some
sentences together.
Who cares whether you are not going to see any show? You can do whatever
you want with your money, but don't ever think other people should
behave as you would like to.
In 1992 I spent 7 hours queueing at the ticket counter in order to get 2
tickets for the U2 show. You can disagree with me, but, I repeat, DON'T
EVER REPEAT people like me are ignorant. We do not care what you think
or do.
Enjoy yourself,
Fabrizio
Brandon Barrett
On 2 Mar 1997, Eric DeFonso wrote:
> In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.970301141...@ucs.orst.edu>,
> Brandon Barrett <barr...@ucs.orst.edu> wrote:
> >On 1 Mar 1997, Eric DeFonso wrote:
> [...]
> >> Besides, I thought you said in an earlier post that you thought U2
> >> was pretentious and silly. Well, now you say they are trying act like
> >> something they aren't. Which is it? Are they deep down pretentious, or are
> >> they just acting like it? And if they are just acting like it, why do you
> >> think that is?
> >
> >
> >It can be both. Pretenious people revel in acting like things they aren't.
>
> Hmmm... that means, for a pretentious person to act like something they
> aren't, they must be acting humble and modest, and perhaps self-effacing.
> I thought that generally the big criticism against U2 was that they were
> acting pretentiously. I was simply asking Jen (and anyone else, I suppose)
> whether she thinks they are pretentious, or not really pretentious. I
> would submit that it CANNOT be both.
It definitely can be both. One common way that some folks on a university
campus show their pretension, for example, is to talk all
serious-sounding about things they know nothing about. Lots of people
like to sit in coffee houses and talk meaningless dribble about
philosophy and theology and issues in which they have no formal training
or knowledge... all the while bad-mouthing the common man or woman who
isn't as wise as them, the blue-collar worker who could "never in a
million years grasp the intricate nature of Nietzche's work", or
whatever. I call that pretension, and these people are acting like
literate, informed thinkers, which they are not. As another example, I
know of several rich families whose members enjoy acting like high-class,
cultured, and refined individuals, which they definitely are not. They
are pretentious, and they are acting like things they are not. In fact,
I think that "acting like something you are not" is one of the defining
attributes of a pretentious person. Comments?
>
> >
> >By the way, I bought concert tickets. Yes, curiousity won out over
> >principle, and soon it'll be time for me to see with my own two eyes the
> >spectacle that is PopMart. I figure that after the experience is over,
> >either I'll have found some great enlightening truth about U2 and
> >"convert" back into a devout U2 fan... or I'll be totally disgusted by
> >the display and want my money back. (I think one of those
> >possibilities is much more likely than the other, I'll let you guess
> >which...) Until then, I'll try to keep a more open mind about the whole
> >thing.
>
> Well, I must say I am surprised. I do hope you enjoy the show for your own
> sake, although, based on your main gripes against them that you've
> written, that might be hard. Then again, if you spent the money, surely it
> wasn't because deep down you're a masochist! 8^)
> Seriously, I applaud your openmindedness in light of your earlier
> comments. I'm not sure I could have done the same thing (especially
> admitting it in a newsgroup).
Actually, the main reason I bought tickets is just to piss off all those
damn people who say, "Good! I'm glad you hate U2, now there's more
tickets for me!!!" How unoriginal. I hope I bought their ticket. :-)
>
> --
> Eric D UC Davis
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Building the towers belongs to the sky..."
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Brandon Barrett
barr...@ucs.orst.edu
John Benyamine
Cheryl Duffy <cdu...@sos.net> wrote in article
<cduffy.45...@sos.net>...
> Guess they'll just stay home and miss out on all of the fun.
>
> Cheryl
>
just play their music. Well, they could just stay home and play the
records. I, for one of many, will go out there and see the band play live.
The thing I like about U2 is that they are pretentious (might as well give
in, eh?)! They know they're great, we know it, we like it! They fuck you
well and then they let you know that they just fucked you well. People who
just like bands to "play music" seemingly lump U2's music (most of which
may go over their heads) with non-sensicle garbage such as Alanis
Morrisette and No Doubt. Yeah, it's music...yeah, it's there...and that's
what they care about. What I care about is the message behind the music as
well. If they put up PopMart, as garish as it is, to make a point, I love
them for it. That's why I love U2: from War to Pop, they made it a point
to have a specific message behind their music. That's intelligence.
That's fulfilling. That's art. And that's what I love.
....WZTV...tired of pelvic-thrusting guitar solos for the sake of just
having a guitar solo "here"...baby, that may be music, but it's not much
else!
Eric DeFonso
In article <3319E6...@oro.net>, Jen Van Dijk <vand...@oro.net> wrote:
>Eric DeFonso wrote:
>>
>> What if they WANT an image? What if they recognize that they can use an
>> image to express an idea, regardless of whether or not the image is
>> somehow exemplary of themselves?
>
>Well, I think if they WANT an image, that means they don't think they
>can express ideas themselves, like they NEED an image to do it, and
>therefore I think they are actually short-changing themselves.
I think you misunderstood what I'm asking, but I see what you're saying.
I do think it's interesting that you believe that they are
"short-changing" themselves while also believing that deep-down they are
pretentious. What exactly are they short-changing, in that case?
>
>> > I would always much rather experience the individuals and their
>> >personalities and real lives than a stupid act of trying to be something
>> >they aren't.
>>
>> How do you know who they are, and who they aren't? What do you base your
>> perceptions of the persons of the band on?
>
>I base them upon interviews, videos of them, their new songs, their new
>video, the whole POPmart concert thing, the fact that they are charging
>50 dollars for their concert, I base it on a lot of things.
OK, that's remarkable, because that's exactly what I base my opinion of
them on. Nevertheless, we have strikingly opposing views. Go figure.
>
>> The one single momentary
>> experience of your cousin?
>
>In THIS SPECIFIC THREAD, I did not say anything about my cousin's
>experience. If you could please quote the exact location IN THIS THREAD
>where I mentioned my cousin, I would be very grateful.
Sorry, I can't. I was thinking of a different thread. You did say
something to that effect once, didn't you?
>
>> Besides, I thought you said in an earlier post that you thought U2
>> was pretentious and silly. Well, now you say they are trying act like
>> something they aren't. Which is it? Are they deep down pretentious, or are
>> they just acting like it? And if they are just acting like it, why do you
>> think that is?
>
>They can be both. They can be deep down pretentious, and also feel they
>need an image. I never said the image itself was pretentious, now did
>I?
No, but I thought that's what you meant. By disclaiming this, are you
saying that you DON'T think the image is pretentious? I certainly think
the "image" is. I also think it's great.
I disagree with you on the "both" part too. I asked you essentially
whether you thought the band was either "truly" pretentious, or "not
truly" pretentious. Logic dictates that they cannot be both.
> I said U2 was pretentious, meaning it's band members.
But not their image? How do either of us know them apart from their image?
>> >And I think if they NEED to have an act, an image, then
>> >yes, the individuals ARE pretentious.
>>
>> The band will have an image thrust upon them whether they want it or need
>> it or not. >
>
>That isn't necessarily true. That's your opinion. But we don't know,
>because they HAVE made their own image. Besides, first you are trying
>to say that they have an image because they want it, now you are saying
>that it is all made up by other people? Make up your mind. I can't
What I am saying is that they have to have an image. They can choose
any one they want, however.
>argue with you if you change your mind every three seconds.
Neither can I with you. Please tell me once and for all if you think
the band is "deep-down" pretentious, or whether they are, in your *own*
words, that "they are trying to act like something they aren't".
>
>>Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. "Need" or "want" is
>> immaterial. What matters is "which".
>
>In this case, if they WANT an image, they obviously think they NEED one,
Not based on the ideas I am presenting. For example, people are going to
have a perception of you, one way or another, whether you like it or not.
So, why not choose to portray yourself in a way that you are happy with?
Eric DeFonso
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.970302211...@ucs.orst.edu>,
Brandon Barrett <barr...@ucs.orst.edu> wrote:
>On 2 Mar 1997, Eric DeFonso wrote:
>
>> In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.970301141...@ucs.orst.edu>,
>> Brandon Barrett <barr...@ucs.orst.edu> wrote:
>> >On 1 Mar 1997, Eric DeFonso wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> was pretentious and silly. Well, now you say they are trying act like
>> >> something they aren't. Which is it? Are they deep down pretentious, or are
>> >> they just acting like it? And if they are just acting like it, why do you
>> >> think that is?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Hmmm... that means, for a pretentious person to act like something they
>> aren't, they must be acting humble and modest, and perhaps self-effacing.
>> I thought that generally the big criticism against U2 was that they were
>> acting pretentiously. I was simply asking Jen (and anyone else, I suppose)
>> whether she thinks they are pretentious, or not really pretentious. I
>> would submit that it CANNOT be both.
>
>It definitely can be both. One common way that some folks on a university
>campus show their pretension, for example, is to talk all
>serious-sounding about things they know nothing about. Lots of people
>like to sit in coffee houses and talk meaningless dribble about
>philosophy and theology and issues in which they have no formal training
>or knowledge...
Really? Seriously, I wouldn't know since I never spend any time in coffee
houses. Maybe that's why...
all the while bad-mouthing the common man or woman who
>isn't as wise as them, the blue-collar worker who could "never in a
>million years grasp the intricate nature of Nietzche's work", or
>whatever. I call that pretension, and these people are acting like
>literate, informed thinkers, which they are not.
I see. I think the source of our disagreement here then is our differing
operative definitions of the word "pretension". I don't think one has to
bad-mouth or criticise someone else to be pretentious, although such
criticism may well be implied. Can one be pretentious in the sense simply
being self-adoring? That is, without any obvious contempt for someone
else? I *think* so, but perhaps not. I would say that the post-AB image of
U2 is pretentious, but intentionally so in an ironic sense.
To my knowledge, U2 has not expressed contempt for anyone in the
process. But the image of the Fly may well be considered pretentious.
> As another example, I
>know of several rich families whose members enjoy acting like high-class,
>cultured, and refined individuals, which they definitely are not. They
>are pretentious, and they are acting like things they are not. In fact,
>I think that "acting like something you are not" is one of the defining
>attributes of a pretentious person. Comments?
Well, hmmm...In this case, I would agree, although I'm not sure that
merely "acting out" makes one pretentious. After all, suppose I act very
boorish and stupid, even moreso than usual. I don't think others would
characterize me as pretentious, even though I may not be acting "as I
really am". I also don't think that acting politely is necessarily a bad
thing either, even if one's predilections are to act in a more, let's say,
"laid-back" fashion.
I guess that what it boils down to, is that I am confused about
whether U2's current critics think that the band has a high opinion of
themselves, and that they are displaying currently "trashy" (low
self-esteem) behavior that is pretentious; or whether their critics think
that the band has a high opinion of themselves, and that they think the
band is *acting* like they have a high opinion of themselves (big stadium
tour, etc); or that they think the band is inherently low- or
middle-class, but are acting like upper-class snobs; or some other
possibility(ies) which I haven't mentioned.
It may well be that their critics have differing opinions among
themselves. Certainly U2's defenders seem to have differing opinions on
what makes them good.
Personally, I simply consider that Bono is a very intelligent
person. I have always found his lyrics very poetic and sharp - not all the
songs have the same emotional impact, to be sure, but in all his songs,
especially from War onward, I have been impressed with his use of the
language, and the kinds of imagery he conveys in his words. I have also
been impressed with his ability to write about things without beating the
listener over the head with the message - the message is conveyed subtly,
or metaphorically, or anecdotally. I'm thinking of songs like Bad, Bullet
the Blue Sky, Heartland, One Tree Hill; and more recently, Daddy's Gonna
Pay, Acrobat, Zooropa, One, and Miss Sarajevo (not strictly U2, but close
enough).
As a result, I consider Bono a very perceptive person who is also
very interested in communication and expression, and I am more likely to
think that if he is saying or acting differently or in an unfamiliar way,
it would be because he is simply looking for another way of expressing
himself - that he is actually trying to say something via the image. Of
course, that is simply my interpretation, and nothing more. My knowledge
of the persons of the band is limited to the music on my cassettes, the
videos I have, several articles in magazines that I've read, and a few
tidbits (questionable, I suppose) that I've read in this newsgroup.
>> Seriously, I applaud your openmindedness in light of your earlier
>> comments. I'm not sure I could have done the same thing (especially
>> admitting it in a newsgroup).
>
>Actually, the main reason I bought tickets is just to piss off all those
>damn people who say, "Good! I'm glad you hate U2, now there's more
>tickets for me!!!" How unoriginal. I hope I bought their ticket. :-)
All right! Chalk one up for spite! 8^)
-=[ DzineR ]=-
Jen wrote:
>
in response to:
> >> it's worth the $50 to me. But then again, I'm not a CHEAPSKATE!
>
> >Bono prance around onstage like a chicken with his head cut off are not
> >band who actually cared about their fans and just played music without
> >care anymore, and I'm sure Brad doesn't either.
>
> >Jen
I work just as hard as the next person for my tix, and plan on enjoying
every MINUTE of bono and boys prancing, dancing, playing and performing
their butts off!!
It's so easy to do that for two+ hours a night; night after night, week
after week for over a year, and still put on a fantastic performance (if
you've seen'em you know how awesome they are LIVE)! Yeah, they don't
care about their fans!
____________________________________________________________________________
Cheryl Duffy wrote:
>
> If you don't care anymore then why are you still here? I'm not trying to be
> rude, just curious. You've made your anti-U2 feelings plain. If you're not
> into them anymore, that's your choice but why are you still hanging around
> this newsgroup? It's not likely that we can convince you that they still care
> about their fans. And frankly, I'd be interested to know of a rock
> musician who doesn't try "to be cool and put on an act".
>
> Sorry that you're going to miss the fun of Pop Mart - it's going to be quite
> the time!
>
> Cheryl
Good point cheryl!
Stephen J. Baum
I agree John. I like being fucked by U2... their music and their concerts
are too good. Its better than sitting around and missing all the fun.
Shoot its better than sitting around and then later 25 years from now...
telling my kids their bands suck and U2 is the only band.
Has this U2 thing all gone mad!!
>
LZO
I have a sneaking suspicion you're only "acting" like a U2 hater, when
you actually like them a lot. I think you love rattling people's cages
and stirring up a good debate. I bet you already bought Pop and have
every album they ever made! I bet you ran out the day tickets went
on sale! You sure do spend a lot of time on the U2 fan newsgroup!--LZO
Jen Van Dijk
> Cheryl Duffy wrote:
> >
> > If you don't care anymore then why are you still here? I'm not trying to be
> > rude, just curious. You've made your anti-U2 feelings plain.
I'm not anti-U2. I don't like what they are doing now, but I still love
the older stuff. It IS possible to love the music yet dislike the
musicians.
> >If you're not
> > into them anymore, that's your choice but why are you still hanging around
> > this newsgroup? It's not likely that we can convince you that they still care
> > about their fans. And frankly, I'd be interested to know of a rock
> > musician who doesn't try "to be cool and put on an act".
KoRn for one.. hm, let's see... Mazzy Star, Tool, Alice in Chains,
Sublime, Cake, and if I had the time, I could think of MANY other bands,
but I really don't have time to listen to you spew your bull, so I'll
see you later.
Jen Van Dijk
Cheryl Duffy wrote:
>
> In article <5fa5ms$n2p$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu> szde...@boris.ucdavis.edu (Eric DeFonso) writes:
>
> >>
> >>Being a cheapskate and not wanting to pay 50 hard-earned dollars to see
> >>Bono prance around onstage like a chicken with his head cut off are not
> >>necessarily the same thing.
>
>
> He's never done that.
It's called a simile. But he does prance around on stage.
>
> >>I could understand if maybe they were a
> >>band who actually cared about their fans and just played music without
>
> >What does it mean to "just play music"? You are the second poster I have
> >seen who wishes that the band did this. I guess I don't understand what
> >that entails.
> > What is an example of a band that "just plays music" without
> >actually trying to enjoy it? It seems to me that U2 has never ever "just
> >played music".
>
> >--
> >Eric D UC Davis
>
> Eric, the people who want them to "just play music" are those who want to
> dictate how the band presents their music to us. They resent having to pay
> for a stage production - they want the band to walk out with their
> instruments, microphones, amplifiers and just play the songs. You know, kind
> of like how artists do it on MTV Unplugged. They don't want the band to
> expand creatively, to try and present its music in a way that will stimulate
> both them and us. They want a cheap tour. They want the band to do it
> "their" way, rather than the way the band wants to do it. Kind of like the
> boss who restricts your creativity because she or he is paying your salary and
> has a myopic idea of how things should be done.
Actually, by "just play" I mean to play the music for the sake of
enjoyment, to go out there and just play your heart out because you love
it. I've seen a lot of bands that do this. I DON'T mean go out there
and put on a big stage production. I think if you need to put on a big
stage production, it takes away from the music. And in my opinion, U2's
music can stand on its own, it doesn't need a big stage production to
enhance it, the stage production would just take away from it. I didn't
say that I didn't want them to expand creatively either. I hate it when
I go to a concert and every song sounds *exactly* like the record. I'm
all for improvisation and expanding the music. I don't know about you,
but when I go to a concert, I go for the music, because that's what I
like about the band, not their image or their stage production, because
that isn't very important. So when I say "just play" I DON'T want to
control how they play the music, but don't think they need to gift-wrap
it and give it a nice cover, a nice presentation, because to me that
would say they don't think the music can cut it without the marketing.
>
> Guess they'll just stay home and miss out on all of the fun.
>
I guess so. At least that means I won't run in to your annoying self.
> Cheryl
Jen
Jen Van Dijk
-=[ DzineR ]=- wrote:
>
> Jen wrote:
> >
> in response to:
> > >> it's worth the $50 to me. But then again, I'm not a CHEAPSKATE!
> >
> > >Bono prance around onstage like a chicken with his head cut off are not
> > >band who actually cared about their fans and just played music without
> > >care anymore, and I'm sure Brad doesn't either.
> >
> > >Jen
> ____________________________________________________________________________
>
> I work just as hard as the next person for my tix, and plan on enjoying
> every MINUTE of bono and boys prancing, dancing, playing and performing
> their butts off!!
>
I'm very happy for you. But I still think 50+ dollars is a little
pricey. I would think they'd still make a bundle if they sold them for
35.
> It's so easy to do that for two+ hours a night; night after night, week
(I think you mean "not so easy" and I agree with you there.)
> after week for over a year, and still put on a fantastic performance (if
> you've seen'em you know how awesome they are LIVE)! Yeah, they don't
> care about their fans!
>
Yeah, and it's not like money is any incentive or anything...
</end sarcasm> I know they already have a whole load of money, but
there is no end to greed. And I'm not denying they enjoy playing. I
would think the adrenaline rush that comes from having a million people
screaming for you is pretty addicting, also. But that doesn't
necessarily mean they care about their fans to any great extent.
Jen
Hugo. G. S. Makin
In article <brubin-2502...@news.fuse.net>, Brad
<bru...@fuse.net> writes
>
>
>No doubt I'll take some grief from the folks here who would bend-over and
>kiss the people at Ticketmaster and Island Record's ass just to get a good
>seat for the new "Screw You 2 Tour," but fuck U2's attitude towards their
>music and their pathetic attitudes towards their "so-called" fans.
>
>While I still love their music, it is hard for me to accept $50+ for a
>ticket, and the absolute crap you have to go through just to get one.
>
>Fuck "PopMart", or whatever their pretenious "theme" is nowadays for their
>self-absorbed tour scam, the ridiculous props, and everything else that
>takes away from their music.
>
>Why can't they just play their damn music and let it stand on it's own?
>
>Or do they have to satisfy the idiot-mass culture of today by
>supplementing their music with effects, self-imagery, and props to win
>over people?
>
>What a bunch of assholes, really.
>
>I don't fucking worship musicians to the point that I'm paying
>$20 a year to belong to some fan-club, or wearing wrist-bands and wasting
>my time listening to the radio just to attend a show. Give me a break!
>
>U2 should just take their Advil, wash it down with some liquid antacid,
>and get over their pretenious self-indulgent attitude.
>
>I went to a show on their last tour in Cleveland, and it was so half-assed
>I couldn't stand it. What a waste of time and money! They couldn't even
>play an entire concert because they are so busy trying to make fucking
>money that they don't even care about their music, and their fans anymore.
>
>
>Anyone who disagrees with this is just plain ignorant. I like the music on
>POP over-all, but the poor sales they've experienced so far on their
>recent tour just goes to show what money-mongering fools they are!
>
>Just look at the sales in Columbus, or in Southern California, and you'll
>see what I am talking about.
>
>Bono needs to get it back in his pants, and quit floundering himself all
>over MTV, and get back to what music is all about in the first place.
>
>What a pathetic turn for the worse this band has taken. They certainly
>won't get any of my money this year for their ridiculous "super-tour."
>I'll make a tape of their CD and enjoy it for "$3.95" like a normal
>person.
>
>Quit over-analyzing songs like "Discotechque," or however it is spelled,
>god, some people need to get a life.
>
>Give me a break.
you are a sad misguided fool, crawl back up your own arse!
If you find the price too much just shut up and dont go.
open your eyes, you're missing the big picture
Huge
Cheryl Duffy
No, if you won't be at the shows you won't "see me later". You have an
incredible attitude - I disagreed with you gracefully and you accuse me of
spewing bull.
And U2 fans are usually pretty cool people.
-=[ DzineR ]=-
JenJen Van Dijk wrote:
>
> -=[ DzineR ]=- wrote:
>> It's so easy to do that for two+ hours a night; night after night, week
>(I think you mean "not so easy" and I agree with you there.)
Sorry, I'll try to be more specific when I'm being sarcastic.
>> after week for over a year, and still put on a fantastic performance (if
>> you've seen'em you know how awesome they are LIVE)! Yeah, they don't
>> care about their fans!
>
> Yeah, and it's not like money is any incentive or anything...
Well it's what they do for a LIVING - I know if I found something that I
enjoyed
doing and got paid WELL for it, I'D do it!!!
I just happen to think it's worth the money, and I'm sorry that you
don't.
Also, who knows how many more times we'll get to see them tour? I mean
how much more can they pump out? I'd like to believe they'll keep at it
until they're all pushing 50, but let's be realistic here. Maybe after
this tour they'll put out a box set of greatest hits/b sides and start
touring smaller venues without the "show" props. Yeah, now I'M dreaming.
But seriously, think about that.
> I know they already have a whole load of money, but
> there is no end to greed. And I'm not denying they enjoy playing. I
> would think the adrenaline rush that comes from having a million people
> screaming for you is pretty addicting, also. But that doesn't
> necessarily mean they care about their fans to any great extent.
I believe they've always made a point to care about their fans. Every
show I've been to (about 7) bono makes the audience feel like part of
the show, and doesn't just get up there and 'perform'. How many shows
have you been to where the singer pulls one or two, I've even seen four
people on stage, from the audience?? I don't know of any. People who
have banners-get to show them off on the stage; lucky fans get plucked
out of every show, it's almost tradition to see bono dancing with a girl
he's pulled, or have a guy playing a few riffs with the edge - (of
course having to know how to play helps.) I think it shows that they DO
care and they're not there just to pick up their paychecks. Also people
I know who've met the band members either after shows or just by chance
say that they are the nicest people and are appreciative of their fans.
I'm sorry you won't be going, but there's some hope: if you try to get
tix the day of the show I bet you'll find the amount of people who have
extra tickets, who will be trying to "not get stuck" with them are going
to sell them for less than face value by the time it get's dark! (or an
hour or so before the show) If you hunt the parking lots, you'll find
them. It seems like people went nuts buying extra tickets just to turn
around and sell them-either for face value or "best offer" which is I'm
sure at this point-tremendous. Come the day of shows, the people who
couldn't sell their tickets for $200, will be anxious to get rid of
them. Bartering never hurts either, especially if they sound a little
desperate. It's worked for me in cases where I don't have tix to the
shows (but only at HUGE venues-smaller venues you'll be paying out the
nose!).
Good luck, and thanks for responding. sue
Jen Van Dijk
Well, in MY opinion it IS bull, and I wasn't insulting you personally,
just what you were saying. And I do somewhat apologize for that. It
was late, I was getting tired, etc etc.. I usually try to stay civil in
my posts, but sometimes it gets out of hand.
Jen
LZO
Jen Van Dijk wrote:
> >
> Stop yelling. You'll scare all the little kids. Geez. Maybe the guy
> just wants to hear the music, not all of the band's pompous attitudes
> and other miscellaneous junk.
>
> Jen
Must apologize. You're probably right...don't quite know what came over
me. (Sticky cap-lock key, maybe.)
Am I the only one who is actually looking forward to seeing U2 emerge
from a giant lemon?? What a laugh!--And admittedly silly and wry. But I
would hate to be in a huge stadium just watching four little dots
playing music. Give me spectacle! Give me a memorable night! Give me
stunning visuals to go with the stunning music! Why not? Bands have been
trying to add visual interest and expression to live performances long
before MTV. I have a feeling that future U2 tours might be
smaller-scale. So enjoy while it lasts. And I really don't think U2 is
trying to rip us off. They have plenty of money by any standards.--It's
everyone else trying to make a buck off the tour that drives up the
price. If there is the demand, the price will reflect it. Why doesn't
ticketmaster offer a student discount? What do other popular bands
charge for their concerts in the US these days anyway? --LZO aka Linda
Jen Van Dijk
Metallica (who has been around for approx. the same amount of time as U2
and uses a considerable amount of pyrotechnics and special effects) only
charged 21.50 and that was WITH KoRn opening, No Doubt (god forbid I'm
using them as an example) is charging like 20, I think the average price
is between 20 to 35 or 40 dollars, 40 being high.
Jen
Lazarus72
Another bad thing I see about these prices is that other bands will take
that hint and start knocking up their prices as well.
R.E.M. hopefully won't go that route the next time they tour. Of course,
with their recent record sales, they may be going back to the clubs...
Erik J. Malvick
oro.net>
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo:
Distribution:
I find all the previous messages very interesting. We can complain that
U2 is greedy and money hungry ( I won't ), but didn't people see the
press conference a few weeks ago. They are charging more for the tour
to cover the costs of taking the tour to countries that are not as well
off as the usual U2 countries are. If they charged $50 in eastern
Europe no one would even show up because they couldn't afford to. Plus
there is the fact that no matter how much money we may think they have
U2 was damn near bankrupt after ZooTV because they had no sponsors and
put the show on themselves.
