Morrissey interview (American Songwriter, Feb. 2018) posted - Official FB



41996_american_songwriter_1.jpg

41997_american_songwriter_2.jpg

41998_american_songwriter_3.jpg


Unfortunately, the pictures have been subject to FB's image compression.
Photo by SER. Interview by J.Beviglia (who I believe writes for American Songwriter Magazine).
Regards,
FWD.


Posted by dotmatrix522

FYI- the interview is from the current issue of American Songwriter magazine, the “Legends” issue!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This one is a keeper.
Morrissey take note -- this is the kind of interview that pleases fans, and also gets non-fans interested.

Fixed that for you and agree.
 
He said, on November 25th, at the Chicago Riviera Theater: ‘I did an interview a couple of weeks ago for a German newspaper and, of course, let me just say this: That was the last print interview I will ever do.’

In that case, this interview must have been conducted before that comment; the only other possibility is that Morrissey is a hypocrite when it suits him, which surely cannot be the case.

Is that really the only other possibility? How about this one - a "print interview" is one in which the "journalist" transcribes an audio interview. This is what it has meant traditionally. Emailing answers to a list of questions is also a "print interview" but only in the sense that it is "printed." Do you understand the difference? It gets to the heart of why he won't do "print interviews" any longer. He is claiming, and this is where your charge of "hypocrisy" may have some validity, that his words are edited or altered between the time he speaks them aloud and the time the journalist transcribes them and puts them in print.
Now, we know that the things he claims he didn't say are actually on the recording in the Der Spiegel interview, and we know that the things he said to the NME about the "floodgates" of immigration were most likely on the recording, too. He has said similar things for decades. He manages to get away with it because there are fans who will pretend that we can never know what he actually meant when he said "England is being lost," even when he supports UKIP.
But to claim he is a hypocrite because he did an email interview which might have taken place after he said he would no longer do print interviews and that this is "the only possibility," is clearly not the case.
 
Is that really the only other possibility? How about this one - a "print interview" is one in which the "journalist" transcribes an audio interview. This is what it has meant traditionally. Emailing answers to a list of questions is also a "print interview" but only in the sense that it is "printed." Do you understand the difference? It gets to the heart of why he won't do "print interviews" any longer. He is claiming, and this is where your charge of "hypocrisy" may have some validity, that his words are edited or altered between the time he speaks them aloud and the time the journalist transcribes them and puts them in print.
Now, we know that the things he claims he didn't say are actually on the recording in the Der Spiegel interview, and we know that the things he said to the NME about the "floodgates" of immigration were most likely on the recording, too. He has said similar things for decades. He manages to get away with it because there are fans who will pretend that we can never know what he actually meant when he said "England is being lost," even when he supports UKIP.
But to claim he is a hypocrite because he did an email interview which might have taken place after he said he would no longer do print interviews and that this is "the only possibility," is clearly not the case.

Just look at the f***ing state of you. Banned multiple times, doesn't have the balls to register with a new name for fear of being banned again, and waits like a Pavlovian doggy for a chance to spout brainfarts at selected targets.

Just for you, Mr. Logic Man, if it's in print, it's a print interview, you straw-clutching dullard. And my logic in the previous post is unimpeachable. But don't let that stop you giving us more laughs. Off you go.

And grow some balls and log in. But you won't do that, will you?
 
Just look at the f***ing state of you. Banned multiple times, doesn't have the balls to register with a new name for fear of being banned again, and waits like a Pavlovian doggy for a chance to spout brainfarts at selected targets.

Just for you, Mr. Logic Man, if it's in print, it's a print interview, you straw-clutching dullard. And my logic in the previous post is unimpeachable. But don't let that stop you giving us more laughs. Off you go.

And grow some balls and log in. But you won't do that, will you?

I can't log in, as you know. Why would I attempt to register with a new name? But that's not the issue, anyway.
Why do you resort to personal attacks instead of discussing the issue at hand? I am still waiting for your response to how your supposed research on Vitamin C invalidates that of the National Institute of Health. But that's not the issue either.
You're doing exactly what you claim I'm doing, waiting, "like a Pavlovian doggy for a chance to spout brainfarts at selected targets." You thought you'd really caught Morrissey in a lie this time. You've asked for "evidence" of this before and like clockwork, here it is again.
 
So apparently we now understand the difference between an email interview in which the replies are all controlled by the subject of the interview and a print interview which is transcribed by the journalist and we can now move along as if we were rational human beings?
Awesome! :thumb:
 
Let me try to follow the logic of the base here...

Just because it’s an interview that appears in print, doesn’t make it a print interview.

Just because he was never threatened by Italian police doesn’t make him a liar.

Just because he wears animal products and eats cheese, doesn’t mean he’s not a vegan.

Just because he targets specific countries and cultures, using terms like “sub-species” doesn’t make him a racist or xenophobe.

