Smiths album covers

[Copeland]

That new poll question really bothers me. What was so special about those Smiths covers? Am I supposed to know who those people are that are on them? Well, I don't, and I don't have the slightest desire to find out. I've heard that they are British actors and actresses. I mean, don't get me wrong...there are worse ways to adorn an album cover, but I just don't feel emphatically nostalgic about them. Personally, I thought the Picadilly Palare album cover said it all: here's a white English loner freak that will blow you away with wit (while wearing a hopelessly retro blouse).

[greasetea]

Copeland, do you snort coke?

Are you sure?

Well it's obviously something because you fart pixie dust you hinghang!

I hate you!!!

I hate everyone of you!!!

I even hate YOU!!! (Yeah you know who YOU ARE!!!!!!)

Greasetea Scorned 4 Life but Greasetea Rules 4-ever (man I am one witty mouthafugga!)

[Copeland]

> Copeland, do you snort coke?

I don't think people snort coke anymore. Well, maybe only in your neighborhood.

[Lifeguard Sleeping]

> That new poll question really bothers me. What was so special
> about those Smiths covers?

Umm...well, it was a HUGE part of what made the Smiths "special."

Nevermind.

[Copeland]

> Umm...well, it was a HUGE part of what made the Smiths
> "special."

yeah, sure. For some reason, I was a little more taken with the music.

[Lifeguard Sleeping]

> yeah, sure. For some reason, I was a little more taken with the
> music.

I obviously did NOT mean to imply that their music had nothing to do with what made the Smiths great, Copeland.

But a huge part of what endeared them to their legions of fans was the world that Morrissey the band a part of, and that included the artwork.

I hope you're enough of a fan to realize that Morrissey was obssessed with certain elements of art: literature, poetry, old films, yaddayaddayadda...and when he decided to put a Terence Stamp or a Joe Dallesandro on the cover, it was with the intention of paying some kind of respect to them and possibly introducing them to his fans, many of whom would never have heard of them, otherwise.

Don't be a dope.

[Cili]

> yeah, sure. For some reason, I was a little more taken with the
> music.

That's a risible response Copeland. This "just the music" crap always annoys me, whether it comes from a band or their fans. There was much more to the popularity of The Smiths than *just* the music, and if you didn't know that, you've missed a lot. When people connected with Morrissey during The Smiths' era, they connected with his clearly delineated *image*, as well as the band's identity--things that were influenced and molded by the aggregate of everything that you saw and heard from the band, including the covers. If The Smiths were dressed as clowns or like those mutants in GWAR, would it have made no difference to you since your focus was the music? What if Morrissey had big, crimped hair and wore tight spandex like those eighties rockers? Would they have been as loved and embraced by fans as they are still today? Much of what made and still makes The Smiths so timeless is Morrissey's (very clever) contrived association with "classic" images, films, writers, etc. Remove literature and sixties Britain away from a Morrissey of The Smiths, and you're left with something very different. The images help create the identity of the band. I don't think it was a coincidence--and if it was, it was certainly lucky--that Johnny Marr, when he looked his retro coolest, looked a hell of a lot like George Harrison did during middle-era Beatles.

Take a band like The Cure, for instance, which is the best example of how a band offers a world through the combination of their image as well as their music. The Cure, as did The Smiths, offers a universe to step in to, which is about more than just the music--although of course the music is the most important element. Bands speak to and touch us through a lot. As a fan, it's a very comforting place to be.

I assume you were being cheeky.

Cili.

[Copeland]

Well, no. It was just the music for me. I don't think the sixties images were particularly compelling, original, or interesting. (emphasis on original)

[Cili]

> Well, no. It was just the music for me. I don't think the
> sixties images were particularly compelling, original, or
> interesting. (emphasis on original)

I can see where you're coming from, but those images really helped construct The Smiths' identity, and that's what a whole lot of the fans were able to latch on to. They were very important to The Smiths, because they were so important for (not necessarily "to") the fans.

One hates to admit this, but at the tender ages at which people usually first begin to realize their burgeoning obsession with music, it's also often a time when one is searching for his or her own identity. When a band offers a packaged ID, that psychological plight only makes it that much easier for a young fan to bite down and hang on. The Smiths' images were very specific and deliberate in what they conveyed. I just thought it was strange that someone wouldn't understand how valuable they were.

I have to constantly listen to people who try to ignore all the more subtle aspects of films and music (I live in Los Angeles), and it always peeves me. I think it's unrealistic.

Cili.

[Andrew]

I'm sorry but I got to the Smiths by borrowed copies of tapes from friends - no covers involved. I don't know how many of you had the same experience, but I was rather appalled when I finally saw the real cover of "Hatful" or "The Smiths".

OK for the icon and imaginary and stuff, but that came later, and was intriguing because Morrissey was intriguing. And I haven't really seen much singles either; the first album I bought was Meat is Murder and to say the truth, the cover is ... a statement rather than a real icon.
And I never got the thing about the Queen is dead cover either. What's more than what's visible?

[Cili]

> I'm sorry but I got to the Smiths by borrowed copies of tapes
> from friends - no covers involved. I don't know how many of you
> had the same experience, but I was rather appalled when I
> finally saw the real cover of "Hatful" or "The
> Smiths".

But even if you were appalled, those images still are parts of the collective image (or "conception," or "representation") of The Smiths.

> OK for the icon and imaginary and stuff, but that came later,
> and was intriguing because Morrissey was intriguing.

I think it was a partnership of both, really. Of course Morrissey, his music, and his lyrics were more important, but the "personality" of The Smiths as a band I'd say was just about as intriguing as Morrissey the frontman. They really stood for and embodied something that was very clearly understood, which all the cover images complemented and rendered very nicely. Within the context of their time, The Smiths seemed to be totally new, yet at the same time seemed like they've always been there, and I think much of the latter had to do with Morrissey's ingenious machinations.

> And I
> haven't really seen much singles either; the first album I
> bought was Meat is Murder and to say the truth, the cover is ...
> a statement rather than a real icon.

It's a statement, but really, all the covers were statements in one form or another, subtle or not. The Meat is Murder cover and The Smiths' cover, those were more direct, while The Queen is Dead and Strangeways had covers that I think were probably meant to invoke indirect feelings or associations.

But taking a step back, all the images epitomized very well a sort of Smiths ethic. That's what made them valuable. Those covers (or should we say Morrissey did) usurped images of icons from the sixties, or statements about barbarism, vegetarianism, and homosexuality and turned them into symbols of The Smiths.

Really, the only difference between The Smiths' covers and the covers of most other bands is the fact that The Smiths' developed a theme, which ended up carrying more importance than any of the single images. The theme maintained a coherence, and that coherence was what constituted The Smiths' identity in images. All Morrissey's doing, by the way. So arguably, Morrissey *was* the Smiths.

> And I never got the thing about the Queen is dead cover either.
> What's more than what's visible?

I'd say that it was meant to incite feelings, more than any explicit message. There's an article that David put up on the front page about The Smiths covers, and it told about Morrissey and Jo Slee having looked at six different colour schemes for that image. This tells me that Morrissey was searching for a feeling--"an unquantifiable correctness," said Slee herself--more than he was trying to make some sort of statement.

Cili.

[Andrew]

I fear I will have to come back later on this one.

While it certainly is the way you describe it, I do think there were other fans who only saw sleeves of the actual albums. And to tell you my point of view, the link between Meat is Murder, The Queen is Dead, The World Won't Listen, Louder than Bombs and Strangeways was not clear to me; and it feels as though there's a shift in attention or focus from the first two albums (The Smiths/Hatful) to the later ones. I find the first two rather explicit (on the homo-erotic theme), the others not at all.

that has to be all for now though.

Andrew.

[Ruffian]

What an intelligent Comment Cili.. regarding the artwork on the Smiths albums..

To comment on Andrews later post.. I don't think their was any attempt to create a link in the albums and the images selected. I always loved the artwokd.. disticntive, stylish and just so captivating.. 'Gayness' in the imagery was not an issue really.. Some were and some were not.. They were always more 'urban' and very indicative of the 'kitchen sink imagery' that Morrissey always loved.

If there was a Smiths album now it would probably feature a sepia toned 'muscle man' from Venice Beach with a rockabilly 'chick-ette' gazing longingly into the middle distance!! Or something like that...

[Kirstie]

> If there was a Smiths album now it would probably feature a
> sepia toned 'muscle man' from Venice Beach with a rockabilly
> 'chick-ette' gazing longingly into the middle distance!! Or
> something like that...

only if it were in jest. I don't think Morrissey is too far gone living in LA. But I can see it as sort of a Pulp-esque foldout reminiscent of the pictures in the booklet of This is Hardcore.

Kirstie

[Cili]

> What an intelligent Comment Cili.. regarding the artwork on the
> Smiths albums..

Thanks Ruffian.

> If there was a Smiths album now it would probably feature a
> sepia toned 'muscle man' from Venice Beach with a rockabilly
> 'chick-ette' gazing longingly into the middle distance!! Or
> something like that...

Ha, I agree totally. That would seem to be right in line with Morrissey's sensibilities (with a little humour thrown in for good measure).

I think I'd like to see that cover, actually.

Cili.