Re: MJ and U2

[email protected]
Sun, 5 Jul 1998 22:19:08 EDT

Hi John,

First off for folks reading this, this is not the start of a huge flame war
with John. I have corresponded with John many times in the past and respect
and value his opinion. I just happen to disagree with him on this one point

>Second, I reiterate, U2 in 1992 were SUPER huge! They
>were plastered all over everything (I should know, I have
>most of the magazines :oP) - from Rolling Stone to GQ! After
>the mega-success of U2 in 1987 and again in 1992, I find
>it hard to believe that anyone who paid any sort of attention
>to the news did not know of U2. If that story was from
>1986, then I'd understand.

Look at the magazines you just mentioned (Rolling Stone, GQ and i'll throw in
Time). The 3 most popular mags in a black person's home (let's exclude the
upper class blacks), are Essence, Ebony, Jet, and Vibe (sidenote: Vibe had an
excellent review of POP, thanks to Gibi for pointing me to that one.) U2 is
not going to get much coverage there. Do you see these magazines in the homes
of white folks who buy magazines? No. The reason you know about Puff Daddy,
Notorious BIG is because of MTV. And i wonder if the irony of MTV's current
programming has hit anyone on this list. When MTV first started out, there
were protests from the black community because black videos weren't being
played (most notably protests led by Rick James). Therefore, MTV wasn't
viewed by blacks, why look at a show where you are never shown. Most blacks
are going to watch BET where they will see Puffy but others that never make
the cross over. Now, look at MTV's music video programming. Despite their
huge sales, Puffy and BIG are consistently dissed by white musicians (Rolling
Stones) and white music fans. So, because these 2 are respected in the black
community, it's obvious they aren't respected in the white community. But
because U2 is respected in the white community, then the black community
should know they are the hottest thing since buttered toast? The reason you
know about Cassandra Wilson is because of her U2 cover. Why do you need U2
dedicating a song or singing a song about a African-American to expose you to
another culture's music? I mean let's bring in another culture here. How
many knew about Selena before she was brutally murdered? But yet she was huge
in the Tejano music industry.

You say that most of your friends are scientists and you read a lot of
scientific-related material. The reason is, individuals tend to interact with
others that hold the same world view as them, who look like them.

You talk about not allowing yourself to fall far from mainstream society as to
not know who is at least "popular" in the world. But which world? You know
of these black artists because they have crossed over. Well U2 didn't do a
reverse cross over, and they don't have the name recognition among blacks such
as Elvis, Rolling Stones, and the Beatles. There are black artists that i'm
sure most whites haven't heard of: Phyllis Hyman, Minne Riperton, Jeffrey
Osborne, etc. So, should we make a statement that you have been living in a
cave because you're never heard of these individuals. Sure, you can say well
they never made it big because they didn't cross over, well again U2 hasn't
crossed over in the black community.

well, john i guess we'll agree to disagree on this one :-)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Sun Jul 05 1998 - 19:20:50 PDT