That’s just off the top of my head but should provide you with enough food for thought while you’re heads are buried up Steve-O’s asshole to your noses - with your little tongues out, licking his balls.
 
Let me try to follow the logic of the base here...

Just because it’s an interview that appears in print, doesn’t make it a print interview.

Just because he was never threatened by Italian police doesn’t make him a liar.

Just because he wears animal products and eats cheese, doesn’t mean he’s not a vegan.

Just because he targets specific countries and cultures, using terms like “sub-species” doesn’t make him a racist or xenophobe.

That’s just off the top of my head but should provide you with enough food for thought while you’re heads are buried up Steve-O’s asshole to your noses - with your little tongues out, licking his balls.

Since you're posting from an "anonymous" account so that means your opinion is already invalid, but I'll answer anyway.
No one has claimed that "just because an interview appears in print doesn't make it a print interview." But someone did claim the opposite, with "unassailable logic." No, this is all based on something Morrissey said onstage, that he would do no more print interviews. He did not say, "never again will I respond in writing to a journalist. If I do you may consider me, with unassailable logic, a hypocrite."
I have already pointed out that "print interview" is a term with a meaning that was established long before anyone heard of email. Was the Der Spiegel interview conducted via email? It was not. His words were transcribed.
Now, this is not to say that he was misquoted. It turns out that the quotes attributed to him were pretty much what he said. He has made conflicting statements before. Is he a hypocrite? He might be. Is he inconsistent? Definitely. To say you are against rape and sexual assault while blaming the victims of rape and sexual assault is, at best, inconsistent.
Meanwhile, I'm not "the base" and I've specifically said he's a xenophobe and that he intentionally used language that had historical ties to racism when he chose the term "subspecies."
I'm sorry if this is a difficult issue for you to understand but you're really just trying to muddy the waters.

Again, he did not say, "I will never again respond in writing to a journalist's questions." He said he won't do print interviews. Talk to some journalists or just google "print interview." you will see that email interviews, while they may appear in print, are different in one crucial way, which is that the subject's words are transcribed, something which does not occur in an email interview.
 
Since you're posting from an "anonymous" account so that means your opinion is already invalid, but I'll answer anyway.
No one has claimed that "just because an interview appears in print doesn't make it a print interview." But someone did claim the opposite, with "unassailable logic." No, this is all based on something Morrissey said onstage, that he would do no more print interviews. He did not say, "never again will I respond in writing to a journalist. If I do you may consider me, with unassailable logic, a hypocrite."
I have already pointed out that "print interview" is a term with a meaning that was established long before anyone heard of email. Was the Der Spiegel interview conducted via email? It was not. His words were transcribed.
Now, this is not to say that he was misquoted. It turns out that the quotes attributed to him were pretty much what he said. He has made conflicting statements before. Is he a hypocrite? He might be. Is he inconsistent? Definitely. To say you are against rape and sexual assault while blaming the victims of rape and sexual assault is, at best, inconsistent.
Meanwhile, I'm not "the base" and I've specifically said he's a xenophobe and that he intentionally used language that had historical ties to racism when he chose the term "subspecies."
I'm sorry if this is a difficult issue for you to understand but you're really just trying to muddy the waters.

Again, he did not say, "I will never again respond in writing to a journalist's questions." He said he won't do print interviews. Talk to some journalists or just google "print interview." you will see that email interviews, while they may appear in print, are different in one crucial way, which is that the subject's words are transcribed, something which does not occur in an email interview.

The mental contortions to even attempt to come up with doublethink bollocks like this is quite an achievement.

MHlfAaH.png
 
'King Leer said:
This one is a keeper.
Morrissey take note -- this is the kind of interview that pleases fans, and also gets non-fans interested.'


Fixed that for you and agree.


he usually seems to answer any question asked by the interviewer....

Interviewers TAKE NOTE !

'This one is a keeper.
Music "journalists" take note -- this is the kind of interview that pleases fans, and also gets non-fans interested.' - King Leer


RE-FIXED !

:tiphat:

For, King Leer ... WAS RIGHT .


:thumb:
 
Anything but 'I can see what you mean, but I disagree."

Whatever your anger is about, and it seems to be tied to your self image judging from your need to show how logical and intelligent you are, it has nothing to do with me. :)
 
Anything but 'I can see what you mean, but I disagree."

Whatever your anger is about, and it seems to be tied to your self image judging from your need to show how logical and intelligent you are, it has nothing to do with me. :)

Oh do shut up.

I am the cat, you are the ball of wool, and this is great sport.
 
After reading this article, interview, whatever you want to call it, it is clear that Morrissey has evolved as an artist. However, this new Morrissey 2.0 has removed most of the nuance and charm from his lyrics that drew me to him originally. He complains endlessly about politicians but he has become just this now with his blunt, direct attack on issues making comments many of which I strongly disagree with.