Now, no one is saying that U2 needs to put on the elaborate show they
do, but the reason for that is so the people who don't get great seats
can get something from the show. Large video screens make it possible
for everyone at the stadium to see the show. Afterall, if all that a
fan can do is hear the music why should he go to the show in the first
place. U2 is only making it possible for all 50,000 at a stadium to
enjoy the show, for the guy in the back row to have as much fun as the
guy in the front row. For that I congradulate U2.
--
.8. .8. .8' .8' Malvick
.8`8. .8`8. .8' .8' emal...@harp.calpoly.edu
.8. `8. .8 `8 .8' .8'8:8:8 http://www.calpoly.edu:80/~emalvick
.8`8. .8`8:8' .8' .8`8.
.8. `8. .8' 8. .8' .8' `8. "You miss too much these days if
`8. `8. `8. you stop to think" - U2
`8. `8. `8.
Erik J. Malvick
: > ticketmaster offer a student discount? What do other popular bands
: > charge for their concerts in the US these days anyway? --LZO aka Linda
: Metallica (who has been around for approx. the same amount of time as U2
: and uses a considerable amount of pyrotechnics and special effects) only
: charged 21.50 and that was WITH KoRn opening, No Doubt (god forbid I'm
: using them as an example) is charging like 20, I think the average price
: is between 20 to 35 or 40 dollars, 40 being high.
: Jen
And then there is Pink Floyd who can be better compared to U2 than
Metallica who charged $75 and that was the cheap seats. The other groups
you are talking about are hardly big enough to charge more for seats.
No Doubt is basically new in the large scale touring thing. Established
popular groups charge more because the demand is there and the cost of
putting on a show of the caliber we are talking is huge as I said before.
Metallica never has the huge video screen which I bet is the largest
part of the cost for U2. By the way the Eagles charged a high price and
there was not anything special about their concert other than there hadn't
been an Eagles show in 14 years.
Fly1550958
THANK YOU MALVICK!!!!!!!!!!
YOU BROUGHT OUT A LOT OF GOOD POINTS THAT SOME PEOPLE DIDN'T CONSIDER.
ENOUGH HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT THEIR TOUR,THAT I MIGHT ADD ISN'T EVEN HERE
YET! I'VE SEEN THEM SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE AND I'M EXCITED ABOUT SEEING THEM
ON NOV.10TH,12TH,&14TH.YEAH, 52.50 IS A LOT BUT IT'S WORTH SEEING THEM.
THEY DON'T GIVE A CHEAP SHOW. THEY GIVE THEIR FANS A LOT BACK. THERE IS SO
MUCH PUT INTO THEIR SHOWS.
ALSO, ANOTHER POINT,---U2 IS NOT ONLY A MUSIC GROUP, BUT PEOPLE WHO ARE
GROWING AS INDIVIDUALS AND "ARTISTS".THEY CAN'T STAY THE SAME. (REPEATING
AND REMAKING THE SAME ALBUM TIME AND TIME AGAIN. THERE HAS TO BE CHANGE! I
KNOW I CAN'T BE THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS MATURED WITH U2. I'VE ALWAYS LOVED
AND APPRECIATED THEIR MUSIC.IT ALWAYS SEEMED TO FIT RIGHT ALONG WITH WHERE
I WAS /&AM.
*************************AND THAT DOESN'T MEAN I'M SILLY AND
PRETENTIOUS!******************* IT JUST MEANS "SOME" WHO WROTE EARLIER ARE
NARROW MINDED AND CAN'T SEE WHAT THEY ARE REALLY DOING!!!!!!
************************THERE HAS TO BE
CHANGE**********************************
FLY (ERIN)
Fly1550958
SHOW ME THE MONEY!?
I'M TIRED OF ALL THIS BS GOING BACK AND FORTH.THEY HAVE TO MAKE A LIVING
FOR THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES. AND ALSO DO WHAT THEY LOVE AND HAVE SO MANY
ENJOY U2'S MUSIC.YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO, BUT I WILL AND I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE
WHO GETS A LOT OUT OF THEIR CONCERTS.
THE FLY
THANKS MALVICK
Fly1550958
...................