Report Backing Clemens Chooses Its Facts Carefully

Book Report on Ronald Kessler’s “THE TERRORIST WATCH”

The public is aware of only the tip of the counter-terror iceberg. In 2007, there were 60-70 terror plots in US being investigated every day. Every morning in the NCTC at 8:00 AM the Threat Matrix involving these treats is evaluated. Vice Admiral Redd, NCTC, with his small group of representatives from all the security agencies prepares a list of 25-30, which list is further reduced to 10-20. These are brought into the daily video conference involving the President, Nat. Security Council, DHS, and Nat. Intelligence Director. In 2004 alone, the Justice Department reported 379 convictions related to terrorism.

The NCTC is a 10,000 sq. ft. facility built like a TV network control center with 32 large screens and 350 computer stations. They operate a web page for 5000 world wide intelligence analysts. They control the no-fly list, and they are available for instant communication country-wide access from police, customs or immigration officers having a suspicious incident involving a terror risk. Someone on the no-fly list, if stopped for a traffic violation, can be held for a surveillance interview. There are 400,000 names on the NCTC list of terrorist entities.

Kessler points out that a major concern of our all of counter-terror officials is the demoralizing effect of the attacks by the left leaning media. The effectiveness of the terror investigations depends to great degree on the assistance and cooperation of the public. To the extent that the left is successful in engendering suspicion of the counter efforts it will further damage our security. At the current level, even though less than 1% of the open tips actually have lead to a terrorist, they are a valuable eye on the ground that has been extremely important especially regarding the new home grown Jihadist threat.

Iranian Nuclear Rewrite

Give Admiral Michael McConnell credit for trying to walk back the cat. Questioned this week by the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Director of National Intelligence defended the "integrity and the professionalism" of the process that produced last December's stunning National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran's nuclear program. Yet his testimony amounts to a reversal of the previous judgment.

The December NIE made headlines the world over for its "key judgment" that in 2003 "Tehran halted its nuclear weapons programs" -- programs that previously had been conducted in secret and in violation of Iran's Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligations.

This was a "high confidence" judgment, though the intelligence community had only "moderate confidence" that the program hasn't since been restarted. The NIE also waded into speculative political and policy judgments, such as that "Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs."

So it was little wonder that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad quickly called the NIE a "declaration of victory" for Iran's nuclear programs. Diplomatic efforts to pass a third round of U.N. economic sanctions ground to a crawl, though another weak draft resolution is currently making the rounds. Russia decided to ship nuclear fuel to the reactor it has built for Iran at Bushehr, a move it had previously postponed for months and which has worrisome proliferation risks.

Elsewhere, the NIE complicated U.S. efforts to deploy an antiballistic-missile shield in Central Europe. The Israelis worried that the report signaled the death of American seriousness on Iran, possibly requiring them to act alone. At home, Democrats used the NIE to accuse the Administration of hyping intelligence. "It's absolutely clear and eerily similar to what we saw with Iraq," said John Edwards.

Now Admiral McConnell is clearly trying to repair the damage, even if he can't say so directly. "I think I would change the way that we described [the] nuclear program," he admitted to Evan Bayh (D., Ind.) during the hearing, adding that weapon design and weaponization were "the least significant portion" of a nuclear weapons program.

He expressed some regret that the authors of the NIE had left it to a footnote to explain that the NIE's definition of "nuclear weapons program" meant only its design and weaponization and excluded its uranium enrichment. And he agreed with Mr. Bayh's statement that it would be "very difficult" for the U.S. to know if Iran had recommenced weaponization work, and that "given their industrial and technological capabilities, they are likely to be successful" in building a bomb.

The Admiral went even further in his written statement. Gone is the NIE's palaver about the cost-benefit approach or the sticks-and-carrots by which the mullahs may be induced to behave. Instead, the new assessment stresses that Iran continues to press ahead on enrichment, "the most difficult challenge in nuclear production." It notes that "Iran's efforts to perfect ballistic missiles that can reach North Africa and Europe also continue" -- a key component of a nuclear weapons capability.

Then there is the other side of WMD: "We assess that Tehran maintains dual-use facilities intended to produce CW [Chemical Warfare] agent in times of need and conducts research that may have offensive applications." Ditto for biological weapons, where "Iran has previously conducted offensive BW agent research and development," and "continues to seek dual-use technologies that could be used for biological warfare."

All this merely confirms what has long been obvious about Iran's intentions. No less importantly, his testimony underscores the extent to which the first NIE was at best a PR fiasco, at worst a revolt by intelligence analysts seeking to undermine current U.S. policy. As we reported at the time, the NIE was largely the work of State Department alumni with track records as "hyperpartisan anti-Bush officials," according to an intelligence source. They did their job too well. As Senator Bayh pointed out at the hearing, the NIE "had unintended consequences that, in my own view, are damaging to the national security interests of our country." Mr. Bayh is not a neocon.

Admiral McConnell's belated damage repair ought to refocus world attention on Iran's very real nuclear threat. Too bad his NIE rewrite won't get anywhere near the media attention that the first draft did.

The Right Is Wrong on McCain

There's an old Groucho Marx riff in which he launches a new career as a stick-up artist -- while worrying that his native cowardice may not induce the requisite fear among his victims. Sure enough, after a little time in a dark alley he springs out to confront his first victim, points his gun to his own head and says, "Take one step closer and I'll kill myself."

Such is the posture today among pundits on the far right of the Republican Party as Sen. John McCain moves closer to receiving his party's nomination. Consider the destructive implications of their pledge to work against Mr. McCain's nomination and even -- in the event he is nominated -- not to vote in the general election. Start with where it would leave our country -- presumably under the leadership of either Democrat candidate -- in the two domains where we will face critical challenges in the years ahead: our national security and the threat of an economic meltdown.

..Surely Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter can agree that these challenges are terribly demanding and cannot be left to luck or divine providence. Finally, there is the cost of their extremist rhetoric to the Republican Party. As President Reagan once told me, "Going over the cliff, flags flying, is still going over the cliff."

Korean Intelligence

U23D - The Lefsetz Letter

I cannot hype this movie enough. This is not Andy Warhol’s 3D, you positively feel like you’re there. Is this the future of rock and roll shows? I don’t know, but even if this is "In Rainbows", a one time stunt, don’t let it pass you by. The only place you can see it is at your local theatre. Make the trip. You’ll tell every living soul about it. You won’t come down for days. It’s just like going to the show, in some ways even BETTER!

Barak Obama video

Barack Obama is nothing but inspiring--so inspiring that it is becoming deeply creepy. The Boston Globe reports on a new music video touting Obama:

Inspired by the speech Barack Obama delivered in Nashua the night of the state primary, will.i.am [of the Black Eyed Peas] set Obama's text to simple guitar and a soulful melody, recruited 36 artists to appear in a music video that was conceived, shot, and edited over three days last week, and posted "Yes We Can" online over the weekend. . . .

The split-screen video features clips of the candidate speaking alongside shots of R&B singer John Legend, actress Scarlett Johansson, rapper Common, jazz pianist Herbie Hancock, actor-singer Nick Cannon, rocker Ed Kowalczyk, and others echoing Obama's spoken words in song. Will.i.am set the song's tempo to synch up with the New Hampshire audience, which supplies the song's rhythm with chants of "We want change, we want change!" . . .

"I do think it allows people an accessible way into politics," Jesse Dylan said. "Rallies can be dry, but Will has taken the words and dramatized them with these wonderful artists and it gives people an easy way to become passionate."

The video, which you can watch here, depicts people who appear to be in some sort of trance as they mouth along with Obama's various rhetorical flourishes from his speeches, then repeat the mantra "Yes, we can." The whole thing has the feel of a cult of personality.

We aren't the first to make that observation. The other day one Kathleen Geier, who says she voted for Obama and considers him "a good progressive," took to the liberal TPMCafe site to declare that she is "increasingly weirded out by some of Obama's supporters":

She quotes from a Sacramento Bee article that she (and we) found "unsettling":

"He looked at me, and the look in his eyes was worth 1,000 words," said [Kim] Mack, now a regional field organizer. Obama hugged her and whispered something in her ear--she was so thrilled she doesn't remember what it was. . . .

She urged volunteers to hone their own stories of how they came to Obama--something they could compress into 30 seconds on the phone.

As Geier notes, "this sounds more like a cult than a political campaign":

The language used here is the language of evangelical Christianity--the Obama volunteers speak of "coming to Obama" in the same way born-again Christians talk about "coming to Jesus."

But he's not Jesus! He's not going to magically enable us to transcend the bitter partisanship that is tearing this country apart.

ABC's Jake Tapper notes other enthusiasts and detractors from the enthusiasm, all on the Democratic left. "I've been following politics since I was about 5," Chris Matthews tells the New York Observer. "I've never seen anything like this. This is bigger than Kennedy. [Obama] comes along, and he seems to have the answers. This is the New Testament."

On the other side, Times Joe Klein writes that there is "something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism" of the Obama campaign, which "all too often is about how wonderful the Obama campaign is." Adds the dyspeptic leftist James Wolcott:

Perhaps it's my atheism at work but I found myself increasingly wary of and resistant to the salvational fervor of the Obama campaign, the idealistic zeal divorced from any particular policy or cause and chariot-driven by pure euphoria. . . . I don't look to politics for transcendence and self-certification.

What are we to make of Obama himself in the midst of all this adulation? A cynic would say that he is a manipulator if not a demagogue, exploiting the gullible to further his own ambitions. A more charitable view is that his intentions are all to the good, that he has simply figured out how to tap into a genuine desire for inspiration in politics, and that if elected he will use his political powers to do good for the country.

Each view seems plausible, but which is correct? Does anyone know Barack Obama well enough to say? And if not, isn't he the candidate who has a problem with authenticity?

Et Tu, U2? “Wake Up Dead Man” and Bono’s Perceived Betrayal of the Faith

Kevin Holm-Hudson
University of Kentucky

Abstract

In one of U2’s most controversial songs, “Wake Up Dead Man,” from 1997’s Pop album, singer-lyricist Bono seemingly portrayed a dead and powerless Jesus, unable to help a troubled world. This interpretation assumes the song to be an autobiographical spiritual statement, the legacy of the perceived “sincerity” of 1970s singer-songwriters. But was Bono portraying a musical persona? Drawing upon Edward T. Cone’s persona theory as well as the writings of C. S. Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, N. T. Wright and Christian Kettler, “Wake Up Dead Man” is interpreted as a dialogue, rather than as a diatribe.

[1] In 1993, religion writer John Smith began an article on U2 with the following disclaimer: “To write an analysis of U2 for the Christian public is akin to doing a film review of Martin Scorsese’s Last Temptation of Christ: no matter how balanced, insightful, careful, or even courageous the effort, inevitable protest, denial, and misinterpretation will result.”[1] Risking the same response, I would like to present a theological interpretation of one of U2’s most philosophically challenging—and misinterpreted—songs, “Wake Up Dead Man.” That this song comes from Bono’s “drinking-smoking-swearing” period—that is, the period of U2 history between 1988’s Rattle and Hum and 2001’s acclaimed “return to form” All That You Can’t Leave Behind—makes my task appear to be all the more a fool’s errand. Nevertheless, even if I appear to make myself a fool for Christ’s sake (I Cor. 4:9-10), I hope to show, through my analysis of this song, that Bono’s voice—as surly and, yes, profane as it is on this song—is a voice the Church needs to hear and consider as it reaches out to so-called “post-Christian” culture.

[2] James advised believers that “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this. To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world” (James 1:27; NIV). Such a balance of material service and spiritual purity is difficult to maintain. Liberal Christians tend to emphasize the first part of the equation, whereas—at least in American Evangelical circles—there is such an emphasis on the second part that the world seems to be held in arm’s-length suspicion. When three of the four members of U2—one of the most popular music groups in the world—confess to follow Jesus Christ, then, reactions predictably differ. While the secular media have publicized Bono’s efforts at the first part of James’s definition, from AIDS relief to Jubilee 2000 and Amnesty International, the Christian media have been preoccupied with examining the evidence for James’s second criterion in the group’s work.

[3] In the neo-conservative glow of the Reagan era, U2 were held high as Christian music’s next big hope for converting the lost. Interestingly, the sound of U2’s early uplifting anthems such as “Gloria” and “40” (a paraphrase of Psalm 40) persist twenty years later in today’s contemporary worship movement—in songs such as Chris Tomlin’s “Forever” and MercyMe’s “I Can Only Imagine,” for example. Nonetheless, U2 continued to evolve, both musically and spiritually; while early in their career several group members were practicing members of Ireland’s Christian Shalom religious community, the group ultimately chose to present their Christian spirituality in a less literal, more socially activist context, with mixed responses. John Smith describes this evolution:

All was quiet on the Christian front during the days of “Sunday Bloody Sunday,” when U2 sermonized “We must finish the work Christ began on that Sunday, bloody Sunday.”

For thoughtful evangelicals—who had a rightful place in their hearts for Martin Luther King and Archbishop Oscar Romero’s self-giving martyrdoms—“In the Name of Love” rang the right bells.

Shallow souls on Christian and secular fronts totally missed the point of “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For.” For the shallow opponents of Christianity it served as a departure from sermonizing faith. For fundamentalists…they had betrayed the simplistic slogan of “Jesus is the answer”. … That the song reaffirmed Christ’s vicarious embracing of our guilt and sin and reasserted the declaration of faith (“You know I believe it”) was overlooked in a frenzy of Sunday school responses.[2]

[4] What was worse for the mainstream Christian media, it appeared in recent years that as U2 took on the world, the world won. The band began to distance itself from its image as pop proselytizers and turned toward ironic fascination with the superficiality of postmodern media culture, beginning with the album Achtung Baby (1991) and culminating in the group’s most experimental effort, Pop (1997). Regarding the latter album one reviewer notes, “If you listened closely…you could hear the band's last few remaining unalienated evangelical Christian fans quietly slipping out the door.”[3] It didn’t help matters for the group’s defenders that Bono told Spin’s Ann Powers as Pop was being recorded: “I enjoy the test of trying to keep hold of what’s sacred, and still being awake. … It’s one thing being in that holy huddle; it’s another thing taking yourself out there into the world.”[4]

[5] For conservative Evangelicals, this would appear to be a dangerous gamble indeed; for some, Bono was not only taking himself out into the world but wallowing in it. Even the band’s more secular-minded fans had had enough of the stylistic experimentation and the apparent crass materialism: the album and tour for Pop were both commercial disappointments, and secular rock critic Dave Marsh used words such as “crashed,” “bombed,” and “tanked” with barely concealed glee.[5]

[6] Gone were the uplifting anthems to draw one’s attention to higher things; instead, Bono told Powers “we wanted to make a record that would actually feel like your life.”[6] Pop resounds with discordant electronic sounds; feedback-drenched guitars; and references to name-brand commercial products, corrupt televangelists, and the death of Bono’s mother when he was a teenager. It does feel like life in a post-Christian, media-driven world, and it is not meant to be comfortable.

[7] Pop’s closing song, “Wake Up Dead Man,” particularly agitated the Christian community. Even four years later, a review that celebrated the return to anthemic form in Pop’s follow-up, All That You Can’t Leave Behind, began with a reference to the song:

When we last left U2, at the climax of 1997's polarizing Pop album, Bono was busy needling a Certain Someone. The titular command of the final song, “Wake Up Dead Man,” was rather impudently directed at Christ, as if the singer were literally and figuratively trying to get a rise out of Him. “Jesus, I'm waiting here, boss/I know you're looking out for us/But maybe your hands aren't free,” he taunted, lamenting some unexplained tragedy. Was he mocking the supposed omnipotence of the Almighty? Or just trying out some tough love on Him?[7]

[8] The theme of “Wake Up Dead Man” is nothing new, however. It is as old as Job’s lamentations and also stated, perhaps more articulately than Bono, by C. S. Lewis: “‘If God were good, He would wish to make His creatures perfectly happy, and if God were almighty, He would be able to do what He wished. But the creatures are not happy. Therefore God lacks either goodness, or power, or both.’ This is the problem of pain, in its simplest form.”[8] A more contemporary critique by N. T. Wright points out that despite such recent paradigm-shifting events as Auschwitz, the human suffering following the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and the terrorist attacks of September 11, society fails to grasp the supernatural import of such cataclysmic events by its continued adherence to the Enlightenment-era social philosophy of “automatic progress.” This results in an inaccurately positive view of humanity, in which any misfortune is seen as the “price of progress”; according to Wright, the result is that “first, we ignore evil when it doesn’t hit us in the face. Second, we are surprised by evil when it does. Third, we act in immature and dangerous ways as a result.”[9] Wright responds to this conundrum by constructing a carefully nuanced “long-range” perspective of the problem of evil, demonstrating that the Old Testament may be viewed as a history of God’s unfolding strategies for containing supernatural, individual and political evil; he then shows how in the life and atoning death of Christ all of these threads are brought to a magnificent resolution.

[9] At the same time, Christian Kettler points out,

A christocentric theology demands that we take existential issues in humanity seriously. Too often the concern of theology has been about the precise relationship between the deity and the humanity of Christ without delving deeply into the radical implications of the Word that became flesh for the world of despair, guilt, shame, weakness, loneliness, anxiety, and doubt. Popular theology such as in the Left Behind novels still reflect the kind of theological mindset that obsesses over the time of the Great Tribulation at the end of the world and ignores our own personal “tribulations” of loneliness, despair, and doubt.[10]

[10] When such personal despairs are acknowledged in Christian media, they are often “overcome” dramatically, and rather simply, through an embracing of faith that often precludes further struggles with doubt or challenges to belief. Perhaps if Bono had stated the “problem of pain” in his song in the form of a third-person syllogism or a methodical philosophical argument for the transcendent intervening justice of a personal God, and concluded with a “happy ending”—or at least an answer—he could have avoided interpretations such as that of Jason Ewert, reviewing the Pop album for the Christian music web site cMusicWeb.com:

U2's frustration is directed towards God, a common thing for people who feel like they're in a dead end. And when you feel this way, your initial reaction is to shift the blame from yourself and onto someone else. Often, that “someone else” is God. “Why does uncertainty abound? Why does pain fill my life? Why doesn't God make life happy?” Though the answer may be right in front of you, it is difficult to believe in these situations.

Throughout Pop U2 attempts to ignore this predicament by searching for salvation in other areas.[11]

[11] As the album reaches its conclusion, Ewert writes, “U2 is left broken and shattered. As one final desperate plea, they call on God to reveal Himself in ‘Wake Up Dead Man’. Though they know that there is nothing else to turn to, U2 is defiant to the last, unwilling to give in.”[12] Ewert concludes:

For U2 fans this album leaves questions unanswered. Are they falling away from the Christianity they professed in the 1980’s? Have they been corrupted by fame? The answers can only be found on their next album. Until then, Pop serves as a reminder of the joylessness of life without God. As Bono said, the world is a messed up place when Jesus is simply a dead man. But if you recognize Him as Lord and Savior, you're looking at a whole new landscape. And that should be our prayer: that the eyes of U2 would be opened, and instead of looking to save themselves, they would proclaim Jesus as their Master.[13]

[12] Apparently Ewert has interpreted “Wake Up Dead Man”—if not the entire Pop album—to be autobiographical, a kind of dispatch of Where U2 Are Now Spiritually. Such an interpretation—the first-person pop-singer voice as confessional—brings up the issue of what Edward T. Cone identified as a song’s persona.

[13] Cone applies the concept of the persona originally to the poetic voice, which is given characterization by the composer’s musical setting. This characterization is further transformed in performance, so that “the poetic persona is transformed into … the vocal persona: a character in a kind of monodramatic opera, who sings the original poem as his part.”[14] Cone calls such a vocal persona “the protagonist of a song.”[15] Significantly, Cone argues that the listener must be mindful of the barriers that are to be erected among the various personae:

There could be no drama if we did not accept what we know in fact to be false: that the actors are the characters, who are living their parts and making up their lines as they go along. More than that: the principle that some form of dramatic impersonation underlies all literature means that all modes of imaginative writing are united in implying a basic simulation. The lyric pretends that its persona is composing the poem; the novel pretends that its narrator is telling the story. The reader must go along with the pretense, else he cannot derive emotional satisfaction from the poem or enjoy the suspense of the story.

If we take the art of song seriously, we must accord the same faith to the characters portrayed by singers. … We admittedly connive at this pretense when we watch an opera, but we should realize that a similar situation must obtain if we really attend to a performance of a Schubert lied. For if we try to follow words as well as music, we must accept the song, no less than the opera, as a dramatic presentation.[16]

[14] John Smith decries “the problem of general Christian—and secular—ignorance of art forms, symbolism, and media techniques,”[17] resulting in “a literal interpretation of symbolism.”[18] Hence, Bono’s “MacPhisto” character on the Zooropa tour—a Vegas-style Satan inspired by C. S. Lewis’s use of a first-person Devil in The Screwtape Letters—was widely misinterpreted: “U2’s satire is perceived as embracing rather than exposing the demonic.”[19] Of course, no one reading The Screwtape Letters would conclude that C. S. Lewis was a nom de plume for Lucifer, just as critic Deena Weinstein has dryly observed that no one reading Melville’s Moby Dick (with its famous opening “Call me Ishmael”) would conclude that Melville was suffering from an identity crisis.[20] Yet popular-music listeners often “hear the singer’s ‘I’ as a literal reflection of the author, indicating a failure to see that art may be something beyond giving vent to one’s personal feelings and experiences.”[21]

[15] The roots of Pop’s persona problem are found in the perceived “sincerity” of 1970s singer-songwriters such as James Taylor, Jackson Browne, Carole King, and Dan Fogelberg. Although some of the singer-songwriters’ songs were at least partially based on personal experience (Taylor’s “Fire and Rain,” for example, addressed the singer’s heroin addiction and institutionalization), often times the first-person narrative was automatically equated with authenticity. In 1976 millions heard Barry Manilow sing “I Write the Songs,” unaware that he didn’t write that song—Bruce Johnston did. Thirteen years later, Neil Young sang in his song “Wrecking Ball”: “My life’s an open book / You read it on the radio.” (What, then, are we to make of this line when sung by Emmylou Harris in her 1995 cover version?)

[16] In a paper entitled “She Sounds So Sad—Do You Think She Really Is?”, musician and teacher Sarah Dougher points out that the oldest meaning of “authentic” comes from the Latin (and Greek) authenticus, “from the author.” “So if you say you want to communicate “authentically” it has a meaning close to wanting to “author” something. The other things we associate with authenticity, like “truth” or “reality” are a little more nostalgic and depend on some notion of what “truth” and “reality” might be…. In the early stages of developing my voice as a teacher and performer, I realized right away that audiences want to hear you speaking. They want a version of you that conforms to their expectations. … If you don’t conform, or if you challenge your audience, you have a mighty row to hoe.”[22] There is a contradiction embodied in this statement: “audiences want to hear you speaking,” yet they also want “a version of you that conforms to their expectations.” Some songwriters—such as Randy Newman—willfully play with these expectations of authenticity; most of Newman’s songs are in the first-person voice, but instead of autobiography these songs are invariably in the voice of sundry unsavory characters: a bigot, a slick slave trader, an abusive father, a pimp. When one of Newman’s songs unexpectedly reached the top 10—“Short People” reached #2 on the charts in 1977—the success brought on predictable protests from the vertically challenged.

[17] In U2’s case, the fact that “Wake Up Dead Man” began with a verse containing the “F” word would, in Irish pastor Steve Stockman’s words, “not help the medicine go down.”[23] In his book Walk On: The Spiritual Biography of U2, Stockman summarizes what the song meant for many people, and offers an alternative interpretation:

Initially, the song seems to portray Jesus as dead and impotent with His hands tied behind his back, unable to bring any help to a troubled world. Closer inspection sheds a little more light. Struggling with why things are as they are and why God does nothing about it is common to everyone at one time or another. “Wake Up Dead Man” is trying to make sense, without actually making any, of the problems of pain and suffering under the eye of a loving God. It is the prayerful seeking of help and wanting a reminder of how things will be in eternity. It confesses belief in God as Creator—“He made the world in seven”—and in Jesus as the “Boss.” It’s a ranting plea to intervene and bring a solution to humanity’s conundrum of evil: “Are you working on something new?”[24]

[18] Bono’s interpretation of the song was straightforward: “It’s the end of the century, and it’s a century where God is supposed to be dead. … People want to believe, but they’re angry, and I picked up on that anger. If God is not dead, there are some questions we want to ask him. I’m a believer, but that doesn’t mean I don’t get angry about these things.”[25] As Bono put it in a better-known U2 song, Christ “carried the cross and my shame / You know I believe it / but I still haven’t found what I’m looking for.”

[19] Speculating as to the state of anyone’s spiritual walk is ultimately a dangerous business. Many of Bono’s at-times-controversial spiritual opinions can be traced to his background. Born in Dublin, to parents of a mixed Protestant-Catholic marriage, Bono witnessed firsthand the tragic results of sectarianism in Ireland. It has influenced some of his more blunt statements on the subject, such as “I often wonder if religion is the enemy of God. It's almost like religion is what happens when the Spirit has left the building.”[26] Evangelical Christians frequently make the argument that Christianity is a relationship and not a religion; Bono’s clarifying remarks about the Spirit similarly imply that he sees true Christianity as more than the sum total of a particular denomination’s doctrine and traditions. “God's Spirit moves through us and the world at a pace that can never be constricted by any one religious paradigm. I love that. You know, it says somewhere in the scriptures that the Spirit moves like a wind--no one knows where it's come from or where it's going [John 3:8]. The Spirit is described in the Holy Scriptures as much more anarchic than any established religion credits.”[27] Such a statement would appear to harmonize with Jesus’ statement that “a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem. … God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth” (John 4:21, 23; NIV).

[20] Similarly, in its music U2 has resisted efforts to be pigeon holed as standard-bearers for what has become commodified as “Contemporary Christian Music” or CCM. Steve Stockman frankly addresses the failings of CCM:

Since its start, U2 has lived its art in the eye of a storm that has been kicking up dust since Jesus walked the streets of earth. In Jesus’ day, the Pharisees strictly differentiated between what was sacred and what was profane. Today in the United States and Northern Ireland—two places of particular reference to U2—there is a similar dualism at work, and it has put bands like U2 under pressure regarding where they perform and what they say.