A lyric like:

"But last night the plans of a future war
Was all I saw on Channel Four"

allows the listener to form their own opinion of what he is trying to convey. I think we can agree that war is bad, but the belief that soldiers who are willing to risk their own lives to defend the country they love and its citizens makes them somehow accountable for their service is misguided at best.

I also disagree with his attitude towards the police. Their main duty is to serve and protect the citizens of their community. I am grateful for their service and always make it a priority to go up and thank them for doing just this. My Uncle was a policeman and put his life at risk everyday he went to work with a wife and children at home.

Sure there are bad people in society. There are bad soldiers, policemen, politicians...but there are also bad teachers, accountants, parents, etc. Morrissey's answer to this by extension would be to close the schools, stop paying taxes, and outlaw having children. Some here might agree with his opinions, but they are just AND ONLY this "his opinions". He has a right to voice them as I do mine.
 
After reading this article, interview, whatever you want to call it, it is clear that Morrissey has evolved as an artist. However, this new Morrissey 2.0 has removed most of the nuance and charm from his lyrics that drew me to him originally. He complains endlessly about politicians but he has become just this now with his blunt, direct attack on issues making comments many of which I strongly disagree with.

A lyric like:

"But last night the plans of a future war
Was all I saw on Channel Four"

allows the listener to form their own opinion of what he is trying to convey. I think we can agree that war is bad, but the belief that soldiers who are willing to risk their own lives to defend the country they love and its citizens makes them somehow accountable for their service is misguided at best.

I also disagree with his attitude towards the police. Their main duty is to serve and protect the citizens of their community. I am grateful for their service and always make it a priority to go up and thank them for doing just this. My Uncle was a policeman and put his life at risk everyday he went to work with a wife and children at home.

Sure there are bad people in society. There are bad soldiers, policemen, politicians...but there are also bad teachers, accountants, parents, etc. Morrissey's answer to this by extension would be to close the schools, stop paying taxes, and outlaw having children. Some here might agree with his opinions, but they are just AND ONLY this "his opinions". He has a right to voice them as I do mine.

.

nah
,


but ...

'close the schools, stop paying taxes, and outlaw having children.
'

you may have some food for thought there that's worth chewing.




Anyways,


maybe in the next world?




:tiphat:




.
 
Let me try to follow the logic of the base here...

Just because it’s an interview that appears in print, doesn’t make it a print interview.

Just because he was never threatened by Italian police doesn’t make him a liar.

Just because he wears animal products and eats cheese, doesn’t mean he’s not a vegan.

Just because he targets specific countries and cultures, using terms like “sub-species” doesn’t make him a racist or xenophobe.

That’s just off the top of my head but should provide you with enough food for thought while you’re heads are buried up Steve-O’s asshole to your noses - with your little tongues out, licking his balls.

Saying racist things isn't racist though http://newsthump.com/2016/03/13/saying-racist-things-not-racist-say-racists/
 
.

'close the schools, stop paying taxes, and outlaw having children.'

Anyways,
maybe in the next world?
:tiphat:
.

KS...there is a place in HEAVEN for you and your friends!!

I am a teacher, you know how I feel about taxes, and no kids sadly. ;)

Morrissey seems to not have found his place in your world. Fingers crossed he does in mine!

PS> Don't believe everything you read about Mary Magdalene. :)
 
Last edited:
.



Dear numbskulls, patriotic old fogies, breeders and conformists ....


Fortunately for this planet and it's children, we don't all share the same opinion as you.


After reading this article, interview, whatever you want to call it, it is clear that Morrissey has evolved as an artist. However, this new Morrissey 2.0 has removed most of the nuance and charm from his lyrics that drew me to him originally. He complains endlessly about politicians but he has become just this now with his blunt, direct attack on issues making comments many of which I strongly disagree with.

A lyric like:

"But last night the plans of a future war
Was all I saw on Channel Four"

allows the listener to form their own opinion of what he is trying to convey. I think we can agree that war is bad, but the belief that soldiers who are willing to risk their own lives to defend the country they love and its citizens makes them somehow accountable for their service is misguided at best.

I also disagree with his attitude towards the police. Their main duty is to serve and protect the citizens of their community. I am grateful for their service and always make it a priority to go up and thank them for doing just this. My Uncle was a policeman and put his life at risk everyday he went to work with a wife and children at home.

Sure there are bad people in society. There are bad soldiers, policemen, politicians...but there are also bad teachers, accountants, parents, etc. Morrissey's answer to this by extension would be to close the schools, stop paying taxes, and outlaw having children. Some here might agree with his opinions, but they are just AND ONLY this "his opinions". He has a right to voice them as I do mine.


Well,

more than a few folk went through the trouble of making unofficial videos for this song, so
...

IT STRUCK THE CHORD OF TRUTH !!!
:rock:











chew on that !



:cool:





.
 
Tags
low in high school info

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom