J ([email protected])
Wed, 22 Jul 1998 04:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
It's quite a shame to have this guy write posts about what Lanois says
about the JT songs. Why does he believe Lanois when he doesnt believe
He once told me something like "do you actually buy all the things U2
say nowadays that it's all about the music now more than ever?" Well,
obviously, he doesn't agree even 1% about what Bono and the band has
to say about Pop. Thus, there are these possible conclusions:
-Lanois knows more about Bono and the band when it comes to U2's songs
-Bono used to tell the truth before when he said stuff like "spirit of
abandonment" but is nothing more than a liar now when he sells POP
-Bono always lied and only peple like Lanois know the truth behind the
>Even the b-sides Luminous Times, Spanish Eyes, Deep in the heart along
>with Sweet fire of love convey more emotion than I wish to quantify.
>I guess those tracks exemplify Bono's 'spirit of abandonment' which to
>him was the key, a raw naturalism that was real and devoid of any
Well, Gone, Please, One, and So Cruel (to name a few 90's tunes) also
have emotion that are unqualtifyable. U2 wirtes and sings from the
heart straight to one's senses to whether it is a 90's or 80's track,
the emotion is more often than not unquantifyable. So what did you
"rebut" when you gave those examples? What's the point?
Once again, your arguments (or rebuttals as you think they rightfully
are though they not even tangential to the point) fail to nail any
point but instead be more questions and impossible presuppositions.
Most of the people on Wire have disagreed with you flaming the 90s U2.
Can't you see the light? Is your mind that closed and stuck up to
the JT Tour? We all have freedom of speech so I respect your opinions
but I just can't seem to respect your way-off arguments simpy because
they don't make much sense.
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Wed Jul 22 1998 - 04:39:38 PDT