Morrissey interview (part 2) on the Swiss music show

Doris Day writes:

Morrissey's exclusive interview in English with a Swiss journo (part 2) is now published on:

The Swiss Music Show

Thank you Amy Araya for helping me making it clear in English. David



Here is part two of David's interview with the singer ahead of next month's concert (for part one, scroll below). In this second section, Morrissey talks about Switzerland, his autobiography, voting, Margaret Thatcher, pop culture, social media, and more. Read on find out what the singer gets up when he is in Lausanne!



Related item:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why, God, WHY can't he just keep his trap shut about immigration, integration and multiculturalism? It never comes out any good, does it?
 
Im going to call bullshit on him actually being a tagger. :D
 
Why, God, WHY can't he just keep his trap shut about immigration, integration and multiculturalism? It never comes out any good, does it?

He didn't say anything particularly not true, other than it's my understanding (economics is not my forté) "lower income areas" make up the majority of any given country since the idea of a middle class is a myth shoved into our brains by media to make people feel secure when really the gap between rich and poor is gargantuan with very few between who are actually drowned in debt pretending to be floating. So by extension of Morrissey line of thought, multi-cultural communities are actually prolific and (to answer the guys question) yes, the government has a responsibility to cater to multiculturalism. In short, maybe he didn't really answer the question here. My statistics could be wrong though, perhaps there is a true middle class in Europe.
 
"Multi-cultures in England have only taken place in lower-income areas."

He doesn't half spout some bollocks. Utter horseshit.

P.
 
Why, God, WHY can't he just keep his trap shut about immigration, integration and multiculturalism? It never comes out any good, does it?

Because he was asked a direct question on the subject, perhaps?:paranoid:
 
"Multi-cultures in England have only taken place in lower-income areas."

He doesn't half spout some bollocks. Utter horseshit.

P.

Bearing in mind that this interview has a semi-translated whiff ~ some of it reads as a slightly less nutso version of googletranslate ~ I'm guessing that the point he is making is a fairly common one, which is that the nature of the beast (free flow of people in a capitalist EU-Nation) is that immigrants, in my city at least, are shoved in the shittiest parts of town. Therefore the most blighted, least educated people already living (existing) there are being forced to accomodate sometimes radically different cultures from their own, in a way that the leafy Lexus luvvies simply are not. Those luvvies are then the very first to berate and demonise anybody from those shitholes that even dares to cough a critique of this arrangement.

In that sense, yes, 'multi-cultures' (sic) have, if not only, but certainly taken place on a far more widespread basis in lower-income areas than in the middle-income areas. I would say also that Britain/England's poor have handled this change far better than pretty much every other nation in the EU State ~ France, Spain, Germany, etc, where the level of organised hardcore racially motivated violence is statistically far higher.
 
I can't speak to his point about multiculturalism being a primarily lower class concern in England, since I don't live there and I'm not as familiar with the demographics.

However, nothing else in Morrissey's answer is particularly outrageous or even untrue. Group selection and humanity's tribalistic tendencies (and their implications) have been studied for ages, perhaps most notably by the economist Thomas Schelling, who utilized agent-based modelling to study segregation using game theory and a multitude of preference-based predictions. This blog post provides a detailed explanation of what Schelling's study entailed. The outcome of his study indicated that in totally integrated areas, even when the majority of inhabitants claim to value diversity and express only a mild preference of having neighbors of their own race, segregation still tends to develop. It seems deeply racist from an outsider's perspective but in actuality, it's much more complicated that that.

This sort of segregation occurs frequently within societies, and not just amongst whites---if you visit a major city, there's a good chance you'll find a Chinatown or a Little Italy or a Latino district for example. We also see it happen with social class, sexuality, even gender to some extent. People instinctively want to be around other people who are similar to them, for comfort, validation, solidarity, etc. It is a deliberate form of segregation, but one that is not necessarily a malicious thing or motivated out of bigotry. Furthermore, most people are resistant to compromising or giving up their longstanding cultural traditions and landscape, and when met with diversity this often leads to friction. For this reason, conflict that rises from multicultural societies will not resolve any time soon. This seems to be what Morrissey is pointing out.
 
Last edited:
Intelligent, well thought out questions. Nothing wrong with Morrissey's answers, he's entitled to his opinion.

How many "pop" stars are asked these kinds of questions.....especially in America?
 
Very Swiss questions, very British answers.

-"Sooo: in Switzerland we like melted cheese. And it's good. Do you think the rest of the world should eat cheese that way?"
-"Well, in Brixton, they don't like Stilton much."

Okayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy... :D

No no, I can definitely see a new world coming, through profound understanding and communication between open-minded nations...And loads of deep deep avant-garde ideas... :D

A breath of fresh air! The wind of change! Edith Piaf! Charles Aznavour!

And free zimmer frames for everyone!!!
 
What sticks out most about these "interviews" of late, all conducted by email Q&A, is that they all nearly ask the same questions, almost as if it's part of the agreement that there will be a question about animal rights, a question about the music industry, a question about the monarchy, a question about UKIP and/or immigration, another inane question along lines of "Tell me what The Bullfighter Dies is all about?" and various other "issue" based questions that ultimately become very boring. And while some of his answers are witty, they all feel like opportunities wasted and a bit of a white-wash. No novel or off-the-beaten-track questions, no real in-depth questions about his back catalogue, or unexplained lyrics. They just read like earnest, not very funny and very scripted "feed" questions by amateur bloggers and sycophants. Makes you miss the old days of the really fascinating Morrissey face-to-face encounter with a William Shaw or a Maconie or a Morley when you at least got a sense of who he is. These Q&As are really party political broadcasts, not objective journalism.
 
"Multi-cultures in England have only taken place in lower-income areas."

He doesn't half spout some bollocks. Utter horseshit.

P.


You could really have quoted any part of the interview and still added the same comment. And no, I am not saying the interview was 'horseshit'.
 
What sticks out most about these "interviews" of late, all conducted by email Q&A, is that they all nearly ask the same questions, almost as if it's part of the agreement that there will be a question about animal rights, a question about the music industry, a question about the monarchy, a question about UKIP and/or immigration, another inane question along lines of "Tell me what The Bullfighter Dies is all about?" and various other "issue" based questions that ultimately become very boring. And while some of his answers are witty, they all feel like opportunities wasted and a bit of a white-wash. No novel or off-the-beaten-track questions, no real in-depth questions about his back catalogue, or unexplained lyrics. They just read like earnest, not very funny and very scripted "feed" questions by amateur bloggers and sycophants. Makes you miss the old days of the really fascinating Morrissey face-to-face encounter with a William Shaw or a Maconie or a Morley when you at least got a sense of who he is. These Q&As are really party political broadcasts, not objective journalism.

Morrissey chooses the questions which enable him to put forward the same tedious, ill-thought out nonsense. Read one of these puff pieces and you've read them all. You only thing you learn from such interviews is that Morrissey is a control freak and a coward.

As usual he tells us what he thinks is wrong but fails to put forward any alternative. Until he does these patty cake email chats are no more enlightening than getting trapped with the average pub bore.

I would never have guessed that the man who once wrote with such lyrical brilliance would one day be reduced to this. It's very sad to see him like this.
 
Geneva. New York. London's financial City. Every megacity that has ever attracted high-level migrant workers.

P.

What about Newport, Slough, Stoke and Derby?
 
Interesting how he averred on the question of the rich finding shelter in Switzerland.

There is a certain rote quality to the latest interviews. Perhaps he felt pushed to do them via e-mail as a safety valve after the last NME set-to and the "chip salter" debacle. They do make for more sterile reading and lack the spontaneous and quick wit of the Eighties and Nineties Q&As.
 
Geneva. New York. London's financial City. Every megacity that has ever attracted high-level migrant workers.

P.

I can only speak for NYC in which case it's true. The migrants are clustered in the economically disadvantaged parts of the five boroughs.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom