U2 North American Tour Postponed

[Dusty Ayres]

Go and see a new band that has something to say unlike these tired old hasbeens

No new band will ever have anything to say that matches the lyrics of those such as Bob Dylan or Crosby, Stills & Nash.

That's why they stand the test of time.

Go and see a new band that has something to say unlike these tired old hasbeens

Did Bono touch you where your bathing suit covers?

The young person has a point, one which I have reiterated time and again in this BBS; this constant veneration and worship of the old over the new (nostalgia) is getting tiresome and wearying to boot, their bashing of U2 aside. There is new music out there that is just as great as the old, and the constant forcing of Beatles, Rolling Stones, Who et al down everybody's throats is doing nothing but breeding contempt (as in 'familiarity breeds contempt') for older rock music. This is something that you and Garak will have to deal with, Exodus. The same also goes for me as well; I weary of this constant push of nostalgia for old rock music as well to the point that I avoid radio as much as possible. It would be nice for the people who run radio in North America to try and realize that there is great rock music out there, as well as great electronica music, great world beat, and so on, rather than just shove '50's and 60's rock/pop/soul/R&B/folk down society's throat because half of the population can't deal with the present day. A lot of the 50's, 60's, and 70's bands/artists probably qualify for what Stoneroses said; I sure know that the Rolling Stones do. Unlike U2, they haven't really progressed or changed, or even really experimented like U2 has; remember the albums Achtung Baby, Zooropa, and Pop? All of those were an attempt to be different musically and probably challenge themselves by doing dance/electronica, and yet, they were beat up for doing so by everybody. That's what music's supposed to be about, not just regurgitating the past. That's why Stoneroses said what they did-and again, with the exception of their dissing of U2, I don't really blame them for saying it.

 

[exodus]

Go and see a new band that has something to say unlike these tired old hasbeens

No new band will ever have anything to say that matches the lyrics of those such as Bob Dylan or Crosby, Stills & Nash.

That's why they stand the test of time.

Go and see a new band that has something to say unlike these tired old hasbeens

Did Bono touch you where your bathing suit covers?

The young person has a point, one which I have reiterated time and again in this BBS; this constant veneration and worship of the old over the new (nostalgia) is getting tiresome and wearying to boot, their bashing of U2 aside. There is new music out there that is just as great as the old, and the constant forcing of Beatles, Rolling Stones, Who et al down everybody's throats is doing nothing but breeding contempt (as in 'familiarity breeds contempt') for older rock music. This is something that you and Garak will have to deal with, Exodus. The same also goes for me as well; I weary of this constant push of nostalgia for old rock music as well to the point that I avoid radio as much as possible. It would be nice for the people who run radio in North America to try and realize that there is great rock music out there, as well as great electronica music, great world beat, and so on, rather than just shove '50's and 60's rock/pop/soul/R&B/folk down society's throat because half of the population can't deal with the present day. A lot of the 50's, 60's, and 70's bands/artists probably qualify for what Stoneroses said; I sure know that the Rolling Stones do. Unlike U2, they haven't really progressed or changed, or even really experimented like U2 has; remember the albums Achtung Baby, Zooropa, and Pop? All of those were an attempt to be different musically and probably challenge themselves by doing dance/electronica, and yet, they were beat up for doing so by everybody. That's what music's supposed to be about, not just regurgitating the past. That's why Stoneroses said what they did-and again, with the exception of their dissing of U2, I don't really blame them for saying it.

Sorry, I disagree.
The fact that music from generations before me is still finding an audience decades later, says something.
You don't toss out something good because it's old. Music is more than just this, it evokes emotion, a memory and inspiration. You remember where you were when you hear a song or makes feel you feel a certain way. I know I can't help but start to tap my foot half way through "Start Me Up".
Hundrends of young men around the world were inspired to pick up a guitar and learn to play after hearing stuff from Chuck Berry or Eddie Van Halen. Without these folks, you wouldn't have new music.

If you don't like the classics, then don't listen but the new artist you defend still do. There'd be no U2 without the Rolling Stones, you think Bono & the Edge don't listen and have their songs downloaded? Aviril Levigne used to called Joan Jett. Green Day is a watered down Sex Pistols. Anybody 40 and over knows Lady Gaga is ripping off Grace Jones. U2 got beat up for doing electronica because they did it poorly. Malcolm MacLaren went from successfully producing punk rock to a successful career in Hip Hop. Damon Albarn went from doing Alternate rock to electronica/pop/hip hop, both were hugely successful.
So just as you told me: You're going to have to deal with it.