Morrissey has compiled the track-listing and chosen the sleeve for "Best of the Ramones" - TTY

Re: Morrissey digs Ramones! ~ tty

http://www.buzzfeed.com/katienotopoulos/teenage-morrisseys-scathing-review-of-the-ramones#2wx15gt

Awesome! “Blitzkrieg Bop”

 

[Anonymous]

Re: Article: Morrissey has compiled the track-listing and chosen the sleeve for "Best of the Ramones

I think it's cool. What's wrong with targetting the gay community?

 

[Protagonist]

Maybe this is a poor explanation, if so, I'm sure you kind people will let me know. "Homoerotic", when used to refer to art like this, a piece of photography, usually means that the art employs the sexualized male gaze on male subjects. It's difficult to explain, but you know it when you see the sexualized male gaze, because it's everywhere. Maxim Magazine, Playboy, FHM, and any ad campaign featuring attractive female models all spring to mind. This is a similar sort of shot, but with boys instead of girls.

 

[Detritus]

Re: Article: Morrissey has compiled the track-listing and chosen the sleeve for "Best of the Ramones

Can you please define homoeroticism? Morrissey was asked in an Australian interview in 1985 to explain a piece that was written on him in Rolling Stone in regards to him being gay. He said he was never asked if he was gay and he attributes it to wishful thinking on behalf of the interviewer. "That person said I was gay. He never asked me. He never approached the subject. I think it was wishful thinking on his part. People see what they want to see." I quote the interview because as far as 'homoeroticism' I truly think it is what you want to see.

Well, yes. Whether or not something is homoerotic is ultimately subjective, which is partly what I meant when I wrote "homoeroticism as an aesthetic form is often about perception". As far as why someone might perceive the image to be homoerotic, as well as what homoeroticism is in relation to art, I've already explained. See Protagonist's post above if you're still confused.

To be clear, I'm not arguing that there is a right or wrong way to interpret the photograph or the artist's intentions. You seemed perplexed as to how the image could be perceived as homoerotic, so I explained. I never said it couldn't be taken at face value as just a picture of some street kids hanging out. You're the one who seems determined to only see what you want to see in the image.

 

[realitybites]

Re: Article: Morrissey has compiled the track-listing and chosen the sleeve for "Best of the Ramones

If a girl finds this pic hot which I'm sure many would, even if none do here is the pic still homoerotic? If it lights the fire of both sexes then isn't it just a photo?

The person who captured the image was a gay man. It is HIS vision. He obviously found those young men to be erotic. But eroticism is in the eye of the beholder. The perceiver does not need to be gay in order to see the image(s) as homoerotic. Perhaps they are picking up on the subtle clues that the photographer staged: attire, pose, hairstyle--features/elements that men find attractive in other males, as opposed to what women stereotypically find attractive? I think these images are neutral though--humasexual if you will. They can be appealing to both straight women and gay men. Maybe even gay women and straight men.

 

[roguerebellions]

Re: Article: Morrissey has compiled the track-listing and chosen the sleeve for "Best of the Ramones

Well, yes. Whether or not something is homoerotic is ultimately subjective, which is partly what I meant when I wrote "homoeroticism as an aesthetic form is often about perception". As far as why someone might perceive the image to be homoerotic, as well as what homoeroticism is in relation to art, I've already explained. See Protagonist's post above if you're still confused.

To be clear, I'm not arguing that there is a right or wrong way to interpret the photograph or the artist's intentions. You seemed perplexed as to how the image could be perceived as homoerotic, so I explained. I never said it couldn't be taken at face value as just a picture of some street kids hanging out. You're the one who seems determined to only see what you want to see in the image.

You sound defensive. Don't take my eagerness to engage in conversation as a reflection on your ability to answer question or of you as a whole. I pride myself that I'm not a troller or someone who is here only to diss Morrissey. Like any great piece of art whether it is drawn or taken by a photographer it has created a stir .

 

[roguerebellions]

I think the image looks hetero erotic.

 

[Detritus]

Re: Article: Morrissey has compiled the track-listing and chosen the sleeve for "Best of the Ramones

You sound defensive. Don't take my eagerness to engage in conversation as a reflection on your ability to answer question or of you as a whole. I pride myself that I'm not a troller or someone who is here only to diss Morrissey. Like any great piece of art whether it is drawn or taken by a photographer it has created a stir .

Fair enough. No hard feelings.

 

[manicboy]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

Are those the Ramones on the cover? It's certainly a nice photo but what does it have to do with the 'Mones?

And while he's at it, why not ask Sire to distribute World Peace?

 

[marred]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

Are those the Ramones on the cover? It's certainly a nice photo but what does it have to do with the 'Mones?

And while he's at it, why not ask Sire to distribute World Peace?

