"Low In High School" review by Stephen Troussé in Uncut (5/10, Dec. 2017)

Comments

Orson Swells

Well-Known Member
Its a f***ing 5/10 get over it. @Orson Swells, so anyone who gives a sub par review isnt a fan? On the contrary, i think he is a fan, just a disappointed one. The fact he has to go back 26 years to find an album which is comparably worse, suggests to me that he's enjoyed most of the stuff inbetween. He's reviewed Morrissey favourably on many occasions. I'm a fan, a massive fan, and i think the new stuff is shit. Thats my review, five thumbs down. :thumbsdown::thumbsdown::thumbsdown::thumbsdown::thumbsdown:
Generally a fan of an artist doesn't express the wish they died 30 years ago. That's what aroused my suspicion.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
PEOPLE, the BAD ANONS are in Magazines. NO reading Please PEOPLE. Only crazy writings. This anon in magazine is the BALD PONCE ANON from the other magazine!!
 

Maurice E Maher

Well-Known Member
The evidence suggests otherwise. The music business has changed radically from the model you set out. It is no longer enough for an artist to demand their record company spend money on promotion & wine & dine radio dj's to play a track. Morrissey's new single has been played sufficiently for the UK public to decide if it's a track they want to add to their collections. The evidence is they are ignoring it as it isn't even in the Spotify Top 200 chart even though it's free to hear! It's also no longer in the industry orchestrated Viral chart which suggests the attempts to win over the radio stations was a short-lived effort.

Ed Sheeran's songs are played non-stop by vast numbers of people. He is one of the few artists who can still sell physical CDs as he has the brand power to have them in petrol stations and supermarkets for legacy CD equipment in cars. He is immune to reviews as his audience know the industry is full of people trying to foist legacy hype such as Morrissey on to listeners. In the era of Spotify, it's viral streaming that drives album sales for a select few artists. Morrissey isn't one of them.

The evidence suggests that you could play STDIB non-stop on UK radio but nobody would ever listen to it again. For free. On Spotify and other streaming services. Why? Because these 'clueless consumers' as Morrissey called them think it's not worth listening to again.

You could plaster every billboard in the UK with the cover of LIHS and people would ignore it. The 'clueless consumers' aren't ast stupid as Morrissey thinks. His decades long posturing as a 'radical artist trying to break into the mainstream media' has been exposed as nonsense. He is a Singing Troll and the British Public are not interested. At least not in the numbers that Morrissey bizarrely imagines he is 'entitled' to. His conspiracy theory must now shift from the record labels, radio stations and print media to the music listening public. Why are the music listeners of the UK refusing to play his new single even when it's free on Spotify? Should be amusing to watch his contortions to explain that one!
https://spotifycharts.com/regional/gb/weekly/latest
Gosh - you don't like our Steven much, do you? I've gone off him lots in the last 5-10 years (the Paris atrocity incident was an all-time low) but I still love it when he sings a great new song (for me there were 5 or 6 on WP deluxe), and I still think he can be an amusing and interesting interviewee although he is frighteningly clueless/clumsy about politics and international affairs. And I usually greatly enjoy the live shows (depending on set-list).
Err, this streaming business. I read an interview with Robbie Williams recently, possibly the most successful UK solo act of all time. His sales have dropped away but his albums still shift around 0.5 million. He ruefully observed at the time of his last lead single that he didn't stand a chance in the singles chart because his fans 'don't stream'. Anyone of Robbie Williams generation or older is probably the same. Their fans/followers cannot be bothered with streaming.
We'll see when the first week sales of the album come out. World Peace shifted just under 20,000. I'm certain LIHS will shift a lot more, at least 25,000, probably over 30,000 simply because of the extra airplay given to the single, and that it's a pretty good song. If you're right, and everyone who's heard Spent the Day can't stand it, then the album will do as badly as World Peace (in first week at least). We'll probably know on Monday 20th Nov when the first album sales news comes through.
 

ordinaryboy86

Well-Known Member
Generally a fan of an artist doesn't express the wish they died 30 years ago. That's what aroused my suspicion.
I think the point he was trying to make was, ''Quit while you're on top'' - Morrissey has 4 incredble albums with the smiths, and 3 of his first 4 solo Lps were seen as a massive success. As time's gone on his material has gotten worse, and though them early days will never be forgotten, no one wants to see him tarnish his legacy by releasing garbage. He's put out enough good albums to allow himself a few stinkers, but when the bad material starts to outweigh the good, It will be time to call it a day, and that day is edging closer.
 

Tbevie

Girl afraid
What's more likely is that the reviewer has simply given up giving Morrissey the benefit of the doubt and arrived at the same conclusion I did years ago: Morrissey is a Singing Troll who will offend anybody just to get attention.
Why are you even on here then? Serious question.
 

Orson Swells

Well-Known Member
That must be it, because what other possible explanation could there be? That the album's not that good? Perish the thought.
That's not quite what I was getting at. I was commenting on the fact that the reviewer opens by wishing Morrissey had died in 1986, wilfully misreads and misrepresents songs, ignores a great song on the album, and maintains a jaundiced tone of simmering hostility throughout. To me this certainly suggests a skewed view of an album that may be good or not. We don't know. Few of us here have heard it yet. So far, I like seven of the tracks albeit six are in their live incarnations. Of the songs I do know, I disagree with the reviewer's take on them in the review. But these things are subjective as we know.
 

BrummieBoy

BrummieBoy
umm..ok..if he wrote those lyrics now I could see how it could be interpreted that way but he wrote it back when he was student age so....:confused:



lol! Though it's more like he's demanding to be molested - maybe by students...
I think the video for KMAL was pretty seedy. I can understand how the reviewer thought Morrissey was fantasising about those girls, not realising Morrissey is profoundly humasexual.
 

Maurice E Maher

Well-Known Member
I think the point he was trying to make was, ''Quit while you're on top'' - Morrissey has 4 incredble albums with the smiths, and 3 of his first 4 solo Lps were seen as a massive success. As time's gone on his material has gotten worse, and though them early days will never be forgotten, no one wants to see him tarnish his legacy by releasing garbage. He's put out enough good albums to allow himself a few stinkers, but when the bad material starts to outweigh the good, It will be time to call it a day, and that day is edging closer.
It's your opinion that his albums have got worse since 1994 but that's certainly not the critical consensus. His form has gone up and down from album to album which is no big surprise given the varying gaps and the changes in his musical songwriters and producers. What can't be denied is that Morrissey has become an absolute musical icon. Many other icons put out material that doesn't compare favourably with their earlier stuff but it doesn't really diminish its appeal. Paul McCartney has released a lot more albums than Morrissey - many if not most have had worse reviews - but that doesn't diminish his Beatles work, and it's still great to have the chance to see him perform live and fantastically enjoyable for those that do (although I'm not a fan of his or the Beatles). I wish people weren't so precious about Morrissey either in a negative or positive way. He's a pop singer with quite a few brilliant pop songs. Every few years a new album comes along and a handful of its songs are usually just as enjoyable as anything he's ever done although most are not. What's the big deal?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
My only problem with this review aside from its view of suicide as possibly being a positive thing and good for legacy building are that it seems to ninety percent focus on the reviewers objection to lyrical content and doesn't really go into what the songs sound like and sorta insinuates this point is incidental to the album. It doesn't talk about melodies or the instrumental side of things hardly at all and indicates that the reviewers dislike of the lyrical content, which will of course be the consencous of the "fans", is the top priority when reviewing the album
 

Shane D

Member
Its often noted that this site must be the only fan site in the world, where more members actually hate the subject rather than like it - and I think that's very true.

However, I think some people are being very quick to dismiss this (shocking) review.

I've no doubt that his UKIP comments will knock one or two points off the reviews of leftist reviewers (The Guardian must be sharping their knives), but its likely that if the album is wholly political it will be shocking at times.

When the track list first got released I breathed a huge sigh of relief because I thought it remained largely A-political but now it seems even In Your Lap could have been written by Russell Brand.

The man has given us some genuine classics like Your Arsenal and Vauxhall & I - even Quarry, Ringleader & Years hold up so much better now that alot of indie albums released back then.

I think we all know he'll never release another Vauxhall - but if he keeps up the sloppy political stuff he might never even make a Quarry.

A separate point though, is that there's probably no artist scrutinized more for being a shadow of his former self than Moz - mainly due to his "right wing" views.

Jonny Marr hasn't written a classic riff since Strangeways - yet he's still the son of god to pretty much the entire industry.

Paul McCartney has had some absolute stinkers - yet no one talks about him diminishing his Beatles legacy.

Nothing David Grohl has done past Nirvana will ever actually be remembered as a defining album - but he's Mr Nice.
 

Vegan

Well-Known Member
Critics truly are useless. He may be right he may be wrong about how good the album is (will know in a month) but the superfluous attacks on Moz reek of personal butthurt.
 

ordinaryboy86

Well-Known Member
My only problem with this review aside from its view of suicide as possibly being a positive thing and good for legacy building are that it seems to ninety percent focus on the reviewers objection to lyrical content and doesn't really go into what the songs sound like and sorta insinuates this point is incidental to the album. It doesn't talk about melodies or the instrumental side of things hardly at all and indicates that the reviewers dislike of the lyrical content, which will of course be the consencous of the "fans", is the top priority when reviewing the album
Well when it comes to Morrissey, who set the bar high and forged a name for himself as the best lyricist of his generation, arguably of all time, then i'm sorry, but he has to do better. I have friends that constantly ask me why i like him so much, i'm sure we all do. And i'll play them Rusholme Ruffians, or these things take time, infact i'll tell them to go away and listen to ANYTHING he's released, from 84-94, and they get it. Some people don't even like the sound of his voice, they just like to read his lyrics. But when the man i hold in such high esteem, comes out with ''Kiss me a lot'' and ''No bus, no boss, no rain, no train'' - It's very, very disappointing to say the least.
 

Kewpie

Member
Moderator
Subscriber
Its often noted that this site must be the only fan site in the world, where more members actually hate the subject rather than like it - and I think that's very true.

However, I think some people are being very quick to dismiss this (shocking) review.

I've no doubt that his UKIP comments will knock one or two points off the reviews of leftist reviewers (The Guardian must be sharping their knives), but its likely that if the album is wholly political it will be shocking at times.

When the track list first got released I breathed a huge sigh of relief because I thought it remained largely A-political but now it seems even In Your Lap could have been written by Russell Brand.

The man has given us some genuine classics like Your Arsenal and Vauxhall & I - even Quarry, Ringleader & Years hold up so much better now that alot of indie albums released back then.

I think we all know he'll never release another Vauxhall - but if he keeps up the sloppy political stuff he might never even make a Quarry.

A separate point though, is that there's probably no artist scrutinized more for being a shadow of his former self than Moz - mainly due to his "right wing" views.

Jonny Marr hasn't written a classic riff since Strangeways - yet he's still the son of god to pretty much the entire industry.

Paul McCartney has had some absolute stinkers - yet no one talks about him diminishing his Beatles legacy.

Nothing David Grohl has done past Nirvana will ever actually be remembered as a defining album - but he's Mr Nice.
I'd use the word critical rather than hate.

From the beginning the standard of Morrissey's work is higher than average which causes disappointment to some people.
 

countthree

Obvious person
Can it not just be that the album is not that good? Uncut has been kind to morrissey's last few albums, giving WPINOYB 8/10 and very favourable to Ringleader and Years Of Refusal. I don't think there's any hidden agenda here, it's just an honest review in my opinion.
It could be, but none musical album should make you wish the death of a person in retrospect. Supposing the reviewer is a mentally sane person, of course. As we can see, this is not the case.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
No, it isn't. It's the opinion of a reviewer in a very influential magazine & thus has far more weight than yours or mine. A lot of tosh on this thread that it doesn't matter what critics think, except it does....

There will be panic at BMG today. And in a suite in The Dorchester a very nervous PR person is going to have to break the news to Morrissey that his new album is off to a terrible start with reviewers.
Hmm "a very influential magazine" that sells less than 50,000 copies a month

I seem to remember the NME awarding the debut Stone Roses album 7/10...yet now it is hailed as one of the greatest albums in the history of recorded music.

The album may well be a disappointment, most things these days are, but the view of one critic in one tin-pot magazine will affect no change at all.
 
Tags
low in high school info

Trending Threads

Top Bottom