Bonnie Quigg ([email protected])
Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:21:48 -0700
You are a brave man to be so critical of POP...be prepared
for the flames! I won't flame you, but I want to express why
I disagree with your opinion:
I don't agree with your assessment that POP is not good
music and not "honest" and not up to the U2 standard.
I think U2 experiment. Rattle and Hum was an experiment.
I loved it. I think it(R&H) was also tangential to their previous
sound...just as POP is tangential to Achtung Baby. But putting
out an album that is a radical departure from their own past is
their modus operandi. They have always changed their sound and
their style as they explore their own changing tastes in music
and the changing tastes of the public. The style of music is a
reflection of either their interests(the roots of rock for R&H) or a
statement of where society seems to be(POP).
I believe that with POP they tried to use current trends in music as
a vehicle to convey their "message", but as always they only used them
as a starting point, creating their own versions of these styles.
I see POP as just another experiment on their path of growth and life.
POP's lyrics, as always, deal with the great questions of faith, love and
social concerns. I don't see that as a sell-out or as being inferior music.
Selling out would be to do whatever was a sure thing commercially.
POP was a gamble. They have always gambled on the public "getting"
[message truncated]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Wed Jul 15 1998 - 11:43:44 PDT