If U2 had been in fellowship in the United States or even just sixty miles north of Dublin, in Northern Ireland, it would have been easy to get sucked into a Christian subculture. Many bands in similar situations are discouraged from playing in secular venues like bars or clubs because Christians shouldn’t be in these places. The theory is that you shouldn’t take Jesus into what are often called “dens of iniquity.” The only acceptable reason for attending these places would be to evangelize the lost who go there.

As a result of this mindset, many talented musicians are steered into a gospel band scenario, going from church to church singing cliché-driven songs with limited content. The audience members are almost exclusively Christian, and, as the majority of them have already assented to the beliefs being preached from the stage, the clichés are wasted. A safe Christian industry ghetto is created with pop stars and record companies. There is a magazine, Contemporary Christian Music, which has become the label for the entire industry—an industry that is always in danger of ending up culturally irrelevant. When Jesus told His disciples they were the light of the world, where did He want them to shine? (Matt. 5:14) As more beams of light that make the light shine blindingly bright upon itself, or as strobes of illumination flashing radical alternative lifestyles across the darkness? Do you blame the dark for being dark, or the light for not shining?[28]

[21] Stockman may be making his case with overly broad strokes, but one look at the best sellers in the popular Christian media seems to confirm his argument. Catalogs from major retailers such as Family Christian Bookstores regularly give highest visibility to products intended to help the believer’s walk—not necessarily to reach the lost. Christian radio mega-networks such as K-Love offer a steady stream of uplifting, “positive and encouraging” praise songs that often don’t even address Jesus or God by name.

[22] U2’s refusal to fit the “Contemporary Christian Music” mold is partly because of such market-imposed limitations. Bono also sees that kind of marketing as setting the artist up for failure (and it has already happened—for example, Amy Grant’s divorce from Christian artist Gary Chapman in 1999 and subsequent marriage to country artist Vince Gill sullied her image in the eyes of many Christians). He has said, “I think carrying moral baggage is very dangerous for an artist. If you have a duty, it's to be true and not cover up the cracks.”[29] When the artist’s cracks are allowed to show, they are repaired by grace, which Bono calls “the most powerful idea that's entered the world in the last few thousand years” and “the reason I would like to be a Christian.”[30]

[23] How, then, can we reconcile these statements with the persona of “Wake Up Dead Man”? Even Ann Powers concedes that in “Wake Up Dead Man,” Bono sounds “like a drunk calling for another whiskey … trying to remember how he got to this terrible place.”[31] The roots of this dissatisfaction can be found at the height of U2’s “anthem” stage—in “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For.” John Smith has argued that the song is a plea for fulfillment of the Lord’s Prayer—“Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:10)—not as passive acknowledgment but as active imperatives. In the absence of such fulfillment, the song deals with what Smith describes as the “Christ-like agony of a world so racked with Divinely rejected injustice, loneliness, and corruption.”[32] It is this same world of “Divinely rejected injustice, loneliness, and corruption” revisited—in even more harrowing, stark, detail—on “Wake Up Dead Man.”

[24] So let us assume for a moment that the voice of “Wake Up Dead Man” is not Bono in some spiritually destitute state, but instead might be a persona—representing all that are without Christ and yet, in their own groping way, are seeking Him. Much of the song’s affect can be attributed not only to the performance, but also to the production and arrangement surrounding the vocal. Cone observes that the vocal persona “participates in, and is largely formed by, an all-encompassing environment of nonverbal sound—an environment to which he in turn contributes through his own melodic line and vocal timbre. And because we as audience are bathed in the same sound, we can feel this environment as ours. To the extent that we do so, we tend to interpret the vocal character in terms of our own sympathies and emotions, and to feel ourselves involved in his.”[33]

[25] Even the production of the song, its arrangement and the unusual way that Bono’s voice is recorded, help to construct the “persona” that Bono adapts for “Wake Up Dead Man.” As the song begins, Bono’s voice sounds haggard, slurred, and dirty—a distortion box is used to give extra “grain” to his voice. At the same time, a single unprocessed finger-picked electric guitar provides accompaniment, while a layer of murky processed sampled sound hints at something disquieting below the surface. In the second verse (beginning at 0:27), as Bono sings “Tell me the story / the one about eternity,” another voice emerges from the samples, sounding initially like a wailing gospel singer (0:37-0:46). The voice, however, is from a sample of Bulgarian choral music, making the “gospel” reference at once familiar and alien, ambivalent between exultation and despair.

[26] An additional, more distorted electric guitar punctuates the “wake up” of the chorus with power chords (0:48). As the song adds instrumental layers, including bass and drums, the guitar takes on a stylistic persona reminiscent of the late-1950s instrumentals of guitarist Duane Eddy. Eddy’s low-register “twang” style was heard on songs such as “Rebel Rouser” and “Peter Gunn,” but other songs—such as “The Lonely One” and “Forty Miles of Bad Road”—suggest a connotation of wide-open spaces and lawlessness. This connotation of the low-register twang guitar was taken up in the 1960s by film music composer Ennio Morricone (in his theme for The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, for example) and in the 1990s by Angelo Badalamenti (the theme for the TV series Twin Peaks might be seen as Morricone’s musical signifier mediated through New-Age marketing sensibilities). The same musical terrain was staked out in the closing song on U2’s Zooropa, “The Wanderer.” That song, a sort of musical version of Ecclesiastes, cast Johnny Cash as its singer, “walking with a bible and a gun,” his guest status perhaps making it easier to hear as a vocal persona. The place where Bono’s vocal persona finds itself in “Wake Up Dead Man,” then, is lonely, bleak, and—thanks to the song’s A-flat-minor aeolian tonality—dark.

[27] All of this is quite foreign to the freshly scrubbed musical Prozac offered by the likes of K-Love. But it is instructive to remember that American folk hymnody of the nineteenth century was often in modal, minor keys; such songs also often reminded believer and non-believer alike of death and judgment. Today—“Softly and Tenderly”’s reference to “deathbeds coming for you and for me” aside—we have few reminders of this. Today’s praise choruses freely adapt passages from Psalm 8 (“O Lord, Our Lord, How majestic is Thy name in all the earth!”) or Psalm 118 (“Give thanks to the Lord; for He is good; his love endures forever” [NIV]). How many contemporary Christian songwriters turn for inspiration to Psalm 10 (“Why, O Lord, do you stand far off? Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?” [NIV])? Psalm 13 (“How long wilt Thou forget me, O Lord? Forever? How long wilt Thou hide Thy face from me?”)? Psalm 60 (“You have rejected us, O God, and burst forth upon us; you have been angry—now restore us!” [NIV])? Even after the horrors of 9/11 no Christian artist dared to write such songs. While this may appear to be a facetious argument, it should be remembered that the Psalms record both extremes of human experience with God. Bono has said in this regard, “David was the first blues singer. As well as praising, he was there shouting at God—you know: ‘Where are you when we need you?’…’We’re surrounded.’…’Your people are starving.’…’Are you deaf?’ That type of thing. He’d be wailing, this militant mind, this poet musician with enough faith to believe he had a deal with God…believed it to get angry when it looked like He wasn’t coming through.”[34] Elsewhere he told an interviewer, “I was never tormented in the way those early rock and rollers were between gospel and the blues. I always saw them as parts of each other. I like the anger of the blues—I think being angry with God is at least a dialogue.”[35]

