"List of the Lost" review in The Times

An anonymous person posts:

listofthelost_times.jpg



List of the Lost by Morrissey by Melissa Katsoulis - The Times (subscription required)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll just have to guess what it said because I won't subscribe..I'm sure it's not much different than all the other reviews lately anyway
 
"Long may he joyishly jiggle his art in our faces." :p
 
Oh God! Here is an astonishing ultrapositive review from nowhere, some may say... We must fight back! Immediately! Haters arise! Cooperate! Philosophize! Decide! Attack!...

Well the real world exists. And the reviews are just reviews, darling... Morrissey did it his own way. Some like it and others not. Some understand and others do not. I hope one day Morrissey decides to be a part of a rallye race as a crazy driver. I will see you then squeezed among the loads of his crazy fans. You will be eating your nails and praying for his defeat. Madly in love with him... Ciao for now
 
I'll just have to guess what it said because I won't subscribe..I'm sure it's not much different than all the other reviews lately anyway

Interesting article. We see here significant change in perspective of analysis. The first (reviews) that came out where deliberately nasty (to put Morrissey ego down finally and to set bad tone for readers), but this one is different, for example, in perspective of style; Morrissey the novelist is "deliberately eccentric in the high Modernist style". In time (in distant, distan future for sure - I want him with us as long as possible), because LIST OF THE LOST is clearly 'roman a clef" about him (some kind of ultra-fictionalized autobiography), this book will be very important in understanding his legacy.
 
I cannot read this image... but I assume it is the first positive review of List of the lost.

More 50/50 negative and positive. The article ends " unreadable at times but inimitable and irreplaceable". Started out much more negative though.
 
She mainly seems desperate not to write the same review that's already been written multiple times. She seems to acknowledge all of the books failings for which it has been pilloried elsewhere, but also points out that there are nice sentences in it here and there. Which, fair enough, is not false, but it seems a bit of a weak argument to put in defence of the book. A bit like "yes, the cake was moldy and the waitress sneezed on it, but it had little bits of chocolate in, and everyone likes chocolate, don't they?"
 
Now that was a good review but its the times so thats expected. Morrissey a fan of modernist literature. I mean that's so so unexpected right. Seems spot on to me from my understanding of his leterary tastes. Has anyone actually read portrait of an artist which I love but for sure found to be almost unreadable so to speak at times with its strange narrative breaks but for sure came to see its genius and as I already mentioned Ulysses's is super difficult with the run on sentences in penelope. That book I love a lot less but for sure found it interesting and well written.

Detritus, did u find the post where I claim it will be vindicated in time or did you see that I added qualifiers. If I'm wrong and I just misspoke then I'm adult enough to apologize if you can show me
 
Am I asking for it by mentioning a dairy product in my post?
 
Detritus, did u find the post where I claim it will be vindicated in time or did you see that I added qualifiers. If I'm wrong and I just misspoke then I'm adult enough to apologize if you can show me
You never expressed the sentiment in those exact words, but by drawing multiple parallels to classic works of literature that were similarly maligned upon publication only to be appreciated and embraced over time, it certainly seemed to be what you were suggesting . I should have chosen my words more carefully, so apologies for that.
 
It is a more balanced review. I started re-reading List again from about halfway through and it didn't mangle my brain as much as the first time. I knew what to expect. It is very playful with words and the plot does seem like a slight frame to hang Morrissey's heavy thoughts on but it is still captivating. I was expecting the book to be life changing like some of his lyrics and it isn't but as some one once said, he is still a very interesting drug.
 
You never expressed the sentiment in those exact words, but by drawing multiple parallels to classic works of literature that were similarly maligned upon publication only to be appreciated and embraced over time, it certainly seemed to be what you were suggesting . I should have chosen my words more carefully, so apologies for that.

apology accepted. i do try to choose my words very carefully even if i dont type welln when i dont care to, think and speak way way faster than i can possibly type (or even speak as a child which caused a stutter i had to really work on) and dont care for being judged for grammar which i find a shield for those who cant challenge the idea people are trying to present. especially when grammar makes almost no logical sense in and of itself and is just an evolution of many accepted concepts. im not saying you do all of these things but im trying to be forthright about how i communicate so that you dont think im trying to suggest or infer anything. i mean what i say and will just say so though as tactfully as i can with peoples feelings in mind
 
It is a more balanced review. I started re-reading List again from about halfway through and it didn't mangle my brain as much as the first time. I knew what to expect. It is very playful with words and the plot does seem like a slight frame to hang Morrissey's heavy thoughts on but it is still captivating. I was expecting the book to be life changing like some of his lyrics and it isn't but as some one once said, he is still a very interesting drug.

i agree with this being a much more considered objective review but like i said its the times and i have a bunch of respect for there review section. way more than the telegraph or the nme. i just think his musical tastes and what he wants to do with music differ from his literary tastes and goals. i think he writes music to connect with people, that his goal there is a goal to mass communicate, where his novel is kinda split down the middle. a desire to communicate and influence masses sure but also with his love of novels probably really wanted to enjoy himself in the way he enjoys the authors he holds dear. in short i think he almost seemed to write this novel maybe more for himself and his own enjoyment than for others to get or love. more self indulgent for sure but i really like that about authors and i love the language gymnastics but like ive said before my fav contemporary author is martin amis who for sure falls into that category
 
A fairly decent review. Doesn't anyone (apart from Morrissey) ever ask 'why do we need or want critics?'. Is it for people who will never buy or read the book but who want a quick synopsis? Otherwise it is just the opinion of one person, and it's not worth more or less.
 
A fairly decent review. Doesn't anyone (apart from Morrissey) ever ask 'why do we need or want critics?'. Is it for people who will never buy or read the book but who want a quick synopsis? Otherwise it is just the opinion of one person, and it's not worth more or less.

What it's worth depends on what's said. The idea that one opinion is as good as another renders all opinions meaningless in the end.
 
A fairly decent review. Doesn't anyone (apart from Morrissey) ever ask 'why do we need or want critics?'. Is it for people who will never buy or read the book but who want a quick synopsis? Otherwise it is just the opinion of one person, and it's not worth more or less.

Only slightly to differ here, would be the subject on which the opinion is rendered. If I am feeling ill, I am much more interested in a doctor's opinion than a mechanics, and if my car has problems vice versa. I would lay more weight on a literary critics opinion of a book than some random individual because (in theory) it is their specialty/field of study. Still in the end I agree that it is but one person's opinion.
 
A fairly decent review. Doesn't anyone (apart from Morrissey) ever ask 'why do we need or want critics?'. Is it for people who will never buy or read the book but who want a quick synopsis? Otherwise it is just the opinion of one person, and it's not worth more or less.

There are hundreds of books, films, plays and albums out every month.
If there were no reviews, how would you work which were worth seeing/buying?
You can't read much into an individual review but if most of them are agreeing that something is rubbish or something is brilliant, it's usually an accurate indication.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom