Brian Libby

Bono

Over two decades, U2's leader has evolved from heart-on-his-sleeve idealist to irony-drenched rock 'n' roll Liberace to hopeful pragmatist.

  • more
    • All Share Services

Bono

In June, Bono of U2 delivered the commencement address to graduating students at Harvard. Before sharing his thoughts about AIDS, Africa and Third World debt, the legendary singer began with an Alcoholics Anonymous-style confession: “My name is Bono, and I am a rock star.”

At 41, Bono is at an age when many rock musicians start exploiting bygone successes to keep feeding at the trough of fame. But with Bono, it’s more than a rock ‘n’ roll career. Behind the black leather togs and wraparound shades, there has always been an earnest social crusader. Embarrassingly earnest? Perhaps. But, oddly, that’s part of his charm. In a business where people sell their souls for success, he has constantly risked celebrity-cause cliché — and he knows it. “The only thing worse than a rock star,” he told the starry-eyed Harvard grads, “is a rock star with a conscience. I’ve seen great minds and prolific imaginations disappear up their own ass, strung out on their own self-importance. I’m one of them.”

But as we accept the notion that the horrific attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center on Sept. 11 have changed our world irrevocably, Bono looks better than ever; his earnestness suddenly feels a lot less corny. It’s not to say that he has all the answers, but once again celebrities who crusade have less reason to fear ridicule. The great thing about Bono, though, is that he probably doesn’t care whether he looks cool along the way.

Bono’s humanitarianism has always been purchased on the credit line of U2′s fame, which is precisely why it has made a noticeable return in the last year. Many U2 fans (and rumor has it even Bono and his band mates) had speculated that the band’s best days were behind them. But now U2 have suddenly made their best album in a decade. “All That You Can’t Leave Behind,” released in fall of 2000, has received nearly unanimous critical acclaim and sold millions. The accompanying Elevation 2001 Tour has sold out arenas throughout the world, and U2 have racked up a slew of honors. Suddenly, it’s as if they never stopped being the biggest band in the world.

“It’s hard for rock ‘n’ roll artists to grow and mature and find ways to have long careers,” says New York Times rock critic Ann Powers, an avowed fan of the band. “U2 figured out how to break out of that, and a lot of bands don’t.”

In the wake of “All That You Can’t Leave Behind,” Bono and U2 have been praised for coming back to the kind of guileless art-rock that originally gained the band acclaim before Ronald Reagan had even unpacked his bags in Washington. But like his band mates, Bono is not the same man he was 20 years ago. In U2′s first several albums, Bono’s lyrics exhibited uncommon faith in an era full of anger and gloom. But after the darker introspection of the band’s albums from the last decade, “All That You Can’t Leave Behind” is particularly notable because Bono has again come to see the glass as half-full.

Yet when he sings “It’s a beautiful day, don’t let it get away,” it’s not youthful pie-in-the-sky optimism, but a faith that’s been redeemed over time. That’s something altogether more meaningful. And while that was already true before Sept. 11, it’s even more relevant now. This is no time for idealism, but rather one in which defiant, profound hope is desperately needed. And that’s what “All That You Can’t Leave Behind” is all about.

As Bono has become a prominent spokesman for Third World debt relief and the related African AIDS epidemic, there’s no doubt it recalls countless pet causes of years past. In the mid-’80s, as “War” (1983) and “The Unforgettable Fire” (1984) first carried U2 toward multiplatinum success, they were fixtures in the Band Aid and Live Aid campaigns to end famine in Africa. When “The Joshua Tree” (1987) was about to make them the biggest rock band in the world, U2 joined Sting and Peter Gabriel belting out hits for Amnesty International. Around the same time Bono joined the chorus of artists singing “I ain’t gonna play Sun City,” in an effort to end South African apartheid. Because it’s easy to be cynical about high-profile celebrity causes, it’s to his credit that such a high-profile star managed to maintain credibility while so actively utilizing the spotlight, however nobly, for his own objectives.

Remember back in the late ’80s when Arizona dragged its feet establishing a Martin Luther King holiday? Soon after, a lot of famous acts (Stevie Wonder, the Doobie Brothers) canceled their concerts there. Not U2. Playing a sold-out arena in Tempe, they instead prepared a statement of protest for the crowd, played a rollicking show and afterward invested thousands of their own dollars in the grass-roots campaign against Gov. Evan Mecham, the MLK holiday’s chief opponent. “Who are they to tell Arizona what to do?” raged one of Mecham’s aides. And really, he was right. U2 should probably have canceled the show, which Bono later confessed to biographer Carter Alan. But, however clumsily they came off, or how much they exposed themselves to justifiable criticism, U2 were willing to risk themselves, to use music as ammunition in a larger struggle regardless of the consequences. How many corporate rockers can you say that about?

Yet compared to Bono’s meeting this summer with North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms to discuss the African AIDS crisis, all that past activism seems like child’s play. In recent times he has brought his crusade to the likes of President Bill Clinton, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Pope John Paul II, the last of whom famously donned the singer’s trademark shades in a surreal photo op. But Bono’s summit with Helms was much more noteworthy, because it marked a leap over the ideological divide.

For millions the North Carolina senator symbolizes American conservatism at its ugliest. And yet here was Bono breaking bread with Helms at the Capitol as if the two were old chums. “You’ll always be a friend here,” Helms told Bono that day.

“U2 has always been about bringing ideas to a larger audience, and crossing boundaries,” says Powers. “I think that Bono’s wise enough at this stage of his life to see that sometimes the right connection can come from a surprising place.”

Bono’s meeting with Helms reflects a rite of passage most of us experience sooner or later. Maybe his more idealistic days seemed a more appropriately romantic rock star stance, but Bono has learned that all the posturing in the world won’t make cohesive progress without cooperation across the political boundaries. Why wave protest signs outside when you can waltz through the corridors of power?

“He’s very articulate,” says Rolling Stone contributing editor Anthony DeCurtis, who has written about U2 frequently over the last 15 years. “In a great tradition of Irish rhetoric, Bono has a way of just leaping over contradictions, and through sheer eloquence and charm managing to bridge otherwise completely unbridgeable gaps.”

Whether it’s our friends or our idols, the people who capture our imagination are always changing. Bono has evolved over two decades from heart-on-his-sleeve idealist, to irony-ensconced rock ‘n’ roll Liberace, and finally to a sort of hopeful pragmatist. Regardless of the actual effectiveness of his crusades, his more practical political acumen is something Bono has been working toward — in and out of music — for most of his life.

What originally transported U2 from Dublin clubs to the world stage was a combination of punk rock aggression and a defiantly purposeful attitude. Mere months before U2′s band mates first met, the Sex Pistols’ Johnny Rotten famously sang that there was “no future for you.” Growing up just across the water in Ireland at a time of near-revolutionary civil strife, nobody could have blamed Bono for feeling the same kind of bitter angst.

As the child of a Catholic father and Protestant mother, however, Bono saw beyond the polarized religious rhetoric, his lyrics demanding a more promising future. As U2 gained notoriety in songs like “Sunday Bloody Sunday,” with Bono singing, “I can’t believe the news today, I can’t close my eyes and make it go away,” the band pleaded for peace with 11th-hour urgency. We loved them for it, even if deep down we knew it wouldn’t change the world.

Various strains of this idealistic persona remained all the way to the album and concert film “Rattle and Hum” (1988), but by that point in U2′s career something had to change. Whether it was their derivative rendering of American roots music, or how their overexposed politicking simply grew tiresome, by 1991′s “Achtung Baby,” a complete reinvention was not only advisable, but downright essential.

In the changed musical landscape of the post-Nirvana early ’90s, a lot of famous acts lost their way. But the masterly “Achtung Baby” suddenly made U2 more vital than ever. And after bristling for so long at the notion of rock ‘n’ roll stardom, their embrace of the crazy burlesque pageant that is rock was oddly refreshing. While U2′s stage persona took a turn toward the bombastic with the Zoo TV Tour in 1992, Bono largely took leave from high-profile social activism as his lyrics entered a sort of blue period, exploring the doubt and desperation we’ve all felt at times.

“For all of the theatrics of ‘Zoo TV’ and ‘Achtung Baby,’ there still is a core of belief in U2 that has remained constant,” notes DeCurtis. “There’s a kind of skepticism, or questioning side of them, that’s come to the surface, but also there’s a kind of yearning that real ironists never admit to.” Looking back with the hindsight of history, the darkness of “Achtung Baby” is precisely what gives the optimism in “All That You Can’t Leave Behind” its legitimacy.

Great artists also have an intrinsic sense of timing, and U2 are no different. Just as “Achtung Baby” perfectly reflected the irony-obsessed early-’90s zeitgeist, “All That You Can’t Leave Behind” embodies our renewed taste for the genuine, which has only increased following the events of Sept. 11. “It reminds me of that aphorism by William Blake: Enough or too much,” says DeCurtis. “That’s pretty much U2′s guiding principle. Whether it’s their total reinvention on ‘Achtung Baby’ after ‘Rattle and Hum’ or ‘All That You Can’t Leave Behind’s’ return to essentials, the connection is that they’ve always bounced back from something beyond its usefulness.”

And so a man who just a few short years ago was parading the concert stages of Europe dressed as MacPhisto, an absurd combination of Faust’s Mephistopheles and Liberace, can go on to share the stage with the most powerful men and women in the world. That Bono has so often looked absurd and bounced back gives every one of us who has embarrassed ourselves at a party, or pontificated far too long at a podium, or created art that disappointed, hope that the future is indeed unlimited. Bono reminds us that time makes everything possible.

Not only is that timing useful when it comes to making rock records, but it’s equally important in politics. That’s why we see Bono out there now with Jesse Helms and John Paul II. As the age of irony wanes, and the world unites against an uncannily elusive enemy, a rock star like Bono can speak matter-of-factly about social causes again and actually be taken seriously. Whether it’s in the studio or on the steps of the U.S. Capitol, Bono knows he’s got to ride the wave while it lasts.

Samuel Mockbee

Amid architecture's increasing irrelevance, one man decided that poor people can have great houses.

  • more
    • All Share Services

Samuel Mockbee

In the last century of American homebuilding, there may no other time when architects were so irrelevant. Less than 10 percent of single-family residences are designed by architects now, and most of the rest come from mass-produced blueprints that make entire neighborhoods identical. The small percentage of homes architects actually do design go overwhelmingly to the wealthy. And while many charities such as Habitat for Humanity address low-income housing needs, the notion that poor people could ever inhabit unique pieces of architecture anymore is almost laughable.

Somebody forgot to tell this to Samuel Mockbee.

Born in Mississippi and educated in Alabama, Mockbee has spent much of his life surrounded by the extreme poverty of the Deep South. Driven to change this endless cycle, Mockbee and his partner Coleman Cocker designed a series of “charity houses” for low-income families. This was early in Mockbee’s career, and the project won a 1987 Progressive Architecture Honor award. But the homes were never built. The funding simply didn’t exist, and Mockbee vowed not to let this happen again.

In 1993 — Mockbee was now teaching at Auburn University’s College of Architecture, Design and Construction — he founded what is now called the Rural Studio. This time his efforts bore fruit: For the past eight years, Mockbee has brought a group of his students to rural Hale County to design and build homes for the poor. One of the poorest regions in America, the county has more than 1,400 substandard dwellings, nearly all lacking electricity and running water. According to the 1997 Alabama County Data Book, about one-third of residents there live below the poverty level, with a per capita income just over $12,000 and an unemployment rate of 13 percent.

Often dubbed “Redneck Taliesin South” (after Frank Lloyd Wright’s Wisconsin and Arizona homes and architectural studios), the Rural Studio not only fulfills an overwhelming need for decent housing but gives architecture students the kind of hands-on experience virtually all other educational institutions in the field lack. The houses are built for about $30,000 each using a variety of recycled and discarded materials (tires, bottles) and funded mostly with grants from a local power company. Designed through a collaborative process involving students and local residents, the homes boast an unconventional modern flair that incorporates the cultural vernacular of the region. They may be cheap, but these are nice houses.

In this remarkable rebuilding of Hale County, which also includes a number of public buildings, Mockbee is the glue, ensuring that his young protégés meet his meticulous standards and that the clients, perhaps for the first time in their lives, go home happy. Last year he won a MacArthur Foundation “genius” grant, only the third architect (along with Elizabeth Diller and Ricardo Scofidio) out of 588 past recipients to receive this award, in his case totaling $500,000.

Recently Mockbee spoke with me from his home in Canton, Miss., about architecture, public service and what he’s doing with his MacArthur windfall.

How does it feel knowing your profession has been marginalized by the American home building industry?

It’s a shame, because houses are the great paramour for architects, from the most successful all the way down to the most struggling. We draw them on the backs of napkins. But too often when I look at what builders and developers are doing, we’re not talking about architecture any longer. We’re talking about capitalism at its most obscene. The public has bought into the mediocrity and insipid attitude of manufactured and spec houses, and has given up any hope of creating homes with spirit. Real architecture does cost somewhat more. But most homes in America are built with false façades that try to pass themselves as architecture.

You’ve often said that all great architecture is honest.

It always has been. Architecture addresses truth and beauty and has a moral sense to it. All great art has that, too.

You cite painters like Klee, Goya and Picasso as your primary architectural influences, emphasizing the art of architecture. Yet the Rural Studio is known for advancing the profession’s social and practical side.

For me art is a very personal endeavor, a way to reflect on what I’m trying to do as an architect. An architect, on the other hand, has to be an extrovert. You can’t get anything built by yourself. You’ve got to have consultants, suppliers and a client who understands what you’re trying to do. The connection is that art is a reflection of the best of who we are. One informs the other, and vice versa.

Which Rural Studio clients have been the most satisfying to design and build for?

What immediately comes to mind is the Hay Bale House we did for Shepherd and Alberta Bryant. Shepherd is about 80 years old, and unable to fish or hunt or do many of his favorite outdoor activities anymore. His wife, Alberta, who had lived with him in an old shack for 40 years, wasn’t in the new house six weeks before she had a leg amputated and the other soon after. She says she doesn’t know what would have happened to her had we not built that house.

But the most profound result of our efforts has been on their grandson Richard Bryant. This was a kid who didn’t have anything, but because of his relations with the students — we’ve watched him grow up over the eight years we’ve been building down there — he’s blossomed into a mature young man who’s just graduated from high school, and is going to go to college. He wanted to be like them, and now he’s going to be.

The Rural Studio is transforming Hale County. What would you like to see preserved?

An architect’s primary connection is with people and place. You don’t have to be from that place, but you have to be inspired by that place and its people. For example, the heat down here is the primary enemy. We want to be in the shade. So how our forefathers built down here — taking advantage of shade and wind — all those principles that were true 100 years ago are true today, and will be 100 years from now. Our great-grandchildren will still be trying to get out of the sun. But if we were in the Midwest or somewhere else that can get cold, you’d be trying to get into the sun. One has to understand the landscape one is working in and be inspired by it.

Have any clients chafed at the vibrant designs and unconventional materials being used for their homes?

That has happened to us, but not to the extent that it can’t be fixed. The students have to learn to listen to the clients, and find out what their needs are. But on another level, as hard as we try to get the clients to be honest and relaxed with us, there is some apprehension that if they don’t agree with us somehow we won’t build it for them. I’m always trying to explain to the clients that we’re going to build the house for them no matter what, and that they need to tell us what they need and want. We don’t push our aesthetics onto anybody, nor do we push any values. The students work very hard to win the respect of these clients. They want to make these houses wonderful for them.

A lot of architects talk about trust being the key to a relationship with a client.

Well, sometimes that word means the architect wants the client to indulge his ego. Architects like to have their way; they micromanage too much and they think they have the answer to everything. But we are good problem solvers, and our education serves us well in attacking projects and looking at them creatively. The problem is, we often believe our own propaganda. But there are also two sides to that coin. You don’t want a client who misunderstands what design and architecture are really about. Many want this faux architecture, and that drives us nuts.

Can the Rural Studio be replicated in other places?

It can be done anywhere on the planet. This last academic year we built about six projects, and every one is wonderful. There are over 100 schools of architecture in the United States. If every school were to do just one project a year, you’d have 100 wonderful pieces of architecture. But you have to have the faith that the students can do it. Academia and the profession are too incestuous. They’re pussyfooting around and babbling about environment and health and code issues. It’s about going out and doing it, and all that other stuff will work itself out.

Have any students gone on to do charitable architectural work like this on their own?

To get outside the status quo, there’s no structure available for students to do it. We had some ex-students who did something similar to the Rural Studio in Nashville but it just about killed them, because they were doing it on weekends and that sort of thing. But what’s happened to these students can’t be taken away. They know the gratification that comes from serving people by using their talents. It’s going to surface again at some point in their careers. I don’t know when, but I know it will. It’s like having a great love and losing it: They’re going to want to find it again.

Do Rural Studio houses reflect your own architectural style?

I don’t lift a pen or put one stroke down on those designs. But I have a high bar I expect students to reach. I make them draw and redraw, so in that sense maybe it does reflect my style a bit. At any firm the work takes on the personality of the principals, and I think that’s true of the Rural Studio. But really the students do it themselves.

Do you think we should give more large-scale commissions to young architects?

I’ll have to be honest about this: I feel just the opposite. Back in the ’60s, we said don’t trust anybody over 30. Now I say don’t trust anyone under 50. If you take a look at the primo architects of the Renaissance, and the ones practicing today, you’ll see that they’re all over 45 and older when they do their major buildings. Frank Gehry is over 70. It takes years to accumulate the necessary abilities to produce a piece of architecture. You can do small work at a young age, but the technical aspects, the business aspects, the aesthetic aspects — all of this you’re juggling throughout your career, and trying to improve and mature. I tell my students: You may be able to start practicing two or three years after you graduate, but you’re not really going to be an architect until you’re 45. It’s just the nature of the beast. That’s probably true in medicine, law and all the professions — except the oldest one, of course. You’ve got to invest in the long haul.

What are you doing with the MacArthur grant?

We’re underwriting what’s called the Subrosa Pantheon. In the last couple of years, several younger members of our [Auburn University] faculty have passed away, and this is a memorial to them. It looks almost like a little tornado shelter, but with roses growing on top and a fountain outside. Other than that, I’m just sort of holding my money, but I hope that perhaps next year I’ll be able to take a sabbatical for some serious painting. It would really recharge my batteries.

Continue Reading Close

Page 3 of 3 in Brian Libby