Billie Joe Armstrong on recording with Morrissey

In an interview promoting Green Day's new album "Father of All Motherfuckers"...



Article here... https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...knroll-helps-you-dance-through-the-apocalypse

Excerpt:

This year the band will turn 34. No punk band has made it this far. The Sex Pistols lasted three years, the Clash 10, the Ramones 22. Green Day are writing the blueprint while living it, so it is no surprise that they have sometimes made mistakes. Last year Armstrong duetted with Morrissey on his covers album California Son – a terrible look in the wake of Morrissey’s vocal support for far-right organisations and individuals.

“I wasn’t aware until the song came out,” says Armstrong. “We do the song, and he was very lovely, and then the song comes out and a lot of Brits were like: what the hell are you doing? I really did not have a clue … ” Bewitched by the singer’s status as an 80s indie godhead, he simply failed in his due diligence. Cool pipes up, giggling: “Hey, we’ve all got our Ted Nugents, right?” – a reference to the US rocker and gun enthusiast.


Related item:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Comments

Thewlis

Junior Member
No, not necessarily. In interviews where multiple people are being interviewed (as is apparent in this one) sometimes you get people saying things to each other, saying things over the top of each other, finishing each others' sentence etc, which are difficult to quote directly so may be glossed.
The fact of the matter is, as indicated in your first answer, you don't have the first clue so you launched a tedious, lazy attack on the messenger. Presumably because that is easier than actually engaging with the inescapable fact that many people now dislike Morrissey because of his far-right political views, and some (like BJA) regret ever working with him.
Please read again. He never said he regretted ever working with him. If he had done so, The Guardian had certainly headlined it. He said, direct quote: 'he was very lovely'. Geez. Open your eyes.
 

BookishBoy

Well-Known Member
No, not necessarily. In interviews where multiple people are being interviewed (as is apparent in this one) sometimes you get people saying things to each other, saying things over the top of each other, finishing each others' sentence etc, which are difficult to quote directly so may be glossed.
The fact of the matter is, as indicated in your first answer, you don't have the first clue so you launched a tedious, lazy attack on the messenger. Presumably because that is easier than actually engaging with the inescapable fact that many people now dislike Morrissey because of his far-right political views, and some (like BJA) regret ever working with him.
Gosh, we're not going to find much common ground on this are we, you and I? Let's try, though: I completely agree with you that it's an inescapable fact that many people now dislike Morrissey because of his views, and that some people regret working with him. That's fine, and 100% correct! I don't like lots of Morrissey's views, either.

But I simply don't believe, given everything you and I know about the Guardian's current views on Morrissey (fuelled by both parties, of course) that in this particular situation, even with the Green Day band members "saying things over the top of each other" that if BJA had said something (however muffled or part-heard) about how he wish he'd never worked with Morrissey, agrees that he's a racist, whatever - the journalist would have asked for that to be repeated or clarified. I mean bloody hell, I still like Morrissey but if I'd been the interviewer in this situation I would have been doing my job *abysmally* if I'd managed to fuck that up, and not get the relevant quote.
 

ordinaryboy86

Well-Known Member
No, not necessarily. In interviews where multiple people are being interviewed (as is apparent in this one) sometimes you get people saying things to each other, saying things over the top of each other, finishing each others' sentence etc, which are difficult to quote directly so may be glossed.
The fact of the matter is, as indicated in your first answer, you don't have the first clue so you launched a tedious, lazy attack on the messenger. Presumably because that is easier than actually engaging with the inescapable fact that many people now dislike Morrissey because of his far-right political views, and some (like BJA) regret ever working with him.
The brick wall in my garden will be more receptive to your common sense, than the bookishboy idiot
 

A Man Escaped

Well-Known Member
Never understood the positive attention Green Day have received from the "serious" music press. Just a mass selling guitar pop band. Their lyrics make Bono or Chris Martin seem like Leonard Cohen or Nick Cave.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Please read again. He never said he regretted ever working with him. If he had done so, The Guardian had certainly headlined it. He said, direct quote: 'he was very lovely'. Geez. Open your eyes.
His bandmate compared Morrissey to Ted Nugent right there in print. That's not good.
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
Morrissey is 'very lovely' is the only direct experience described in that interview.

Everything else is people telling him he shouldn't have worked with him.
 
R

Roger O

Guest
If Moz had known beforehand that Billy Joe had mounted a musical on Broadway he may have passed on him.
A really corny cringeworthy musical. Jaysus lads.
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
It goes without saying.....Morrissey would be very insulted by that comparison.
Ted's a hunter, isn't he?

Morrissey' concerns are actually on the centre-left - authority, local cultures all becoming the same, religion being privileged over women's rights, gay rights & animal rights.

But for various ideological reasons these discussions are hard to have without being monstered, shouted down or forced out to join the right.
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
No, he's not, but that his bandmate thinks that comparison is valid, even in jest, is worrisome.
Yeah. I saw it being bandied about on Twitter, so it's becoming a myth.

It's a combination of laziness, malice & group think. No one dares say anything different once it's reached a critical mass.

It's not true though, so there's a pathway out, even if it takes a while.
 

PuppetParrot

Active Member
No, not necessarily. In interviews where multiple people are being interviewed (as is apparent in this one) sometimes you get people saying things to each other, saying things over the top of each other, finishing each others' sentence etc, which are difficult to quote directly so may be glossed.
The fact of the matter is, as indicated in your first answer, you don't have the first clue so you launched a tedious, lazy attack on the messenger. Presumably because that is easier than actually engaging with the inescapable fact that many people now dislike Morrissey because of his far-right political views, and some (like BJA) regret ever working with him.
Skinny slow down with the verbosity.
 

PuppetParrot

Active Member
Gosh, we're not going to find much common ground on this are we, you and I? Let's try, though: I completely agree with you that it's an inescapable fact that many people now dislike Morrissey because of his views, and that some people regret working with him. That's fine, and 100% correct! I don't like lots of Morrissey's views, either.

But I simply don't believe, given everything you and I know about the Guardian's current views on Morrissey (fuelled by both parties, of course) that in this particular situation, even with the Green Day band members "saying things over the top of each other" that if BJA had said something (however muffled or part-heard) about how he wish he'd never worked with Morrissey, agrees that he's a racist, whatever - the journalist would have asked for that to be repeated or clarified. I mean bloody hell, I still like Morrissey but if I'd been the interviewer in this situation I would have been doing my job *abysmally* if I'd managed to fuck that up, and not get the relevant quote.
You do know you are arguing with the insane, with Skinny.
 

Trending Threads

Top Bottom