"List of the Lost" reviews in The Guardian, The Daily Beast

I'll make up my own mind, but The Guardian are not impressed...

Morrissey: What we learned about him from List of the Lost by Michael Hann - The Guardian blog
Morrissey’s first novel is out and … well, it’s not very good. But the classic Moz tropes are present and correct

Excerpt:

"It’s commonplace in this kind of article to tell you we’re reading the book so you don’t have to. It’s a tease, usually. In the case of List of the Lost, however, it’s absolutely true. Do not read this book; do not sully yourself with it, no matter how temptingly brief it seems. All those who shepherded it to print should hang their heads in shame, for it’s hard to imagine anything this bad has been put between covers by anyone other than a vanity publisher. It is an unpolished turd of a book, the stale excrement of Morrissey’s imagination."

By the way ... I note at the very beginning "The author would like to thank Helen Conford"

The Dailybeast say...

Morrissey’s First Novel ‘List of the Lost’ Is a Bizarre, Misogynistic Ramble by Nico Hines - The Daily Beast
The writing is laughably clunky, the characters thinly drawn, the style stilted. But what’s worst about the ex-Smiths frontman’s List of the Lost is its repulsive treatment of women.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Eliza and Ezra rolled together into the one giggling snowball of full-figured copulation, screaming and shouting as they playfully bit and pulled at each other in a dangerous and clamorous rollercoaster coil of sexually violent rotation with Eliza’s breasts barrel-rolled across Ezra’s howling mouth and the pained frenzy of his bulbous salutation extenuating his excitement as it smacked its way into every muscles of Eliza’s body except for the otherwise central zone.”

HOLY JESUS! That might just be the worst sentence I've ever read. Is it too late to cancel my order? :(
 
I don't think Morrissey has experienced any personal growth since 1985. He had such a brilliant mind at one time, but I think all the yes men agreeing to his self indulgent rubbish for years and years has clouded his judgement.
 
The excerpts that have come out so far are all hideously bad. I'm keeping my money in my pocket for this one.
It seems like a real contender for the Bulwer-Lytton award.
 
Last edited:
The allegations of misogyny in The Daily Beast review are intriguing, particularly in light of similar allegations that were made against 'Autobiography' (vaginas yawning like open graves, etc). There seems to be a clear thread of women hating in Morrissey's writing that stretches back from 'Pretty Girls Make Graves' to 'Kick the Bride Down the Aisle' - and yet this is often overlooked by starry-eyed female fans, and Morrissey himself claimed back in the Smiths' days to be a staunch feminist.

I don't know his feelings towards women have something to do with his obvious aversion to heterosexuality, and what was expected of him as a presumed straight man growing up, but there is something interesting going on here that I'd love someone to unpick. Never mind 'is Morrissey a racist' - how about 'is Morrissey' a misogynist? As usual, the guy presents us with a mass of contradictions. I'd love someone to get him on an analysis's couch and publish the results.
 
Re The Daily Beast, I don't think I give rat's fart about the opinions of the kind of critic who'd dismiss a book because he finds it shockingly misogynistic. Presumably, he'd find Burgess revoltingly fond of violence and Houellebecq really rather a distasteful chap. Which is true, but those are reasons why they are worth reading. Good books that make you think aren't generally written by nice people who share your preconceptions.
 
"Eliza and Ezra rolled together into the one giggling snowball of full-figured copulation, screaming and shouting as they playfully bit and pulled at each other in a dangerous and clamorous rollercoaster coil of sexually violent rotation with Eliza’s breasts barrel-rolled across Ezra’s howling mouth and the pained frenzy of his bulbous salutation extenuating his excitement as it smacked its way into every muscles of Eliza’s body except for the otherwise central zone.”

HOLY JESUS! That might just be the worst sentence I've ever read. Is it too late to cancel my order? :(

He forgot the beth part.
 
What a stunning piece of crap the Guardian "review" is! Possibly I may share its central conclusion (I won't know until I've read the book), but this is simply not a review. It merely dismisses the book without even a pretense of analysing it, and then goes on to treat it as if it was not in fact a novel, but rather a coded depiction of Morrissey's present condition and views. Presumably written on the basis of the safe knowledge that the people who are mainly going to be finding it through Google this very morning and giving the Guardian their precious clicks are of the kind who care primarily about that. "What we learned about him" indeed. What a despicable piece of journalism.
 
Last edited:
I'm afraid this whole sorry episode demonstrates just how deluded Morrissey has become. Well, the truth is out. The writing here is embarrassing, nothing more, nothing less. Did he actually read it, before pinging it off to Penguin? If he did, what did he think? This thin story - I refuse to call it a novel - could have been written by a 12 year old with a thesaurus. It's that bad. I've always suspected Morrissey's was an accidental sort of genius, and this pitiful attempt at long-form writing has confirmed my suspicions. Penguin should hang their head in shame for publishing this. Two reputations in tatters this morning.
 
The allegations of misogyny in The Daily Beast review are intriguing, particularly in light of similar allegations that were made against 'Autobiography' (vaginas yawning like open graves, etc). There seems to be a clear thread of women hating in Morrissey's writing that stretches back from 'Pretty Girls Make Graves' to 'Kick the Bride Down the Aisle' - and yet this is often overlooked by starry-eyed female fans, and Morrissey himself claimed back in the Smiths' days to be a staunch feminist.

I don't know his feelings towards women have something to do with his obvious aversion to heterosexuality, and what was expected of him as a presumed straight man growing up, but there is something interesting going on here that I'd love someone to unpick. Never mind 'is Morrissey a racist' - how about 'is Morrissey' a misogynist? As usual, the guy presents us with a mass of contradictions. I'd love someone to get him on an analysis's couch and publish the results.

He's not a misogonist. There's an interesting part where he describes a sexual experience as a 13 year old and the girl laughs at him. It explains A LOT. He has dumbass male characters in the book that he described with the same contempt as some of the women. Eliza is a main character and she's intelligent interesting and likeable. Morrissey only likes a certain type of person and that's the same whether it's male or female. People call him a misogonist cos if your a man and you say something unflattering about a female than you must be misogonist. The mothers are all described as saints. Last time I checked only females were mothers. It's just lazy journalism. Doesn't everyone believe that woman's bodies have been shown more than men's? I've never seen a penis in a movie, but tits and vaginas are shown all the time. Some things are facts. Recognizing them and calling them out doesn't make you a woman hater.
 
I only consider reviews by novelist about a novel. If you haven't written a novel and you make you're living on reading and reviewing them then your opinion is moot. Write a novel first. Get it published. Then I'll consider reading your review.
 
That review was extremely harsh. Talk about assassinating a book. I doubt if it will stop longtime Moz fans from buying it but could put off some casual buyers. No reviews on Amazon yet so will be interesting to see what readers think. Their review is just as valid as the Guardian reviewer. I see the price of the book jumped up on amazon: last night it was 5.59 GBP approx, today it is 6.39 but when you click on it says 5.59. I will wait until I have enough items to buy to qualify for free delivery to Ireland, and in the meantime will keep an open mind and will scan the amazon reviews. I've lost faith in Newspaper reviews as most critics seem to have an agenda. Only the reader can decide. As a great man once said "Why don't you find out for yourself?".
 
What a stunning piece of crap the Guardian "review" is! Possibly I may share its central conclusion (I won't know until I've read the book), but this is simply not a review. It merely dismisses the book without even a pretense of analysing it, and then goes on to treat it as if it was not in fact a novel, but rather a coded depiction of Morrissey's present condition and views. Presumably written on the basis of the safe knowledge that the people who are mainly going to be finding it through Google this very morning and giving the Guardian their precious clicks are of the kind who care primarily about that. "What we learned about him" indeed. What a despicable piece of journalism.

Dead right you are. They attacked the author as well as the book. Same reviewers probably lap up drivel from the likes of Dan Brown or whatever that spasm is who wrote those 'shades of grey excrement' books. But reviews have to be taken with a pinch of salt. Hopefully a more balanced review will come out soon that is more fair and informative.
 
I'm afraid this whole sorry episode demonstrates just how deluded Morrissey has become. Well, the truth is out. The writing here is embarrassing, nothing more, nothing less. Did he actually read it, before pinging it off to Penguin? If he did, what did he think? This thin story - I refuse to call it a novel - could have been written by a 12 year old with a thesaurus. It's that bad. I've always suspected Morrissey's was an accidental sort of genius, and this pitiful attempt at long-form writing has confirmed my suspicions. Penguin should hang their head in shame for publishing this. Two reputations in tatters this morning.

I've said something similar in another thread, but I believe that if Morrrissey had a natural ability to write a novel it's something he would have done when he was younger, or during the 'wilderness years'. This whole thing has been dragged kicking and screaming into this world because of the success of the other book. If you write under pressure or duress, or with the prospect of making money then there's a chance it's not going to be good. When Morrissey announced he was writing a novel in an interview he acknowledged the success of 'Autobiography' and said he was working on this as a result...

He hasn't written a novel because of a desire to do this. He's written it in leiu of a record deal. And that's what sucks the big one because Morrissey has said many times that he's never regarded what he's done as work in the conventional sense. Nowadays he appears only to want to sign to a major label, and this novel is clearly a money making exersise. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, of course, but commerce means more to Morrissey than art, quite clearly. Whatever happened to just wanting to sing? Or just wanting to write? About showing the world what you are capable of, where your talents lie?
 
I've said something similar in another thread, but I believe that if Morrrissey had a natural ability to write a novel it's something he would have done when he was younger, or during the 'wilderness years'. This whole thing has been dragged kicking and screaming into this world because of the success of the other book. If you write under pressure or duress, or with the prospect of making money then there's a chance it's not going to be good. When Morrissey announced he was writing a novel in an interview he acknowledged the success of 'Autobiography' and said he was working on this as a result...

He hasn't written a novel because of a desire to do this. He's written it in leiu of a record deal. And that's what sucks the big one because Morrissey has said many times that he's never regarded what he's done as work in the conventional sense. Nowadays he appears only to want to sign to a major label, and this novel is clearly a money making exersise. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, of course, but commerce means more to Morrissey than art, quite clearly. Whatever happened to just wanting to sing? Or just wanting to write? About showing the world what you are capable of, where your talents lie?

And from where comes this amazingly detailed insight into Morrissey's motives? ;) There is nothing inherently wrong in speculating, but whatever happened to just expressing yourself in a way that acknowledges that's what you're doing?
 
Cold water in the faces of those who took Morrissey for some sort of poet or philosopher because his vocabulary outstrips that of a George Michael. In 2015, one might be able to have dinner with George Michael and come away feeling warmly toward him, whereas Morrissey's myopia has driven him mad.
 
Everything said, the Grauniad review is unfair. It describes 'List of the Lost' as an 'unpolished turd'. Everyone knows you can't polish a turd.
 
The Guardian review looks to me like it's the work of someone who hasn't read the book but has sped through it with the purpose of producing a bit of a hatchet job. I suppose they wanted to win a race of their own for the first review.

However, if the rumours about no editing and proofing are correct then the author would only have himself to blame for any shortcomings or flaws.

I would suggest reading the thing and forming your own conclusions but the early indications are not good which is a real shame as his autobiography had moments (the first section in particular) of stunning quality.
 
Last edited:

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom