UK Music Hall of Fame: U2

[Partridge's Love Child]

I've just posted in the General Discussion thread that the problem with Channel 4's series is that we don't know what the criteria are decide who is nominated for the Hall.  This also goes for the five artists selected automatically, which we were told to lump whether we liked it or not, and were given no explanation as to why.  Well, I find it hard to argue against Elvis Presley and The Beatles, and I think Madonna's inclusion is fair game.  I have a problem with Bob Marley being in there, but this thread's not about that - he'll get his own later.  But U2?  I cannot understand the justification for their undisputed admission.

Now, anyone that knew me back in the late 80s and early 90s would be astonished to hear me say this, for U2 were the first band that I adored.  My bedroom was adorned with far too many pictures of these cowboy hat wearing bogtrotters, I even had a U2 calendar hanging on my wall.  I loved U2.  And the thing is, I still do.

It's not very fashionable these days to admit that you like U2, particularly as Bono continues to climb his way to the summit of his arsehole, but I think they've spent the best part of 25 years making blindingly good records.  The peculiar thing is, the older I get, the further into their history I seem to want to delve - I would say that my favourtie U2 walbum these days is their 1980 debut Boy, which I reckon you could shove on Wireless 1 now, pretend it's someone else and it'd sound like a crackingly good contemporary guitar band.  I challenge you to name a current band who've made a better punk rock album than Boy or October.  Razorlight?  The Libertines?  Get to fuck.

Despite my waxing lyrical of The 2, I still cannot justify their automatic selection.  The mish mash of live and new songs comtained on directionless double walbum Rattle & Hum (1988) is probably their weakest long player, and even that's worth listening to - I even like Pop.  However, if you ask me if they've been sufficiently important in terms of sociological and artistical history, then I'd have to say no.  A potted history of the 50s is incomplete without Elvis Presley - so too the 1960s with The Beatles.  So too Madonna is impossible to ignore in terms of her impact - and the power of her sex, in both senses of the word, is of utmost importance to her importance.  U2 on the other hand don't really have this.  Yes, they've dabbled with this genre and that genre, they've produced some quite boggling live shows - but can you give a brief overview of music history without mentioning them?  I think you can, whereas the same cannot be said of Elvis, John, Paul, George, Ringo and Madonna.

[Ciarán2]

U2 and the "Rock and Hall of Fame" absolutely go hand in hand. Both equally loathsome, the antithesis of what rock is supposed to embody, teenage rebellion and insurrection.

The UK Hall of Fame can fuck off.

[Partridge's Love Child]

Yeah, but you know you're going to watch it all.

[Ciarán2]

I shan't be watching a single moment of it, so there.

[Silver SurferGhost]

I haven't watched a single minute of it either. Or indeed even read the other thread yet. Is this that Theakston thing with Williams' sneering cunt of a mug seemingly all over it? If so then enough said. And it's another  Channel 4 list show, don't forget.  

I've never been that fond of U2, even though I've got a few of their albums mouldering away at the back there. They're just too earnest, even when I was young enough to take everything incredibly seriously, they were too serious for me then. I do like Numb though.
Sure it's not just based on sales? Like them or not the inclusion of the others is arguably inarguable as you say (Marley's fair enough as well I reckon), but I can only really see U2 getting in there if sales (including concert returns, aaaah do you see) come into it in a big way. Because I'm sure their influence can't be that great, can it?

And wot, no Bowie? That's a fucking disgrace that ensures I won't be tuning in any time soon.
.

[Goldentony]

if soft cell dont get into this 80's episode next week im gonna kick off.

[fanny splendid]

U2 have exclusively released their new single and video through Apple's itunes music store, and the new iPod advert has U2 in it, playing the new song.

[Lumiere]

U2 make me sick.

[Partridge's Love Child]

Care to tell us why?

It's like blood and stones in here sometimes.

[Lumiere]

Because whenever I hear about them in the press, they're harping on about how talented they are and how they are the best rock band in the universe. That they're willing to release a shite version of their new album on download before the thing is out just to beat bootleggers and illegal downloads irritates me - not because of the music, but because they are blatantly after cash.

Their music is, to me at least, middle of the road pop-rock shite.

[Jaffa The Cake]

Agreed. I've never understood the attraction. They're listenable, but I don't understand the collective orgasm people have over their music.

I listened to one of their albums...
When it finished, I couldn't remember any of it.
I listened again...
It finished, still couldn't remember any of it.