And there lies the irony. Also I had the same question about Sire.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: Article: Morrissey has compiled the track-listing and chosen the sleeve for "Best of the Ramones

Can you please define homoeroticism? Morrissey was asked in an Australian interview in 1985 to explain a piece that was written on him in Rolling Stone in regards to him being gay. He said he was never asked if he was gay and he attributes it to wishful thinking on behalf of the interviewer. "That person said I was gay. He never asked me. He never approached the subject. I think it was wishful thinking on his part. People see what they want to see." I quote the interview because as far as 'homoeroticism' I truly think it is what you want to see.

Did you read Autobiography???
Funny how - for a supposed "humasexual" - Morrissey has largely used images of sexy men throughout his entire career and he may claim not to be into types but rather individuals, but he seems to be attracted to a very specific type (young skinhead white dudes).
I can't believe people are still debating this, but then it was perfectly clear in the days of The Smiths for anyone with eyes, ears and a modicum of intelligence.

 

[realitybites]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

Are those the Ramones on the cover? It's certainly a nice photo but what does it have to do with the 'Mones?

And while he's at it, why not ask Sire to distribute World Peace?

Moz could have used this photo instead. But it perhaps isn't homoerotic enough. Not erotic at all actually.

I do see similarities in the two images: both are in black and white, have four dudes, and are taken in a city setting. Maybe this image inspired Moz's choice of the other. Being that they look so much alike.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

I do see similarities in the two images: both are in black and white, have four dudes, and are taken in a city setting...

The only difference being that the dudes in Moz's photo aren't fugly. *thumbsup*

 

[realitybites]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

The only difference being that the dudes in Moz's photo aren't fugly. *thumbsup*

And they are shirtless--one is, anyhow. But the Ramones are wearing leather jackets. Perhaps that was the real reason Moz didn't chose an actual Ramones image. All of them have them in leather. Ha!

 

[VivaGil]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

Moz could have used this photo instead. But it perhaps isn't homoerotic enough. Not erotic at all actually.

I do see similarities in the two images: both are in black and white, have four dudes, and are taken in a city setting. Maybe this image inspired Moz's choice of the other. Being that they look so much alike.

Not erotic enough although although you can clearly see it's package?

 

[marred]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

Moz could have used this photo instead. But it perhaps isn't homoerotic enough. Not erotic at all actually.

I do see similarities in the two images: both are in black and white, have four dudes, and are taken in a city setting. Maybe this image inspired Moz's choice of the other. Being that they look so much alike.

It's a great photo but it's too obvious for Morrissey. They are hardly a macho looking bunch of dudes.

 

[realitybites]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

Not erotic enough although although you can clearly see it's package?

Haha. Oh wow! Yeah, definitely erotic!

 

[realitybites]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

It's a great photo but it's too obvious for Morrissey. They are hardly a macho looking bunch of dudes.

I'd argue that they are stereotypically masculine. Don't let their thin frames and long hair fool you.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

Moz could have used this photo instead. But it perhaps isn't homoerotic enough. Not erotic at all actually.

I do see similarities in the two images: both are in black and white, have four dudes, and are taken in a city setting. Maybe this image inspired Moz's choice of the other. Being that they look so much alike.

this picture was already used though on the cover of Ramones Rocket To Russia album so be stupid to use again.

Johnny Ramone though must be turning in his grave at this cover. The most un Ramones cover you could ever choose,.

 

[Mr Delaney]

Re: TTY: Morrissey digs Ramones

Trust me, the picture has a homorerotic element. Not that that changes anything - it's all in the eye of the beholder etc and it does not preclude other ways of viewing the pic.

I do see similarities in the two images: both are in black and white, have four dudes, and are taken in a city setting. Maybe this image inspired Moz's choice of the other. Being that they look so much alike.

I'm sure there's a The World Won't Listen-type of explanation behind it - even if the Moz-chosen boys look far too good to represent the skinny "real" Ramones.

 

[BrummieBoy]

Re: Morrissey digs Ramones! ~ tty

"The Ramones have absolutely nothing to add that is of relevance or importance and should be rightly filed and forgetten."
- 17 year old Morrissey

http://boingboing.net/2012/09/27/morrissey-at-age-17-ramones.html

Yes, Morrissey is a retrospective pseud. He also never mentions the Sex Pistols gigs at Birmingham Barbarellas & Bogarts. Mind you, nor does John Lydon. Nor did McClaren. I guess being LOL'd at by Sabbath denizens for trying to parlay a slower version of "Paranoid" as "Anarchy In The UK" was so mortifying that it had to be erased from the record. Maybe young "Morrissey" was watching Coronation Street those nights or the NME/Sounds/Melody Maker didn't alert Madchester to the epochal gigs in Brum.

This pathetic cover is designed to signal that The Ramones (like Lou Reed and others) were really only important as part of the pantheon of Morrissey's supposedly "cool" hipster influences. The fact that the pseud never even liked them when they exploded onto Britain's shores speaks volumes...what a tosser! Who knew? Well, actually, a LOT of folk have known since Cannock Chase in 1983 that this guy had Wanker written all over his forehead. Just some of us were more gullible/trusting. Time for another fatwa?

regards
[LOL'ing till my tummy hurts]
BB.