throwing arrows with glance


khufu ([email protected])
Sat, 08 Aug 1998 10:04:41 -0400


> John J. Hlavaty ([email protected])
> Sat, 8 Aug 1998 03:57:08 -0400
> The arrogance part comes from releasing this movie
> in the theaters...
> But overall, I would readily agree that U2 are arrogant,
> Bono in particular. However, he MUST be. If
> he wasn't, U2 more than likely would have not
> survived past 1983...
> Anyone that achieves a certain job
> or degree or car or whatever often does so because
> they feel they deserve to get this - and that is
> the definition of arrogance.

well actually what arrogant means is more on the line with
being overly convinced with one's own importance, overbearingly
proud; haughty - which can mean scornful and self satisfied.

in relation to their music, i don't think he is arrogant,
because they have earned their place in the world of music;
their importance in this arena is real. perhaps in the past
he appeared arrogant in relation to their music because at
that point they hadn't yet earned their place in the hall of
fame so to speak, but now they no doubt have. also he seems
to genuinely respect and appreciate the work and greatness of
other musical artists. and i don't believe u2 are self satisfied
with their music, as evidenced by the fact that they are always
trying something new, even when their efforts haven't gotten the
best response in the past. but if he uses his star status to get
away with that which any other ordinary schmuck can't get away with,
such as stealing a boat for a joy ride, then that is an arrogant act
which can't be justified.

^



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Sat Aug 08 1998 - 07:03:13 PDT