SOE
Active topics
U2 - American Soul
 Album:
Songs Of Experience (2017)
  1. Originally posted by TheRefugee:Subtlety? Forced? The album titles tell you all you need to know about the thematic connection.

    It's obviously self referential. They've done it in the past; Sunday Bloody Sunday & "40"; Please and Sunday Bloody Sunday. Nothing wrong with it.

    Anyway, why the hell not reuse the lyric? It's art. It's rock and roll! Why must there be so many rules? Why must a song have a solo?

    Many may not like it, but that doesn't mean the band are guilty of breaking some sacred rock music rule that thou must not re-use lyrics in different tracks. Van The Man did it. Bruce has done it. No harm done.
    ^yes, this.
  2. That being said, I should withhold judgement on an album that I haven’t heard all of yet.
  3. Originally posted by Bloodraven:I will just insist in my previous point:

    American Soul didn't borrow anything from Volcano, is the other way around: Volcano borrowed a small part of American Soul (previously known as Glastonbury) as a reference.

    It's not lazy or lame, since this song existed before SOI.

    American Soul is not a rehash on Volcano.
    American Soul IS Glastonbury, just like Vertigo is Native Son, 11 O'Clock Tick Tock is Silver Lining, and Fire is Saturday Night.
    Volcano is the one briefly referencing the whole chorus of American Soul, not viceversa.

    [edit]
    In other words, pretend for a second that they didn't change the name of the song and kept it as "Glastonbury". I honestly don't think people would've had that much problem with it having the "you are rock n roll" bit (which is basically all there is as controversy.


    Chicken and the egg, but either way Volcano was released first, and it doesn't really matter what copied what, the copying is what people are taking issue with. And I stand by my theory that this song was written after Trump was elected and U2 needed another quick rock track for the album. Sounds that way.
  4. I feel at this point we reached an impasse. Either you like what they did in this song (and others that we have yet to hear) or you hate it.
  5. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:Chicken and the egg, but either way Volcano was released first, and it doesn't really matter what copied what, the copying is what people are taking issue with.
    I think it does matter, because like I said, if the song hasn't changed its original name, I don't think people would've had a problem with it.

    If you see that "Glastonbury" is on the album, you know what it would sound like, you know it will have that chorus, and you would've accepted it a lot easier, many people would've been actually excited about it just by reading the name.

    And nobody would've cared that a bit of this one was borrowed for Volcano a couple of years ago.

    Maybe a lyric adjustment, but not the chorus bit, that one was already there years ago.
  6. Also, it does matter which one was first, because the argument that it was lazy or something like that, doesn't make sense considering that American Soul was written first, regardless if Volcano (which only references this song) was released first.
  7. Can't believe I'm letting myself get dragged into this. . .

    First off, I really like this song. I do. But your arguments in its defense are flawed. That being said, if it was Glastonbury, no, we wouldn't all be thrilled. Glastonbury is outdated, out-of-place, and, regardless of how YOU feel, most people would say we already got a finished Glastonbury in Volcano. I understand your argument that Volcano isn't a finished Glastonbury, but I disagree and it seems most of the other forum members do to. That's largely a question of opinion, so arguing doesn't do anything.

    Second, even IF American Soul is Glastonbury and Volcano isn't, the argument that it seems "let and lazy" still stands because it was lame and lazy of them to grab the bridge from another song and use it to finish Volcano rather than just writing one for it. It's no different.

    I like the song for what it is. That's not to say there aren't legitimate criticisms with it. I personally share the opinion that they took the unfinished Glastonbury and updated it so that they could have a last-minute rocker with some really on-the-nose Trump criticisms that'll already feel dated by the next election cycle. But hey, it's fun to listen to.
  8. Originally posted by cesar_garza01:I feel at this point we reached an impasse. Either you like what they did in this song (and others that we have yet to hear) or you hate it.
    this^
  9. i can't believe u2 today.........and in the last months
  10. I like the way Bono sings this - reminds of Pop album a lot. Lyrically? I have mixed feelings. But as the album connects directly to SOI, I guess that is why they thought about re-using certain lines. I don't know the exact reasons.
  11. Just my opinion but this would have been an awesome b side. I don’t think it should of made the album.