[28] It is possible to hear “Wake Up Dead Man” as such a dialogue, rather than as a diatribe. In this reading of the song, the title phrase is not addressed to God or Jesus, but to humanity. The chorus is, after all, a paraphrase of Ephesians 5:14 (“Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you”), which is itself a paraphrase of Isaiah 60:1; Bono’s titular line, then, merely continues a tradition of Biblical paraphrasing that has its roots in Scripture itself. The strophic form of the song, and the differences in arrangement between verses and chorus, suggest a dialogic approach. In that case, Jesus’ answer to this entire litany of doubt and despair presented in the verses is summed up by Ephesians 5:14—“Wake Up Dead Man.” If Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8), why not use a repeating chorus for His part of the dialogue? His answer remains the same.

[29] A few observations of the printed lyrics’ typography, as found in the Pop CD booklet, reinforces this dialogic reading: the verses are written in all lower-case letters (with the significant exception of the nouns “Jesus,” “Father” and “He/Him” in reference to God), while the chorus line is written in all upper-case letters. (Another item of typographical interest is that the only punctuation marks in the song’s lyrics are question marks). Even the distorted quality of the voice, then, makes sense in light of C. S. Lewis’s observation that “God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts [in capital letters, as in an e-mail] in our pains: it is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world.”[36]

[30] Obviously “Wake Up Dead Man” expresses a significant amount of dialectical tension, between belief (however obliquely stated) and doubt. It is equally easy to interpret this song as a bitter expression of disbelief, as many Christian media commentators apparently did. But the fact that this song does not so obviously yield its secrets is what makes it so compelling. C. S. Lewis correctly observed that Christianity “creates, rather than solves, the problem of pain, for pain would be no problem unless, side by side with our daily experience of this painful world, we had received what we think a good assurance that ultimate reality is righteous and loving.”[37] In other words, we need our U2 along with our K-Love.

[31] Bono summed up the music of U2’s Achtung Baby – Zooropa – Pop era as moving “from Psalms to Ecclesiastes.”[38] Stockman concurs, writing that “whether listening to the Pop album, enjoying the Popmart experience or just watching the video … there is an overwhelming feeling that the book of Ecclesiastes is being made into song to live among us.”[39] Ecclesiastes, of course, relates the world-weary state of someone who has tried living without God. It is not, however, a rejection of God—in fact, the final chapter of Ecclesiastes signals a return to seeking God’s grace. In the same manner, the last verse of “Wake Up Dead Man” seems to acknowledge a need for repentance, asking “If there’s an order in all of this disorder? / Is it like a tape recorder? / Can we rewind it just once more?”

[32] In this study I have referred frequently to the writings of C. S. Lewis. I close with a reference to another C. S. not often discussed in evangelical Christian circles—the American pragmatic philosopher C. S. Peirce. In his essay “The Fixation of Belief,” Peirce notes that “The irritation of doubt causes a struggle to attain a state of belief.”[40] He elaborates as follows:

Doubt is an uneasy and dissatisfied state from which we struggle to free ourselves and pass into the state of belief; while the latter is a calm and satisfactory state which we do not wish to avoid, or to change to a belief in anything else. … Belief does not make us act at once, but puts us into such a condition that we shall behave in a certain way, when the occasion arises. Doubt has not the least effect of this sort, but stimulates us to action until it is destroyed.[41]

It is for this reason that Mark tells us that the father of the possessed boy immediately implored, “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!” (Mark 9:24; NIV). As Kettler interprets the story, the man “admits … that he believes and does not believe. … The man is of two minds, yet he does not revel in that situation. He wants to be delivered from his unbelief: ‘help my unbelief!’ Doubt is not a virtue for him.”[42] This desire for immediate resolution may be what led many commentators to automatically interpret “Wake Up Dead Man” as a denial of the Christ rather than to earnestly grapple with the difficult questions of belief that the song poses—the same questions expressed by David in many of the Psalms. By effectively writing off the possibility of this interpretation, we fail to come to terms with the problems for which Christ offers the solution. As Peirce puts it: “we frequently hear it said, ‘Oh, I could not believe so-and-so, because I should be wretched if I did.’ When an ostrich buries its head in the sand as danger approaches, it very likely takes the happiest course. It hides the danger, and then calmly says there is no danger; and, if it feels perfectly sure there is none, why should it raise its head to see?”[43]

The solution, according to Kettler, may be found in Christ’s vicarious faith. “The paradox of the Crucified God is one who takes upon all of our sufferings, including our doubts, and triumphs over them by his faith, not ours.”[44]

[33] Francis Schaeffer, in his classic apologetic text The God Who Is There, wrote that everyone has a “point of tension” at which “the person is not in a place of consistency in his [world] system.”[45] To deal with this point of tension, “man” has “built a roof over his head” at this point to shield himself “as a protection against the blows of the real world, both internal and external.”[46] Schaeffer’s solution is straightforward:

The Christian, lovingly and with true tears, must remove the shelter and allow the truth of the external world and of what man is to beat upon him. When the roof is off, each man must stand naked and wounded before the truth of what is.

The truth that we let in first is not a dogmatic statement of the truth of the Scriptures but the truth of the external world and the truth of what man himself is. This is what shows him his need. The Scriptures then show him the nature of his lostness and the answer to it. This, I am convinced, is the true order for our apologetics in the second half of the twentieth century for man living under the line of despair.[47]

Schaeffer reminds the reader that “Christianity is realistic and says the world is marked with evil and man is truly guilty all along the line. Christianity refuses to say that you can be hopeful for the future if you are basing your hope on evidence of change for the better in mankind. The Christian agrees with the man in real despair, that the world must be looked at realistically, whether in the area of Being or in morals.”[48]

[34] In focusing exclusively on the new life after salvation, as so many Christian books and contemporary songs do, one forgets the other side of that equation. As Schaeffer put it: “When I accept Christ as Saviour, I pass from death to life, and therefore, before that time I am clearly dead. Therefore, when modern man feels dead, he is experiencing what the Word of God tells him he is.”[49] Bono’s song, then, is not the rant of a reprobate Christian, no matter how the reception history of singer-songwriters invites us to interpret it as such. Although it avoids presenting any facile answers, it is simply an acknowledgement of the human condition, and a reminder to every believer of his or her own spiritual state before their salvation.

Notes

[1] John Smith, “The New U2,” in The U2 Reader: A Quarter Century of Commentary, Criticism, and Reviews, ed. Hank Bordowitz (Milwaukee: Hal Leonard, 2003), 178.

[2] Ibid.,180.

[3] Chris Willman, “U2 Leaves Nothing Behind,” [http://jesus.beliefnet.com/story/52/story_5248_1.html], 2001.

[4] Ann Powers, “The Future Sound of U2,” U2 Reader, 110.

[5] Dave Marsh, “U2’s Crash: Why Pop Flops,” U2 Reader, 115-120.

[6] Powers, “The Future Sound of U2,” 108.

[7] Willman, “U2 Leaves Nothing Behind.”

[8] C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (New York: Collier, 1962), 26.

[9] N. T. Wright, Evil and the Justice of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006), 23-24.

[10] Christian D. Kettler, The God Who Believes: Faith, Doubt, and the Vicarious Humanity of Christ (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2005), 9-10.

[11] Jason Ewert, “Pop” (album review), [http://www.cmusicweb.com/rock/u2/pop.shtml], 2001.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Edward T. Cone, The Composer’s Voice (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974), 21.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid., 22-23.

[17] Smith, “The New U2,” 179.

[18] Ibid., 180.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Deena Weinstein, “Progressive Rock as Text: The Lyrics of Roger Waters,” in Progressive Rock Reconsidered, ed. Kevin Holm-Hudson (New York: Routledge, 2002), 98.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Sarah Dougher, “Authenticity, Gender and Personal Voice: She Sounds So Sad—Do You Think She Really Is?” (paper presented at the inaugural Experience Music Project conference, Seattle, WA, April 13, 2002).

[23] Steve Stockman, Walk On: The Spiritual Biography of U2 (Lake Mary, FL: Relevant Media, 2001), 151.

[24] Ibid., 151-52 (emphasis in original).

[25] Ibid., 152.

[26] Anthony DeCurtis, “Bono: The Beliefnet Interview,” [http://www.beliefnet.com/story/67/story_6758_1.html], 2001.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Stockman, Walk On, 12-13.

[29] DeCurtis, “Bono: The Beliefnet Interview.”

[30] Ibid.

[31] Powers, “The Future Sound of U2,” 110.

[32] Smith, “The New U2,” 180.

[33] Cone, The Composer’s Voice, 21-22.

[34] Quoted in John Waters, Race of Angels (Belfast: Blackstaff Press, 1994), 1.

[35] DeCurtis, “Bono: The Beliefnet Interview.”

[36] Lewis, The Problem of Pain, 93.

[37] Ibid., 24.

[38] Bill Flanagan, U2 at the End of the World (New York: Delta, 1995), 434.

[39] Stockman, Walk On, 139.

[40] C. S. Peirce, “Illustrations of the Logic of Science: First Paper—The Fixation of Belief,” Popular Science Monthly 12 (November 1877): 6.

[41] Ibid., 5-6.

[42] Kettler, 52.

[43] Peirce, 7-8.

[44] Kettler, 53.

[45] Francis Schaeffer, The God Who Is There (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1968), 129.

[46] Ibid., emphasis in original. While Schaeffer’s image may lack the sophistication of N. T. Wright’s overarching social critique, the belief in “positivism and progress” cited by Wright may be regarded as such a “roof.”

[47] Ibid., emphasis in original.

[48] Ibid., 46 (emphasis added).

[49] Ibid., 130 (emphasis in original).

References

Cone, Edward T. 1974. The Composer’s Voice. Berkeley: University of California Press.

DeCurtis, Anthony. 2001. “Bono: The Beliefnet Interview.” Downloaded from the World Wide Web on 23 September, 2003, at <http://www.beliefnet.com/story/67/story_6758_1.html>.

Dougher, Sarah. 2002. “Authenticity, Gender and Personal Voice: She Sounds So Sad—Do You Think She Really Is?” Paper presented at Experience Music Project “Crafting Sounds, Creating Meaning” conference, Seattle, WA, April 13, 2002.

Ewert, Jason. 2001. Pop (album review). Downloaded from the World Wide Web on 12 September, 2003, at < http://www.cmusicweb.com/rock/u2/pop.shtml>.

Flanagan, Bill. 1995. U2 at the End of the World. New York: Delta.

Kettler, Christian D. 2005. The God Who Believes: Faith, Doubt, and the Vicarious Humanity of Christ. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books.

Lewis, C. S. 1962. The Problem of Pain. New York: Collier.

Peirce, C. S. 1877. “Illustrations of the Logic of Science: First Paper—The Fixation of Belief.” Popular Science Monthly 12 (November): 1-15.

Powers, Ann. 1997. “The Future Sound of U2.” In The U2 Reader: A Quarter Century of Commentary, Criticism, and Reviews, ed. Hank Bordowitz, 102-14. Milwaukee: Hal Leonard, 2003..

Schaeffer, Francis A. 1968. The God Who Is There. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Smith, John. 1993. “The New U2.” In The U2 Reader: A Quarter Century of Commentary, Criticism, and Reviews, ed. Hank Bordowitz .Milwaukee: Hal Leonard, 2003. 178-183.

Stockman, Steve. 2001. Walk On: The Spiritual Biography of U2. Lake Mary, FL: Relevant Media.

Waters, John. 1994. Race of Angels. Belfast: Blackstaff Press.

Weinstein, Deena. 2002. “Progressive Rock as Text: The Lyrics of Roger Waters.” In Progressive Rock Reconsidered, ed. Kevin Holm-Hudson, 91-109. New York: Routledge, 2002).

Willman, Chris. 2001. “U2 Leaves Nothing Behind.” Downloaded from the World Wide Web on 12 September, 2003, at <http://jesus.beliefnet.com/story/52/story_5248_1.html>.

Wright, N. T. 2006. Evil and the Justice of God. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

The Untold Story: How the iPhone Blew Up the Wireless Industry

Battling the crisis in China

Bono Inc. Expands to Art

Rock Star Woos Artists For Big Charity Sale; A $7 Million Hirst

By KELLY CROW
February 1, 2008; Page W4

Rock star Bono is turning to the booming art world to help his altruistic brand, (Product) Red, raise much-needed cash and cachet.

On Feb. 14, Sotheby's Red auction in New York will sell as much as $28 million of art donated by Damien Hirst, Jeff Koons, Banksy and five dozen other top artists in a sale of a scale not usually seen in art or charity fund-raisers. Offerings include a 9-foot-tall medicine cabinet by Mr. Hirst estimated at up to $7 million; a red balloon-animal sculpture by Jeff Koons estimated at up to $1.2 million; and a new Jasper Johns gray watercolor estimated at up to $600,000.

The sale marks a shift in strategy for Red. Until now, the two-year-old commercial enterprise has teamed up with companies to license the Red logo on everyday products like $51.99 sneakers and $28 T-shirts, with between 40% and 50% of the profits going to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, a Swiss foundation spearheaded six years ago by former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan.

Between March 2006 and March 2007, Red partnered with four companies that generated $25 million in contributions. Since then, it has added five new partners and generated $34 million in contributions. (Three of those partners, Hallmark , Microsoft and Dell, are just now rolling out their products.) One early partner, American Express, says it has decided to not issue its Red card outside the United Kingdom.

Red's chief executive, Susan Smith Ellis, says the brand needs "oxygen" and that the auction is one step in an effort to move upmarket. The new Red Editions line includes a series of 39 red Zaha Hadid "Aqua" tables priced at almost $60,000 each at boutiques like London's Established & Sons. She hopes to line up other collaborations with art stars like Mr. Hirst who can attract a well-heeled clientele.

"The difficult thing Red faces is that it tried to make charity trendy for everyone," says Daniel Borochoff, president of the American Institute of Philanthropy. "And in a down economy, you need deep-pocketed supporters because the rest are worried about their mortgages."

So far, Red's contribution to the cause is comparatively small. Over the past six years, the Global Fund has attracted a total $18.4 billion and committed $10.1 billion for disease-treatment and -prevention programs in 137 countries, with nearly all the money donated by governments. Of Red's $59 million in donations, the fund has made $42 million in AIDS-related grants to Africa.

Last year the major auction houses sold $12 billion of art. Yet charity art auctions rarely raise more than $5 million apiece, auction houses say. Sotheby's participated in over 300 charity auctions last year that collectively raised over $150 million.

Q & A

Damien Hirst, a major donor to the Product (Red) auction, talks about art, commerce and guilt-tripping for a cause with Bono.

For the Red auction, Mr. Hirst says Bono invited him more than a year ago to bring his family to the south of France for a vacation. During their visit, the rock singer hired a boat, which the artist initially considered a "generous" gesture. Then one night Mr. Hirst says Bono "got me drunk, and at about 5 o'clock in the morning, he asked me if I'd do this [auction]." Mr. Hirst agreed to donate his own work as well as compose handwritten letters to induce 50 other artists to give.

Bono says he approached Mr. Hirst to steer the sale in part because the artist, who last year covered a human skull with roughly $24 million in diamonds, is "not afraid of the big beast of commerce -- he rides the back of it."

Some diplomacy was required to bring together traditional art-world rivals. Bono and Mr. Hirst asked Sotheby's and the Gagosian Gallery to market the sale together and conduct it on Valentine's Day. To do that, the auction house had to push back a major auction of contemporary art in London so that it wouldn't compete for bidders at the Red sale in New York, even though rival Christie's is proceeding with its London sale next week as planned. Gagosian and Sotheby's funneled their invitations through a third-party mailing house because neither wanted to share its client roster. The pair will split as much as 10% of the auction's sales to cover administrative costs; the remainder goes to the Global Fund.

Sotheby's and Gagosian are using the sale to showcase some of their artists who haven't typically been seen in a New York evening sale, such as Bernar Venet and an art team called Gelitin. Sotheby's is privately brokering some sales of Mr. Venet's steel sculptures, and Gagosian recently showed Gelitin in its London gallery.

Participating artists were allowed to suggest prices for their donated works, but not every artist approached for the sale signed on. Bono says Chris Ofili declined. (A spokesman for Mr. Ofili says the artist had committed to another upcoming benefit.) Last week several pieces by African artists were added as a gift from collector Jean Pignozzi; only one African native, Yinka Shonibare, had been included in the sale's original lineup.

Artist Antony Gormley in London says he is "inundated" by requests to give art to fund-raisers. He accepted this time because he wanted to help Africa and he hoped the auction would be "the art world's answer to Live Aid." For Christmas, Bono sent a red iPod nano to Mr. Gormley and each of the other participating artists. "I was very touched," says Mr. Gormley. His sculpture of a man, "Insider IX/Weeds II," is expected to sell for up to $250,000.

Some see Red's high-end focus as proof that its business model needs tweaking. "Red's success has been up and down, and the next round will only get more complicated," says Russ Meyer, a chief strategy officer who tracks Red for the branding firm Landor Associates.

Bono calls his start-up's performance "incredible" when compared with sales of other products with nonprofit tie-ins. The Lance Armstrong Foundation says it took nearly four years to sell $70 million of yellow "Live Strong" wristbands at $1 a pop, and it has taken 25 years for Newman's Own Foundation to pull in more than $200 million.

Unlike these nonprofits, Red faces market pressure to show growth. Red charges an undisclosed licensing fee to companies to pay for its 16-person staff and London and New York offices. For the most part, Red has relied largely on the marketing budgets of its partner companies, which spent about $50 million in Red's first year, Ms. Smith Ellis says. (Red's own annual marketing budget is under $1 million.)

Artist Marc Quinn in London says he has been following Red's trajectory from afar, and agreed to donate "Red Sphinx," a white-bronze sculpture of Kate Moss in a heart-shaped yoga pose with red lips. It is estimated to sell for as much as $350,000. "Maybe this will convince other companies to give away more than a few cents at a time" to charity, he says. "I mean, we're giving away the whole thing."

Write to Kelly Crow at kelly.crow@wsj.com

Sotheby's Valentine's Day Red auction aims to raise up to $28 million to help fund AIDS relief. Damien Hirst and Bono asked more than 60 artists to create, and then donate, art that incorporated the theme of love or the color red. Here's a sneak peek of what will be on the block. –Kelly Crow

Sotheby's

Bono says he began collecting art by Jeff Koons in the 1990s: "I'm in awe of Koons's work—that combination of joy and melancholy, that childlike fun with a dark cloud around it," he says. This Koons piece, "Balloon Rabbit Wall Relief (Red)," is estimated to sell for up to $1.2 million.

Blog Posts About This Topic

• Art for a cause, and PRODUCT(RED) happymonkeyplanet.com

• Preview the (RED) Art Auction joinred.blogspot.com

Irish rocker Bono keeps busy off the stage. A guide to his various interests.

Derek Webb Coming to Dallas, March 3

MARCH 8

Live at Mokah
2803 Taylor St.
Dallas, TX 75226
p 214.651.0633

Show Info
8:00pm - Showtime

7:00pm - Doors

$10 Advance

$12 Day of Show

Derek Webb @ MySpace