Hindley and The Smiths: art vs artifice

Found this article in the Guardian today and the reference to Suffer Little Children reminded how, at one point, Morrissey was capable of really connecting emotionally with others and could show kindness, warmth and compassion.

T-shirts with Myra Hindley on them? Modern art has forgotten how to care
by Jonathan Jones - The Guardian

Excerpt:

When The Smiths released Suffer Little Children, their song about the Moors Murders, they too were criticised for exploiting tragedy. And yet Morrissey’s lyrics do what images of Hindley cannot do, however clever the artistic manipulations of her photograph may or may not be. Morrissey imagines the ghosts of the murdered children speaking to their killers. His Hindley is a woman in hell, haunted by the innocents she helped to slaughter. Reading Morrissey’s words again after all these years reminds me that art can be compassionate: “We may be dead and we may be gone/ But we will be, we will be, we will be, right by your side/ Until the day you die.”

 

[nicky wire's legs]

yeah i felt the same way about Dahmer. He's one of the few serial killers that i found fascinating, but at the same time i don't think he was actually repentant of his crimes, but unlike bundy, he didn't blame it on porn, religion and violence. Dahmer actually had a normal childhood so probably there was something wrong with his brain.His father seemed pretty normal to me

i dont know that much about dahmer, i just feel like it was probably hell being inside his head. he didnt act like he was 'da man' because he killed people, the way some, like richard ramirez, did. i used to, when i was 19, hang around this serial killer forum, back when i was going through that obligatory killerz are kool phase that we all go through as youngsters (right??). and there was this girl there, who is actually quite a well known blog personality in sweden now, who called herself "lady dahmer", and was ridiculously beautiful, cool and gifted. she used to paint these amazing pictures of jesus in the likeness of jeffrey dahmer (lololol), and insist that jeffrey dahmer was very handsome in an ideally swedish way, and i would say that he looked like a creepy mommys boy, which he does. i was never really into killers myself, i was at that forum, much like i am here: who's morrissey? thats nice, can we talk about something else now. brad dourif, perhaps? the new crop of dutch models? to me it was the people there who were so interesting. the mentality of the groupies, people who would visit the killers and revolve their lives around them, and even the people whose interest was more psychological. i dont know what it is that i find so fascinating about these people. i still keep in contact with some of them, and feel nostalgic about that group, as strange as it seems to say that about an online forum. they were great--so much funnier and more interesting than the people here (and strangely, less hostile and hateful). never thought the name jeffrey dahmer would stir up feelings of nostalgia in me like that

 

[Anonymous]

What a sick stunt. Who would want an image of a child murderer on a t-shirt?

As for Suffer Little Children - I felt very uncomfortable about it, mainly because it mentioned the victims by name in lines like "Oh John, you'll never be a man, and you'll never see your home again." I don't think the family of John Kilbride really needed a pop star to re-imagine their child's death in that way, did they? Morrissey knew the song would be controversial and could be seen as exploitative, but to his credit he met with Ann West and was able to clarify his intentions properly. If I had been affected by that case, I'm not sure it's a song I'd want to hear, art or not. It's living memory and too close to home - unlike, say, his musings on "Jack the Ripper."

Jack the Ripper is a metaphorical reference. If you explore the song closely then it is more about a state of mnd rather than a direct reference. I can't see why you would feel uncomfortable about Suffer Little Children. The title is a biblical reference and it centres on the suffering. The song wasn't even that big a deal at the time. The press latched onto it for a while but there was never any mileage in it. The Smiths went onto being very successful and not viewed as opportunists, such was Morrissey's sensitivity and sincerity towards the subject.

 

[tyronepowebottom]

i dont know that much about dahmer, i just feel like it was probably hell being inside his head. he didnt act like he was 'da man' because he killed people, the way some, like richard ramirez, did. i used to, when i was 19, hang around this serial killer forum, back when i was going through that obligatory killerz are kool phase that we all go through as youngsters (right??). and there was this girl there, who is actually quite a well known blog personality in sweden now, who called herself "lady dahmer", and was ridiculously beautiful, cool and gifted. she used to paint these amazing pictures of jesus in the likeness of jeffrey dahmer (lololol), and insist that jeffrey dahmer was very handsome in an ideally swedish way, and i would say that he looked like a creepy mommys boy, which he does. i was never really into killers myself, i was at that forum, much like i am here: who's morrissey? thats nice, can we talk about something else now. brad dourif, perhaps? the new crop of dutch models? to me it was the people there who were so interesting. the mentality of the groupies, people who would visit the killers and revolve their lives around them, and even the people whose interest was more psychological. i dont know what it is that i find so fascinating about these people. i still keep in contact with some of them, and feel nostalgic about that group, as strange as it seems to say that about an online forum. they were great--so much funnier and more interesting than the people here (and strangely, less hostile and hateful). never thought the name jeffrey dahmer would stir up feelings of nostalgia in me like that

lol totally. I went throught that phase as well, but i didn't become as obsessive as some other people i've seen. I was checking the jeffrey Dahmer tag on tumblr yesterday and omg it made me sick how many young girls are in love? with him ugh. I feel like the serial killer phase and the 80's music is a phase every young person who tries to be different goes through. At least that's what happened to me

 

[Calamine Lotion]

It wasn't a morrissey song, it's a smiths song, if your going to troll morrissey at least get the facts right

A Smiths song is a Morrissey song and Morrissey has a long history of creating controversy in order to get attention.

 

[Water]

i dont know that much about dahmer, i just feel like it was probably hell being inside his head. he didnt act like he was 'da man' because he killed people, the way some, like richard ramirez, did. i used to, when i was 19, hang around this serial killer forum, back when i was going through that obligatory killerz are kool phase that we all go through as youngsters (right??). and there was this girl there, who is actually quite a well known blog personality in sweden now, who called herself "lady dahmer", and was ridiculously beautiful, cool and gifted. she used to paint these amazing pictures of jesus in the likeness of jeffrey dahmer (lololol), and insist that jeffrey dahmer was very handsome in an ideally swedish way, and i would say that he looked like a creepy mommys boy, which he does. i was never really into killers myself, i was at that forum, much like i am here: who's morrissey? thats nice, can we talk about something else now. brad dourif, perhaps? the new crop of dutch models? to me it was the people there who were so interesting. the mentality of the groupies, people who would visit the killers and revolve their lives around them, and even the people whose interest was more psychological. i dont know what it is that i find so fascinating about these people. i still keep in contact with some of them, and feel nostalgic about that group, as strange as it seems to say that about an online forum. they were great--so much funnier and more interesting than the people here (and strangely, less hostile and hateful). never thought the name jeffrey dahmer would stir up feelings of nostalgia in me like that

Oh let's talk about Brad Dourif and Dutch models. Brad Dourif played one of the great anti-hero's in Wiseblood. He actually lived what he believed while others shaped their beliefs to fit in conveniently with their lives. He also made me think that if you really follow what the Bible says, it can be a very extreme life. I also remember Brad in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. It was one of the most fragile performances I can think of. In both roles, I think he was determined to be free. Other then that, I think I saw him as a cracker sheriff in some movie. He's a great actor. I remember being pleasantly surprised to see him in the lead role of Wiseblood, because actors like him rarely get leading roles. I don't know much about dutch models, but I'm getting the image of you sitting at home making a model of little wooden shoes. What a charming hobby.

 

[Calamine Lotion]

As Suffer Little Children was amongst the first Morrissey/Marr compositions it's hard to envisage it being written for the potential shock value on an unsuspecting public. How did either Morrissey or Marr know in 1982 how successful The Smiths would be?

This doesn't really add up. They planned to be huge and people at the beginning of their careers are the ones who need attention the most.
I'm not 100% certain that was their intention but I could make a case for it using many examples where Morrissey has gained a little notoriety at the expense of some public goodwill.

 

[nicky wire's legs]

lol totally. I went throught that phase as well, but i didn't become as obsessive as some other people i've seen. I was checking the jeffrey Dahmer tag on tumblr yesterday and omg it made me sick how many young girls are in love? with him ugh. I feel like the serial killer phase and the 80's music is a phase every young person who tries to be different goes through. At least that's what happened to me

i was never obsessive about it either. though i did try to immerse myself in it at times (and even got into a bit of trouble with a cop when i decided it would be a good idea to taunt him with my serial killer knowledge, in an episode i shall not recall here... not one of my finer moments ), my interest was always half-hearted. plus i cant do gore. i find it baffling that there are some people who like to hear all the gory details. i cant even watch a show like dexter.
i dont think i ever went through the 80's music phase. thats a new one to me!

 

[nicky wire's legs]

Oh let's talk about Brad Dourif and Dutch models. Brad Dourif played one of the great anti-hero's in Wiseblood. He actually lived what he believed while others shaped their beliefs to fit in conveniently with their lives. He also made me think that if you really follow what the Bible says, it can be a very extreme life. I also remember Brad in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. It was one of the most fragile performances I can think of. In both roles, I think he was determined to be free. Other then that, I think I saw him as a cracker sheriff in some movie. He's a great actor. I remember being pleasantly surprised to see him in the lead role of Wiseblood, because actors like him rarely get leading roles. I don't know much about dutch models, but I'm getting the image of you sitting at home making a model of little wooden shoes. What a charming hobby.

haha no, dutch models, as in dutch fashion models. there was a great crop of them in the early 2000's: anouck lepere, an oost, griet troch, delphine balfort, elise crombez, hannelore knuts, roos von bosstraetten, an incredible assortment of the most wonderfully jolie laide sorts. a great moment for fashion, but im sure this doesnt interest you.
I LOVE Brad dourif! he's absolutely mesmerizing! his performance in wiseblood (youll note it's my favourite movie!) is absolutely superb. and as cute little billy bibbit. and you are right about him playing a cracker--well, deputy--in the film mississippi burning. i was a bit obsessed with him for a while. and yes, i saw him in an interview for wiseblood and he stated that they originally wanted tommy lee jones for the role but he wasnt available or something, so the role got handed to brad. thank goodness, i cant imagine anyone else as hazel motes.

 

[Water]

haha no, dutch models, as in dutch fashion models. there was a great crop of them in the early 2000's: anouck lepere, an oost, griet troch, delphine balfort, elise crombez, hannelore knuts, roos von bosstraetten, an incredible assortment of the most wonderfully jolie laide sorts. a great moment for fashion, but im sure this doesnt interest you.
I LOVE Brad dourif! he's absolutely mesmerizing! his performance in wiseblood (youll note it's my favourite movie!) is absolutely superb. and as cute little billy bibbit. and you are right about him playing a cracker--well, deputy--in the film mississippi burning. i was a bit obsessed with him for a while. and yes, i saw him in an interview for wiseblood and he stated that they originally wanted tommy lee jones for the role but he wasnt available or something, so the role got handed to brad. thank goodness, i cant imagine anyone else as hazel motes.

I'm going to have to watch Wiseblood again. From watching that clip, I realize I've forgot some of the finer points of the movie. It's been a few years. I'm interested in Dutch models (the fashion kind), just don't know to much about them.

 

[ACTON]

As Suffer Little Children was amongst the first Morrissey/Marr compositions it's hard to envisage it being written for the potential shock value on an unsuspecting public. How did either Morrissey or Marr know in 1982 how successful The Smiths would be?

Exactly right. Morrissey has said countless times that he never expected The Smiths to be so successful. David Brett (in his book 'Scandal and Passion') said that the debut Smiths album had a lot of risque innuendos (Reel Around The Fountain, The Hand That Rocks The Cradle, etc) but Morrissey started to tone it down after they got successful. I've read a few interviews with Moz where he said he was amazed at their success. It's probably why he doesn't play the industry game because he knows he's already far more successful than he could ever have dreamed. He still has fantasies about being number 1 but I think that's a throwback to the old days when good music was actually reflected in top chart positions.

 

[nicky wire's legs]

I'm going to have to watch Wiseblood again. From watching that clip, I realize I've forgot some of the finer points of the movie. It's been a few years. I'm interested in Dutch models (the fashion kind), just don't know to much about them.

it's brilliant, so many good lines ("no man with a good car needs to be justified" lol)

well as for dutch models there's not much to know. well, actually there's a lot to know, who am i kidding?! so i shall explain, you poor bastard, you...
well see, ive always liked models, models from every era (not however victorias secret or swimsuit models, thank you very much eww). im not really sure why. im sure it goes beyond the superficial though because i dont pay the same attention to celebrities and couldn't care less about people like angelina jolie or taylor swift. i think it has to do with art, a sense of 'how can we make life beautiful?' and to me, models, distinctly different from mere pretty faces, are like works of art. but the dutch models especially appealed to me--not at first though; it took me a while to warm up to them. but when i did it was like a revelation. this dutch invasion coincided with another fashion movement known as 'butch chic', of which just the name itself initially repelled me (the term butch calling to mind as it eternally does images of my fat mustachioed aunt). these girls were the archetype of the model who dumb know-nothing males who think only with their cocks (no offense, you're a male right? i only mean the know-nothing ones, of which you are not) will look at with puzzlement and make some dumb comment about 'how can i find that attractive?' (as though the fashion industry has anything at all to do with the sexual gratification of those males who have likely never bought a high fashion item in their life). but after looking at these models for a while, i mean, really studying their faces, something changed in me: i realized that beauty does not have to be immediately beautiful, and that often times the highest form of beauty rarely is. rather, the highest form of beauty arrives like a challenge: dare to think im beautiful. and in daring you invoke both the intellect and the imagination, and when the intellect and imagination are engaged the visual experience of looking at something is obviously going to be much more rewarding and engaging than the visual experience of looking at, say, pamela anderson (who is categorically not beautiful and i was aghast when i read morrissey say that she is--surely he's not that lowbrow?); the understanding of what is beauty becomes changed, deepened, enriched. people think beauty is a shallow thing, but i would argue that it is only shallow when realized on a shallow level: for example, a level that only recognizes that which is immediately beautiful or that which meets all the requirements of conventional attractiveness. and actually i think it's not only shallowness but also laziness that makes people just generally assume that whatever is immediately and in-your-face attractive is beautiful; that this immediate appeal is a criteria of beauty at all. and when i talk about beauty that is not immediately beautiful im not talking about any "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" "everyone is beautiful in their own way" nonsense. i am all too ready to argue that beauty has an objective reality of it's own, and that not everything can be said to be beautiful. but as part of that objective reality, all of our current society's specifications or requirements for attractiveness beauty itself could care less about; can even be found sharing the same space as what we as a society would deem as ugliness (and hence we have one of the most beautiful terms a person can ever be called, that of jolie laide), even if only manifesting itself as something subtle, some slight lingering in the lines or about the corners of a persons features, releasing it's charms slowly over time. there is a french saying--that no woman can be beautiful without also being a little ugly; this is true: a note of ugliness, i think, rather than taking away from beauty underscores it's majesty. and with that i present an oost, roos van bosstraeten, elise crombez, and my personal favourite, exemplar of butch chic herself, anouck lepere:

an:
http://media.allyou.net/2/22133/images/3008276/WebAnOost1-12.jpg.900x5000_q90.jpg

roos:
http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m315yntApD1qad56lo1_1280.jpg

elise:
http://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9gqfen9YU1qgop8jo1_1280.jpg

anouck:
http://i.models.com/feed/i/2011/06/20-700x1050.jpg

http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Anouck+Lepere+Cinema+Society+Screening+Romantics+nnkmaTsEjVql.jpg

http://41.media.tumblr.com/9c6671d84bcd7a8da0cb7f25e1c66b3f/tumblr_mwwjarxCVZ1qgjvz2o1_1280.jpg

(although actually i made a mistake: some of these models ive been calling dutch are actually belgian but whatever. its all the same to a dumb canadian)

 

[nicky wire's legs]

'T-shirts with Myra Hindley on them? Modern art has forgotten how to care ' - Johnathan Jones the Gaurdian

Does ART have to care ?

good point! what an inane thing to say.

 

[Mr Delaney]

'T-shirts with Myra Hindley on them? Modern art has forgotten how to care ' - Johnathan Jones the Gaurdian
Does ART have to care ?

No, but art has to relate (however vague a term that might be), as art is about dialogue, sending an message from the creator and getting a reaction from the viewer.

As will all communication, mileage may vary.

My reaction to this tee would be revulsion, same as with one bearing the likeness of Manson or Stalin.

 

[nicky wire's legs]

No, but art has to relate (however vague a term that might be), as art is about dialogue, sending an message from the creator and getting a reaction from the viewer.

As will all communication, mileage may vary.

My reaction to this tee would be revulsion, same as with one bearing the likeness of Manson or Stalin.

art does not have to relate. art is not necessarily about dialogue. where did you get that idea? art can provoke, it can confront, it can be controversial, it can be ugly, it can inspire revulsion. often it does. 'to each time it's art, to art its freedom' (motto of the viennese seccession)--if art has a duty to it's time than it must accept the ugliness of it's time as well, and i would say the myra hindley dress does this well, by being a statement on apathy and the culture of turning even the most abject and undeserving people into celebrities.

though i would say this is not art, not because its a picture of myra hindley but because since when does a picture of a person on a dress constitute art?

 

[Anonymous]

"Found this article in the Guardian today and the reference to Suffer Little Children reminded how, at one point, Morrissey was capable of really connecting emotionally with others and could show kindness, warmth and compassion"

"At one point"? It doesn't say that in the article, of course, but hey - so long as all snide remarks conform to the anti-Morrissey agenda of So_Low...

 

[Anonymous]

Pop culture has always had - and always will have - a fascination with murder and murderers: from the "penny dreadfuls" of Victorian London giving elaborate (fabricated) descriptions and illustrations of the crimes of Jack The Ripper, to Bonnie and Clyde, to Truman Capote's 'In Cold Blood', to the movie '10 Rillington Place' (Richard Attenborough's finest hour), to 'Gary Gilmore's Eyes' by The Adverts and beyond. As for the image of Myra Hindley, does no one recall the Saatchi 'Sensation' exhibition of 1997...?

For some to single out 'Suffer Little Children' as poor taste or as evidence of a lack of compassion simply betrays a shocking lack of knowledge and understanding of pop culture as well as a determination to perpetuate their predictable, infantile anti-Morrissey agenda. This is barrel-scraping of the most desperate kind. Stick to worshipping your Smiths tribute bands, Benny.

 

[Anonymous]

No, but art has to relate (however vague a term that might be), as art is about dialogue, sending an message from the creator and getting a reaction from the viewer.

As will all communication, mileage may vary.

My reaction to this tee would be revulsion, same as with one bearing the likeness of Manson or Stalin.

i agree. it needs to relate to be relevant and if people werent trying to be relevant then they would just keep there art to themselves. art can also just be secondary agendas to hurt cause pain and make money which is also kinda pointless imo. since there is no absolute truth i imagine it would be up to each individual to decide for themselves what art is and if there creations are worth any price cost to others whether it be financial or otherwise. i would say no

 

[nicky wire's legs]

i agree. it needs to relate to be relevant and if people werent trying to be relevant then they would just keep there art to themselves

i dont know what you mean by this "art needs to relate". to whom does it need to relate? it's not arts job to reach out to anyone. you have to meet it at least half way, you have to be a proper receiving vessel for it's message. if it was arts job to reach out to people then it would be forever pandering to the common man, the philistine, and it doesnt; it remains aloof. what is art is rarely ever defined by what the masses can relate to.

 

[Anonymous]

i dont know what you mean by this "art needs to relate". to whom does it need to relate? it's not arts job to reach out to anyone. you have to meet it at least half way, you have to be a proper receiving vessel for it's message. if it was arts job to reach out to people then it would be forever pandering to the common man, the philistine, and it doesnt; it remains aloof. what is art is rarely ever defined by what the masses can relate to.

i dont know why you refer to masses though it could be the masses indeed. art is an expression as defined by me. i feel that if you show your art try to sell display then you are trying to express something to anyone who can receive positively and negatively but its still trying to relate to someone or else why show it to anyone at all. if said art wasnt trying to reach out to anyone at all why show it. since it is its success is measured on that successful relation with either a positive or negative reaction. usually art as i know it is designed not with randomness but is design with a plan a goal as a painter paints something and not just random colors for example ie the idea that they want to express something within themselves and then show it to the public. i dont rate all expression as worth it or that it should trump certain principals such as free democratic rule. if something is deemed to offensive by the majority then im fine with it being banned from being sold. child pornography easily falls under this umbrella

 

[Water]

it's brilliant, so many good lines ("no man with a good car needs to be justified" lol)

