Comment on a recent review

You know, I try not to do many posts which are purely editorializing here (and I know I probably fail) but... am I the only one who was brought up short by this passage in the Independent.ie's official review of NLOTH?

There are several euphoric moments and lots of allusions to redemption. Songs like "Moment of Salvation" [sic] - which, at more than seven minutes long, definitely outstays its welcome - is loaded with lyrics referencing "soul", "God" and "fire". The atmospheric "Unknown Caller" is cut from the same cloth. Let's face it, it would hardly be a U2 album if Bono wasn't engaged by such themes - and if you're one of the many who finds this sort of stuff off-putting, much of the album simply won't work for you.
There are plenty of songs that won't have such a divisive effect, however.

So given that we agree that "it would hardly be a U2 album" if the band didn't write from the redemptive perspective they have drawn on for 33 years, in what sense is it helpful to dismiss a couple *particular* moments within that perspective with pejorative language like "divisive"? There are certainly people who can't stomach U2 at all because of the worldview underlying their work, and I respect that outlook. But here, doesn't pinning blame on particular examples of their art for having "such a divisive effect" mean something a bit more like "I don't like Christianity, and I'm uncomfortable because unlike the other nine tracks, I couldn't find a way to ignore the Christian worldview in these two"?

No comments: