In The Name Of Someone Else's Love

The other night I was wandering through the store in search of fine edibles when I heard a very nice cover of Pride (In The Name Of Love.) A smooth female voice laid like silk over a delicate acoustic arrangement. It was a very pleasant experience.

In many ways, it was much better than U2's original version ever was. Granted, it didn't have that mean backbeat that U2 is so notorious for, but I liked it much better overall. Then I remembered how the only reason I even tracked down the original U2 version was because a section of the chorus was in Moulin Rouge. And that I liked that small section of song so much, I tracked down the CD.

And that's when it hit me: U2 is this generation's Bob Dylan.

And it's not because of the epic storytelling (please) or because they've managed to revive new life into a traditional genre (ha!) Just the mere fact that their music only seems to be digestible when other people are singing it.

Now the reasoning is different with Dylan. The man actually did some pretty revolutionary things musically. And no one can argue that he could definitely tell a story. But Dylan was held back by a couple of minor details: He strummed too fast and sung like a bullfrog.

The man was barely comprehensible, it's a sad but painful truth. He mumbled everything and when he actually did attempt to sing, it sounded like a seizure. Love the man all you want, but you have to acknowledge the fact that if artists like The Byrds, Joan Baez, and Peter, Paul & Mary hadn't done versions of his songs, Dylan might not even be a fart in history.

Even today, the best Dylan songs are those being covered by other bands. Ministry, Clapton, and slew of others who have taken that gravely voice and made something ethereal out of it. Even Dylan has knows this and rolls with it like a true gentleman.

Now, there's no question that U2 can play, and there's no question that Bono can sing. In my professional opinion, the brunt of their work is finely penned (well, except for the Pop album, but hey you can't win them all.) So, the comparisons to Dylan aren't related to musicianship or singing ability.

It's mostly due to the fact that the world at large cannot get over the fact that Bono is a douche.

Come on, admit it. Look past all those charity's and the nobility, and big glasses, and you can see it too. The man annoys you. Gets under your skin and irritates you like a rash. I've seen pictures of him with poor underprivileged kids in news articles and so forth and even they're looking at him like, "Step off me! What's your problem?"

The man is unsettling, and when you put something righteous with something unsettling, it's a recipe for a lynch mob. He's got the greasy smugness of a man who'd be trying to buy you drinks and steal your undies at a bar. It's only considered acceptable because the man can't talk about anything but charity and goodwill.

And it is that notion of "doing good for the world" that ruins the music. You start to enjoy a song like Pride (In The Name Of Love) and suddenly Bono has to start saying shit like "This song is a tribute to all the starving people of the world, and to those who would fight oppression and war in these perilous times." And you're sitting there like, "Fuck man, I just wanted to hear this song and reminisce about an ex-girlfriend! You're ruining this for me!" Like songs that have special memories to them are now going to being replaced with images of hungry African kids and crying mothers. Granted those are some mighty sad things, but just once, wouldn't it be nice to have a song be for you what you want it to be?

Which is why U2 covers are going to get mighty popular. Without the shadow of Bono over these songs, people can now say "You mean I can actually listen to this song, and have it actually be about simple love? Oh, for joy!" How liberating would that be?

So I think as the world grows older , and the church of Bono grows a firmer grasp on the patent of the world "righteous" that we'll be hearing more of these bands generating a fresh and inspired energy to these well worn songs. And Bono will get place (who'd stop him?) in the pantheons of musical history, but we will all know that when the need for a U2 song to fill the soul and memory comes along, we'll be looking elsewhere.