well as for dutch models there's not much to know. well, actually there's a lot to know, who am i kidding?! so i shall explain, you poor bastard, you...
well see, ive always liked models, models from every era (not however victorias secret or swimsuit models, thank you very much eww). im not really sure why. im sure it goes beyond the superficial though because i dont pay the same attention to celebrities and couldn't care less about people like angelina jolie or taylor swift. i think it has to do with art, a sense of 'how can we make life beautiful?' and to me, models, distinctly different from mere pretty faces, are like works of art. but the dutch models especially appealed to me--not at first though; it took me a while to warm up to them. but when i did it was like a revelation. this dutch invasion coincided with another fashion movement known as 'butch chic', of which just the name itself initially repelled me (the term butch calling to mind as it eternally does images of my fat mustachioed aunt). these girls were the archetype of the model who dumb know-nothing males who think only with their cocks (no offense, you're a male right? i only mean the know-nothing ones, of which you are not) will look at with puzzlement and make some dumb comment about 'how can i find that attractive?' (as though the fashion industry has anything at all to do with the sexual gratification of those males who have likely never bought a high fashion item in their life). but after looking at these models for a while, i mean, really studying their faces, something changed in me: i realized that beauty does not have to be immediately beautiful, and that often times the highest form of beauty rarely is. rather, the highest form of beauty arrives like a challenge: dare to think im beautiful. and in daring you invoke both the intellect and the imagination, and when the intellect and imagination are engaged the visual experience of looking at something is obviously going to be much more rewarding and engaging than the visual experience of looking at, say, pamela anderson (who is categorically not beautiful and i was aghast when i read morrissey say that she is--surely he's not that lowbrow?); the understanding of what is beauty becomes changed, deepened, enriched. people think beauty is a shallow thing, but i would argue that it is only shallow when realized on a shallow level: for example, a level that only recognizes that which is immediately beautiful or that which meets all the requirements of conventional attractiveness. and actually i think it's not only shallowness but also laziness that makes people just generally assume that whatever is immediately and in-your-face attractive is beautiful; that this immediate appeal is a criteria of beauty at all. and when i talk about beauty that is not immediately beautiful im not talking about any "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" "everyone is beautiful in their own way" nonsense. i am all too ready to argue that beauty has an objective reality of it's own, and that not everything can be said to be beautiful. but as part of that objective reality, all of our current society's specifications or requirements for attractiveness beauty itself could care less about; can even be found sharing the same space as what we as a society would deem as ugliness (and hence we have one of the most beautiful terms a person can ever be called, that of jolie laide), even if only manifesting itself as something subtle, some slight lingering in the lines or about the corners of a persons features, releasing it's charms slowly over time. there is a french saying--that no woman can be beautiful without also being a little ugly; this is true: a note of ugliness, i think, rather than taking away from beauty underscores it's majesty. and with that i present an oost, roos van bosstraeten, elise crombez, and my personal favourite, exemplar of butch chic herself, anouck lepere:

an:
http://media.allyou.net/2/22133/images/3008276/WebAnOost1-12.jpg.900x5000_q90.jpg

roos:
http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m315yntApD1qad56lo1_1280.jpg

elise:
http://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9gqfen9YU1qgop8jo1_1280.jpg

anouck:
http://i.models.com/feed/i/2011/06/20-700x1050.jpg

http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Anouck+Lepere+Cinema+Society+Screening+Romantics+nnkmaTsEjVql.jpg

http://41.media.tumblr.com/9c6671d84bcd7a8da0cb7f25e1c66b3f/tumblr_mwwjarxCVZ1qgjvz2o1_1280.jpg

(although actually i made a mistake: some of these models ive been calling dutch are actually belgian but whatever. its all the same to a dumb canadian)

I never realized I would enjoy learning about Dutch models so much. Of course it's more than just the models themselves. It's how their appearance challenges the perception of beauty. I agree with you, the term "butch chic" is kind of unappealing, but the concept is much more interesting. Out of all the photos you listed, I think the one of An seems to capture this concept. There's a kind of androgyny to her. The way she's lit and photographed, I see her having some masculine features that have a feminine softness to them. (Bear with me, I'm trying) I'm also drawn to her neck and the way her hair is tucked behind her ear. She also seems to be gritting her teeth, not in frustration, but with a determination. (Like I said, I'm trying) The thing that also interested me about these models, is that I've always found myself attracted to these kind of women. I never knew the term or concept of "butch chic", but I've always been naturally attracted to this kind of beauty. In my limited vocabulary, I would call them the "bookworm or arty type", but I think you summed it up well when you said they're the type that spark the intellect and imagination. I want to know more about them and imagine them to have depth and maybe something I'm lacking in myself. I have seen Anouck before, and without knowing who she was, I was drawn to her appearance, wondering "Who is that?!" I've never really been attracted to the Pamela Anderson type, well maybe a little, but not really. I think the story with Morrissey and Pamela, is that he found her attractive because of her being vegetarian and working for animal rights and that he bought a poster of her for his nephews, in the hope that it would influence them somehow to learn about being vegetarian. Some kind of subliminal psychology I guess.